Placeholder Content Image

‘To truly forget life for a while – a reprieve and a reward’: why Australians love going to the cinema

<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ruari-elkington-105955">Ruari Elkington</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a></em></p> <p>Australians have had plenty of time in the last 100 years to work out what they value about cinema-going and why it matters. Head to any cinema and catch the Val Morgan advertising in the pre-show. Take a closer look at the date the company was founded. Not 1984, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Val_Morgan">but 1894</a>. That’s more than 125 years of “Making Messages Memorable” on Australian screens.</p> <p>We have a deep and abiding love for cinema in this country. Over the last century, the experience of going to the movies has both shifted significantly (<a href="https://villageroadshow.com.au/-/media/VRL-Corporate-Media-Library/Documents/Press-Releases/2017/5-December-Gold-Class-Celebrates-20-Years.pdf">we invented Gold Class, you know</a>) and somehow remained resolutely enduring in terms of appeal.</p> <p>My colleague Tess Van Hemert and I have spent the last two years <a href="https://research.qut.edu.au/dmrc/projects/resilient-screens-investigating-the-value-of-australian-cinema-exhibition/">researching</a> the cultures and practices of cinema-going and how cinema sites shape that experience.</p> <p>A typical response in our research was: "I love the cinema experience. It’s a bonding experience, if it’s good it’s an emotional and cathartic experience."</p> <h2>‘A reprieve and a reward’</h2> <p>Cinemas <a href="https://www.bfi.org.uk/industry-data-insights/reports/measuring-economic-value-cinema-venues">are a catalyst</a> for social, cultural and economic activity wherever they operate, from single-screen regional sites to major multiplexes in suburban shopping malls. Cinema, our participants said, is the “ideal” way to watch a movie: "I like to sit as close as I can to the screen so that the ‘real’ world is completely blocked out. I am immersed in &amp; in awe of the film only. To truly forget life for a while – a reprieve &amp; a reward."</p> <p>Cinemas also mirror communities back to themselves. We may go in alone, as a couple or with family and friends, but in the cinema we form a community.</p> <p>When reflecting on returning to the cinema between COVID lockdowns, one person spoke of seeing American Utopia "There were only about 10 people in the cinema. We didn’t know each other but we all started spontaneously dancing, first in our seats, and then everyone ran down to the floor in front of the screen to dance together. It was like a mini music festival when live music was banned."</p> <p>Despite the cost, despite the hassle, despite the need to leave the couch, Australians turn up time and time again to cinemas. In 2023, the Australian box office generated nearly <a href="https://if.com.au/australian-box-office-neared-1b-in-2023/">A$1 billion</a> (although this is down on <a href="https://variety.com/2020/film/asia/australia-annual-box-office-drops-1203476275/">pre-COVID figures</a>). Four of the top ten highest grossing films of all time in Australia have been released <a href="https://www.valmorgan.com.au/2022-at-the-movies">since the pandemic began</a>. Australian census data tells us cinema-going remains Australia’s <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/people-and-communities#:%7E:text=44%25%20of%20people%20attended%20the,popular%20cultural%20venue%20or%20event">most popular</a> cultural activity.</p> <h2>‘Being able to switch off’</h2> <p>When cinemas face closure – or shut temporarily, as they did during the pandemic – the outpouring of community support can galvanise a community and remind them of all the times and ways in which they valued that access to that experience.</p> <p>One participant spoke of seeing their first film in the cinema after the pandemic: "It made me appreciate the whole cinema experience more. Getting out and being able to switch off was a welcome change."</p> <p>In our research, we observed how cinemas began to <a href="https://www.palacecinemas.com.au/blog/the-cinema-why-we-love-it/">articulate</a> their value to community through the pandemic period of forced closures.</p> <p>In the <a href="https://eprints.qut.edu.au/243758/">large-scale national audience research</a> we conducted in partnership with Palace Cinemas the value audiences derive from cinema-going was as diverse as the programming.</p> <p>They remembered specific films, such as watching the opening credits of Force Awakens with a crowd of avid fans, or feeling like they were “experiencing summer in Italy” while watching Call Me By Your Name.</p> <p>They focused on memories of the people they were with, such as feeling “all grown up” while seeing arthouse films with their dad when they were a kid.</p> <h2>‘Float in the memory’</h2> <p>They spoke about the feelings they had before during and after the screening and the experience overall. One respondent wrote of loving the end of a film: "the quiet few minutes as the credits roll and you float in the memory of the film. This only happens for me when I see it in the cinema."</p> <p>Another participant spoke about leaving the cinema and: "doing a walk around the block thinking about the movie, still thinking about the movie driving home."</p> <p>One participant said they love “being able to have respectful (unbothered) alone time publicly”.</p> <p>Clear in this data is that memorability – and the experience of cinema – is far more nuanced than the simple appeal of watching a big film in a big room on a big screen. Cinemas continue to serve Australian communities in far more complex way than simply movies and popcorn.</p> <p>Cinema has always battled headwinds. Since radio, cinema has constantly faced in-home entertainment technology that was supposed to knock it over completely – TV, colour TV, cable, satellite, VHS, DVDs and now streaming. Each time, the desire for people to come together in a space and watch something unique in a way they can’t find anywhere else, with a level of engagement they can’t find anywhere else, has prevailed. We all have a kitchen at home, but we still love going out to restaurants.</p> <p>Disney, Warner Bros and Australia’s own Birch Carrol and Coyle all celebrated 100 years of operation in 2023. To sustain another century, more research is needed to better understand how cinema-going must continue to evolve to meet shifting audience expectations.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222597/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ruari-elkington-105955">Ruari Elkington</a>, Senior Lecturer in Creative Industries &amp; Chief Investigator at QUT Digital Media Research Centre (DMRC), <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/queensland-university-of-technology-847">Queensland University of Technology</a></em></p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/to-truly-forget-life-for-a-while-a-reprieve-and-a-reward-why-australians-love-going-to-the-cinema-222597">original article</a>.</em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

New outdoor cinema with Queen-size beds opening

<p>Do you ever find yourself torn between wanting to catch a flick and the irresistible allure of your comfy bed? Well, brace yourself, because Sydney's movie scene is about to get a serious dose of comfort with the grand opening of Mov'in Bed in Barangaroo.</p> <p>Yes, you read that right – a cinema where you can literally Netflix and chill on a queen-size bed!</p> <p>Set against the breathtaking backdrop of the Barangaroo skyline, Mov'in Bed promises a cinema experience that'll make you question why you ever settled for uncomfortable theatre seats in the first place.</p> <p>Picture this: a giant 15-metre 4K screen, plush queen-size cloud-like beds, and a total transformation of Barangaroo's Harbour Park into a sandy tropical paradise. It's like combining a day at the beach with a movie night – talk about the best of both worlds.</p> <p>The grand opening on January 12 marks the return of Mov'in Bed after an extended intermission courtesy of the pandemic. If you've been waiting for the perfect excuse to combine your passion for cinema with your love of lounging, this is it. The lineup promises a mix of new-release blockbusters and timeless classics, with films like <em>Trolls</em> and <em>Barbie</em> making their debut on the giant Mov'in Bed screen.</p> <p>For those who like to take their movie nights up a notch, Mov'in Bed offers VIP packages that include unlimited popcorn, bubbly on arrival and even a personal butler. Because why settle for a regular cinema experience when you can have someone cater to your every cinematic whim?</p> <p>But what about the practicalities, you ask? Fear not, for Mov'in Bed has thought of everything. Each bed comes with comfy blankets, LED-lit bedside tables for those all-important snacks – and, of course, comfy pillows for all your cinematic napping needs. And to ensure you don't miss a single dialogue or explosion, noise-cancelling headphones are provided – because the only explosions you want to hear are on the screen, not your neighbour's popcorn bag.</p> <p>And let's not forget the halftime experience; a nostalgic nod to classic drive-in nights where you can replenish your snacks or hit the bathroom during those longer films. Scorcese's epic <em>Killers of the Flower Moon</em> with its 3-hour-and-26-minute runtime? No worries, you've got time for a quick snack break without missing any plot twists.</p> <p>Mov'in Bed isn't just a cinema; it's a full-blown cinematic event. Partnering with local restaurants, you can savour delicious dinners while catching the latest blockbuster. It's the perfect excuse for a summer evening date night or a laid-back hangout with friends.</p> <p>So, mark your calendars, Sydney-siders! Mov'in Bed Barangaroo is here to redefine your summer nights from January 12 to April 14, 2024. Whether you're a film buff, a beach lover, or just someone who appreciates the genius of combining the two, <a href="https://movinbed.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Mov'in Bed</a> is the place to be.</p> <p>Because why settle for a regular movie night when you can have a cinema experience that's fun, chill, laid-back and upbeat – all while lying in the lap of luxury? Get ready to sink into cinematic bliss under the glistening Sydney moon!</p> <p><em>Images: Mov'in Bed.</em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

World mourns the passing of one of the true greats of cinema

<p>Renowned British-Irish actor, Sir Michael Gambon, celebrated worldwide for his iconic portrayal of Albus Dumbledore in the beloved Harry Potter film series, has passed away at the age of 82.</p> <p>In an official statement relayed by his publicist, it was confirmed that he succumbed to pneumonia, leaving his family and fans heartbroken. The statement issued by his family reads, "We are devastated to announce the loss of Sir Michael Gambon. Beloved husband and father, Michael died peacefully in the hospital with his wife Anne and son Fergus by his side."</p> <p>Michael Gambon's acting journey spanned more than half a century, with one of his most significant milestones being his assumption of the role of Dumbledore in the Harry Potter series, succeeding the late Richard Harris in 2004. In characteristic humility, Gambon downplayed his performance, often remarking that he merely portrayed himself "with a stuck-on beard and a long robe".</p> <p>The Harry Potter franchise expressed its grief, stating, "He brought immeasurable joy to Harry Potter fans from all over the world with his humour, kindness, and grace. We will forever hold his memory in our hearts."</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> <p dir="ltr" lang="en">We are incredibly saddened to hear of the passing of Sir Michael Gambon. He brought immeasurable joy to Harry Potter fans from all over the world with his humour, kindness and grace. We will forever hold his memory in our hearts. <a href="https://t.co/1CoTF3zeTo">pic.twitter.com/1CoTF3zeTo</a></p> <p>— Harry Potter (@harrypotter) <a href="https://twitter.com/harrypotter/status/1707371391866028071?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 28, 2023</a></p></blockquote> <p>James Phelps, known for his portrayal of Fred Weasley in the series, shared a touching anecdote on Instagram, recounting how Gambon generously helped him rehearse a script during the filming of "Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince". Phelps hailed Gambon as both a legend on and off the camera, describing him as funny and always willing to share his knowledge.</p> <p>Gambon embarked on his acting career in the early 1960s, initially treading the boards of the stage before transitioning to television and film. His filmography boasted remarkable performances, such as his portrayal of a psychotic mob leader in Peter Greenaway's <em>The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover</em> in 1989 and his portrayal of the elderly King George V in Tom Hooper's <em>The King's Speech</em> in 2010.</p> <p>Despite an early start in engineering apprenticeship, Gambon's passion for acting remained unwavering. He recounted to <em>The Herald</em> newspaper in 2004 that he always knew he would become an actor. His breakthrough came in 1962 when he auditioned for the legendary Laurence Olivier, who subsequently appointed him as one of the founding members of the National Theatre at the Old Vic, alongside emerging talents like Derek Jacobi and Maggie Smith.</p> <p>Gambon's reputation soared on the stage, with his portrayal of Galileo in John Dexter's <em>Life of Galileo</em> in 1980 being a standout moment. In the 1980s, his lead role in the TV series <em>The Singing Detective</em> garnered widespread acclaim, earning him one of his four BAFTA Awards. Additionally, he clinched three Olivier Awards and two Screen Actors Guild Awards for ensemble cast performances in <em>Gosford Park</em> (2001) and <em>The King's Speech</em>.</p> <p>Acknowledged for his contributions to drama, Gambon was honoured as a Commander of the British Empire in 1992 and subsequently knighted in 1998. Despite these prestigious titles, he often displayed a mischievous side, weaving tales such as showing fellow actors a forged signed photograph of Robert De Niro, among other playful antics.</p> <p>In 2015, Gambon retired from the stage due to long-term memory issues, yet he continued to grace the screen with his talent until 2019. In a 2002 interview, he expressed that his work made him feel "the luckiest man in the world".</p> <p><em>Images: Getty / Instagram</em></p>

News

Placeholder Content Image

Beyond Barbie and Oppenheimer, how do cinemas make money? And do we pay too much for movie tickets?

<p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a></em></p> <p>I’ve got two questions about blockbuster movies like Barbie and Oppenheimer.</p> <ol> <li> <p>Why aren’t the cinemas charging more for them, given they’re so popular?</p> </li> <li> <p>Why are they the same price, given Oppenheimer is an hour longer?</p> </li> </ol> <p>The opening weekend <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/culture/movies/how-australian-cinemas-and-audiences-handled-the-barbenheimer-juggernaut-20230724-p5dqso.html">for both films</a> saw an avalanche of Australians returning to the cinema. Extra staff had to be put on (although probably not enough) to manage queues, turn away pink-clad fans who couldn’t get in, and clean up mountains of popcorn trampled underfoot.</p> <p>An obvious solution to such a rush of demand is to push up prices. Airlines do it when they are getting low on seats. When more people want to get a ride share, Uber makes them pay with “<a href="https://www.uber.com/au/en/drive/driver-app/how-surge-works/">surge pricing</a>”.</p> <p>Even books are sold at different prices, depending on the demand, their length, their quality and how long they’ve been on the shelves.</p> <p>But not movie tickets, which are nearly always the same price, no matter the movie. Why? And how much has the cost of a trip to the movies risen over the past 20 years?</p> <h2>Why not charge more for blockbusters?</h2> <p>In suburban Melbourne, Hoyts is charging $24.50 for the two-hour Barbie – the same as it is charging for the three-hour Oppenheimer, even though it could fit in far fewer showings of Oppenheimer in a day. It’s also the same price as it is charging for much less popular movies, such as Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny.</p> <p>It’s also how things are in the United States, where James Surowiecki, author of <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/175380/the-wisdom-of-crowds-by-james-surowiecki/">The Wisdom of Crowds</a> blames convention and says "it costs you as much to see a total dog that’s limping its way through its last week of release as it does to see a hugely popular film on opening night."</p> <p>Australian economists Nicolas de Roos of The University of Sydney and Jordi McKenzie of Macquarie University quote Surowiecki in their <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167718714000174">2014 study</a> of whether cinema operators could make more by cutting the price of older and less popular films and raising the price of blockbusters.</p> <p>By examining what happened to demand on <a href="https://www.eventcinemas.com.au/Promotions/HalfPriceTuesdays#cinemas=59">cheap Tuesdays</a>, and developing a model taking into account advertising, reviews and the weather, they discovered Australian cinemas could make a lot more by <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167718714000174">varying their prices</a> by the movie shown. We turn out to be highly price sensitive. So why don’t cinemas do that?</p> <h2>‘There’s a queue, it must be good’</h2> <p>It’s the sort of thing that puzzled <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/1992/becker/biographical/">Gary Becker</a>, an economic detective of sorts who won the Nobel Prize for Economics in the early 1990s. A few years earlier, he turned his attention to <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2937660">restaurants</a> and why one particular seafood restaurant in Palo Alto, California, had long queues every night but didn’t raise its prices.</p> <p>Across the road was a restaurant that charged slightly more, sold food that was about as good, and was mostly empty.</p> <p>His conclusion, which he used a lot of maths to illustrate, was there are some goods for which a consumer’s demand depends on the demand of other consumers.</p> <p>Queues for restaurants (or in 2023, long queues and sold out sessions, as crowds were turned away from Barbie) are all signals other consumers want to get in.</p> <p>This would make queues especially valuable to the providers of such goods, even if the queues meant they didn’t get as much as they could from the customers who got in. The “buzz” such queues create produces a supply of future customers persuaded that what was on offer must be worth trying.</p> <p>Importantly, Becker’s maths showed that getting things right was fragile. It was much easier for a restaurant to go from being “in” to “out” than the other way around. Once a queue had created a buzz, it was wise not to mess with it.</p> <h2>Cashing in from the snack bar</h2> <p>There are other reasons for cinemas to charge a standard ticket price, rather than vary it movie by movie.</p> <p>One is that it is hard to tell ahead of time which movies are going to soar and which are going to bomb, even if you spend a fortune on advertising as the <a href="https://variety.com/2023/film/box-office/barbie-marketing-campaign-explained-warner-bros-1235677922/">makers of Barbie did</a>. In the words of an insider, “<a href="https://variety.com/2018/film/opinion/william-goldman-dies-appreciation-1203030781/">nobody knows anything</a>.”</p> <p>Another is the way cinemas make their money. They have to pay the distributor a share of what they get from ticket sales (typically <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167718714000174">35-40%</a>). But they don’t have to pay a share of what they make from high-margin snacks.</p> <p>This means it can make sense for some cinemas to charge less than what the market will bear – because they’ll sell more snacks – even if it means less money for the distributor.</p> <h2>Rising prices, despite some falling costs</h2> <p>But cinemas still charge a lot. From 2002 to 2022, Australian cinemas jacked up their average (not their highest) prices <a href="https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/fact-finders/cinema/industry-trends/box-office/ticket-prices">from $9.13 to $16.26</a> – an increase of 78%.</p> <p>In the same 20 year period, overall prices in Australia, as measured by the <a href="https://theconversation.com/whats-in-the-cpi-and-what-does-it-actually-measure-165162">consumer price index</a>, climbed 65% – less than the rise in movie ticket prices.</p> <hr /> <p><iframe id="E2kxi" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/E2kxi/5/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe></p> <hr /> <p>A 2015 study found Australian cinemas charge more <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306227560_Counting_the_cost_the_impact_of_cinema_ticket_prices_in_Australia">than cinemas in the US</a>.</p> <p>Yet some of the cinemas’ costs have gone down. They used to have to employ projectionists to lace up and change reels of film. Digital delivery means much less handling.</p> <p>A now-dated <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/publications/developments-in-the-cinema-distribution-exhibition-industry">1990s report</a> to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission found the two majors, Hoyts and Greater Union/Village, charged near identical prices except where they were faced with competition from a nearby independent, in which case they discounted.</p> <p>Whether “<a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/The%20Cinema%20Industry.pdf">by design or circumstance</a>”, the two cinema chains rarely competed with each other, clustering their multiplexes in different geographical locations.</p> <h2>Longer films no longer displace shorter films</h2> <p>I think it might be the multiplex that answers my second question: why cinemas don’t charge more for movies that are longer (and movies are <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/culture/movies/bigger-than-ben-hur-why-movies-are-getting-longer-and-longer-20220322-p5a6ty.html">getting longer</a>).</p> <p>In the days of single screens, a cinema that showed a long movie might only fit in (say) four showings a day instead of six. So it would lose out unless it charged more.</p> <p>But these days, multiplexes show many, many films on many screens, some of them simultaneously, meaning long films needn’t displace short films.</p> <p>Although we have <a href="https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/fact-finders/cinema/industry-trends/screens-and-theatres">fewer cinema seats</a> than we had a decade ago (and at least until the advent of Barbie, we’ve been <a href="https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/fact-finders/cinema/industry-trends/screens-and-theatres">going less often</a>) we now have <a href="https://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/fact-finders/cinema/industry-trends/screens-and-theatres">far more screens</a>.</p> <p>Long movies no longer stop the multiplexes from playing standard ones. And because cinemas like to keep things simple, you pay the same price, no matter which movie you chose. <!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/211121/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: https://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/peter-martin-682709">Peter Martin</a>, Visiting Fellow, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/crawford-school-of-public-policy-australian-national-university-3292">Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University</a></em></p> <p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/beyond-barbie-and-oppenheimer-how-do-cinemas-make-money-and-do-we-pay-too-much-for-movie-tickets-211121">original article</a>.</em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

Are the Oscars going to take animated films more seriously?

<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/robert-boucaut-1215760">Robert Boucaut</a>, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-adelaide-1119">University of Adelaide</a></em></p> <p>“Animation is cinema. Animation is not a genre. And, animation is ready to be taken to the next step – we are all ready for it, please help us, keep animation in the conversation.”</p> <p>This was Guillermo del Toro’s testament accepting the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature Film in 2023 for <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1488589/">Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio</a>, released by Netflix. As one of the most acclaimed modern auteurs – and one who has <a href="https://www.avclub.com/guillermo-del-toro-is-going-all-in-on-animation-1850539253">announced his intention to stick with animation</a> as his preferred medium – his acceptance speech reads like a plea directly to the academy.</p> <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/shW9i6k8cB0?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <h2>Animated films at the Oscars</h2> <p>The Oscars have had a storied history of engaging with animated cinema. Since 2002, they have awarded a Best Animated Feature award, first won by Shrek. This was a time of technological innovations for 3D animation (think Toy Story or A Bug’s Life), and of standout A-list voice performances (Robin Williams in Aladdin, or Shrek’s star-studded cast).</p> <p>By including animated films as a standalone category, the Oscars ended up segregating them: animation was treated as its own thing. Beauty and the Beast broke ground as the first-ever animated nominee for the Best Picture Oscar in 1992, but only two films have achieved such a feat since.</p> <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iurbZwxKFUE?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <p>Up (2009) and Toy Story 3 (2010) were Best Picture Oscar nominees (and Best Animated Feature winners) of their respective years. However, such recognition only came after the academy expanded its Best Picture category from five nominees to up to 10. This was a concerted effort to include more popular films in the Oscars due to waning audience interest, after Best Picture snubs of The Dark Knight and WALL-E.</p> <p>If animated films have had difficulty breaking into the Oscars’ vision of a Best Picture, then voice talent has been outright bypassed for consideration in acting categories. Since Shrek, stars have increasingly taken on voice work for animated projects in ways that elevates them from a side-hustle to key parts of their CVs.</p> <p>For instance, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5L1iX5JiuwI">Chris Pratt</a> and <a href="https://www.vogue.com/article/anya-taylor-joy-princess-peach-super-mario-premiere">Anya Taylor-Joy</a>’s promotional duties for The Super Mario Bros. Movie represent significant time and stardom investments for the sake of animated intellectual property.</p> <p>Yet without the physical body to observe, the Oscars have ignored voice work in animated films. The most meaningful push to have a voice performance nominated was for Scarlett Johansson’s in Her where she played a computer operating system. Johansson’s performance was nuanced, played with chemistry against her co-stars, and, ironically, Her was not an animated film.</p> <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dJTU48_yghs?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <h2>Are things changing?</h2> <p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/winning-everything-everywhere-all-at-once-5-experts-on-the-big-moments-at-the-oscars-2023-201661">Oscars this year</a> shifted their brand of “prestige” to value the “cinematic experience” (and box office money) in the age of streaming.</p> <p>The sweep of Everything Everywhere All at Once and Best Picture nominations for Top Gun: Maverick and Avatar: The Way of Water in 2023 signal the academy conspicuously praising populist fare for bringing audiences into the physical cinema. This then hopefully attracts <a href="https://variety.com/2023/tv/news/2023-oscar-ratings-academy-awards-audience-1235550070/">more audience eyeballs to an Oscars telecast</a> where they are likely to have actually seen some of the nominees.</p> <p>Popular film’s infiltration of the Oscars even seeped into the acting categories. Everything Everywhere All At Once’s indie cred made nominations (and three eventual wins) for its stars logical and welcome, but even Black Panther: Wakanda Forever’s Angela Bassett scored a Best Supporting Actress nomination, the first acting recognition for the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Its online fandom was instrumental here, having opined the academy’s biases against their beloved franchise.</p> <p>Now, Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse has arrived ahead of the 2024 Oscars race. The animated film boasts a star-studded cast, including past Oscar nominees and winners like Daniel Kaluuya and Hailee Steinfeld in key supporting roles. Shameik Moore’s lead vocal performance as Miles Morales is also exceptional. Still figuring out what it means to balance being Spider-Man with a complicated home and social life, he sounds remarkably recognisable as a modern teenager.</p> <figure><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cqGjhVJWtEg?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" width="440" height="260" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></figure> <p>Credit for this extends to a snappy script and intricate editing that bounces through its complex multiverse setting and superhero super-stakes to focus on moving character development. Thematically, it reflects on the artistic value of the superhero genre, unpacking the Spider-Man lore across its many iterations. And, of course, the visual artistry on display is mind-blowing, truly pushing cinematic excess in ways that only animation (currently) can.</p> <p>Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse is the kind of popular cinema that the academy is currently primed to take more seriously. It’s on track to become one of the year’s box office successes, serves a dedicated fandom, showcases a stacked cast and dynamically plays with genre and narrative conventions.</p> <p>As part two of a trilogy, it is unlikely to take out the Best Picture race altogether (Beyond the Spider-Verse, coming in 2024, is the more likely candidate if it sticks the landing). But it is still well-positioned to break through the confines of the Best Animated Feature category.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/207716/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /></p> <p><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/robert-boucaut-1215760">Robert Boucaut</a>, PhD Candidate &amp; Tutor, Media Department, <em><a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-adelaide-1119">University of Adelaide</a></em></p> <p><em>This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/are-the-oscars-going-to-take-animated-films-more-seriously-207716">original article</a>.</em></p> <p><em>Images: Sony Pictures Animation</em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

Readers respond: What was the most disappointing movie you paid to see?

<p dir="ltr">There’s nothing worse than being hyped about a movie and paying for it, only to be disappointed.</p> <p dir="ltr">We asked the Over60 readers about the most disappointing movies they paid to see, and some were so bad they sent our readers to sleep. </p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Lynne Formby</strong> - Apocalypse Now. Dreadful movie. Only went because my husband wanted to see it and he slept through the whole movie.</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Colleen Burgess </strong>- The Great Gatsby. Baz Luhrmanns version. Only movie I’ve ever walked out of.</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>David Oldfield Nettleton</strong> - La la land. Most over hyped movie ever. Also, a long time ago, Summer Holiday with Cliff Richard. I walked!</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Lorraine Neasey-Dodd</strong> - Jaws at the drive in, I went to sleep lol</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Jeannette Wylie</strong> - The Hustler, I walked out and left my boyfriend at the time to watch the rest by himself!</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Linda Hopkins</strong> - Lala Land</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Jennifer Sabatino</strong> - Fantasia, at the drive-in. Kids were leaving the cars to play in the playground, people were going to the kiosk to buy snacks out of boredom and then cars started leaving, including us. </p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Glenis Stevenson</strong> - Clockwork Orange.</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>David Briggs</strong> - Moment by Moment with Lily Tomlin and John Travolta. It’s the only movie I’ve ever walked out of.</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Susan Clare </strong>- Starship Troopers, I left my husband to finish watching it half way through.</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Val Goodwin</strong> - Picnic at Hanging Rock, the most boring movie ever</p> <p dir="ltr"><strong>Mardi Sloan</strong> - Walked out of War of the Worlds starring Tom Cruise.</p> <p><em>Image: Getty</em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

Interactive cinema: how films could alter plotlines in real time by responding to viewers’ emotions

<p>Most films offer exactly the same viewing experience. You sit down, the film starts, the plot unfolds and you follow what’s happening on screen until the story concludes. It’s a linear experience. My new film, <a href="http://www.albinomosquito.com/before-we-disappear/">Before We Disappear</a> – about a pair of climate activists who seek revenge on corporate perpetrators of global warming – seeks to alter that viewing experience.</p> <p>What makes my film different is that it adapts the story to fit the viewer’s emotional response. Through the use of a computer camera and software, the film effectively watches the audience as they view footage of climate disasters. Viewers are implicitly asked to choose a side.</p> <p>I chose to use this technology to make a film about the climate crisis to get people to really think about what they are willing to sacrifice for a survivable future.</p> <p>Storytelling has always been interactive: traditional oral storytellers would interact and respond to their listeners. For almost a century, film directors have been <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_cinema">experimenting with interactivity</a> – the past decade has seen an explosion of interactive content.</p> <p>Streaming services give viewers the opportunity to choose their own adventure. However, letting the viewer control the action has long posed a challenge: it’s at odds with narrative immersion, where the viewer is drawn into the world created by the story.</p> <p>One of the most prominent recent experiments in interactive film, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Mirror:_Bandersnatch">Netflix’s Bandersnatch</a>, clearly illustrates this. Here the action stops to ask the user what to do next – breaking the flow of the story and actively involving the viewer. Solving this issue of breaking the immersive experience remains a key question for artists exploring interactive film.</p> <p>The films I create and direct take a different route, leveraging non-conscious control to influence a film as the audience watches. My previous <a href="http://braincontrolledmovie.co.uk/">brain-controlled</a> films, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7853742/">The Moment (2018)</a> and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt8072006/">The Disadvantages of Time Travel (2014)</a>, used brain computer interfaces (BCIs). These systems use computers to <a href="https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/980302/scanners-exploring-the-control-of-adaptive-films-using-brain-computer-interaction">analyse electrical signals from the brain</a>, allowing people to effectively control a device with their minds.</p> <p>Using this data from the brain, audiences <a href="https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/index.php/output/1468705/from-directors-cut-to-users-cut-to-watch-a-brain-controlled-film-is-to-edit-it">create a non-conscious edit</a> of the film in real time – reinforcing the films’ respective stories of science-fiction dystopia and a wandering, daydreaming mind.</p> <p>However, the BCI interface requires specialised equipment. For Before We Disappear, I wanted to use a technology more readily available to audiences, that could allow films to be shared over the internet.</p> <h2>Controlling the narrative</h2> <p>Before We Disappear uses an ordinary computer camera to read emotional cues and instruct the real-time edit of the film. To make this work, we needed a good understanding of how people react to films.</p> <p>We ran several <a href="https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3290607.3312814">studies</a> <a href="https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3290605.3300378">exploring the emotions</a> filmmakers intend to evoke and how viewers visually present emotion when watching. By using computer vision and machine learning techniques from our partner <a href="https://www.blueskeye.com/">BlueSkeye AI</a>, we analysed viewers’ facial emotions and reactions to film clips and developed several algorithms to leverage that data to control a narrative.</p> <p>While we observed that audiences tend not to extensively emote when watching a film, BlueSkeye’s face and emotion analysis tools are sensitive enough to pick up enough small variations and emotional cues to adapt the film to viewer reactions.</p> <p>The analysis software measures facial muscle movement along with the strength of emotional arousal – essentially how emotional a viewer feels in a particular moment. The software also evaluates the positivity or negativity of the emotion – something we call “<a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00261/full">valence</a>”.</p> <p>We are experimenting with various algorithms where this arousal and valence data contributes to real-time edit decisions, which causes the story to reconfigure itself. The first scene acts as a baseline, which the next scene is measured against. Depending on the response, the narrative will become one of around 500 possible edits. In Before We Disappear, I use a non-linear narrative which offers the audience different endings and emotional journeys.</p> <h2>Emotional journey</h2> <p>I see interactive technology as a way of expanding the filmmaker’s toolkit, to further tell a story and allow the film to adapt to an individual viewer, challenging and distributing the power of the director.</p> <p>However, emotional responses could be misused or have unforeseen consequences. It is not hard to imagine an online system showing only content eliciting positive emotions from the user. This could be used to create an echo chamber – where people only see content that matches the preferences they already have.</p> <p>Or it could be used for propaganda. We saw in the Cambridge Analytica scandal how <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal">large amounts of personal information</a> were collected from Facebook and used for political advertising.</p> <p>Our <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348325526_Brain-controlled_cinematic_interactions">research</a> aims to generate conversation about how users’ emotion data can be used responsibly with informed consent, while allowing users to control their own personal information. In our system, the data is analysed on the users’ device, rather than, say, the cloud.</p> <h2>Big business, big responsibility</h2> <p>Non-conscious interaction is big business. Platforms such as <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/algorithms-take-over-youtube-s-recommendations-highlight-human-problem-n867596">TikTok</a> and <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/social-media/algorithms-take-over-youtube-s-recommendations-highlight-human-problem-n867596">YouTube</a> use analysis of users’ past interactions on the platforms to influence the new content they see there. Users are not always aware of what personal information is being created or stored, nor can they influence what algorithms will present to them next.</p> <p>It’s important to create a system where audiences’ data is not stored. Video of the viewer or facial expression data should not be uploaded or analysed anywhere but on the player device. We plan to release the film as an interactive app, incorporating an awareness of potential abuse of the user’s data, and safeguarding any personal data on the device used to watch it.</p> <p>Adaptive films offer an alternative to traditional “choose-your-own-adventure” storytelling. When the story can change based on the audiences’ unconscious responses rather than intentional interaction, their focus can be kept in the story.</p> <p>This means they can enjoy a more personalised experience of the film. Turns out the old traditions of storytelling may still have much to teach us in the 21st century.</p> <p><em>This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/interactive-cinema-how-films-could-alter-plotlines-in-real-time-by-responding-to-viewers-emotions-200145" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.</em></p> <p><em>Images: Getty</em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

14 great movies that got rotten reviews when they came out

<h2>Critics missed the mark on these movies</h2> <p>Before there was the almighty review section of every online shopping site, we looked to movie critics to fill us in on whether a film was worthy of our dollars, eyeballs, and time. A trip to the movie theatre isn’t exactly an inexpensive activity, so the opinions of these cinephiles has been historically a pretty important factor in terms of whether or not we buy those tickets. However, these film buffs don’t always get it right. In fact, some features that were badly panned by critics ended up becoming what we now consider the best movies of all time.</p> <p>This surprising list includes some of the most iconic dramas, comedies, romantic movies, and horror films – many of which went on to become blockbusters and award winners. It just goes to show you that sometimes it’s best to trust your gut and take a chance on a big-screen story that looks interesting, regardless of what the so-called experts have to say.</p> <h2>Vertigo</h2> <p>Released: 1958</p> <p>Director: Alfred Hitchcock</p> <p>Directed by Alfred Hitchcock, Vertigo tells the story of a former police detective battling his own demons who becomes obsessed with a beautiful woman. Starring James Stewart and Kim Novak, the film is now considered a classic by fans of thriller movies, and of Hitchcock in particular. It’s hard to believe any critic could have distaste for a film that’s held in such high regard today, but Time magazine’s review was less than stellar: ‘The old master has turned out another Hitchcock-and-bull story in which the mystery is not so much who done it as who cares.’ Although we appreciate the reviewer’s pun, if you love a good mystery, give Vertigo a watch.</p> <h2>2001: A Space Odyssey</h2> <p>Released: 1968</p> <p>Director: Stanley Kubrick</p> <p>One of the best sci-fi movies ever, this flick directed by Stanley Kubrick is about astronauts sent to the moon on a mysterious mission who wind up in a battle between man and machine. ‘For all its lively visual and mechanical spectacle, this is a kind of space-Spartacus and, more pretentious still, a shaggy God story,’ wrote John Simon of the New Leader when the film came out. Keep in mind that the movie won an Oscar for its dazzling visual effects (which were a big deal for the time), and Kubrick was also nominated for the Best Director award. We side with the real critics – the fans – on this one, because 2001: A Space Odyssey was an instant classic that earned its place in film history.</p> <h2>Armageddon</h2> <p>Released: 1998</p> <p>Director: Michael Bay</p> <p>There are so many things to love about Armageddon: there’s action, romance, family drama, and cool special effects. Oh, and Aerosmith’s killer power ballad ‘I Don’t Want to Miss a Thing,’ which gives the flick one of the best movie soundtracks. It also boasts a great cast with Ben Affleck, Bruce Willis, and Liv Tyler. Still, film critics weren’t sold. ‘The movie is an assault on the eyes, the ears, the brain, common sense, and the human desire to be entertained,’ wrote Roger Ebert in 1998. The New York Times‘ Janet Maslin penned a similarly terrible review, saying, ‘Though it means to be inspiring, it has quite the opposite effect. There’s not a believable moment here.’</p> <h2>A Star Is Born</h2> <p>Released: 1976</p> <p>Director: Frank Pierson</p> <p>Today when we think of A Star Is Born, we conjure up images of the most recent adaption starring Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga. But back in 1976, Kris Kristofferson and Barbra Streisand put their own spin on one of the best movie musicals of all time, about a former star helping a fledgling singer find fame while his own career falters due to age and alcoholism. The heartbreaking drama had audiences in tears all over the world, but apparently for some critics, those were tears of agony. ‘A bore is starred,’ quipped the Village Voice‘s famous review of the film. A review in the Hollywood Reporter was slightly less savage, complaining mainly that the flick focuses too much on the main stars and not enough on the supporting cast. Still, if you loved the Cooper and Gaga version, you should check out the 1976 entry.</p> <h2>Gladiator</h2> <p>Released: 2000</p> <p>Director: Ridley Scott</p> <p>Even if you’re not a pop culture trivia whiz, you probably know where is this movie quote from: “Are you not entertained?” Of course, it’s this surprising underdog story. In the Ridley Scott directed picture, Maximus (Russell Crowe) starts out as a big-deal general who finds himself demoted to common gladiator after a sinister betrayal. Needless to say, this move does little to help him avenge his murdered family, so like any good action film character, he has to take matters into his own hands. Gladiator was a massive hit at the box office, so clearly movie seekers thought it was worth seeing. But Roger Ebert’s review wasn’t so sparkling: ‘By the end of this long film, I would have traded any given gladiatorial victory for just one shot of blue skies.’</p> <h2>Jaws</h2> <p>Released: 1975</p> <p>Director: Steven Spielberg</p> <p>Yes, it’s a horror movie, but it’s also one of the best beach movies ever made – and started the tradition of the summer blockbuster. Jaws further proved its power by literally making people afraid to go in the ocean for fear of sharks after its 1975 premiere – and today. Directed by Steven Spielberg, the film stars Roy Scheider as a local sheriff desperate to locate a killer shark plaguing the oh-so-quaint Amity Island. The mere sound of the Jaws theme music (you know the one) insinuates there’s trouble afoot. Although the film did get many fine reviews from critics back in the day, it also had its fair share of harsh comments. ‘While I have no doubt that Jaws will make a bloody fortune for Universal and producers Richard Zanuck and David Brown, it is a coarse-grained and exploitive work which depends on excess for its impact,’ wrote Charles Champlin in the Los Angeles Times. ‘Ashore it is a bore, awkwardly staged and lumpily written.’</p> <h2>The Shawshank Redemption</h2> <p>Released: 1994</p> <p>Director: Frank Darabont</p> <p>The Shawshank Redemption gifted us the wonderful big-screen duo of Andy (Tim Robbins) and Red (Morgan Freeman) in one of the best drama movies of all time. As they spend years together in prison, the film chronicles the journey of these unlikely friends, long-term inmates who form a close bond. On any given weekend you’re like to find this movie being replayed on television because it’s that good to watch over and over again. Some critics, however, found the film listless. ‘Speaking of jail, Shawshank-the-movie seems to last about half a life sentence,’ writes Desson Thomson in the Washington Post. ‘The story, chiefly about the 20-year friendship between Freeman and Robbins, becomes incarcerated in its own labyrinthine sentimentality.’</p> <h2>Psycho</h2> <p>Released: 1960</p> <p>Director: Alfred Hitchcock</p> <p>This Hitchcock thriller’s shower scene featuring Janet Leigh’s heart-pounding screams has been riffed on countless times in pop culture. And to this day motel manager Norman Bates is still among the creepiest of all film characters – made all the more disturbing because this horror movie is inspired by a real story. The movie was also shocking to audiences because in a surprise twist (spoiler alert!) the purported lead star is killed off early on in the movie. But of course, critics wouldn’t be critics without some sort of, you guessed it, criticism. ‘The trail leads to a sagging, swamp-view motel and to one of the messiest, most nauseating murders ever filmed,’ says a Time review. ‘At close range, the camera watches every twitch, gurgle, convulsion, and haemorrhage in the process by which a living human becomes a corpse…. The nightmare that follows is expertly gothic, but the nausea never disappears.’ Actually, that’s kind of a compliment for a horror flick!</p> <h2>Pretty Woman</h2> <p>Released: 1990</p> <p>Director: Garry Marshall</p> <p>Julia Roberts was nominated for a Best Actress Oscar for her role in 1990’s Pretty Woman, now considered one of the best romantic comedies of all time. Many poked fun at the idea of a wealthy businessman falling for a call girl he meets in Hollywood, but moviegoers fell in love with the couple and the pairing of Roberts with actor Richard Gere. Time magazine critic Richard Corliss wrote, ‘A ticket to Pretty Woman buys you mechanical titillation and predictable twists…Old-fashioned, assembly-line moviemaking without the old panache.’ Perhaps, but we still love it, and so do a legion of fans.</p> <h2>Dirty Dancing</h2> <p>Released: 1987</p> <p>Director: Emile Ardolino</p> <p>Maybe you’re just in it for the dancing, the romance, or the nostalgia, but Dirty Dancing is one of those flicks you can watch over and over because it just makes you feel good. And we’d be remiss if we didn’t mention its iconic line, “Nobody puts Baby in a corner.” But Roger Ebert wasn’t here for any of it. ‘The filmmakers rely so heavily on clichés, on stock characters in old situations, that it’s as if they never really had any confidence in their performers,’ he said in his review. Another critic, for TV Guide, felt the supporting cast was pretty unlikeable. ‘One problem with the film is that it does nothing to endear the Catskill social setting to an audience; the inhabitants seem to be competing for awards in obnoxiousness,’ wrote Sandra Contreras. That’s an interesting observation, especially as 40 years later, guests still enjoy visiting the Dirty Dancing resort where the movie was filmed.</p> <h2>The Shining</h2> <p>Released: 1980</p> <p>Director: Stanley Kubrick</p> <p>If you’ve ever read Stephen King’s novel of the same name, you know it’s one of the scariest books of all time. And director Stanley Kubrick’s cinematic take on the scary tale definitely leaves us feeling unsettled. But despite a memorable performance by Jack Nicholson as Jack Torrance, a man who, with his family, spends the winter in an isolated, haunted hotel, film reviewers weren’t so wowed by it. ‘Stanley Kubrick’s production of The Shining, a ponderous, lacklustre distillation of Stephen King’s best-selling novel, looms as the Big Letdown of the new film season,’ said Gary Arnold in the Washington Post. “I can’t recall a more elaborately ineffective scare movie. You might say that The Shining, opening today at area theatres, has no peers: few directors achieve the treacherous luxury of spending five years (and $12 million to $15 million) on such a peerlessly wrongheaded finished product.” Ineffective? Horror fans would disagree.</p> <h2>It’s a Wonderful Life</h2> <p>Released: 1946</p> <p>Director: Frank Capra</p> <p>We often assume that classic holiday films like It’s a Wonderful Life must have always inspired the feel-good emotions that make it prime for repeat viewing. But while this story of a disappointed small-town man’s visit from an angel is uplifting for many, it didn’t warm critics’ hearts when it first came out. ‘Indeed, the weakness of this picture, from this reviewer’s point of view, is the sentimentality of it – its illusory concept of life,’ read a line in the New York Times’ review. Meanwhile, in New York’s Daily News, Kate Cameron wrote, ‘The film is too sprawling in extent, too noisy as to background music and voices and much too obvious in the application of its social significance notes.’ We beg to differ: it’s one of the best Christmas movies that brings tears to our eyes every holiday season.</p> <h2>The Empire Strikes Back</h2> <p>Released: 1980</p> <p>Director: Irvin Kershner</p> <p>Despite that this movie is (almost) universally considered to be the best in the Star Wars  franchise, film reviewers picked at the second flick in the saga just as they did the first. In this ‘episode,’ Luke Skywalker is in Jedi training with Yoda, and the rest of the gang is still at odds with Darth Vader and Boba Fett. So what beef could critics have with The Empire Strikes Back? Oh, plenty. ‘This time out, the Star Wars enterprise isn’t anywhere as enjoyable as the original,’ wrote Joy Gould Boynum in the Wall Street Journal. “One might argue that all this represents a gain, adding to the original, sophistication, richness, depth. But truth to tell, these developments seem little more than inappropriate. To place internal struggles within one-dimensional characters who by definition have no interior is absurd.”</p> <h2>Inception</h2> <p>Released: 2010</p> <p>Director: Christopher Nolan</p> <p>Sometimes a movie is so high concept, even the critics can’t get behind its artistic gravitas. That seems to be the case with this thriller starring Leonardo DiCaprio, about a thief who uses dream-sharing technology to commit his crimes. The tables are turned, however, when he’s asked to actually put an idea into a dream, rather than steal from it. The film was an awards-show darling, scoring dozens of nominations and even winning four Oscars in mainly technical categories. However, Rex Reed’s review for the Observer might most succinctly sum up how many folks felt about it: ‘I’d like to tell you just how bad Inception really is, but since it is barely even remotely lucid, no sane description is possible.’</p> <p><em><strong><span id="docs-internal-guid-8aac66e8-7fff-2514-a0b8-b634871fe968">This article originally appeared on <a href="https://www.readersdigest.com.au/true-stories-lifestyle/entertainment/23-great-movies-that-got-rotten-reviews-when-they-came-out?pages=1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Reader’s Digest</a>.</span></strong></em></p> <p><em>Image: Shutterstock</em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

12 movies that were better than the books they were based on

<p><strong>The Notebook (2004)</strong></p><p>The reason that the film adaptation of <em>The Notebook</em> eclipses the bestselling Nicholas Sparks book is simple: It’s impossible to capture the sizzling chemistry between Rachel McAdams and Ryan Gosling.</p><p>The Canadian duo – and former couple – star in the popular romantic drama as Allie and Noah, a young couple who fall in love in 1940s South Carolina. Meanwhile, in the modern day, an elderly man reads their story from a notebook to a woman in a nursing home.</p><p>Chances are, you already know how this moving story ends, which means you also know that its tear-jerking ending hits harder on-screen than it ever could on the page.</p><p><strong>The Devils Wear Prada (2006) </strong></p><p>Meryl Streep may not have won an Oscar for her role as intimidating fashion magazine editor-in-chief Miranda Priestly in <em>The Devil Wears Prada</em> – but she should have.</p><p>While Lauren Weisberger’s 2003 novel is reportedly inspired by her experiences working as Anna Wintour’s assistant at Vogue, Streep portrays the role with much more nuance than she’s presented with in the book.</p><p>Anne Hathaway also shines as Andy Sachs, a fashion industry-averse journalism grad who nevertheless hopes to jumpstart her career as Priestly’s assistant.</p><p>Plus, it’s more fun to see Devil’s countless elegant outfits – from Chanel to Fendi – on-screen.</p><p><strong>The Shawshank Redemption (1994)</strong></p><p>It’s a credit to Stephen King’s talents that this ‘90s classic remains beloved today.</p><p>King, of course, is mostly known for his horror writing, but this Oscar-nominated drama – about a man (Tim Robbins) who, despite his professed innocence, is sentenced to life in prison for killing his wife and her lover, and his friendship with a fellow prisoner (Morgan Freeman) – closely follows the material from his novella, <em>Rita Hayworth and Shawshank Redemption</em>.</p><p>But the film also takes the opportunity to expand on the story, telling it in such a rich, compelling way that sticks with viewers long after the credits roll.</p><p><strong>Jaws (1975) </strong></p><p>We all know the story of <em>Jaws</em>: a string of shark attacks at a summer resort town leads a police chief, marine biologist and shark hunter to go off in search of the great white responsible for the havoc.</p><p>But we know the story because of Steven Spielberg’s renowned blockbuster, especially thanks to the filmmaker’s instinct to focus on the shark hunt and introduce new material that wasn’t in the novel.</p><p>There’s also John Williams’s unforgettable score and the ingenious decision to suggest the shark’s presence, rather than show it on-screen, to build tension.</p><p><strong>Crazy Rich Asians (2018)</strong></p><p>Kevin Kwan’s 2013 bestseller is a fun, dizzying multi-generational novel that revolves around the wedding event of the year in Singapore, told from five different perspectives.</p><p>The plot of Jon M. Chu’s rom-com centres on the same event but zeroes in on the sweet love story between Rachel (Constance Wu) – an economics professor raised by a single mother – and Nick (Henry Golding), who is secretly a member of one of Singapore’s richest families.</p><p>Viewers get to spend more time with the main couple and become more invested in their relationship, set against a lavish, visually stunning backdrop.</p><p><strong>Mean Girls (2004)</strong></p><p>Did you know that <em>Mean Girls</em> was based on a 2002 self-help book called <em>Queen Bees and Wannabes</em>?</p><p>Luckily, Tina Fey switched up the genre – and incorporated her own high school experiences – for her screenplay.</p><p>The result is an endlessly rewatchable, incredibly quotable movie about cliques and bullying that also includes one of the all-time great teen movie casts, thanks to fantastic performances from Lindsay Lohan, Rachel McAdams, Amanda Seyfried, Lizzy Caplan and more.</p><p><strong>The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (2001 - 2003)</strong></p><p>Fans of <em>The Lord of the Rings</em> may consider its inclusion on this list somewhat controversial – J.R.R. Tolkien’s epic high-fantasy novel is beloved by many, after all.</p><p>But with a length of 1200 pages and a handful of slower-paced sections, it can also be hard to get through.</p><p>Though Peter Jackson’s influential film trilogy – <em>The Fellowship of the Ring</em>, <em>The Two Towers</em> and <em>The Return of the King</em> – is also quite long, it does a great job of condensing Tolkien’s dense and detailed mythology, making for a vivid, immersive and immense moviegoing experience.</p><p><strong>The Godfather (1972)</strong></p><p>This one is pretty obvious. Francis Ford Coppola’s <em>The Godfather</em> is widely considered one of the best films ever made, with everyone involved – from Coppola to cinematographer Gordon Willis and stars Marlon Brando, Al Pacino, James Caan and Robert Duvall – delivering career-best work.</p><p>Author Mario Puzo’s source material, on the other hand, with its pulpy prose and out-of-place subplots, never reaches the same operatic heights.</p><p><strong>Election (1999)</strong></p><p>Before there was <em>Big Little Lies</em>’ Madeline Martha Mackenzie, there was Tracy Flick. This fantastic early Reese Witherspoon role saw the star playing a super intense, Type A high school overachiever set on winning a class election.</p><p>Tom Perrotta’s black comedy novel of the same name – which finds Tracy going toe-to-toe with a jealous teacher (Matthew Broderick in the film) who wants to sabotage her campaign – is an interesting read, but on the shorter side.</p><p>The novel’s satire is drawn out better on-screen, making each drama-filled scene that much juicier.</p><p><strong>Jackie Brown (1997) </strong></p><p><em>Jackie Brown</em> is the only Quentin Tarantino film based on a book – and it’s also one of his best.</p><p>Adapted from prolific crime writer Elmore Leonard’s <em>Rum Punch</em>, <em>Jackie Brown</em> takes the opportunity to get creative with its source material. Case in point: the titular flight attendant-turned-smuggler (Pam Grier, in a critically acclaimed performance) was a white woman in the novel.</p><p>The result is a slick, lively homage to the ‘70s Blaxploitation films that Grier helped make famous.</p><p><strong>A Simple Favor (2018)</strong></p><p>Author Darcey Bell’s debut novel, <em>A Simple Favor</em>, is written as a tense, <em>Gone Girl</em>-esque thriller that’s more of a pale pastiche of the genre than a gripping page-turner.</p><p>For the film adaptation, director Paul Feig reinvented the story, and instead made the tale – about a small-town vlogger searching for her missing, enigmatic friend – a sharp and twisty black comedy.</p><p>Stars Anna Kendrick and Blake Lively are dynamite and deliver on the laughs. And we can’t forget the many covetable suits Lively dons on screen that sparked a thousand memes!</p><p><strong>Legally Blonde (2001)</strong></p><p>Elle Woods (another iconic Reese Witherspoon role) is a perfect protagonist. She’s smart, funny, ambitious and surprising on her quest to battle stereotypes and conquer Harvard Law School.</p><p>On the other hand, the novel is inspired by writer Amanda Brown’s own pretty negative experiences at law school, making it…kind of a drag.</p><p>It’s more mean-spirited and, frankly, less empowering than the film to the point where it feels like everything you love about the charming movie is missing from the page.</p><p>Thankfully, the movie took a different approach, which we can all be grateful for the next time we re-watch the “bend and snap” scene.</p><p><em>Image credits: Getty Images</em></p><p><em>This article originally appeared on <a href="https://www.readersdigest.com.au/culture/12-movies-that-were-better-than-the-books-they-were-based-on?pages=1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Reader's Digest</a>.</em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

Where are the films starring successful women entrepreneurs?

<p><a href="https://www.hbo.com/documentaries/the-inventor-out-for-blood-in-silicon-valley">The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley</a>, now streaming in Australia on Binge, depicts Theranos founder and former CEO Elizabeth Holmes as a bewitching sociopath.</p> <p>Holmes wanted to revolutionise health care by providing a simple and cheap way to perform blood tests using only a finger prick. In 2003, she founded Theranos, with a vision of the company’s machines in every home in America.</p> <p>But, as the Wall Street Journal’s John Carreyrou <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-has-struggled-with-blood-tests-1444881901">revealed</a> in 2015, Holmes created an intricate web of deception. Even as machines found their way into chemists and were being used by medical insurance companies, they never actually worked.</p> <p>Holmes put patients’ lives at risk and cost investors millions of dollars.</p> <p>The documentary is compelling viewing, but as it enters a very slim field of movies about female entrepreneurs it is worth questioning the impact of the stories we choose to tell.</p> <p><strong>Fall from grace</strong></p> <p>The journey Holmes took from young idol to spectacular failure is a story about systemic issues and the <a href="https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/silicon-valley-work-culture/">sometimes toxic</a> culture of the world of start-ups.</p> <p>Prior to the scandal breaking, Holmes was <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/12/15/blood-simpler">celebrated in the media</a>. She was portrayed as a Stanford University dropout with a vision for changing the world. She raised hundreds of millions of dollars from powerful men in a start-up landscape known for its <a href="https://hbr.org/2020/01/how-the-vc-pitch-process-is-failing-female-entrepreneurs">discriminating funding practices</a>.</p> <p>She made the <a href="https://www.forbes.com/profile/elizabeth-holmes/#338f337c47a7">cover</a> of Forbes magazine in 2014 as the world’s youngest self-made female billionaire. Holmes represented a heady mix of tech, science and business. She was the golden girl of the start-up world.</p> <p>This made her fall from grace even more spectacular.</p> <p>But compare Holmes’ portrayal with another well known example of a deceitful male entrepreneur: <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/feb/28/wolf-of-wall-street-jordan-belfort-sex-drugs">Jordan Belfort</a>, the “wolf of Wall Street”.</p> <p>Belfort ran an elaborate crime scheme linked to manipulating the stock market and was jailed for 22 months for securities fraud. Nonetheless, his <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/522776.The_Wolf_of_Wall_Street">autobiography</a> and Martin Scorsese’s 2013 <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0993846/">film adaptation</a> depict Belfort’s story as celebration of wealth and power, rather than a critical review of his fraudulent behaviour.</p> <p><strong>Where are all the good stories?</strong></p> <p>Feature films about female entrepreneurs are few and far between.</p> <p><a href="https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/AMBPP.2020.21276abstract">Research</a> from one of the authors examined English-language films from 1986 to 2016 with female entrepreneurs as the central character. Over the 30-year period, only 11 films about women entrepreneurs were identified – fewer than the number of <a href="https://www.macworld.co.uk/news/apple/steve-jobs-movies-documentaries-to-watch-3786148/">films about Apple co-founder Steve Jobs</a> alone.</p> <p>From <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092605/">Baby Boom</a> (1987), where Diane Keaton’s character starts a baby food business, to Melissa McCarthy’s brownie empire in <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2702724">The Boss</a> (2016), these films overwhelmingly depicted female entrepreneurs as running small-scale kitchen table businesses in female-dominated industries.</p> <p>These movies told stories of cleaning, as in <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2446980/">Joy</a> (2015) and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0862846/">Sunshine Cleaning</a> (2008); fashion, as in <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2361509/">The Intern</a> (2015); and not-for-profit work, as in the <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116313/">First Wives Club</a> (1996).</p> <p>Businesses depicted typically had low numbers of paid employees. The entrepreneurs were resource-poor, and most often it was a supporting male character who helped the female entrepreneur succeed.</p> <p>Additionally, the study found a woman starting her own business is seemingly not enough to hold audience attention: all films included a parallel romantic storyline.</p> <p><strong>The female entrepreneur as role model</strong></p> <p>Celebrating successful female role models <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487011000353">encourages women</a> to dream big and succeed in male dominated arenas.</p> <p>Role models provide a source of inspiration and contribute to self-belief. As the quantity of entrepreneurship related media increases, so does the amount of <a href="https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11365-006-0018-8.pdf">entrepreneurial activity</a>.</p> <p>However, negative portrayals of careers may <a href="https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1997-04591-001">prevent</a> people from considering a profession.</p> <p>The case of Holmes and Theranos is damaging for the <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-03-14/theranos-misled-investors-and-consumers-who-used-its-blood-test">betrayed</a> customers and investors, but also for the field of entrepreneurship, which only in recent decades has seen its reputation overhauled.</p> <p>Entrepreneurship was once the <a href="http://cup.columbia.edu/book/a-brief-history-of-entrepreneurship/9780231173049">domain of racketeers</a>. Over time, it has evolved to be the domain of tech celebrities, socially conscious founders and a vehicle for upward social mobility – but still, too often, a domain of men.</p> <p><a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9780429279836/chapters/10.4324/9780429279836-26">One study</a> investigated how female entrepreneurs are featured on the cover of Entrepreneur magazine. Women were vastly outnumbered by men on the cover, and were often portrayed in a stereotypical female fashion.</p> <p>Words surrounding images of women tended to be about nurturing, health, beauty and fashion. Wording accompanying images of male entrepreneurs talked of power, innovation and risk taking.</p> <p>Women were “glamified” in full make-up and focus given to their face, while men were more likely to be standing and set against a corporate colour palette.</p> <p>How we tell stories of female entrepreneurs matters.</p> <p>In order to achieve equity in entrepreneurship, we need to acknowledge the role of the media in filling the entrepreneurship pipeline.</p> <p>Positive depictions of innovative women act as a mirror, showing girls and women what they can achieve. We need more, and better, stories about female entrepreneurs so stories about female innovation aren’t limited to failure and fraud.</p> <p><em>Written by Bronwyn Eager and Louise Grimmer. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-inventor-tells-a-story-of-a-fraudulent-female-billionaire-where-are-the-films-starring-successful-women-entrepreneurs-145922">The Conversation.</a> </em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

How Scorsese cinema boycott will shape the future of movies

<p>Cinema has always been a medium in crisis. After the so-called golden age of Hollywood came television: why go to the movies when you can sit in the comfort of your home, watching recycled movies in letterbox format? Yet cinemas adapted and survived.</p> <p>This week, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/nov/07/why-martin-scorseses-the-irishman-wont-be-coming-to-a-cinema-near-you">major cinema chains</a> said they would not run Martin Scorsese’s upcoming film <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1302006/">The Irishman</a> because Netflix - who partially funded production and own distribution rights - were restricting its theatre run to four weeks before it hit small screens.</p> <p>The news signals a looming threat to cinema as we know it.</p> <h2>Big screen blues</h2> <p>Television made movies a commodity audiences could consume on their own terms. Yet cinema survived. In fact, it became a global mass cultural medium in the late 1970s and in the <a href="https://blog.scienceandmediamuseum.org.uk/very-short-history-of-cinema/">multiplexes</a> of the 1980s.</p> <p>Even the turbulent digital turn that brought cinema to a second crisis point in the early 2000s was navigated by the major Hollywood studios with the rebirth of the blockbuster in pristine form: <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499549/?ref_=nv_sr_2?ref_=nv_sr_2">Avatar</a> (2009) in stereoscopic 3-D, the high-tech Marvel <a href="https://hbr.org/2019/07/marvels-blockbuster-machine">cinematic universe</a>.</p> <p>This is all to say that cinema, for the time being, is alive and well.</p> <p>But shrinking diversity in cinema offerings - Scorsese is <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/nov/05/martin-scorsese-superhero-marvel-movies-debate-sadness">no Marvel fan</a> - has forced even big name directors to seek funding from alternative sources. This is especially necessary when their movie <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/21/business/media/netflix-scorsese-the-irishman.html">costs US$159 million</a> (A$230 million) to make. Enter television streaming giant Netflix.</p> <h2>Are you talking to me?</h2> <p>The Irishman, Scorsese’s eagerly anticipated gangster epic, opened this week in a number of independent <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-irishman-australian-cinemas-2019-11">Australian cinemas</a>.</p> <p style="text-align: center;"><iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WHXxVmeGQUc?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><span class="caption">The Irishman tells the story of war veteran Frank Sheeran (Robert De Niro) who worked as a hitman alongside Jimmy Hoffa (Al Pacino).</span></p> <p>Scorsese is perhaps America’s greatest living auteur, the director of films including <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075314/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1">Taxi Driver</a> (1976), <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081398/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Raging Bull</a> (1980), <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099685/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Goodfellas</a> (1990), and <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112641/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Casino</a> (1995).</p> <p>But what makes The Irishman unlike any other Scorsese film is that it is being distributed by Netflix. After its short theatre run it will be distributed to our homes, where it will do its major business.</p> <p>In February, the tension between Netflix and theatrical distributors escalated with the nomination of Alfonso Cuarón’s Netflix-distributed <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6155172/?ref_=fn_al_tt_2">Roma</a> for a Best Picture Oscar. Director Steven Spielberg subsequently <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/03/steven-spielbergs-netflix-fears/556550/">declared</a> a Netflix film might “deserve an Emmy, but not an Oscar”.</p> <p>A Netflix production – whether David Fincher’s monumental longform series, <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5290382/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Mindhunter</a>, or Scorsese’s The Irishman – was television and therefore not cinema.</p> <h2>Goodfellas or bad guys?</h2> <p>Netflix represents a very real threat to theatrically screened cinema and its distribution apparatus, which is why several large cinema chains in the US (and, indeed, Australia) are boycotting The Irishman.</p> <p>While Netflix has consistently produced high quality content either through internal production or by acquiring and distributing titles, its assimilation of an auteur picture – a Scorsese gangster epic, no less - signals an aggressive move into the once sacrosanct domain of cinema entertainment.</p> <p>One wonders: if Scorsese capitulates to the economic strictures of the contemporary studio system, what will independent filmmakers do? How will low budget features be funded in an era in which Netflix colonises the large and small-scale productions alike?</p> <p><iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/SshqfhmmtSE?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> <span class="caption">Scorsese has directed many of the greatest characters of modern cinema.</span></p> <p>Netflix is not cinema, but neither is it television. Directors such as Spielberg struggle to understand that the new media entertainment regime is far removed from the projection (theatre) or broadcast (television) media environment of a predigital era.</p> <p>Instead of declaring a Netflix production unworthy of an Oscar, we could invert this measure: perhaps it is the Oscar that is increasingly outmoded as an artistic and cultural mark of value.</p> <h2>‘The End’, roll credits</h2> <p>The digital economic currents that carry Netflix intuitively seek expansion into proximate markets, and cinema is a natural fit. Netflix’s move into cinema distribution – with Scorsese at the helm – is therefore a smart negotiation. Even if Scorsese is an unwilling participant, it sets a clear precedent.</p> <p>It seems unlikely that cinema will end in any formal sense, at least within the next few decades.</p> <p>But a Netflix-distributed Scorsese film gives us cause to lament the ailing cinema experience. Christopher Nolan’s <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5013056/?ref_=nv_sr_1?ref_=nv_sr_1">Dunkirk</a> (2017) exemplified cinema’s ability to assault us with big screen images and jolt our bodies with a powerful soundscape. Only a grand technological scale can provide this kind of visceral experience.</p> <p>And yet, like Scorsese, I’m tired of Marvel. I’m tired of the rigidity of formulaic narrative and image structures intrinsic to the contemporary studio system. I’m disappointed at Hollywood’s capitulation to an instrumental economic model. Could a studio have produced The Irishman? They had a chance, and they <a href="https://variety.com/2019/film/news/theater-chief-blasts-netflix-over-handling-of-martin-scorseses-irishman-its-a-disgrace-1203390726/">turned it down</a>.</p> <p>Hollywood - and media entertainment structures more generally - will need to find a way for the big and small screen distributors to get along in order to keep the dynasty alive.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/126598/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: http://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em>Written by <span>Bruce Isaacs, Senior Lecturer in Film Studies, University of Sydney</span>. Republished with permission of </em><a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/pass-the-popcorn-scorsese-cinema-boycott-will-shape-the-future-of-movies-126598" target="_blank"><em>The Conversation</em></a><em>. </em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

Can cinema survive in a golden age of serial TV?

<p>There are many reasons you might think cinema is going the way of the dinosaurs. With the popularity of long-play TV series booming, are films “too short” now to allow the kind of plot and character development that we have become used to? In our changing world of media, does the distinction between “TV series” and “film” even make sense?</p> <p>In a recent class, when I asked my film studies students who had watched the set film for the week only a few hands went up – and my heart sank. Searching for an explanation, I asked who had watched the latest episode of the popular Netflix show <a href="https://theconversation.com/stranger-things-inventiveness-in-the-age-of-the-netflix-original-84340"><em>Stranger Things</em></a>. Nearly every hand went up.</p> <p>What does this anecdote reveal about changing viewing habits? Does the fact that even film students prefer the latest streaming series to the classic films set as coursework serve to illustrate the point that cinema is dying?</p> <p>There is no doubt of the enormous appeal of the many long-form series readily available to subscribers of streamed content providers such as Netflix, Amazon Prime, HULU, iTunes, Google Play, and NowTV. Viewers can binge-watch or pace their way through their favourite show before algorithms point them to their next favourite show, in an endless addictive cycle of entertainment and sleep deprivation.</p> <p><strong>Screen companions and virtual friends</strong></p> <p>There are many reasons for the global popularity of streamed series. For one, their characters are often more diverse and interesting than many of those in mainstream Hollywood filmic fare. This is exemplified so well by shows such as <a href="http://theconversation.com/how-orange-is-the-new-black-raised-the-bar-behind-bars-78702"><em>Orange is the New Black</em></a>, with a nearly all-female cast playing characters with diverse sexual orientations and ethnic and class backgrounds.</p> <p>Over the many hours of screen time, spanning many years in some cases, audiences become emotionally invested in characters’ stories. They become our screen companions and virtual friends. This has seen global fan bases emerge. These fans find kinship and a new kind of collective mourning when providers cancel their favourite show as seen with the devotees of the <a href="https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/ustv/a28618013/the-oa-fan-petition-season-3-axe/"><em>The OA</em></a>. The size and influence of these groups has helped the success of campaigns like that of Sense8 fans, who fought for and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jun/30/your-love-has-brought-sense8-back-to-life-cancelled-netflix-show-wins-two-hour-finale">won a finale</a> of their cancelled show. Similarly, <a href="https://themuse.jezebel.com/fans-saved-one-day-at-a-time-1835924491">the fans of <em>One Day at a Time</em></a> helped it find its new home at cable network “Pop”.</p> <p>The ultra long-play format of streamed series also allows time for extreme character development. The best known character evolution is perhaps that of Breaking Bad’s Walter White who makes a <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdDfhe-0JS0">dramatic moral transformation</a> from school teacher to conflicted drug kingpin over the show’s 62-hour run-time.</p> <p><strong>Hollywood cinema refuses to die</strong></p> <p>But traditional Hollywood cinema refuses to die – as evidenced by the boom in <a href="https://theconversation.com/avengers-endgame-and-the-relentless-march-of-hollywood-franchise-movies-119130">franchise event cinema</a>. <a href="https://www.mpaa.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/MPAA-THEME-Report-2018.pdf">A recent report</a> from the Motion Picture Association of America reveals rising worldwide cinema ticket sales. The total takings at the box office topped US$41 billion – and the number of cinema screens worldwide increased by 7% (to 190,000 screens). The report states that “there is no question that in this ever complex world of media, theatres are vital to overall entertainment industry success”.</p> <p>But cinema still has its place. It allows a fantasy-filled retreat for family and friend entertainment – an immersive experience without the distraction of mobile phones, knocks on the door or family members talking over important bits. Cinemas, film societies, or open-air screenings become spaces where we can put our political divisions aside and cheer collectively for heroes overcoming odds to save screen worlds.</p> <p>Blockbuster films may be thriving, but poetic art cinema has a more precarious place in the market and needs nurturing by cinephiles. Film director <a href="https://www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/9780719097591/">Alejandro G. Iñárritu</a> (of <em>The Revenant</em>,<em> Birdman</em>, and<em> Babel</em> fame) recently <a href="https://variety.com/2019/film/global/alejandro-g-inarritu-on-the-need-to-preserve-poetry-in-cinema-1203305924/">spoke to Variety</a> about how our worlds are being closed in by streaming services managed by “algorithms designed to keep feeding people what they like”. He added: “the problem is that the algorithms are very smart but they are not creative, and they don’t know what people don’t know they like.”</p> <p>We are in a golden age of streaming content and at-the-cinema-film. We just need to be guided by more than algorithms to see the treasures hiding away in this new era of excess and neglect.</p> <p><strong>TV or film – what’s the difference?</strong></p> <p>To complicate the arguments about the relative merits of TV series and film, distinctions between film and television are less clear than they ever have been. Many films (particularly those involving <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-the-superhero-films-ever-end-the-business-of-blockbuster-movie-franchises-78834">superheroes</a>) are no longer stand alone, but form part of a serial cinematic “Universe”.</p> <p>Many TV series now consist of feature-length episodes. With a run-time of 151 minutes, we could ask whether the Sense8 finale was actually a Netflix film, rather than a single episode. And, does it even matter to viewers what we call it?</p> <p>In a world where visual media is being increasingly viewed on tablets, mobile phones and laptops rather than in actual cinemas or on television sets perhaps the terms “cinema” and “television” no longer even make sense. This is an argument my co-editors and I <a href="https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/25785273.2019.1660067">make in a recent editorial</a> for the journal Transnational Screens.</p> <p>A key point is that streaming platforms such as Amazon and Netflix do not stand in opposition to cinema. Instead they have consumed cinema, repackaged it and made it available to global audiences. Powerful voices <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/mar/04/netflix-steven-spielberg-streaming-films-versus-cinema">rail against the power</a> of such platforms, but they do enhance screen culture and make cinema more available to global audiences.<!-- Below is The Conversation's page counter tag. Please DO NOT REMOVE. --><img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/122234/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /><!-- End of code. If you don't see any code above, please get new code from the Advanced tab after you click the republish button. The page counter does not collect any personal data. More info: http://theconversation.com/republishing-guidelines --></p> <p><em>Written by <span>Deborah Shaw, Professor of Film and Screen Studies, University of Portsmouth</span>. Republished with permission of </em><a rel="noopener" href="https://theconversation.com/can-cinema-survive-in-a-golden-age-of-serial-tv-122234" target="_blank"><em>The Conversation</em></a><em>.</em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

Gravity lends weight to cinema – and always has

<p>Cinema’s relationship to gravity is a fascinating one.</p> <p>At the time of its birth, in 1895, cinema was seen as a revolutionary machine that didn’t simply defy gravity through moving pictures seemingly suspended in air, but allowed one to experience the forces of the world directly, sweetly, intimately.</p> <p>The stories of the first movie patrons hurrying away from the screen in case they were run over as <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0000012/">The Train Arrived at the Station</a> (The Lumière Brothers, 1896) flickered before them is a startling – if perhaps mythical – account of cinema’s gravitational grandeur.</p> <p>The awe and wonder of cinema lies in its remarkable ability to visualise and texturise the weight and feel of things, to render movement and velocity realistically, and to create spaces deep, far and wide. The precipice is one of cinema’s favourite environments. Directors turn to it to create a sense of depth and distance, and to enact the experience of falling.</p> <p>An iconic cinematic moment, captured in such films as <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052357/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Vertigo</a> (Hitchcock, 1958) and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114558/">Strange Days</a> (Bigelow, 1995), involves a character looking down from the precipice, to then either jump, fall or be pushed off the edge, with a corresponding cinematography that captures them hurtling, hurtling, hurtling towards the nadir. Then splat.</p> <p>The power and beauty of cinema in part resides in its ability to effectively engage the viewer’s emotions, and to envelop the body in a sea of sensations that are directly felt. Cinema is a sentient machine that awakens the senses in all of us.</p> <p>Cinema can create the conditions for viewers to sweat, feel nauseous, or be aroused. In action sequences or scenes of terror, it can lead to an increase in viewers’ heart-rates and make their pupils dilate.</p> <p>At its most awesome, when we are faced by something extraordinary or perplexing, cinema can take our breath away, render us speechless and powerless before its infinite gaze. Many critics argue that the Star Gate sequence in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">2001: A Space Odyssey</a> (Kubrick, 1968) is one such sublime moment. The viewer is taken along an unknown colourised vector, without “narrative” coordinates to anchor them, enabling them to experience the existential nothingness of (anti) gravity as they do so.</p> <p>Science fiction cinema is particularly suited to capturing the sensorial qualities of movement and speed. Its special effects and future settings enable it to legitimately defy gravity; to take the viewer through incandescent wormholes at light speed and out into alien environments where objects, spaces, things don’t follow gravitational laws or the iron cage of physics.</p> <p>The expansive space of science fiction creates the sense that gravity is a minor factor in the workings of the universe. When these films are set in outer space, science fiction is able to demonstrate the giddiness of weightlessness, the eerie silence of dark space, and the absolute terror of being untethered from Earth.</p> <p><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1454468/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Gravity</a> (Cuarón, 2013) is perhaps one of the most perfect demonstrations of cinema’s intimate and inter-connecting relationship to the forces of nature and the forces that lie beyond them, nestled as they are amongst the vast, undulating sheets of the cosmos.</p> <p>The film’s unbroken opening “floating” shot, lasting more than 13 minutes, captures the weightlessness and the spinning vastness of space, the distant, rotating beauty of Earth, and humankind’s sense of isolation and isolating melancholy as the astronauts go about their daily, routinised work, as if they have clocked in at an inter-stellar factory.</p> <p>Gravity’s 3D spatial arrangements induce a sense of vertigo, disorientating the viewer, creating the sensation that one is in outer space, beholden by its massiveness, and yet trapped precisely because one is not tethered to anything. Debris shoots out from the darkness; lines dangle; space is not logical. There is zero gravity in Gravity.</p> <p>There is no single or singular precipice in the film: the mise-en-scène combines zenith and nadir. One is constantly falling or climbing, climbing and falling. It is difficult to breathe while watching the movie, and almost impossible to not experience one’s own body as if it is stranded in outer space, without gravitational crampons to hold onto, to root one to terra firma.</p> <p>If newspaper <a href="http://movies.about.com/od/gravity/fl/Gravity-Movie-Review.htm">reports are accurate</a>, then just as the train that arrived at the station created hysteria in those who watched it more than 100 years ago, so today Gravity sends people running down the aisles, too discombobulated to carry on watching.</p> <p>Much of contemporary blockbuster cinema functions simply to activate the senses; to enact and embody the “thrill aesthetic” through its lavish special effects and immersive 3D technology.</p> <p>There is much criticism of this as a cinematic form. Some argue that complex characterisation and serious storytelling are marginalised or juvenilised in favour of the kinetic ride.</p> <p>Thrill, however, is an expansive concept and the senses are not necessarily crude or divisible in the way. Spectacle can create the conditions for profound contemplation, as Gravity clearly does.</p> <p>Gravity releases the viewer into an unknown or unknowable void and in so doing asks, or rather compels, them to consider what it is that makes one human, social, and connected.</p> <p>Lost in space, caught floating and fleeing in the pure realm of the senses, we find out who we truly are and can be.</p> <p><em>Written by Sean Redmond. Republished with permission of </em><a href="https://theconversation.com/gravity-lends-weight-to-cinema-and-always-has-19157"><em>The Conversation</em></a><em>. </em></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

5 dark facts about the scandalous world of Old Hollywood

<p>We all look back at Old Hollywood movies with a sense of fondness. What seemed like simpler times and glitz and glamour, Old Hollywood sparked a dream in all of us, an ideal lifestyle that we hoped to obtain.</p> <p>But behind the flashing lights and the black and white cameras, Old Hollywood was embroiled in scandal and controversy.</p> <p>Here are the top 5 darkest facts about tinsel town:</p> <p><strong>1. Judy Garland’s twisted past</strong></p> <p>Judy Garland was a household name. After starring in the classic musical, <em>The Wizard of Oz</em>, the star shot to fame. But unfortunately, her downfall came as quickly as her success. Garland was surrounded by people who used her for their monetary benefit. Whether it was greedy film producers or her own mother, who was known to be a notorious stage mum, Garland had an upsetting life to say the least.</p> <p>One incident in particular was the most twisted of all, and it was the moment her mother and Hollywood executives forced Garland to get an abortion. A concept that was illegal at the time with those involved keeping the entire process hush.</p> <p><strong>2. </strong><strong>The rise and fall of Montgomery Clift</strong></p> <p>Montgomery Clift was one of Hollywood’s biggest names during his time – that is until May 12, 1956.</p> <p>A method actor who gave multiple Oscar-nominated performances, Clift starred in movies <em>From Here to Eternity</em>, <em>A Place in The Sun</em> and <em>The Search</em>. But it all came crashing down when Clift was involved in a car accident after falling asleep behind the wheel.</p> <p>Clift was forced to live a life of constant physical and mental pain, and soon became addicted to alcohol and painkillers. Many dubbed his life as “the longest suicide in Hollywood history”.</p> <p><strong>3. The curse of <em>The Misfits</em></strong></p> <p>One of Clift’s final films was <em>The Misfits</em>, a movie considered to carry a dark curse on anyone who associated with it. While it failed at the box office at the time, Rotten Tomatoes has</p> <p>since given the movie a 100 per cent rating.</p> <p>The film starred plenty of big names such as Clark Gable and Marilyn Monroe. But soon after the movie began production, people’s lives were thrown into a discourse.</p> <p>Monroe overdosed on set after her relationship with Miller ended. She died a year after the movie wrapped up. Gable died of a heart attack only a few short days after filming, and Clift was involved in the accident that destroyed his career.</p> <p>Five years after the movie finished filming, Clift was informed by a friend that it was airing on television, to which he refused to watch. It was that night that Clift was found dead due to a heart attack.</p> <p><strong>4. Frank Sinatra and his temperament</strong></p> <p>It’s no secret that Frank Sinatra was not particularly pleasant. Jazz wasn’t the only reason he was famous, as many knew him as the man who would spew obscenities at valets, reporters, wives and friends.</p> <p>But in one satisfying occasion involving Marlon Brando, Sinatra told the actor that his method acting was “crap” and gave him the nickname “Mumbles” for the way he spoke. But Brando didn’t take any of it, as during a filming of a musical Sinatra was starring in, Brando intentionally ruined scenes of Sinatra eating a cheesecake multiple times, forcing him to eat so much cake that he threw his plate on the ground and broke down screaming.</p> <p><strong>5. The master of misogyny</strong></p> <p>Alfred Hitchcock was known to be one of the greatest directors of his time. Directing multiple films that garnered high praise from critics and viewers alike. But his movie <em>The Birds</em>, starring Tippi Hedren, turned out to be a decision the actress would later regret.</p> <p>Hitchcock became so obsessed with Hedren that he would stalk her throughout the filming of the movie, keeping her isolated from the rest of the cast. When she spoke up against the mistreatment, Hitchcock sabotaged her career, and being Old Hollywood, there was nothing she could do about it.</p> <p>Scroll through the gallery above to be transported back in time.</p> <p>Are you a fan of Old Hollywood movies? Which one is your favourite? Tell us in the comments below.</p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

The first movie I ever saw in cinemas

<p>Going to the cinemas is an activity that is enjoyed by all ages alike. Being immersed in a film for two hours is not only entertaining but going to the cinemas is a social outing that also leaves us with great memories. Here are some of the films the Over60 community saw on their first trip the pictures.</p> <p><strong>1. <em>Bambi</em>, 1942</strong></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><img width="500" height="750" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/35750/bambi_500x750.jpg" alt="Bambi"/></p> <p>“My first was <em>Bambi</em>. My sister 18 months older than me was going with friends, I badgered her to go too but she refused. For once my Mum (reclusive) decided I should go and took me herself. My sister was furious when we turned up. I did wonder later if Mum was checking up on her instead of being kind to me. I suppose I will never know but the film was fantastic!” – Mary Bennett </p> <p><strong>2. <em>The Sound of Music</em>, 1965</strong></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><strong><img width="500" height="709" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/35751/sound-of-music_500x709.jpg" alt="Sound Of Music"/></strong></p> <p>“Mum took my brother and I to see <em>The Sound of Music</em> I was around seven years old loved it. My brother about five at the time said that the best part was the drumstick ice cream at the interval.” –  Karen Bruce</p> <p><strong>3. <em>Fantasia</em>, 1940</strong></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><strong><img width="499" height="820" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/35752/fantasia_499x820.jpg" alt="Fantasia"/></strong></p> <p>“The first I remember would be<em> Fantasia</em> – I can't remember how old I was but the ‘Sorcerer's Apprentice’ scared the dickens out of me.” – Chris Simms </p> <p><strong>4.  <em>The Ten Commandments</em>, 1956</strong></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><strong><img width="500" height="744" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/35753/ten-commandments_500x744.jpg" alt="Ten Commandments"/></strong></p> <p>“Going back years ago, we used to get two movies and a half time then watch the second movie. [My first movie] was <em>Ten Commandments</em>. We paid 20 cents to see movies.” – Dot and Trevor Dixon</p> <p><strong>5. <em>The Wizard of Oz</em>, 1939</strong></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><strong><img width="499" height="745" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/35754/wizard-of-oz_499x745.jpg" alt="Wizard Of Oz"/></strong></p> <p>“My elder sister got scared by the wicked witch so we had to leave.” – Kerryn McDonnell</p> <p><strong>6. <em>Sleeping Beauty</em>, 1959</strong></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><strong><img width="499" height="735" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/35755/sleeping-beauty_499x735.jpg" alt="Sleeping Beauty"/></strong></p> <p>“I used to go to the cinema on Saturday mornings along with most of the local kids. We got a main movie, a cartoon and an episode of a serial, all for sixpence. Sixpence more for sweets and a drink. For a shilling for each child the local mums had three hours free on Saturday mornings and most of us walked there and back with friends. The first film I can remember seeing was <em>Sleeping Beauty</em> with the scariest witch ever!” – Nita Crompton</p> <p><strong>7. <em>Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs</em>, 1937</strong></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><strong><img width="500" height="749" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/35756/snow-white_500x749.jpg" alt="Snow White"/></strong></p> <p>“My earliest memory is <em>Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs</em>. My big brother took me and I was probably about 4 at the time.” – Alistair McAllister </p> <p><strong>8. Journey to the Centre of the Earth, 1959</strong></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><strong><img width="500" height="750" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/35757/journey-to-the-centre-of-the-earth_500x750.jpg" alt="Journey To The Centre Of The Earth"/></strong></p> <p>“The first film I remember seeing in the cinema was <em>Journey To The Centre of the Earth</em> with James Mason and Pat Boone which would have been around 1960 when I would have been about seven. I will always remember the scenes with the prehistoric animals that scared me to death at the time.” –  Phil Ross</p> <p><strong>9.  King Kong, 1976</strong></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><strong><img width="500" height="765" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/35758/king-kong_500x765.jpg" alt="King Kong"/></strong></p> <p>“The very first version of <em>King Kong</em>. Not many believe me when I tell them a few people saw the giant animals and ran screaming from the cinema.” - Mark Giaquinto </p> <p><strong>10. The Parent Trap, 1961</strong></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><strong><img width="500" height="765" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/35759/parent-trap_500x765.jpg" alt="Parent Trap"/></strong></p> <p>“My dad took me to Melbourne for my birthday when I was quite young to see the <em>Parent Trap</em> starring Hayley Mills.” - Kathy Pearce </p> <p>What was the first movie you saw at the cinemas? Let us know in the comments below. </p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

Movies worth seeing in 2017

<p>2016 might have disappointed with its plethora of similarly themed action-fantasy movies and sequels to movies that were popular a generation ago, but there's plenty to get excited about amongst this year's cinematic line-up.</p> <p><em><strong>1. Trainspotting 2 (February 23)</strong></em></p> <p>Just over 20 years after Danny Boyle's film (as well as its poster and soundtrack) about Edinburgh's drug culture captured the cultural zeitgeist, Spud, Renton, Begbie, Sick Boy and the rest of Irvine Welsh's gang are back with more misadventures.</p> <p>2016 proved that long-gestating sequels generally do not big box office make (think <em>Zoolander 2</em>, <em>My Big Fat Greek Wedding 2</em>), but could this prove to be the exception?</p> <p><em><strong>2. Logan (March 2) </strong></em></p> <p>Hugh Jackman's latest outing as X-Man Wolverine looks both poignant and powerful.</p> <p>Early footage suggests it’s based on the comic-book Old Man Logan which focuses on his and an aged Charles Xavier's (Patrick Stewart) attempts to protect a young girl who is being hunted by sinister forces. Could yet be the best X-Men movie so far.</p> <p><em><strong>3. Kong: Skull Island (March 9)</strong></em></p> <p>Yes, they're remaking<em> King Kong</em> just over decade after Peter Jackson's effort, but has a great cast – Tom Hiddleston, Samuel L Jackson, John Goodman and Brie Larson – and it's actually a piece of a "cinematic universe" not many people knew existed.</p> <p>Jordan Vogt-Roberts' film is intended to help set up a showdown with <em>Godzilla</em> in 2020.</p> <p><em><strong>4. The Lego Batman Movie (March 30)</strong></em></p> <p>The breakout star of The Lego Movie, Will Arnett's Batman's solo spin-off finally offers a mostly family friendly take on Gotham's favourite vigilante. </p> <p>This time around he has to learn to share his Bat-space with young ward Robin and battle The Joker. The impressive vocal cast also include Michael Cena, Zach Galifianakis, Rosario Dawson and Ralph Fiennes.</p> <p><em><strong>5. Beauty and the Beast (March 30)</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><img width="498" height="245" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/33380/in-text-image-1_498x245.jpg" alt="In -text Image 1 (3)"/></p> <p>While the live-action versions of fellow Disney animated classics <em>Cinderella</em> and <em>The Jungle Book </em>have been stonking successes, is it too soon for what looks like a pretty close replica to the 1991 Oscar-nominated musical?</p> <p>Fortunately, the casting looks spot on with Emma Watson as Belle, Sir Ian McKellen voicing Cogsworth and Luke Evans as the pompous Gaston.</p> <p><em><strong>6. Ghost in the Shell (March 30)</strong></em></p> <p>Whatever Scarlett Johansson thought about her time in Wellington, it's going to be fascinating to see the pre-quakes capital city up on the big screen standing in for futuristic Japan.</p> <p>Based on the popular manga and anime, it's the story of a cyborg policewoman who attempts to bring down a nefarious computer hacker.</p> <p><em><strong>7. Fast and Furious 8 (April 13)</strong></em></p> <p>The once seemingly dead franchise that keeps going from strength to strength steps up another gear with the addition of Charlize Theron and Helen Mirren into the high-octane mix.</p> <p>Rumour has it that the action this time will be set in New York, but most interest will centre on how the franchise gets on without the late Paul Walker. </p> <p><em><strong>8. Guardians of the Galaxy 2 (April 25)</strong></em></p> <p>The Marvel Cinematic Universe carries on its merry way with the return of cinema's breakout stars of 2014. Groot, Gamora, Drax and Rocket are this time helping in the search for Peter Quill's true parentage.</p> <p>Nathan Fillion and Kurt Russell are new additions to the cast. </p> <p><em><strong>9. Alien: Covenant (May 18)</strong></em></p> <p>Ridley Scott's attempts to connect the dots between facehuggers old and new with this Australasian-shot adventure which sees a new group of colonists thinking they've discovered paradise – a planet only inhabited by a single synthetic called David.</p> <p>Katherine Waterston, Billy Crudup and Danny McBride join the expected carnage.</p> <p><em><strong>10. Despicable Me 3 (June 29)</strong></em></p> <p>Scheduled to open a week after Pixar's second Cars sequel, this third outing for Gru and his girls sees the emergence of the former megalomaniac's twin brother Dru.</p> <p>South Park's Trey Parker is set to play the movie's big bad – Balthazar Bratt, a former child star obsessed with the character he played back in the 1980s.</p> <p><strong>11. Captain Underpants (July 6)</strong></p> <p>Ed Helms, Kevin Hart and Kristen Schall star in this hotly anticipated animated version of Dave Pilkey's much-loved book series.</p> <p>For those who don't know, or have never had kids under 10, it's the tale of two mischievous kids who hypnotise their mean high school principal and turn him into their comic-book creation.</p> <p><em><strong>12. War for the Planet of the Apes (July 13)</strong></em></p> <p>As the 21st Century "reimagning" of the much-loved 1960s and '70s action series continues, a nation of genetically evolved apes (led by Andy Serkis' Caesar) become embroiled in a battle with an army of humans.</p> <p>Once again, our own Weta Digital's skill with motion capture will take centre stage.</p> <p><em><strong>13. Dunkirk (July 20)</strong></em></p> <p style="text-align: center;"><img width="498" height="245" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/33379/in-text-image-2_498x245.jpg" alt="In -text Image 2 (2)"/></p> <p>Almost three years after I<em>nterstellar</em>, Christopher Nolan finally returns to the director's chair with this World War II drama focused on the eponymous battle.</p> <p>Tom Hardy, Cillian Murphy, Mark Rylance and Kenneth Branagh are among the actors suiting up for battle.</p> <p><em><strong>14. The Dark Tower (July 27)</strong></em></p> <p>Idris Elba teams up with Matthew McConaughey for this Stephen King-penned horror about a gunslinger who roams an Old West-like landscape in search of the titular tower.</p> <p>He hopes that reaching it will preserve his dying world. </p> <p><em><strong>15. IT (September 7)</strong></em></p> <p>Another adaptation of a popular Stephen King novel. Previously made into a 1990 mini-series, King's killer clown Pennywise finally gets the big-screen treatment he deserves.</p> <p>Bill Skarsgard is among those trying to keep him at bay. </p> <p><em><strong>16. Blade Runner 2049 (October 5)</strong></em></p> <p>Little is known about this sequel to Ridley Scott's near 35-year-old sci-fi cult classic, but the cast and crew sound exciting.</p> <p>Harrison Ford returns as Rick Deckard, joined by the likes of Ryan Gosling, Jared Leto and Robin Wright. Arrival's Denis Villeneuve is the man behind the camera.</p> <p><em><strong>17. Thor: Ragnarok (October 26)</strong></em></p> <p>The Marvel Cinematic Universe gets a Kiwi infusion, with Taika Waititi behind the camera and Karl Urban and Sam Neill joining series regulars like Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston and Mark Ruffalo for this latest Asgard adventure.</p> <p>Likely to set up the two-part Avengers' blockbuster<em> Infinity War.</em></p> <p><em><strong>18. Star Wars: Episode VIII (December 14)</strong></em></p> <p>Naturally security has been tighter than a Death Star for information on the latest instalment of the 40-year-old recently revived space opera.</p> <p>All we can tell you at this stage is expect more Luke, <em>Looper's</em> Rian Johnson is directing and new cast additions include Benecio del Toro and Laura Dern.</p> <p><em><strong>19. Jumanji (December 21)</strong></em></p> <p>Dwayne Johnson continues his one-man conquest of Hollywood with this big-budget "reboot" of the 1995 Robin Williams action-adventure.</p> <p>This time around, four-teenagers are sucked into the world of the dangerous board game. Kevin Hart, Jack Black, Rhys Darby and Doctor Who's Karen Gillan co-star. </p> <p><em><strong>20. Paddington 2 (December 26)</strong></em></p> <p>Hugh Grant and Brendan Gleeson are among those joining the expect fun for the second outing for the Marmalade-loving bear from darkest Peru.</p> <p>This time the plot revolves around Paddington picking up a series of odd jobs so he can buy a present for his Aunt Lucy's 100th birthday.</p> <p>Tell us in the comments below, which of these films are you looking forward to seeing this year?</p> <p><em>Written by James Croot. First appeared on <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Stuff.co.nz</span>.</strong></a></em></p> <p><strong>Related links:</strong></p> <p><a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/entertainment/movies/2017/01/famous-biopics-ranked-from-most-to-least-accurate/"><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>Famous biopics ranked from most to least accurate</strong></em></span></a></p> <p><a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/entertainment/movies/2016/12/things-you-never-knew-about-indiana-jones/"><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>7 things you never knew about Indiana Jones</strong></em></span></a></p> <p><a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/entertainment/movies/2016/12/watching-movies-is-good-for-you/"><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>6 reasons why watching movies is good for you</strong></em></span></a></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

100 greatest films since 2000

<p><a href="http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20160819-the-21st-centurys-100-greatest-films" target="_blank"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">The BBC</span></strong></a> has gathered some of the world’s most esteemed film critics to determine a definitive ranking of the best movies released since 2000. They polled 177 film journalists, reviewers, bloggers and academics from each corner of the globe and asked them, what are the greatest movies of the 21st century so far?</p> <p>Here’s what the critics decided:</p> <p>100.<em> Toni Erdmann</em> (Maren Ade, 2016)<br /> 100. <em>Requiem for a Dream</em> (Darren Aronofsky, 2000)<br /> 100. <em>Carlos</em> (Olivier Assayas, 2010)<br /> 99. <em>The Gleaners and I</em> (Agnès Varda, 2000)<br /> 98. <em>Ten</em> (Abbas Kiarostami, 2002)<br /> 97. <em>White Material</em> (Claire Denis, 2009)<br /> 96. <em>Finding Nemo</em> (Andrew Stanton, 2003)<br /> 95. <em>Moonrise Kingdom</em> (Wes Anderson, 2012)<br /> 94. <em>Let the Right One In</em> (Tomas Alfredson, 2008)<br /> 93. <em>Ratatouille</em> (Brad Bird, 2007)<br /> 92. <em>The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford</em> (Andrew Dominik, 2007)<br /> 91. <em>The Secret in Their Eyes</em> (Juan José Campanella, 2009)<br /> 90. <em>The Pianist</em> (Roman Polanski, 2002)<br /> 89. <em>The Headless Woman</em> (Lucrecia Martel, 2008)<br /> 88. <em>Spotlight</em> (Tom McCarthy, 2015)<br /> 87. <em>Amélie</em> (Jean-Pierre Jeunet, 2001)<br /> 86. <em>Far From Heaven</em> (Todd Haynes, 2002)<br /> 85. <em>A Prophet</em> (Jacques Audiard, 2009)<br /> 84. <em>Her</em> (Spike Jonze, 2013)<br /> 83. <em>A.I. Artificial Intelligence</em> (Steven Spielberg, 2001)<br /> 82.<em> A Serious Man</em> (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2009)<br /> 81. <em>Shame</em> (Steve McQueen, 2011)<br /> 80. <em>The Return</em> (Andrey Zvyagintsev, 2003)<br /> 79. <em>Almost Famous</em> (Cameron Crowe, 2000)<br /> 78. <em>The Wolf of Wall Street</em> (Martin Scorsese, 2013)<br /> 77. <em>The Diving Bell and the Butterfly</em> (Julian Schnabel, 2007)<br /> 76. <em>Dogville</em> (Lars von Trier, 2003)<br /> 75.<em> Inherent Vice</em> (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2014)<br /> 74. <em>Spring Breakers</em> (Harmony Korine, 2012)<br /> 73. <em>Before Sunset</em> (Richard Linklater, 2004)<br /> 72. <em>Only Lovers Left Alive</em> (Jim Jarmusch, 2013)<br /> 71. <em>Tabu</em> (Miguel Gomes, 2012)<br /> 70. <em>Stories We Tell</em> (Sarah Polley, 2012)<br /> 69. <em>Carol</em> (Todd Haynes, 2015)<br /> 68. <em>The Royal Tenenbaums</em> (Wes Anderson, 2001)<br /> 67.<em> The Hurt Locker</em> (Kathryn Bigelow, 2008)<br /> 66. <em>Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter… and Spring</em> (Kim Ki-duk, 2003)<br /> 65. <em>Fish Tank</em> (Andrea Arnold, 2009)<br /> 64. <em>The Great Beauty</em> (Paolo Sorrentino, 2013)<br /> 63. <em>The Turin Horse</em> (Béla Tarr and Ágnes Hranitzky, 2011)<br /> 62. <em>Inglourious Basterds</em> (Quentin Tarantino, 2009)<br /> 61. <em>Under the Skin</em> (Jonathan Glazer, 2013)<br /> 60.<em> Syndromes and a Century</em> (Apichatpong Weerasethakul, 2006)<br /> 59. <em>A History of Violence</em> (David Cronenberg, 2005)<br /> 58. <em>Moolaadé</em> (Ousmane Sembène, 2004)<br /> 57. <em>Zero Dark Thirty</em> (Kathryn Bigelow, 2012)<br /> 56.<em> Werckmeister Harmonies</em> (Béla Tarr, director; Ágnes Hranitzky, co-director, 2000)<br /> 55. <em>Ida</em> (Paweł Pawlikowski, 2013)<br /> 54. <em>Once Upon a Time in Anatolia</em> (Nuri Bilge Ceylan, 2011)<br /> 53. <em>Moulin Rouge!</em> (Baz Luhrmann, 2001)<br /> 52. <em>Tropical Malady</em> (Apichatpong Weerasethakul, 2004)<br /> 51. <em>Inception</em> (Christopher Nolan, 2010)<br /> 50. <em>The Assassin</em> (Hou Hsiao-hsien, 2015)<br /> 49. <em>Goodbye to Language</em> (Jean-Luc Godard, 2014)<br /> 48. <em>Brooklyn</em> (John Crowley, 2015)<br /> 47. <em>Leviathan</em> (Andrey Zvyagintsev, 2014)<br /> 46. <em>Certified Copy</em> (Abbas Kiarostami, 2010)<br /> 45. <em>Blue Is the Warmest Color</em> (Abdellatif Kechiche, 2013)<br /> 44. <em>12 Years a Slave</em> (Steve McQueen, 2013)<br /> 43. <em>Melancholia</em> (Lars von Trier, 2011)<br /> 42. <em>Amour</em> (Michael Haneke, 2012)<br /> 41. <em>Inside Out</em> (Pete Docter, 2015)<br /> 40. <em>Brokeback Mountain</em> (Ang Lee, 2005)<br /> 39. <em>The New World</em> (Terrence Malick, 2005)<br /> 38. <em>City of God</em> (Fernando Meirelles and Kátia Lund, 2002)<br /> 37. <em>Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives</em> (Apichatpong Weerasethakul, 2010)<br /> 36. <em>Timbuktu</em> (Abderrahmane Sissako, 2014)<br /> 35. <em>Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon</em> (Ang Lee, 2000)<br /> 34.<em> Son of Saul</em> (László Nemes, 2015)<br /> 33. <em>The Dark Knight</em> (Christopher Nolan, 2008)<br /> 32. <em>The Lives of Others</em> (Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck, 2006)<br /> 31. <em>Margaret</em> (Kenneth Lonergan, 2011)<br /> 30. <em>Oldboy</em> (Park Chan-wook, 2003)<br /> 29.<em> WALL-E</em> (Andrew Stanton, 2008)<br /> 28. <em>Talk to Her</em> (Pedro Almodóvar, 2002)<br /> 27. <em>The Social Network</em> (David Fincher, 2010)<br /> 26.<em> 25th Hour</em> (Spike Lee, 2002)<br /> 25. ​<em>Memento</em> (Christopher Nolan, 2000)<br /> 24.<em> The Master</em> (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2012)<br /> 23. <em>Caché</em> (Michael Haneke, 2005)<br /> 22. <em>Lost in Translation</em> (Sofia Coppola, 2003)<br /> 21. <em>The Grand Budapest Hotel</em> (Wes Anderson, 2014)<br /> 20. <em>Synecdoche, New York</em> (Charlie Kaufman, 2008)<br /> 19. <em>Mad Max: Fury Road</em> (George Miller, 2015)<br /> 18.<em> The White Ribbon</em> (Michael Haneke, 2009)<br /> 17. <em>Pan's Labyrinth</em> (Guillermo Del Toro, 2006)<br /> 16. <em>Holy Motors</em> (Leos Carax, 2012)<br /> 15. <em>4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days</em> (Cristian Mungiu, 2007)<br /> 14. <em>The Act of Killing</em> (Joshua Oppenheimer, 2012)<br /> 13. <em>Children of Men</em> (Alfonso Cuarón, 2006)<br /> 12. <em>Zodiac</em> (David Fincher, 2007)<br /> 11. <em>Inside Llewyn Davis</em> (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2013)<br /> 10. <em>No Country for Old Men</em> (Joel and Ethan Coen, 2007)<br /> 9. <em>A Separation</em> (Asghar Farhadi, 2011)<br /> 8. <em>Yi Yi: A One and a Two</em> (Edward Yang, 2000)<br /> 7. <em>The Tree of Life</em> (Terrence Malick, 2011)<br /> 6. <em>Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind</em> (Michel Gondry, 2004)<br /> 5. <em>Boyhood</em> (Richard Linklater, 2014)<br /> 4. <em>Spirited Away</em> (Hayao Miyazaki, 2001)<br /> 3. <em>There Will Be Bloo</em>d (Paul Thomas Anderson, 2007)<br /> 2. <em>In the Mood for Love</em> (Wong Kar-wai, 2000)<br /> 1.<em> Mulholland Drive</em> (David Lynch, 2001)</p> <p>Do you agree with the critics? How many of these films can you tick off the list? Share your thoughts with us in the comments below.</p> <p><strong>Related links:</strong></p> <p><a href="/entertainment/movies/2016/09/best-movies-based-on-kids-books/"><strong><em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Hollywood’s 15 best movies based on kids’ books</span></em></strong></a></p> <p><a href="/entertainment/movies/2016/08/5-must-watch-films-about-ageing/"><em><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>5 must-watch films about ageing</strong></span></em></a></p> <p><a href="/entertainment/movies/2016/06/favourite-musical-films/"><strong><em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Our favourite musical films</span></em></strong></a></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

Revealed: Behind-the-scenes footage of Clint Eastwood and Tom Hanks on set of Sully

<p>Clint Eastwood’s new movie, <em>Sully</em>, brings to life the untold story of one of the most historical events in aviation history. Watch the two screen veterans on set of the movie that is to be released next week. The clip above includes teasers from the movie and a some on-set action.</p> <p>Starring Tom Hanks, the heart-pounding drama recounts the events of what is known as “the miracle on the Hudson”. On January 15, 2009, Captain “Sully” Sullenberger did the impossible. After assumed double engine failure, he successfully glided his aircraft onto the frosty surface of the Hudson river, saving the lives of all 155 souls on board.</p> <p>The heroic tale did not end there though. Even as Sully was praised by the public and the media for his incredible skills, an investigation unfolded that questioned if the risky landing was necessary at all, and threated the pilot’s entire career.</p> <p>Recalling his experience working with the legendary Eastwood, Tom Hanks said, “I don’t think anyone but Clint could make this movie. He’s a master film maker”.</p> <p>When the director was asked about the process of casting, he proudly responded, “Tom was one of the first people we thought about”.</p> <p>We think this one looks like a real winner. Will you be seeing it at the cinemas? Let us know what you think in the comments below.</p> <p><strong>Related links:</strong></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong><a href="/entertainment/movies/2016/07/7-actors-who-got-their-big-break-later-in-life/"><em>7 actors who got their big break later in life</em></a></strong></span></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong><a href="/entertainment/movies/2016/07/what-10-stars-looked-like-when-they-were-young/"><em>What 10 stars looked like when they were young</em></a></strong></span></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong><em><a href="/entertainment/movies/2016/06/incredible-actors-who-havent-won-an-oscar/">8 incredible actors who haven’t won an Oscar</a></em></strong></span></p>

Movies

Placeholder Content Image

Our favourite mother and daughter duos from films

<p>There are certain films that will always feel as though they whisper to our souls and arrest our hearts. The kind that take hold early on, and never let go.</p> <p>When films capture the nuances of female relationships it’s a beautiful thing. So, when this complexity is given the screen time it deserves, you seldom forget the stories and the women who told them.</p> <p>These 10 films are meant to be watched curled up on the couch with your loved ones, with a block of chocolate and a box of tissues.</p> <p>Scroll through the gallery above to jog your memory, and get ready for the waterworks.</p> <p>1. <em>Steel Magnolias</em></p> <p>2. <em>Little Women</em></p> <p>3. <em>Mamma Mia</em></p> <p>4. <em>Bridget Jones Diary</em></p> <p>5. <em>Stepmom</em></p> <p>6. <em>Anywhere But Here</em></p> <p>7. <em>Stella</em></p> <p>8. <em>Terms of Endearment</em></p> <p>9. <em>The Help</em></p> <p>10. <em>The Sound of Music</em></p> <p><span>Can you think of a movie we’ve left off of the list? Let us know in the comments below.</span></p> <p><strong>Rekated links:</strong></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong><a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/lifestyle/family-pets/2016/07/how-to-find-your-balance-as-a-grandparent/"><em>How to find your balance as a grandparent</em></a></strong></span></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong><a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/lifestyle/family-pets/2016/07/parents-beliefs-about-failure-are-crucial-for-kids/"><em>Parents’ beliefs about failure are crucial for kids</em></a></strong></span></p> <p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong><a href="http://www.oversixty.co.nz/lifestyle/family-pets/2016/07/how-to-pass-family-history-onto-grandkids/"><em>How to pass family history onto grandkids</em></a></strong></span></p> <p> </p>

Family & Pets

Placeholder Content Image

10 shocking transformations by actors for movie roles

<p>Some actors sure are dedicated to their craft. Whether it’s gaining weight, losing weight (or in the case of Robert De Niro in Raging Bull, both!) or cutting off all their hair, these talented artists prove they’re willing to do anything in the pursuit of the perfect performance.</p> <p>Flip through the gallery above, you’ll be stunned at some of the drastic changes they undergo.</p> <ol> <li>Robert De Niro – <em>Raging Bull</em></li> <li>Charlize Theron – <em>Monster</em></li> <li>Christian Bale – <em>The Machinist</em></li> <li>Jared Leto – <em>Chapter 27</em></li> <li>Chris Hemsworth – <em>In the Heart of the Sea</em></li> <li>Anne Hathaway – <em>Les Miserables</em></li> <li>Matt Damon – <em>The Informant</em></li> <li>Tom Cruise – <em>Tropic Thunder</em></li> <li>Matthew McConaughey – <em>Dallas Buyers Club</em></li> <li>Tom Hanks – <em>Castaway</em></li> </ol> <p>Have you seen any of the movies pictured above? Which transformation shocked you the most? Share your thoughts in the comments below.</p> <p><strong>Related links:</strong></p> <p><a href="/entertainment/movies/2016/05/most-expensive-films-ever-made/"><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><em><strong>The 15 most expensive films ever made</strong></em></span></a></p> <p><a href="/entertainment/movies/2016/05/8-classic-films-getting-remakes/"><strong><em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">8 classic films getting remakes</span></em></strong></a></p> <p><a href="/entertainment/movies/2016/03/best-movie-quotes-of-all-time/"><strong><em><span style="text-decoration: underline;">20 classic movie quotes you’ll love</span></em></strong></a></p>

Movies

Our Partners