New Era in Sri Lankan Cinema - A Dream or Reality?

Yesterday I was able to attend a lecture presented by veteran Sri Lankan filmmaker Ashoka Handagama titled “A New Era of Sri Lankan Cinema - More than a Dream”.  Handagama, not only a well known and controversial director but also a top figure at Central Bank of Sri Lanka working as Director of Communications. Although as a filmmaker, he’s known to focus on controversial issues and had attracted both praises and criticism from different ends, his lecture seem to distance him self from the rebellious character and focused on a detailed and a structured plan on revitalizing the Sri Lankan Cinema Industry.

Kadaunu Poronduwa (1947) considered to be the first Sri Lankan film to be produced 

Sri Lankan Cinema Industry, which flourished and reached its peak in the late 70s, came crashing down during the 80s and was lagging on its knees during the 90s and even now. The number of cinema halls and even the total cinema admissions have reduced drastically compared to the golden age of the 70s. Miscalculated government policies, television and also the communal and social unrest that prevailed during the early and late 80s crippled the once flourished Sri Lankan Film industry with little  hope for a revitalization. Mr.Handagama pointed out some attempts made during the 90s to revitalize the Sri Lankan Film industry, with appointment of a commission to look into the crisis headed by Professor Senaka Bandaranayake. Though the commission report published in 1996 identified several factors that needs to be improved in order to revitalize the industry, these were not properly implemented or practiced. After one and half decades later, Sri Lankan Film industry is at almost non-existent with only a handful of quality films being produced. Local film industry has lost its mass market appeal and few quality halls remaining are invaded withHollywood and Bollywood blockbusters, without much success to the local filmmakers.

An International Film Festival?

Proposal made by Handagama was to revitalize the whole industry by exposing the Sri Lankan Cinema to the International Markets, and vice versa through an extravagant mass scale film festival that would in turn entice enthusiasm about film, promote local productions and also benefit Sri Lankan tourism industry through entertainment tourism. The idea here was to make this film festival, termed “Colombo International Film Festival” which will bring in International films, directors and the film community to Colombo while also promoting selected locally made films during the festival. The event will provide opportunities to promote local productions and networking whilst promoting Sri Lanka as a destination for film locations.

International Film Festivals as a means of promoting and uplifting an industry has worked out well for many countries.  Apart from some of the major film festivals such as Berlin, Cannes, Los Angels there are other festivals such as Dubai, Busan, and Tokyo that have made a great impact in the region where it has helped the film industry of the host country immensely. One main example Handagama presented was the success story of the Busan Film Festival, in South Korea. In 1996 when it was first launched the Korean film industry was virtually unknown in the International arena, however, within few years, Korean films reached its golden era where many Korean film directors were able to make a name for themselves globally. It also helped the country to revitalize its industry and helped grow enthusiasm amongst the general public, where by now Korean Film Industry has become one of the top globally. This model has now become a favored strategic implmentation that has been picked up by many other countries as well, some of the examples are film festivals such as Hanoi, Indian.

The practical application of this model is yet to be taken up by relevant parties as this is just a proposed plan and suggestions. In the Sri Lankan context it may not be as easy as the Korean scenario and in terms of sustainability and profitability there may be questions. However, it’s great to see a new bold way of thinking has gone into this, where Mr.Handagama with his experience in the film industry and also as in his role as a banker had devised a fresh plan to uplift the film industry in the country. Of course this is just a first step in a long journey, however if this can be implemented correctly, this might very well be the spark that can reignite the Sri Lankan Film Industry back to its former glory.

The Last Stand

Is it a comeback for Arnold or massive failure? In terms of a Schwarzenegger movie it's a roaring success. For the 65 year old actor he makes a very good comeback considering his limited acting abilities.

The film initially has two parts, one being a CIA operation in Los Angeles and the transport of a federal prisoner and the second is about a small town Sheriff (Arnold) and the town he lives in complete with an inept police department. Naturally the prisoner escapes custody and meanwhile strange characters show up in the small town.

From the opening scene itself the movie holds high promise and holds a certain amount of suspense that it manages to hold throughout the film. Credit should go here to the director (Jee-woon Kim), cinematographer (Ji-yong Kim)and the composer (MOWG) all of whom are Korean. The only area where this doesn't hold true are in the villain's scenes which continuously break the suspension of disbelief that is built up very well everywhere else in the movie.

Scenes in LA are very reminiscent of The Dark Knight robbery both in terms of the way it's shot and the musical score. But then again that film was heavily influenced by the film 'Heat'. Regardless this is the style used for these parts of the film.

There are plenty of car sequences in the movie, with the second by far being the best and if you ever wondered what a 'Need for Speed' movie would look like this scene would be a good indicator.

Latter car sequences look like they straight came from Bollywood in terms of their implausibility and are easily the worst parts of the film. Though there is one interesting game of cat and mouse. It's an all American Muscle affair which is not a bad thing. Sections where cars blaze down the road put the fifth entry of the Fast and the Furious series to shame.

Now on to Arnold. His performance is much as can be expected though its certainly better than in Expendables 2. He delivers one liners in spades. His action sequences are heavily toned down which is a good thing considering his age. Beyond that it's pretty much standard Arnie. He hasn't really gotten any better. Other actors with notable performances are Peter Stormare and Forest Whitaker who really help add credibility to the film.

The shootouts in the film are all well done with very believable tactics being used including and cover and suppression fire. There are also minute sniper on sniper battles which I haven't seen since since 'Enemy of the Gates'. In these shootout sequences everything is very plausible and all of the film's high points take place in the town.

There is also a steady supply of light hearted moments which convey the fact that the movie doesn't take itself too seriously. This is a good thing considering the lead actor.

The biggest weakness in the movie is easily the villain. It's a seemingly large blight on an otherwise very enjoyable film given the scale of his scenes in comparison to the movie. Still definitely worth a watch especially if you ever liked Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Expendables 2

Bigger, Badder and Better.

The first and most important thing to say is that this movie is vastly superior to the first. Everything is just plain better from the dialogue to the action scenes.

Actions scenes really have to be given a mention as the action sequences in the first film were severely underwhelming. In this film we have much more personal encounters that are well choreographed especially in one particular scene that takes place in a small town. This is where the action sequences really take off and hark back to the glory days of the 80's action flick.

There are also numerous scenes where the 'Good Guy's' just stand around guns blazing 24-7 with people falling front, left, right and centre. These are easily my least favourite sequences in the film. In the aforementioned town scene gun bursts are tight and controlled which makes for a far more interesting action sequence overall instead of non-stop guns blazing.

Jean Claude Van Damme really shines in his first scene as a villain who is quite naturally of Belgian/French ancestry which allows him to just act without being hindered by the way he talks. It's a smart move and his first scene shows that he can act in comparison to the other actors in the movie. Sadly he doesn't get nearly enough meaningful screentime and I felt that he was a bit underpowered as a villain despite showing off his trademark kick several times.

Liam Hemsworth also deserves a special mention as he is easily the best actor in the entire film and steals the show in several scenes. However even he can't save the film from plain bad writing in certain sections. Overall his segments are somewhat stronger than the rest.

Certain cameos are much better than others. The humour is also significantly better in certain segments especially the Chuck Norris joke which I laughed at once during the actual scene and again when I remembered it at the end. Some of the action sequences were also funny, some of which was intentional and some of which wasn't. The same could be said for Stallone's acting.

I have to say Arnold Schwarzenegger really didn't seem to have his heart in this film at all, or he just plain can't act. Not sure which it is. Bruce Willis is interesting but never really hits home. There was however *some* good dialogue between Willis and Arnold.

Overall I'd have to say the film is worth a watch just to get a kick.  It doesn't try to be Citizen Kane and doesn't pretend to be either. It certainly doesn't take itself seriously and has it's moments amidst some cringeworthy ones. If you ever liked or laughed at the long gone glory days of the 80's action flick, you should definitely check it out.

Mathawaada Chithrapata presents Pissu Cinema Show

 

 

Filming those Long Takes....

When I was small, used to think that film making or even making a teledrama is just a piece of cake as long as you could get hold of a camera and some good actors, where you would just shoot the conversations that happens. But I later came to realized the mammoth effort that goes into creating even the smallest scene.

One of the main aspects in a movie clip would be the camera angles and how the camera is being used in each scene. You could shoot a film in many different angles; this is done due to many reasons.

Some can be to best illustrate the contents of the scene, for example in a scene where two actors are engaged in a conversation the camera will switch between their facial expressions. For this you would either need to shoot with two cameras at once or to shoot the conversations separately.

Also you would slice the movie down into different scenes and have breaks in camera shots just to make it easy for you to get the perfect picture. Then you would work your way through little by little shooting each scene with breaks, this will reduce actors mistakes and ease up choreography and handling of other props.

But as of late I have grown in interest and being fascinated by “long takes”. Long takes are simply where the director uses one single camera to film an entire scene without having breaks in the acting. It lasts longer than the normal editing phase going into extra several minutes. Long shots are extremely hard to do simply due to the effort and the cohesiveness of all the teams that need to go in just to get it right. One single error means that the whole shot have to be taken from the scratch and for a very complex scene this is simply a nightmare.

I first started to show a keen interest on long takes through the movie Children of Men, where director Alfonso Cuarón has created a masterpiece giving you an amazing experience and suspense through his extensive use of this technique.

Of course there are so many directors who are famous for long takes, such as Alfred Hitchcock, Quentin Tarantino, Paul Thomas Anderson and many more but these are three of the best scenes I could find over YouTube and i am sure you are going to enjoy these...

The Goodfellas - Copacabana Entry 
I love this one. One of the most popular scenes from Martin Scorsese masterpiece; The Goodfellas, the scene is where Henry and Karen enters the Copacabana. With the use of a steady cam the director takes the viewer in a smooth journey into Henry’s stratum of friends society he deals with.



Interview on how they made the Copacabana Long Take, utilizing a steady camera
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBMKyNJvNV8


Children of Men (Uprising scene)
I have no idea how they pulled this off; this highly complex and thrilling take keeps you at the edge of your seat, and I am sure the director was able to strike right at the heart of the viewers with the free hand camera that follows Theo (Clive Owen) though this scene.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuZSmSBLWAg

Children of Men ( Car Scene)

Great use of the Long Take to give the viewers a roller coaster ride of emotions. The shot which is done inside the car is amazing and the techniques they have used for this is simply brilliant.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=en16i8BY4hI

Old Boy

This fight scene from old boy has been dubbed as one of the best movie fight scenes ever, and I couldn’t agree more. The director Park Chan-wook has done an amazing work in making Old Boy and this scene is undoubtedly a testament for it.

The long take starts at 0:58