ENTERTAINMENT

CO-EDITORS FRAN MULVEY & CAMERON LUSTY

AN INTERVIEW WITH

BY FRAN MULVEY ANNIE SCHERERPART 3

ANNIE: : [Giggles] aw! That’s sweet [giggles] FRAN: ‘After Rain’ was – I liked the melody of that a lot

ANNIE: Thank you FRAN: And it felt like it was telling a certain story about – it was a number of experiences, like with ‘Ashamed’ [Annie hums agreement] and I wondered what played into that song? ANNIE: Yeah well, I wrote that I think two years ago, and I had been experiencing writers’ block for a little while and then that song kind of came to me all at once and, so what it’s about. I have always been a very independent person, I’m not – I wouldn’t say that I always want a relationship and so I was just kind of like, riding the solo wave for a long time, and I – you know I entered a relationship and I just kind of felt,

– I was just very nervous about it and – but it ended up kind of being this light that I didn’t know – not that I needed but, I don’t know it’s like, you kind of go into things scared but sometimes it works out and you just know it was meant to be, so I wrote that song about kind of just like seeing the light at the end of the tunnel you know and, entering a new phase in your life and, just kind of going with the flow I – I tend to be very rigid with myself sometimes I like to plan things out and, with this it wasn’t planned out and I kind of just had to free fall, you know? FRAN: I think – like with the other song, that a few – at least a few people can relate to that, [...] I thought ‘Andy Warhol’ was quite – quite an interesting song as well, and I think I remember you saying in that Instagram post that it was in relation to how perhaps we view nature or some element of the world?

ANNIE: Yeah, so, ‘Andy Warhol’, it’s kind of about seeing someone in a light that’s maybe unrealistic or kind of just like seeing something, in a way that it looks better than it actually is or just, just questioning if something is too good to be true, so I wrote the song kind of about like, fantasising over someone and just maybe being nervous about disappointment like are they really this good or, like why do I deserve something that good? You know what I mean? It was just kind of like, really questioning, how good something was, and I called it ‘Andy Warhol’ because when I wrote the song I – I tend to see things when I write and I just kind of was envisioning his work and his colours, I’m a big fan and, it just made sense to me to call it that, I don’t know I thought it really just captured what I was going for visually. FRAN: That’s very cool, and [...] the lyrics you felt like “you’re just a work of art, then I am just a dream.” ANNIE: Yeah, “If I was just a view to you, then you are just a dream”, like –

It’s like I want you to see me for who I really am, you know, and if you don’t then maybe you were just kind of just this kind of fantasy that I thought was real.

FRAN: Mm, I thought I can relate to that personally as well though I won’t go into it for personal reasons [they both laugh], but ‘Take Me Places’, going on to the next song. ANNIE: Mhm.

FRAN: That almost seemed like you were talking to someone who brought light into your life, and made your world better for a lovely specific reason . ANNIE: Yeah, that’s pretty accurate, ‘Take Me Places’ – I mean I kind of wanted the song to sound very ethereal, kind of like flying and just, very beautiful sounding, because it is kind of just about entering something new and, that feeling of flying and experiencing new things. I started that song back like years ago, I had the verse I had the pre-chorus, and I just could not come up with a chorus that I was happy with, like I – so I kept going back to it and then one day it just worked and it took years to finish that song so I kind of had to re-enter the mindset that I was in years ago, during like my first relationship ever and, that’s kind of how I felt at the time you know just, experiencing something totally new and exciting.

THORPE PARK

BY LYNSEY ROPER OUR COMPETITION WINNER

My friend Leanne and I had a great time at Thorpe Park Fright Night thanks to Student Life. A journey that should have taken an hour and a half, in typical M25 fashion, took much longer so that, by the time we arrived at the resort we had to tend to our stomachs first! We were eager to try out the newest additions to the park that neither of us has tried before, so we headed to the Black Mirror Labyrinth which needs to be prebooked via a QR code to get an allocated time spot. By the time we had done this around 1:30pm, the earliest slot available was at 7:45pm, so we booked this and went on our way. The first ride we went on was the Walking Dead ride (this was the only time of day that this ride had a queue time of less than 90+ minutes!). We thought this was a great ride to ease us into the day and didn’t upset our nice, full tummies too much! The next ride we went on was Nemesis Inferno and whilst queueing, this was the first time we saw any element of ‘Fright Night’ with some spooky dressed up characters chasing the public around. We were keen to watch the seasonal shows – Birthday Bash and Legacy Fire and Light show as these were things that we wouldn’t be able to do if we came back to the park on a regular day. All the large rollercoasters had a queue time of over an hour and a half, so we were happy to eat our donut-sundaes and watch the preshow entertainment of the actors interacting with the audience. Unfortunately, the 6pm Birthday Bash show was cancelled and, honestly, the fire and light show was slightly underwhelming. However, we did manage to catch the Flash Mob outside of Stealth which was amazing – it is only 10 minutes long, but I would highly recommend catching it! The dancers/actors were extremely talented and this was definitely a highlight of our day. Overall, I would have liked to have seen more scare actors around the park to enhance the idea of ‘Fright Night’ but there was a lot on and it was an enjoyable day and evening!

LOVE HARD

NETFLIX REVIEW BY FRAN MULVEY

It’s only November, but I’m never one to shy away from watching Christmas films out of season (the first time I watched one this year was early October), so I have no qualms about writing a review on a new Christmas film that was recently released on Netflix. Starring Nina Dobrev (The Vampire Diaries), Jimmy O. Yang (Crazy Rich Asians) and Harry Shum Jr. (Glee, Shadowhunters). Love Hard follows Natalie (Dobrev), a writer from L.A. who thinks she’s met her perfect match on a dating app, only to learn that she’s been catfished when she flies 3,000 miles to surprise him for the holiday season. I’d seen the film advertised on Netflix before its release, but I’d nearly forgotten about it when my best friend, who lives in Spain, suggested we buddy-watch it – and I’m so glad I said yes! Having loved Nina Dobrev as Elena Gilbert on The Vampire Diaries I was excited to see how she portrayed this new character, unlucky in love and somehow making a career out of it.

Considering she’d had so little luck in love, but hadn’t given up hope and was still trying online dating, it was incredibly wholesome watching her character fall for this amazing person that she meets online with whom she seems to have a lot in common. There is an amazing sequence early on in the film during which she’s shown having an everlasting conversation on the phone with Josh, her gorgeous dream man, during which she does a myriad of things while talking with him. There’s one scene in particular that I absolutely loved, in which they’re shown side-by-side on top her bed covers, as he reads a novel that her late mother would read to her at night to help her fall asleep; which I thought an excellent example of screenwriting. I felt for her therefore, when she travelled all that way to surprise him, only to discover that he wasn’t exactly who she expected and was understandably upset and annoyed by the deception and the truth that she had been “catfished.” Despite this fact, Natalie stays and experiences Christmas with Josh’s family – although his older brother (Shum Jr.) doesn’t exactly take to her, and the movie retains its wholesome element while also taking on a comedic air that carries through to the end. What I love about the film is that it combines romance and comedy with wholesomeness, but also reinforces the message that it’s always best to be yourself.

ZACK SNYDER’S

FILM OF THE MONTH JUSTICE LEAGUE

BY ANONYMOUS

Zack Snyder’s Justice League is the director’s 2021 re-release of the 2017 superhero film of the same name (both distributed Warner Bros. Pictures). Zack Snyder’s Justice League, dubbed as “the Snydercut” by fans, proves itself to be a masterpiece. It is without a doubt the best film in the DC Extended Universe (DCEU), perhaps the best DC film since Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight (2008). The director of the film, Zack Snyder, embraces the creative freedom he was given to create such a surreal film that perfectly connects itself with the DCEU’s continuity. I guess you could call the Snydercut a different film from its predecessor. After several conflicts over the film’s creative direction and the tragic passing of Snyder’s daughter, Warner Bros. hired Joss Whedon (director of Marvel’s The Avengers, 2012), to complete post-production. This resulted in several scenes being added, removed, and re-shot, which changed the film entirely. The character development in the film was perfectly crafted. Each hero was seen to be suffering their own personal matters, and we could see them slowly evolving as the story unfolded. Particularly Cyborg, played by Ray Fisher, and the Flash, played by Ezra Miller. Both heroes proved themselves to be the real emotional aspects of the film, unlike in the theatrical version where both characters were lost potentials. Not to forget, the acting was incredible. Each actor, from Ben Affleck’s Batman to Gal Gadot’s Wonder Woman, knew how to embrace their comic book counterparts and represented what each character embodied: hope, fear, and justice. Unlike 2017’s Justice League, the Snydercut provided DC fans with spectacular action sequences, no corny jokes, no sexualisation of female characters, and no CGI moustaches! Just brilliantly produced fight scenes with quality CGI/ sfx. In addition, the villains, Steppenwolf and Darkseid, really proved themselves to be serious threats. Because of Snyder’s incredible storytelling, he was able to develop Steppenwolf as a character and made me sympathise with him. Which is odd because many superhero films don’t do that.

But is it perfect? Almost. There were a few problems, such as scenes being dragged out for too long. Perhaps if some of the scenes were cut slightly, then the film would not be such a drag and only the main plot points would remain present. An example would be a scene between Lois Lane, Superman’s lover, and his mother, Martha Kent. The scene was perfect until something, which will not be spoiled, took place, and took away part of the impact it had on Lane’s character arc. In addition, Wonder Woman’s new “lamentation” themed background music was overused. It would have been fine using it to introduce her and for her final scene in the epic battle against Steppenwolf, but definitely not every time we see her!

Overall, Zack Snyder’s Justice League was the only DC Extended Universe film to not have any major problems, which is great seeing how the comic book film franchise has had its ups and downs when it comes down to critical reception. The film also proves that Snyder is an incredible filmmaker and deserves the full credit for his work of art. Unlike his previous films, Man of Steel (2013) and Batman v Superman (2016), the Snyder cut was the type of superhero film which made fans want to read an actual comic book. Something that a lot of mainstream audiences don’t do!

In conclusion, the film deserves 5 stars!

Despite the film’s worldwide success, the Snydercut is not getting a sequel… yet! Which is why DC fans across the world have reunited once again. After campaigning for the release of the Snydercut, they are now fighting for the “Snyderverse” to be restored.

PUZZLE FILMS

BY CAMERON LUSTY

What is a Puzzle film? There are a few different definitions for what could be considered a puzzle film as it is not a thoroughly researched area of Film studies and is relatively new. Before I go over the different theorists’ definitions, I want to cover the history of the term ‘Puzzle Film’.

HISTORY

David Bordwell, a film theorist whose works include cognitive film theory and narratology, highlighted in his book the “surge of complex narratives” as early as the 40s to the 50s and noted that it occurred again from the mid-60s to the early 70s. Charles Ramirez Berg in his article agrees with Bordwell that Puzzle films have been around since the 40s by citing Citizen Kane (1941) as one of the first examples. But when was the term first coined?

Kiss and Willemsen claim the origin of “the term ‘puzzle film’ stems from Norman N. Holland’s 1963 article entitled ‘Puzzling Movies’, in which he referred to a new genre of European art films of the late 1950s and early 1960s”. Interestingly, they note it was to describe a genre of films originally but then the term was revived by Bordwell to describe more of a classification of films then a genre. This illustrates that while the complex narratives of ‘Puzzle films’ existed in cinema for decades, they weren’t comprehensively defined until relatively recently. David Bordwell’s book Narration in the Fiction Film (1985) laid the foundation for what would become puzzle film theory with its assessment of different narrative types (a must read for any film studies students/fans). Bordwell then coined the term himself which was then applied and developed by other theorists such as Elliot Panek, Kiss and Willemson, and others.

Kiss and Willemson noted that “recent film history has seen the emergence of a range of films, both surprising cult hits and major blockbusters, making clever use of confusing plots”, including Mulholland Drive (2001) and Memento (2000). Charles

Ramirez Berg concurs and Quentin Tarantino’s Pulp Fiction (1994) as inspiring the new wave of films, in what he dubs the ‘Tarantino Effect’, which he defines as “unorthodox film narration”.

So, it feels we are in a new wave of puzzle films (I’m sure you can think of more), but how do you define it? In the next section we will look at the different theorists’ different definitions, but spoilers: it’s not so cut and dry.

DEFINITIONS

When it comes to defining puzzle films there isn’t a rigid definition but more a vague set of conditions that a film can meet to be considered a puzzle film. Warren Buckland sums it up best by saying that each puzzle film is in “possession of a clustered subset of some set of properties, no one of which is necessary, but which together are sufficiently many” to be considered a Puzzle film. Straightforward right? David Bordwell does provide a clear characteristic of a ‘puzzle film’: “the complex telling (plot, narration) of a simple or complex story (narrative)”. In other words, the content of the story (the narrative) can be simple but the way it’s told (the plot/narration) must be complex. Elliot Panek in his article for Film Criticism Journal (2006) developed his own category of films that deviate from Bordwell’s classical narration: “psychological puzzle films”. He defines it as films that “possess narratives in which the orientation is not immediately clear, thus creating doubt in the viewer’s mind as to how reliable, knowledgeable, self-conscience, and communicative the narration is”. This is achieved through “unusual story structure, violations of causal logic, or flaunted, unresolved gaps in the chain of story. This feels much clearer and specific than Bordwell’s definition.

Kiss and Willemsen took Panek’s term further and developed the “impossible puzzle film”. They define this as films “characterised by pervasive paradoxes, uncertainties, incongruities, and ambiguities in the narration” which provoke a “state of ongoing confusion throughout the viewing experience”. So, as you can see there are a few different types of puzzle films, and they are all open to interpretation and criticism. If you want to read more about puzzle films then check out the following books: Narration in the Fiction Film (Bordwell); Puzzle Films: Complex Storytelling in Contemporary Cinema and Hollywood Puzzle Films (both by Warren Buckland); Impossible Puzzle Films: A cognitive Approach to Complex Cinema (Kiss and Willemson); The Poet and The Detective: Defining the Psychological Puzzle Film (Panek); and for an intro, then Janet Steiger’s Complex Narratives, an Introduction.