Wednesday, May 7, 2025
Blog Page 1555

Review: Zero Dark Thirty

0

★★★★★

Five Stars

Any film that is ‘based on true events’ or labelled as a ‘historical drama’, creates an altered viewing experience. The plot is tautological, we often know the outcome, and the film instead becomes about detail, nuance and interpretation. At least, that is what a good film should do.

Zero Dark Thirty, a highly controversial work from director Kathryn Bigelow (The Hurt Locker), is no exception to this. In a blur of documentation and dramatization, the film details the decade long hunt for America’s Public Enemy No.1, Osama Bin Laden, culminating in his grisly assassination. From that description alone, I had my misgivings, furthered by the inevitable backlash from all corners regarding Bigelow’s extremely uncomfortable depiction of torture. This film could have so easily become a vehicle for patriotism, propaganda, and large men dressed as Navy SEALS chanting ‘USA’ in front of a rippling star spangled banner. However, Bigelow’s intense, pared down filming combined with Mark Boal’s unforgiving and unsentimental script  creates a brilliant take on what is vast becoming its own genre; the ‘War on Terror’.

The secret lies in the film’s main motive. This is not a film about torture, or politics, or America. It is barely a film about Bin Laden. Much like The Hurt Locker, it is a film about obsession. CIA agent Maya (Jessica Chastain) is almost fanatical in her search for OBL (the film is thick with jargon); to the extent that the emotional core of the piece is the search itself.

Characters come and go, torture is used and dismissed almost ambivalently, and leads are found futile, until the only thing left is Chastain’s fragile, exhausting, and utterly compelling performance. She, like the majority of the characters, is without past or future, and figured only within the context of the mission.

This centrality allows Bigelow to depict the political undercurrents and relationships without letting them become the chief objective. In this creative environment, co-stars Jason Clarke, Mark Strong and Joel Edgerton give excellent performances with little material to work from. Bigelow did deviate a little from her nameless character trope by casting John Barrowman as a White House suit, however. Go back to Wales, Captain Jack.

Though the tracking progress takes centre stage in Zero Dark Thirty, the film’s climax is of course the success of the mission. After hurtling through years of work, with some slightly clumsy examples of terrorists attacks (including the London bombings), we finally reach the night Maya has waited for. And Bigelow makes us wait as much as her heroine has to. The pacing is steady, but the suspense is relentless, drawing out every detail of the raid until the task is complete and the audience’s energy is utterly spent. Here Bigelow is at her filmmaking best.

Unexpectedly moved to tears during the last part of the film, I am made to face the most uncomfortable reality yet. Though a ‘historical drama’, unlike Lincoln or some others of this year’s Oscar contenders, the politics of Zero Dark Thirty is on-going. However, it is not the political element that inspired the strongest reaction, but a single shot of Chastain’s face when her task is finally complete. The film may have its controversies and its flaws, but it remains a fantastic piece of cinema and for that, I give it full marks and any Oscar it wants. 

Once upon a time in Utah…

0

There is a faraway land that independent filmmakers dream of. It is a land of untold (six-figure) riches. It is a land of ice palaces and pleasantly guffawing Hollywood bigwigs. It is a land where the manicpixiedreamgirl roams free. It is Utah. Welcome to the Sundance Film Festival.

Sundance is the uncontested champion of independent film competitions. Founded by Robert Redford (the original Sundance Kid, hence the iconic name), the festival takes place in Park City, Utah every winter. The festival was originally called the Utah Film Festival and took place in the height of summer, when Utah is about as interesting as the Book of Mormon, but was rebranded and moved to winter on the advice of the late Sydney Pollock, who sagely noticed that the movers and shakers of Hollywood would be more interested in the film festival if they could use it as an excuse for a skiing holiday.

Sundance has cemented its position as one of the most important film festivals in the world: whilst Cannes, Venice, Toronto and Berlin are still the go-to prestige events, Sundance is a showcase for films financed outside of the studio system. Filmmakers like Quentin Tarantino, David O. Russell, Paul Thomas Anderson and Darren Aronofsky all got their big breaks at the festival and, as a result, the queues of independent filmmakers lining up to follow suit are miles long. In 2012 there were in excess of 10,000 feature films submitted, with only 200 films programmed, which works out as a one in 50 shot at getting in. Apparently that slim chance is worth the $100 entry fee.

But whilst the festival is something of a gladiatorial arena for indie filmmakers, for the discerning cinephile it’s a veritable bordello of unheard treasures. Last year’s top winners in the Documentary and Dramatic awards, The House I Live In and Beasts of the Southern Wild, have both been nominated for Oscars. Other recent hits at the festival include Lee Daniels’s slightly nauseating social chore Precious; the greatest hillbilly Western of all time, Winter’s Bone; and 2012’s unnerving but electric Martha Marcy May Marlene. Not a bad selection of films to get to see, especially given the fact that the distributors will all be in the audiences in Park City, like circling sharks waiting to snap up a commercially viable indie hit, so these films won’t be in cinemas for another year or so.

The 2013 Sundance promises to be every bit as intriguing. Given that Redford’s experimental Sundance London project at the 02 has been a massive critical and commercial failure, you probably won’t be bothering to watch these films for a while (unless you’re planning to hotfoot it to Utah and bail on 3rd week). Matthew McConaughey’s Mud is being pushed for acting prizes already, whilst Before Midnight (the sequel to Before Sunrise and Before Sunset) is hot property and currently without a distributor. I think Park Chan-Wook’s Stoker looks dynamite, whilst there’s also some good buzz surrounding The East, starring Brit Marling and Ellen Page. And, if worse comes to worst, you can always fix your attention on Kill Your Darlings, which stars Daniel Radcliffe as Allen Ginsberg (looking strangely like Dan from Gossip Girl).

Sundance is a film festival that holds enormous power in the industry and, therefore, gets a huge number of column inches devoted to it. But it deserves every one of them, because it’s the single biggest platform for indie films and manages to level the playing field somewhat. So, Sundance, have a few more inches, courtesy of Cherwell.

Review: Gags (Oxford Revue)

0

★★★☆☆
Three Stars

Gags left me feeling cautiously confident about Oxford’s comedic future.

This was a performance that was in many ways akin to having a deep, unctuous full body massage: initially rather painful and awkward, but surprisingly enjoyable and refined at the end (if leaving you slightly conflicted).

Comprised of a series of small sketch pieces, Gags highlighted contemporary obsessions with the minutiae of social mores, from the Attenborough-eqsue “mating ritual” in a seedy Sainsbury’s to politics of Power Rangers clothing. The ensuing chuckles certainly held a mirror up to the great British obsession with social mores, whether concerning those who sniff the scented air of society’s upper rafters or those you find lurking in the smoking area at Camera at 2am. A sketch about a man in his car frantically trying to reach his child bearing wife only to be obstructed by a ticket machine left me cackling quietly away to myself, although this could only be because I’ve witnessed this problem several times at Heathrow Airport.

The first half was definitely the weaker of the two, but was marginally redeemed by its emphasis on physical comedy rather than witticisms; perhaps that’s why some of the writing in the first half stood out to me as weaker than the second. Thankfuly this was raised by strong performances from Rachel Watkeys Dowlie and George Mather, the latter of which has one of those semi-innate senses of comic timing. Funniest of all though, was a performance from Joseph Morpurgo, giving us a quick succession of stereotypes with sharp improv and a nice bit of audience interaction thrown into the mix. Whether or not this was purely down to him, the humour in the second half seemed to be sharper and the writing tighter, particularly the slightly metafictional doctors sketch about a dying joke- or to paraphrase, “penises are always funny”.

Gags is not a bad show. More to the point, it is not an unfunny show, and it’s laughs come by cleverly either confirming or subverting our preconceptions-particularly in the latter half. But as I left I left the Old Fire Station, I couldn’t help but feel that the humour was a bit, well… safe. The darkest it got was a few puns about a professional assassination service. Next time, less Armstrong and Miller, and more Frankie Boyle please guys.

Bueller… Bueller…

0

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6849%%[/mm-hide-text]

Hacked Off film’s immersive cinema screening of Ferris Bueller’s Day Off always sounded like a great way to spend a Friday evening. My only concern was whether expectation would match the reality of screening an 80s classic in an academic building. How would the escapism of Ferris Bueller translate to a space more used to Shakespeare, Milton and Literary Theory?  Would the joy of John Hughes’ vision be dulled by the subterranean setting?  But as I swiftly realised, this was a stroke of excellent planning by Owen Donovan and Edd Elliott, the brains behind Hacked Off Films. As the 120 strong crowd started to seat themselves (about the size of my own school year back in ’03) I felt increasingly part of Ferris’s world. In our assorted 80s gear, inside our own concrete classroom, we were the ‘sportos, the motorheads, geeks, sluts, bloods, wastoids, dweebies, dickheads’ of Hughes’ High Schools. A postgraduate tutor (Michael Mayo) who had been fortunately coerced into portraying Ferris’ economics teacher emerged into the Lecture Theatre. This led to a genius sequence in which he used the audience to call the register. We scrambled to claim “Atkinson” “Blasingham” or “Bruton-Jones” for our own before leaving “Bueller…Bueller…Bueller…” hanging as the opening titles rolled.

There was a collective sigh of meta-cinematic satisfaction as the English lecture scene on screen echoed the audience, right down to matching lecterns (a parallel not even the Hacked Off team anticipated, as I later learnt). These moments of grin-inducing realisation were what characterised Hacked Off Film’s approach, bringing surprise and novelty to a film that I imagine most of the audience had seen many a time before. There were slight technical issues but these were minimal and dealt with well, using the same economics teacher we’d met at the start.

The actors mingling with the audience in the foyer set the tone from the beginning. Several carried Pepsi cans, asking for donations to ‘Save Ferris’ whilst really collecting coppers for their chosen charity ExVac. Dougie Young, last seen in Angels in America, brooded in the corner as the drug-addled delinquent played by Charlie Sheen. Becca Fallon, a fantastically cast Jennifer Grey lookalike, scowled at all and sundry as Ferris’ sister Jeannie.

Donovan and Elliott had clearly thought a lot about their immersion experience, keeping it casual but clever, and full of little surprises. The duo say they’re proud that they’ve managed to keep their events cheaper than regular cinema, and they’ve clearly spent their limited funds wisely.  Details like placing a packed of Oreos and a Pepsi (the original sponsors) at each place, and borrowing paintings from Exeter JCR to make a mini-gallery were both low-key and greatly appreciated. They left the larger stunts for appropriate moments later on in the film – complementing the ‘Twist and Shout’ carnival scene by releasing balloons and firing confetti cannons.

Producing ‘SAVE FERRIS’ t-shirts was a smart move, showing just how tuned into the cult the organisers are. They matched savvy audience awareness with their own ingenuity at every turn. Ferris Bueller’s Day Off is a much-loved film, as indicated by the audience’s quiet chant of “Let my Cameron Go” and our crooning along to Wayne Newson’s ‘Danke Schoen’ at appropriate points. Its cult following made the film a brilliant choice for this sort of screening and gave Hacked Off a bit of a head start for success. What Donovan, Elliott and their team did so well was tap into its tongue-in-cheek, camp, homespun energy.

This is only Hacked Off Film’s second immersive cinema event, building on the success of screening Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban in Exeter’s Dining Hall last Michaelmas. But they’ve clearly hit on a winning formula, and are aware of the importance of their choices of film and location, not using the same space twice so that each time it really fits the theme. The commitment to detail and sheer enjoyment evident throughout Friday’s show promises great things for the future of Hacked Off Films. Their other endeavour, the Oxford leg of The Future Shorts Festival is already a firm favourite of the Oxford Hub, and fast approaching as part of the Turl Street Arts Festival.  Further information about this and all of their future projects can be found on their facebook page, which is well worth a look and a ‘like’. Elliott told Cherwell that the main focus for him was always “how much fun can we have”. This is precisely what came across. The experience was fun rather than flashy; the film was enhanced rather than overpowered. I felt like this was something thrown together by and for Ferris’s friends. And I loved it for that.

5 Minute Tute: Philosophy

0

What is Philosophy?


Most academic disciplines are defined by their subject matter, but with Philosophy this is tricky, because its subject matter is, well, everything. We could say that Philosophy is a critical investigation into any aspect of the universe or of human experience. Maybe Wittgenstein’s approach is more useful here: he said that Philosophy is an activity rather than a subject. It is the activity of rational reflection, of challenging assumptions and asking questions. You can philosophise about absolutely anything; so philosophers will never be out of work even if they are not always paid!

 

Which philosophers have had the biggest impact on modern Philosophy?


For our 21st anniversary issue we recently circulated a questionnaire to professional philosophers asking them which historical philosophers they thought the most interesting or important. Aristotle came top, followed by Immanuel Kant, then Plato. In terms of philosophers who have influenced modern developments, Frege, Russell and Wittgenstein (and later Quine) were crucial to the development of the analytical school of Philosophy. He- gel is still the point of reference for most strands of continental Philosophy. My own favourite is Oxford ethicist Philippa Foot who had so many great ideas about the foundations of morality that I still see her as underrated, despite her fame.

 

Who is Friedrich Nietzsche and how has he influenced modern day society?


When I started studying Philosophy I remember one lecturer dismissing Nietzsche as “more a poet than a philosopher,” but really he was both. He was a brilliant young professor of Philosophy at the University of Basel, who resigned his chair due to poor health and spent the next ten years or so wandering around Europe writing books about what he saw as an imminent crisis of values. He saw Christian morality – which he hated anyway – as being fatally undermined by a widespread decline in religious faith (“God is dead”) and he called for a “revaluation of all values”. Did he cause the crisis of values or merely foresee it? Probably the latter, but he gave an early and influential voice to the idea that values had no firm foundation.

 

Isn’t it all a bit wishy-washy?


The usual accusation made against English-language Philosophy – especially that done in Oxford – is that it is overconcerned with precision about language. However, given the great difficulty of some philosophical problems and the long history of disagreement about them, I think that there is no such thing as being “over-concerned with precision,” and that it is better to move slowly and test every footstep carefully, if you want to make real progress.

 

Can we all be philosophers?


Yes of course – it doesn’t even require any expensive equipment! We all stumble across philosophical problems at one time or another: Is there a God? Should we eat meat? What is life for? What comes after death? Is it sometimes all right to lie? How should we deal with this or that ethical dilemma? Some of these problems are inescapable, so the only question is whether we deal with them well or badly. Sadly, many people deal with dilemmas on the basis of emotional responses, tradition, or peer pressure rather than reasoned argument. As Bertrand Russell said, “Most people would rather die than think; in fact, they do.”

Here’s why you should all join your college choir

0

So you’re back in Oxford, collections are long gone, Christmas is a memory only your waistline remembers and the rigours of Oxford life are back in full swing. Fifth-week blues are yet to come and still many delicious weeks of hard work and academic inadequacy stretch ahead, with some hard partying – maybe, if I can just get this essay and reading done – added in. But sometimes you wonder if you could be making more of your Oxford experience than leading a life tied to the twin poles of booze and books. Your college choir is here to help.

The wonderful thing about your college choir is that it probably doesn’t audition, and if it does, it shouldn’t. Sure they are there to sing at important college events for the great and the good, but musical quality is really not the main point. It is all about fellow feeling, friendships, and the well-documented psychological benefits of singing in a group. That spiritual uplift need not be of a religious kind: at my college the vast majority of the choir do not take communion. It can actually get quite embarrassing sometimes. Instead the music is the real joy, as it drifts from the chapel into the fading light and monastic calm that only falls over college on a Sunday evening.

One term in my choir has furnished me with some of my most memorable encounters. My friend and I found ourselves dining opposite Gail Trimble of University Challenge fame (a.k.a. ‘The human Google’) at a choir formal. “What meat is this?” My friend asked me. “Dunno, Chicken?” I guessed. Gail did not look impressed. Earlier in the term I had opened the chapel door to find myself face to face with the Bishop of Oxford. We stared at each other for an agonising moment before I clocked that the man in front of me was older, wiser, more grandly dressed, and in every respect more important than me. I abased myself and stepped aside.

Of course the world of chapel carries its olde-worlde trappings without apology or irony. When we hosted the University sermons we said prayers not only for the monarch, nation and more colleges than I could count, but also “all the aristocracy of this realm” (which, I must note, still includes Jeffrey Archer). It was positively Elizabethan. I mean Bess I, not the current Queen. For those of an OCA bent this sort of thing is probably rather comforting. For the rest of us we accept it as part and parcel of the whole shebang.

And if you’re still not convinced, remember that whereas rowers have to pay for their hobby, college subsidises you in choir. Free formals are a real boon for all you freeloaders out there, even if you do have to sing for your supper.

 

In Defence of the European Union

0

Eurosceptics have seized the red meat, Nigel Farage is back to braying from the sidelines, and Cameron has demonstrated that he is a man of the people by offering the country a plebiscite on that brooding, meddling octopus, the European Union (EUSSR).

The right-leaning national press has cheered him to the rafters, with The Times rustling up a coterie of B-list business leaders representing companies that don’t even bother trading internationally, including a pub chain, Betfair and UCI Cinemas.

The problem is, Britain has never really understood Europe, and that’s why it’s never accepted the EU as a solution to centuries of strife. The Prime Minister alluded to this issue in his speech: “We have the character of an island nation – independent, forthright, passionate in defence of our sovereignty.”

To that I would add ‘ignorant’ and ‘exceptionalist’, both characteristics of the island mentality. How typical it was that the original date of Cameron’s great address was planned on the 60th anniversary of the Elysée Treaty between Charles de Gaulle and Konrad Adenauer.

Those familiar with The Thick of It can imagine how this omnishambles played out in Whitehall as they deliberated whether the continental knees-up really mattered that much – after all, aren’t the French needlessly emotional about absolutely everything?

De Gaulle blocked British entry into the European Economic Community, the forerunner of the EU, on two occasions (1963 and 1967) because of Britain’s different trading relations, employment attitudes and agricultural policies. “England in effect is insular, she is maritime, she is linked through her exchanges, her markets, her supply lines to the most diverse and often the most distant countries. She has in all her doings very marked and very original habits and traditions.” 

Alas, his efforts were to no avail; les rosbifs simply waited until he died to slip in and join the party, swiftly securing its first series of optouts in 1973, negotiated by Harold Wilson and put to the people.

But while the nation state has worked quite well for Britain over the last few centuries, the Peace of Westphalia, agreed in 1648 to recognise national sovereignty, did not stop wars and empires as means and ends to a political consensus in an ethnically diverse continent. The European Union has delivered 60 years of peace and was rightly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in recognition of this. It is neither perfect nor complete, as the Euro crisis shows, and Cameron is right to raise concerns about its democratic deficit.

But it is equally salient to point out that the peoples of Spain, Italy and Greece are still vehemently supportive of the EU, despite being ravaged by economic depression. They all have recent histories of brutal dictatorships offering a far worse way of life.

The reason why alarm is being expressed in European capitals and from Washington is that Cameron may have set in train the unravelling of the EU from 2017. If he gets a suitable renegotiation and keeps Britain in then he will pioneer a new EU based on Peter Mandelson’s cafeteria service, where all member states feel entitled to go à la carte on European policy, leading inevitably to disbandment.

If he wins the election but fails with the renegotiation and takes Britain out, then the EU has lost a very influential partner on defence, trade and liberal policy. The balance of power will shift in the remaining bloc and might entice other countries to seek an exit too. He will fail because he underestimates the extent to which the values of compromise and solidarity matter to the other member states.

In a continent with a shrinking demography and declining influence in the world, a fragmentation back to the model of querulous Westphalian states would surely be the death knell of European prosperity in the post-imperial age, in which sovereignty is moving to regional spaces and enacted by international organisations and corporations.

Many things can happen between now and 2018, and it would be useless to predict any- thing except the continuation of an increasingly unstable world operating in turbulent times. Since reform is happening already in the EU, and since active British involvement can help resolve the issues surrounding democratic accountability and the like, it seems self- defeating even to be contemplating the idea of leaving an institution that has delivered so much and promises to deliver so much more.

Britain’s stance on the EU is like the attitude of the sheriff in Blazing Saddles. At one point he says: “If you don’t do what I want, I’ll blow my brains out.” The problem for Cameron and the whole country comes when the rest of the EU says, “OK, go ahead.”

Inspired by the catwalk: Monochrome

0

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6843%%[/mm-hide-text]

image:vogue.co.uk

The tux is back. Unsurprisingly, this look has been revived, reconstructed and recreated by the wealth of menswear designers now dominating womenswear – Raf Simons at Dior, Hedi Slimane taking over Saint Laurent Paris… Kill two trends with one stone with the monochrome tuxedo. Statement jewelry optional.(Diamond Jacquard Blazer, Topshop, £65)

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6842%%[/mm-hide-text]

image:topshop.co.uk

Inject some pizazz into this monochrome number with a stylish hat, à la Anna Dello Russo. Wear with pointy heels for that extra bit of glamour. (Wide-Brim Fel Hat, Guess, £12)

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6845%%[/mm-hide-text]

image:guess.com

Stripes go supersize. Clash with this patterned number from Topshop and werkkk it hard. (White Stripe Pencil Skirt, Topshop, £32)

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6844%%[/mm-hide-text]

image:topshop.co.uk

Score style points while staying toasty warm in this coat from Warehouse – fashion can be practical! (Stripe Coat, Warehouse, £75)

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6846%%[/mm-hide-text]

image:warehouse.co.uk

We are happy to announce the long awaited revival of cigarette-cut trousers. Team with heels for feminine flair or flats for a more retro look. (Puppytooth Jacquard Cigarette Trousers, Topshop, £40)

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6841%%[/mm-hide-text]

image:topshop.co.uk

How to Wear: Red Lipstick

0

1. Buff your lips using a toothbrush and then moisturise them with a lip balm. The bright colour will only enhance any cracks. Wait for a few minutes for it to soak in and then blot away any excess so that your lips are dry to make sure the lipstick stays put after application.

2. Define and fill in your lips with a red lipliner that matches your lipstick. This helps to bring out the colour of your lipstick and prevents bleeding, which is a common problem with bolder colours. Make sure you keep only colour inside your actual lip line – do not go over the edges. Use a clean brush to blend and even out the colour.

3. Using either your finger to lightly apply the lipstick to your lips and then using a brush build up the colour and blend, taking particular care around the edges of your lips. Blot with a tissue and clean up any mistakes with a cosmetic wedge sponge.

4. Apply concealer around the edges of your lip to further prevent any bleeding and enhance the colour and shape of your lips.

5. Finally, add lip balm to seal the colour and keep your lips looking smooth.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6839%%[/mm-hide-text]

How to Find the Shade for You:

Fair Skin: All skin tones look great with a true red, or compliment paler skin with reds that have pink or blue undertones. Try Revlon Matte in Really Red.

Olive Skin: Flatter tanned skin tones with orangey or tomato reds, like Lady Danger by MAC.

Dark Skin: Darker skin tones look great with plum and berry shades such as this Kate

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6840%%[/mm-hide-text]

 

 

Longing and Urbanity

0

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6830%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6836%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6831%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6833%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6834%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6835%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6837%%[/mm-hide-text]

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%6838%%[/mm-hide-text]