:00:00. > :00:00.Aintree. All in sports day at 6. 30. Now on BBC news it is time for the
:00:00. > :00:27.film review. Hello and welcome to the Film Review
:00:28. > :00:32.and BBC News, what have we got? As I am sure you know, this is the week
:00:33. > :00:40.that Noah opens, the great big controversial or is
:00:41. > :00:46.or is it biblical epic. We have Mark Cousins' A Story Of Children And
:00:47. > :00:51.Film, and The Double by Richard Ayoade. We have all been waiting for
:00:52. > :00:56.Noah in different ways! You basically know the plot, the period
:00:57. > :01:00.after the creation, the rains are going to come down, Noah has a
:01:01. > :01:05.vision that he needs to build a massive ark, he will put all the
:01:06. > :01:09.animals in it. There has been a lot of controversy over whether this
:01:10. > :01:13.takes to the big book version. I love people being annoyed about a
:01:14. > :01:21.film`maker taking liberties with the story of a six hole digger `` a
:01:22. > :01:26.600`year`old man hearing voices in his head. But Darren Aronofsky has
:01:27. > :01:30.taken inspiration from a number of sources, and the Bible is only one
:01:31. > :01:35.of them. Consequently, we have a great big, romping epic, closer to
:01:36. > :01:39.George Lucas than it is to Genesis, in which you have Noah as this
:01:40. > :01:44.increasingly mad figure, literally driven bonkers by these demands to
:01:45. > :01:49.do something, which seem really outrageous, and on the other hand
:01:50. > :01:53.Ray Winstone as sort of the reason that the creator, not..., the
:01:54. > :01:56.creator is sending the rain. Here is a clip.
:01:57. > :02:03.When I heard talk of miracles, I dismissed them. But then I saw the
:02:04. > :02:08.birds with my own eyes and I had to come. There isn't anything for you
:02:09. > :02:15.here. This all belongs to me. This land, this forest. That stronghold
:02:16. > :02:18.of yours. Did you really think you could protect yourself from me in
:02:19. > :02:24.that? It's not protection from you. Then what is it? An ark ` to hold
:02:25. > :02:29.the innocent when the creator sends his deluge to wipe out the wicked
:02:30. > :02:34.from this world. Return to your cities of Cain! Know we have all
:02:35. > :02:40.been judged! I have men at my back and you stand alone and defy me? I'm
:02:41. > :02:55.not alone. It is not a 1950s biblical epic, is
:02:56. > :02:58.it? Definitely 21st century. It is a science`fiction and fantasy movie,
:02:59. > :03:01.and good for it. Many people familiar with the story from the
:03:02. > :03:12.Bible will not run but that there are six gigantic rock monsters,
:03:13. > :03:18.Angels, who looked like the bold of monster from Galaxy Quest, they do a
:03:19. > :03:23.lot of the building of the ark. Darren Aronofsky has said, this is a
:03:24. > :03:28.myth, a story that resonates through west and east, through a number of
:03:29. > :03:31.religions, let's just go with it. He's great with human obsession,
:03:32. > :03:37.Black Swan, how it destroys people and how their minds change, and that
:03:38. > :03:41.sounds a bit like Noah here. You definitely get that with Russell
:03:42. > :03:45.Crowe's Noah, who becomes an extremist eco`warrior, save the
:03:46. > :03:50.animals and let everybody else try one. He becomes incredibly
:03:51. > :03:55.unsympathetic, he is somebody who is borderline mad. Actually, if we get
:03:56. > :03:58.into his character and believe in the character, and for a lot of it
:03:59. > :04:02.we do not, it is because of Jennifer Connelly, who places long`suffering
:04:03. > :04:06.wife, who enables the human contact. The film is terribly
:04:07. > :04:10.flawed, utterly preposterous, occasionally exasperating, but it is
:04:11. > :04:15.to be congratulated for being as out there as it is. I like the fact that
:04:16. > :04:20.are not he has said, I am going to do a version of the Noah story, it
:04:21. > :04:23.is pretty madcap already, let's just go for it. There are moments with
:04:24. > :04:28.the walking rock angels, you could hear people in the screening going,
:04:29. > :04:31.what?! It is a great big romping science`fiction movie that has a
:04:32. > :04:39.biblical connection in the background. It is what it is. It is
:04:40. > :04:43.what it is! I am a very big fan of Mark Cousins. Who isn't, frankly? He
:04:44. > :04:47.has made a beautiful documentary about the portrayal of children in
:04:48. > :04:51.film, and it is basically a visual essay. He starts with a film that he
:04:52. > :04:54.made in a zone of his nephew and niece playing, and he starts looking
:04:55. > :04:58.at it and saying that he sees in their faces all these different
:04:59. > :05:04.expressions, you know, at times moody, showing off, sad. Then he
:05:05. > :05:06.says, let's look at how these expressions have occurred throughout
:05:07. > :05:12.the history of cinema. He takes us on a trip that goes over decades,
:05:13. > :05:16.continents, formats, from old silent film to modern video, and he does so
:05:17. > :05:21.in a way that only he could do. It is lyrical, poetic, you be like you
:05:22. > :05:24.are learning about cinema, but most importantly you are watching the
:05:25. > :05:30.creation of a work of art. He is a critic on the one hand, but he is an
:05:31. > :05:34.artist, a genuine poet of the moving image. And it is the breadth of
:05:35. > :05:39.knowledge, extraordinary. He writes beautifully. In terms of research,
:05:40. > :05:44.there is stuff... The research is extraordinary, but it is done with
:05:45. > :05:48.such a light touch, at one point he is in Van Gogh's bedroom, looking at
:05:49. > :05:52.a beauty obsessed over, then the Isle of Skye, and all the way
:05:53. > :05:57.through is this almost fairy tale sense that you are being led through
:05:58. > :06:01.like a fable. I was enchanted by it, but also really impressed, just with
:06:02. > :06:07.the scope of film knowledge. I mean, he is one of film knowledge. I mean,
:06:08. > :06:11.he is one`of`a`kind about doubles, because I think it is a really
:06:12. > :06:18.hacked device for saying, let's give him an evil twin, here here we go.
:06:19. > :06:23.It is a Richard Ayoade film inspired by Dusty Askey, it is a future retro
:06:24. > :06:27.setting, Jesse Eisenberg is an obvious Schlupp, turned upside down
:06:28. > :06:32.by the arrival of a double who is everything he is not, confident,
:06:33. > :06:36.forthright and somebody who gets his way in the world. Here is a clip.
:06:37. > :06:41.What'll it be? What, do you want to... Sorry, I'll just have a Coke
:06:42. > :06:48.and a bagel. We're out of bagels. Oh, right, then...right, then I'll
:06:49. > :06:55.just... Come on. I'll just... I'll just have the Coke, then, I guess.
:06:56. > :06:59.Coke, and you? A coffee and scrambled eggs. We don't serve
:07:00. > :07:02.breakfast in the evening. Why not? Because it says so on the menu.
:07:03. > :07:06.Well, do you still have eggs here? Yeah. And do have a frying pan?
:07:07. > :07:09.Yeah. Then do me a favour and make me some scrambled eggs. Fine,
:07:10. > :07:15.anything else? Bacon and toast and a beer. And a beer, anything else? No,
:07:16. > :07:25.that's it. Are you sure? Just get me the damn food!
:07:26. > :07:31.I am converted, Jesse Eisenberg is terrific. He is very good in that
:07:32. > :07:33.dual role, they are two very distinct characters. One of the
:07:34. > :07:38.things that is interesting about this, when you watch it, you see
:07:39. > :07:42.some of Terry Gilliam's Brazil, such a brilliantly designed film, the
:07:43. > :07:46.high watermark of that dystopian future fantasy. You can you from the
:07:47. > :07:54.sound effects, it has the rumbling industrial groaning of Eraserhead.
:07:55. > :07:58.He does well to dramatise this arts editor paranoia, where somebody who
:07:59. > :08:05.looks exactly like you is in the world and nobody else notices.
:08:06. > :08:09.Occasionally, its point of reference are too obvious. As soon as you
:08:10. > :08:16.start evoking Brazil and Eraserhead, those are hard films to live up to,
:08:17. > :08:21.but it does a pretty good job of it. It has that grey`green `brown sense
:08:22. > :08:26.of industrial conformity, and there is, as I said, this great sense of
:08:27. > :08:29.absurdist paranoia. You are in a world that makes no sense, but it
:08:30. > :08:36.appears to make sense to everyone other than you. So you enter into it
:08:37. > :08:38.completely. Presumably Jesse Eisenberg's performances, two
:08:39. > :08:44.different characters are the key. If that doesn't work, the movie
:08:45. > :08:48.doesn't. Everything we saw about them, their stands, their manner,
:08:49. > :08:52.and we saw in the clip, what makes it worse is that there is this other
:08:53. > :08:56.version of himself doing well, and he starts being edged out of his own
:08:57. > :09:02.life, which is a very Woody Allen idea, but it works well. Your best
:09:03. > :09:08.of the week is the French film The Past. I love this, Asghar Farhadi
:09:09. > :09:12.making a film in France, a wonderful performance by Berenice Bejo, who we
:09:13. > :09:16.saw in the Artist, a wonderful physical performer. It is a really
:09:17. > :09:19.intelligent and insightful look at the changing nature of relationships
:09:20. > :09:23.and about people's inability to escape the past. And I think it is
:09:24. > :09:30.wonderful, you should definitely see it, I know you liked the Separation.
:09:31. > :09:36.Very much, but how far is this the clash of civilisations idea as well?
:09:37. > :09:41.An Iranian film`maker, Berenice Bejo, who is not. Working in a
:09:42. > :09:45.language which is not his own. One of the terrific things is that he
:09:46. > :09:49.has an eye for culture, Separation is about a couple and the culture
:09:50. > :09:54.they are in. This is, similarly, about marriages and divorces, but it
:09:55. > :09:56.is about the French setting, and I think he is about the French
:09:57. > :09:58.setting, and I think he's a genuinely international film`maker.
:09:59. > :10:01.I think you could put him anywhere in the world and he would understand
:10:02. > :10:08.what was specific about that culture, but also what was
:10:09. > :10:12.universal. You picked Frozen, I have not opened it yet! White?! I thought
:10:13. > :10:18.it would be a bit schmaltzy and I have not had time. This is
:10:19. > :10:22.terrific, it is basically them doing what they do best, it is a fairy
:10:23. > :10:26.tale which you sort of know, but it has been revised to have a young,
:10:27. > :10:31.modern message. The ending of it breaks a number of boundaries, which
:10:32. > :10:38.I thought was handled well. The songs are fabulous, the animation is
:10:39. > :10:42.really lovely to look at, a kind of land of ice, I saw it in the cinema
:10:43. > :10:47.and on DVD, and for home viewing it worked every bit as well. I think it
:10:48. > :10:53.is a modern classic, and I think they have done really well. Who is
:10:54. > :10:57.it for? Disney say everybody. The great joys of the classic Disneys is
:10:58. > :11:02.that they are kind for everybody, if you go back and look at the classic
:11:03. > :11:06.animations, they work the ages. You could take a child to see this, and
:11:07. > :11:10.you would be laughing as much as they would, but I am saying you very
:11:11. > :11:16.specifically ` you would be enchanted by it! Give it a go, it is
:11:17. > :11:19.a really, really charming film. You have sold to me. Thank you very
:11:20. > :11:26.much, you will find more film news and reviews from Mark on his blog.
:11:27. > :11:41.That is it for this week, thank you for watching and goodbye.
:11:42. > :11:47.Good evening! I do not think the weather is exactly going to be as
:11:48. > :11:50.spectacular this weekend, most places will get wet at some point,
:11:51. > :11:51.there will be some