why are 'british' films shit?

- more interesting than the boring Telegraph list -

Fopp in the UK have been selling off DVDs from this enormous list of Brit film obscurities for £3 a go -

http://networkonair.com/shop/103-the-british-film

I have been buying, not so far watching very much. Among the highlights - The Cracksman (Charlie Drake comedy directed by Peter Graham Scott, who also directed Children of the Stones); French Dressing (Ken Russell's first film, additional dialogue by Johnny Speight); She'll Have to Go (Bob Monkhouse meets Anna Karina, from Hammer cinematographer Jack Asher); Slayground (Richard Stark adaptation with Mel Smith, Billie Whitelaw and Peter Coyote); Spanish Fly (Leslie Phillips and Terry-Thomas together in one extremely tawdry softcore comedy); S.P.Y.S (UK-funded M*A*S*H rip-off w/ Gould and Sutherland - made by Empire Strikes Back director Irvin Kershner); The Terrornauts (Amicus SF cheapie w/ Charles Hawtrey, screenplay by John Brunner!)

I didn't know there was a Slayground film. That's one of the best Richard Starks.

Yeah, Network is kinda daunting, they release so much stuff and little of it has a reputation outside of very small niches.

Enjoyed All The Way Up, an early 70's social climber comedy with Warren Mitchell.

She'll Have to Go (Bob Monkhouse meets Anna Karina, from Hammer cinematographer Jack Asher)

lol what

I don't give Network as much custom as I'd like but I'm glad they're doing their thing

I wrote a thing on 'Beast' and tried to do something about what happens in British films in general, and... yeah, why does it always seem as if nothing is happening in British film? I mean, a lot of films are coming out each year, and they definitely have things in common, but it just never seems as if there's any excitement surrounding British film. Compare it to music, and it's remarkable.

I realized I could say the same thing about British literature, btw.

Dunkirk and Paddington Bear not enough for you?

Nothing wrong with Paddington.

the honest answer is that most uk filmmaking talent works in tv which, in spite of everything and regardless of what Tom D is about to say, is still pretty incredible in terms of volume and quality of output.

it's very sad that most of the younger generation of british filmmakers have shifted focus to the US. Lynn Ramsay, Andrew Haigh, Andrea Arnold. Steve McQueen is a shit filmmaker but him too, I guess.

was the last Ben Wheatley thing set in the US?

yes, but he'll be back

although iirc his next thing is also us-based

anyway there's loads of hype-worthy uk cinema

Did anyone see Apostasy? It looked excellent but only played here while I was away.

that was a debut too - so there's that and God's Own Country, Lady Macbeth and I am Not a Witch (haven't seen that one yet) all highly-regarded debuts.

I did its good in the sense that most things as made by bbc films is good. But there's also a lack. Xp

I've only seen God's Own Country and I am Not a Witch, but if that's the best new things that are happening, then I'd say it underlines my point. They're good to very good, but they aren't really exciting. There's always loads of highly-regarded debuts, and 'hype-worthy' films, but it's also never amazing. It's solid but it's hard to get excited about.

Not amazing to you maybe

I mean sure they're no Toni Erdmann but very few films are. I Am Not A Witch is an absolutely insanely brilliant debut imo

Meh. It's good but feels like something that has been done before.

always good to set a nebulously impossible bar then watch stuff not meet it.

I've got I think seven debut films on my 2017 ballot that passes that bar.

I am Not a Witch is really good but it's aesthetically fairly ordinary arthouse style without a lot of surprises.

i'm not defending any particular movie here but i srsly distrust any aesthetic with "novelty" central to its values and wondered if you could make clearer what you think "amazing" or "exciting" means

there's an irony here when you argue with imago cos i think both of you value "the new" pretty highly

spooky magic realist witchcraft tone poem meets genuinely hilarious zambian corruption farce, you bet nothing like that's been done before

although in saying that I'm reminded of Arabian Nights which was another recent favourite. maybe surreal political allegory is my thing idk

was asking Fred but yeah thanks for answering imago. one of my big problems with novelty is that "nothing like that's been done" breaks down to "i'm not aware of other things like this" at some point, in any sphere.

and that's before we get to "sure, but was it worth doing?"

what do people like about ben wheatley?

first 3 or 4 movies were nicely opaque/wyrd. he might've jumped the shark now tho.

-_-

Still rate Kill List as just about the best British horror movie of the last X years, but High Rise - so so bad - pointed to the limits of his (and Amy Jump's) abilities. Don't think making American-set films will help him, either.

high rise...madly overwrought retrofuturistic dystopian melodrama, last days of rome to portishead covering abba, feminist magick undercurrent rising to overwhelm, whole thing is basically a punk movie...the goddamn fall over the end credits...I mean sure you can call it bad or weirdly paced but it is compelling, fun, kitschy brilliance imo

Whether its good I don't know however I am not a witch sounds like a few things Sembene has done, as well a couple of African filmmakers.

(but mainly I like wheatley/jump because they made 'a field in england' which is a truly superior treatise on this little benighted nation)

xyzzzz feel free to recommend!

It's exactly like the plot of 'Xala'

think I've discussed this elsewhere but I can't remember a film that has disappointed me more than a field in england

A Field in England and Kill List are both superb. “Compelling” is the last word I’d use to describe High Rise but it does have some good images.

we also haven't mentioned joanna hogg's last two films yet, both of which i think fred likes? idk *shrugs* they're p great

I dare say there's an extent to which you can say ________ is making some really exciting films at the moment but i suspect all or nearly all of those countries are in east asia so i'm not sure why you'd single out britain as lacking excitement.

x-post: Haven't seen them. Really want to!

My favorite British film from the last few years - apart from the Paddingtons! - is probably Ben Rivers' 'The Sky Trembles and the World is Afraid and the Two Eyes are Not Brothers'.

And other countries that excites me: Denmark, Sweden, Iceland, Portugal, Romania (still), Italy, etc. Lots of countries make exciting things. Russia is probably the one big one where I feel as confused about how little is going on as with Britain.

This is a weird complaint (and lol @ listing Denmark, Sweden and Iceland). Britain just doesn't (odd filmmaker aside) embrace the sorts of aesthetics in places like Romania or Argentina or Iran or parts of East Asia, say. Of the current bunch I think Hogg probably engages with it (given her interest in Akerman) but I haven't seen her films.

What we come out with is stuff like Apostasy and God's Own Country, and they are fine debuts that speak to things locally. There probably is something to be said for the aesthetic of BBC Films, which is illustrated by this pair - they are accomplished, well-acted, with nuance in their treatment of subject and yet they lack a scene that pushes it over the line. But that isn't to say that the people involved won't do something really great in future.

Overall a bunch of filmmakers are making good stuff, it feels like they are supported. xp

Lady Macbeth perhaps has that quality you can't quite pin down. GOC has it at times, the way the story expands to say or show something broader, more poetic or more widely relevant than what is being explicitly addressed on screen.

Maybe, anyway!

Well, I guess that's as comprehensive an answer to the question as can be.

I do get a bit sad at the idea that there's something inherently exotic about modern experimental film aesthetics. Most films from Romania and Iran and East Asia is just as drab and conventional as everywhere else, in most countries it's just a couple of weirdoes. (And the traditional East Asian film nations has kinda declined recently, which iirc has to do with China's rise as a film nation crowding out local industries. The flipside to that is that China has made a lot of great films recently, with that Elephant Sitting Still being the latest example)

But if what you say is right, perhaps it's the film system in Britain that makes it more samey than should be? Does BBC perhaps have too much power? The reason Danish cinema is so great at the moment is due to a specific political prioritization of low-budget cinema which has led to a bunch of young directors getting the chance, resulting in festival winners like Winter Brothers, The Guilty and Holiday the last year. And they've probably killed that by giving the power over the purse back to the tv-stations, who don't care about that.

jed - agree that it isn't as straightforward with GOC, just loved the sequence of the main leads working the land and building their r/ship. I enjoyed Lady Macbeth enough, that was an unexpected adaptation of a story I really like.

I should read that.

I know most local films in those countries are purely conventional made for the market and we are looking at things that travel on the festival circuit. But it isn't just a couple of weirdoes. Like, quite a lot of Romanian films in the last decade or more by quite a few directors, enough for the bfi to recently have a whole month retro.

Can't comment on how UK film is funded rn but there is more of (massive generalisation alert) a realist tradition going on here. That isn't bad at all, there is variety to this, its just not what you might count as exciting. It used to be that a lot of the talent was snapped up by TV as well -- which totally scanned when I watched a lot of it -- but that view is not something I've re-visited recently.

Romania is the big miracle country, but that's still only four really great ones (Puiu, Porumboiu, Mungiu and now Jude) and they've been greatly helped by the fact that the local cinema distribution system is still, well, pretty fucked if I understand it correctly. It's not as if there's something in the water in Romania that makes them see things differently, and that Britain couldn't equally easily get back the adventurousness from the Greenaway/Jarman/Potter period.