Flood
Disaster movies have always been very successful. Back in
the 1930s audiences flocked to see movies such as ‘San
Francisco’, ‘In Old Chicago’, ‘The
Rains Came’ and ‘The Last Days of Pompeii’,
which, in turn, featured earthquakes, fires, floods and erupting
volcanoes. World War II was a big enough disaster for the
1940s, but by the 1950s and 60s the genre had been successfully
revived with movies like ‘Titanic, A Night to Remember’
and ‘Krakatoa, East of Java’. The formula for
disaster movies was firmly set in the 1970s and 80s. Pick
a natural disaster, cast some current popular actors, throw
in some old Super Stars from a bygone era, and you were in
business. Movies such as ‘The Towering Inferno’
and ‘Earthquake’ were typical big ‘blockbusters’
of that period. During the 1990s, and on into this century,
complicated special-effects have also added considerably to
the disaster movies’ appeal. Movies such as ‘Armageddon’,
‘Dante’s Peak’ and ‘Twister’
could never have been made without the ‘blue screen’
and advanced digital computer technology. The mass destruction
of human lives and property, by a nasty natural disaster,
has always been a top box-office attraction, and, interestingly
enough, the disaster movie has always been a unique American
phenomenon. Therefore, it comes as a surprise that the British
are entering this particular genre, with the release of Tony
Mitchell’s ‘Flood’. The British cinema basically
has no history of this type of movie, and it is fascinating
to see how they tackle the subject-matter. A massive storm
is working its way down the British coastline, causing catastrophes
in its path. Computer analysis forecasts that it will reach
the Thames Estuary to coincide with a high tide. London is
in peril, and the only thing that can stop a devastating disaster
is a new high-tech dam, or ‘barrier’, built across
the river for just such an emergency. Will the barrier hold?
And will their able-bodied engineers be able to open the gates,
and redirect the water, just in time? These are crucial questions,
and, as a Scotland Yard ‘think-tank’ ponders evacuation
plans, time is ticking away. Millions of lives are in danger.
Tony Michell’s movie is a strangely cold and analytical
piece of work. It doesn’t play on the emotions, like
an American disaster movie would, but, instead, it tackles
the intellect in a calm and rational manner. It epitomizes
the British attitude of quiet fortitude and detachment while
under pressure. Granted, though, there are some spell binding
scenes of victims trying to escape precarious circumstances,
which have their own suspense. Perhaps the most interesting
moments in the movie are those when the camera pans across
the many pieces of post-modern architecture that have sprung
up in London over the last few years. You know instinctively
these buildings are going to be underwater sometime in the
next twenty minutes. A flooded London is a fantastic sight
to see. As the tension builds, everyone approaches the situation
with that famous British ‘stiff-upper-lip’. ‘Flood’
is not ‘glamorous’ movie making in the American
style. Rather, it is typically British in its understated
objectivity. Feasibly, in this era of global warming, the
movie comes not so much as ‘entertainment’, but,
as a timely warning.
Bee Movie
Another movie with a strong ecological message is this delightful
cartoon, ‘Bee Movie’. After his long running successful
television sit-com, Jerry Seinfeld disappeared from the scene
for sometime. But, he is back now as the producer of this
story about a bee called Barry, who decides to sue the human
race for stealing all of the bees’ precious honey. Seinfeld
also wrote the movie, so it is full of his typical Jewish
humor and alienated slant on life. Much of the wisecracks
will soar over the heads of young children, being more readily
appreciated by an older age group. However, there is enough
cartoon magic in the movie to keep the attention of the little
ones. An aerial flight through New York’s Central Park,
in particular, is a fabulous display of contemporary computer-animated
cartoon techniques. Jerry Seinfeld’s message is totally
sugar-coated, and it is highly unlikely to offend anybody.
Stardust
I guess if there had never been the ‘Lord of the Rings’
and the ‘Harry Potter’ sagas, Matthew Vaughn’s
movie ‘Stardust’ would never have been foisted
onto us. Personally, I am just a little bit sick of elves
and goblins and witches and warlocks. Michelle Pfeiffer plays
an ugly evil witch hunting a ‘fallen star’, who
has transformed into a gorgeous girl in the shape of Claire
Danes. If Michelle captures Claire, kills her, rips out her
heart, and eats it, all of Michelle’s beauty and youth
will be restored to her, plus, she will have increased magical
powers. I think that is how the story goes. It is hard to
tell. Based on Neil Gaiman’s children’s book,
the script is more like abbreviated chapter highlights, and
the plot whizzes by at such an alarming rate it is difficult
to tell what is actually going on. Over-acting outrageously
seems to be Michelle Pfeiffer’s idea of performing for
children. For most of the movie she carries on like a demented
‘drag queen’. By the end of the movie she is completely
unbearable. Claire Danes is typically vapid. I guess your
teenage daughter might find the movie interesting, but, then
again, most teenage daughters these days are way too sophisticated
for this kind of cod’s wallop.
