The boy (2016) - A review

The boy posed me with quite the challenge! I wanted to write about all the things I liked about this movie but, by doing so I would automatically reveal far too much. So how to write this?
I think I might have managed. But –there’s a reason why I kept this review under the hat for over a year – maybe not. Tread carefully. ‘Brahms is watching!’

Oh how I love this movie! Every once in a while you get to see a film that makes you smile from ear to ear. The boy is that for me. There are only one or two nitpicks that I would like to see differently (the shoe-inned bad boyfriend and the title, but for the rest of it: don't change a thing!

The boy is a bit of a deadpan title.

It focuses all the attention on said boy that’s for sure.

But for me I would have enjoyed something more creative

(there are already 9 different movies called the boy, boy or boys).

Maybe something as simple as the name of the boy: Brahms!

Now this is a movie that gets hurt from any review. You should go into it without knowing anything from the plot. So let’s keep the story vague: Greta (Lauren Cohan) accepts a job babysitting a small boy in jolly ol’ England. That's all you need to know. Now just let yourself get comfortably creeped out by said boy

Acting
The movie is basically a one-woman show and Cohan is perfect as a likeable caring girl who has this underlining strength that makes you feel comfortable having her around (I guess something of The Walking Dead stuck). She's no Halloween -run away screaming- victim- which is good.
Now, I’ve read reviews that stab at the ‘bad-acting’ in this movie and I can tell you: I’ve seen a lot worse. This isn’t a bad acted movie. Each and every actor brings his or her best to the table to bring this small tale to completion.

Script
Because that’s the strength of The boy. The basic tale is sillyto accept at first and the movie knows it. But what I like is that, after this reveal, every logical step is taken: discarding, occurrence, acceptance; the movie works as such. And as such it works marvellously.

Truth be told: the ‘sex scene’…

well let’s just say that I wouldn’t be in the mood at that time.

Especially when you realize (after seeing it) that every piece of  script is -like a symnphony- keyed  to the entirety of the mystery. There isn't a comma out of place. This is truly like watching a carefully constructed book; an Agatha Christie. In the end The boy ties this movie off in a wonderful black-rimmed ribbon and hands it to you as a present.

Cinematography
The setting, then, is amazing. Here we have a haunted house that isn’t all cobwebs and shadows. No. This house might be old but it is still lived in (like Burnt offerings) so it brings a sense of ancient-ness to the table without denying the fact that it takes place in the present.
The camera makes good use of this decor. It lingers long enough on the shadows to bring the tension. Just seeing the white skinned boy glaring with his glass eyes or, the bad-boyfriend tensing up more and more is enough to bring the shivers. With the lack of music at certain key moments it are these images that haunt your irises. That with the well crafted script brings a classical ghost story that is far too rare nowdays.

Conclusion
In the end The boy might be considered a straightforward thriller with a silly story at its core. But because of the skill of the people making this (genre)picture it encapsulates the audience. Endure the boy in the most positive sense of the word. This is one haunted house movie you don’t want to miss.

The end of the f***cking world – a review

Two disturbed teenagers find each other in their ‘strangeness’. The girl (Alyssa) acting out to hurt as many people around her. The boy (James) convinced of the fact that he’s a budding psychopath planning to murder her. Together this modern-day Bonnie and Clyde go on a road trip to find Alyssa's father. With the police on their heels.

Based on a graphic novel  of the same name The end of the f***cking world (TEOTFW ) takes its quirkiness to heart. Often reminiscent of a (rather violent) sequel to Juno (2007) the tales of Alyssa and James bring a strangeness to the table that balances nicely between (hilarious) fantastical and reality.
Like Juno brought a view on teenage pregnancy in which everything and all wasn’t, per-se, abysmal. TEOTFW plays this same light-heartedness for this show's (immensely) troubled teens.

It is the ‘fun’ part of this TV-show that the weird stuff that happens to our main characters during their one week trek are, on their own merit, rather unlikely.
But daily newspapers do inform us that these things do happen somewhere in the world. Alyssa and James just bought a trillion-to-one lottery ticket which caused them to meet a pederast, serial killer and a not-by-the-book police officer in a span of days.

SPOILER: Though I must note here that hitchhiking partially naked is probably a good way to attract creeps in real life too.

But that’s the format you have to accept going into the show. TEOTFW tries to balance between the cruel day-to-day ‘reality’ and ‘happy going’-fiction by letting all the gutter trash tumble over our two heroes and letting them get out (somewhat) clean. This, I think, part of the point is, because they are already damaged.

The running time of each episode does help in this regard. Each episode clocking in at a comfortable 20 minutes is more than enough. It’s easy to bench-watch but at the same time the ‘chapter-vibe’ gives the viewer enough time to digest that which is portrayed.

Criticizing I would argue that in the final three episodes the show start to drag a bit. This has everything to do with the final pieces falling in place. Episode five, for instance, demands the praise and destruction of the father figure to move on to the inevitable finale. This brings a bit of predictability to the table that was wonderfully absent before.

I would argue that the praise and destruction of the father would work better as the end and start of two episodes.

Then the final ending, which is hard not to spoil, makes it all a bit annoying. I understand what the creator wanted to try for. And I certainly give points for trying. But, I argue, it would actually work a whole lot better if the main characters were still pretty much unlikable.

The first rule of storytelling is that people who are on screen the most are still –to some extent- liked by the audience. Now the trick is to balance things out.

Alyssa’s character is constantly making things worse for herself. In the first few episodes she is hilariously unhinged like a chain-smoking petrol smuggler. James then is the darker character who actually has blood on his hands.
It is hard, at first, to like these characters too much. But TEOTFW manages in the end. Manages to such an extent that the ‘ending’ –to me- feels a bit like a copout.

But that’s just part of a creatively written show in which the creators didn’t shy away to show some of the more extreme things that go on in the minds of teenagers.
No not every teenager dreams about shooting down the school in real life. But not all teenagers are Disney-channel perfect either. It’s refreshing every once in a while for a show to come out to counter the Hannah Montana’s and Dog with a blog's of this world. And throughout the craziness of TEOTFW you actually get a rather lovely love story to boot.

Movies as roller coasters (part 1.5)

A year ago I had some fun with a little project of mine concerning movies as roller coasters (link). And to tell you the truth: I really enjoyed the project; just me having some silly fun.
So I've decided to keep this project of mine going like the 'the mixed tape'-ones. Whenever I feel like it I'll upload some new ones just for the fun of it. But before I do this I wish to use this blogpost to revisit my original plan for the rollercoaster.

Though this update comes with an upgrade; in glorious Technicolor (I even made my own background art- I love symmetry).

I also created some new elements to my coaster ride – just to keep it interesting.

As I wrote before a ‘movie as a roller coaster ride’ is a common term I decided to take literally. So each aspect of my rollercoaster-ride has something to do with structure of the movie (suspense, payoff, a turn in the story, et cetera).
For this I created rules (which I have a tendency to break). I’ll repeat them here:

• The straight track: Nothing really happens. It’s exposition – meeting characters.

E.g. The town where the story is set.

Meeting the main character.

• The low rise: Tension is build upon but it doesn’t require a ‘pay-off’.

E.g. the hero is reading a book –shadows form behind him –

he closes the book and the shadows go away.

• The low rise and drop: Something is bound to happen (tension). It happens! And then things go back to normal – the ‘boo’-moment.

E.g. a character enters a dark room –

then ‘boo’ a friend appears and the tension is nullified.

• The high rise: Something very important is going to happen (tension builds).

E.g. a mysterious mist creeps into a small town.

Something dreadful is bound to happen soon.

Tension rises with each car the mist overtakes. 

• The high rise and drop: Something very important is going to happen – and then it happens.

E.g. A group of people enter a mysterious town and all hell breaks loose.

• The sudden drop: Something unexpected happens.

E.g. The hero is walking down the street and suddenly

-out of nowhere-  a branch falls before his feet.

• The sudden drop and rise: Something (unexpected) happens that causes the story to take on tension.

E.g. The hero is suddenly shot at.

The hero runs away –

knowing that the villain will chase him.

• The rise and straight drop: The hero knows what is about to happen. He prepares himself to face the consequences.

E,g, A killer robot is on the loose.

The hero prepares the weapons he needs to defeat him.

• The tunnel: The storylines that need to be discarded/ are shrouded in mystery (before the climax).

E.g. How did the second-hero arrive just in time to save our hero?

• The looping: The lesser version of ‘the twist’: the world is put upside down.

E.g. A girl goes swimming and a shark grabs her.

• The double looping:  The world is put upside down –and just when you think you got away with it it bites you in the buttocks.

E.g. The girl who goes swimming is attacked by a shark.

She thinks she got a away but alas the beast is back to take her down.

• The twist/corkscrew: Everything you learned in the movie so far is turned on its head.

E.g. The main character is brought as reliable but

suddenly turns the other way.

• The turn: A sudden change in the story.

E.g. At first they were talking about the theme park

– now they are entering it!

There was safety in the mist

– now this mad woman is starting a revolution.

So there you have it: new rules and new coaster parts. I'll get back to this soon.
The full version is here.

Outdated technology in movies.

Movies that feature technology are already outdated at the premiere. We know the tropes by now: hackers ramming their keyboard punching out line after line of code as if it were a race against the clock. Early ninety laptops managing feats that even current computers would raise an eyebrow at. And, of course, many more.
The goal of this article is to take you, dear reader, along several things I noticed/remembered from technology-movies. The do’s and don’ts as it were. Each paragraph I’m going to tackle a ‘techno’-movie and distil a lesson to be learned from it.

Hackers
This wonderful 90s movie cemented Angelina Jolie in the collective male mind palace. But this movie has so much more. Hackers is the pinnacle of ‘bad’ technology movies. It’s like this movie is desperately trying to do everything a hacker does the other way around.
Now this story starts with the word: ‘Hacker’. Back then there was no real consensus on what a hacker was. A hacker could either be a computer enthusiast (like little Lex in Jurassic Park) or somebody ‘hacking into a computer system’.

Anyway, as I said, this movie does every wrong what either definition of a hacker would really do. A hacker doesn’t slam his fingers on the keyboard in a wild frenzy because somehow somewhere there’s a referee taking score.

That’s the nice joke the movie Swordfish pulled. This time ‘round there was a referee involved and…something else.

A true hacker runs his little program and waits. A true hacker reads a site/program/whatever for leaks and abuses it. Basically a real hacker spends his/her time sitting still staring at the screen.

Then there are the funky effects on the laptops. Just running those animations on those old computers would use up all of the ram not on that singular machine but in the entire neighbourhood. But I’ll go into that sort of thing in the next paragraph.

What’s really interesting about Hackers is the way IT-genius is handled. Basically the movie sells the idea that: If you want to get ahead in IT? Do as little as possible!
In the first IT-bubble this was common practice. Companies would hire kids out of high school to design websites and whatnot for them. However, companies weren’t/aren’t stupid. If the kid does nothing or has a big mouth he’s fired.
Hackers displays one of these ‘wiz-kids’ with all the attitude that comes with it and actually makes him the villain. It’s like a warning to all those companies back then hiring high-schoolers. But then; did the companies listen to some silly movie? Of course not.

Independence day
The most famous one. Here we have Jeff ‘Brundle-fly’ Goldblum hacking a superior alien race mothership with a Mac-laptop. Like a single chisel trying to take down the Berlin wall.
It is explained in the deleted scenes of Independence day that there is quite a logical explanation behind it (re-engineering). But since that scene isn’t in the final movie (all of the patriotic stuff still is – even more in the extended version) it doesn’t count.

Now; I’ve always been on two minds about this little issue. Yes, the poor Mac would probably fry the minute it was plugged in. But, then again, a small computer could easily transmit a long-forgotten virus into a superior mainframe. This, a bit like ancient diseases popping up now and again.

The net
The whole concept of this movie is literally erasing a person online. The fun part being that this is now doable (the fear of the future of technology). There are various cases (in the past) of people trying hard to get their stole identity back only to be pushed back into a corner due to some clerical tomfoolery.

But why put that big pi symbol at the bottom of a webpage?
If this is Hollywood being smart than they’ve got quite a learning curve ahead of them. Everybody who visits a webpage and sees something strange they will want to click it. It’s human nature.

The lawnmower man
Computer programs as educational tools. Now this is something that (I think) is rather clear nowadays. Computer software can be used to educate people. It is, in fact, used to help people get over phobias in a safe environment.
True, the movie is a bit hefty on the special effects department (don’t get me started on the sequel) but overall the premise stays the same. However, it’s the supernatural element that throws it all out of whack.

Telekinesis, pyrokinesis, mindreading and whatnot. This is the age old fear of technology that Stephen King uses in his original story. And that’s what makes this movie so interesting to me. Here we have an absolute right on the money prediction on the future of technology and instantly the moviemakers/author grabs a dark disturbing side to accompany it. No matter how farfetched it is.

Sneakers
Sneakers is a perfect movie because the technology used is, in fact, believable in it being contemporary.

"A computer program linked you to her? Unlikely."

Want to disable an impossible key lock? ‘Kick it!’

Sneakers is one of those rare technology movies that is still watchable today because there’s no sci-fi to be found. Sneakers isn’t about predictions of the future. It is about the here and now (back then).

One (unwitting-I am sure) prediction this movie did makes is: too many secrets.
Sneakers uses the idea of every secret being public as a red herring throughout the tale. And with it it highlights one of the biggest discussion we are currently having in our facebook/wikileaks/whatnot-era.

The Jackal
To make one little sidestep at the end of this article to: the Jackal.
In this movie serial hitman Bruce Willis (a.k.a. the Jackal) manages to stay ahead of the FBI and CIA eventhough his mission has been compromised since the beginning. Then the dear man walks into an internet café and ask the proprieter if (to paraphrase): ‘does this computer has internet?’.

Pardon me but can I please assume that a hitman-extrodinaire would have some basic computer skills? Why oh why didn’t the FBI/CIA/Whatever hack him?
But that's the interesting part about late 90s movies - all the criminals in those movies are online yet the cops are still oldschool.

Conclusion
So there you have it: a few short paragraphs on the things outdated technology movie taught us. To summerize:
It showed use the time in which these movies were made. With companies hiring kids left and right to teach them about this strange new thing called ‘computers’.
But most of all those outdated movies made predictions that could very well happen nowadays but coated it with some very basic stupidity or highlighted some insanely far-fetched darkness to accompany it.

Project: The Sleuth Movie house and maze blueprint

I love the movie Sleuth; based on the play by Anthony Shaffer this is a fantastic parody of the old fashioned who-dun-it of yesteryears. But, like any good parody (take Shaun of the dead for instance) it doesn't shy away from bringing some real terror into the mix.

Kenneth Brannagh's remake has its charms as well (at least he didn't try for a carbon copy). But I feel his version focuses on the wrong things -like the underlying homosexual theme- which takes away some of the charm of the original which is, after all, a high stakes poker game between two brilliant minds.

What I love about the movie is the acting competition between Sir Laurence Oliver and the (then not a sir yet) Michael Caine. Sir Laurence Oliver stating on record that -due to the quick pace of a movie  production- he wasn't on top of his game. He'd have preferred him and Michael doing a month of stage with this play to get a feel for each other.
While Michael Caine has gone on record stating that he was so muxch in awe of the great Olivier that he didn’t even know how to address the man. So let's just say that the two great actors met in the middle.

This movie really has two actors at the top of their game not only fighting each other in script but in their profession as actors as well. And the end result is magical.
The way Olivier delivers the line: "Love is the game - marriage the penalty." is delicious and the script is littered with these wonderful one-liners.
I cannot stress enough that anyone who likes a good Agatha Christie novel should see this movie (or Deathtrap - Michael Caine is the only actor who's been in the two of the most delicious parodies of the genre - It just makes me respect him more). It's that good!

The map
Now; I'm ‘hobbying’ along with this little blog of mine. I like it! But I certainly noticed that it are my photoshop projects that are read more. Especially when they deal with something popular (like Stranger Things). So yes I could map out Iron Man's travel around the world in the latest Marvel extravaganza. Or, staying true to myself, map out something I would actually google.
So here is my little blueprint of the house used in the movie Sleuth. As usual it is just me having fun.

I had, originally, intended to include all the furniture but as time went on (I’ve had this blueprint on my computer for over a year) I lost interest to start this massive task of including each and every silly little table. In short: Andrew Wyke has far too much stuff lying around in his living room.

Now, as a final note, you'll notice that I made this map from scratch. Why? One may surely ask. Because I didn't feel like using the standardized architectural tools on the internet. I wanted to draw something. So, there are probably a lot of little mistakes. That's fine, I can live with that.
Here is the full-size picture.