comedy – Paint a Mental Picture

I love ‘Love Actually’, actually, to quote Kitty from Ghosts. British romcoms just have that thing about them, from my totally biased British opinion. They are cosy and unrealistic and feature a barrage of clumsy bumbling characters. Usually featuring Hugh Grant if you’re thinking of a certain time period for British romcoms. But yes, I love them. I love the stiff upper lip awkwardness, the double entendre, and yes, there are plenty of stereotypes. But movies have stereotypes. And, and this is my main point, movies are fictional.

You’ve probably seen the following kind of article lately. I watched this and I have questions. I watched that classic film and I was horrified. I’m watching love actually for the first time and it’s AWFUL!!! Yes. We get it. It was made in 2003 and you’re super offended by its lack of 2020 standards (and “oh the Andrew Lincoln scene is just creepy”). But is it that bad? I don’t think so. In fact, there’s so many good things about Love Actually that these people don’t seem to realise. The smattering of jokes unique to British humour. The singing priminister’s guard, the irony of a pair of movie body doubles struggling to ask each other out. Emma Thompson’s acting. References to the passengers aboard the planes of 9/11.

The scene between Keira Knightly and Andrew Lincoln is still my favourite scene. As he mentions, he’s confession to provide an explanation, clear the air. Not with any other motives. “With no agenda.”

The criticism around Love Actually and other films of the like, such as Four Weddings and a Funeral, has increased in the last year or two. The key criticism being too straight, or too white. As I say, we are not in the time we were. As for Four Weddings, in my opinion, it features one of the most modern and respectful depictions of a gay couple, even by the depictions used today (such James Corden in that Netflix film… Prom, is it?). In a sea of incorrect and potentially hurtful stereotypes of gay men, we saw a couple that weren’t characatures for cheap jokes. We just saw a couple, the only couple among that group of romantically unsuccessful friends, fully accepted by all.

We need to edge away from the idea that all movies need to depict social issues, need to shoehorn characters in for the sake of diversity. So many films focus on one group of people, and yet today there seems to be this pressure to feature as many racial, cultural and LGBTQ groups as possible into mainstream movies. So much so that it deviates from a true story. Love Actually may have its issues when viewed from the lenses of today, but it wasn’t made for that. It was made for audiences of then. Movies used to be made for escapism. To reflect technological advances. To tell a story. Today, even in a fantasy or a superhero flick, we are being reminded of social issues and imbalances. In the time we are currently in, do we need to be reminded in the evenings too that the world isn’t perfect? Do we need our TV shows to preach to us in a time of what we want to use for relaxation and switching off?

Yes, some movies should be made to deliver a message. But other movies can simply exist to have fun with. To watch when we just want to feel warm and fuzzy, or cry like no one is watching. What, I ask, is wrong with that?

Uncategorized

Judging the Past by Today’s Standards – A Rant

14th Dec 2020 maymargaret

So its time to put this particular rant in writing. I think I’ve bored enough of my family enough with it, but alas. And rants are good. They’re cathartic. And this is one rant that just feels needed.

So I’ve been seeing alot of a particular kind of article recently. More so in the last week. ‘I watched this for the first time and now I’m shocked’ type discussions, in which someone (often around my age) watches a classic film or TV show and is super offended by its outdated jokes and content (‘On the Buses’ I get, but that was an extreme case). The most recent one was about someone watching the first episode of one of my favourite shows, Only Fools and Horses. Straight away, it was racist, sexist, and how dare they focus on three white men. Look. That was the time. The time now is different. The time now is different because of shows like this. We know time is different now because we have shows like this to compare it too. Yes, some jokes were made back then that haven’t aged well. But there were jokes made in shows 10 years ago that haven’t aged well, either. We are in the midst of a huge shift in standards, and thats a good thing. But does that mean we should delete the things that remind us how far we’ve come?

I’ve also seen some wilful fabrication of TV show content in support of the BLM movement. One fine example was concerning a show called Benidorm, in which there was a character in black face during the second episode. Apparently, one of the central couples walked out in disgust, and it was supposed to be a poignant point concerning how offended one of the characters was. But no, that didn’t happen. The couple who actually walked out of a bar was a totally separate couple walking out of a completely different bar due to a very different act.

I think context is a huge factor in some jokes, particularly in classic comedy and content. To get the jokes, sometimes you need to know the characters. Case in point; Basil Fawlty, and The German’s episode. Now, this character is meant to be unlikeable. He’s meant to get in his own way. He’s bigoted, he’s old fashioned and outdated. He’s meant to contrast with the more current characters. To be prejudice is part and parcel of the characature of a middle class man who clearly wants to be higher up in the ranks, but doesn’t go about getting there in the best way. The fact that he recoils from a black doctor in the presence of his embarrassed wife just goes to show his worst traits; in the 70s, shows such as Love Thy Neighbor purposefully created unlikeable white characters to contrast with likable black characters to show the changing times. It was progress.

And this is why old comedies like this should still be valued. Shows as recent as Friends, with an all white principle cast, are products of their time. The shows we have today are products of this time. We should be proud of that progress. Not repulsed by past jokes.

If we delete these shows, and those old jokes, what have we got to learn from?

Uncategorized

Classic Movies – Why I Recommend Them

14th Nov 202014th Nov 2020 maymargaret

I love old movies. When many people hear this, or they think of an old movie, they think of something made in the 80s, or even the 90s. I still struggle with the concept that really, those movies made in the 90s, the ones that came out around the time I was born, are now considered old.

But the old movies I’m talking about were made back in the 30s, 40s. Cary Grant, Katherine Hepburn, James Stewart. Fast spoken comedies, everyone in suits regardless of their jobs. Random dance scenes. No CGI whatsoever. To me, this was the best of cinema. To me, too many people don’t give them a chance. So here is a list as to why I think you should. Yes, I know. But I love lists. They’re so organised!

1. The storytelling – many romcoms that come out today use tried and tested formulas. Boy meets girl, fall in love. For the classic movies, these formulas were fresh, new, lacking the convolution of what we have today. Sure, some of the screwball comedies had certain common traits; ‘Made for Eachother’ and ‘Vivacious Lady’ both feature James Stewart falling in love with a woman and marrying her after one night of knowing her (both happen within minutes of the film starting, so no spoiler there), while Cary Grant remarries his ex wife in both Philidelphia Story and His Girl Friday (yes spoilers, but both are delightful watches and predictable anyway). But nonetheless, these films were where the ideas started, where the cliches began.

2. It’s probably been remade – You’ve Got Mail is a remake of The Shop Around the Corner, and predictably i think the latter is better. Now I do like You’ve Got Mail, and it’s so similar in its concept that its impossible to dislike it too much beyond certain cheesy moments. But The Shop Around the Corner takes place in mostly one place, and gives the romance the scale that fits it. It’s not a lowly book store owner falling for a millionaire competetor without realising. Its two people working in a store, always around each other. Its plausible in ways that You’ve Got Mail isn’t. And it’s modern in its writing; the shop staff are fleshed out. The main characters are intelligent and well read, and not because they work with books. They don’t, but Meg Ryan knows all there is to know because she works with books, and thats kind of it.

3. A different time – these movies were made in a different time. Standards were different, the age was different. Today, some ask for the deletion of these movies because they do not match up to todays standards. But I think this is why we need to watch them, and keep them around. I watched a movie the other night in which a character put black make up on his face as a disguise, but that was okay then. While we might cringe now, I think these films should be around just to see how far we’ve come. And that goes for the treatment of women, too.

4. The Style – just the look, the sound of everything. Quick quips, sharp suits and equally sharp dresses. Everyone was so well dressed, and spoke so fast, and with such wit. It was classy, and fashionable, or at least it was on film.

5. Just storytelling – Frankenstein (1931) was one of the earlier uses of contact lenses in film… and they looked so damn uncomfortable. Sounds were made using materials at hand rather than a computer, and invention had to be used for the rest if something new was to be made. The Lady Vanishes, for example, was groundbreaking for showing dream like visuals such as double vision. It was relevant to the story, and didn’t distract from it in any way. Besides that, movies focused on the story, acting and dialogue. No distractions to increase the run time, and if we were shown something truly mindblowing, chances are it was a first.

A new take – novel adaptions were very popular back then, but they werent always faithful to the book. Sure, they were essentially the same story, and ended in much the same way, but there were also some tweaks. For example, Pride and Prejudice (1940) made one certain cretinous character ultimately act in the interest of the characters’ happiness, rather than social conventions of the time. Little Women (1949) almost entirely focused on Jo’s story, creating a sense of perspective as opposed to dipping in and out of the girl’s lives like subsequent adaptions.

The drama – finally, just the drama of it all. Today, many romcoms go for the understated quirky characters, quietly neurotic and loudly mundane in their lives. But classic characters wear their hearts on their sleeves, swooning all over the place and being all passionate and all that. And they could make drama out of anything too, with the right lead.

Uncategorized

Escapism Through the Screen – TV Shows

6th Nov 20206th Nov 2020 maymargaret

If I thought of all the TV shows I’d watched over the years, all the hours I’d spent sat down and switching on to switch off, I probably wouldn’t sound like a very productive person (a matter of perspective maybe). The last couple of months have been a real journey of discovery into (almost exclusively) British comedy shows I’d never seen, or never wanted to commit any time to. Side note…these are all quite short shows, and as of yet accessible for free.

1. Green Wing – Green Wing is one of those off the wall shows with not one serious bone in its body. Despite being set in a hospital, none of its plots are medically related, and it’s characters spend their screen time cartwheeling or playing out romances that feel like caricatures of those in more serious shows, and are just as gripping to watch.

2. Spaced – continuing the channel 4 comedy route, Spaced has been one I’ve watched on repeat for years now, once again during my time at home. It’s constant references to pop culture seem fresh in a modern TV world convoluted with geeky stereotypes who eye roll every time someone says they haven’t watched Star Wars.

3. Black Books – More 4. I know. At this point, you start spotting many of the same actors in each, and there’s a nice kind of familiarity with that. Bernard and Manny are great polar opposites as serial pessimist and serial optimist, while Fran offers the perspective of somewhere in between. Its fast and chaotic at times, exaggerated in its principle setting of a cluttered book shop.

4. The League of Gentlemen – today, some of the characters used in The League of Gentlemen, as well as some of the jokes, do seem quite outdated. But the black humour is niche, and simply reflects the attitudes of the time (some of the characters are meant to be somewhat socially isolated, after all). The characters span between the weirdly mundane to the wacky and offensive, each independent and rarely (if ever) meeting. It is bizarre, and difficult to explain why this kind of humour is so addictive to me, and I think thats part of the charm.

5. Inside No 9 – sticking with Steve Pemberton and Reece Shearsmith, Inside no 9 is an anthology…well it’s difficult to define it besides that. Comedy, horror, crime, drama…everything, really. Each as unique as the last. As a fan of older anthologies such as Hammer House of Horror and Tales of the Unexpected, I believe anthologies can never get old.

6. The Mighty Boosh – probably the most outlandish of the lot, it’s humour deviates from relatable and typical to funny words, quite beautiful imagery and total randomness. The characters are all bizarre or exaggerated versions of stereotypes we might be familiar with, but besides that it is a world in and of itself.

Honorable mentions

1. Car Share – I watched this in the space of one evening. I love any TV show or movie that can create something from one principle setting, and rely entirely on dialogue to create what it’s meant to.

2. Psychoville – I think you have to be fan of Shearsmith and Pemberton for this, but that’s just my point of view. Much like The League of Gentlemen, several characters are played by the same actors, and once again the humour comes from the mundane characters who are essentially oddballs. And it is, in places, genuinely creepy. To me, anyway.

3. Ghosts – Unmistakably British I think, with a number of typically English stereotypes such as the stuff upper lip WW2 captain, the sleazy politician, and the anguished poet. It’s jokes are fast paced, and its humour is silly and occasionally essentially adult.