Author: John Page 57 of 121

REVIEW: ‘Dreams on Spec’

Dreams on Spec is a 2007 documentary which follows three writers as they work on spec film scripts.

The three writers – David, Joe and Deborah – are at different stages; David works at a talent agency and has sold one of his scripts, Joe’s been working on a script for a number of years whilst day-trading and looking after his autistic daughter, and Deborah used to work for a creative agency and is now trying to find funding to film her first script. As well as being at different stages in their careers, their screenplays are on wildly diverse themes – David’s is a modern take on the slasher film, Joe’s written a coming of age piece, and Deborah’s film is described as a ‘gory commitment comedy’.

We don’t get to learn too much about the content of their scripts, but the focus of the film is more on their attitudes and perseverence; David’s concerned about losing control of the script as it goes into production, Joe’s meetings with a script advisor suggest it’s almost ready to be sent out, and Deborah is trying to pay the bills whilst hoping that money’s forthcoming to make her film. Intercut with their three tales are short ‘talking head’ spots with established screenwriters like Nora Ephron, Carrie Fisher and Ed Solomon, all of whom talk in a realistic way about the nature of working in the film industry, and the ways they’ve been treated by studios in the past.

The film’s about 90 minutes long (plus an extra 30 minutes of material featuring the established writers), but I found it seemed much shorter than that, as it was very engaging; it’s an interesting insight into the often mundane reality of writing (that is: re-writing, and re-writing, and so on), interspersed with some very amusing insights. The three writers were well presented – for example, it’s hard not to feel for Joe when he asks his wife to read his latest draft, and she sharply replies that she’s already read several drafts for him.

The direction, editing, and general film-making on this documentary are pretty much perfect – by which I mean that it’s as good as invisible; whilst it’s very professionally made, there are no flashy or obtrusive directorial tricks, and so it just gets on with telling the story – and it’s a story which, if you’re interested in writing, is an interesting one. In a way, the film could be seen as a bit of a litmus test to establish whether writing’s for you – given the stated unlikelihood of succeeding (it’s likened to the chances of winning the lottery), the film makes one either feel that there’s little point in applying pen to paper (or finger to keyboard), or rather stirs the feeling that trying harder is the way to go (you can probably guess which camp I fell into).

I don’t know if this film has been shown on UK TV (More4 or BBC4 seem the most likely channels for a broadcast of it), but it’s available to buy on R1 DVD, and I certainly recommend it – if nothing else, it’s nice to see that there are people in the same boat as you are. You can buy the DVD from the official website, or from Amazon, and I think it’s well worth watching.

Numbers Which May Or May Not Be Relevant To The Current Fuss About Brand And Ross’s Phone Messages To Andrew Sachs

(Details of the fuss here )

– The age of Mr Sachs (78)
– Number of complaints received before press coverage (2)
– Number of complaints received after the Daily Mail covered the story (4700)
– Number of days which it took for the Mail to cover the story (8)
– Number of semi-dressed pictures of Andrew Sachs’s granddaughter in the Daily Mail coverage of the story (5)
– The salaries of Ross and Brand (seven figures and six figures respectively)
– Number of answerphone messages left (4)
– Number of people involved who left Germany in 1938 because of Nazi persecution of Jews (1)
– Number of newspapers involved who supported the Blackshirts and Nazis between 1934 and 1939 (1)
– Number of comedians whose apologies referred to Daily Mail support for Nazis (1)
– Number of uses of phrase ‘full transcript’ to describe an edited version of the messages (1)
– Number of times I laughed whilst listening to the podcast, prior to press coverage (>1)
– Probability as a percentage that there are more than two possible opinions to hold on this matter (>50)

Dead Set On e4 Last Night: Initial Reaction

Did you watch the first episode of Dead Set last night? I did, lured in by the fact it was written by Charlie Brooker.

And I enjoyed it – more drama than comedy, but I thought it worked, and the high production values certainly helped. But…

But was I alone in thinking that the scenes of the infected people running amok in the production office corridors looked like a blood-soaked version of the recent promos for Channel 4’s Generation Next talent search (the ones which featured young people bursting into meetings at C4 HQ, onto the set of the news with Jon Snow, that sort of thing)?

Like A Mirror Reflecting Another Mirror Into Infinity…

Is it just my imagination, or could this book be seen as slightly self-referential?

No offence intended to the author – I haven’t read the book so I’m not really passing comment, but you can see what I’m driving at, right?

I Wouldn’t Normally Change In Public…

… but as you may have noticed, the blog template changed over the weekend.

This is to bring it more in line with the overall colour scheme (that is to say: blue) of my not-quite-revised-yet-but-nearly website, which is shockingly close to ready, I promise, and hopefully will be online by the end of the week.

Hmm, thinking about it, both Stephen Fry and I have revamped our websites within mere weeks of each other. What good company I find I am in.

Do let me know if there are any changes to the blog you feel strongly about (either pro- or anti-), and while I’m on the subject, do hop over and have a look at Mr Fry’s new site.

Review: ‘Bodyworlds – The Mirror Of Time’

‘The Mirror of Time’ is the latest incarnation of the ‘Bodyworlds’ series of exhibitions, run by the anatomist Gunther von Hagens. And yes, the Bodyworlds exhibitions are the ones with real dead bodies preserved by a process called ‘plastination’.

Let’s just deal with the issue of looking at dead bodies first; I have no problem at all with it – I don’t consider the human body, even stripped of its flesh, ugly or scary or gross or anything like that, though I understand that a lot of people might feel that way. That’s fine, though I do dislike it when saying ‘I don’t like it’ gets conflated with ‘ah, but were the bodies obtained legally?’ and the like. I’m absolutely fine with the idea of something I’m interested in not being to someone else’s tastes.

As an aside, I think part of the reason that such sights might creep people out is because the only times we’re generally likely to see the human body with its musculature exposed, or nerves poking out, is in a horror film (example: Hellraiser) where it’s not exactly presented in a good light. And its sheer lack of familiarity (to most of us, anyway) makes looking at such sights feel like looking at one of those lifeforms from the bottom of the Marianas Trench – just too outside of our frame of refence to be immediately comfortable, basically.

Anyway, all that aside, I thought this was an interesting exhibition. It starts off showing the stages of development in the womb, and then shows various stages in the lifecycle, with particular emphasis on aging and other ways that our internal organs change and decay over time. There are several other plastinated forms which don’t really fit in the ‘chronology’ really – a plastinated horse and giraffe, for example – but the overall theme just about holds, and I was genuinely surprised at some of the items, such as the size difference between a healthy and a diseased liver.

This was the first time I’d seen one of these exhibitions, and thus the first time I’d been within such a short distance of a dead body. I have to say that, even knowing that these were real people who’d once been walking and breathing and eating and pooing like you or I, after seeing the first one, I didn’t really focus on that aspect of it, but instead was more intrigued by the way you could see the nerves or whatever. Which, I guess, is the point of the exhibition.

I did come away, though, with a renewed sense of being impressed at just what a clever device the human body is; fragile in some respects and yet resilient in so many others, and whether you believe that the form developed as a result of some divine intervention or evolution or some other route, it’s nonetheless an incredible organism, and the mere fact that you’re able to see these words and read them and interpret them as having some meaning is, in itself, the result of a number of biological processes in a system that we could all too easily take for granted. That said, Mrs Wife and I did go on to the chip shop afterwards, so one might argue that the respect for the body was short-lived.

If you don’t find the idea of the plastinated forms off-putting, there’s some informative stuff to be gleaned from this exhibition, and I’d recommend it.

It’s on at the (now post-)Millennium Dome in Greenwich, London, until August 23, 2009.

It’s Behind You!

As I may have mentioned before, I have a bit of radio presenting experience, and I like to think I’m fairly unflappable, and able to keep things afloat when a track doesn’t begin, a jingle goes off when not expected, etc.

But this chap… wow.

Colour me impressed.

Film Stars

A lot of posters for films, as you may have noticed, tend not to quote actual words from reviews nowadays, instead preferring to include stars. A little-known fact about the film industry is that the stars you see in film reviews are not stars in the Michelin-restaurant-acclaim fashion, but are actually asterisks that were intended to be included in the original review.

That being the case, you’re probably wondering how to decode what the reviewer actually thought of the film. Well, here at John Soanes, we’re nothing if not public-minded, so here’s a handy cut-out-and-keep guide to the real meaning of the stars you see on film posters…


Carry the above with you at all times, and next time you see a film advertised without proper words being quoted from the reviews, use the above and all will be revealed!

Review: ‘The End Of Mr Y’ by Scarlett Thomas

I talked back here about how pleased I was to get this book at a bargain price, and I’m even more pleased to be able to report that it’s a cracking read.

The plot, put very simply, is that student Ariel Manto finds a copy of the rare book ‘The End Of Mr Y’ – she’s pleased about this, as it’s covered by a thesis she’s writing on the author of the book, who disappeared. Like the main character in the book. And where exactly has her tutor vanished to?

The writing style is very readable, even when characters have to talk about some fairly in-depth theoretical stuff, and it’s got enough twists and turns to keep you unsure what’s going to happen next – it was, cliché as it may sound, the kind of book that made me wish I had just one more tube or bus stop to go before I had to stop reading.

My only niggle was that the slight romance sub-plot felt just that – slight – and I thought it was going to develop into something slightly more interesting than it did, but really this was just a disappointment in comparison to the way the other plot elements flowered so satisfyingly.

Definitely recommended, and if you’re wavering, do bear in mind that the edges of the pages are all black, so as one carries it around it looks like a grimoire, or some other book containing mysterious knowledge. A book that’s both a good read and physically well-designed? What’s not to like?

One to own, and certainly read more than once, I’d say.

How To Annoy People – Lesson The Second

People who don’t take kindly to sarcasm
They say: “Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, you know.”
You say: “Perhaps, but at least it’s an attempt at wit, unlike parroting aphorisms.”

People who try to make themselves sound like sexual adventurers
They say: “Well, pain is very close to pleasure.”
You say: Nothing. Stamp on their foot.
And then ask, “Did you like that? Are you feeling frisky now? Are you?”

People who quote cliches to make themselves sound emotionally complex
They say: “There’s a thin line between love and hate.”
You say: “Only if looked at in a two-dimensional sense. If you take the bigger view, there’s actually a vast plain between the two.”

People who generalise on the subject of TV comedy
They say: “Of course, all the best shows end after two series – Fawlty Towers, Spaced, The Office…”
You say: “… Seinfeld, Only Fools and Horses, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Reggie Perrin, Peep Show…oh, hang on a mo…”

Page 57 of 121

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén