:00:30. > :00:38.Hello and welcome to Film 2011. We are live and if you want to get in
:00:38. > :00:47.touch the details are on the screen now. Coming up tonight: We go back
:00:47. > :00:57.to Antarctic as The Thing returns. I think this thing... Life is sweet
:00:57. > :01:07.in Romantics Anonymous. And the little birds with big
:01:07. > :01:07.
:01:07. > :01:13.personalities are back for happy Feet Two.
:01:13. > :01:17.First tonight, The Thing, a prequel to the classic 1982 film of the
:01:17. > :01:26.same name. 48 hours ago we found something
:01:26. > :01:29.remarkable. What did they find? structure. And a spesman --
:01:29. > :01:35.speciman. It's a character piece about a group of people stranded in
:01:35. > :01:40.a camp and they think they made the biggest discovery in the world,
:01:40. > :01:44.finding alien life. We estimate this being here 100,000 years.
:01:44. > :01:49.they find this alien frozen in the ice it's initially extremely
:01:49. > :01:58.exciting and their first thought is they are going to be rich and
:01:58. > :02:03.famous. Sander decides he wants to drill into it. I am going to take a
:02:03. > :02:13.tissue sample. Do you think that's a good idea? Once they do that it's
:02:13. > :02:14.
:02:14. > :02:19.out. Somebody was attacked. seems everyone is fine. This thing
:02:19. > :02:23.has probably replicated a person. The original is an all-male cast
:02:23. > :02:28.and it was cool to see a film that has an all-male cast. We really
:02:28. > :02:32.want to set ourselves apart from that. It isn't a remake. We are
:02:32. > :02:38.doing something different and bringing in this different dynamic.
:02:38. > :02:43.Kate, OK. This is not the time to be yelling fire. Let's stop, gather
:02:43. > :02:53.our thoughts and discuss this in private. We don't need any private
:02:53. > :02:54.
:02:55. > :02:59.meetings, Dr. Boo! This is what the fans will want to
:02:59. > :03:09.see. They'll want to see the dirt, the isolation. They'll want to see
:03:09. > :03:20.
:03:20. > :03:24.the paranoia and the fear in this Good evening. Hello to you. Scary
:03:24. > :03:28.or not scary? It's scary-ish. It's interesting, everyone who is
:03:28. > :03:33.associated with The Thing is keen to point out this is not a remark,
:03:33. > :03:39.it's a prequel. In fact, I think it's both. It's probably a pre-make.
:03:39. > :03:44.It does work hard to knit itself into the story John Carpenter told
:03:44. > :03:50.in 1982. That starts with dead Norwegians. This explains exactly
:03:50. > :03:54.how they got there and how they got there in a way which will induce
:03:54. > :03:58.deja vu. What tends to happen in this is more or less exactly what
:03:58. > :04:01.happened in both. There's a lot of running down the same corridors, a
:04:01. > :04:04.lot of the same conversations. From The Thing's point of view it must
:04:04. > :04:08.be in hysterics, it can't believe how stupid these people are, two
:04:08. > :04:15.lots doing the same thing. My luck's in tonight! It's even
:04:15. > :04:25.weirder because there is a crafty sort of almost pseudo alien thing
:04:25. > :04:31.going on. They've taken Mary Elizabeth Winstead and it's a
:04:31. > :04:34.tribute to Sigourney Weaver. Is it any good? I am going to have to
:04:34. > :04:38.abstain. As a Friday night movie, for an audience who haven't seen
:04:38. > :04:40.The Thing it does what it's there to do. I wouldn't go any further. I
:04:41. > :04:44.am not sure I would recommend it, I wouldn't stop anyone else
:04:44. > :04:49.recommending it. If you haven't seen the original and you happen to
:04:49. > :04:53.- I was scared, at one point I bit my hand and jumped up and hid. It
:04:53. > :04:57.was embarrassing for all concerned. We have moved on. But if you
:04:57. > :05:01.haven't seen the original then it's probably fine. If you have seen the
:05:01. > :05:06.original, you are left feeling like you just want more. Also, this is
:05:06. > :05:11.weird, I much preferred the effects in the original because you didn't
:05:11. > :05:14.see everything and it was terrifying. It's not as good as the
:05:14. > :05:20.Carpenter movie. What is interesting is normally when they
:05:20. > :05:25.remake a movie that's 30 years old the pretext is that effects have
:05:25. > :05:31.moved on that they're making it more spectacular. Here the effects,
:05:31. > :05:38.for the most part, it's old-school effects and I think they're kind of
:05:38. > :05:45.sweet and quantity. -- quaint. It's impressive, I was trying to think
:05:45. > :05:50.of the best way to describe The Thing, it's gynaecological. It's
:05:50. > :05:53.not. You see far too much and far too much is explained. John
:05:54. > :05:58.Carpenter was a master at withholding information. With this
:05:58. > :06:02.you know where The Thing has come from, what its MO is. Everyone is
:06:02. > :06:06.stopping to explain what you have just seen, what you are about to
:06:06. > :06:09.see. Presumably The Thing has a tea in its trailer at that point. It
:06:09. > :06:14.doesn't help the film. It doesn't have the same amount of suspence,
:06:14. > :06:17.that's what you are missing. Absolutely. It would be easy to
:06:17. > :06:20.jump up and down and say this is a travesty and shouldn't have been
:06:20. > :06:27.made, I don't feel that. But at the same time it's not a patch on the
:06:27. > :06:37.original. Next Roman Ticks -- Romantics Anonymous, a story of
:06:37. > :06:37.
:06:37. > :07:47.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 70 seconds
:07:47. > :07:53.love, chocolate and crippling I loved this film. Be bold. I know,
:07:53. > :07:57.I want to be bold. It's incredibly slight. It's wafer thin. You feel
:07:57. > :08:01.like it could dissolve in your hapb. That doesn't mean it's bad. I
:08:01. > :08:05.thought it was adorable. The leads were great. What I almost loved
:08:05. > :08:09.more were the factory workers and herself-help group that acted like
:08:09. > :08:12.two Greek horses, if you like, I thought it was an adorable sweet
:08:12. > :08:16.little film. It is, I have to emphasise how slight it is. This is
:08:16. > :08:20.the only time I have seen a film which is 76 minutes long and it
:08:20. > :08:29.feels overstretched at that. There's one joke here and it's a
:08:29. > :08:34.good joke, it's all about this pair of anxiety-riddled social-phobic
:08:34. > :08:37.neurotics. It's sweet. In a good sense and bad sense. There are
:08:37. > :08:43.moments which are sweet and touching, there are also moments
:08:43. > :08:52.it's so sweet you feel your teeth are about to fall out. It makes
:08:52. > :08:58.Ameile feel like scum. The lead actors are both great. Isabelle
:08:58. > :09:08.Carre, you can see why he falls for her and he is great as well, he has
:09:08. > :09:17.
:09:17. > :09:21.this brilliant expression going on, the lead actor. Benoit Is known for
:09:21. > :09:26.a movie 20 years ago. Would you recommend it? For fans of
:09:26. > :09:30.incredible slight whimsical... divine. The weird thing was this
:09:30. > :09:33.one moment where she bursts into song and the film comes to life at
:09:33. > :09:36.that point. You think it's strange to say given the musicals
:09:36. > :09:46.conversation we had the other week, I could have done with more singing
:09:46. > :09:47.
:09:47. > :09:52.because it's reminiscent of the Umbrellas of Cherboyl. It's on
:09:52. > :09:56.limited release on Friday. Now it's time for the top five. This week
:09:56. > :10:01.Catherine counts down her favourite John Carpenter moments of mayhem
:10:01. > :10:06.and horror. When you love a director's work as
:10:07. > :10:10.much as I love the work of John Carpenter picking just five
:10:10. > :10:14.favourite moments is a nightmare. With massive apologies to the many
:10:14. > :10:21.fantastic moments that didn't make it into this top five, here are my
:10:21. > :10:25.favourite bits of John Carpenter's back catalogue. At number five,
:10:25. > :10:29.it's assault on Precinct 13, considered by the director himself
:10:29. > :10:35.to be his first proper piece of film-making and a nasty piece of
:10:35. > :10:42.work it is, too. Can I get an ice- cream? Sweetheart, I am closed.
:10:42. > :10:46.took the structure of one of his favourite westerns, Rio Bravdo and
:10:46. > :10:54.reimagined it as something bleaker. We all know that in a western the
:10:54. > :11:01.cute kid is going to survive. Not so much in Carpenter's world.
:11:01. > :11:08.I want a Vanilla twist. At number four it's They Live. It's
:11:08. > :11:13.in some ways an extremely silly film indeed. Hur hero is -- our
:11:13. > :11:17.hero is played by a pro-wrestler. A drifter with a mullet, a shotgun
:11:17. > :11:23.and pair of magic sunglasses that enable him to see the aliens who
:11:23. > :11:27.walk among us for who they really are. Plus, he gets to adlib one of
:11:28. > :11:35.the coolest lines in action hero history. I have come here to chew
:11:35. > :11:40.bubble gum and kick ass. And I am all out of bubble gum.
:11:40. > :11:47.At number three, Dark Star. On paper it sounds like a potential
:11:47. > :11:50.disaster. It was begun by students as a 45-minute film about a bunch
:11:50. > :11:54.of slobish astronauts on this spaceship in the middle of nowhere
:11:54. > :12:00.and it was extended to full feature length after a producer saw it and
:12:00. > :12:04.decided there might be money in it. You could have killed me.
:12:04. > :12:08.The debut is not the most polished film in the world but there are
:12:08. > :12:15.moments of genius that shine through. And none more so than when
:12:15. > :12:20.the crew use philosophy to reason with a superintelligent bomb that's
:12:20. > :12:24.become convinced it is to explode. Hello, bomb, are you with me?
:12:24. > :12:34.course. Are you willing to entertain a few concepts?
:12:34. > :12:44.At number two, Hallowe'en. In the hugely influential Hallowe'en John
:12:44. > :12:45.
:12:45. > :12:51.Carpenter pretty much writes the rulebook for the slasher movie. He
:12:51. > :12:55.use us unsettling composition and eerie, roving steady-cam and
:12:55. > :13:05.minimal score he composed himself to ratchet up the tension to almost
:13:05. > :13:15.
:13:15. > :13:25.At number one, it's The Thing. It's John Carpenter's masterpiece.
:13:25. > :13:27.
:13:27. > :13:31.It's horror stripped down to the It doesn't simply want to kill you,
:13:31. > :13:39.it wants to become you. And that's precisely what makes it so
:13:39. > :13:46.terrifying. Forget CGI, the practical creature effects in this
:13:46. > :13:52.scene are a viseral and grisly affair.
:13:52. > :13:56.You see those effects, you see that! I am not arguing. OK. I love
:13:56. > :14:00.Catherine, and that top five, did you want to add anything? Catherine,
:14:00. > :14:05.The Fog. That's all. Let's move on. Never
:14:05. > :14:08.having an argument with you. Next the big year, a comedy about bird-
:14:08. > :14:18.watching, indeed. Starring Steve Martin and jack Black and Erin
:14:18. > :14:25.
:14:25. > :14:34.Wilson. What drew me to the story was the
:14:34. > :14:43.intelligence competitive nature of man. Let the explorers through.
:14:43. > :14:48.Even in something as seemingly insignificant as bird-watching. The
:14:48. > :14:58.stakes are so low, there's no money in it, no glory or fame really. But
:14:58. > :15:03.
:15:03. > :15:09.to be the best. Sorry to disappoint you boys again.
:15:09. > :15:17.Kenny, my character, is holding on to his record of 732 birds spotted
:15:17. > :15:26.over the course of a year. many? You might want to sit down.
:15:26. > :15:30.707 you? 715. How many? 715. Wow, welcome to the 700-club kid, of
:15:30. > :15:38.course it's this old-timer we got to worry about, what's your number.
:15:38. > :15:48.You don't want to know. I do, scare me. 730. Really? All right, have a
:15:48. > :15:51.
:15:51. > :15:55.Excuse me, did our friend say where he was going? He wanted directions
:15:55. > :15:59.to the area. You see this obsession and passion that these guys bring
:15:59. > :16:09.to it, and there is something kind of life affirming and funny about
:16:09. > :16:13.
:16:13. > :16:18.that. Competition is a metaphor for trying to achieve great ambition.
:16:18. > :16:22.want to do something big, you know. We needed a venture. It is about
:16:22. > :16:27.the pursuit of excellence, and it is about three guys who are trying
:16:27. > :16:33.to get outside of their normal every day existence and achieve
:16:33. > :16:37.something they have dreamed of. Yeah. This is my year. I am going
:16:37. > :16:42.to make my mark. Most people wake up one day and realise they didn't
:16:42. > :16:47.do everything they wanted to do. I nuts? Are you asking me as
:16:47. > :16:53.therapist or a wife? Which is cheaper? I shouldn't have said
:16:53. > :16:56.there is going to be a freak bliz zard.. That is the experience that
:16:56. > :17:03.is the big year. There is one screening of this, I couldn't make
:17:03. > :17:08.it. Please tell us all. How is it? Possibly funnier than anything.
:17:08. > :17:13.have seen the trailer 19 times. It doesn't look funny. Am I being
:17:13. > :17:19.unfair? A people are saying comedy about bird watching, how funny can
:17:19. > :17:22.it be? Not funny. Selling it as a comedy is a mistake. You expect a
:17:22. > :17:27.comedy because of the people who are in it. For the first half hour
:17:27. > :17:33.there is a zany soundtrack and close ups of Jack Black gurning. It
:17:33. > :17:37.gives it up and it is a film about bird watchers or as they are called
:17:37. > :17:40.birders. You could try and justify it as a film about the male urge to
:17:40. > :17:45.competition or whatever. I don't know how well that would stand up.
:17:45. > :17:49.It is one of the most gentle films I have seen in my life. That sounds
:17:49. > :17:54.lovely. I have seen harder core episodes of Last of the Summer Wine.
:17:54. > :18:00.As soon as you see Steve Martin, you think this may go either way.
:18:00. > :18:05.But maybe this is Planes Trains and Automobiles. You wait for the
:18:05. > :18:08.stripper or something to catch fire. It doesn't happen. You have another
:18:08. > :18:13.bird. Are, are there beautiful birds in it? Are they true to
:18:13. > :18:18.birders? Yes and know. There is a lot of bird action but some of the
:18:18. > :18:23.birds at least are digitally created which seem like a cheat. If
:18:23. > :18:29.you want to see wonderful birds there are documentaries. It pains
:18:29. > :18:35.me a bit, because Steve Martin was, still is the funniest man on effort.
:18:35. > :18:40.You go back to the Jerk, I don't know why he has had to have this
:18:40. > :18:44.campaign, to campaign against comedy, but it is still going on.
:18:44. > :18:51.He is still marching on. Good luck with that Steve and leave the rest
:18:51. > :18:56.of us in tears. I am going to weep. Fee things arouse such controversy
:18:56. > :19:06.as remakes but they keep getting made. The worst remakes of all time
:19:06. > :19:12.are notorious. Godzilla. The grand tragic monster movie turned into a
:19:12. > :19:17.Masterclass of CGI gormlessness. The Haunting. One of the most
:19:17. > :19:23.terrifying films made, exhumed years later as an excuse for
:19:23. > :19:32.Catherine Zeta Jones to dress up as captain cave man. The remake of Get
:19:32. > :19:37.Carter allowed Sylvester Stallone to deliver the line, your a big man,
:19:37. > :19:43.you're out of shape. Sit down. Blandly botching everything that
:19:43. > :19:47.was special about the original. Witness Tim Burton's cack-handed
:19:47. > :19:50.molestation of Charlie and the chocolate factory. The remake is
:19:50. > :20:00.the definitive simple of the film industry's greed and creative
:20:00. > :20:06.collapse. And yet, look past the famous clun Kerrs and there is a
:20:06. > :20:15.different story with some attracting huge acclaim. Like The
:20:15. > :20:19.Departed.. You got something you want to ask me? Done right a remake
:20:19. > :20:29.can introduce great stories to a new generation and allow to see
:20:29. > :20:31.
:20:31. > :20:41.them in a new life. Look at how Brian deParma turns an old film
:20:41. > :20:42.
:20:42. > :20:48.into Scar Face. Or how a B-movie was turned into The Fly. And one of
:20:48. > :20:53.this year's most acclaimed films tinker tailor soldier spy with its
:20:53. > :20:57.previous life as a BBC drama. has been helping us. He has been
:20:57. > :21:03.telling us about his adventures. With films like this delighting
:21:04. > :21:12.audience, are we being too unkind to the poor, misunderstood remake?
:21:12. > :21:16.And joining us is film king Zan Brooks. We have had so many tweets
:21:16. > :21:23.it would be rude for me not to mention om of them. This one from
:21:23. > :21:27.Jez, he says "We need money to be put into new talent to allow the
:21:27. > :21:31.industry to grow." When you hear Hollywood is remaking scar face do
:21:31. > :21:35.you want to openly weep or do you go yes, it is getting another shot?
:21:35. > :21:39.I would have a prejudice. I think if it ain't broke don't fix it and
:21:39. > :21:44.a remake very rarely trumps the original. I think that is a great
:21:44. > :21:49.point, if you reach the point where a good idea, a fresh idea a new
:21:49. > :21:53.idea is greeted not with excitement but with fear, trepidation, disdain,
:21:53. > :21:57.then that is depressing and it suggest there's is a lot of great
:21:58. > :22:02.scripts that maybe will never see the light of day because Holt wood
:22:02. > :22:08.is too busy remaking weekend at bernies. Because they are lazy or
:22:08. > :22:14.they want a safe bet? I don't want to say you love a remake, you are
:22:14. > :22:20.not as ante. I am not going to say I am pro. In the right hand, it is
:22:20. > :22:26.a question of whose hands it is in, they can work beautifully. If
:22:26. > :22:32.Hollywood is remaking something I listen closely, because The Fly.
:22:32. > :22:39.That was a Hollywood movie. Jeff Goldblum was a big star. Another
:22:39. > :22:44.example was the French movie from 1961, beautiful movie, but for film
:22:44. > :22:50.buff, the cinema lovers they will worship that film. What Terry
:22:51. > :22:55.Gilliam did was turn that act of subversive brilliance into a
:22:55. > :23:00.blockbuster. He brought Brad Pitt and Bruce Willis into it. There is
:23:00. > :23:05.a lot of heat and light about Old Boy, and people are getting angry,
:23:05. > :23:11.you know, in anticipation of that. But it will be remade by spike Lee.
:23:11. > :23:15.It is not being made by a 23-year- old fresh out of school. He is one
:23:15. > :23:22.of the greatest directors of the last 20 years. If he wants to, go
:23:22. > :23:27.ahead. Some things can be better. Can I use the words True Grit? So
:23:27. > :23:32.you think I am pleased they made that. Don't be irritated. I am
:23:32. > :23:37.nervous you are going to kill me. Joe Cunningham says I find remakes
:23:37. > :23:42.are a great way to introduce myself and others to the originals. Is
:23:42. > :23:47.there a place for them? That is the intelligent audiences response, to
:23:47. > :23:51.go further back, go through the Rabbit Hole in a way. You have got
:23:51. > :23:54.this weird thing of Hollywood remaking foreign film, on the
:23:54. > :23:59.understanding that most audiences aren't going to see a foreign film
:23:59. > :24:02.because it is subtitled. You see a lot of that, and yet, a lot of the
:24:02. > :24:06.time these films are delicate animals that have grown up in one
:24:06. > :24:13.habitat and you are shunting them to another where they might not
:24:13. > :24:18.thrive. I can read this to you. Carl says "I hate it when foreign
:24:18. > :24:26.classics are remade. Hollywood are arrogant to think they can do bet."
:24:26. > :24:31.Should we talk about Let the Right one In. I didn't mind the new.
:24:31. > :24:34.me in was described as travesty. I would be interested to know, I hope
:24:34. > :24:40.they went to see it, I have a suspicion some people didn't
:24:40. > :24:45.because they took the fact here was this beloved Swedish movie and
:24:45. > :24:49.Hollywood had stamped all over it. It hadn't. Matt Reeves directed it
:24:49. > :24:54.intelligently. It was a different interpretation. He went back to
:24:54. > :24:57.screenplay and put a different spin on things. It wasn't a glossy
:24:57. > :25:01.Hollywood version of people running off into the sunsets. Or the sun
:25:01. > :25:06.rice. In some ways it was a much darker and cynical film, cynical in
:25:07. > :25:11.the best sense. It is about films that we feel personally attached to.
:25:11. > :25:16.My husband for example, loved The Thing so much he thinks it is has
:25:16. > :25:22.been hornt that anybody has gone to make a prequel or remake. Even made
:25:22. > :25:29.eye contact with it. I feel the aim way about ET. Are there films you
:25:29. > :25:35.go go on, like footloose, but don't touch my whatever it is. Of course,
:25:36. > :25:43.everyone has their sacred cows. Apartment. Can you imagine...
:25:43. > :25:48.will never remake that. The Third Man. A film of its time. You can
:25:48. > :25:50.got not go back to fame like that. One of the films I would think of
:25:51. > :25:56.as a favourite and something where it would be pointless to remake it
:25:56. > :25:59.would be the Shining. That was about Kubrick, what is the point in
:25:59. > :26:03.redoing that, Stephen King who wrote the novel December pieth
:26:03. > :26:08.piesed what Kubrick had done to it and remade his own version. There
:26:08. > :26:17.is that question of author ship. To me, you though that story belongs
:26:17. > :26:21.to the novelist, Let The Right One In. We have to tell you we haven't
:26:21. > :26:26.talked about Hugo, they didn't want us to go to a screening because
:26:26. > :26:30.they didn't like the way we reviewed the Rum Diary. I wanted to
:26:30. > :26:34.mention it. The trailer looks brilliant. Is it? It looks
:26:35. > :26:39.brilliant. The film looks brilliant top to tailful all the way through.
:26:39. > :26:43.It is Marty. It is Martin Scorsese, making a kids film, I guess, kids
:26:43. > :26:50.film for the first half, kid running round a station in Paris,
:26:50. > :26:54.then it turns into a heartfelt earnest lecture on the magic of
:26:54. > :26:58.cinema, which is fine but I don't go to Martin Scorsese for a lecture
:26:58. > :27:02.on the magic of cinema, I go for the magic of cinema, that is the
:27:02. > :27:08.only problem I had with Hugo but it looks great. I am going Saturday.
:27:08. > :27:14.We will go together. Snuggling. That would be weird. Happy Feet two
:27:14. > :27:18.the sequel to the Oscar-winning animation Happy Feet. Five, four,
:27:19. > :27:23.three, two... We are the part of the rhythm nation. There are many
:27:23. > :27:32.of reasons to dance. What is mine? The only way the find out is to try
:27:32. > :27:37.it. Let's shake this world.. Happy Feet Two is picking up not long
:27:37. > :27:43.after the last film. We find a community of emperor penguins,
:27:43. > :27:49.vibrant, happy, all of them dancing and singing. And we are introduced
:27:49. > :27:53.to Mumble and his son, and the crux of the story telling follows Mumble
:27:53. > :27:59.and his struggle with his relationship with his son. Come on,
:27:59. > :28:09.it is one big old foot after the other. No-one will laugh at you. I
:28:09. > :28:18.
:28:18. > :28:22.# I don't care where the people say And then there is this ultimate
:28:22. > :28:28.conclusion which is the fact that the emperor penguin land is trapped
:28:28. > :28:34.by a massive iceberg. And the struggle of how to get them out.
:28:34. > :28:44.The population is trapped by huge walls of ice and snow. What can he
:28:44. > :28:49.do. He is an ordinary penguin. is this? The wave of change We are
:28:49. > :28:58.following the two Krill who are almost providing a commentary of
:28:58. > :29:06.the larger issues.. Brad Pitt is playing a Krill. I am going to kill
:29:06. > :29:11.something that has a face. anybodyed on its butt. I am
:29:12. > :29:15.leaving.. I was Australia? Must we. It seems silly. I have shot movies
:29:15. > :29:21.that were settle in Australia. forgot when I do other animations
:29:21. > :29:27.you are alone. I thought that is right. You normally do your lines
:29:27. > :29:32.and... What? When you in the same room you get it going. And with
:29:32. > :29:39.Hank, if you are heckling him you can build off like, comic response,
:29:39. > :29:43.it just makes it so much easier. You have confused me up close you
:29:43. > :29:46.don't make sense. # Shake your body down to the
:29:46. > :29:52.ground # Sing, dance
:29:52. > :29:56.# Let's dance # OK. I mean, amazing. I was woo! I
:29:56. > :30:01.was full of; I don't get the story they bring in a puffin, I don't
:30:01. > :30:06.like it, here is the bottom line, they are penguins, they are dancing,
:30:06. > :30:12.they are dancing to Justin Timberlake. There is a baby penguin
:30:12. > :30:17.called Eric. I took my kids. They have said every morning can we see
:30:17. > :30:21.Happy Feet Two. It is the Film of the Year. They dance. Under
:30:21. > :30:25.pressure. The dancing to understand der pressure. The dancing is great.
:30:25. > :30:31.Everyone talks about Happy Feet in terms of this all star cast. Think
:30:32. > :30:37.the real star of Happy Feet Two and one is the tap dancer
:30:37. > :30:41.extraordinaire, who choreographed the penguins. So hats off to him. I
:30:41. > :30:45.am going to have to pick you up on the story thing. I think the story
:30:45. > :30:48.should be more important, the problem with the story is no-one
:30:48. > :30:52.cares about it, George Miller doesn't care about it. They are
:30:53. > :30:56.dancing. Doesn't matter. He is like a nine-year-old boy. Wandering off.
:30:56. > :30:58.Let us have another dance. Let us go bah to Krill. I understand that
:30:59. > :31:03.because the Krill are great. I could have watched more of the
:31:03. > :31:08.Krill. The Krill is this story and it is nicely animated. So I see why
:31:08. > :31:18.he is dris tracted but at the same time do it whole heartedly. But I
:31:18. > :31:20.
:31:20. > :31:24.I don't like penguins, Claudia. I find them self-important. Really!
:31:24. > :31:28.Who are you. Let's move on. I have to speak to your parents. Next, a
:31:28. > :31:35.Pope, a newly elected Pope has a crisis of confidence and seeks help
:31:35. > :31:45.from a psychoanalysis but the notion of of patient-doctor
:31:45. > :31:45.
:31:45. > :32:44.Apology for the loss of subtitles for 70 seconds
:32:44. > :32:47.confidentialality makes on a new It's the story of a reluctant Pope.
:32:47. > :32:52.It's this slight curse, which is the curse of the brilliant opening
:32:52. > :32:58.scene, we open in the Vatican and the Cardinals are assembled to
:32:58. > :33:02.elect the new Pope. You get this behind the scenes glimpse of a life
:33:02. > :33:07.of a Cardinal. They're praying for the Holy Father it's not them. It's
:33:07. > :33:11.a funny nicely handled scene. The rest of the film doesn't work so
:33:11. > :33:16.well. You have to cherish the memory of that scene. It's
:33:16. > :33:20.occasionally very funny. The weird thing about it is you could almost
:33:20. > :33:26.tell the story in split-screen. Half the story is the comedy
:33:26. > :33:34.business in the Vatican and this psychoanalyst attempts to cure the
:33:34. > :33:42.Pope, essentially. The Pope has done a runner. But the Pope as
:33:42. > :33:48.would be, played by Michel Piccoli, when the story follows him him, he
:33:48. > :33:52.has this crisis of faith, it's a different story. -- movie. The two
:33:52. > :33:59.never match up. It's two interesting sweet movies, but it's
:33:59. > :34:03.not one whole. I agree. I loved the beginning. I loved some of the
:34:03. > :34:11.shots, absolutely beautiful. I also loved the end. Absolutely. It's
:34:11. > :34:14.fabulous. It's the middle somewhere it loses its oomph. Best beginning
:34:14. > :34:20.and ending. In terms of film of the week, for me, watch The Thing and
:34:20. > :34:25.then watch the DVD of John Carpenter's thing and watch the
:34:25. > :34:35.1950s produced by Howard Hawks as well. A weekend of The Thing.
:34:35. > :34:36.
:34:36. > :34:41.Yours? Romantics Anonymous. On Sunday director Ken Russell died
:34:41. > :34:45.aged 84. Here is a reminder of some of his work. Ken Russell was a true
:34:45. > :34:50.British original a maverick who took cinema to new exhilarating and
:34:50. > :34:55.sometimes uncomfortable places. His first major film, Women in Love,
:34:55. > :35:05.called the kind of controversy he thrived on.
:35:05. > :35:13.
:35:13. > :35:20.-- caused the kind of controversy The Devils, a tale of sex, nuns and
:35:20. > :35:25.demonic possession established him as the enfant terrible of British
:35:25. > :35:30.cinema. The first time I really think got an idea of how I could
:35:30. > :35:34.turn something into a film is when I heard Romeo and Juliet and I was
:35:34. > :35:38.in the airforce then, away in the country and I heard this fantastic
:35:38. > :35:42.music and I felt I can put pictures to that and I must put pictures to
:35:42. > :35:49.that. From that moment I decided that's what I just had to do.
:35:49. > :35:57.Russell was a passionate music lover, making films about Elgar and
:35:57. > :36:07.Delius. With Tommy he turned it into a garish and brilliant rock
:36:07. > :36:13.
:36:13. > :36:19.opera. He took on science fiction in 1980
:36:20. > :36:29.with Altered States, a extravagant adventure into the world of mind-
:36:30. > :36:31.
:36:31. > :36:41.altering experiments. By the mid-80s he was finding it
:36:41. > :36:44.hard to get funding for his kind of cinema and turned to music videos.
:36:44. > :36:50.Your left arm, it was against your body and I didn't see your hand
:36:50. > :36:54.hrpts. Nowadays you get more far freedom in music videos than in
:36:54. > :36:59.features, because the concepts are usually left to the director.
:36:59. > :37:04.Obviously, it has to be approved by Elton in this case, and one works
:37:04. > :37:09.together with Elton. But they want imagination and in the cinema, you
:37:09. > :37:15.know, I mean, they seem to want less of it and more talkies and
:37:15. > :37:20.less pictures and exuberance. 1988 he was back on mischiefous
:37:20. > :37:30.irrepressible form with The Lair of the White Worm which went on to
:37:30. > :37:33.
:37:33. > :37:38.become a cult classic. In later life he described himself
:37:38. > :37:42.as as making films in his garage, he will always be remembered as a
:37:42. > :37:47.man who liked to do things in his own way. I like people I get on the
:37:47. > :37:50.same wavelength and can almost instinctively know what I want to
:37:50. > :37:55.do. The more you can do that throughout life, apart from films,
:37:55. > :38:05.without going into great long verbage, the more you can
:38:05. > :38:07.
:38:07. > :38:13.communicate through there, than And that's all for tonight. Next
:38:13. > :38:23.week we will be reviewing Another Earth, New Year's Eve. Playing us
:38:23. > :38:32.