Writer/Director

Read, Imagine, Create and Enjoy.

[paulthompstone]

The Militarization of Space - Kubrick vs. Lucas

Stanley Kubrick brought to our eyes, a film of question. One which people always asked themselves, what is the meaning of life? Kubrick’s film 2001: A Space Odyssey, 1968, defines human life as we may or simply may not know it. 2001 examines the relationships between humanity and technology. A significant contribution to Kubrick’s 2001 was the Space Race of the 1960’s as well as the links between the militarization of space and the technological value in which it held. Coincidentally, the film was released at the height of the space race between the USSR and the US. To top this off, 2001, also showed the enduring influence of which computers would have on our everyday lives.

  Space has not yet been weaponized however it is already highly militarized which can been seen in close context when talking about 2001. From the beginning moments of the film, we witness the creation of the first weapon ever made. While not physically created in front of us, its use as a weapon was lethal, just a branch from a tree. As we witness the event unfold, we are forcefully focusing on the transition in evolution from that of the Apes to the Neanderthals.

  In ways similar to Metropolis, Kubrick’s work in 2001 delves to explore much more than the process of evolution, it too contains many other elements of a hidden kind. Feminism, much like as seen in Metropolis, is a significant one in particular. Throughout its entirety, 2001, if I am not mistaken, contains few female characters, no more than five I would imagine. This would include Doctor Floyd’s daughter whom in fact is played by Kubrick’s own daughter. The main actors in this film are all men, while the women only briefly participate. Aside from this, the only other times in which we see women in the picture is while they are playing the roles of flight attendants, the, oh so, stereotypical role of a women in that time. While the female roles, as previously mentioned are brief, they do seem to add a sense of normality to this profoundly abnormal film. One scene to mention in relation to this is the scene of Doctor Floyd’s interaction with his daughter via video call. What better way to bring a sense of normality to an epic space adventure then one’s birthday wishes over video calling, something which we can strongly relate to in the not so distant future of this film with the likes of modern technology such as Skype and Viber. While these meanings portrayed throughout 2001 are significant, they are easily forgotten as we are constantly admiring the magnificent journey of Kubrick’s surreal visuals.

  The film was seen from the beginning by MGM as a shaky production to go forth. Initially, the production of 2001 was supposed to cost $6 million, but due to the innovative imagination of Kubrick, after each of the special effects eventually settled into place the final price lay just shy of $11 million. On top of this hefty budget, the arrangements of Kubrick’s finances insinuated that he would not begin to make profit until MGM earned 2.2 times its negative as well as advertising costs. Luckily for Kubrick, 2001 went on to become one of the most successful films in the history of MGM, even though it had previously received bad reviews from New York critics and too sat victim to a disappointing screening for Hollywood executives.

  The importance of this film alone is defined predominantly by the decade it was made in. The 1960’s, while a period of time which is today mainly associated with the ideas of freedom of speech as well as the fusing between races and sexes, it was also a time of conflict, repression and fear from the notion of powers beyond ones control. Incidents such as the Vietnam War and the ongoing Cold War had people on edge throughout the 60s whom all pondered on the possibilities of a nuclear war. Each of these aspects most definitely cannot be shrugged aside when talking about 2001.

  Some may say that Kubrick’s 2001 is in fact the very first Star Wars, delivered to audiences before Lucas ever stepped foot onto the scene. The 60s was a time where space was being used for military purposes, hereby giving Kubrick all the information and tools needed to deliver a successful blockbuster in which the generic people of the world would pay time and time again to see.

  Well, also with credit being given to the VFX, of which given the extent of them throughout the course of the film itself, would have given a pretty intense trip to those of whom were participating in the acts of recreational drugs associated with that time, such as LSD and Acid etc. The journey through the star-gate is one which is associated with a totally different form of being, portrayed through the many colours of a drug induced trip.

  As 2001 embraces many issues of the day as well as today or any day at that matter, through the visualisation of the star-gate and the mechanical artificial intelligence of HAL, it also makes the film itself full of unknowns, beyond human comprehension. Kubrick focuses on the idea of a world which is dominated by machines. A scary thought. In a time full of the uncertainty of controllability, 2001 conveys a solution which can diminish these ideas of nuclear wars through the means of AI such as HAL, but only momentarily as you will come to learn. As the crew feel that they are in the safe hands with the ships on board artificial intelligence, we suspect that everything will run smoothly and without any hic-ups along the way. Yet to our surprise the situation deteriorates quite rapidly when we are greeted with quite the opposite.

  Spacecraft, most of the time, tend to be quite jaw dropping, colossal and awe inspiring, in the case of 2001 we tend to get a sense of normality once again in relation to this matter. For example the stewardess whom could have very well stepped off of a Pan-am flight and proceeded directly to her next connecting journey which just so happened to be on this abnormally large sized aircraft. We are also brought back to the reality of space as we notice the grip bottomed shoes, liquid food, weightlessness as well as hyper-sleep. These elements give the audience a vague insight of what the future has in store for them or at the very least, what they think it does. For the people, space has never been seen in such a way before. The silence, the darkness, the disconnection from life on earth, “A place of noiseless death”. There is nothing to be seen out there that will be able to fill the void of space itself. No aliens nor saucers of any kind, not even the slightest hint of air to be able carry sound, nothing. These same elements can be seen in the recent blockbuster, Gravity, 2014, to a frightening extent.

  The trigger in which Kubrick added and pulled to make the frightening notion of space even more bearable was the killer spaceship HAL in which it had progressed to after all. This interpretation of HAL by Kubrick was quite an odd one to witness due to its life like interior which it seemed to have contained. In fact, the only thing for me which connected it to being a system at all was the monotone voice as well as the obvious physicality of its numerous instalments through the various levels of the ship.

  The close ups of HAL’s red eye gives off an uncertain vibe It has killed off one of the crew in order to prevent its own deactivation. This is the moment of 2001 where we come to terms with the question we have been asking ourselves since the beginning, which is, does HAL have feelings and finally see for certain that the on board AI is just a psychotic killer after all. This also implants a fresh message in the mind of each person in the audience, will there come a time in the future that the human race will one day rely on technology for a living? Don’t we already? Is it safe? Just like the cut backs to HAL’s deathly stare, it reminds the people in the audience who the real culprit is.

  Once the life functions of HAL are “terminated” we are reminded of the military influences which were had in the production of the film, sending across messages such as the killing of civilians as ‘collateral damage’. Kubrick portrays a universe whereby stating that humans have lost their own humanity as they search for something which is simply beyond their capabilities or even beyond themselves. Plummeting our imaginations to thinking only of what we hold in store for ourselves in the future.

  Religious interpretations, the conceptions of allegorical statements as well as the previously mentioned notions of space being used for military purpose throughout the 60s are all possible notions for the sole purpose of Kubrick’s 2001 alone, all portrayed throughout the supposed form of a science fiction blockbuster. It is almost as if these visual effects, fictional characters and the memorable film score are only present to help the audience digest the bigger picture which is being handed to them, which is plainly the philosophy of life itself. Kubrick was later interviewed in Rolling Stone Magazine where he stated, “On the deepest psychological level, the films plot symbolizes the search for God, and it finally postulates what is little less than a scientific definition of God. The Film revolves around this metaphysical conception and the realistic hardware and the documentary feelings about everything, were necessary in order to undermine your built-in resistance to the poetical concept.”

  From a strictly religious perspective, you could say that 2001 focuses on the evolution of man as well as the universe from the viewpoint of God. Certain sequences throughout this film can also be seen related in close context with the Bible. For starters, the opening sequence is a rising shot of the Earth in the distance with the light of the sun peaking overhead of it, almost like a halo, which is comparable to the light spoken into existence in Genesis 1 “Let there be light”. One more example of this religious interaction undertaken by Kubrick would be from the “Dawn of Man” section of the film. In this segment we witness one of the ape’s touch the monolith, this action ends up sparking the “Dawn of Man” which can be seen in comparison with the famous painting ‘The Creation of Adam’ by Michelangelo. The meaning behind this painting is to represent the moment God breathed life into Adam, the first man supposedly created.

  2001 has also been thought of by people as an allegory, one of human conception, birth as well as the inevitability of death. In 2001 this is played out non-stop. The spaceship in its whole can be seen as a sperm, in its shape, on a journey to Jupiter, where Jupiter in this case is the egg. The meeting of the two would symbolize the trigger for the growth of a new race of man. The previously mentioned psychedelic light show, which in fact has puzzled many reviewers, is seen as Kubrick’s visually depicted attempt on the moment of conception, when the child seen in the final sequence comes into being. The “star child”.

  Obviously the interpretation of this particular film is in the eye of the viewer, but it is most certain that Kubrick has brought to the foreground an outstanding film driven from its very own core by meaning. Issues such as those pertaining to evolution and civilization can be seen as more readily tackled in comparison to generic genres such as Drama or Romantic Comedies. These films also tend to remain the most popular in the eyes of the audience. An example of this would be the 1969 best picture Oscar winner which went to the musical, Oliver. Although it is an Oscar winning film, other films such as those in the Sci-Fi genre have been much more successful in the terms of grossing profit, because they are simply more appealing to watch, in the eyes of the viewer.

  What is a Blockbuster if you think about it? Most would proceed to answer that it is just a popular film that has become very successful under the light of making mega profits, but is that all there is to it? Many seem to think so. A film such as Star Wars, 1977, is an obvious one when the notion of a Blockbuster is mentioned, in fact it is one of the very first of its kind apart from Kubrick’s 2001, set in its way of science fiction. It is one of the not so many ‘greats’ which kicked the word Blockbuster into the existence that we associate it with today. Clearly after seeing the success and profit that films such as Star Wars were capable of generating, Hollywood proceeded to create numerous big-budget spectacles, in time creating the empire which is so very well known to this day. It is as if the production companies of Hollywood, proceeding the events of these successful films, had in fact created some sort of formula to keep the magnificent money ball rolling.

  George Lucas was a certain prodigy of the 1970’s American commercial cinema, creating the massive Blockbuster franchise of Star Wars. Lucas had borrowed idea from the earlier past of Sci-Fi films such as again, Kubrick’s 2001, leading him into a very successful career and helping him to begin the cycle of today’s big-budget productions. Ever since its emergence, Star Wars has been deemed the foremost example of a space opera. The franchise also followed on to become a large part of mainstream popular culture, as well of course being one of the highest grossing series of all time.

  Not like earlier heroes in space science fiction such as the television series of Star Trek, the heroes of Star Wars are not seen in any way as materialistic but as romantic individuals. In a recent article, I found the following quite interesting, “College literature professors have remarked that the Star Wars saga, with its struggle between good and evil, democracy and empire, can be considered a national epic for the United States.”

  People often ponder on the thought that social concerns and trends are mirrored in the medium of mass media such as television and film. It is also believed that pop culture forms can in consequence be seen as a gauge of social change and attitude. An example of this would be that feminist film critics have previously looked at the various ways of which women have been portrayed throughout various periods of time in cinema. These different aspects would have included features such as, differences of change in women’s real fortune, their power as well as status in society, cinematic representations of war and also masculinity in the ways they have been subjected to similar scrutiny. Though a lot of these issues have been pointed out in the earlier eras of Science Fiction cinema, contemporary or should I say early contemporary Sci-Fi films such as Star Wars, seemingly live up to their predecessors. Whilst the overall goal is to be that of a blockbuster, it still endeavours into that of meaningful film too.

  Spreading over the course of four decades, from 1977 to 2005, George Lucas’ six part Star Wars franchise has grown to become the most profitable screen franchise of all time. In chronological order, the saga begins with IV: A New Hope, V: The Empire Strikes Back, VI: Return of the Jedi, I: The Phantom Menace, II: Attack of the Clones and III: Revenge of the Sith as well as the recent 2008 animated Clone Wars, which was set in the three year gap between Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith, and finally we have episode VII which is currently being filmed and is due to be released in December 2015. Totalling to date, a profit of $4.38 billion.

  The Star Wars franchise was born from Lucas’ blend of inspirations, from fairy-tale myths to literary traditions of Joseph Campbell as well as Carlos Castenada. In Star Wars, 1977, Lucas aimed for a film of nostalgic recreation of the cliff-hanger suspense and stand out action of Saturday morning sci-fi shows. The original Star Wars was made for $12 million of which neither Lucasfilm nor Fox, expected more than twice that in domestic rentals, due to the hard selling market of Science Fiction, by which that ‘hard selling’ market, effectively became extinct after the release of Star Wars. It was at this point in time that the audiences changed course in terms of the films they went to see, the era of Kubrick’s space opera was out and the era of Lucas’ space blockbuster was born.

  References

Filmography:

George Lucas, Star Wars IV: A New Hope, 1977

George Lucas, Star Wars V: Empire Strikes Back, 1980

George Lucas, Star Wars VI: Return of the Jedi, 1983

George Lucas, Star Wars I: The Phantom Menace, 1999

George Lucas, Star Wars II: Attack of the Clones, 2002

George Lucas, Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith, 2005

Clone Wars, 2008

Stanley Kubrick, 2001: A Space Odyssey, 1968

Bibliography:

On Kubrick by James Naremore

The film Genre Book by John Sanders

Contemporary American Cinema, Edited by Linda Ruth Williams and Michael Hammond

 Web Articles:

Star Wars – The Real Truth

Real Life Star Wars: The Militarization of Space

[paulthompstone]

A Trip to Bollywood

The Vibrant Mise en Scene of Bollywood

  In this article ‘The Vibrant Mise en Scene of Bollywood’ I will be taking you through a journey of Bombay Cinema as well as primarily focusing on Mira Nair’s colourful spectacle Monsoon Wedding. My reason for writing about the topic of Bollywood cinema is due to the vibrancy of music, colour and overall life which it tends to bring to the foreground of a cinematic experience.

  The enormity of Indian cinema is almost as massive as its population which today is a little over one billion. Eight million films per year are shown in over thirteen thousand mainly urban cinemas and viewed by an average of eleven million people each day, which are also exported to around one hundred countries. (Temples of Desire, Vijay Mishra, 2002.) The majority of these films would have been from the Bollywood genre, which is now India’s sixth largest industry, grossing around $600 million annually and employing some three hundred thousand workers.

  Until the late 1920s, some ninety percent of all films screened in India were from abroad. (Rajinder Kumar Dudrah, 2006.) This soon changed when aspiring filmmakers within the country realized they needed to do something that would share the experience of their culture with the rest of the world. Indian cinema was vaguely recognized throughout the world if not at all, until the invention of Bollywood, so to speak, arose. Bollywood allows a unique opportunity to pin point the contrasting move of globalization in popular culture. It is a hybrid of both the film industry in Bombay or as it is now known as Mumbai, and the famously known Hollywood industry of America. Mostly, contemporary Bollywood sticks to the fantasies and representations of the middle-class Indian lifestyles through which tensions and modernity are portrayed.

   As oftenly seen throughout Bollywood films, traditional Indian song and dance is a very regular occurrence. (Rajinder Kumar Dudrah, 2006.) This form of cinema is seen to represent an ideal India in one’s creative imagination, the shared cultural fantasy of an ideal India which is seemingly and constantly striven for and not the real, problematized nation.  All of these aspects within Bollywood films are a lot of the time centralized through the use of song. Actually, the film song and dance is not only central to the cultural and musical aspects of film, but also has become a major aspect of diverse Indian life. Song sequences can also operate on a metaphorical level, giving them the opportunity to do what they like with the film itself. For example, they can be dream sequences that are often fantasies for the protagonists but also for the audience.  

  Monsoon Wedding is most definitely one of the fine line Bollywood films in which case uses its music accordingly for the spectator’s experience. It is a beautifully phenomenal film, which takes you on an adventure through a world of colorful flowers, intimate relationships and traditional dances which all tends to revolve around a family in crises.

  Essentially Monsoon Wedding is a romantic film. This genre of film seems to be the dominant factor when talking about the current success at the box office in both India and throughout South Asian diaspora. (Raminder Kaur and Ajay J. Sinha, 2005.) Predominantly, the majority of successful earners within Bollywood have come from the romantic genre. Erotic and romantic elements have always featured highly across the wide range of Indian cinema and films from the romantic genre have always been seen as quite popular within the mise en scene of Bollywood. Whilst open sexuality is prohibited in Indian film, a lot is conveyed through the means of suggestion and semiotics.

   Use of the musical aspect of Bollywood plays a crucial role whereby sexuality and eroticism are often closely portrayed with the particular songs and dances used (Rajinder Kumar Dudrah, 2006.) It is believed that good songs make a good movie, in the production process of Bollywood; Music directors are given only the broadest of outlines to work with for a film. This includes a story outline as well as the main stars that will usually act and mime their voices on screen. Music directors draw a range of musical traditions and styles for their song choices in the movies, from Indian classical and folk music to western pop. This becomes a link between signifiers of tradition and modernity, so that western and traditional instruments are combined together.

  In Monsoon Wedding we see the juxtaposition of the ingenuous and the sexual.  The film has found its place in an international audience due to its addressing of the issues of sexuality and human relationships, in which everybody relates to.  Throughout the organization of the Punjabi wedding we begin to see the blossoming of numerous relationships, the strongest one being between the wedding organizer PK also known as Dubey and the Verma’s live-in maid Alice, whom both have rich flirtations of beautiful imagery. This gives the audience that dreamlike fantasy of true love but also refers back to the reality which is true love being so hard to find.  Dubey makes marigold flowers the central theme of the wedding for the decorative part and is often seen throughout the film to be munching away on the flowers. This relates back to the first time in which Alice sees Dubey, she is in a state of daydream and moving in slow motion to clean up broken glasses whilst harmlessly chewing on marigolds. We begin to see the passionate love that the two have for each other as Dubey’s assistants throw the marigolds over the pair, pronouncing them as man and wife, as they participate in a mock up wedding underneath the parasol of marigolds. These flowers in this context can be shown as the symbolic aspect, which is portraying both Alice and Dubey’s love for one another, and the metaphor, which is the suddenness of their love.

  A lot of the romance contained within Monsoon Wedding also accounts for the films downfall. After a certain period in the film, it begins to feel quite empty and filled with too much fantasy. The relationship for Dubey and Alice for example, may be exotic, but at the same time they are not even offering anything towards each other, but then again so is the film itself. Without all of the exoticism, which is the dancing, singing, flying saris and even monsoon rain, Monsoon Wedding is essentially a western romantic film made predominantly for a western audience. Whilst some may view the film this way or Bollywood in general like this, is that not the point? They do what they are supposed to do which is, giving us that feeling of euphoria whilst retaining and portraying those deeper meanings. An obvious key feature of the film is the portrayal of a masculine figure. 

  Gender is seen as what it means to be masculine or feminine based on the society in which they live and what is seen as social standards (Rajinder Kumar Dudrah, 2006.). In Monsoon Wedding we see the character of Lalit Verma as one whom grew up under quite a strong influence of traditional social values. These values would have included a big emphasis on male masculinity but also discipline. Throughout certain sequences within the film we see that Lalit’s son Varun as the complete opposite, generating conflict between himself and his father due to his femininity which would have grown on him throughout the years as the generation he grew up in was one of a heightened process of globalization. Monsoon Wedding shows us Varun as he continues to grow up in a world, which is overflowing of this globalization portraying him as an aspiring cook whom wants to be a chef whilst simultaneously juxtaposing Lalit’s view of a man, which is to have a successful job and study hard in areas such as medicine or engineering.

   This film is extremely active when it comes to the twists and turns of a writer’s imagination and seems to accurately convey the happenings of a not so distant reality, which is family life. There are ups and downs in almost every second sequence. We constantly see joyful sequences in Monsoon Wedding, like when the family’s woman, gather together and sing folksongs about getting married and participate in some, what would seem as, quite sexual humor. All of a sudden we are watching real people, not a group of exotic foreigners from a fantasy novel, enabling us to see the universality of family love.

  Throughout the movie, it is apparent that there is a conflict between traditional Punjabi customs and more modern western customs. In one scene, Aditi’s (The Bride’s) father, Lalit, and the wedding organizer Dubey, get into a small disagreement over the colour of the wedding tent. Lalit wanted a traditional colorful tent of Punjabi origin, whilst Dubey had already began the construction of a westernized white tent, “Y2K style” as he explains. They both continue to flesh it out until Dubey finally agrees to re-doing it in the “old style” which Lalit is so keen on having for his daughter’s wedding.

  As the previous section of this case study has shown the modernized change which Bollywood but most of all India, had undergone. I would like to pause for a little while and focus on the Indian Diaspora as well as the impacts in which films like Monsoon wedding have had on them. As I have previously mentioned is one of the fastest growing Diasporic communities in the world. It is currently estimated at around eleven million people, with one and a half million of them living in Europe alone.

  This diaspora of Bollywood and Indian Cinema lovers, has grown out of two quite distinct moments in history. As Vijay Mishra explains in his book ‘Temples of Desire’ the starting moment which was of late capitalism had developed the movement of binding labor to the colonies and the second movement of late modern capitalism was the 1960s movement of the economic migrants, two substantial moments.

  This space, which was occupied by the new wave of diaspora, for a lot of people, was too the desired space for the wealthy and the luxurious in which case was approved and taken over by Indian Cinema itself. (Vijay Mishra, 2002.) However, in reality, the dreams of wealth were often disposed of in the new diaspora’s by the rise of a neo-racism even as the nation state redefines itself through an idealized project of multiculturalism (Balibar and Wallerstein, 1991.)

  The first generation of non-resident Indians are seen to desperately try to hang on to values that mark their difference from the rest of the nation state. The differences in which are seen here are generally and most commonly about tradition, family and most often, the importance which is given to arranged marriages, as seen in Monsoon Wedding. This is one of the areas in which the Indian diaspora which is now spread almost completely worldwide, can relate to one another, giving them that fulfilled felling of what it means to be Indian, from the words of Mishra, “There is a remarkable parallel here between the way in which a shared sense of reading newspapers defines belonging to a nation and the way in which the consumption of Bombay Cinema constructs an Indian diaspora of shared Cultural idioms”.

  Voyeurism can be seen as quite a significant element when we are talking about Mira Nair’s Monsoon Wedding. For Indian’s as much as Westerners, it is a pleasure which is both primal as well as constructed through an absence in the body of dispora (Vijay Mishra, 2002.).  The absence in which Mishra is referring to is that of a two sided result. The first is the sense of being excluded from the racial politics of the nation and the second is the need for self-representation. The predominant point in which Mishra is trying to make is that non-westerners too, take part in a voyeuristic culture. They too are spectators of which take notice and pleasure at that matter of viewing the female body, as a natural human being would.

  Although a natural element, consequences do so follow this practice of an imperial gaze. It “Infantalizes”, “animalizes”, and “sexualizes” the spectator. The spectator comes with a narrative of this “gaze” as a frame of filmic reception (Vijay Mishra, 2002.) In Monsoon Wedding it is possible that wedding elements of song and dance directs the diasporic gaze to the “ideal arranged love marriage”, therefore in some sense making it unlikely to be realized in the diaspora, where in fact men and women negotiate between public notions of partners in marriage as well as private expectations. The diasporic woman in this case, enables Bollywood to extend sexual desire in cinema even as forbidden sexual relationships are not tolerated in the culture.

  This notion of sexual desire brings us right to Nair’s Monsoon Wedding, as she introduces into the film, the notion of a pedophile in the form of Tej, one of the oldest family friends. For a culture in which sexuality was and still is quite a dangerous subject, Nair’s bravery could be seen as one of the key elements to the international success of her film.

  Ria, whom throughout the movie was seen as a very held back character and quiet, addresses in front of her family and her loving uncle Lalit, that their family friend was not what they all thought of him to be, but in fact a pedophile who was about to repeat his action once again on another young family member. This sequence is one which is quite powerful as Lalit who desperately attempts to salvage what is left of his family, essentially expels Tej from the family wedding and pretty much the family forever, along with his wife.

  However, these drastic turn of events do not for one minute mean that Monsoon Wedding is a dark and gloomy film, because it is not. Monsoon Wedding is beautiful, colourful and visual film which brings us through a state of family affairs, song and dance as well as the medium of love. Each and every aspect of love plays out near the end of the film as the audience are surprised with not one, but two beautiful weddings. Away from Aditi’s banquet, we watch as Dubey and Alice marry and become one in beautiful romance.

  The final sequences of Monsoon Wedding shows the endless monsoon rain wash down on top of the colourful wedding tent which was once argued over. All previous anger and conflict disappears into thin air as we watch the entire family, friends and wedding planners dance away to the sounds and feelings of Sitar’s and the monsoon rain, connecting diaspora’s and Indian families from all over the world directly back to their home place in this Monsoon Wedding.

    Reference List:

Bollywood Cinema, Temples of Desire – Vijay Mishra. (Ch.1, Inventing Bombay Cinema, Ch.2 Auteurship and the Lure of Romance, Ch.8 Bombay Cinema and Diasporic Desire.)

Sociology Goes to the Movies, Bollywood – Rajinder Kumar Dudrah. (Ch.2 Singing for India, Ch.5 Queer as Desis, Ch.6 Between and beyond Bollywood and Hollywood.)

Bollywood, Popular Indian Cinema through a Transnational Lens –Raminder Kaur and Ajay J. Sinha, 2005. (Ch.6 Sexuality, Sensuality and Belonging, Ch.11 Belonging and Respect vis-à-vis Modern East Indians, Ch.13 Diasporic Representations and Reception of Popular Indian Movies.)

[paulthompstone]

The Significance of a Relationship: Directors and Composers

Music is one of the most important elements if not the most important, to a film. Sure you can have films with only a few sound effects and no music but personally I think it is vital to have a soundtrack to a film, not only to add meaning and grasp attention to a story but also to trigger emotion within the audience of what’s on the screen.  Right now I am going to talk a bit about the relationships between two well established composers and the directors whom they have had the pleasure of working with. To start off, the topic in discussion is that of the remarkable work of Howard Shore, known mostly for his compositions towards Peter Jackson’s box office trilogy The Lord of The Rings. Long before this Howard Shore worked with Director David Cronenberg on his horror masterpiece The Fly amongst many more of his films. The two bonded well and Shore knew exactly what a film like this needed and he went on to compose a brilliant and bold score. It consisted of each element of fear, compassion and most of all horror to match perfectly what we, the audience, would soon perceive on the big screen. Shore is personally one of my favourite composers of all time so either way I am going to vouch for him so to speak, but his work with David Cronenberg is some of my all-time favourite. In one of Cronenbergs’s first major films The Brood, Shore wrote a remarkable score for strings. After listening to it a couple of times I undoubtedly sensed the influences of film noir music. Creepy, edgy and very avant-garde. His use of percussion almost sounded like somebody playing slap bass but in this case it would have been slap double-bass and instead of somebody slapping or popping it sounded more like someone whacking the strings with a wooden polearm.  Shores soundtrack for The Brood also reminded me of Bernard Herrmann’s main theme in his original score for Cape Fear.  As Howard shore and David Cronenberg have been working together for about thirty years now, there are many examples of their work compiled together and though some of the music can be as unusual as what Cronenberg wants us to watch within the mise en scene, the two elements seem to always fit together. Some of Shores work with David Cronenberg can contrast to other work he has done with him. An example would be taking Shore’s composition from The Brood and comparing it to his composition from Crash. As I said just a while ago the score from The Brood works extremely well with the string section from an orchestra and there are elements of emotion, horror and whatnot but if we then listen to his score from Crash it is a very different atmosphere altogether. It has a very mellow feel to it, soft electric guitar focusing on one maybe two chord progressions and scales and dare I say giving off a very psychedelic vibe throughout its entirety.

  Cronenberg is known mostly for his unique take on the horror, or ‘Venereal Horror’ and by listening to Shores compositions for Cronenberg’s films we see that he had his own interpretation of music in horror films.  His music doesn’t make the film extremely creepy nor freak you out enough to make you not to want to watch it, in other words it is not Mike Oldfield’s Tubular Bells but yet it grabs you in a different way altogether. The music is very melodic sometimes and other times it isn’t but when it isn’t he adds some completely different dynamics to catch the attention of the spectator. I personally think he’s nothing shy of a musical genius. Cronenberg’s films capture you and drag you into the horror that’s taking place as if your actually there. Some of his older material such as The Fly may not have the best special effects whilst watching it now but it is still a remarkable film, A human fly, Even the concept of it alone is just outrageously and psychoanalytically fantastic, much better than a lot of the stuff these day’s such as ‘Paranormal Craptivity’ whatever number they’re onto now, excuse the pun, in fact I’m not even quite sure if that film can be listed under the genre of genre because to be quite honest it’s ridiculous. 

  Although Cronenberg’s films can be fascinating to watch, I’m sorry to say they wouldn’t be anything without Howard Shore’s music, at this stage in Cronenberg’s career and after watching just a couple of his films I cannot really imagine anybody else writing the music for his films other than Shore himself. One particular score stands out to me the most because I think it was the stepping stones to one of the greatest scores he would ever write in his long career as a composer The Lord of The Rings. It is the score from Cronenberg’s film Dead Ringers and in the main theme of the film Shore tends to use a lot of the same instrumentation that he did in Jackson’s Trilogy. It can really have the ability to hit you where your emotions are resting but also it can change drastically and give you an impact of hatred or most of all horror but this is one of the reason I love Shore, after listening to him he doesn’t necessarily have any pattern in which he follows when composing a piece of music. In every film he has written music for, or at least in the ones I have had the pleasure of seeing, he does not really set a ‘signature’ so to speak, on his music like some composers would. In other words If I hear music by Hans Zimmer without seeing his name I would be able to tell most of the time if it is him because there are a lot of predominant major chords in his pieces bar a couple, with Shore this is not so. Maybe once or twice he will have something similar in his pieces but certainly not to an extensive level.

  Cronenberg and Shore make a good team. It’s not all of the time that you see a director and composer connect so well. I have seen a lot of documentaries where there are directors talking about the worst part of their jobs and one reason being that sometimes you have to let go of a composer just because it doesn’t sound right or they don’t have that special connection so it really is a remarkable talent that both Shore and Cronenberg have between each other.

  Now to move on to the then next segment I will be talking to you about the Director and Composer relationship between John Carpenter and himself again John Carpenter, This man truly is and should be an inspiration for every filmmaker out there. As well as an excellent filmmaker he is also an excellent composer. He uses synthesisers in almost each one of his scores and puts them to great use. A good example would be his escape movies, Escape from New York and Escape from L.A.  The main theme for Escape from New York is so brilliant that I am almost lost for words. Its soundtrack most definitely influenced the soundtrack to The Terminator, 1984, so many similarities in this particular track I find. It goes with the movie perfectly and it’s just of that time. This brings me onto his soundtrack for Escape from L.A, it’s basically the exact same just spiced up. A lot more of a rock influence to it but the synths are still there. His work is of great interest to me, more so as a composer then a filmmaker as I have listened to more of his scores then watched his films but either way he is one of the great examples in the industry of someone who likes to take on the task of doing it themselves, because he can. Another composer that reminds me of John Carpenter is Harold Faltermeyer who composed the main theme tune for the famous Beverly Hills Cop films and also for Top Gun. He tends to use the same type of synths in some of his films. I love synth pop in films but some more so than others and the main ones I tend to really like are those of John Carpenters compositions. Carpenter is a very action movie type of guy and the synths he writes for the movies really go with that particular genre I find. Although there are many great action movies from that particular time I still get drawn into Carpenter’s Escape films more so. I think it’s not only to do with the soundtrack but also to do with the entire setting of the film. It can sort of remind you of Tron and also Bladerunner in terms of soundtracks and film sets, and by watching them it’s not only the story or music that fascinates me but everything that’s going on within the mise en scene, Bladerunner more so than Tron, In all fact I’m not really quite sure why It even reminds me of Tron so much but it does.

  One of John Carpenter’s best scores of all time would have to be from his film Halloween. That horrifying theme tune played on piano is just without a doubt freaky and with his invention of the notorious killer Michael Myers this music goes hand in hand with the film. To be able Direct a film as well as score the music for the same film couldn’t be the easiest task at hand, this is one of the reasons for my built up respect for Carpenter, because he can accomplish this vast task of completing all of this himself. Carpenter has composed the music for the majority of his previous films and is one of Hollywood’s most renowned composers as well as filmmakers, I have to say he isn’t exactly my favourite composer but he is up there, and it is mainly because he knows how to put the music to the screen, even though it cannot physically be seen he can still paint the picture with it. Some people tend to call John Carpenter “the master of horror” and you can see why they would throughout some of his features. His horrors would include Halloween as I already mentioned, but also his film The Thing. It would without doubt be one of his most popular and successful films. In certain ways it would have been ahead of its time and it stood out not to mention the great deal of gore it had, funny yet revolting it was brilliant. Although Carpenter didn’t write the score for this particular feature I would still like to mention that it is a great example for a composer and director relationship because Carpenter being the master of horror would have had to work hard with Ennio Marricone to make it the spectacle it is.  As good as it is though I would still have liked to have seen Carpenters interpretation of his own score for his film The Thing as I think some of his typical synths would have been an interesting idea to say the least to go with that particular feature. Carpenter clearly knew what he was doing and what he wanted to accomplish in terms of success and music which he was writing with his horror films. The relationship between his music and films is certainly strong although sometimes he has a couple of recurring themes throughout his pieces but he has definitely done what he needed to do because the majority of his film are spectacular and really stand out when they are compared to other horror films.

To sum up I’d like to point out the importance of music in film, because without it you can only watch No Country for Old Men so many times. The music no matter what genre or how much of it there is throughout the film is what gives us probably half of the experience of watching a movie, it is the reason for us feeling the emotions we feel, no matter if its happy, sad or scared, that is usually the reason for people in the audiences shedding a tear. John Carpenters music may not be the type that will make you want to cry, at least in that way, but it can sure as hell be creepy sometimes and other times it can just be really nice to listen to. This is usually the case when I am watching Escape from New York because I just think it is a brilliant score and as I may have said already I prefer it much more than the Escape from L.A score because I just don’t get why somebody would remake something that is already perfect, It just doesn’t make sense to me but at the end of the day everybody has their own reasons. I just think it would have been cool to have the two movies back to back with the same main theme and nothing changing. I know Shore did that throughout some of his career but that was because he is one of my idols as I have previously said and I haven’t gotten around to all of John Carpenter’s material but I’m sure that when I do I will not be disappointed as it is the sole purpose for the writing of this article.

An Article by Paul Thompstone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJcdI1CyoBI - John Carpenter, Escape from L.A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTxBc_-XxmI - John Carpenter, Escape from New York

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80bF8FbN33Y - Howard Shore, The Fly

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqe7rpkpm2c - Howard Shore, Dead Ringers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=musMdqb9Up8 - Howard Shore, The Shire

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vk1vngOQGI0 - Hans Zimmer, Madagascar 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N28AfUoeApU - Ennio Morricone, Love Themes

[paulthompstone]

The Crises of Contemporary Film Theory: Queer Theory, Feminism and Psychoanalysis.

Film Theory? What the hell is Film Theory? Does this not defeat the purpose of cinema? People may have had these exact thoughts when the emergence of Film Theory came around in the 60s and 70s as the film industry began to come to terms with its educational purposes. When we talk about Film Theory, it can be seen as a very broad term when in fact it is essentially about the deeper meanings both hidden and sometimes not so hidden (for example, Queer Cinema) which are taking place on the screen. This essay will be focusing on the topics of Queer Cinema and Theory, Feminism, Semiotics as well as Psychoanalysis and their impact of the filmic world.

  For Gay and Lesbian filmmakers of this prior period in Hollywood, the creation of their imagination into cinema would have been a drastically rebellious move and lay nothing other than a fantasy.  It was not seen to be the “American way” to be queer and the closeted visions of gay and lesbian screenwriters, actors and directors were submerged into the heterosexual. Queer characters as well as references to the being Queer to the homosexual audiences were routinely concealed for more than half of a century. They were a hidden people, a group whom were seen as an embarrassment to a nation and did not deserve recognition, as it would only confuse the heterosexual beings. In the early 60s, even if you attended a movie in cinemas which contained inappropriate gay or lesbian sex scenes that was enough to get you arrested which today seems absolutely ludicrous. In early queer cinema especially in the times during the production code, European cinema is where the American people turned to for sex. Films such as Fellini’s ‘Satyricon’ and Basil Dearden’s ‘Victim’ are where these people could find their “sexual fix” so to speak, in cinema.

  The use of psychoanalysis is often used in Queer cinema. Psychoanalysis is a set of psychological theories and associated techniques as well as psychotherapeutic techniques. A method which was originally thought of by Sigmund Freud and used for treating psychopathology, was later developed into a new psychoanalytic theory of humankind by Jacques Lacan, which proceeded to spread a world-wide movement of its own. Humorously enough, this psychopathological treatment was later used by queer filmmakers in a bid to show its heterosexual nation that being gay or being lesbian was perfectly normal. One of the key elements for the need to get these films publicised was the feeling of isolation in which gay and lesbian people as well as filmmakers were going through at the time. They did not feel like they were part of something and cinema was their mission, it was the lock that needed to be broken in order to push a lonely and frightened group of people into the freedom of a strong, prosperous and proud group of people. Similarly to Queer Theory, Feminism too underwent such movements within the industry. A very small amount has changed in terms of the representation of the female figure within film since the beginning of the 30s. One of the key people whom comes to the foreground when talking about gender is a woman named Judith Butler. Butler is a gender theorist whose work has influenced vastly across the fields of feminist, queer and literary theory. She explains to us that gender is a radical thing, which it is, as is our sexuality and whether or not we are straight, gay, or bi-sexual. Few people took this notion of being radical into context, but when that time arose they would join together to make a powerful statement in the form of a drag queen. Two particular and outrageously upfront films which portray this statement are Jack Smith’s Flaming Creatures and John Cameron Mitchell’s Hedwig and the Angry Inch.

  Flaming Creatures contains a sequence of a magnificent transvestite party, in which a couple of men in drag as well as a woman, pose, flirt and dance to display their outgoing selves in different stages of dress or undress in front of the camera. By comparison, Smith’s film is not particularly graphic although it does shove the notion of sexuality into the face of the viewer. While people cannot ascertain the description of the film recorded in the Congressional Report, it still overdramatizes the films explicit sexuality and it cannot be denied that the notion of sexuality is featured vastly throughout Flaming Creatures. Butler’s theories interlink with the works of Queer filmmakers, she conveys the point that gender is not a primary category, it cannot be and is not a fixed category “Gender is just another fantasy of these corporeal styles” Butler also talks about the notion of drag in the sense that it is about adopting a disguise as well as being a very brave form of expression. There is a very instable relationship between sex and between genders. For Butler this raises some serious questions. Is the man in woman’s clothes essentially a man with the exterior look of a woman? Or is his display of femininity a statement that he is a woman trapped in a man’s body. Drag queens represent gender as a cultural code which relies on imitation and reappearance. “In America we don’t” this was the straight up message of the Motion Pictures Association of America. Just about a month after its decision to revise the Code to allow homosexuality onscreen. The audience and critical reaction to Tony Richardson’s A Taste of Honey and Basil Dearden’s Victim, immediately indicated the direction that American films would begin to take on the subject of homosexuals. In 1962 both British film imports became the first films to apply for the seal of approval under the new guidelines of the Code. Victim was refused to be granted the seal without certain cuts and was found “thematically objectionable” by the Motion Pictures Association of America whereas A Taste of Honey had no problem with the Code and was granted its seal of approval, however it was handled nervously in the states.

A study guide, which was prepared with help by an affiliated church film-society and which was then reprinted in Life Magazine, quoted psychiatrists on the “causes and cures” of homosexuality. Really? America might as well have been the definition for a nation in denial. In the book The Celluloid Closet by Vito Russo a quote reads “There are times when Victim says that being homosexual should be punishment enough for such creatures, that to hound them seems a pointless exercise.” This kicks back on the reality of the world we have been living in and shows that these film-makers creations are anything but pointless and contain the powerful statements that are needed to open the eyes of a homophobic as well as masculine planet.

Both Femininity and homosexuality can be seen hand in hand throughout their emergence in Hollywood cinema. Laura Mulvey is a key theorist and activist when it comes to the topic of femininity. She talks about the emotions of those woman accepting “masculinization” while they are watching action movies which have male heroes. Some woman may have found themselves unconsciously enjoying the feeling of freedom with which a hero provides, being torn between the feelings of passive femininity and dominant masculinity. Butler also mentions that the notion of masculinity is narrowly conceived as well as confirmed, she portrays the idea of the unconscious in a way that it is a part of life in which we do not have access to so therefore we cannot prove that it exists. On the other side, woman wanted to show to the world the idea of the dominant female perspective, a female protagonist, a female Heroine.  This unstable difference is relieved by Freud’s theory of femininity. For Freud, femininity is quite complex by the fact that it emerges out of a crucial period of a two sided development between the sexes, a period he sees as masculine for both men and woman. In Ridley Scott’s 1979 hit Alien, it is seen as a purely feminine film due to Sigourney Weaver in the leading role of Ripley. Alien was not the first science fiction film to feature a serious female protagonist but it was the first science fiction film to assault the rational human subject from the basis of biological gender roles. It would seem that the main concern in science fiction of the 60s and 70s was to question the primacy of the humanist subject which was, what does it mean to be human? Alien reveals to be a complex vision of male anxiety in the face of feminism and the vast majority of assessments deem the film a feminist picture because it represents a gender neutral society. It is not only a great horror movie but it is also a vital document of that period in history. It takes us back to the late 70s which was the celestial point in the second wave feminist movement and highlights repressed fears of that era’s men. Mulvey proceeds to say that while a boy might know well that it is unlikely that he will go into the world, make a fortune through prowess and marry a princess, he still contains the ambition of that expectation. On the other hand, for a girl, the cultural and social overlap is a little more confusing. Freud’s argument that a young girl’s dreams concentrate on the erotic which ignores his own position on a girl’s early masculinity and her active day dreams on that subject.

Virginia Woolf’s Orlando which was later made into a film by Sally Potter, contains too the elements of feminism but which appear in the ambiguity between genders and the idea that there is no difference between male and female, that Orlando had remained that same as he or she always was which was the defined line of both sexes compiled into one. The character of Orlando also seems to care not so much for the practical implications of gender change, treating the possible loss of his/her property with little concern as she grew impatient with this legal redundancy. As seen similarly in Alien we are shown once more the representation of a gender neutral society, where woman can too rise to the role of leader and hero.

  Could this be it then? Is this the only reason in which film theory had been made public in the first place? The notion of contemporary film theory being in a state of crisis is because contemporary film theory is in a state of crisis. Why, you ask? Well because there is no need for it. Film theory at a point of change in humanity, was essentially needed to be developed for the educational purposes of people who just could not come to grips with what was happening in their surroundings at that time. Whether we are talking about Queer Theory, Feminism, Masculinity, or how they affect each other as well as they affect us, in today’s world these subjects alone are not seen to be in a state of crisis which immediately turns around to being the reason why film theory is. The pinnacle moments of these movements have already taken place and yes, it may not have been so long ago that these theoretical and critical issues were deemed vital in the study of film itself but on the other hand most of these issues are in the present, resolved. Although. As the process of life spins onwards, it also seems to spin around, repeating itself. Maybe film theory is at a point where it needs to rebuild where it left off. Maybe it will become a renewed interest in pop-culture due to post-modernism. Today we are in a digital age, where our filmic world has become victim to CGI and visual effects which seems to be drastically drawing attention away from the theoretical perspective of film. Submerged into the idea of blockbuster fantasy’s in which people delve away into their imaginations and away from the deeper meaning of art house cinema but too in blockbusters. Conversations of crisis in film theory would generally seem to look to institutional or intellectual reasons for unexpected changes in practices. However, the deeper and more generic question which lies overhead once we begin to reflect on the history, foundations or even the future of film theory which repeatedly replays in the back of your mind is, Why does film matter?

  Written by Paul Thompstone.

  References:

The Celluloid Closet, Homosexuality in the Movies – Vito Russo

Gender Trouble – Judith Butler

Alien Woman, The making of Lt. Ellen Ripley – Ximena Gallardo and C.Jason Smith

Psychoanalysis and Cinema – E.Ann Kaplan

Looking for the other, Feminism, Film and the Imperial Gaze – E.Ann Kaplan

Bike Boys, Drag Queens, and Superstars – Juan A.Suárez

Masculinity – Bodies, Movies, Culure – Peter Lehman

A Fine Romance, Five Ages of Film Feminism – Patricia Mellencamp

New Queer Cinema – Michele Aaron

Impossible Bodies, Femininity and Masculinity in the Movies – Chris Holmlund

[paulthompstone]

THE ICEMAN, RICHARD KUKLINSKI

THE ICEMAN

Based on the true story of notorious hitman Richard Kuklinski, this spine-chilling story is one of which can be seen as a truly factual portrayal of the happenings in Dumont, New Jersey during the 1960’s.  Kuklinski, played by Oscar nominee Michael Shannon was given his thriving nickname ‘The Iceman’ after he began freezing his victims to confuse the time of death. With the help of A-list actor Ray Liotta whom is highly associated with the gangster film genre, The Iceman is a far from disappointing gangster thriller.  Stylish to the smallest detail we see the film as it comes to life within the mise en scene as if Scorsese was in the shadows during the making.

  Through almost each and every sequence we see The Iceman as he paces past meaningless victims which he has stabbed, shot and sprayed with cyanide to keep mob bosses such as Roy DaMeo happy but most of all to keep them from killing him, at least before he kills them first.  As we watch the bullets torpedo through torsos and the knives slice through victims like a slice pan during the majority of the picture, it is both equally intriguing as it is shocking at how Kuklinski had the time to be as much a heartfelt family man as he was a rampaging sociopathic murderer. Although on the contrary and a more humorous note is that he still had the audacity to send his two daughters to catholic school.

  One of the stranger and more frightening facts which for some can have a considerable impact on their view of reality is that not many people have heard about The Iceman. Now if you ask me, a man who is said (and has also said himself in an interview which can be found on YouTube) to have killed (on estimation) over one hundred people in the space of twenty years, you would think they would have heard about him at least before a multi-million dollar feature film was made about it and although being a traumatizing true story, at the end of it all it could also be viewed as just another gangster flick as it does its duty of ticking all the boxes in terms of a nauseous mood, internal gang conflict, double crossing and leading  a double life.

  Kuklinski proceeds with his double life, managing to settle down with his wife Deborah and two daughters. While he is it out doing his bloody deeds they are drawn to believe he is in currency trading where in actual fact he is trading lives for currency which brings to focus the very unsettling thought that a loving family member could do that. One of the points that bothers me about some of the critic reviews, is that a lot of them (one for example being film journal) are saying that the film is dramatized. I have done quite an amount of research after the viewing of this film and I can tell you that all if not for the exception of possibly one minor fact within the context of this film is true, which is what made the film very compelling from my own personal perspective.

  Shannon’s passionate and intensive acting throughout the film seemed to have shaken audiences in cinemas around the world, but a disappointment is that not a lot of people within that audience would have known the name, Michael Shannon. Not even after being nominated for an Oscar for his prestigious performance in Revolutionary Road. But, if you know Shannon as an actor, and after his performances in features such as ‘Take Shelter’ then you know that with every twitch in his body could arise a monstrous eruption of rage. 

  One specific section in an interview which I read on Movie Talk that was conducted by Johnathan Crow which I found quite interesting was John asking Shannon what he thought Kuklinski’s personal aspects of his job was after he witnessed the Kuklinski interview which was carried out by HBO and Shannon’s response was “There are a lot of jobs in this world that require people to do things that can be damaging to other people in order to make a living and take care of your family. There are people that go out, say, in the financial sector and screw hundreds and thousands of people out of money and their houses so that they can go home and make sure that their family, their children go to nice schools and they have a nice dinner at night. This is a very blunt example, but there are a lot of people that cause suffering in order to collect the paycheck, particularly nowadays.” For myself I figured this was quite an important topic to bring up when discussing Shannon’s role in the film, as it is his job to get inside the head of the character or in this case the mindset of a factual serial killer.

  Seeing as it is quite a ludicrous idea in the first place to attempt to cram somebodies life story in a one hundred odd minute movie, Ariel Vromen did well to impress myself as well as others I am sure in terms of the structuring of the feature itself and although it is a bitter and gloomy film, Shannon too did very well to portray quite a vast amount of empathy for his character considering what a demented and tormented human being he was.

  When Vromen was first planning on creating this particular film which eventually became his big break into cinema, he had talked to Shannon on numerous occasions, once at the Oscar party for Revolutionary Road where he first said to Vromen “ You do not have the money to finance a movie that I am in” and another time where he spotted Shannon at a restaurant in Los Angeles where his response was “You’ll know what to do”, to some filmmakers, this may seem like Shannon was being ignorant and only shooting movies that would be worth his while in terms of cash, but to other crew members on board of this shoot it came surprising as they didn’t even know who Shannon was. Eventually a test shoot was had to show the potential of Shannon’s acting ability for this particular role and he decided to come on board.

  Vromen was also approached by various reporters asking him as to whether or not he had contacted Kuklinski’s daughters for some background information which eventually came out to be true and I quote “I think the movie made them re-live the story [of their father] all over again, and that it helped them cope in, in some way,”.

  Unfortunately for Vromen, as frightening and true the facts may have been to the film, it was still a complete box office failure, at least to date. At a budget of $10,000,000, its gross profit as it stands today is only $1,939,441 which is an awful shame considering the vast amount of digging and work which was put into the pre-production stages of the film.

During the creation of his all-star cast which included Winona Ryder, Ray Liotta, David Schwimmer, Michael Shannon and James Franco, Vromen said it took an abnormal amount of work, and “a lot of sleepless nights” to get the actors and even worse, the investors on board. Vromen also went on to mention that once Shannon came on board ‘The Iceman’ fell into place much easier. An interesting and enjoyable watch.