Latest news with #Wachowskis
The Guardian
30-05-2025
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
Post your questions for Gina Gershon
Gina Gershon has been on our screens for nearly 40 years, during which she has starred in scene-stealing roles opposite some of Hollywood's biggest actors. In her more likable moments, she orders an orgasm from cocktail-maker Tom Cruise in Cocktail ('How many would you like?' 'Multiple' – fnar fnar) and takes a bullet for Nicolas Cage in Face/Off. In her less likable (but equally scene-stealing) moments, she receives a lapdance from – and gets pushed down the stairs by – Elizabeth Berkley in Showgirls, chops Val Kilmer into small pieces in Breathless, gets murdered under the supposed watch of Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jim Belushi in Red Heat, and is forced by Matthew McConaughey to simulate oral sex on a chicken drumstick in Killer Joe. Ahem. Now Gershon stars as the wife of Vegas thief John Travolta in High Rollers, although, from the trailer, in which she gets kidnapped to force Travolta to work, it's hard to see if we're dealing with a nice or nasty Gina. But that won't stop her having plenty to talk about; ask her anything. Maybe her first bit part in 1986's Pretty in Pink or becoming a gay icon for starring as a lesbian ex-con in the Wachowskis' first film, Bound in 1996. Or there's that time in Curb Your Enthusiasm where she offers to have sex with Larry David as his birthday present from Cheryl. She has also parodied Melania Trump on more than one occasion. And perhaps most bizarrely of all, she played the jaw harp on the second Scissor Sisters album. Please get your questions in for Gina by 6pm BST Monday 2 June, and we'll print her answers in Film & Music later in June. High Rollers is on digital platforms from 16 June
Campaign ME
30-04-2025
- Entertainment
- Campaign ME
Beyond the billboard: The evolution of outdoor advertising
In a world saturated with content, capturing consumer attention has become a high-stakes game. While traditional outdoor advertising – billboards, bus shelters, transit ads – once relied on big visuals and catchy taglines to make a splash, today's most effective campaigns are embracing a more immersive, narrative-driven approach: transmedia storytelling. Transmedia storytelling is the technique of telling a single story or story experience across multiple platforms and formats using current digital technologies. Each medium contributes uniquely to the narrative, adding depth and engagement while encouraging audiences to actively participate in the story. This concept isn't new – it actually has deep roots in Hollywood, where some of the biggest blockbuster franchises pioneered the approach long before marketers caught on. The Hollywood origins Transmedia storytelling first gained traction in the entertainment world, with franchises such as Star Wars and The Matrix setting the gold standard. George Lucas's Star Wars universe expanded not only through its films, but also through novels, animated series, comic books, video games and even theme park attractions – each medium adding layers to the story and building a richer world. Similarly, The Matrix didn't just live on the big screen. The Wachowskis extended their narrative through animated shorts such as The Animatrix, video games such as Enter the Matrix and interactive web content – all essential to understanding the larger storyline. This interconnected method of storytelling laid the groundwork for the way brands and creators now think about engaging audiences across multiple channels. When applied to outdoor advertising, transmedia turns static spaces into dynamic entry points for a larger, multi-platform narrative journey. From static to story: The evolution of outdoor advertising A standalone billboard can only say so much. But what if it could lead audiences into a world they could explore further – through mobile interactions, social media, augmented reality, or even real-world activations? Enter transmedia outdoor campaigns. Rather than being the story itself, the billboard becomes a gateway. For example: A mysterious QR code on a mural leads to a character's Instagram account. An interactive bus shelter features a riddle that ties into a branded online game. A digital screen shows only a glimpse of a film's backstory, inviting viewers to unlock the full narrative via an app. These experiences don't just advertise; they invite audiences to co-create and live the story. Why it works: Layered stories, loyal fans Transmedia storytelling works by allowing different parts of a story to unfold across multiple platforms – each offering a unique piece of the narrative puzzle. A billboard might introduce a mysterious character, while social media reveals their backstory, a mobile game lets users step into their world and a short film deepens the emotional arc. This layered approach creates a more holistic, immersive experience that feels less like advertising and more like meaningful engagement. It's especially effective for younger audiences who prefer to discover content organically rather than be interrupted by traditional advertisements. By inviting them to explore, participate and piece together the story on their own terms, brands earn attention rather than demand it. Real-world wins: Transmedia in action Netflix's Stranger Things Season 4 used urban projections, missing person posters and themed pop-ups to create an eerie presence in cities before the show aired. The story unfolded across social media, augmented reality filters and on Spotify tailored to fans' viewing habits. Nike's You Can't Stop Us campaign combined outdoor murals with geotagged Instagram posts, fitness app challenges and real-time user-generated content that added layers to the core story of resilience and community. HBO's Westworld took it a step further with a city-wide scavenger hunt in Austin during the South by Southwest (SXSW) festival, featuring cryptic signage, in-world experiences and a fully interactive website that tied back to outdoor placements. How brands can use transmedia in OOH Start with the story, not the space: What is the narrative you want to tell? Who are the characters? What's the conflict or mystery? Your outdoor creative should tease or ignite the journey. Connect the dots with tech: Use QR codes, near field communication (NFC) chips, AR filters, or geolocation tools to transition users from physical to digital. Make each platform additive: Avoid simple duplication. Let each touchpoint (poster, video, app, live event) contribute uniquely to the story. Encourage user participation: Let fans interact, unlock secrets, or even shape outcomes. This boosts emotional investment and viral sharing. Plan for long-term engagement: Transmedia storytelling isn't just a one-off stunt – it's a narrative arc. Design your campaign to evolve over days or weeks. The bottom line From the galaxies of Star Wars to the mind-bending reality of The Matrix, transmedia storytelling has long captivated audiences by building immersive, interconnected worlds. Now, that same magic is reshaping how brands use outdoor advertising. Transmedia turns passive moments – waiting for a bus, walking down a city block – into moments of discovery. In an age when attention is the ultimate currency, turning a billboard into a gateway to the story isn't just smart – it's essential. Outdoor media can either be a powerful standalone platform for transmedia storytelling or seamlessly integrated with indoor, digital and experiential channels to create a cohesive, multi-sensory narrative journey. Whether it's the entire stage or just one scene, outdoor has the power to move the story forward. The future of advertising isn't just about being seen. It's about being experienced. By Dr. Stavroula Kalogeras, MBA Programme Director, Edinburgh Business School, Heriot-Watt University Dubai
Irish Times
26-04-2025
- Irish Times
Can AI make my life easier? I spent a week living and working with chatbots to find out
Artificial intelligence wrote this article. That is a lie actually; I thought AI might write this article, but after several attempts with different models, the end result was peppy, relentlessly positive and ... not good. If you want something done properly, they say, do it yourself. For all our fears about AI taking our jobs, there are still some things that it – fortunately, or unfortunately depending on the task – can't quite do yet. Three years ago, most of us had little idea what ChatGPT was, or why we should care about AI. Fast forward to 2025 and it seems everyone wants in on the AI game. There are chatbots managing customer service, a kind of high-tech automated phone system steering you to the right person. There are virtual assistants offering help on every app you open. We can't get away from AI that apparently exists just to make our lives easier. But does it? READ MORE We are naturally suspicious of the technology. AI gone mad has been the basic premise of numerous dystopian futuristic nightmarish movies. In 2001: A Space Odyssey, Hal took over the ship and went rogue. Terminator not only started with a sentient AI taking over the world's defence systems, it built an army of robots to finish the job. And the Wachowskis – most famous for the Matrix series – managed to eke out far more movies than necessary out of the whole 'robots at war with humans' theme. If we are dependent on Hollywood for our views on AI, it is no wonder we are all terrified of ceding control to the machines. Still, there are plenty of good ways to use AI, and so I am tasked by The Irish Times to document how it can be used in day-to-day life over the course of a normal week. A bit of thought reveals that I am already using it regularly, even if I didn't realise it. Take my email for example. It already suggests replies, organises itself into categories, and bumps priority emails back to the top of my inbox. As a journalist I use AI to transcribe interviews, saving several tedious hours every week. And I probably interact with chatbots regularly on websites without realising. Then there is my mobile phone – or phones, if I'm being honest. Both my iPhone and Android have AI built in now. Android's AI has useful features such as Circle to Search, which allows you to tap or circle anything on the phone's screen to search for it online, or you can have a full-on conversation with its digital assistant Gemini . I ask Gemini how to deal with my 10-year-old's newfound ability to roll her eyes at me. Then I make her listen to the answer Apple Intelligence is just getting started. For phone users, it is only available on the iPhone 15 Pro and the new iPhone 16 series; luckily I have the latter. It can give me AI-powered writing tools to proofread or change the tone of an email or document, or help me create my own custom emojis. You can also use the camera to search for images online. I've been using a preview version of the software for a few weeks, but have rarely dipped into the AI features so far. This week will be different though. I'm going to give AI a proper shot, using it for every day-to-day task I can think of. I decide to start small. An email reply here, a proofread document there. But it quickly snowballs as I find more uses for it. What about some holiday recommendations? Can it make me a better writer? How about life advice? Before I know where I am, AI has infiltrated every part of my life. Monday Three years ago, most of us had little idea what ChatGPT was, or why we should care about AI. Illustration: iStock On Monday morning, I check my personal email on my iPhone to find Apple Intelligence has helpfully arranged everything into conversations, with short AI-generated summaries to flag the most important bits. It has also added a priority section at the top of my inbox, just in case I missed that very important deadline for a child-related activity coming up. The day's emails are dealt with in a few seconds; replies are proofread by AI. One useful feature is the automatic follow-up prompt – if I've asked a question that hasn't been answered by return email, the system prompts me to chase it up. It is like having a personal assistant on hand. I have a feeling I rarely experience: almost organised . When I open my work inbox, that warm and fuzzy feeling is instantly squashed. There are a few hundred unread emails, and in this case, I have no AI to help me. I am all my own. It doesn't have to be this way. Microsoft – which powers Outlook – was a relatively early adopter of AI. The company has ploughed billions into OpenAI , the maker of ChatGPT, and integrated the software into many of its popular products. There are CoPilots – or AI assistants – for almost everything. They can check your email and prioritise the most important messages, compose documents for you, summarise video content, and – best of all – sit in on Teams calls, take notes on your behalf and send you a summary when everything is done, picking out tasks and queries that are specifically addressed to you. Provided you – or your employer – can pay for it, that is. CoPilots cost actual money, and more importantly in my case, require permission from the powers that be to install them on your work system. [ Irish authors seek to stop Big Tech 'scraping' their work for AI amid copyright breach claims Opens in new window ] For now, I'll have to read my own email. How boring. But wait. A strange email claiming to be from a password manager that I used in the past pops into my inbox. Apparently my login was leaked and I need to change my details. I'm naturally suspicious of anything like this, so I ask Siri – Apple's voice-activated AI assistant – if this content is likely to be a fake. Siri can't answer, offering instead to send the screenshot to ChatGPT. I agree, and a screenshot is fired off to OpenAI's assistant. It correctly flags it as a potential scam – I've already checked the sender and it doesn't match up – but it also raises a few points that I didn't consider. Just in case, I check a few more emails, and it seems that ChatGPT isn't just throwing out a few generic security tips. Each time I ask, it highlights different elements of the message that indicate whether it is fake or genuine. Score one for AI. I have a few articles to write, but The Irish Times isn't one of the newsrooms that has adopted AI to write basic stories. I don't think now is the time to stage a one-woman AI-fuelled charge, but I ask ChatGPT to write a persuasive argument to convince the newsdesk that it is a good idea. I file that one away for later. I already use some AI tools occasionally at work. I have tried using AI for a first pass at transcribing lengthy speeches at press conferences or public events, which can save a lot of time. But I still need to check the text for accuracy myself. Also, if the transcription service uses cloud technology, you have to trust that it will keep tight control over your data. The best way to make sure everything stays confidential is not to upload it to a cloud platform to start with, so I wouldn't use it for sensitive interviews. Some tools – Otter AI, for example - can also attend virtual meetings for you and take notes, but the silent assistant in the (virtual) corner isn't for everyone. Speaking of time saving, what about the domestic side of life? I waste at least an hour each week reminding Child Number One that she needs to empty the dishwasher, that it was her own suggestion she take on the job, and her extra pocket money hinges on it. [ No escape for professions from rolling revolution that is artificial intelligence Opens in new window ] This week I'll leave it up to AI to decide who does what around the house. Gemini suggests a family meeting and making things 'fun' with a chore chart. I can think of better ways to have fun, but we give it a go. CoPilot creates a chart, but I can't follow what it is trying to tell me; it is a mess of checkmarks. ChatGPT vindicates our current approach by suggesting the 10-year-old helps with loading and unloading the dishwasher. It also creates a full list of daily, weekly and monthly chores, and assigns them. As a follow-up question, I ask Gemini how to deal with my 10-year-old's newfound ability to roll her eyes at me. Then I make her listen to the answer. Tuesday Tuesdays are early starts here. Before going to bed I asked various AIs – Google Gemini, Apple Intelligence, Claude and ChatGPT – what was the best way to get a good night's sleep and wake up refreshed at 6am. Apparently I'm doing it all wrong. My screentime is out of whack with all their recommendations, I exercise at the wrong time of day, and I am a chronic snooze-button abuser. I never take a daytime nap though, and I don't have a TV in my bedroom, so Gemini gives me some points for that. I use Otter AI to transcribe a product presentation. It does a decent job, and fast. To eliminate the cloud aspect, I also try a Pixel phone with Google Recorder, which processes everything on the phone. It also transcribes it reasonably accurately. In the afternoon, the robot vacuum is let loose on the mess around the house while I am out. It used to get stuck on cables abandoned on the floor, or eat a sock or two on the way around. Now it has AI 'obstacle avoidance', so it makes its way around anything in its path, and helpfully marks a symbol on a map, which I can check on my phone. It could be a shoe, others it's a power cord. The one that makes me stop and pause is the poop symbol. I'm almost afraid to go home. Wednesday 'It turns out AI is not that funny'. Illustration: iStock As part of the 'new me' thing I kick off every couple of months (and subsequently abandon), I've decided I need a new fitness plan. Forget about the gym membership I pay actual, real-life money for; I feel now would be a good time to put AI to the test. I ask several apps to create a running plan to help me run a marathon. Gemini comes back with a 16-week programme that involves four runs a week, increasing the time spent running week by week, interspersed with rest days and cross training. ChatGPT opts for 20 weeks, and goes for a distance-based training plan. Claude gives me a pre-programme checklist to go through, including getting medical clearance before starting, and a mixture of distance and time-based training. I'll never actually do a marathon mind you – it is just one of those bucket-list things. and I suffer from FOMO. (Gemini, how do you prevent FOMO?) Health isn't just physical, of course, and people are using AI for everything from companionship to therapy. I try out a few conversation apps, with mixed results. I have a chat with an AI-generated Mario. I tell him Princess Peach could probably save herself if he just left her to it. He doesn't take that well, insisting he is the only one who could save her. Since conversation isn't going great, perhaps AI can help me out with some jokes. There is an ongoing battle in our house to find the worst dad-joke possible, but the one rule is that it still has to make people laugh. Claude offers up a few, the best of which is: 'Did you hear about the guy who invented the knock knock joke? He won the no-bell prize.' It turns out AI is not that funny. But it redeems itself later in the day. Small children are relentless question machines, and AI exists to answer questions. If I can't answer the left-field queries that my seven-year-old lobs at me, usually while I'm driving, he immediately addresses his question to Gemini. 'How do you say underpants in Irish?' Gemini answers correctly – fobhríste – but absolutely mangles the pronunciation. If my parents had AI back when I was a (very inquisitive) child, their lives would have been much easier. My Irish pronunciation might have been a lot worse though. Thursday The week is starting to get to me. I have a twinge in my back from sitting too long at my computer. 'Gemini, give me some exercises to help relieve back pain.' It thinks for a moment. Because I am using the voice interface, it doesn't direct me to websites showing the exercises, preferring instead to give a brief audio description. That does not work for me. At all. I need visuals, and preferably a short video showing me what way I put this arm and where this leg goes. I am utterly confused, and still in pain. I decide I want, or rather I need, to organise my life. This feels like the perfect task for AI. But Gemini clearly mishears me, and launches into a soothing 'you're not on your own' spiel. It's comforting, but it doesn't solve my original problem. Apple Intelligence fares just as badly. A plaintive 'organise my life' gets zero response from Apple's digital assistant. When I repeat it, things take a turn for the worse. [ Teachers seek indemnity from legal actions over students' improper AI use in Leaving Cert Opens in new window ] 'If you think it could be serious, ask me to call emergency services or someone you trust,' it offers. I mutter something at it, expressing my displeasure. 'Do you want me to use ChatGPT to answer that?' I don't think it's being sarcastic, but it is hard to tell. Then it disappears. At this point, I'm ready to throw in the towel. Which AI can compose the best email to get me out of this assignment, without putting me on the Magazine editor's hit list? I decide against sending the email. Instead, I ask Apple Intelligence to suggest a good relaxation routine to deal with work-related stress. In true executive fashion, it immediately pawns off the request to ChatGPT (but it asks first). It suggests, among other things, a gratitude journal. Because nothing says 'relaxation' more than (*checks notes*) more work. Instead, I use Apple Intelligence's 'genmoji' feature to create a personalised emoji summing up how I feel right now – my head, explosions, and fireworks. That amuses me, so I do a few more, plus some stylised versions of family members with a new app called Playground. No one would mistake these for realistic images, and there are limits to what it will create – you can't create obviously offensive images, for example. Friday For all our fears about AI taking our jobs, there are still some things that it – fortunately, or unfortunately depending on the task – can't quite do yet. Illustration: Getty Images After yesterday's experiments with AI images, I decide to explore further. Which AI will let me create photorealistic images with few guardrails? Clearly not Apple Intelligence; it sticks to more artificial looking images by choice. But others happily take up the challenge, within reason. Open AI's image-creation tool Dall-E will create some images – Jeff Bezos riding a Blue Origin rocket and Elon Musk in a broken down Cybertruck, for example – but won't create anything more offensive. [ When AI images become 'an insult to life itself' Opens in new window ] I ask Grok – Elon Musk's xAI creation – to make an image of Musk; it creates a photorealistic image of the billionaire. Then I ask it to make him look like a clown, which it also does. This is amusing me, but it feels like a bad use of resources. Rory McIlroy is playing this week at the Masters. ChatGPT puts his chances of winning at 15-20 per cent, noting his struggles in previous outings at Augusta, the mental toll of the career Grand Slam he has been chasing, and the fact that he has been so close on a few occasions – 2022 as a runner-up and his collapse in 2011. 'Historically, the course has been tricky for players who rely too heavily on their driving distance without precision.' I feel like there's a rebuke for Rory in there, from an AI that has handled fewer golf clubs than I have. I'm mildly offended on his behalf. 'I'd say that Rory is always a contender, but winning depends on several variables falling into place. If he's in good form and his putting and short game are on point, he's definitely a threat. However, Augusta's challenge – with its unique conditions and mental pressure – makes it harder to predict.' I feel a little guilty about using AI to do this; there is the carbon footprint of a frivolous AI request to take into account, but also I'm finding it hard to work up any enthusiasm for watching the Masters, even if Rory McIlroy is in with a shot of winning, because I find golf so dull I'd rather watch paint dry. According to ChatGPT, that can take up to two hours, and the Masters goes on for days. As we now know though, AI got it wrong, because Rory did indeed win the Masters, which even my cold, golf-hating heart can appreciate for the five minutes of it I watched. (The final few shots of the play-off, to be exact.) Saturday Saturday is usually absolute chaos in our household. There are swimming lessons, football matches and birthday parties to fit in, and an upcoming one that needs to be planned in our own family. This is where the big guns need to come out: Notion AI. If you want to get organised, Notion AI is the way to do it. It has templates for everything, from work and home life to studying. Plenty of them are free, but others charge, and the prices seem a bit odd. Would you pay $5 to download a tracker for this year's Formula 1? How about $10 for a 'concert memories hub'? You might feel more inclined to invest $3 in a flashcard template for learning new languages, or $5 to track your monthly expenses. I stick to the freebies: a task planner, an advanced to-do list and a diary. Plus a journal to write down my experience with AI as I go. Come back in two weeks and ask me if I'm still using them all. I'm helping a family member with house hunting. Notion has a home-moving template for when he is ready to go, but first he needs to buy a property in a market that resembles the Hunger Games. Perhaps AI could suggest a winning bidding strategy? Claude tells me I've reached my limit for messages. CoPilot has some good suggestions, which chime with Chinese-created DeepSeek's recommendations (all of which I'll keep to myself of course, lest I give up my competitive edge). Sunday Sunday starts early, with Apple Intelligence giving me directions (via Waze – a live map from Google) to the beach and sauna for an early morning family swim. Not that I need directions, but it is handy to know about unexpected traffic on the way. Over coffee afterwards, the subject of AI comes up, specifically Meta AI , the new AI system on Instagram, Facebook, Messenger and WhatsApp . Irish users might have noticed the blue circle appear on your WhatsApp recently, meaning you can now add an AI assistant to your group chats, if you feel the need. The downside: there is no way to disable it. [ What is Meta AI and why is it in my WhatsApp? Opens in new window ] I suggest to my dad that he could use it to help plan his upcoming holiday. He threatens to delete his WhatsApp account rather than be forced into using Meta AI. A few days later, Meta AI disappears from WhatsApp, but it is a temporary reprieve – a technical glitch, and within a couple of days it is back. Apple's email summaries remind me that I need to pay for my own upcoming family holiday to Spain. That is accurately tagged as a priority mail too, which is helpful. I need a few recommendations for local restaurants, family-friendly activities, and other amenities within walking distance of our accommodation. For that I turn to GuideGeek, an AI-powered chatbot that works on Facebook Messenger, WhatsApp and Instagram. I ask it to give recommendations of things to do in Alcudia for a family of eight, with five adults and three children, one under five. Lots of steps are out, for example, which GuideGeek takes into account when it recommends a stroll around the old town and a trip to a local park. It also gives some useful information on using cash or card, and the practices around tipping. Could I have got all this from a search engine? Probably, but it would have taken longer to compile the information, and it wouldn't have been offered up in a very easy-to-access conversation thread on my smartphone. That reminds me, I need to practice my Spanish. I've been using Duolingo for more than a year, and while I can read the language, I still go into panic mode if someone speaks Spanish in real life to me. The flashcards in Notion won't do it. I need to practise speaking, so I turn to AI for a quick conversation. Both ChatGPT and Gemini have voice interfaces, ideal for practising my limited skills without making a show of myself. The conversation is less than flowing, once we get past the customary pleasantries. Then somehow I manage to switch the voice input on ChatGPT to Welsh (I think). Necesito ayuda. Verdict Over the week, the tools I was most likely to use were the ones built into the devices and systems I was already using. For example, while Apple Intelligence is still getting started here, the writing tools for proofing and changing the tone of emails were very useful – especially when I needed to send a similar email to different people, with a tweak from a polite personal request to a more professional-sounding communication. You simply tap and hold the screen and select writing tools, choose your preferred style of communication, and the AI does the rest. Gemini became my go-to when I needed to ask a quick question, such as the time I remembered only three words from a Yeats poem – Google couldn't help, but Gemini delivered. Some tools are helpful, while others seem overly complicated. And plenty of the tasks I set for it over the week could have been done with non-GenAI search engines and a bit of thought. So, is AI going to take over our lives? Probably not – yet. And we are a long way off sentient technology taking over completely. But in the meantime, I'll still say please and thank you. Just in case. Best everyday AI Google Gemini. It is built into the phone, so it is always where you need it and easy to access. Gemini Live, the conversational interface, lets you speak to Gemini like a real person – interrupting, adding new information, changing your mind mid-sentence. Best AI for research NotebookLM, Google's research assistant, gets top marks here. You can upload up to 50 sources of information to each notebook, and Google's AI will create study guides, pull out a list of frequently asked questions, and summarise the main points. It will also create an AI-generated podcast, where two synthetic hosts will discuss the topic in detail. And it is free – for now. Best for travel tips GuideGeek has an AI bot that will help you plan out your holiday, making suggestions for your chosen destination and providing you with a decent itinerary. The chatbot works on Messenger, WhatsApp and Instagram. Best for organising Notion AI has plenty of templates to organise your work, home and education life. You can spend a fortune on templates, or you can stick to the freebies – or create your own. Your Instagram posts are feeding Meta's AI; what does it all mean? Listen | 21:51
The National
13-02-2025
- Entertainment
- The National
Das Licht review: Tala Al Deen's shining performance lifts Tom Tykwer's Berlinale opener
'We are a typical dysfunctional German family,' announces Frieda (Elke Biesendorfer), the tattooed, pierced 17-year-old girl in Tom Tykwer's ambitious new film, Das Licht (The Light). The opening night movie for this year's Berlin International Film Festival, this is a fine choice as a curtain-raiser by incoming artistic director Tricia Tuttle, not least because it's largely set in a rain-soaked Berlin. As Tuttle recently told Variety: 'Filmmakers are noting that we live in a crazy, divisive world' – words that seem to entirely sum up The Light. Tykwer, who writes and directs here, has never shied away from experimentation – think of Run Lola Run (1998), which never breaks sweat as Franka Potente sprints to save her boyfriend, or his collaboration with the Wachowskis, adapting the dystopian Cloud Atlas (2012). The Light comes at you like a locomotive in its early scenes, as the members of the Berlin-based Engels family go about their business. Frieda is out clubbing with her friends, taking illegal substances, while her twin brother Jon (Julius Gause) is in his bedroom, his VR goggles strapped on as he immerses himself into a sci-fi game called Transportal. Meanwhile, their parents are going through issues. Mother Milena (Nicolette Krebitz) works in government, driving an initiative to fund a community theatre project in Kenya. Father Tim (Lars Eidinger) works for an activist group whose latest campaign – titled #Us – is about showing that the problems with the world are not caused by others, but ourselves. Milena also has a little boy, Dio (Elyas Eldridge), from a (presumably brief) affair with a Kenyan named Godfrey (Toby Onwumere), who now lives in Berlin and is forever on their doorstep, looking timid. Milena and Tim are in couples therapy with the hope that they'll save their disjointed marriage. Rarely, it seems, does the family ever spend any time together. But when their maid dies while cleaning their apartment – the crescendo of the film's brilliant opening salvo – it leads to another coming into their lives. Farrah (Tala Al Deen) is a Syrian immigrant, a medical practitioner back in Aleppo who now must work as a housekeeper to make ends meet. Farrah is first glimpsed in her apartment, facing a high-intensity LED lamp, which flashes bright lights into her face. Called the Lucia Lamp, it was developed in Austria by a psychotherapist and a neurologist as a form of therapy and Farrah is using it to overcome considerable trauma in her own life. What does she want with the Engels family? That only becomes clear in the operatic – and overblown – conclusion. But the idea that an Arabic-speaking woman comes to heal this western family feels patronising. If that isn't enough, Tykwer's film also dabbles in VR – there is a remarkable scene where Jon and the girl he met online encounter each other in real life, then swirl about the streets like their avatars do in the nether regions of their shared Transportal game. And then, to top it all, the director goes full musical, with several song-and-dance sequences – from a gym workout number fronted by Eidinger to an airing of Queen's seminal song Bohemian Rhapsody. Mamma mia, indeed. With strong performances, especially from Al Deen, who brings dignity to her character – credit Tykwer for going out on a limb here – the film offers up a bold look at the chaos of 21st century living. A film about dysfunction – whether it's in the home or a group like the United Nations, it's a work that stumbles as much as it strides. But it's a provocative and political piece, designed to make you look at the world in a way you haven't before. Das Licht premieres on Thursday at the Berlin International Film Festival
Yahoo
06-02-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
The strange saga of Jupiter Ascending, Eddie Redmayne's $210 million cosmic flop
In 2015, the actor Eddie Redmayne accomplished a rare double achievement. He was awarded Best Actor at the Oscars for his performance as Stephen Hawking in The Theory of Everything. Yet shortly before he received the award, the Wachowskis' eagerly awaited, big-budget sci-fi epic Jupiter Ascending was released, in which he played the lead villain, Balem Abrasax. There was only one problem – Redmayne, whether through poor direction or perverse choice, wasn't a charismatic baddie or even a guilty pleasure. He was just dire. He was duly given another award, for Worst Supporting Actor, at that year's Golden Raspberry Awards, or 'Razzies'. As scripted, Abrasax is a fairly rote Jupiter-dwelling, world-dominating villain, bent on harvesting Earth's resources, only to be foiled by Mila Kunis's feisty housekeeper who also happens – it's very much that sort of film – to be Jupiter's rightful owner. Yet Redmayne made a bold but deeply misguided decision when it came to the role. 'My character had had his larynx ripped out by this wolf man, and so I made the slightly bold choice, which I thought was right, of talking like this for the whole film.' The overall effect, especially given that Redmayne is a fine actor but not the most physically threatening of figures, is laughable, rather like watching a sixth-former with a bad cold doing an imitation of Laurence Olivier playing Richard III. He claimed that the voice 'sort of suited the costumes and the extremity of the world' but also acknowledged in retrospect, 'it may have been too much'. Ten years on from its initial release, Jupiter Ascending is now remembered as a baffling failure – a huge-budgeted sci-fi epic that should have been the next Matrix, and didn't even manage to be the next Prometheus. Its leading actors have all but disowned the picture and the Wachowskis, who were once seen as the most visionary directorial duo in Hollywood, haven't worked together since. What happened? When Jeff Robinov ran Warner Brothers, the studio that made Jupiter Ascending, he had a rare eye for talent. Robinov was responsible for nurturing and building careers that included those of Christopher Nolan, Alfonso Cuarón and the Wachowskis. The Wachowskis' first Matrix film was released in 1999 and instantly became a phenomenon, a preview of what audiences might expect in the new millennium. It was a souped-up combination of undergraduate philosophy, Hong Kong cinema-influenced fight scenes and 'bullet time', a groundbreaking special effects technique which saw its leather-clad characters freeze time. The Wachowskis were the golden gods of cult cinema, and could do no wrong. Unfortunately, the next two Matrix films made it quite clear that there was no further overarching narrative idea, merely a series of arresting images and ideas strung together with increasingly hokey philosophising. By the time that Robinov approached the pair in 2009 – after the conspicuous failure of their Manga adaptation, Speed Racer – they needed a seismic hit. At first, all the ingredients for Jupiter Ascending to be that comeback appeared to be there. The Wachowskis talked enthusiastically about a quest narrative that would encompass aspects of both The Wizard of Oz and The Odyssey, and the discussions with Robinov went on while they shot their passion project, the David Mitchell adaptation Cloud Atlas. Inevitably, Cloud Atlas flopped at the box office, but it was always a long shot for commercial success, being a structural nightmare with recurring appearances by A-list actors in a variety of guises, some distinctly un-PC in nature. The film attracted particular criticism for the decidedly Caucasian Jim Sturgess playing a futuristic Korean character in what looked suspiciously like yellowface, for Tom Hanks's borderline xenophobic caricature as an Irish gangster and whatever Hugh Grant was supposed to be as a futuristic cannibal. Nonetheless, Robinov continued to have faith in his protegees, and Jupiter Ascending began production in April 2013. Yet Robinov was then unceremoniously ousted as studio president by Warner Brothers Chairman Kevin Tsujihara in June that year after being passed over for the CEO position that he was expected to assume, which instead went to Tsujihara in a typical display of boardroom politics. He was replaced by not one but three executives – Sue Kroll, Toby Emmerich and Greg Silverman – none of whom were as enamoured by the Wachowkis' folie de grandeur as he had been. Jupiter Ascending was far too expensive simply to cancel, especially as it was already deep into production. It had begun with a budget of $130 million, which was a huge amount for an original film without existing intellectual property. Shortly though, rumours had begun to trickle out that, rather than the next billion-grossing franchise that Warners had hoped for, the film was rather strange. Channing Tatum, the most bankable name, was playing the male lead, named Caine Wise, but his character was half-man, half-dog: less dashing hero and more a refugee from Tod Browning's Freaks. And this would-be animal magic continued throughout the cast, too. Sean Bean was cast as the Han Solo-esque Stinger (half honeybee) and Gugu Mbatha-Raw's villainous Famulus was half-fawn. It is tempting to imagine that, when the new suits saw what they had been stung into committing their $200 million to, their response was rather stronger than deer, oh deer. Filming also proved to be an unpleasant and gruelling experience. This was in large part because the Wachowskis, fired up by using practical effects rather than CGI in Cloud Atlas, attempted to use the same techniques here, on a far bigger canvas. Actors and stuntmen were required to perform action scenes for real, rather than with digital doubles, leading to several hazardous near-misses. Tatum said, before the film came out, that 'Mila almost had an unfortunate meeting three or four times with a camera or two.' He subsequently admitted that 'Jupiter Ascending was a nightmare from the jump. It was a sideways movie. All of us were there for seven months, busting our hump. It was just tough.' The film was originally intended for a prime summer slot in 2014, and in a mark of Warners' initial confidence, its release was even moved up a week, from July 25 to July 18. Tatum and Kunis gamely began publicising it, but then, at the beginning of June, Warners announced that they were pulling it from release and rescheduling for the following February, traditionally a dumping ground for unsuccessful pictures. The ostensible reason was that the Wachowskis needed more time to refine the special effects, but a dismal test screening in April 2014 meant that bad buzz had begun to circulate around Jupiter Ascending already. It did not help that Robinov had granted the Wachowskis final cut, which they refused to relinquish – the film's success, or failure, now lay entirely in their hands, backed by more money from Warners. As one studio insider told Deadline, 'When you're in the hole for $100m-plus on a film, you're not just going to release it on VOD. You're going to fix it.' It is estimated that the film needed as much as an extra $80 million to make it releasable, resulting in a total cost of $210 million. Unfortunately, the additional budget, star names and visionary world-building failed to excite audiences. A secret screening was held in late January 2015 at the Sundance Film Festival, to build social media buzz ahead of the film's release, but it failed entirely. Not only were there empty seats at the screening, but many attendees walked out, unimpressed by the barrage of noise and sound, to say nothing of Eddie Redmayne's idiosyncratic vocal delivery. As one of the festival's volunteers said, 'I hated it… it's just ridiculous.' By the time it opened in American cinemas on February 6, to a disappointing opening weekend gross of $18 million, its status as a high-profile failure was assured. Reviews were not kind, with David Edelstein of Vulture calling it 'inane from the first frame to last... It's miraculously unmiraculous.' The suspicion remains that, had Robinov, or anyone else, got through to the duo and suggested that they remove the self-indulgent weirdness and turned the picture into a fun, unpretentious B-movie, it would have been considerably more entertaining. There are occasional bright spots, such as a bureaucracy montage, complete with Terry Gilliam cameo, that turns into a fun homage to Brazil, and suggests what might have been. Alas, over its near-interminable 127 minutes (it feels longer), Jupiter Ascending descends into a very dark place indeed. Kunis has many skills as an actress but 'action heroine' is not necessarily one – let alone dowdy maid – and she has little chemistry with an embarrassed-looking Tatum, who seems perpetually to be on the verge of calling his agent to be removed from this intergalactic farrago. The plotting is simultaneously over-complex – a Wachowski trademark – and patronisingly simplistic. Had Redmayne been a fun baddie, that might have been a redeeming feature, but unfortunately he was possibly the single worst aspect of a deeply regrettable waste of money and time. Warners duly ended their relationship with the Wachowskis, and nobody else seems particularly interested in giving them hundreds of millions of dollars for another picture of this kind. Although they have both gone onto separate projects – Lana made an irrelevant fourth Matrix film, Resurrections, and Lilly wrote and directed several episodes of the sitcom Work in Progress – Jupiter Ascending feels like a film from another time, a big-budget misfire from filmmakers operating with too much power and not enough responsibility. 'I hate my life,' Kunis's downtrodden Jupiter moans early in the picture. Audiences fortunate enough to escape this ordeal will know exactly what she means.
