Movie Labyrinth

BERLINALE 2012: The End of Puberty (Koi Ni Itaru Yamai)

2012-02-21T23:15:00.002Z

After attending this year's Berlin International Film Festival I thought I should take the time to review one of the only films that really stood out for me (unfortunately I only got to see six), that being the wonderfully original Japanese gender-switcher from newcomer Kimura Shoko. I was lucky enough to attend the screening that Shoko herself attended and so got to witness the very interesting Q&A that followed the film. In this article I will review the film and follow it with my analysis and some of what I noted from the Q&A. Please enjoy and do leave any comments you have below. If you've seen the film, I'd love to know what you thought of it!

Film: The End of Puberty/Koi Ni Itaru Yamai

Movie Labyrinth Rating: "Awesome"

Standard Rating: 7.5/10

Running Time: 116 mins

Director: Kimura Shoko

Cast: Wagatsuma Miwako, Saito Yoichiro, Satsukawa Aimi, Sometani Shota.

Sometimes feeling more like an anime than a live action film, with its overly exaggerated, high energy, kooky character performances and 8bit music score; The End of Puberty opens with obsessed schoolgirl Tsubara (Wagatsuma Miwako) fawning over her nerdy, flustered teacher Mr. Madoka (Saito Yoichiro) as he struggles to hold his lesson together. As the rest of the classes' attentions wander, Tsubara is seen feverishly scribbling something into a notebook which turns out to be an extensive list of the daily idiosyncrasies that Madoko displays each class as his frustration and panic rises as a result of his powerlessness. The rest of the notebook is devoted to many drawings depicting the fusing together of Tsubara and Madoko via their genitals, finishing with a complete swap...

If this isn't strange enough, Tsubara's perverse dream comes true when she literally pounces of Madoko one day after class and following a confused sexual tumble the magic is complete much to Madoko's horror and to Tsubara's delight. The two escape to the countryside to hide while they decide what to do, Madoka now bursting into fits of wretching at even the slightest touch from Tsubara. No sooner that they have retreated to Madoko’s secluded childhood home that are they followed by En (Satsukawa Aimi), the enigmatic best friend of Tsubara who is secretly in love with her and then by Maru (Sometani Shota), the puppy dog-like admirer of En completing a crazy love circle. What ensues is a story not just about the trials and sexual confusion of adolescence but also a fresh and unique take on the body-swap genre which causes us to question the importance of gender altogether. Should we allow our genders define who we are?

What made this film so enjoyable for me was its distinctly Japanese feel. Only in Japan would you find such a bizarrely premised film with a cast of caricature-like characters, so exaggerated they are; while also managing to convey a deeper meaning, raising questions that are fundamental the society we live in.

My thoughts and notes from Q&A with Kimura Shoko: WARNING! *Spolier Alert!*

Kimura Shoko at the Berlinale screening of the film

It was my impression that the film was a highly progressive statement on the standing of gender in society and in Japanese society in particular. To me it suggested that gender is immaterial and we should not allow it to define us as humans. We are not men and women, we are simply people. This was best displayed by Madoko’s changing attitude. Madoko’s first reaction to the swap is horror (understandably) and he refuses to accept the situation believing his life is ruined. After all, his status as a man has been compromised. However as the film progresses Madoko begins to gain courage and he starts to take control of his powerlessness as oppose to hiding in the wardrobe as he did in the beginning of the film. Although the ending is ambiguous as to whether Madoko and Tsubara’s genitals are returned to their original state; if we read it as if they don’t it is easy to assume that Madoko has come to the realisation that his genitals need not define him as a person, it is his actions that do so. This is similar to Tsubara, who obsessively maintains a diet of supplements in an effort to preserve her body after she dies so that no one will forget her- it is not her body that will make people remember, it is her actions.

However, during the Q&A which followed the film I was very surprised to hear Shoko’s own ideology behind the film as my ideas contrasted so vastly to hers! The idea of “The Death of the Author” came to mind upon leaving the cinema. She stated that the original premise of the film came from the idea of the possessive nature of the teenage girl that is manifested in Tsubara’s wish to swap genitals in order to possess Madoka. She also stated that she believes, in a society where women have gained more power through the women’s rights movement, that the traditional role of the dominant male in relationships has been compromised. Though she thinks the progress made in women’s rights are a good thing, she also believes that men and women should not be equal in a relationship. She believes that the traditional male dominant role in a relationship should be restored. This is why she restores Madoka’s male prowess at the end of the film so that he is able to stop the volatile Tsubara from running away. Again I repeat how surprised I was to hear this, especially coming from a woman, as I feel the idea is very counterproductive to a modern society.

Shoko also announced that though she intended the question of whether or not the genitalia were reverted to their normal state at the end of the film to be open to interpretation, she herself believed that in fact they were. This of course reinforces the above idea of traditional male dominance but at the same time (to me anyway) renders a very boring and conservative ending to the film and I find it is far more interesting to assume that they didn’t revert. It raises far more interesting questions (as discussed above).

Other interesting points that were raised were the subjects of name and costume. All of the characters’ names; Tsubara, Madoko, En and Maru are apparently written with the same Japanese characters which Shoko intended to denote a sense of unity or circle. Likewise each of the characters’ costumes hold significance. Tsubara is always seen wearing bright reds to emphasise her energy. En always wears greys and blues to emphasise her boredom with life. Maru wears bright greens and pink to show his energy like Tsubara, while Madoko frequently wears beige, white and black to emphasise how boring and unadventurous he is.

However contrasting our ideas, with this astounding first feature I feel the young Kimura Shoko (only 25!) will be one to watch in the future!

The Woman in the Fifth: or sixth, or seventh- who cares?

2012-02-13T21:50:00.001Z

Another review for TFR. Hope you enjoy and leave any comments below.

Movie Labyrinth Rating: 'Schmeh'

Standard Rating: 4/10

Running Time: 85 mins

Director: Pawl Pawlikowski

Cast: Ethan Hawke, Kristin Scott Thomas, Joanna Kulig

Polish director Pawel Pawlikowski, following an eight year gap since the successful My Summer of Love (2004), returns to the screen with The Woman in the Fifth a ‘mystery thriller’ adapted from the book of the same name by Douglas Kennedy. Despite Pawlikowski’s previous critical successes, after watching this film I can’t help but think there may have been a distinct reason for his long absence from the film world; for though The Women in the Fifth may be mysterious, I certainly wouldn’t call it thrilling!

Ethan Hawke plays Tom Ricks, recently fired American college lecturer and novelist who arrives in Paris with the aim of gaining access to his estranged daughter despite a restraining order against him. After dozing off on a bus only to wake up at the ‘end of the line’, Ricks finds himself destitute, robbed of all his money and luggage. Help comes in the form of seedy hotelier Sezer (Samir Guesmi) who offers accommodation in his grotty establishment in return for the even seedier post as a ‘no questions asked’ night watchmen in a tiny bolted room somewhere in the city with just a surveillance camera for company. Concurrently, Ricks begins a love affair with the woman of the title, the mysterious femme fatale Margit, sensuously played by Kristin Scott Thomas. Ricks’ days begin to meld into each other as he maintains his boring job for the sake of the roof over his head, enjoys intermittent sex with the controlling Margit and pays the occasional paternal visit to his daughter. None of these encounters are thrilling or particularly mysterious, that is until an encounter with the police finally causes Ricks to perceive aspects of his relationship with Margit as mysterious – so much so that his sanity is called into question.

However, the film overall irritated rather than intrigued. Even though the acting is admirable (especially in the case of Scott Thomas) the characters are boring and stereotypically drawn, even down to their predictable clothing styles for their ‘types’. For instance, Ricks the tortured writer, wears thick rimmed glasses, dark polo necks, a tweed sports jacket and a heavy overcoat while Margit the mysterious femme fatale, wears black from head to toe and Sezer, the volatile mob man sports tacky gold jewellery. The first half of the film sets up a straightforward and somewhat engaging story but during the second half Pawlikowski takes an increasingly meandering course with his narrative, bringing more and more questions to the fore, only for them to remain unanswered right through to the end. The effect is a mystery film that is not thrilling, nor is it compelling. The end of the movie is welcomed despite the unanswered questions. I left the cinema, simply not caring.

The Woman in the Fifth is on general release as of the 17th of February

YOUNG ADULT: Charlize Theron becomes a new kind of monster...

2012-01-24T22:35:00.002Z

My best laid plans fell to pieces when it came to this blog... I've completely neglected it, but since I wrote this review for my college film review magazine (www.trinityfilmreview.com) , I decided I might just put it up here too, so without further ado here it is:

Rating: 7.5/10

Director: Jason Reitman

Running Time: 1 hour 30 mins

Cast: Charlize Theron, Patton Oswalt, Patrick Wilson, Elizabeth Reaser

Collaborators Jason Reitman and Diablo Cody who brought us the charming story of teen outcast Juno back in 2007, team up again but this time deliver us a biting, acerbic character study that is often times as uncomfortable to watch as it is darkly comic. Charlize Theron, never a stranger to leaving her comfort zone, dives in and winningly portrays the “psychotic prom queen bitch” that is Mavis Gary, a character who certainly fits the bill of the film’s tagline “Everyone gets old. Not everyone grows up.”

Mavis, to all her friends and family back in her dull little hometown of Mercury, Minnesota, appears to have made it in life. The former prom queen, now big time Young Adult book series writer in the big city (Minneapolis in this case) appears to have it all; a nice apartment, good looks and talent. However we soon learn to the contrary as we find the stagnant Mavis caught in a cycle of binge drinking, meaningless one-night-stands and endless circling of local coffee shops and shopping malls in the hopes of catching snippets of the vapid dialogue of passing teens to inspire her failing, once popular book series. Upon receiving an email from old flame Buddy Slade (Patrick Wilson) showing a picture of his new baby daughter, Mavis snaps into action with a new plan- that being to go back to Mercury in the hope of rescuing Buddy from the monotony of domestic life in which she believes he has been imprisoned.

Although the plot may be formulaic and somewhat predictable, it is the atypical stance that the film takes that makes it a compelling and engaging film. We’ve all seen countless films about the high school queen b, but it is rare that we see her all grown up (but the same no less). The film surprises us by presenting not only an unlikeable protagonist but also by challenging the notion that people mature as they age and lose those petty tendencies they had as teenagers.

Theron certainly steals the show as Mavis almost seems to have walked off one of the pages of her preppy books, a silly teenage girl, the delusional high school bitch queen, trapped in the body of a 37 year old woman as evidenced by her failure to recognise the ludicrousness of her naive plan and the cruel, insensitive way of communicating she uses to those she believes to be beneath her. For instance, when Matt, humorously played by Patton Oswalt, crippled for life by bullies and the former resident nerd of her high school strikes up a conversation with her in a bar, her crass response is “Oh, you’re the hate crime guy, you should have said!” Despite this rocky start, the two form an unlikely friendship and the audience is happy to take solace in this sardonic side character, who acts as the moral compass of the film, attempting to discourage Mavis from carrying out her foolish plans. Oswalt offers a complementary parallel to Mavis as the short, chubby, self-deprecating but ultimately friendly and kind-hearted guy, compared to the tall, beautiful, stoic and ultimately mean Mavis.

The film consists of a series of funny and often uncomfortably cringe-worthy episodes, culminating in a tumultuous climax in which Theron amazingly manages to invoke in the audience a strong and unexpected feeling of pathos towards this unsympathetic, amoral and frankly mentally unstable woman. Definitely worth the watch for the stunning performances and the winning combination of Jason Reitman and Diablo Cody.

Review: Labyrinth (1986)

2011-02-20T02:26:00.001Z

After reading a collection of decidedly negative and often inaccurate reviews on Jim Henson's 1986 adventure/ fantasy puppet masterpiece I figured it was high time something was done to redeem this underrated, charming coming-of-age tale. Invaluable to any children's movie collection, I truly can't imagine how it flopped in the box office back in the day. I may be a tad bit bias but dammit; too much negativity has been falsely directed at this fantastic film for me to stand by passively at the injustice of it all!

Movie Labyrinth Rating: Awesome/ Guilty Pleasure

Standard Rating: 8.5/10

Running Time: 1 hour 38 mins approx.

Director: Jim Henson

Cast: David Bowie, David Bowie's Crotch, Jennifer Connelly, Toby Froud and a bunch of muppets.

Plot Synopsis: Teenage fantasy lover Sarah (Connelly), fed up with her parents for making her babysit baby brother Toby; in a fit of exasperation calls upon the Goblin King from her favourite book LABYRINTH to take away the baby. When her fantasy comes true and Goblin King Jarreth (Bowie) appears at the window having stolen Toby, Sarah is faced with the task of completing his Labyrinth and forcing her way through the Goblin City to the castle to retrieve him in just 13 hours. What follows is Sarah’s long trek through the Labyrinth and all the obstacles she faces and chums she makes along the way...

Analysis and general musings: Where to start? Well Labyrinth first and foremost is a fantasy adventure tale with all of the trimmings; goblins, muppets, glitter, mazes, trickery, fairies, musical numbers etc. but under all the gloss we have the theme of a young girl on the cusp of adulthood. This immediately rings alarm bells in the mind of the cynic already expecting an overly sentimental, hammy, coming-of-age plot line but they should do well to be cautious in their judgements. Labyrinth is subtle and sophisticated in its underlying theme (the story of a girl caught between adolescence and adulthood) using some interesting concepts to illustrate events in life that are common to all of us; for instance the junk scene which I will discuss later. The ball scene is probably the only scene which is overtly clear about its intentions. It makes you feel that teenage discomfort of "am I a teenager or an adult?". In the video below Brian Henson talks more about this condition and his father Jim's understanding of it in relation to Sarah's character in the film:

On a side note concerning Sarah's character, I read on one site that she represents feminism. In asking the goblins to take the baby away she is rejecting traditional roles, throughout the entire film she rejects Jarreth and all the temptation he represents and at the end of the film her statement to Jarreth "You have no power over me" is her completely rejecting any male dominance he had over her. Perhaps one shouldn't read too much into it, I just thought it was interesting to note.

I really like the junk scene and like Brian Henson in the video below, the message it conveys went completely over my head until just recently. The junk people are a metaphor for the baggage you collect in life; something you do unconsciously, here are evoked in a very clever way; depicted as ultimate bag ladies! The chief junk woman's devious face is hard to forget and she creates a lasting impression on the viewer. I thought her little shifty eyes craning up to see Sarah were great, and a lot of effort went into creating her evil demeanour as her puppeteer here explains:

Another part of Labyrinth that I really appreciated was Henson's attention to detail; in every scene there is something interesting and often absurd to look at, be it the puppets themselves, the glitter covered set or some of the weird things to be found about on set. My favourite has to be the the little lichen plants with creepy moving eyes seen all around attached to rocks. Every puppet is so detailed and unique and there are some really weird and wonderful creations to be found too; such as the tunnel of 300 "helping hands" which form various faces as they talk to Sarah, the "false alarm" statues that shout out messages of impending doom as you pass, and the farting, burping 'Bog of Eternal Stench'.

However, everything said thus far is frankly just prelude to what we really want to hear about; the man who made the film what it is we know and love today, Mr. David Bowie! When Henson came up with the concept for his film he knew they needed someone cool and contemporary for the Goblin King role; so they thought 'rock star' and the first choice had to be Bowie. Bowie came to his audition fully prepared with a couple of tracks already written and recorded for the film. (Tracks that far surpassed the likes of other children's films in quality might I add.)

Bowie took to his role swimmingly as the camp but suave Jarreth, King of goblins; donning the dodgiest wig to grace the earth, some of the coolest jackets I've ever seen and not to mention the tightest tights in the world! (It's clear to see what kind of 'fantasy guy' the production team wanted to create). Which brings me to the real star of the show entirely; Bowie's crotch! Even as children, myself and my little innocent chums couldn't fail to notice the countless close ups on said crotch throughout the film, always wondering why but never believing it was intentional- until I found proof! Watch below and behold!

As I said previously, from various reviews I read Labyrinth got a lot of unwarranted stick, with quotes varying from "a crashing bore" to "the star is for the refreshing choice of a particularly unattractive baby to play the object of Sarah's request" but it was perhaps Roger Ebert, celebrated film critic's review which irritated me the most. He didn't even bother to get the facts straight and is politically incorrect in the process too; "One of the key characters in this film is Toby (played by Toby Froud). Froud is a midget who has been given a Muppet head to wear."- This guy is an idiot. Toby Froud plays the baby Toby. Hoggle, the character to whom I assume he is referring to is played by performer Shari Weiser in a costume with an animatronic head. Roger Ebert- you are lazy and you suck!

Moving on, and on a final note, I mentioned above that Bowie lends some fantastic tracks to the film so I leave you now with the music video to the title track of the film "Underground". Hope you enjoyed my review and I encouraged you to watch this awesome film!

Hello! Introducing The Movie Labyrinth Scale...

2011-02-07T23:38:00.002Z

Hello and welcome to my blog! I started Film Studies in college this year and I love it and all, but you don't exactly get to talk about what you want to in our essays and such, so I thought this would be a good place to splatter my 'non academic musings'. For my first entry I want to introduce for future film review posts and general advice for happy movie watching, The Movie Labyrinth Scale! This is a personal scale for rating movies that I have been toying around with for a while. I don't think it is simple enough to just rate a film out of ten or out of five stars- those systems just aren't specific enough for me- if you are like me then check out my scale below and let me know if you agree:

1. "Wow!": A film for me gets a Wow rating if it met your every standard, you could watch it a thousand times, it met all expectations, you would buy the super mega ultimate edition, you would kill the person who said it was crap, if it was a person you would marry it etc. etc. It's not often that a film will merit such an esteemed rating. Usually childhood classics fall into this category as you just can't see past that thick screen of nostalgia to its flaws. An example for me has got to be the original Alice in Wonderland or Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (Both of which ruined by Tim Burton's remakes- stick to your gothy stuff Tim!)

2.Awesome!: Not quite as good as a Wow but as the title says, still awesome! These are films almost everyone loves if not at least enjoys on some level. Might not be in your top 5 but definitely up high. These are usually feel-good films but not necessarily. Some generic ones that might fall in this category for some; The Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Forrest Gump, Toy Story.

3. The "I know it's good but...": this generally translates to one of those films you were told was a "must-see" or "all time classic" but when you do finally watch it you just react with "I know it's good but..." you watch it and you can recognise that it is a very good film, well produced, interesting symbolism or whatever but you just can't bring yourself to care. Wouldn't be a film you would pick up in a hurry again. For me Raging Bull is a good example- I saw all its merits but just didn't give a crap (also Joe Pesci does my head in).

4. "Schmeh": Pretty self-explanatory. You watch the film and your esteemed review of it can uttered in that single syllable word; "Schmeh". It wasn't bad, wasn't good. Would you watch it again? Maybe if I was bored and nothing else was on TV. Hundreds and hundreds of films fall into this category; think of any crappy rom-com or low grade comedy you've seen lately. Guaranteed they fall in here. Some prime examples: What happens in Vegas, anything with Adam Sandler in it.

5. The "Guilty Pleasure": Everyone has one! One of those films that's just too cheesy/mushy/babyish etc. to be mentioned in polite society. Your love affair with these films is usually kept a secret unless you are lucky enough to find someone who shares your weird obsession. For lots of people I'd say the Twilight films are a leader. For me it's gotta be Jim Henson's 'Labyrinth' with David Bowie; but more on that later...

6. The "Oh Dear Jesus!": You know what I'm talking about, that film you watch that is nothing short of life-robbing; whether it is from the sheer stupidity of it or the mind-numbing boredom inducing qualities it possesses you can't wait to see the back of it. Sometimes you might switch it off before it even ends or leave the cinema perhaps. I also find you tend to end up watching these films from misguided friends and colleagues who proclaim its virtues, hailing it as 'a masterpiece'- yeah whatever, might wanna check where your head is at the moment... A prime example is Year One (but that was to be expected I guess). Also 'The Spirit', who would have thought Frank Miller could produce something so awful?

That's all the ratings I have for the scale right now but doubtless over time additions will be made to it- there's a lot of films out there! If you read this far, cheers hope you enjoyed it.