Father Geek here with Edgard and the Euro-AICN column fo this week...

EURO AICN

Angry Edgard here... yep I'm angry... some film critic wrote a very mean review on AMELIE IN MONTMARTRE... of course I shouldn't be angry, after all anyone can have his own opinion. But what makes me angry is that first, this guy waited a month to write his review... meaning he suddenly decided to write a negative review a month after the film's release, after 4 millions of happy French have made AMELIE a huge success... you will call that the "Titanic Effect" : to be negative about the film everybody loves and which has a huge success... it seems to be a cool attitude : "hey look at me, everybody loves this film... I don't ! Why ? I don't know, but I just like to be different...". Come on, get a life ! This is also typical of the European pseudo-intellectual film world : first they complain American movies get more than 50% of the market... then you have finally a group of local films proving that European cinema can find its public, and bam !... these films are being attacked because they're too "popular"... Here it seems quality is measured on the level of boredom a movie should have...

But again if the guy didn't like AMELIE and just found out about it now... why not... I should respect that... I can understand some people don't like AMELIE... I can understand you have trouble to get in Jeunet's world... I can understand you don't feel moved by Amélie... but what I don't respect it's the way he attacks AMELIE...basically for that guy AMELIE could be (hold on your hat) a fascist movie...!! What he means is the Paris described in the film looks like the Paris from the 50's - a Paris with no foreigners in the street, only white folks... My question : what the f***k does that mean ? Until today I thought Europe was resisting quite well to the "political correct" factor... but here this guy seems to say we need some sort of quota's in the film... put a Chinese here, two Belgians, one Jew, two British, one dog, what's next ? he believes AMELIE is not representative of Paris as it is today... a multicultural Paris... well first I don't believe AMELIE is a movie about reality so if he's stupid enough not to get that, he should change job... now I agree there's an effort to make in French cinema to show more this multicultural side, for example to stop showing North African only as the dealers and rapers (and little by little it's changing : look at TAXI... maybe not the best example, still...), to really integrate this mix of culture properly in the films...but ONLY if it makes sense, only if it serves the film... AMELIE is not supposed to be realistic, it's a "dream film"... it's about a girl, it's about life, love, happiness, about you, me... wherever you come from... and yes I am angry at this review because it's totally gratuitous and I feel sorry for Jean-Pierre Jeunet who must wonder how his beautiful little movie became suddenly a fascist weapon...

So anyway back to happier thoughts... this week it's a special UK / Ireland movie news... with another European look at PEARL HARBOR... so here it's... enjoy !

UK

* Lots of great stuff on the Empire website... Check it at www.empireonline.co.uk :

First up is yesterday's report from Fox who showed us exclusive previews of their upcoming productions including Planet of the Apes, Behind Enemy Lines and Don't Say a Word. We've also got exclusive pics from One Hour Photo and The Ice Age. Just Click

Then there's some stuff revealed about Catherine Zeta Jones's new project, Coming Out Click Here

IRELAND

* We are currently Calling for Entries of the 14th Foyle Film Festival International LIM Competition 2001. Foyle Film Festival, Northern Ireland's International Film Festival this year falls on the 9th to the 18 of November. Competition Entry Deadline is September 1st. Application and regulations forms can be downloaded from the festival website at www.foylefilmfestival.com or www.northernirelandfilmfestival.com or else phone (44) 028 71 267432 to request an entry form.

* Here's a report from Guy Ritchie's next project filming at the moment: Vinnie Jones has been throwing his weight around on the set of his latest film The Mean Machine. Football's former bad boy returned to his old sparkling form when he lost his temper with fellow cast member Warren Mitchell. According to the Daily Record, Mitchell quit the project after a series of arguments in which Jones lost his cool. SKA films, run by Matthew Vaughn with business partner and co-producer Guy Ritchie, blamed 74-year-old Mitchell's departure on a difference of opinion over how the part should be played. "We think that Warren Mitchell is great. However, when we started filming we realised that the role was not right for him because he is a comedy master, but we wanted it played as a straight part."

* From Showbiz Ireland :

1) Irish actors may be next to Strike...

The cream of British acting talent, such as Alan Rickman, is threatening to bring the UK film industry to a halt in a dispute over pay, it was disclosed last night and Ireland may just be next. More than 200 leading performers have signed up to a campaign calling for a bigger share of the proceeds from films for British actors. They include Alan Rickman, Julie Walters, Paul Scofield, Kathy Burke, Greta Scacchi, John Thaw, Peter Postlethwaite, Simon Callow and Frances de la Tour. The actors' union, Equity, is calling for the re-negotiation of the cinema films agreement. Under the agreement, in the UK, actors are paid a flat fee in advance for television broadcasts of films, video and DVD sales as well as merchandising. But they get nothing extra, unlike their US colleagues, who benefit every time a film is shown on television, sold on video or DVD, or merchandising connected with the film is sold. The union has highlighted the film Mission Impossible, starring Tom Cruise, as an example of the difficulties facing UK actors. To date 1.8 million US dollars (about 1.2 million) has been distributed to US actors as a result of the success of the film but not one penny has been paid to the British performers who worked alongside them, the union has claimed. Talks were due to be held on Friday between Equity and Pact, the film producers' organisation. Martin Brown, spokesman for Equity, said if the talks failed, the union could propose action in which UK actors refused new contracts. "We understand that the British industry is not Hollywood and we know that there are difficulties in financing films. We are happy to take all that on board," he said. "We are not saying the American system or nothing. What we are asking for is an acceptance of the principle of continuing payments linked to the use. Once they have accepted that we can talk about the mechanism." The Irish actors Union have still not threatened a strike but it still may be on the cards as more and more US blockbusters are made here using the wealth of Irish talent.

2) Bond to lose his British passport?

Reports are that Irish actor Pierce Brosnan's next outing as Bond may be in a more American style setting. The Sunday Express reported over the weekend that there's a fight going on over the future of the Bond franchise. On the one hand MGM wants to make Bond more urban and hire Brett Ratner (Rush Hour) to direct, whilst Producer Barbara Broccolli and Brosnan want to stick to Director Michael Apted (The World is Not Enough). One insider says "MGM is convinced it can make more money out of Bond by diluting his Britishness and making the films more American in style."

3) Connery was a cheap Brosnan

Irish actor Pierce Brosnan may be the current James Bond but for many 007 fans there is only one real Bond. It was the role he made his own, but Sir Sean Connery suggested in an interview published over the weekend that he only got the part in the first James Bond film because he was cheap to employ. According to the 70-year-old Scot, who was first noticed by American audiences in the 1959 Irish 'Begorra' adventure Darby O'Gill and the Little People, the preferred actors for the starring role in Dr No were too expensive for producer Harry Saltzman and author Ian Fleming. He told the Daily Record newspaper: "I got it because they could afford me. Ian Fleming - a terrible snob, but a very interesting guy - wanted Cary Grant or Trevor Howard. They couldn't afford either of them. The movie's budget was one million dollars. Then the Americans devalued, so it was 960,000 dollars. I think I got 5,000 dollars." The star of From Russia With Love and Goldfinger added: "Playing the part is harder than anyone thought. There have been four others and they have all had problems with it. It is maybe easier to be the first because you set the bar which they all have to cross.'' Sir Sean also said his screen career, including seven Bond films and an Academy Award-winning performance in The Untouchables, began almost by accident. The young Connery had been going from job to job, when he was approached by two fellow competitors at a bodybuilding competition in London who mentioned a job in the chorus of the musical South Pacific. "They said all I had top do was a few hand springs and sing and I would get 14 a week,'' Sir Sean told the paper. "I auditioned and said I was an actor. They asked me to sing, but I said I didn't have any music so I didn't have to sing." And Edinburgh-born Sir Sean also told the newspaper why he now goes to see Glasgow Rangers football team play instead of their Old Firm rivals Celtic, the team he had followed during the era of the late Parkhead manager Jock Stein in the 1960s. He explained: "I like good football. I was a very good friend of Jock Stein and Bob Kelly and went to Celtic. They are no longer around. I then met David Murray and I liked him and the things he is doing with Rangers, so I go there. There are now more Catholics there than at the other place."

All Irish Related ShowBiz News: Click Right Here

REVIEW - PEARL HARBOR

By Wayne Cronin - ShowBiz Ireland

The summer film season is upon us and the variety of movies being touted as 'blockbusters' are not in short supply. One of these such blockbusters is Pearl Harbor the much anticipated film by director/producer team Michael Bay (Armageddon, Coyote Ugly) and Jerry Bruckheimer (Armageddon, Gone In Sixty Seconds), and it certainly proves worthy of its hype.

This high-profile drama focuses on the December 7, 1941 Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. It also sees war nurse Evelyn Johnson (Kate Beckinsale) fall in love with best friends Rafe McCawley (Ben Affleck) and Danny Walker (Josh Hartnett), two World War II fighter pilots. While this element of love plays a major part in the movie, it does not take away from the core theme, war.

The attack on Pearl Harbor is regarded as one of the most significant actions of World War II, simply because it dragged the United States into the war. The assault, which was concocted by Admiral Yamamoto, commander of the Japanese fleet, brought the impact of the Japanese military power to Hawaii.

In a two-hour long onslaught, 18 ships were sunk or badly damaged, 188 planes were destroyed (with an additional 159 damaged), and over 2400 Americans were killed, not to mention those who were injured. While many people are knowledgeable on historic events such as this, it is not necessary to be au fait with the issues of World War II in order to enjoy this epic. In fact, if anything, it will inform the viewer on the atrocities that were carried out at that time, just as Shindlers List did way back in '93.

The film can be broken down into three parts, namely the love story, the attack and the revenge, aided by a dramatic score courtesy of Hans Zimmer, who was also responsible for the music behind Gladiator. The love element is woven throughout the plot and therefore cannot be awarded to a specific section of the film. It's a classic will they / won't they senario which will have you rooting for your personal favourite between Affleck and Hartnett. It's well written and a bit difficult to predict.

The actual attack lasts for about 35 minutes and is visually amazing and overflowing with breathtaking tension, I felt almost exhausted after it. The final instalment deals with the April 1942 US raid on Tokyo, which was as unexpected by the Japanese as Pearl Harbor was. Determination and personal courage are the key essentials to this last piece of action.

Aside for the central characters there are notable performances from a strong supporting cast. I offer a special commendation to Alec Baldwin as General Doolittle, who prepared the vengeful attack on Tokyo. Likewise to John Voight, who offers a realistic portrayal of US President Roosevelt. Cuba Gooding Jnr plays Dorie Miller, a ships cook, who also becomes involved in the action. I felt his character could have been developed further, even though it contributed well to the overall story. Another familiar face is Dan Akroyd as a military strategic advisor.

Undoubtedly Pearl Harbor will be compared with Titanic, in part for its epic proportions (over 3 hours long) and huge budget ($135 million). Sure, they both deal with life-changing historical events and they both contain the tear jerking love story, but in my view Pearl Harbor is a much more riveting affair.

Its real strength not only lies in its spectacular special effects and visual beauty, but in its deep and moving plot and wonderful performance of the cast. Pearl Harbor is emotionally gripping, and does not fail to move the audience, whether through laughter or tears. There is something in it for everyone - weepy for the girls, explosions for the boys, reminiscence for the old and education for the young. Whatever you do, don't miss the movie that will have everyone talking this Summer.

http://www.ShowBizIreland.com

Well that's it for this week... don't forget to send us your comments, reviews and news to the Euro AICN offices in Paris at euroaicn@yahoo.com