Nostalgia Fest...

There seems to be a rather interesting thread over the last few years in cinema. Nostalgia is the new buzz word. It could be argued that this has been started by the rebooting craze that began with Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy which, to its undeniable credit, brought a comic book hero into the 21st century and also, more importantly, into reality. But it's not just that: nostalgia is seeping through into all sorts of genres.

Case in point: This Is 40, the sort of sequel to the quite amusing Knocked Up. Though panned by quite a lot of critics, this film isn't as bad as some would make you believe. It's lacking a clear, strong narrative, true, but what it really is is a series of vignettes about a couple who are apporaching the big four oh. The problem I had with this particular couple was that, truth be told, they're not exactly the most likable of characters, despite Paul Rudd and Leslie Mann's decent efforts. However, the fact that there is no discernable plotline and nothing really gets resolved in the end of the film (Money matters, growing family) perhaps helps this a little. If nobody changes (and nobody really does change) then that's the true nature of real life and, more importantly, Judd Apatow's real life; his characters never really change unless the storyline requires them to change and that's actually very rare in his storylines.

Another film where I felt a little let down by the script was Oz The Great And Powerful, Disney's prequel to The Wizard Of Oz, hampered by two major factors: the first is that they couldn't actually use any images/songs/themes from the classic Judy Garland musical. The second is James Franco in the title role. Originally this was to be played by Robert Downey Jr, who you know - not feel, know - would have made much more of an impression as the con man turned hero. Franco is slightly flat and lacking in character. As a result the film has to be held up by the three female leads - Michelle Williams, who captures the spirit of Glinda perfectly, Rachel Weisz who you feel is underused, and Mila Kunis who surprised me as just how good she was as the niave sister caught in the middle. The twist in the plot helps a little, though make up isn't all that fantastic at times, and when you really need a bit of comic relief there is a surprising lack of it from Zach Braff's monkey, who should have been better. The film ould have benefitted from being a little darker, though the winged monkeys are scary at times. The film sets up the plot for the next film (the musical) well, though, despite these flaws, and is a quite good picture to take small children too.

Michelle Williams is good as Glinda, but even better as Marilyn Monroe in My Week With Marilyn. She perfectly captures the star so much you almost forget that she's playing the role, unlike Kenneth Branagh whose Laurence Olivier is a sly knowing wink and a nod away from pantomime. Williams is fun and tragic, sexy and vulnerable; no wonder that Eddie Redmayne, who is good in the naive part of the narrator who spends the title time with the screen goddess, is captivated by her. The film is not too long too, to its credit, and is beautifully shot at times, going at its own pace to really celebrate the work of an actress who knew exactly why she was famous and wanted to prove she could be something more, but was hampered by her own insecurities.

This Is 40: 6/10
Oz The Great And Powerful: 6/10
My Week With Marilyn: 8/10

Artistic Rant

It was announced this week that Newcastle City Council are to scrap their £1.2 million arts grant and produce a new ccultural fund that is half that amount.

This isn't a surprise; we knew this was going to happen. But it still stings and, yes, even stinks. Times are tough, we can all appreciate that, and there are areas which need to suffer. But it just feels like time and time again it is the arts that are being punished. Yes, punished.

This wouldn't happen in London, let's say, because London has Theatreland and the West End; London has a great tourist pull with their theatres.That means that London gains money out of theatres. Okay, fair enough. But when theatres are charging a huge, stupid amount for tickets to see decent shows then it means that there is a huge percentage of the population who are going to suffer. They won't be able to afford to travel to London to see these shows, let alone come and watch them; therefore they don't experience the arts and the closest thing to drama that they associate with is utter bilge such as TOWIE, Geordie Shore or worse.

Now imagine what would happen if arts budgets were increased: more local theatre, more local art, more initiatives and programmes to get young people interested and involved, more summer projects to get them off the streets and learning who they are and, best of all, having fun, for as little money as possible. As a result they determine to work harder in schools, they get better grades, they want to go to University, they want to work in the big world out there and make money, not just for themselves but helping the economy.

TOWIE doesn't teach them that; TOWIE teaches them that all they need to do in life is get a fake tan, a vajazzle and show their boobs to get instant fame.

It doesn't work like that, and it should never work like that.

For far too long the local councils have taken the arts for granted; the more money they take away, the more chance it is that these arts will eventually disappear into the murky world of a middle class minority. Local theatres offer cheap seats, but they won't be able to if their funding is cut; writing initiatives offer opportunities to up and coming writers, but they won't be able to if their funding is cut.

It's time to stop this.