THE ONE WHERE I REVIEW A FILM CALLED SPRING FROM 2014

More and more over these last six months, I'm finding myself significantly affected by films, TV shows and books with an emotional weight. You might think that's an obvious thing to say, but what I mean is, whereas before I could appreciate if something had an emotional storyline, nowadays it actually has an emotional effect on me. Perhaps unsurprisingly (given that I currently live in a different country to my wife) stories involve love, or lost love, have the most profound impact (case in point: VENISS UNDERGROUND by Jeff Vandermeer). Which is all a lead-up to say that SPRING (2014) is about love and it got me right in the feels.

The film follows a Californian man named Evan, who, after the death of his mother, jets off to Italy to clear his head. There he encounters Louise, an intriguing European woman fascinated by evolutionary genetics. Before too long, it becomes apparent there is something unnatural about her, and the question becomes one of: when will Evan find out, and how will he respond?

Film-makers Justin Benson and Aaron Moorhead garnered attention with their debut RESOLUTION (2012), a seriously weird film about a man helping his best friend go cold turkey in a cabin. Before too long it becomes apparent that they're being watched, possibly by something deeply sinister. RESOLUTION plays with perception in a manner akin to Michael Haneke's excellent HIDDEN and spirals into one of the most WTF endings I've ever seen.

With this, their second feature, they toy with perception in different ways. Is Louise playing hard to get? Is she actually dangerous, or controlled by her strange nature? It asks questions of love, of lust, of whether we can truly claim to know or feel something for someone we've just met. The obvious answer is 'of course not' but what about that that ineffable sense of truth that accompanies real love? When we know on an emotional level that can't be measured that this relationship, this person, is right...?

This desperation, this need to be with someone, to know, to prove they're the right person, flows throughout the latter half of the film. Evan understands it's crazy to tell someone after only five days he loves them, and Louise suggests his recent grief is clouding his judgement, but what if it took the death of a loved one to make him realise what he wants/needs from life, from a partner?

Grief underpins SPRING. Throughout, we're reminded that Evan is lost, emotionally, and that grief affects people differently - there is a poignant side story involving an elderly Italian farmer Evan finds work for, who himself is dealing with the death of a loved one (in a very quiet, dignified way). , Though it sinks into the background, death and its repercussions haunt the film in subtle ways; at one point, Louise and Evan head to several ancient graveyards, including one with mummified remains on clear display. It's eerie and fascinating in equal measure, like Louise herself.

It's not spoiling anything to tell you Evan discovers Louise's monstrous secret - after all, the point of the film is he finds out - but how he does, and how he reacts, are what makes things interesting. The film then hinges on the question: how willing are you to accept another person for what they are, if you truly love them?

This is a particularly interesting question to raise in the context of a love story. Plenty of romcoms and dramas answer it, of course, but rarely in such an intriguing or realistic way. Usually, there's the 'acceptance' of a person's 'faults' but no actual acknowledgement of what this acceptance really means. If the issue is so dark, so terrible that even thinking about it is difficult, what does 'acceptance' mean in this regard? It means acknowledging that the issue might fade from thought but never from memory, that its implications and/or consequences may well last the rest of your life. And that you are prepared to stand by that person, to support them in any way you can. It is a chance to show that love is/should/can be unconditional/non-judgemental.

The fx in SPRING are almost all pleasingly physical, with the CGI looking uncanny in the right way (an early shot of Louise's transformed form, with its uncomfortable bone structure and staccato movements, is unnervingly creepy). I thought after the first few times I'd seen all there was and, after hearing Lovecraft mentioned (and seeing the recurrent use of certain animal parts in publicity material) I was a little disappointed. But stick with it and you'll be rewarded with a suitably unique "monster" design.

Lovecraft isn't too bad a touchstone, in that Louise's condition has physical characteristics of some of his creations, there are plenty of shots of the ocean, and it all appears to take place in a small seaside town. There is also the terror of the unknown, of what is the actual cause of Louise's condition, though don't go in expecting huge inter-dimensional gods to pop up and everyone to go mad.

As much as I enjoyed all this ^ what I really liked, and took me by surprise, was the sense of humour in SPRING. Evan's best friend is a drunk/stoner but supportive in his own way and very quick to remind Evan that he loves him, which was a really sweet touch. Once Evan reaches Italy he tags along with a couple of boisterous English lads who are all about "booze and birds" - I've known plenty of lads like them and their characters were spot on, though thankfully lacking the (easy) hooligan aspects of typical wideboys. There are some genuine laughs in SPRING, which helps make it all feel grounded and real - it's a dark, sombre film but clearly set in our reality (despite all the weird stuff).

Why exactly SPRING works is easy to quantify: it treats all its themes (think about what the season of 'spring' typically means) with respect and blends styles so that no one genre has precedence over another. There are plenty of nice story touches (such as the apparent supernatural aspects of Louise's condition and her logic against them) and sweeping camera shots that speak of a confidence in the film-makers that they knew exactly what they wanted to make so they damn well made it.

(I was actually reminded quite a bit of the James Earl Jones b-movie BLOOD TIDE, so here's a song referencing that film:)

NEW YEAR, NEW YOU, NOUVEAU VOGUE

Cripes, it's only bloody 2016 now!

I'm not really a resolution person, but neither am I the sort of person who says "I don't need the start of a new year to better myself" - I don't know what it is, but people who say that tend to be unnecessarily smug about it. Are you superior for being able, in theory, to change your life whenever you want? I don't get it. You can still utterly fail at any point, just like people who make 1st January resolutions. Also, what's the harm in resolutions? Nothing, that's what! Any kick up the bum is a kick up the bum, whether it's new year or not. It's easy to do nothing, so the fact you want to do something is worthwhile, I think. 

Anyway. Pretty much all my plans for 2015 failed spectacularly. I understand people are far worse off than me so I shan't complain or moan right now, but suffice to say, 2015 shouldn't have ended with me on a beach in Queensland without my wife. I've got my fingers, eyes and legs crossed that we'll be together properly by April, but if last year taught me anything it's that you can't count on the future being any one thing. It is chaos and it will do whatever the hell it damn well pleases. 

HOWEVER! One thing I'm hoping to get sorted this year, one way or another, is the publication of a novel. It isn't the first one I've ever written, but it is the first one I'm trying to do something with in maybe two years. I've talked about it a bit in earlier posts, so I'll just recap the deets right now now now oh my goodness it's really happening:

It starts with a woman finding her father's exploded grave, the apparent truth about some weird stuff he told her before his death, and her desire to get answers. The narrative then cuts to her husband, who's travelling across a world now ruled by monstrous gods to find her. Their narratives cross-over at some point and more truths reach the surface.   

It's heavily influenced by Greek tragedy and quantum mechanics; there are themes of love, suicide, repetition of actions and the inevitability of fate. I've been lucky enough to get ten beta readers to have an eyeball - I'm just waiting to hear if it all makes sense and so forth. Once I get past the next stage of writing/revision and it's sorted, I'll try and find a proper home for it with a traditional publisher. Hell, I might as well try contacting agents too. The last time I had so much time on my hands to concentrate on writing was back in January 2009...I've been a published writer for seven years! Anyway, that was when all this really kicked off for me, so it'd be really cool/nice if history repeats itself. Which we all know it does. We just never know when.

If the traditional route doesn't bear any fruit, I may well give self-publishing a go. I mean, I know how to format books and I know a bunch of really cool artists so I'm confident I could knock out a quality product. The mark of a poor self-published author, to me, is terrible book design. I'm not going to drag up that famous quote about books and covers but, well, yes you can. 

I'm also, this month, going to continue my mini monster toy making. I brought mold-making materials back with me from America in November but ran out of clay - kind of important that, haha. But now I have clay, so it's all gravy, baby. I might open up the naming of the monsters to the public, with a free set of the toys to whoever wins. And a credit, of course. The only one I've named myself is called Chompy Dave, and he's a t-rex/shark head on stumpy crustacean legs. Once I've modelled his new, smaller version I'll post pics. 

And that's about it. I've also been catching up on a lot of TV shows, like THE WIRE and MAD MEN, which has sparked some ideas and whatnot to life in the ol' noodle. IT HAS, YOU KNOW. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to write some wonky music inspired by ttthhhiiissss:

DARK WAS THE NIGHT [REVIEW] aka TIME FOR A SENSIBLE POST TITLE

Something's in the forest around Maiden Woods, and it's up to the grief-stricken sheriff and his former big city deputy to figure out what. Shot through an icy blue lens and set in a small town on the verge of a snowstorm, DARK WAS THE NIGHT (2014) is as much a character study as it is a creature feature and is all the better for it.

Sheriff Paul Shields (Kevin Durand from Vikings, Real Steel, a whole ton of stuff) blames himself for the death of his young son, even though every single other person in town (including his estranged wife and other son) know it was a terrible accident. I've read other reviews that point out Durand carries the whole film on his shoulders with his performance, and I'm inclined to agree; though I'd say he wears it on his face more than anything. He spends the entire film looking knackered and on the verge of tears, yet holds it back with no small effort so he can concentrate on protecting his town...even though this is also something he doesn't, privately, feel equipped to do.

A dark shape stalks around the outside of his home at night, startling his son and leaving weird hoof-like prints that stretch from the woods all the way through town. Once the townsfolk wake up to these, they're suitably unnerved and straight away, the film's blanketed in a sense of unease as subtle as the gently falling snow. At first, the rational response is someone's taking a creepy prank too far, but once evidence starts piling up involving claw marks and dead bodies, Paul and his deputy (played by Lukas Haas, Touch) start to suspect old monster stories told by good-natured barman Earl (the always reliable Nick Damici, Stakeland) might have some basis in fact.

DARK WAS THE NIGHT may have a borderline generic title, and you could argue the plot itself follows familiar beats, but this doesn't stop it from being an atmospheric, occasionally tense film. Director Jack Heller (a producer on Bad Milo and The Scribbler) shows he knows how to handle suspense and the monster by giving us glimpses of it in the background and as it darts behind trees/into the surrounding darkness. I even got one really good, genuine jump scare out of the film that has everything to do with careful framing and delayed expectation, rather than a blast of loud music. Writer Tyler Hisel papers over any b-movie familiarity with strong characters and the clever decision to offer clues as to the creature's origin rather than a concrete reason.

The only two places the film stumbles are when Paul's wife talks about her son's death, and when we finally get a good look at the monster. Regards the wife's conversation, although it's not a deal-breaker, it does feel heavyhanded in a film that shows otherwise commendable restraint. The monster might elicit more than a groan, though. I like the design a lot (though I can't really picture it surviving in the freezing temperatures), I'm just not keen on the CG fx as it breaks the immersion (mainly through slightly wonky animation). It's a shame, too, because up until the end, the most we see of the monster is delivered through shadow-drenched practical effects, like this:

I won't reveal the creature here as that'd spoil half the fun of this film, but I do think it's pretty unique – in look, if not form. There're some nice gore fx that serve the story and you really get a sense that this monster is powerful, lithe and smart; in other words, a worthy enemy. For the human characters: aside from the Sheriff, Deputy Donny also gets just enough backstory to flesh out a good-natured personality that shows hints of a recent, troubled past. There's a lot to like about DARK WAS THE NIGHT, and I think it's a real testament to it that I already feel like watching it again. I'm sure I could have come up with a far snappier conclusion, but sometimes a perfectly solid sentiment is just as good, if not better. A bit like this film, really. Oooooh there we go.

OBLIGATORY MUSIC VIDEO THAT HAS NOTHING DIRECTLY TO DO WITH THE REST OF THE POST!