Wait. That can’t be right. I asked for The Avengers, not this crap. This must be one of those cheap knock-off films that Z-Movie studio The Asylum are so famous for producing, like Snakes on a Train or Transmorphers. Silly Mummy bought the wrong film! Better check out the box to make sure. Nope, there’s Joss Whedon’s name on the credits, and there’s Downey Jr’s handsome mug plastered all over the cover. This is the right film, all right. So what’s the deal with that godawful title?

Well, says Non-Parallel Universe Bill, I’ll tell you! It would seem that Marvel think their UK audiences might confuse this titanic, once-in-a-lifetime blockbuster, one of the biggest releases of the year and starring some of the biggest names on the planet, with a shoddy spy TV series from 45 years ago, and have whacked an Anchorman-esque “ASSEMBLE!” on the end of the title for the UK release. Never mind the fact that The Avengers has been building up huge amounts of hype for about five years now UNDER THAT NAME (not to mention all the posters and trailers floating around that bear the film’s original name). Never mind the fact that about .01% of the film’s target audience will have even heard of the TV series, let alone seen it. And never mind the fact that literally everyone who goes to see it will ask the lucky popcorn monkey for a ticket to see “The Avengers”, because there’s a tiny minority of people who think it’s going to feature a considerably older Diana Rigg helping some forgettable, decrepit old man to solve crimes, and damn it all, that tiny minority needs catering to!

Renaming films to avoid confusion with other films is nothing new – M. Night Shyamalan’s adaptation of Nickelodeon’s cartoon series “Avatar: The Last Airbender” dropped the first word in that title to avoid confusion with James Cameron’s behemoth, with hilarious results (Dialogue sample A: “I could tell at once that you were a bender, and that you would realise your destiny”). Roman Polanski’s The Ghost was changed for American audiences to The Ghost Writer to make it less similar to unfortunately-departed stallion Patrick Swayze’s masterpiece. Quite sensible, if not a little expository, given that it’s about a ghost writer, but ultimately forgivable. Just last year, Fast Five was renamed “Fast & Furious 5: Rio Heist” and then just “Fast & Furious 5″ about two weeks before its release, because apparently there are way too many other films featuring Vin Diesel driving fast cars and throwing down with The Rock and there was potential for confusion. The original title then remained in the actual film, and everyone referred to it as Fast Five in conversations, reviews, articles and end-of-year top 10 lists (Time Magazine, before you ask), cementing the title change as a pointless endeavour.

Back to The Avengers, and you really have to wonder who’s in charge of Marvel’s UK branch here –  is it honestly worth jettisoning thousands of pounds worth of UK marketing, as well as violating the metaphorical rectums of thousands of Marvel fanboys (mine included), just to avoid the risk of some old curmudgeon sitting down in the cinema, watching Loki blow shit up for 15 minutes, and then having the epiphany that the film is in fact not about the adventures of John Steed and his shapely young assistants, before going back into the foyer to demand a refund? I don’t think so, because THAT WOULDN’T HAPPEN!

Not surprisingly, there’s been some considerable backlash against the title change, so hopefully Marvel will correct it. It’s doubtful that the cinematic release will revert to its original name, given that its UK release is a mere seven weeks away, but maybe in time for the DVD. I certainly hope so, because I’d rather import from America (a cardinal sin for the obsessive DVD collector) and have the actual title than have “Assemble!” polluting the art that is my DVD catalogue.

This doesn’t make me any less pumped for the actual film, mind – it looks as epic and off the scales as ever and I’ve got faith in Whedon and co that it’ll turn out to be a winner. Here’s the trailer again (with the proper title, and quite right too), and hopefully you’ll all be watching it at Union Films come October time!

I have to confess that Meryl Streep is my favourite actress and so I was overjoyed to witness her winning her third Academy Award after twenty nine exhausting years and seventeen nominations. Her golden Lavin dress foreshadowed her achievement as it closely resembled the Oscar statuette. Whilst many of my friends idolise artificial reality stars, my role model had always been Streep with her illustrious career and perfect thirty four year marriage. Streep has played so many strong women and has really forged the way for generations of actresses in a difficult industry. She even managed to bring humanity to a politician condemned by many.

During the race for Best Actor, I struggled to choose between Clooney and Dujardin. I eventually settled on Dujardin for his unforgettably charming performance in The Artist. I was glad that he won despite Clooney delivering as solid performance in The Descendants. I was moved by his clear appreciation for the award and his moving thank you to his wife. I also loved how he talked about Douglas Fairbanks being the original Oscar host, thereby paying tribute to a star that clearly influenced his winning role. It was also amusing how his translator had to apologise for Dujardin’s dropping of the French F-bomb during his acceptance speech, especially after Melissa Leo’s same mistake the previous year.

I was thrilled to see The Artist win best picture and Michel Hazanavicius win best director for the picture. I fell for The Artist when I first saw it. The Academy indulged in nostalgia as is rewarded the cinematic love letter to the tragically forgotten stars of silent cinema. When I first heard that a silent movie was being made, I have to admit that I had doubts as to its success. Hazanavicius deserved the Oscar for successfully reviving a long neglected filmic style and making it so accessible for a modern audience. I also loved Hugo which also sought to teach audiences of the origins of cinema but it did not equal the tremendous celebration of the medium as The Artist did. The Artist is a real cinematic treasure and if you have not yet seen it, I would strongly urge you to do so.

The presenters also shone exceptionally bright on Oscar night. Rose Byrne and Melissa McCarthy were hilarious as they downed a bottle of vodka on stage in a comical tribute to Scorsese. Robert Downey Jr. and Gwyneth Paltrow stood out though as Downey entered the stage with two camera men in tow to capture his mock documentary ‘The Presenter’ (an obvious nod to The Artist) much to Paltrow’s distress. Downey cheekily recruited the charming narcissism of Tony Stark as he openly mocked the self-indulgence of his celebrated audience.

The red carpet is an undeniable highlight of the Oscars as acclaimed designers showcased their beautiful creations on Hollywood’s finest. Camera Diaz shone in her stunning nude Gucci mermaid style gown as she epitomised Hollywood glamour. However, Clooney’s female wrestler girlfriend stole the show with her Oscar statuette inspired metallic Marchesa gown, thereby making the couple obvious contenders to steal Brad and Angie’s status as King and Queen of Hollywood. Angelina’s leg hilariously trended on Twitter thanks to her daring structured black dress. Her awkward pose was comically mocked by the screenwriters of the Descendants after she presented them with their award.

The 84^th Academy Awards may not have produced any major surprises but the event captured the magic of Hollywood. 2011 was a remarkable year for cinema and I for one cannot wait to see what 2012 has to bring.

On March 10th at 6pm the doors will open on what may prove to be our best event in many years. With free drinks on the door (with Vodka Martini’s available from the bar for those of you really looking for the Bond feel) and assorted canapés to greet you we will be taking you through the best bits of Bond; as voted for by you! Each Bond gets a film (even if it feels like Lazenby cheated by only being in 1 film) that was picked by you as their best.

We begin at 6:30pm with Daniel Craig in Casino Royale. Whilst the latest actor to play Bond, we felt that Craig’s depiction of how Bond became the phenomenon we all know and love needed to kick off the proceedings. After this we are showing; Sean Connery in Goldfinger (9:10pm), Lazenby in On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (11:15pm), Roger Moore in The Spy Who Loved Me (2:00am), Timothy Dalton in License to Kill (4:20am) and finishing with my personal favourite GoldenEye (6:50am) staring Pierce Brosnan.

Now if it just so happens that one or two of these don’t quite enthral you as much as the rest, don’t be put off! In true Union Films style we have all sorts of other entertainment lined up throughout the evening. The recent re-release of Goldeneye (the greatest FPS of it’s time when it début on the Nintendo 64) on the Playstation 3 has given us the perfect opportunity to put your skills to the test and see just who is Southampton’s best Bond. Not to be outdone by those of you with half decent televisions at home we will be projecting the games onto our portable screen to give you the most immersive possible gaming experience throughout the night.

If we still haven’t got you hooked, this final titbit should have you storming to boxoffice.susu.org to get your tickets! As well as playing the films listed above, we will be providing you with an entire second screen showing some of the greatest alternative and spoof spy films available! Be it Austin Powers or Jason Bourne that does it for you, they will be amongst the offerings we put forth on screen 2!

Entry is available throughout the event as we will be issuing wristbands to everyone that buys a ticket so if you decide that you want a 2am trip to McDonald’s, you can still come back afterwards. However, in an attempt to stop you needing to go so far or miss out on any of the films we are bringing back our “Dominoes Pizza” delivery service that worked so well on Halloween. Throughout the night we will be taking orders from you and placing them with Dominoes to attempt to be able to provide you with hot food throughout the event. Granted, takeaway isn’t what some people want at 3am, so we will also be putting on a small selection of sandwiches to cover as many of the bases as possible and ensure a real night to remember.

There really isn’t much more I can say to highlight just how incredible this night is going to be. Tickets are £8 from the SUSU Box Office (£7 if you own a Year Pass) and can be bought any-time between now and March 10th. Ticket numbers have been lowered to 200 to ensure everyone has room to spread out and get comfy (feel free to bring a blanket or three) so they are selling fast. Buy in advance to avoid disappointment.

Those of you that still need convincing… Check out the trailer. Looking forward to seeing you all there!

I’ve mentioned before that I have an eye for actors (though I’m also useless for names); and I geek out a bit for recycling. However, this actor confused me greatly. Joe Don Baker plays villain Brad Witaker in The Living Daylights, an American Arms dealer intent on building a personal military force. However, watching them in an ad-hoc order as myself and my father did, we then stumbled headlong into Goldeneye, with Pearce Brosnan replacing Timothy Dalton as bond in the process. And there was Joe Don again, but playing Jack Wade, CIA officer and 007′s contact in said organisation. Confusion ensues. Was there a back story that I’d missed, did Witaker join the CIA a reformed man? No, wait, he died. Just a simple case of actor-recycling.

Joe Don played Jack Wade again in Tomorrow Never Dies (My favourite Brosnan Film, if you feel like voting. Also, topical at the moment). Jack is the typical “ugly American”, a character placed, one feels, to offset James Bond as the suave secret agent. Interestingly, he doesn’t reappear again in the franchise.

Joe Don has had a long, active career, including the original Walking Tall, which was later remade starring Dwayne Johnson (also known as The Rock) in Joe’s place, and also played an uncredited role in Cool Hand Luke. Joe is billed to appear in 2013 movie Mud.

Among the minor actors that grace the Bond franchise from time to time, one name in my family is well known: that of Walter Gotell, my Great Uncle-in-law (Grandfather’s Brother’s Wife’s Brother- pretty tenuous as familial ties go…). Described by one relative as an aloof arrogant man, who saw himself as above other people. Nevertheless he played one of the iconic Bond Russians, and a host of other characters in many movies, including several somewhat ironic roles comprising Nazi officers.

Walter Gotell as General Gogol in "A View to a Kill"

Born in Bonn, Germany, he emigrated to the United Kingdom with his jewish family when the Nazi regime came to power. Already fluent in English (along with four other languages), he took up acting, normally as German henchmen- a stereotype that was to carry his career right up until 1995, when in his penultimate role he played Victor Kempler, a secondary role in “The X-Files”.

He played many of these one-off character roles in television series, ranging from Knight Rider to Star Trek. He used the remuneration from his assortment of roles as capital to underpin his business interests.

No Walter Gotell, but it is a car chase from 'The Living Daylights'

In the Bond franchise, Gotell is most recognisable as general Gogol in “The Living Daylights“, “A View To A Kill“, “Octopussy“, “For Your Eyes Only“, “Moonraker“, and “The Spy Who Loved Me“. However, his first role amongst Bond was that of Morzeny (another henchman) in “From Russia With Love“.

Gotell died in 1997 from cancer, shortly after his last picture, “Prince Valiant“, in which he played Erik the Old.

Recounting the Vél D’Hiv roundup of 1942, in which thousands of Jewish families were forced to leave their homes to enter the Paris velodrome to then spend numerous days in inhumane conditions before being put on a train to Auschwitz, Sarah’s Key is tragic but not as heavy as other Holocaust films. Rather, Paquet-Brenner wants to focus our attention on the way in which the deportation was seen through the eyes of a child; Sarah. Granted, the young girl appears more like an adult child, but the aspects of responsibility and moral guilt that live in her are what characterise the whole film. Furthermore, the performance of Kristin Scott Thomas as Julia Jarmond, is sincere. Julia only seeks to find the truth about Sarah; she does not want to place unnecessary guilt on those who have not been completely honest with her.

From the start, the film is not hectic: from under the bed sheets, Sarah and her small brother Michel hear the loud knock on the door, and Sarah immediately wants to find out what is happening. Even in the velodrome, the families huddle together but no one truly lashes out at the confusion in their mind. On account of this, the film is not as truthful as it perhaps could be.

The unforgivable silence of the bystanders is later reflected in the modern-day ignorance of Julia’s co-workers; they do not even know of the Vél D’Hiv. Even in the transit camp where the children are kept and from which Sarah and another Jewish girl escape, no one makes too much noise. This allows the film to have a certain element of tranquillity and beauty: when Sarah manages to reach the French guard’s heart in her pursuit of escaping the camp, it is only a few words that allow her freedom. This freedom is then beautifully captured in the scene in which Sarah and her friend float with their heads out of the water in a dirty pond.

It can therefore be said that the film is perhaps too easy-going and loose on morality, while it busies itself with true inner quests. But this is not a bad thing. Because as Julia points out when she first strikes an interest in wanting to find Sarah and the former residents of her apartment in Paris, “How do you know what you would have done?” The film allows the grounding genuineness to be known: there is nothing we can do now; essentially, there is nothing we can say that will change things. We are only presented with a case of a survivor who had to live with the guilt. But even for her, it was too much.

Sarah’s Key is an emotional film, dealing with the case of a young girl growing up in a world where her childhood is completely different from her later life. It seeks to establish the importance of memories and their weight in the characters’ (namely Sarah) minds, and the inevitability to change them. An attempt at paralleling lives is made: Sarah too, like Julia, grew up to have a family of her own. But the films wants to make it clear that although Julia strives to find out as many details as she can about Sarah’s life, no one can truly understand unless, like Sarah, they lived through the time of unspeakable dread and desperation.

Well, to be honest, yeah, mostly they are. Although, whilst I’m not arguing for silent films, as I wouldn’t say I’m much of a fan myself except for Charlie Chaplin and the odd Mary Pickford, they are still a part of cinema that shouldn’t be forgotten. Being a film student, well, at least half of one, studying early and silent cinema is a must in order to understand the origins of the medium of film that we know and love (and yes, obsess over) today. Simply put, the silent era is just the beginning of the beautiful evolution of cinema. Without it there would be no films! No need for cinemas! No Union Films! Now really, what would I do with my life?

It can only be described as amazing how far the cinema industry has come since the first films at the end of the 19^th century, especially when we look at the (highly debated) technology of 3D and the soar in popularity of genres such as animation and sci-fi which now breeds on CGI. Looking back around 90 years ago, I just love the idea that my great-grandparents, maybe even my great-great-grandparents come to that, would have watched these in the cinema with ushers showing them to their places and no mobile phones going off in the middle of the screening. The simplicity of black and white pictures with a man on his piano at the side of the big screen.

So, it is understandable that recently there has been an influx of films paying homage to this era. Okay, well only two come to mind, The Artist and Hugo, but these happen to be the two films with the most Oscar nominations this year, 10 and 11 respectively. Both films are nominated for the coveted Best Picture Award with the highly nostalgic The Artist being tipped (though of course with no guarantee) as winner. This would make it only the second silent picture to win this coveted Oscar since Wings at the first Academy Awards in 1927, a year that saw not only the introduction of talkie films with The Jazz Singer but also therefore the downfall of silent films.

However, such is life that we have come almost full circle with The Artist as being one of the most talked about films of the year. Silent, black and white, with the best use of the beautifully nostalgic aspect ratio 1.33:1 and the use of a lower shot rate, the film really is one to be admired, if purely from an aesthetic point of view. The actors are brilliant, perhaps thanks to the perfect casting, (Although John Goodman and James Cromwell seem a bit off key as they’re a bit too recognisable to a modern day audience.) However, Bérénice Bejo as Peppy Miller looks simply stunning in black and white and Jean Dujardin, as silent movie actor George Valentin, really evokes real silent movies actors: the crisp suit, the charming expressions, and not forgetting that moustache.  Oh and I should probably mention, the dog was pretty good too.

Forgetting the films narrative similarities to Singin’ in the Rain, which I must say bugged me a little, I can’t help but love this film and think it is a definite must-see in 2012. It’s the type of film which helps you realise that films didn’t just start in colour, with dialogue. Although I doubt it will make people want to go see silent films from the early part of the century, I can see The Artist being a ‘classic’ film of the future, as a movie which evokes nostalgic appreciation of a time long gone. Gone but not forgotten, hopefully. Just give me a cuppa and a duvet and I could watch it again and again, with pleasure. 

Watch this video on YouTube.

Right, here we go then:

Honourable Mentions

Super 8, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, Source Code, Cave of Forgotten Dreams, Senna, Fast Five

Really wanted to include all of these but the annoying thing about top ten lists is that there are only ten spaces. All were incredible to watch, particularly Cave of Forgotten Dreams and Senna – two riveting documentaries that everyone really should see. Anyway, the top 10…

10. 127 Hours

One of the few flaws I found with Apes is that it wasted James Franco’s acting talents a bit. He was fine in it, but Will Rodman was a bit of a stock character that any chump could have played. Not so in 127 Hours, where Franco brought a huge amount of likability and sympathy to a man who, when you think about it, is a complete moron for not telling anyone where he was going. Danny Boyle’s direction was pretty top-notch too, wringing a surprising amount of energy out of a film that’s about a dude stuck under a rock. Oh, and fainting during the infamous amputation scene? You wussies, it wasn’t that bad.

9. Bridesmaids

Two spots in and my list is already similar to Andy’s! Film students aren’t different! We’re real people after all! Rejoice! Aside from the usual nonsense that every review has stated about this film proving that women can be vulgar and funny blah blah blah, Bridesmaids is a sweet, hilarious and hugely lovable romcom that does everything right. A masterclass in awkward moments (like the bridal shower toast-duel between Kristen Wiig and Rose Byrne) and hugely funny set pieces (the plane) made this the funniest film of the year, bar none.

8. Moneyball

As someone who cares as little about sports as is humanly possible and as someone who has never sat through a sports movie without wanting to throttle the main character, I found this baseball drama thoroughly engaging. Brad Pitt and especially Jonah Hill give career best performances in this true-life tale of the Oakland A’s, whose unorthodox tactics reinvented the game. A smart and witty script by Steven Zaillian and Aaron Sorkin, along with the fact that this is a sports movie without any actual sports in it, won me over instantly.

7. 50/50

“Cancer” and “comedy” isn’t a combination you hear very much, let alone in the feelgood, lightweight realm of Hollywood. In truth though, this isn’t a comedy at all, just a very real story of how one dude – an Oscar-worthy Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and if you don’t believe me, watch the car scene in the third act – and his best friend deal with a devastating illness: by laughing and joking about it. Adam’s situation is never played for laughs: how he chooses to deal with it is, and even then, the laughs are contrasted with serious and often very moving discussions on cancer, death and how people deal with it.

6. X-Men: First Class

X-Men: First Class revitalised a franchise that had really gotten terrible thanks to the combined efforts of X-Men 3 and X-Men Origins: Wolverine and Robin. McAvoy and Fassbender (especially Fassbender, dodgy accent aside) were incredible and Matthew Vaughn’s brilliant direction made this the film of the summer. Incidentally, the reason I haven’t included any posters in this top 10 list are A) I’m too lazy, and B) the terrible posters for X-Men. A monkey whose intelligence had been enhanced with ALZ-112 could have done a better job with those posters. Thankfully, a bad marketing campaign does not make a bad film, and X-Men: First Class was the summer’s blockbuster to beat.

5. Hugo

NOW we’re in real film-student territory. A Martin Scorsese picture set in the 1920s? A kid’s film masked as a meditation on the birth of silent cinema? Where are my pretentious glasses?! Thankfully, Hugo was nowhere near as up-it’s-own-arse as it had the potential to be, with charming performances and art direction across the board and fantastic use of 3D. The success of both this and The Artist could potentially lead to more people being educated on early cinema than ever before, and that is a very, very good thing.

4. Drive

Here’s the obvious one that’s on everyone’s top 10 lists. Quite right, too. There’s not a whole lot I can say about this one that hasn’t been said a thousand times over by the critics – coolest movie of the year, great direction, Ryan Gosling is amazing, etc etc – but it really is amazing. The opening “chase” where Ryan Gosling drives around eluding the cops is one of the best sequences of the year and the extremely graphic destruction of not one, not two, but three people’s heads was just awesome. Each and every one of Gosling’s performances this year – Blue Valentine, Crazy Stupid Love, The Ides of March and this – was incredible, but this one was by far the best.

3. True Grit

Cast your minds way back to January 2011 and you might remember this gem from the Coen brothers. The fact that I’m a massive Coen fanboy had no impact on True Grit’s high placement on this list. Okay, it did a bit, but can you blame me? This one has all the best Coen-isms rolled into one: surreal moments (the dude wearing a bear’s skin), cracking dialogue, a brilliant period setting (with kick-ass recreation of the period), a huge amount of attention to detail, a unique spin on genre conventions, and Jeff Bridges. What more could a Coen fan want, other than John Goodman?

2. Cell 211

Leave it to a film student to feature so highly on a top 10 list a film that no-one has seen. A shame too, because this is absolutely terrific. It’s got everything: a killer concept (a prison guard, on his first day on the job, becomes trapped in the middle of a prison riot, and has to pretend to be an inmate in order to survive), incredible acting, and is hands down the most thrilling and tense film I saw this year. No one saw it because it’s Spanish and it barely got a release. And unfortunately it’s already being remade by Paul Haggis, who’s already proven he’s crap at remakes of European thrillers with The Next Three Days (sorry Andy). A shame. This is out on DVD now, do yourselves a favour and at least give it a rent.

1. We Need To Talk About Kevin

Yup. Of course I went for an arthouse, low-budget independent British film as my number one pic of the year. But you know what?! So did Andy! See? Film students are just as normal! Ha ha. Ahem. Anyway, here’s why Lynne Ramsay’s terrifying domestic horror got the coveted title of Bill’s Film of the Year: because it is amazing. With all the other films on this list, I came out thinking “Well, that was great! On with my day!”, but this one haunted me for days. I could not stop thinking about it. Not including the incredible performances from Tilda Swinton and Ezra Miller as a broken mother and son, nor the brilliant direction from Ramsay, the fact that I couldn’t get this film out of my head for such a long time meant it had to be my number one pick of the year. It’s on at Union Films next Tuesday. Go and see it.

Watch this video on YouTube.

But musical theme re-use is taken to brand new elevations by the living legend that is Hans Zimmer.

Hans Zimmer is, unsurprisingly ubiquitous. Largely through having become associated with Pirates of The Carribbean as a result of the renowned theme “He’s a Pirate”; he has become a household name, the like of which has not been seen in orchestral music since John Williams rendered the return of classical orchestral themes to cinema when he played his part in Star Wars (in which, by the way, Greedo shot first…).

What’s interesting about the pirates theme is that Hans wasn’t the original composer in the credits- that previously was Klaus Bedelt. It was only with later releases and the disc releases that Klaus Badelt was relegated to co-composer alongside Hans, which is a by-product of the professional relationship they have. It is also a byproduct of the fact that “He’s a pirate” is also a complete rip-off of a theme from Hans’s earlier work,”The Battle of Carthage.”

Having asserted that the piece by Klaus/Hans was a (what I shall politely re-term) a rearrangement of Hans’s earlier work, a listen to the score from the 1996 movie “The Rock” will enlighten you as to a few of the chordal sequences and leitmotifs true origins.

Oh, no, wait, actually, if you listen to “Too Many Notes, Not Enough Rest”, used in the film Drop Zone, you’ll be able to close your eyes and imaging Johnny Depp running along, sword in hand and dreadlocked beard in tow…

And now pause to allow the ladies (and gentlemen of a certain inclination) in the audience to regain their composure…

From Gladiator, we can trace other musical themes also, through Black Hawk Down. But actually, some of those vocal themes can actually be picked up scattered in Mission Impossible II. These are far more subtle, and wander the line of stylistic- the themes are broken apart enough to simply be considered “Essence of Zimmer”, if you will; not to mention that the re-use of Lisa Gerrard’s vocal talents in these pieces would obviously tilt the ear.  Though that excuse cannot be made for the odd three or four note segments from the Lion King that show up in “Tennessee” from “Pearl Harbour” If you start listening for his self plaigarism.

That said, there is nothing like the wholesale reuse of a piece, as with “Roll Tide” from “Crimson Tide” where it resurfaces in “Deep Blue Sea”.

This does not however, decry his brilliance. To observe the list of films for which he has composed at IMDB, is a grand adventure in music. And one need only listen to the scores of The Last Samurai or of course the 2009 take on Sherlock Holmes (my personal favourite) to hear something deliciously different, and so it is I depart this article to go and urge you to seek out theme re-uses by musicians everywhere, and especially Hans Zimmer’s work, because it’s so damn good.

Episodes IV – VI are widely regarded as some of the best sci-fi films ever made. Take a look at any list and you’ll find all three films in the top 100 and Empire Strikes back will more than likely be in the top ten. That’s ten best films of all time in any genre mind you. I was nine years old when I first saw Star Wars: A New Hope in the cinema for the first time and the experience has stayed with me until this day – it was simply breathtaking. Unfortunately for me, I have only ever seen the 1997 re-release in the cinema and due to Lucas’s pathetic selfishness I suspect many of you have never seen any version of Star Wars on a big screen.

The Star Wars Trilogies are the only films that we cannot get a license to screen. And once the 2012-2017  3D re-releases have done their short exhibition rounds, they will again be locked away in Lucas’s bunker.

But I digress. Last year the long awaited Bluray versions of the Star Wars trilogies came out and their quality is unarguably superb – they are even a significant improvement on the colour correction fails of the 2004 DVD releases – anyone notice the green lightsaber on the Millennium Falcon? Whoops! But the problem I have with them is the little edits here and there that ultimately change the way we perceive the story and more importantly the characters.

Pretty sure Ben Kenobi's lightsaber is meant to be blue...

Now I don’t mind small things like continuity errors, or colour corrections or even replacing some really ropey special effect for something slightly better, but what Lucas has done to the original trilogy is pretty unforgivable.

Editing for the sake of it

Here is a lovely example of Lucas’s butchering. In the original 1977 cut, Han Solo is cornered by Greedo who is collecting a debt Han owes to Jabba. Han has little choice but to shoot first and ask questions later, thus setting up Han as someone who walks the fine line between good and evil and makes his character arc all the more interesting.

However, in the 1997 special edition, for some inexplicable reason, Greedo shoots first making Han a lucky SOB and nothing more. Whats worse, is the special effects look like they’ve been done by a 10 year old using After Effects for the first time.

The filmmaking process

Making a film is not a straightforward process, stories and characters evolve as actors bring their own ideas to the film. Scenes are often re-written to take into account unforeseen events during production, such as Brad Pitt breaking his arm during the filming of Seven. When a film is edited, often the order of scenes is changed and quite often scenes are deleted to make a better film. Deleted scenes are exactly that, deleted. For a reason. Often a scene adds nothing to the story and the film is better off without them, so why Lucas? Why did you add a load of them back in?

This is a terrible example of picking up the dregs from the cutting room floor. In the 1997 special edition of Episode IV, Lucas decided to restore a scene where Jabba waits for Han as he returns to the Millennium Falcon. We don’t learn anything from the scene that we didn’t already know, apart from what Jabba looks like – although he looks completely unlike the Return of the Jedi version. So not only does Lucas manage to ruin part of Episode IV by introducing the Millennium Falcon before its proper reveal scene, he also ruins the start of Episode VI!

Are big budgets to blame?

Interestingly the reason this scene was originally cut was that Lucas ran out of money for the stop motion Jabba to replace the human actor in the original footage. Perhaps this goes some way to explain why the prequels just aren’t that good… At the time when the prequels were in production, Star Wars was the most profitable film franchise ever, and has only recently been overtaken by Harry Potter and James Bond. When you are in charge of a franchise worth over $4.5 billion, your budget becomes ‘unlimited’  - certainly, you wouldn’t have to cut scenes because you ran out of money.

Star Wars is not the only franchise to have the same fate, The Matrix (1999) is another highly regarded sci-fi film was made on a relatively small budget of £40 million. It was lean, mean and pushed special effects boundaries, much like Star Wars did in 1977. Its sequels however had a combined budget of over £160 million for what is basically a 2-part bloated action film with less story than the first film between them. They could have been so good…

When you face a budget constraint, you really have to be super critical of what you have – only keep what is absolutely necessary and what you end up with is a lean film that has exactly what is needed.

If you look at the Star Wars prequels, you will see enough cluttered CGI to melt your face – its almost completely unnecessary and CGI just does not stand the test of time like model shots do.

This shot from the 1977 version of Episode IV was ground breaking at the time and still holds up pretty well today.

This is a scene that was added to Episode V in the 1997 special edition and re-mastered for the Bluray release last year. To be honest, SUSUtv could do a better job with a green screen than this… I guess that’s the problem isn’t it. The original trilogy was so good because they had to build a 1:1 scale model of the Millennium Falcon, whereas the prequels were mostly shot in a green screened studio with the motto: “It’s ok, we’ll fix it in post”.

This brings me back to the 3D re-releases set to happen over the next 6 years. If you read my previous post then you will know how I feel about 3D. Who knows what Lucas will do with them this time? Perhaps Alderaan will shoot first? What these Star Wars re-releases are, is another version for the sake of it – no one wants to watch Star Wars in 3D. All we really want is the original copy as it was in 1977 remastered for Bluray; but leave the continuity errors, its what makes them special. We love the fact one of the storm troopers bangs his head!

In Conclusion

What I really want to see, is Cinema returning to its roots. I’d far rather watch a film shot on a clever set with clever camera work than something swollen and utterly crap from a CGI house, tailored to the directors every whim and fancy – its not good cinema. I want more stuff like Moon. Oh and the original 1977 cut of Star Wars.

Watch this video on YouTube.