Film Review: The Wolfpack (U.S.A. 2015) (Director: Crystal Moselle), Filmhouse, Screen One, Edinburgh, Friday 26.06.2015, 20:30 (Edinburgh International Film Festival 2015) 

This is another film in the film festival, where I know I have read about it, though don't know where. This documentary focuses upon six brothers within the Angulo family who live in an expansive apartment in the Lower-East-Side of Manhattan. The apartment reminded me breadline-bohemian residences I have been in in the past. The family's mother and father met when she was hiking in South America, and he was a local guide she met in this time. He holds a kind-of reverence for Krishna, who is said to have had ten children with each of his wives. Mr. Angulo intended having ten children with his wife, though after the six sons and a daughter (who they say is stuck in her own world), she could not have any more. 

Mr. Angulo comes across as a very fearful and insecure man, who is also a heavy drinker. He is also a feckless urban-hippy who excuses his inactivity by uttering quasi-spiritual guff. The essence of controlling passivity. He would at times restrict the movements of all of his family members. For years the members of the family were only allowed out for short times, a few (or less) times each year. Mr. Angulo would encourage his family not to look or engage with others. 

Mr. Angulo is the one who would go to get groceries each day, and also is responsible for encouraging the sons all-encompassing devotion to film. This isolated family have amassed a collection of thousands of films and the sons faithfully recreate and capture favoured scenes, having firstly spent the time required to painstakingly go through the film writing down the script, and typing up copies for each participant. All of this in modern times when I'm sure these scripts would be freely available on line.

In the beginning of the film, it feels like the documenting of a case of abuse, where the family have essentially been kept prisoner within this metropolis which they can see from their windows. This nature of the situation does not escape the sons. One of the sons ways of communicating with the camera in this early section is not 'normal' and he does appear sadly affected by his circumstance. The first part of the film causes a lot of questions as to how is this possible, for a family to be so isolated in such an environment and why had authorities not intervened. The sons mother did have a licence to home-school, though still there appears to have been no consideration in terms of normal socialisation. 

The film all begins to change and be a lot less troubling once it becomes clear that one of the sons had started to challenge the constraints placed upon them (which had lead to involvement of authorities and all of the sons being in counselling - and is clearly what lead to the contacts that lead to the film being made). The audience is then shown how the sons gradually began to push at the boundaries of their world and how this has further affect to the mother and father. The sons breaking free has a very real affect upon the mother who we see out running and speaking with her mother on the phone for what appeared to be the first time in many years. The grandmother did not appear to know of the existence of any of her grandchildren. 

I found the film very engaging and the people within it very interesting; the sons having the good fortune of being friendly and charming. I did feel the film let itself down by not addressing why authorities had not intervened earlier. I had a sense that the film should have ended with text saying something along the lines of 'the New York child welfare authorities are conducting an investigation into...', though no. I feel the films focus was too narrow. I feel it did not need to say much in regard to the negligence of authorities, though to not address this feels negligent of the film-maker. 

An interesting, but by no means perfect film.

Rating:08/10.  

Before the film started, the audience was informed that this had been awarded the 'Best Documentary prize for the Edinburgh International Film Festival 2015. Neither screening had happened yet, though it is still being declared the best? It has been awarded as the best documentary, though is not being included in the 'Best of the Fest' this coming Sunday? Best of the Fest features 17 films of varying form. Best of the Fest features the documentary 'Amy' which I would say is better than 'The Wolfpack'. Why then did 'Amy' not win the prize for best documentary? Or why did 'Chuck Norris Vs.Communism' not win, as is better than 'Amy' or 'The Wolfpack'? All of this contributes to my not trusting Film Festivals.                  

Film Review: Chuck Norris Vs. Communism (U.K./Germany/Romania 2015) (Director: Llinca Calugareanu) (Romanian & English with English Subtitles), Odeon, Screen Two, Edinburgh, Wednesday 24.06.2015, 21:00 (Edinburgh International Film Festival 2015) (European Premiere)

A title to make Bill Hicks proud! This is a film I had known I had read about, though not sure where. This documentary film tells a story of defiance from 1980's communist Romania. The film begins by detailing the extreme lengths censors went to, to try to prevent any pro-western messages getting to the people of Romania.

The film then goes on to discuss the 'underground' operations led by a Mr. Zamfir, who hired a Ms. Irina Nistor to dub full-uncensored western films for covert distribution on V.H.S. cassettes. We hear from enthusiastic people who regularly attended 'film-parties' held in peoples flats. It is made clear by them, that in an age before the internet and when state censorship was easier to manage, this was these people's vital window to a different world, and also a way of being able to tell that their government was lying to them about the west. 

Ms. Nistor already worked for the censoring state doing dubbing and voice-over when she was approached by Mr. Zamfir. She is now regarded as the second most known voice in Romania during the '80's after the leader Ceausescu. This is largely down to the proliferation of the underground video network. In '80's Romania it was forbidden to own a V.C.R. yet after a period of these underground groups spreading, there were reckoned to be 20,000 V.C.R.s in Bucharest. The film also revealed how those using this resource went as high up in the government as just below Ceausescu himself, including his son. 

The film presents a not-unreasonable argument that this underground-culture contributed towards the 1989 revolution that resulted in Ceausescu loosing power. By 1989 Ms. Nistor had dubbed over 3,000 western films for distribution. She did not just dub the action, she did all voices of all characters and also added emotion into her dubbing. She also did her own very charming form of censorship as there are words she is not comfortable translating. The film gives very humorous clips of this to demonstrate. She would also do marathon dubbing sessions where she would do up to eight or nine at a time, and once managed to do ten in a row. Ms. Nistor states that she was motivated to do this as it enabled her to see all of these (full) films for free, though also saw it as a duty, enabling her countrymen to also have the chance to decide whether they wished to engage with this entertainment or not.

The film could actually fairly be called 'docudrama'. A term I usually find wince inducing. The use of re-enactment in documentaries is something I feel has to be approached with caution. Though this film made very good use of this approach. These passages had an authenticity that made them appear as if they were actually bits of footage from the period.   

I found the film charming and moving. A tale of dignified defiance, that also helped to remind that areas of culture which we may commonly deride in the west, such as bubblegum-blockbuster-eighties-American-action cinema, may have far greater importance and influence, depending on the day-to-day context of your life. It also served to remind of how fortunate we are in the west. 

I had not engaged at all with the Edinburgh International Film Festival for the past two years. I tend to stay clear of 'features' within the festival programme as feel, if they are good enough they will go on general release anyway and also there is no way to make any judgement as to how good it may be based upon what is written about it, as the programme is 'P.R.' with no 'Critique'. I do give more attention to Documentaries as still feel they have less chance of getting a general release. Of the four documentaries I have seen in the festival this year, this is without doubt the best and I hope this does get a general release, so that this passionate and hopeful film can have a wider audience.   

Rating: 10/10.               

Film Review: Remake, Remix, Rip-Off (Germany/Turkey 2014) (Director: Cem Kaya) (Turkish with English Subtitles), Cineworld, Screen Twelve, Edinburgh, Sunday 21.06.2015, 20:35 (Edinburgh International Film Festival 2015) (U.K. Premiere)

The advertising blurb for this film states that it is about 'Copy Culture and Turkish Pop Cinema'. Ostensibly it is, though pretty soon it becomes clear that the film has no real sense as to what it is trying to say or what it is focusing upon. 

There are several very funny clips of films that look awful in terms of visual quality (for example pinched Star Wars footage with some Turkish footage plonked on top) and where the same stories are being blatantly retread again and again. 

There are several amusing anecdotes as well, though there are passages that don't appear to add anything. Sadly the film dragged towards the end. The large font text on screen, there to help understand what the examples are that are being shown, sadly add to the confusion, as try to say too much in too many languages at once. 

Regrettably a film that should have offered some understanding as to why Turkey had this conveyor-belt of nonsense whilst at the same time producing reputable films, in my eyes waisted it's opportunity to be interesting. 

Sadly, just before the end of the film, there is a glimpse of the frustration felt by a 'director' who never got to make a proper film. This is far more the detail I would have liked the film to focus upon. Maybe this is a way of some mystique being kept. Possibly Turkish Pop Culture Cinema needs people to just accept without understanding the nitty-gritty. It is after all harder to laugh when you know the details that are lamentably pitiful and tragic. Sadly I don't feel I can recommend this even for those interested in the weirder elements of life. 

Rating: 04/10.        

Film Review: Amy (15) (U.K. 2015) (Director: Asif Kapadia), Filmhouse, Screen One, Edinburgh, Thursday 18.06.2015, 20:35 (Edinburgh International Film Festival 2015) (U.K. Premiere)

This documentary was helmed by the man behind 'Senna' (2010), and has a similar presentational style. All footage is archival and the detail is fresh and insightful, giving voice the childhood friends and others who had substantial relations with this bright and brassy musical voice. 

To consider how much this young lady was pushed into the spotlight and how relatively recently this was, the fact that this does not feel tired or rehashed, reflects on what must have been considerable care taken by those piecing this together.

I would pretty much take it as a given that any one going to see this will already be aware of the tragic nature to the ending of this tale and the film is suitably sombre in this regard. There are no great surprises in terms of story arc, the sustenance is in the details. Details such as she did not expect her sort of music to become huge in the way it did and she had a sense that she would not handle that level of fame. Sadly the film also shows that due to a mixture of nievity, ignorance and self-interest, a number of significant people around her could not consider her best interests at times when this is what she really needed.

I still find Amy's classic second and final album, 'Back to Black' (2006), difficult to listen to, knowing the spiral she entered and could not leave. The film has raised again my sense of voyeuristic discomfort at how life turned out for this young lady with such (mishandled) potential. Despite the film drawing me to this heavy area for my thoughts to dwell, I am very glad I saw the film and feel that it is much richer than I had anticipated. For those who found pleasure in her voice, although it is not happy experience, I recommend this film. 

Rating: 10/10. 

           

Live Performance Review: Chet Faker, Tuesday 09.06.2015, 19:00, O2 ABC, Glasgow

This was pretty much a punt. Colleagues had suggested it and it was not expensive, so I thought why not. The music had similarities to the likes of Massive Attack, generally had a nice groove and most of it was quite easy to loose yourself within. The music was mostly of a good standard while Chet was accompanied by other musicians on drums and guitars/keys, though when he was by himself he did become slightly overindulgent at times. At times it also appeared as though the vocal levels were swamped by the music levels, making the vocals hard to discern. The lighting was well controlled and used impressively to assist with conveying the tunes. Mr Chet did also have a bit of a 'white-sole boy' look about him both in dress and in movement, though also managed to not be annoying with this. There was also some nice (Aussie) banter especially when he asked the audience to not use there phones for the duration of a song. I have a sense that what I have written is a very mix bag, though I am very definite in saying that this was in all an enjoyable evening with some pleasant and pleasing tunes.

Rating: 06/10.