kezbabybabe's Space

So I finally got an opportunity to catch The Artist this week at the cinema.  I had been looking forward to this film since I realised that it was going to be something different from the usual fair that can be found at the cinema.

Personally I felt that they should’ve had silent trailers beforehand to help you get into the mood of the film, as it was a bit of a shock to the system to go from noise to no noise as the film opens up.

Fully monochrome, silent (apart from a very small section at the end) with a musical overture throughout this was going to be a film that you were actually going to have to use your other senses to follow the story line.

We join the film at the point when George Valentin is experiencing the height of his career in silent films.  The film opens up with an interesting cinema in cinema shot, which does initially confuse you, but persevere through this and it soon becomes clear that George is at the showing of his current production.

As the film follows through the next few year, the arrivals of ‘talkies’ means that poor George is out of work, out of luck and the remainder of the film watches his spiral into dispair with good effect, allowing for a good outcome in the end.

I have to say I was very impressed with all those that were in the cast, I can’t imagine that it’s easy to act out a silent film when the actors have been so relient on their voices for so long, however everyone managed to do this without making me feel like it was over the top.  John Goodman was an excellent choice as the Director for Kinograph, trying to keep up with the changing times in film, which keeping his actors happy.

The two main roles of Jean Dujardin (George Valentin) and Bérénice Bejo (Peppy Miller) were great choices and they bounce of each other very well throughout the film and both have the right look for the era.

I suppose I better mention the dog, hadn’t I? Yes he was adorable, playing his part very well, though this isn’t a great portion of the film.

I recommend this film, though please go with an open mind, maybe catch a few old silent films first, so that you know what to expect.  This is not a bang, bang experience, it’s a quiet reflective visual delight that should be enjoyed properly.

8/10

I’ve been looking forward to watching this at the cinema since I saw the trailer for it last year. Having seen the theatre production twice, as part of my GCSE Drama coursework, I was very interested to see if the film was going to be able to replicate the same feelings that the stage version did.

Admittedly it’s been quite some years since I saw the theatre production so my memory was a little hazy on the storyline, but as the film started off the main parts of what I remembered started to come back into focus, albeit some of it has been changed from the book/theatre versions.

Let’s start with the cast; Daniel Radcliffe’s first big screen outing since spending quite a few years as Mr Potter. I wasn’t disappointed with Radcliffe’s performance, as he coped very well with bringing to the audience how his character was feeling with the experiences of being at Eel Marsh House.  My only downside to this performance was that when Radcliffe did need to speak I was just reminded of the Potter role, as you may expect him to have a more ‘mature’ sounding voice for the new role.

All others support the role just fine, Misha Handley, who plays Radcliffe’s son in the film, was totally adorable. 

Trivia Fact: Handley is his real godson, a casting idea made by Radcliffe himself served to help him establish an authentic relationship between father and son. (Source IMDb: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1596365/trivia?tab=tr&item=tr1630577)

The locations in the film are suitable for the era, even down to the house, which gives you that sense of foreboding the moment you first see it in the film.  The village was higgledy-piggledy enough for me to help with the sense that something isn’t right in this tiny place.

On to elements of the film; I heard mutterings after the film that it was slow to get going etc. I did not find this to be the case myself.  The film doesn’t use a lot of music throughout, as it’s certainly trying to build an atmosphere.  It was so quiet at some points, at the beginning, that I almost felt as though the food and drink should’ve been banned as the rustling was putting me off a bit. :o) Maybe modern day film-goers are not used to tension built up through lack of noise? ;-)

The theatre production has the luxury of using the audiences’ imagination to create the tension/scares that this storyline leads to, so for the film to re-create some of this must have been a bit challenging, but I’m pleased to say that all of the parts caught me and most of the audience off guard, so the film achieved its objective!

So I recommend this film, but go to an earlier showing, just in case it really spooks you. ;-)

9/10

(This is my first ‘official’ film review, so any constructive criticisms would be very much appreciated.)

Inspired by Paul Joyce's Blog entry, here's my list of favourite movies from those I have watched.

(Links go to the IMDb page for that film.)

A = The Adventures of Robin Hood

B = Bad Boys

C = Chicken Run

D = The Dark Knight

E = Equilibrium

F = Fantasia

G = Gone in Sixty Seconds

H = How to Train Your Dragon

I = Inception

J = Juno

K = The King's Speech

L = Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels

M = Moulin Rouge!

N = The Nightmare Before Christmas

O = Oliver & Company

P = Pay It Forward

Q = Quantum of Solace

R = Robin Hood: Men in Tights

S = Scott Pilgrim vs. the World

T = Toy Story

U = Up

V = Vertical Limit

W = Who Framed Roger Rabbit

X = xXx (No other options in 'x')

Y = You've Got Mail (No other options in 'Y')

Z = Zoolander (No other options in 'Z')

What do you think? What's your A-Z?