This is England

Okay so last weeks screen This is England was a really nice surprise watch.

The film by Shane Meadows (2006) was a look into British realism such as films from the French new wave 400 Blows. This was very much its British cousin in every sense.

The film itself rotated around a young boy Shaun, not a very much liked boy at his local school. Shaun almost sliding into isolation after his father being killed in the Falklands war is picked up by a local group of children who take him under his wing.
Not at first entirely fitting in at first but eventually becoming as thick as thieves with these bandits of misfits themselves.

All is golden, the band of misfits have their fun by generally doing what they want and going where the wind takes them, until the status quo is suddenly and dramtically changed with the return of Combo played by Stephen Graham.

Things are literally turned on their heads when Combo returns from a prison stretch. He returns with a radical ideology of how Britain is being over run with immigrants and people of colour. The fun loving group are split down the middle as they are forced to question their morals and values as Combo makes them decide what team they are playing for.

Shaun is quilted into banding up with Combo and his group of thugs, he is led down a road that eventually shows him the true volatile nature of Combo and his ideology.

The film was fantastic from start to finish, it was funny, good hearted and also had a very real, very hard hitting under-running plot. It gave enough relief in just the right amounts in just the right places through out the film. Even with the film tackling racism and such we were never taken to far down this bleak road with out the pressure cap being released a few times.

This is a mistake I feel these types of film seem to make and well its a mistake. Yes you are setting out to make a hard hitting film that forces a culture or group of people to view itself in the mirror. Yes you want to raise some very valid points and such but making the audience suffer to much by being too bleak all the time doesn't work. We as an audience are at first effected by this but as soon as it just becomes a situation of and this sounds very harsh but it becomes almost like "I just don't care anymore, this is too much"

What this is England done very well is mix in with its very hard hitting and bleak plot was comical relief moments and light hearted tone. This means when we are faced with characters having to make difficult decisions or a moral value being thrown at you, it works all that more because we are still engaged and connected with the film. Films that are bleak, bleak and more bleakness are just too much to watch. Every time I watch a film like that I can just picture a man with a really big axe cutting the connection with the film and the audience.

Overall I thought the plot was engaging and dare I say it fun at times, every character were real and most of them likeable. The unlikable characters were intentionally unlikeable which really did add a nice dynamic to the piece. It was a surprise to me how much I liked this film. I have to say the title This is England when I heard it the scottish blood in me did begin to boil somewhat. I thought I was going to be hit with English values and such, it never really made a big deal of England, it was more Britain in general. The title did put me off watching it before so maybe a bad title decision...maybe not for me to judge really.

The Road

So another post-apocalyptic film release, now not saying I'm not a fan of these style of films, but recently it just seems like an excuse to throw is some sweeping CG shots.

From just even looking at the trailer for 'The Road' directed by John Hillcoat is was obvious this was something that wasn't going to follow this trend. Yes we get the odd CG shot to establish they are living in this type of world but the rest really is done by character depth and the cinematography of the film.

Now the basis of the story is a boy and his 'papa' on the road trying to survive in a dying world. They can trust no one apart from themselves as this world has turned most people into cannibals and thieves.

I think from about ten minutes into the film I was just amazed at how amazing this film really was, we had barely started on the journey in the film and the characters felt real with plenty of depth and well the plot felt raw and real. The story was so self contained around these two characters but as a member of the audience I never felt bored or felt like I needed more from this film. Yes it did seem odd that they came across very few refugee's at times but that is just being extremely picky.

I felt the cinematography of this film did make this film what it is, watching it you just felt cold. I felt like jumping into a hot bath at the end of the film. The bland muddy colours with the constant grey skies which gradually got darker and darker over time really did add that extra dimension to this film. If it had just been father and son traveling down this road with blue skies and the sun on their faces, well lets jut not even go there.

This film was a film I had to build myself up to go and see, from what other people said about it destroying them emotionally. I could never find a day were in I was ready to be taken apart in such a manner. Who really wants to be put in a downer after a day at university or work? Not me to be sure.

Me and Paul just decided to go for it in the end, and what I can say is yes its a very bleak no relief style of film. But its very strange although its bleak from start to finish we are never really taken to that level of shear emotional destruction. You could argue we are at times in the movie taken to this level, but its very fast at taking us back to normal bleak-ness we as the audience are never made to suffer too long at any great length. This adds the tension the film has done so very well, if it was just scene after scene of them being in danger the risk well wears off on us. We become desensitised that we can just sit back and know they are going to be fine, the fact this film only puts them into real pearl a few times makes this tension work so much more effectively.

Some might say this is a bad thing? no is the answer. Then all you are left with is a film obviously trying to hard and it becomes one of those films you look at and think, they only made this film to scoop a few awards. The story of just these two characters living day by day is enough, its real and helps you connect alot more with them, its not all 'oh the drama' in every second scene.

Its believable and well down right brilliance, it really makes 'The book of The Bible...sorry Eli' have I just ruined that for you? oh wells! Don't throw your religious propaganda film at me in a convert manner!

Anyways! back to the point, a brilliant film with some really award winning performances put into it, a plot that rings true with no obvious flaws to it. Well they had to fund the movie some how, they wrote in the coke placement as well as anyone could really.

I think the characters of the father and son really did just feed of one another, I loved the little touches such as the little boy wearing his mothers hat. Its just the little things like this that made this film what it is. They felt real and you really did feel empathy for the father and how he constantly needs to be on the ball to look after his son. One mistake and they are done for, you really do get a sense for this in his performance. You really did feel like he has been looking after this boy for a number of years and has had to protect him from this world on more than one occasion. Yes the little boys 'weeping' does become rather irritating and times, but only very rarely.

Now flaws...After walking away knowing I had seen an amazing picture, I did feel somewhat empty in the fact that I didn't really feel like I had been taken on a big enough journey. We know they are heading to the cost but we only see the map once. You never really get a sense of were they are really heading to at any one time. They are constantly on the move but, well I just didn't get that entire feeling of being on a journey.

This was my only real problem with the film. Not a real good sense of film geography during this movie, I felt I needed to know more where they were and how far away from the coast they were, so in those moments of pearl and such you can get extra feeling of 'But their so close!' This can be over looked just from the rest of the film being something really special, now theres a word I haven't used to describe a film before. Special?

Watch it, see for youself how cinema should be made. I counted all of about 3/4 CG shots in the entire movie and it felt more like the end of the world than any post-apocalyptic move I have ever seen by a mile...and a half...and three quarters.

The Snow is gone people!

The snow is gone and I am loving it personally, being able to venture out into town or the Academy with out tip toeing the whole way there because the council doesn't understand the concept of not owning a car!

Anyways I could really blog about how much I dislike snow and how over-rated the whole thing is but we'd be here all day.

Were back from the holidays and already a week has shot by us, where are these weeks going? I feel like I'm going to wake up and be in 3rd year any day soon. Now theres a scary thought, actually having to go out and get a real job soon! No more student discount...thats not even worth thinking about, I might just faint. Anyways!

This week has been a mixture of getting back into the swing of things whilst at the same time being thrown alot of work to do. Its all rather worrying about thinking about starting either of the tasks that we have been set. I'm sure once I have started them both it will be fine, but as with all reports the hardest part is actually finding the time and confidence to actually start it.

We had all submitted our scripts to Richard the week before we started back and were awaiting the Skype phone call. As last time mines didn't work this was going to be new to me. I went along to Gavin's flat to use his computer/internet this time, the video had worked for Charlotte perfectly fine just before me, but for some reason it didn't for me. I'm not going to lie I didn't particularly shout for Gavin all that loudly when it didn't. The idea of being on 'display' would make me feel a little okward, having just the audio was fine, it was high enough quality to get by. It also made me feel alot more comfortable so I wasn't just sitting there saying 'yeah...yeah' to all Richards points. I actually found myself sticking up for a few points and explaining others alot better than in any other Richard tutorial.

Not in anyway saying I just wasn't taking on board what Richard was saying but I was able to explain points better, and well I did stick up for my ending. I will look at it and see if it can be explained better but its staying!

Zam was back for a full day of looking at realism in film. Zam's class always follows a general format of looking at a clip from a film then deconstructing it. This format I feel works very well and we all generally pitch in with what we think made that clip work and not work. I feel it gives a certain rhythm to the class that makes it feel alot more relaxed, theres nothing worse than just being talked to for a whole day.

As with all Zams classes I feel I always take away new good and valuable points from it. Maybe a whole day was a little much but if it was going to be a full day of any class I would prefer it to be a Zams class.



Now with Andy's and Ray's assignment I choose to go to the Mitchell Library to try and dig up some resources that could help. Such as autobiographies and the type. I was really shocked to find just how little film resources the Mitchell actually has, I would type in film and/or cinematography into the computer terminal and what little turned up was book that wasn't actually in the Mitchell.

Maybe I was doing it all wrong but the woman at the desk could only suggest looking at small area of the library, which only seemed to contain books written when the digital thing was happening. Books titles 'Digital and what it means for Film' were in abundance but they weren't of any value of and were seriously out-dated.

Looks like this is going to be an online research task, or well a little trip to a book shop is in order I think.


Well my feet really haven't touched the group this week and with re-drafting Richard's script and starting on other projects we have been set, sorry no film review in this post I need to get ready for work. I promise tomorrow I will blog my brains out on films films films!

Where the Wild Things Are

So a drive down to the far far away Cineworld down in that unpleasant looking place of town to see 'Where the Wild Things Are' I've only seen the trailer a few times and have never read the book or knew there was a book until recently so I really didn't have any real perception of what the film was going to be like, apart from everything filmed through a orange tinted filter of course.

A film directer by Spike Jonze and starring Max Records as the little boy Max

The film kicked off and it was fairly certain that it wasn't going to be a children's film in the slightest. It definitely had dark undertones from the off-set. It never really did anything to relieve this in anyway, it kept spiralling down and down this dark path. This is where I would write what the film is about...but from walking away from the film just a short time ago, I'm still fairly unsure what it was about.
There's a boy who is obviously an outcast and feels alienated in his life, he see's his mother as his only friend and person he feels safe around and who will always be there for him, and when someone comes into her life he feels pushed out and lashes out and retreats into a 'magical' land made up of really big hairy ... urmm things. They are too unhappy in life and turn to this young boy to fix everything and make them happy once more.

This might sound like I've contradicted myself and have explained the film. But no, not really. This is a really small part of the film, its established and pushed out the way in a very small amount of time. Its too quickly pushed away, you don't really get a sense of who this kid is, what are his flaws and why he is the way he is.

We are then rushed into a land made up of these cute 'monsters' that are equally as fractured in their lives. From here on out we are presented with a metaphor rapped in another metaphor. This is where it all gets really confusing, I did feel like it was trying to say something about the boy and his life. It was definitely trying to say something about everything, but I was sat their just really confused on what flaws the film was pointing out in whom or what?

These ... okay I'm going to call them ... 'fluff balls' turn to this young boy to fix their way of life and make them all happy. Was this him working out what his flaws are, is this a metaphor for him playing out what makes him unhappy? and how he can fix things? I'm not too sure, we are bombarded with these metaphors one after another that all just becomes too much. The film soon becomes heavy and sluggish from there onwards.

The only way I can really describe it is, a ball of tweed. It never really establishes a clear moving straight line in which to follow. The film seems to stray around in circles for moments then to throw a metaphor at you then to try and provoke some kind of emotion from a character being unhappy/hurt.

Your sat their not really knowing what to think about what is going on, this is what I kind of took from it. The kid who is so far retreated into his own little word, who still thinks he can solve things the children's way. By having play fights and getting together to build a fort - the metaphor being they will all be happy if they work together to build a magical place where anything can happen. But the kid is soon presented with the harsh reality of life, that things can't be sorted out this way and you can't just build a magical place and everything will automatically be okay.



Yes...no? Still not sure, another thing to point out is just the relentless heavy emotional downturns the audience is presented with. Its just too much to watch sometimes, you are sat their eventually just waiting for things to go wrong...and they always do. For the plot to become this predictable combined with the sucker punches of heavy emotional downturns just becomes a little over powering.

I just felt the characters were lost on me, the film never delves to much into there characters and what makes them, them. So I never felt empathy or felt attached to anyone in the film at all. We as an audience are well, taken a little for gradated. We are left with to many blank spots to fill in for ourselves in the end, which really does ask far too much of the audience.

I feel its even confused on who its audience were, its definitely not a children's film, nor an adult film. Somewhere in-between? I'd still argue not really. Its more a film aimed at style, what style of film you are into really depends on wether you will like this film or not. If you were brought up reading fairy tales and lots of adventure stories then you will 'get' this film, for all the rest of us its just something we just won't understand. Almost like buying your granddad an i-Pod, ah see another metaphor.

But even saying this, I really liked the film 'The Fall' which is a sweeping epic set in a child's imaginations, and I totally bought into it because it didn't leave you behind at any point. It would give clear markers to where we were and what the metaphor was.

Over all, nice looking colourful film let down by a lack of a forward moving clear narrative which just confuses itself and the audience in the end. 'Sorry what?...can you speak a little louder I didn't quite catch what you are saying?' Simply the film needed to speak a little louder and clearer. I walked away from this film not really feeling any closure from anything it was trying to say or from the characters introduced. The film didn't resolve anything really in the end, which felt really disappointing as a member of the audience. In the end it almost is a children's film, in the sense it starts things but never really finishes them.

I think the fact I've edited this post about 10 times shows how unsure I still feel about this film

400 Blows

Having seen a lot of 'classical' films recently, I didn't really feel this would raise the bar all too much. All I can say is yes Andy it really is a masterpiece.

It first occurred to me almost half way through the movie how much I was enjoying it because it had taken me that long to come out of it. I was so submerged in the movie the genre and the style of it that it totally captivated me. Its that principle of you know you have a good movie when the audience aren't aware they are watching one.

I'll explain what took me out of the movie later on in the post. But for now I'll explain what I liked about this film.

From watching so many 'dull' and 'tedious' black & White and classical movies recently, I really did have something to compare this movie to. Yes it wouldn't stand up to modern standards as it does loose its drive somewhat during the movie but placing it in its time it really is an astounding piece of film.

What stood out was its cinematography, it never felt flat like a lot of other old movies we have watched recently. The hand held camera work really did help this movie set a new bench mark for movies. It all felt so smooth in the way it handled itself, shots felt fluid and all connected well with one another. I was never taken out the movie by cutting the extreme close ups like the Russian Revolution films seemed to all so adore.

Most importantly the main character was likeable for the most part, he really did feel like a real living person and delivered this through an amazing performance from start to finish. I did feel at points that the movie was stretching itself on how it could more develop and build on this character from showing us his day to day life. This is where I first sat back and realised I was watching a movie again. This is from having been brought up with modern film cuts, It wasn't a bad thing it was just a thought that occurred to me that took me out of the movie itself.

The character I feel can be compared to 'Into the Wild' in the sense that you do feel sympathy for the parents as they aren't really do all to much wrong to deserve what their child does in return. This is another fault I could pick at, but you know. I don't want to, its such a lovely charming movie that really does pull you into this young boys life that I can accept this small fact that occurred to me.

The film was essentially a snap shot of this boys life, its a strand that follows him during a short period of his life. It's not like most other films as it doesn't really to seem to have an active goal or an obvious inciting incident. It's more a story of this boys life, we are almost following him from day to day. This is were it does loose some drive as I think from a modern audience prospective we are constantly expecting something to happen, like one of his parents to get run over and for him to relise what he has. This never happens or something similar, so you can say it does loose drive from this.

If you look at the film for what it is at heart, you see that it would have lost its charm if something like this was to happen. Its about this boy and his life, his faults and his misgivings. This is all we are interested in.

I really did enjoy watching this movie and hope what we watch next can follow its standard, as it really did set the standards in the first place.

So what REALLY scares us?

This is a thought that I have been thinking a lot about recently when thinking of ideas and directions to take my script in. What really makes us sit on the edge of our seats? what makes us jump out of them? The more I thought about it the more it became apparent that its sound design. With out it, we would be looking blankly at the screen not really all to bothered as to who is being mutilated or who is being chased.

From looking at a number of scary films recently as research I found that the tension was always built by this ticking clock Zam referred too. It's that dripping of tap water in a darkened room combined with the unsettling score that makes us feel so uneasy. Its that moment during the night when you hear a door creak open that terrifies us, we suddenly start thinking what was that? What caused that? its the not knowing that really gets to us.

I looked back on a number of films on how they created tension, and I undoubtably looked at 'Saving Private Ryan' That stair well scene were the two soldiers are fighting it away up the stairs and we cut to the lone scared soldier which is his only salvation too scared to move. A lot of different things makes this scene unsettling to watch, but when I looked closer what made it unsettling when we cut to the stair well was again sound. It was hearing them scuffling about up the stairs, those raw human sounds of distress. Again it occurred to me, it's what we were hearing that was making us as an audience sit on the edge of our seats.

It has never until now that I have looked back on horror movies that it doesn't really matter if its a bunch of 'cute aliens' such as in 'Encounters from a Third Kind' You can make almost anything terrifying if you just get the eery sound design and not show the audience for aslong as possible what is lurking in the dark. Its this making the audience suffer for aslong as possible that really does make classic horror pieces.

To look at a more modern example, we must only look as far as the cinema. Paranormal Activity which is sitting at number one in the box office in America. Something that clearly scares the vast amount of people who go an watch it, I know this more than any as I see it from working in the cinema. It was really interesting to sit back and watch the audience and see what scared them. It was clear that it was the unbearable tension of waiting for something to happen, that making the audience suffer for aslong as possible then suddenly throw in that bang. This is what scared people, a slamming door isn't scary in the slightest. Yet because they were forced to wait for it, because they knew something was coming, because it made them wait for aslong as possible this is what scared them.

As essentially this film is just made up of sound design we never see the monster. Every director and screenwriter should take notes from this film, as soon as you show the audience what they are supposed to me afraid of you instantly loose the vast amount of tension you can build.

As until recently I have really shunned sound as a profession, I still don't want to do it...ever. But I have gained so much respect for sound design recently. By sitting back and really thinking why something scares me in a movie, 95% of the time it was that principle of waiting for something to happen combined with the sound design that did it at the end.

This is why I feel horror sequels just don't work, we have been shown what we are supposed to be afraid off, and as soon as we can sit back and say 'I know whats in the dark' it suddenly looses its edge. This is why Aliens and the like of 'The Decent part two' just don't work as horror pieces.

From all this I will really sit back and take heed of sound and tension whilst writing my script for Richard. It's not so much the dark that scares us, as I assume we all sleep in the dark. It's those little sounds during the blanket of night time that terrifies us in the end.

And again

So this week so far has flown past with amazing speed, only one left to go until father christmas makes his yearly trip!

Well Monday I was off so it consisted off me sleeping intill a ridiculous time in the afternoon, sleep always seems to win over anything else. That oh I'll just have another 10 minutes, that false belief soon turns in too an hour...two hours. Oh wells enough ramblings from me about my screwed up sleeping patterns.

Tuesday we came in to watch a screening of 'Not Yet Rated' and documentary by Kirby Dick. He sets out to expose the American Ratings Board. He sets out to try and see what this secretive board is made up off, and what its real goals and morals are that they are stamping these films with.

A large chunk of the film is following him with two lesbian detectives to try and track down these mythical board raters, with the goal of seeing who they really were. To see if they are these so called parents with children aged 5-17 like they so often boast about. I would like to say from the get-go during this investigation, I felt a little curious as to why he had chosen lesbian detectives. I felt like it was trying to push my view in a way that the MPAA were an anti-homosexual organisation. It does later confront this question by putting that very same question to some ex-board members. It is never really answered, but from what I gathered they turned up watched the movie had a discussion and left. How anyone could really get to know someone enough to make an informed judgement on wether someone is gay during that would be impossible.

I just felt like this was straying from the point Kirby was trying to make, It felt like a cheap swipe at the MPAA. I felt he could have addressed this question better by putting the question to the audience that the MPAA openly say they hire ordinary 'parents' to rate movies. This instantly to me says no homosexuals are chosen. That would be a question I would put to someone who worked their, or well to some sort of equality group to question the MPAA on.

We are also shown a number of interviews with his fellow directors who have been subject to the NC-17 stamp of the MPAA. All the films in question were given this stamp due to some sort of intimate sex scene. Here I felt like the MPAA were using their powers just a little too much, I did agree that some of the material may have been to much to not be given a NC-17. But a lot of the time it seemed like even holding the camera on their faces was unacceptable, this seemed like they were taking their jobs too seriously. They seem to have appointed themselves the moral guardians of the nation and in doing so are stopping a lot of provoking films getting through to the audiences.

Films that might change someones view on a certain subject matter, just because a group of parents don't feel and ease with is shouldn't be the only judge and jury on the matter. As soon as the MPAA started gloating that its parents judging these movies, this felt odd. Aren't parents the last people you should actively seek, yes they should have some sort of say on what their children see. But at the same time because they are parents they are going to be out of touch with what these films are saying about the culture they live in present day? It feels all a little demeaning for a group of parents to tell the nation as a whole what they can and cannot see. They are of course going to try and block their children seeing material 'they' wouldn't want their children to see. But to say no you can't have your film as an R because I wouldn't want my children seeing that, but your 'children should be young adults by that time and should be able to choose for themselves.

This is what the documentary is essentially made up from, interviews combined with the investigation to expose the raters. It did do a good job of keeping the documentary feeling like it was progressing and not becoming stale at any point. It definitely is a documentary you have to look at with your on head. It does become very one sided and times, with one point sticking out to me. When they espose the raters they made a point of showing what Political Party they belonged to. This brought back memories of Andy's class and the Nazi teacher with the sex offender husband. It really didn't need to show us that piece of information as it had nothing to do with the subject matter in hand.

Over all I think it was a good watch in the end. It did do what it set out to do and show that the MPAA is still really living in the past and is way overdue a shake up in the way it runs itself. It really does need to stop looking inwards and start looking out wards at the times they are living in. I feel its unfair to slap a NC-17 on someone and not explain why, not telling them what to cut or how to get around it. It just seems all so self defeating in the end. I do think it does loose track on keeping check of giving an evenly sided look at the MPAA. Although it would have been hard to do this as the MPAA would have no doubt turned down any interview.

So yes a good informative watch even if you do have to keep challenging for yourself what is being shown to you.


ZAM is Back!

So Zam is back in the ranks of RSAMD once again to pass on his knowledge of directing.

His first class consisted of looking at comedy as a genre. The question that was presented is what is funny? but more importantly how to make something funny. Zam showed us a number of clips from a broad range of comedy to look at and examine. He played the clip over and over again to show us what made up that clip and why is was funny. It all came down to timing in the end, that extra frame can mean the difference of something being funny and not.

The class were shown a broad range of different comedy genres, such as black comedy to dead-pan comedy, to look at what made each one uniquely funny. Zam did openly admit that comedy was an area that he was entirely comfortable with, and this did show as he didn't seem as excited about what he was talking about. This being said he did deliver the class in a very good manner and did get a lot of good pointers across such as timing. Something that wouldn't have instantly occurred to me if I was to think about comedy.

His next class was a class I don't think I have ever taken so many notes from. He again played clips from a number of movies covering mostly how to build tension, that ticking clock as he put it. The class showed us that in most scenes were tension is built it always almost has its ticking clock. From the Untouchables pram being pushed up the stairs combined with the clock to Aliens and the radar gun clicking away.

As the script I am writing fro Richard is a horror piece which I hope to build a lot of tension into, this was golden material for me. I found myself writing down ideas for my script as new ideas just kept rushing into my head. It has put the question to me, what is my ticking clock going to be? and also it showed me something I already knew a little about but didn't know why I knew it. If that makes any sense, and that is of course not showing for the longest time possible what is chasing them. Whats in someones head is always going to be more scarier to themselves and an individual. We all have our own fears and to give that canvas to the audience to project what they are scared of onto is something else I need to think about.

The class also showed me that its not the bang that is scary, its waiting for the bang that is scary. At some point during my script I am going to be presented with this, how long can I make the audience suffer for. How long can I feasibly hold onto that moment were something is going to happen and how long I can make them wait for it.

It was just an excellent class, one of the best this year for me personally I think.

Friday was time for the screening's, as me and Charlotte had spent so much time in the previous week editing away at it I was most anxious to see how it turned out. As we had spent so much time on so many little details I was afraid that we had become in some sort of way blinded by the littlest of details that we would have missed a bigger one. I was just scared that half way through we would hear 'And Cut!' or something similar.

This didn't happen so I could pull my t-shirt away from my face in anticipation of something going wrong.

From the screening it was clear to everyone I hope the level in which we have progressed from the first set of films to the film 'Little Clown' I think being sat down and watching them back to back was they only way of showing this too us. You can preach it all day long but to actually see it for ourselves in this medium was real shock to me. It was really night and day watching the difference between them.

It was also good to see the third year films as I have only seen them being cut. For all the films being really good in their own right, it did put that thought of 'We could do better' something which I have no doubt that the first years were thinking as well. This will all drive us to make better films in the future, a little competition is good. As with out it, we would get no where in life.

*rests fingers*