From bad taste to paradise. Peter Jackson's journey

The long awaited release (it’s been years for me), of Peter Jackson’s The Lovely Bones, has been, like almost every anxiously expected event, disappointing. Why?

Let’s hop on the wayback machine and travel twenty years in the past when the name Peter Jackson meant nothing and most of his current fans weren’t even born yet. By 1990 Jackson had already released two essential movies in the world psychotronic filmography, Bad Taste (1987) and Meet the Feebles (1989). The first, apparently, just a simple exercise in what Jackson called splatstick, a mix of splatter and slapstick, took him four years to complete by shooting it on weekends with his friends as he played two hilariously antagonistic roles (fighting himself to the dead atop a cliff). What seems like an absurd and demented sci-fi comedy, is on one hand, a cinema’s great moments referential fest (covering from Ed Wood to Kubrick) and on the other hand a criticism of imperialism and globalization represented by greedy extraterrestrials that plan to use humanity as the main ingredient for their intergalactic fast food restaurants.

From this first feature Jackson displayed his technical mastery through the movements of his unstoppable camera while establishing some of the recurrent main concerns of his filmography.

For the fans of Sam Raimi’s The Evil Dead, Bad Taste was a delicious treat, sent all the way from New Zealand, which would only be topped by Braindead, Jackson’s planned next film. After not being able to get financial backing, the plan was delayed and the failure spawned a new screenplay full of cynicism and black humor. Meet the Feebles, which could only be described as the Muppets on acid, is a gory romantic comedy starring puppets that murder, take drugs and engage in all kinds of sexual acts, basically a Jackson styled romp.

In 1992 Braindead is released, considered as the apex of splatstick and gore and proudly bearing the world record for most artificial blood ever used in a movie (300 liters). Behind all the blood, zombies and delirious humor the film presents a story of repressed love by a castrating and murdering mother, where liberation is at the hands of a most improbable hero. Braindead is thematically and stylistically essential in Jackson’s career, solidly cementing his signature.

With his fourth film, Heavenly Creatures (1994), Jackson delves into more mature content, creating a veritable masterpiece. Not just anyone can make a poetically romantic vision of forbidden love and a place beyond reality, the fourth world, where anything is possible through imagination, out of a true story of matricide.

That autumn night in 1994, as I walked out of the cinema, I wasn’t just drunk on Jackson’s cinematic achievement I was also completely in love with the discovery of a superb teenage Kate Winslet in her film debut.

The following year, alongside Costa Botes, Jackson shot the hilarious mockumentary, Forgotten Silver (1995), which tells the story of kiwi filmmaking pioneer, Colin Mckenzie, precursor of the greatest achievements in film history. When the movie was aired on New Zealand television a lot of people thought it was a real documentary and felt very proud until they found out the truth and were outraged at the mockery.

Jackson’s Heavenly Creatures had caught Hollywood’s eye and he decided to take advantage of it by selling a screenplay written with his wife for a Tales from Crypt movie
to Universal. Robert Zemeckis decided to produce the script hiring Jackson himself to direct it, who convinced the studio to let him shoot in New Zealand. The Frighteners (1996), speaking as a huge Jackson fan, was a bit of a let down. Despite the huge Hollywood budget and the presence of Michael J. Fox, the final product didn’t work, the mix of supernatural comedy and serial killers didn’t quite gel. What we got to see again, was Jackson’s interest on the themes of homicide, the afterlife and love conquering evil, even beyond death.

It is notable that Jackson, like Hitchcock, has an interest (obsession) for murder and its motivations, entering the minds of killers and telling their side of the story. Curiously, like Hitchcock, Jackson also has cameos in all of his films.

After The Frighteners Jackson was ready to shoot a remake of 1933’s King Kong, the movie that inspired him to become a filmmaker as an eight year old, thanks to its wonderful stop motion animation. Ultimately the production fell through and he decided to focus on his epic adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings.

A few years of production and legal battles later, the rings trilogy was released: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001), The Two Towers (2002) and Return of the king (2003). The saga is really a single, twelve hour film (in the complete versions) and that is the way it is meant to be seen, that is also the reason why Jackson received the Academy Award for the final chapter of the trilogy. Not only did Lord of the Rings make Peter Jackson a household name the world over, it also defined him as one of the greatest contemporary filmmakers proving his capability at a scale that very few directors reach in their lives and most importantly doing it all on his own terms by producing and shooting, once again, entirely in New Zealand.

Besides the evident anti imperialist theme already present in Tolkien’s original text, Peter Jackson emphasized the importance of friendship and loyalty between Frodo and Sam once more championing the triumph of love over the dark forces of evil.

In 2005 Jackson closes a circle in his life with his mega budget reinterpretation of King Kong where he gave free reign to all his childhood fantasies about the giant gorilla and the perfect way of reimagining it for the new millennium. In the end the story remains the same as seventy years prior, beauty and the beast and the love that transcends all obstacles but can only end with death.

The recently released The Lovely Bones, based on Alice Sebold’s novel promised a return to Heavenly Creatures’ territory by Jackson, with its similar topics of teenage girls, love and murder. Unfortunately Jackson seems to have lost his touch. Maybe he lost it as he navigated all those sugary digital effects while trying to come up with the perfect way of showing the heaven/limbo that Susie Salmon inhabits. Saorsie Ronan’s portrayal of Susie is without a doubt the best element of the film which is at times an unsettling murder story, a teenage drama, a Hallmark channel movie and a Peter Jackson fantasy that never quite makes up its mind and never quite reaches the evocative moments of the novel nor the flight of a heavenly creature. Nevertheless the movie is not a total disaster but my twenty year old admiration for Peter makes me a harsh judge. There is in the end a sweet flavor that carries over from the original text, the strength of the love between a father and a daughter and the delicate healing that time brings to all wounds.

For the time being Peter has a very busy schedule with the upcoming productions of Tin Tin and his return to middle earth, The Hobbit, directed by Steven Speilberg and Guillermo del Toro respectively.

I am sure he will soon take us on another unforgettable journey. After all, for those who have the key to the fourth world everything is possible.

Spidey's tangled web

A few days ago the announcement was made official, Spider-Man 4 was scrapped, Sam Raimi and Tobey Maguire fired. The franchise will be rebooted. Marc Webb will direct.

Let me backtrack a bit. I have been reading comic books since before I can remember and my favorite character since I was six had always been Spider-Man, there’s an everyman quality to the character that makes him immediately relatable and because of this I followed his adventures on and off for decades.
In the late 80’s I discovered Sam Raimi and immediately fell in love with his films, starting with The Evil Dead and never letting go from there.

In 2000 when I first heard he was directing Spider-Man I was ecstatic. I had lived in fear for some years with the rumors of a James Cameron helmed Spidey, played by DiCaprio (thankfully, that never happened).
Finally, in 2002 Sam delivered, with one of the best comic book movies in decades, and though no one can touch Richard Donner’s Superman yet, he came close. One of the most interesting things in Raimi’s Spider-Man 1 and 2 are the similarities they bear with the first two Superman films, some shots are taken straight out of Donner’s films (an obvious homage by Raimi). The storylines are the same, origin, responsibility in the first ones and losing powers/quitting in the second ones. Even the widely panned Spider-Man 3 is a reflection of Superman 3 with its “hero turns bad” storyline (remember the dark, evil Superman?).
Truth is only Sam Raimi had the sheer kinetic energy necessary to pull off a Spider-Man film correctly but there was another essential ingredient to create the perfect Spider-Man, Tobey Maguire’s Peter Parker. If there was ever someone born to play a part (besides Christopher Reeve) it was Tobey as Spidey.
This perfect mix of director, subject and star gave us two great films and a convoluted though enjoyable third outing. The fourth film would be for Sam Raimi a chance to right all the wrongs brought upon the third movie by studio meddling, he was ready to hold on to the reigns and not let go this time around.
So what happened? Hollywood happened. When Raimi stated his dissatisfaction with the screenplay the problems started. After a series of writing and casting disagreements, in a final show of power by the studio they pulled the plug on the project right from under Raimi’s feet, clearly sending a message to any other rogue directors that might be getting the wrong idea. The message: no matter how big you are or how much money you have made for us we can always replace you. And that’s what they did, shattering the hearts of millions of mouthwatering fanboys who were expecting the best Spidey movie ever, and a return to form by Raimi, as clearly seen in his Drag me to Hell, which, besides being one of the most enjoyable films of 2009, was in itself a way of showing what he can do without studio interference and a fraction of their mega budgets.

The planned reboot which will be directed by the aptly named Marc Webb is supposed to follow the Ultimate Spider-Man (a reboot itself) comic book storyline, meaning, less superheroing and more teen angst. The word gritty has also been thrown around in talks of this new take which makes absolutely no sense, since Webb, I’m assuming, was hired for his excellent and very funny handling of modern romance, (500) Days of Summer, which is very much in tune to Spidey’s original tone.

One thing I can say is I was pleasantly relieved at the news of Webb as director, since the shortlist of possible helmers included James Cameron, David Fincher and Michael effing Bay! So yes, I was quite relieved. I enjoyed (500) Days so much I went to see it twice at the cinema and I can really see how Webb will be able to capture Peter Parker’s mental space on film. What I am skeptical about is the way he will be handling the action and budget but there is always a first time and after his pitch perfect "Summer" he sure deserves the benefit of the doubt. Let’s just hope James Vanderbilt (screenwriter) delivers a decent “non gritty” script.

Well that’s the saga of Spider-Man’s cinematic tangled web so far. Now we’ll just have to wait until 2012 to see the end result and hope for the best.

Though I’m sure he has been told this a million times since he signed up for the reboot
- Marc? Please remember “with great power comes great responsibility”.

Find your passion, find yourself.

Julie & Julia


Directed by Nora Ephron


2009







I wasn't really keen on watching Julie & Julia. So, why did I?
Yesterday was my mother's birthday, she originally wanted to watch the film when it was playing at the cinema but she couldn't catch it. Amongst the gifts I gave her yesterday I included the dvd. After having dinner with both my parents, we decided to cap the celebration by watching the movie at their place.

Julie & Julia is not a particularly exceptional film but it is an inspirational film. Through both of the real stories that make the film you get a joie de vivre vibe. Maybe at first, both Julias, are not really happy with themselves or the way their lives are developing, regardless of the fact that they are both happily married to excellent husbands. What they feel uneasy about is the lack of a personal passion, Julia Child is a regular 1940's housewife, Julie Powell works at a government call center. We see how their stories unfold in a parallel narrative as Julia Child discovers her love for cooking and Julie decides to cook her way through Child's entire cookbook in one year, as she writes about it in her blog.
As usual, Meryl Streep's performance is a delight, she creates an interpretation of a familiar character and makes it her own. While Amy Adams' Julie is charming and easy to identify with. They both portray strong women who become themselves one step at a time, enjoying every single moment of their journey.

Julie & Julia may not be the best film of the year but it is funny, endearing, brimming with love and most importantly it is very inspiring. As proof, this evening, my mother, who is not normally a very animated cook, prepared a delicious potato soup with chiapaneco cheese which was simply irresistible and... credit where credit's due, I decided to start writing this film blog.

My thanks go to Julie, Julia, and Nora.

...and so it begins.

January is almost over but it's still early in the year and it's never too late to start something new. In this case I am starting a new blog... with a purpose. I love films. I could spend an eternity watching films. So I decided I should write about them and about what I love in each and every one of them. Besides, when you write about something, you discover more about the subject and about yourself in the process, so it becomes a journey of self discovery and exploration. Yes, as incredible as it may sound, watching and writing about movies is an adventure into a different world. The fourth world. The world of imagination, creativity and art. That's what all this is about.

Besides the regular blog entries, I will also include here the monthly film column I write for Infobaja magazine, in both the original spanish version and an english translation.

The purpose of the blog? Almost forgot about that. Simply a way of forcing myself to write on a regular basis. How regularly? Everytime I watch a movie, I'll write about it. This means you'll be able to read about recent releases, silent films, classics, animation, euro horror, indies, art films, in short, anything that I'm in the mood for watching any given day.

Maybe my blog won't change the world but if I discover new things about myself as I write, that will surely change me, and when you change yourself you change your world. So... it's a start.

I guess that's all you need to know for now. So sit back and enjoy the show.