Back in 1966, French critic-turned-filmmaker François Truffaut published the book Cinema According to Hitchcock, which was comprised of conversations he had with Alfred Hitchcock about his career. In a new documentary about these famous conversations, Kent Jones establishes the context for the time period when this took place, citing how Hitchcock wasn’t considered a serious artist by the general public. Even up to the release of Psycho, Hitchcock was known more as a light entertainer than a true master of the craft. At times, Hitchcock even wondered if he was stuck doing the same types of films and not experimenting more; he spent most his time cemented in the studio system of Hollywood, using his name to sell films as well as superstar actors like Grace Kelly, Ingrid Bergman, Cary Grant, and James Stewart.

Truffaut set out to fix the misconception of Hitchcock as entertainer first and artist second. He promised to expose Hitchcock’s cinematic greatness to the world through in-depth analysis of his filmography, and the book was a major hit. Not only did it help shape people’s perception of Hitchcock as a serious filmmaker, it became a bible for film buffs. To this day, the book is still considered to be the holy grail for aspiring filmmakers, or anyone interested in frame-by-frame breakdowns of how the Master of Suspense approached film.

Jones interviews an elite group of modern directors including Martin Scorsese, David Fincher, Wes Anderson, Olivier Assayas, Peter Bogdanovich, and Richard Linklater about how influential Hitchcock is to their career. Listening to these auteurs gush over Hitchcock is inspiring—each respects him for their own reasons, but all seem to agree that it’s his ability to frame every shot perfectly that sets him apart.

Hitchcock provides a ton of captivating thoughts on what makes things work in film. He explains how not showing or saying something can make a scene operate better and brilliantly defends the implausible tendencies of his own films, saying “Logic is dull.” But perhaps the most fascinating insight of the entire conversation was listening to Hitchcock describe the importance of manipulating time. He claims the most powerful feature cinema offers is the ability to control time. Fincher echoes this sentiment by describing directing as simply controlling moments that should occur really fast and making them slow, and making moments that should occur really slow and making them fast. It’s true when you think about it. Compressing or expanding moments of time is indeed what makes cinema such a powerful medium for storytelling. The whole segment is a great example of the documentary supplementing a subject covered in the book.

It’s when Hitchcock/Truffaut devotes a large section on praising Vertigo that the film becomes a little off-balance. Jones details how poorly Vertigo did when it was first released, then contrasts it with how much of an impact it has on today’s filmmakers. This ends up being more of a puff piece for the film and Hitchcock instead of allowing the Master of Suspense to explain things himself. Some of the best parts of the film are listening to Hitchcock defend his decisions and talk about what he thought didn’t work (it’s fascinating to hear Hitchcock suggest how he’d fix a scene in Truffaut’s The 400 Blows). But the film often glosses over these moments in favor of celebrating Hitchcock for reasons which are mostly known at this point. And while it’s completely understandable that Hitch would receive the majority of attention, fans of Truffaut may be let down by how little his work is covered.

Truffaut revised the original book in 1985, updating it with conversations he had regarding the final stages of both their careers. With Hitchcock/Truffaut, Jones creates an unofficial third revision; offering additional perspectives from contemporary filmmakers who assure us that Hitchcock is every bit as relevant today as he was back then. However, the film isn’t nearly as essential as the book it’s based off, though it serves as a starting point for those who haven’t read the book and a modest companion piece for those who have.

After I came down from the McKellen high that had overtaken my body for a good couple of days, I got back into movie-watching mode and watched a pair of very different documentaries MVFF had to offer. The first was a film I had a deep personal investment in, Kent Jones’ Hitchcock/Truffaut, based on the eminently popular interview book of the same name. The subject matter of An Act of Love struck a chord with me as well, dealing with the controversial Methodist Church trials surrounding Rev. Frank Schaefer’s officiation of his gay son’s wedding. Although I had emotional (and dare I say, religious) ties to both films, only one rang true on a cinematic level.

Master Meets Grandmaster

Occupying the bookshelves of most serious movie lovers, “Hitchcock/Truffaut” is indeed one of my prized possessions. It’s a print version of a week-long, in-depth exchange about the filmmaking process Francois Truffaut and Alfred Hitchcock shared in 1962 that’s influenced virtually every prominent filmmaker since the book’s release. The documentary based on the book, directed by Kent Jones, couples archival photos and audio from the interview and does its best to make us feel like we’re sat in the room with Hitch, Truffaut and their translator. It is a pleasure to hear the legendary filmmakers’ voices and laugh along as they share laughs with each other, and the insights Truffaut mines out of his hero are as enlightening today as ever. A highlight is a moment of master/pupil critique in which Hitchcock suggests a pivotal scene in Truffaut’s The 400 Blows would have been better played had the characters not said a word. To hear these two talk so candidly and in such detail about their craft is as big a thrill on-screen as it is on paper, and as a cinematic extension of the book, Hitchcock/Truffaut lives up to its name. Jones also interviews several big names in the industry (Peter Bogdanovich, Wes Anderson, David Fincher, and Richard Linklater to name just a few) about the genius of Hitchcock, and their words of adulation are terrific, extra perspectives on Hitchcock’s work that you won’t find in the printed version.

Love in a Loveless Place

Following the defrocking by the United Methodist Church of minister Frank Schaefer after officiating his gay son’s wedding, An Act of Love provides a thorough outlining of the political maneuverings, biblical technicalities, and emotional traumas that stemmed from the controversy (which wasn’t limited to Schaefer’s case). The divide in the church created by a fundamental disagreement about gay marriage and the personal stories surrounding it are heartbreaking and inspirational, but the presentation of these stories by director Scott Sheppard is decidedly uncinematic, with talking-head interviews and archival footage strung together in an unsurprising, textbook way. A greater sense of narrative propulsion and shape would have made the film a more engaging watch, though there are a few pleasant departures, like a scene in which Schaefer and his wife return to their old apartment in Germany and laugh about an old indoor palm tree they decorated with Christmas ornaments one year, to the confusion of his mother. The movie’s not flawed in any major way, and its subjects, while not especially charismatic, are impassioned across the board.

Back in 1967 French filmmaker Francois Truffaut (The 400 Blows, Day For Night) sat down with legendary director Alfred Hitchcock to discuss his filmmaking style and career up to that point. This new documentary from Kent Jones acts like a companion piece to the book Truffaut wrote from his interview, which includes several audio recordings from the actual interview. He also calls in several prominent directors such as; Martin Scorsese, Wes Anderson, Richard Linklater, Kiyoshi Kurosawa, David Fincher, and others who offer insight on the master of suspense’s work.

Hitchcock/Truffaut premiered at the Cannes Film Festival in May and recently at Telluride and TIFF, and will open in New York on December 2nd. If you consider yourself a film buff, or simply curious to what made Hitchcock so special, be sure to check out the trailer for Hitchcock/Truffaut.

In honor of Oscar season being fully upon us, we’ve created a new column that combines three of our favorite things: arguing about the Oscars, nostalgia, and passing judgment on others. Oscar Winners Revisited hopes to re-evaluate past Academy Awards results and see how well the winners and nominees held up versus the choices Way Too Indie Staff members would make today. We’ll be sticking to the big six categories: Best Picture, Director, Actor, Actress, Supporting Actor, and Supporting Actress. Make sure to check back on Way Too Indie tomorrow for another year’s batch of Academy Award winners, revisited.

Best Supporting Actress

Who Won – Melissa Leo, The Fighter
Who Should’ve Won – Hailee Steinfeld, True Grit

It’s hard to complain about Leo’s win for The Fighter, though her self-funded pleading for the award looks more desperate now than even then. Truthfully, her performance might be the year’s second Best Supporting Actress role, but her performance wasn’t the best in the category. As the lead of her film, True Grit’s Hailee Steinfeld carries a movie that also features major actors like Jeff Bridges, Matt Damon, and Josh Brolin. The 13-year old’s steely reserve, and scrappy determination in the face of an overwhelming Wild West is captivating filtered through the Coen’s vision for True Grit, and aided by a script packed with Southern idioms Steinfeld is a delight in the role. This is the type of performance Hilary Swank would have won an Oscar for if Steinfeld were 10 years older, but her relative youth makes the part easier to ignore. 4 years later, it’s impossible to overlook Steinfeld’s captivating performance. [Zach]

Best Supporting Actor

Who Won – Christian Bale, The Fighter
Who Should’ve Won – John Hawkes, Winter’s Bone

The Academy loves when big name actors lose massive amounts of weight for their role, as if that’s the only way to show true dedication, and that’s exactly what Christian Bale did (for the second time in his career). Truth be told, Bale did a great job in David O. Russell’s The Fighter, it’s hard to imagine the film without him. But the best performance in this category goes to a different nominee who played a meth-addict; John Hawkes for Winter’s Bone. Here Hawkes makes the most of his limited screen time and perfectly counterbalancing the then little-known Jennifer Lawrence as her drugged up uncle. Hawkes embodies the part of the conflicted antihero with his natural scrappy grit, making him the perfect fit for the role. After picking up the win during the Independent Spirit Awards for this role, there were high hopes Hawkes would also win his first Oscar too. But to this day we’re still waiting for that to happen. [Dustin]

Best Actress

Who Won – Natalie Portman, Black Swan
Who Should’ve Won – Michelle Williams, Blue Valentine

I can’t think of a more heartbreaking performance from 2010 than Michelle Williams in Blue Valentine, it’s one of the best lead actress performances of the decade so far and right up there with Anne Dorval (Mommy), Cate Blanchett (Blue Jasmine), Marion Cotillard (Two Days, One Night) and so many others. Natalie Portman who won this year for Black Swan was incredible in that film, arguably the best she’s ever been, and that certainly made the loss for Williams easier to understand. But still as great as Portman is and she is great, Williams is just on another level with a performance full of tragic and beautiful moments (sometimes seconds apart) as a woman caught in the dissolution of her marriage. [Ryan]

Best Actor

Who Won – Colin Firth, The King’s Speech
Who Should’ve Won – James Franco, 127 Hours

Are you serious? James Franco plays a man who literally gets trapped between a rock and a hard place for 127 hours in agonizing pain and resorts to an unthinkable escape, and yet the Award goes to the portrayal of a British King with a speech impediment? Franco spent the entire film by himself, in a single setting, and wasn’t even able to move, yet his relentless determination proves the power of the human condition, inspiring everyone who watched it. In doing so, Franco demonstrated his ability to perform in a more serious role and earned an Independent Spirit Award in the process. The King’s Speech is one of those films that people forget about several years later, and while Colin Firth’s performance was sufficient, Franco’s is one that sticks with you over the years. [Dustin]

Best Director

Who Won – Tom Hooper, The King’s Speech
Who Should’ve Won – David Fincher, The Social Network

The Social Network isn’t David Fincher’s best work, not by a long stretch, he’s at his best on films like Se7en and Zodiac. But still it’s impossible to call any of the other nominees this year more deserving than the calculated, precise and damn near perfect work on display from Fincher here; it’s almost insulting to award it to anyone else in fact. Still, Tom Hooper and The King’s Speech rode a wave of late-season awards success and pulled the rug right out from under Fincher. It’s not that Hooper’s a totally undeserving winner, although between The Damned United and The King’s Speech I began to sour on his style, it’s that he’s undeserving in 2011. Aaron Sorkin wrote a great script, Jesse Eisenberg gave a career-best performance, but it’s Fincher who is the true MVP of The Social Network bringing his procedural leanings, unique style and oddly strong sense of humor to this story about the beginnings of Facebook or what could just as accurately be called a story of friends, betrayals, and human nature. Fincher’s presence at the helm can’t be undersold and is the biggest reason why this film is or will be considered a masterpiece by many. [Ryan]

Best Picture

Who Won – The King’s Speech
Who Should’ve Won – The Social Network

The Academy Awards have a penchant for looking back at history with the films they awards their top honors. The King’s Speech fits that mold, an ostensibly feel-good project that depicts a bygone era through the experience of a King and his speech therapist. It’s a pleasant film that for one Weinstein-fueled reason or another turned into the foregone conclusion of 2011’s Best Picture race. In awarding The King’s Speech, the Academy snubbed several films that will be remembered as various auteurs’ defining works, notably David Fincher’s The Social Network. “The Facebook Movie,” as many people dubbed the movie, retains the cold precision of Fincher’s other works but fills its story with damaged egos and big money squabbling. The script from Aaron Sorkin (which won Best Adapted Screenplay this year) features dialog delivered at the pace of a screwball comedy, while somehow communicating the intricacies of computer programming and web strategy. The Social Network is a distinctly modern movie, and it captures the rebirth of America’s tech boom without the benefit of hindsight. But far beyond that it’s a compelling story about human behavior, and the value of relationship vs. power. [Zach]

On the subject of David Fincher’s disturbing, fascinating Gone Girl, there are a handful of things of which I am sure, and one thing of which I’m painfully unsure. I’m sure that the film is Fincher at his nastiest and most incisive. It’s a searing, cynical depiction of the ubiquitous media circus that poisons and deludes us daily. It’s an immaculately constructed whodunnit, plays host to some of the most haunting performances of the year, and makes a bold statement about marriage.

Or does it? This is where my uncertainty lies. What is the film saying about marriage, exactly? Is it an indictment on the institution itself? A scathing critique? An extreme, but fundamentally truthful depiction? A misogynist one? Is it saying anything at all?! This is all still rattling around inside my head (Mr. Fincher’s work often has that effect), but to be sure, what’s represented here is marriage (and humanity) at its most horrific.

The film opens and we see a close-up of a husband’s hand on his wife’s pretty head, stroking her beautiful blonde hair. It’s a happy image, but the violent images conjured by the husband’s words as he speaks of “unspooling her brain” to look for answers are a demented contrast. “What have we done to each other?” he quietly wonders in voiceover.

The man is Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck), a laid-off New York journalist who moved to North Carthage, Missouri with his author wife, Amy (Rosamund Pike), to be closer to his parents. One day, Nick comes home to find his wife missing and calls the police. There are signs of a struggle–a shattered glass table, some traces of blood–but nothing conclusive. In fact, something about the crime scene feels odd, though the police can’t put their finger on it.

As Nick gets engulfed in the media firestorm that erupts following Amy’s disappearance (she was the inspiration for her parents’ widely popular children’s book series “Amazing Amy”), we’re shown a series of flashbacks that chronicle the couple’s history before Amy vanished. They were smitten, at first awakening in each other the kind of lustful spontaneity that compels people to have sex in the back of a book store (a compulsion to which Nick and Amy gave in more than once). But as the years went on and they moved to Missouri, they began to drift out of sync. Sex was electric, now it’s routine. Conversations were stimulating, now they’re detached. Nick was supposed to have a job by now, and Amy wasn’t supposed to be so controlling. They expected so much more.

What propels Gone Girl and makes its 149 minutes fly by so quickly is its intricately designed murder-mystery plot, which is so brimming with unreliable narrators, red herrings, and revelations it’s dizzying. When you feel like you’ve got a solid grasp on the characters’ motivations and the facts surrounding Amy’s disappearance, the film throws you for a loop and kicks you in another direction. Gillian Flynn, who wrote the book on which the film is based and adapted it to screen, tells a story that’s entertaining, engrossing, and wickedly funny on the surface, but has a big steaming pile of dark social and psychological commentary bubbling underneath it all.

That brings us back to the thing about Gone Girl I can’t seem to un-stick from my brain: The film’s depiction of marriage. Nick and Amy’s descent from happy Manhattan sweethearts to resentful shells of themselves drowning in the muck of dreary, small-town married life is tragic and unsettling. When people’s hearts are betrayed and love is lost, we’re capable of dreadful, dreadful things. Is modern marriage a deadly trap we fall into that forces us to falsify our identities to please one another? I don’t believe so, but each issue faced by Nick and Amy is informed by indisputable truths about modern marriage. Perhaps there are no grand statements being made about marriage and Flynn’s merely mining our deepest marital fears for entertainment value, but some key moments of abuse (emotional and physical) feel frighteningly poignant.

The absurdity of media and its defamatory nature is conveyed most memorably by Fincher and cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth’s imagery: We see Nick wearing a strange smile as he poses for photographers in front of his wife’s “missing person” poster; We see him standing at the top of the stairs in his McMansion at night, flickers of camera flashes from the paparazzi outside piercing the darkness and lighting him up in a haunting, ghost-like manner. Every move, every smile, every subtle gesture Nick makes in the public eye is scrutinized, and he soon comes to realize that public perception defines him. Tyler Perry plays Nick’s hotshot lawyer, who further instills in him the importance of this philosophy.

Fincher’s unique gift is his ability to use environments to communicate specifically his characters’ state of mind. When they’re depressed, lost, or their spirit is decayed, he bathes them in nauseating, mustardy light that makes you want to take a shower. He goes to such great lengths to put us in the headspace of his characters that escape simply isn’t an option. The film’s editing is evocative as well, with the terrific opening credits sequence showing glimpses of locations around North Carthage, fading quickly to black a few beats before you’d expect. The timing feels strange and off-putting, signaling the creepiness that lies ahead. Technically, Fincher is at the top of his game here.

Take nothing away from his actors, though; Affleck and Pike’s performances are paramount. Affleck’s sensitivity in his turn as Nick is something of a revelation, and for him to disappear into the role so completely is pretty impressive, especially considering his high-profile celebrity status. Pike’s given a role that explores touchier territory and gets very, very slippery in the film’s final act, but she stays on her feet and finishes brilliantly. I won’t divulge much for fear of spoiling the experience, but it’d be fair to say she runs away with the movie.

But in a way, she’s also done a disservice. The most irksome aspect of the film is that, as a he said/she said marriage story, too much sympathy falls on the “he” side of things. The moral scale is tipped heavily in Nick’s direction, showing Amy in a considerably less favorable light. Almost every character in Gone Girl, man or woman, is a narcissistic, unlikable asshole, so at least there’s equity on that level. I do fear, though, that the film may inadvertently, unnecessarily perpetuate a misogynistic attitude toward women that makes me feel uncomfortable in the worst way, unlike the rest of the film, which makes me feel uncomfortable in the best way.

Gone Girl trailer

David Fincher‘s latest endeavor Gone Girl may be his coldest entry yet into a filmography already full of cold works. A deeply misanthropic, thrilling, unpredictable take on a missing person’s case and ensuing media storm that surrounds it.

Ben Affleck stars as Nick Dunne, whose wife Amy Dunne (Rosamund Pike, with a breakout performance) goes missing on their 5th wedding anniversary. The mystery of her sudden disappearance is compounded by the trail of breadcrumbs left in her absence, the sum of which only leads to more confusion as to her whereabouts. As the search for “Amazing Amy” intensifies, the spotlight turns to Nick Dunne when his character comes under scrutiny that leads others to question his innocence.

Each new detail adds a new turn to the story and this branch of the news media is always ready to pounce on the allegations. Fincher’s handling of the satirical elements is some of the most biting commentary in his career, and fills a largely disturbing film with hearty laughs. Missi Pyle plays news show host Ellen Abbott, a scandal-monger so infuriating she’ll make you miss Nancy Grace, a clear inspiration for her role.

Gillian Flynn adapted her own best-selling novel here into a terse, fast-paced screenplay. Gone Girl lives in the ethical grey areas that Fincher habitually explores, but thrives on its ability to show you new information and then illustrate how that revelation can be manipulated or not representative of the full truth. Gone Girl is a fully immersive procedural, and likely one of the most entertaining films of 2014. Fincher proves he is at the top of his game and in full command of his craft with Gone Girl.

Read our full Gone Girl review.

Summer 2014 is coming to a close, and on episode 2 of The Way Too Indiecast we take a look back at the best and worst movies of the summer as well as look ahead to our most anticipated films of the fall. From indie duds (The Sacrament) to arthouse studs (Boyhood), from mainstream cop-outs (The Expendables 3) to foreign knockouts (Snowpiercer), this summer has given us loads of highs and lows at the movie theater. The upcoming fall schedule boasts a wealth of films to get excited about, including the latest from David Fincher, Christopher Nolan, and Alejandro González Iñárittu. In addition to our summer and fall discussions, Bernard and Ananda go head-to-head in our brand new game, “Synopsis Scramble”.

Topics

• Synopsis Scramble (1:00)
• Best & Worst of Summer 2014 (8:15)
• Fall Preview (27:52)

Please subscribe to our podcast on iTunes and leave us some feedback. Also, don’t hesitate leave us a comment below if we missed a film that should’ve been included!

21st Century Discoveries is a feature dedicated to exploring great, underseen and/or underappreciated films released since 2000. The goal is to help readers discover new, challenging and exciting films from around the world worth seeking out.

For my second entry into this feature, I’m breaking my own rules. I’m focusing on a TV show instead of a film. But I might as well go against conventions with something so unconventional and cinematic. For those currently residing in the US, this might be the best show on TV you’ve never heard of. Read on to see why Utopia is such a fantastic series. And if you’re from the UK, or have region free capabilities, you can buy Series 1 on Blu-ray.

Before you begin reading, please take the time (if you can) to watch the opening scene of Utopia. Intrigued? Horrified? Read on to find out more.

Utopia‘s opening frames immediately establish it as a show unlike anything else on television. The show, created by Dennis Kelly and airing in the UK on Channel 4, shoots in 2.35:1. This isn’t the first time television played with aspect ratios beyond 16×9; comedies often experiment with changing their framing, like Chris Morris’ Jam or, more recently, Key & Peele. Sketch shows tend to get away with it because a sketch can operate as its own short film. Utopia is one of the only dramas to film entirely in Scope (exceptions: Borgen shot in 2.2:1, and House of Cards films in 2:1, a sort of happy middle ground between 16×9 and Scope).

And with the recent renaissance of television, one making people wonder how the line between film and television has all but vanished, Utopia might be the most cinematic show on television. It doesn’t boil down to just the use of a wider aspect ratio either. The set design, compositions, use of colour and sound all have a quality to them that’s so offbeat and original in its execution it feels so out of step with current TV trends. I can safely say Utopia is a TV show where, if someone played it in cinemas, I wouldn’t notice it was made for television.

But let’s get to the meat of the show before delving further into its aesthetic pleasures. Utopia opens with two men, Arby (Neil Maskell) and Lee (Paul Ready) walking into a comic book store and murder everyone inside. They’re looking for two things: a woman named Jessica Hyde (“Where is Jessica Hyde?” became the show’s catchphrase last year), and a manuscript for the sequel to graphic novel The Utopia Experiments. In the show’s universe the comic has a cult following, with people claiming its drawings have prophecies and secrets hidden within them. The author, Philip Carvel, was a paranoid schizophrenic who wrote the book while locked up in an insane asylum. He killed himself before finishing the sequel, and now a manuscript of his second book has turned up.

That manuscript is now in the hands of four obsessive fans of The Utopia Experiments: Becky (Alexandra Roach), a medicine student suffering from a rare, degenerative disease; Ian (Nathan Stewart-Jarrett), a lowly IT consultant; Wilson (Adeel Akhtar), a paranoid conspiracy theorist; and Grant (Oliver Woollford), a young and deceptively smart pre-teen. They find out the hard way that The Utopia Experiments actually does have secrets hidden within its pages, as Arby and Lee come hunting for them. Philip Carvel was involved with a vast conspiracy called The Network before losing his mind, and the pages of his manuscript contain vital information that will help The Network pull off their massive, decades in the making project.

While Becky, Ian, Wilson and Grant’s run for their lives to avoid getting murdered by The Network, Utopia also focuses on an entirely different storyline. Government worker Michael Dugdale (Paul Higgins) gets sucked into the conspiracy when he`s blackmailed into complete a mission for them. Both storylines in the show end up combining to provide a complete picture of The Network and its sinister intentions. The four characters on the run provide a bottom-up view, while Dugdale offers a glimpse into the higher levels of the conspiracy.

What distinguishes Utopia from other TV shows is its tone. The world of Utopia is one of death and brutality. Early on in the series one character says “There are no sides. Just people who help you and people who don’t.” The show quickly establishes that, whether you help or not, you’re most likely going to end up killed. Think of the show’s universe as a Cormac McCarthy novel filtered through a pop art lens. For The Network, their secretive project is so vital to them they would be willing to do anything in order to ensure its success. For everyone trying to escape their clutches, the only way to ensure their own safety is to silence anyone with the ability to threaten their chances of survival. It’s the ends justifying the means taken to an extreme level, and Utopia goes out of its way to show nothing is off-limits. Spoilers: the opening to episode 3, while a great example of what the show excels at, caused controversy in the UK considering it aired just over a month after Sandy Hook.

Don’t think Utopia is nothing but bleakness, though. The show juxtaposes its horrific nature with stunning visuals, employing a hyperrealistic look. Colours are oversaturated to the point where they vibrantly pop off the screen; colours and framing are deliberately made to resemble comic book panels. Cinematographer Ole Bratt Birkeland consistently provides some of the best visuals on TV right now. Director Marc Munden, handling the series’ first three episodes (Wayne Che Yip & Alex Garcia Lopez handle the other three), directs on a level that feels unprecedented compared to TV’s top prestige shows. Every shot looks coloured in by hand, and the exaggerative style offsets the dark, brutal content shown every week. The show also manages to be quite funny too. Dennis Kelly has one hell of a twisted sense of humour, and there are plenty of moments in Utopia that inspire a lot of inappropriate laughter. It all combines together to form a truly bizarre, singular viewing experience.

What really cements the unsettling atmosphere of the show is Cristobal Tapia de Veer’s score. The composer was given free rein to come up with a sound for the program, and his results are completely off the wall. In an interview de Veer said he used human bones as instruments during his recording sessions because of Utopia‘s level of death and violence in the story. He also used a trutrukra he played in the subway and a dried piece of rhino feces as instruments. It’s a wildly experimental score, and the usage of warped vocal samples throughout, especially the sounds of people breathing, make it the most unforgettable part of the series.

With television undergoing a sort of transitional period, Utopia feels exciting because it explores an area TV dramas haven’t really touched on yet: experimentation. The cinematic visuals and unorthodox score give off the impression of Channel 4 allowing complete creative control and commitment to the makers of Utopia. The show, whose second series is being unceremoniously dumped by Channel 4 right now, already has one major fan. David Fincher is teaming with HBO to adapt Utopia for US audiences. Hopefully Fincher will fight for the distinctive qualities of Dennis Kelly’s work, since it’d be hard to imagine Utopia having the same impact if it doesn’t shoot in Scope. One major downside of Fincher’s adaptation is that US audiences probably won’t get a chance to see one of the best shows currently on TV. It’s hard to tell what the future of television will hold, but a show like Utopia makes it feel like the future is already here.

Always a master at handling ominous material, 20th Century Fox has released a new trailer for David Fincher’s Gone Girl.

The highly anticipated novel adaptation stars Ben Affleck and Rosamund Pike as Nick and Amy Dunne, a married couple whose personal life and history becomes public fodder when Amy goes missing the day of their wedding anniversary. As the primary suspect Nick is under extreme scrutiny from the press and the police investigating her disappearance. The trailer finally hints at what readers of the book know, much of the story is told through Amy’s journal entries and it appears that Fincher is using narration to move the mystery along.

Fincher is a proven expert when it comes to dubious characters (we’re looking at you Frank Underwood) and we can’t wait to see the film when it hits theaters on October 3rd.

Watch trailer for Gone Girl

Gone Girl is the film adaptation of the Gillian Flynn best seller of the same name. The first official trailer for the film released earlier this week. Gone Girl stars Ben Affleck as Nick, who on his 5th wedding anniversary finds his wife Amy has gone missing from their home. As the search for Amy begins, a case of suspected murder is building as lies and deceit come to the fore and fingers gradually point to beloved husband Nick. This all leads to that burgeoning question: is he guilty or innocent? With David Fincher at the helm of this thriller set to hit theatres on October 3rd, Gone Girl looks to have viewers gripping their seats in suspense.

Watch Gone Girl trailer

Taking a cue from Garfield Minus Garfield, special effects artist Richard Trammell’s digital removal of Tyler Durden from a classic Fight Club scene has been creeping us out since he released the clip last week. Now, Trammell’s followed it up with an eerie version of a scene from The Shining between Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson) and Overlook Hotel caretaker Delbert Grady (Phillip Stone), with Grady scrubbed out á la Durden.

The effect is disturbing and kinda cool in the Fight Club clip, but the removal of Grady makes Nicholson’s already insanely nutty performance even spookier. Unlike the Durden clip, Trammell leaves Grady’s dialog audible, saying that the character’s existence is “a bit murkier” than Durden’s.

Movies on my wish list for the “Trammell Treatment”: The Sixth Sense, A Beautiful Mind, Angels in the Outfield, The Lion King, Swimming Pool, The Machinist, Play it Again Sam

Check out Trammell’s Vimeo page.

The Shining minus Delbert Grady from Richard Trammell

Fight Club minus Tyler Durden from Richard Trammell.

Ricky Gervais hosted the 68th Golden Globe Awards this year. Even though The King’s Speech had the most nominations with seven, it was rather unsurprising that The Social Network ended up with the most of the film awards that included; Best Picture, Best Screenplay, Best Director, Best Original Score. I was very happy to see Natalie Portman won Best Actress in Motion Picture Drama, it was very well deserved. Glee had the most awards for TV with three total wins. I was happy to see Jim Parsons win Best Actor in a TV comedy or musical. Not only do I enjoy The Big Bang Theory but it was nice to see someone in a comedy or musical get some respect other than Glee. Here is the full list of winners:

FILM

Best Motion Picture – Drama:
The Social Network

Best Motion Picture – Comedy or Musical:
The Kids Are All Right

Best Director:
David Fincher, The Social Network

Best Actress – Drama:
Natalie Portman, Black Swan

Best Actor – Drama:
Colin Firth, The King’s Speech

Best Actress – Comedy or Musical:
Annette Bening, The Kids Are All Right

Best Actor – Comedy or Musical:
Paul Giamatti, Barney’s Version

Best Supporting Actress:
Melissa Leo, The Fighter

Best Supporting Actor:
Christian Bale, The Fighter

Best Foreign Language Film:
In A Better World

Best Screenplay – Motion Picture:
Aaron Sorkin, The Social Network

Best Original Score – Motion Picture:
Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, The Social Network

Best Animated Feature Film:
Toy Story 3

Best Original Song – Motion Picture:
“You Haven’t Seen The Last Of Me”, Burlesque

Cecil B. DeMille Award:
Robert De Niro

TV

Best Drama Series:
Boardwalk Empire

Best Comedy Or Musical:
Glee

Best TV Movie/Miniseries:
Carlos

Best Actress – Drama:
Katey Sagal, Sons of Anarchy

Best Actor – Drama:
Steve Buscemi, Boardwalk Empire

Best Actress – Comedy or Musical:
Laura Linney, The Big C

Best Actor – Comedy or Musical:
Jim Parsons, The Big Bang Theory

Best Actress – TV Movie/Miniseries:
Claire Danes, Temple Grandin

Best Actor – TV Movie/Miniseries:
Al Pacino, You Don’t Know Jack

Best Supporting Actress – TV Series:
Jane Lynch, Glee

Best Supporting Actor – TV Series:
Chris Colfer, Glee