Awards Tour: Fish Tank, Moon Win British Independent Film Awards

Bed Head on 12-7-2009 03:42 AM

Doesn't say much for the current state of British independent film then. (When such minor, modest films dominate an awards show.)

On second thought, I guess maybe it DOES say a lot, actually. Says the British indie scene is now, sadly, pretty much completely irrelevant.

Joe Utichi on 12-7-2009 03:51 AM

You'd declare that 12 months after Slumdog Millionaire swept the same awards while Moon, Fish Tank, An Education et al continue to make massive waves on an international stage? Wow. I'd say British independent cinema has never been healthier.

Gordon Franklin Terry Sr on 12-7-2009 04:51 AM

Shifting paradigms (or lenses) seem to be the underlying theme of the pair (MOON and FISHTANK).

In FISH TANK, Mia's schema (or view of the world) is turned upside-down by her mother taking in a new boyfriend.

In MOON, astronaut Sam Bell, is on a sole mission two hundred thirty eight thousand miles above Earth,

Sam's only means of communicating with Earth is through a computer system that seems to have purposefully injured him. Sam therefore cannot trust the computer system (smoothly voiced by KEVIN SPACEY) or the company that built it.
--

So, in MOON we have a British astronaut dealing with a robot bearing an American accent who he cannot trust.

and in FISH TANK, Mia--teenage daughter of a single mother--ends up sleeping with her mother's new boyfriend. The boyfriend breaks-up with Mia's mother. Mia finds-out that the boyfriend is married with a family of his own.

When you socially-contextualize both MOON and FISH TANK (as film-critics are supposed to do among other duties), it appears BRITAIN has a lot of trust issues its dealing with.

In MOON, Britain obviously does not trust communications over a long distance filtered through an AMERICAN voice.

And in FISH TANK, the girl--supposed to be under the authority of her mother's boyfriend--ends-up getting into bed with "the authority," thus becoming equal to the authority.

Then the teenage girl finds out that "the authority" was TOTALLY lying to both she and her mother. The teenage girl assumes role of "the authority" by kidnapping the boyfriends daughter and running away to WALES, ENGLAND of all places.

Both films (MOON and FISH TANK) embody the theme of BRITAIN sensing a need to emancipate itself from ruling authorities (FISH TANK) and prevailing social norms (MOON).

---but this is ROTTEN TOMATOES
. . . so: Both movies "suck," AWARDS "suck", Cinema is "hopeless" is what I am supposed to say
in order to fit in with the social norms of ROTTEN TOMATOES .

Joe Utichi on 12-7-2009 04:55 AM

Moon played to rapturous audiences in Sundance, Tribeca and Sitges, while Fish Tank won an award at Cannes and played Toronto too. And Slumdog's 'fleeting' success propelled a $15m movie to a worldwide gross of $362m, backlash or not.

The British independent scene might be irrelevant to you, but I don't think there's an ounce of evidence to suggest it's not one of the exciting industries in the world right now.

JUDGE DREDD on 12-7-2009 07:01 AM

Have not seen FishTank. But MOON was one of my favorite films of 2009. Great film that didnt rely on overuse of cgi, or spectacle to please its audience. And Sam Rockwell deserves an oscar for his amazing acting in this, playing 2 versions of himself like that, and interacting with his other self was totally believable, and moving. I never really give a crap about the oscars, but he deserves on here.
MOON looks great on bluray too.

jokerboy1991 on 12-7-2009 07:41 AM

Moon, An Education, and Fish Tank are all great. People who dismiss British Independent Cinema obviously don't seen enough of their films to make a fair judgment- that even includes me since I dont see a whole lot of British Cinema but I can say Moon, An Education, and Fish Tank are 3 of the best movies of the year. And Bronson also features one of the top performances of the year from a really good movie. Great year for Brit Cinema!

jokerboy1991 on 12-7-2009 07:42 AM

Oh and In The Loop was also great, pretty hilarious.

Bed Head on 12-7-2009 08:56 AM

Okay! I'll try to state this as clearly and succinctly as possible. (Or at least using less words than Gordon.)

Mike Leigh is, imo, the greatest living filmmaker. And it isn't particularly close. However, I still can't (realistically) state that he is as "relevant" as a Scorsese or an Eastwood since so few people have actually seen "All or Nothing", "Naked", "Happy-Go-Lucky", etc. (And only really "Secrets & Lies" even received much notice from the Academy.)

Now, having said that ... no, I don't think "Moon" is a particularly important film. And even "An Education" (though very good) would still be considered inferior to "About a Boy", for instance.

BTW, jokerboy, may I ask how you've seen "Fish Tank"? I was under the impression it hadn't opened yet in the "colonies"?

BLaCKWoLF on 12-7-2009 10:35 PM

Umm I am not entirely sure if I should join this argument or not, but I was just wondering isnt there a difference between films that are well made, well acted and well written yet unsuccessful at the B.O. and films that are extremely successful at the B.O yet are not as well written, acted or as well made?

I thought the original argument was about the 'quality' of the movies, not there B.O. success. I havent been fortunate enough to see Fish Tank, An Education and some of the other aforementioned movies but I have seen Moon and imo I thought it was an amazing movie, regardless of its appeal to the general public.

Coach McGuirk on 12-7-2009 10:58 PM

My God, is Bed Head really this dense? You might possibly have the worst taste ever. What movies do you like?

Moon was amazing and deserves an Oscar nomination for Best Film, Best Actor, and Best Director (at the very least the former two).

BLaCKWoLF on 12-7-2009 11:27 PM

Correction to my previous posting - I thought the original argument was about the 'quality' of the movies, not their B.O. success*.

BLaCKWoLF on 12-8-2009 12:36 AM

I kind of understand the point you are trying to make about the relevance of some movies, but I think that myself and the others here are just saying that a movie can be relevant in more ways than just being financially successful and being well known in popular culture.

The point you made about the nominees and winners of Academy Awards is and always (as I am sure you know) a strong point of contention with both 'avid' film-loving people and the general public because both groups believe that the wrong movies have received recognition and are not a fair or accurate representation of the movies that were the best, most influential or biggest movies of their respective year. If you were to look at the winner of the Academy Award for Best Picture of the last few years, many of them received lots of exposure and some even did exceptionally well financially or at the B.O. However I am sure you have noticed that some of the nominees from previous years have barely had any success at the B.O. at all yet come pretty close and some even receiving some of the Awards that they were nominated for.