White House Down

So, it has been a little while since I felt inspired to write something on here. Perhaps it's because it has been a little while since I saw a film I felt the need to write about?
Anyway. This week Boyfriend and I went to see White House Down. Or as I prefer to call it; Die Hard 3.5.
It's true you could easily substitute John and Emily Cale for John and Lucy MacLane. Although I suppose at this point Lucy would be older than twelve, bear with me, believe that Die Hard exists outside the time constraints of our universe.The father figure in this case, played by Channing Tatum, could be modeled on McClane's inept attempts at fatherhood. McClane is isolated from his children by time and distance, Cale is locked out of his daughters life by a lack of contact and her preoccupation with things he doesn't understand; politics, social media. They are trapped in a building being attacked by terrorists and there is someone important they need to protect (Holly, The President). Although no one initially believes that Cale/McClane can save the day, of course he manages to. Good guy hides from bad guy, good guy fights and wins against bad guy, destroying some part of the white house along the way, more bad guys come in, repeat. There is even a part where one of the terrorists loses his brother and swears to bring down the person who did this. It's hard not to draw parallels with Die Hard.
The movie is like a buddy cop situation for father and daughter and the story is entirely predictable but the beauty of this movie is in the execution. The casting of Jamie Foxx as the president draws an obvious parallel to the current administration, and the role makes the most of him as the "bad-ass leader of the free world". The developing relationship between Foxx and Cale is the central story here. The beginning sets up carefully that Cale is essentially a failure in everything he has ever attemped. His daughter has spent all morning on her phone, ignoring him. His marriage has fallen apart. He is unable to get a job as anything apart from a glorified taxi driver to a senator. Maggie Gyllenhaal runs through a list of his unsuccessful past in the first few minutes of the film. The president tells him to "stop lying to kids". His former wife is annoyed by him being late and missing out on his daughters life. Yet as soon as the guns come out the president places his full trust in Cale. Most of the action scenes are one on one combat and there are countless shots of Cale sliding over tables, chairs, small walls... well anything really... It's clear that the director is trying to keep the frame 'busy' and keep movement going at all times. They make for an interesting pair and bounce off each other which does keep viewing interesting. If you compare this with its sister movie, Olympus has Fallen, while the trailers make them appear the same, there is a major difference. While Olympus tries to emphasize the gravity of the situation and continually reminds us that Bad Things Are Happening, White House Down looks at the inherent comedy of the typical American Patriotic Action film.
There are ludicrous moments, for example in an utterly ludicrous sequence where Cale and Sawyer are in the President's limousine driving round and round the fountain in the middle of the White House  the windscreen is blacked out and the president is trying to figure out how to assemble and use a rocket launcher in the back seat.The bad guys here are cartoonish and one sided, their motivation is thinly veiled.You get no real satisfaction from them being taken out, but that doesn't mean you don't feel good when the good guys win. The film ends with a Emily waving the Stars and Stripes heroically on the White House' front lawn. It's fun, light-hearted, and doesn't slip into the "I'm OK but how is the country?" overdone patriotism trap that others have fallen into; Vantage Point, Olympus has Fallen et al. Although you might instantly (like Boyfriend) guess the outcome of the entire plot five minutes into the film, it's fun and enjoyable. It's always good to see a film that doesn't take itself too seriously and is able to poke fun at itself and it's genre. That said there are certainly a plethora of haters out there, so I wouldn't necessarily take my word for it. It's always worth doing your research.

The BBC Philharmonic play Sibelius, Shostakovich, Foulds and Nielsen. Saturday 26th October 2013 at The Bridgewater Hall.

The BBC Philharmonic play Sibelius, Shostakovich, Foulds and Nielsen. Saturday 26^th October 2013 at The Bridgewater Hall.

John Storgards, Conductor

Guys Braunstein, violin

Zoe Beyers, guest leader

The Bridgewater Hall is a dramatic venue, narrowing at the stage, which leads the eye towards an intriguing focal point; a large pipe organ. So here, beneath a blanket of stars, John Storgards takes us on a journey from evocative Northern Finnish landscapes, wind and snow swept Russia, Scottish glens and the peaceful Welsh Valleys that ends in the idyll of a tiny Danish Island.

The evening begins with Sibelius’s Tone Poem ‘The Bard’, a reflection on mortality. Beginning in a harp led stillness, The Bard explores string textures and colours with a dark, moody bass line, contrasting with violins at the very top of their compass. The music ebbs and flows, ocean-like, from the reflective to eruptive surges of sound. The piece ends with a certain finality meditating on death and reunanciation.

Shostakovich’s violin concerto is an opportunity for incredible virtuosity and Guy Braunstein is an energetic and charismatic performer whose enthusiasm for the piece is matched by a great playing ability. The concerto is in four parts; Nocturne, Scherzo, Passacaglia and Burlesque with a lengthened cadenza linking the final two movements. The Nocturne begins with the orchestra setting down the melodic language that will define the rest of the movements, and builds as the solo begins to elaborate and expand the ideas. The overall tone of the Nocturne is repressed, as though the violinist is holding back the devil about to release into the scherzo. All eyes are on Braunstein as the movement concludes with the violin breathing a sigh of relief, which elicits an audible gasp from the audience before launching into the ‘diabolical’ scherzo. If the tone of the Nocturne is suppression of emotion and a reflection of Soviet censorship at the time, Scherzo is a complete reaction against it. Braunstein plays with unimaginable speed and clarity of tone. While the orchestra suggest the music of the Russian peasants the solo swirls like snow above it, playing an intricate game of cat and mouse. The Passacaglia is a return to similar form of the Nocturne, but with astonishing emotional depth.

The second half is a well-balanced follow up to the first, with two pieces of similar lengths and moods to the first. Both pieces in the second half are by composers who were reflective of their surroundings and the natural world, while Foulds was a collector of folk music and wrote for Indian classical ensembles, as well as Western, Nielsen never forgot his roots in Funen, his family background and his obsession with the natural world. Foulds’ Keltic Suite is reflective of the landscapes of Celtic countries. The first movement – The Clans- makes use of the Scotch Snap and drone basses to evoke a generalised ‘Scottish-Celtic’ atmosphere especially in the pastoral second subject. The programme notes suggest the second movement – A Lament- is intended to evoke Wales, and the third – The Call – is Irish in inspiration. The second movement possibly owes more to Foulds own background as a cellist (with the Halle, in whose home this suite is tonight played) combining the melodic cello with a delicate harp line. The concluding part, The Call, is a combination of march and jig which has the audience toe-tapping and ready to dance.  This makes use of violin parts styled more as ‘fiddles’ than typical violin writing and this is an opportunity to show off the skill of the orchestra itself.

The evening ends with Nielsens ‘Sinfonia Semplice’ which, contrary to its popular name is anything but simple. Nielsen intended his sixth symphony to be a departure from his other works, and that he thought it would be more amiable and smooth. The piece begins with a mood of untroubled innocence, but this is soon coloured with dissonance in the brass and a grim outburst of sudden noise. The second movement also experiments with colour using an unusual group of instruments; piccolo, clarinets, bassoons, a trombone and a small group of percussion. Although the strings have remained tacet in the Humoreske, the next – Proposta Seria – is intense and dark again, experimenting with string texture in much the same way as the earlier pieces this evening, it also feels restrictive, the strings taking most of the melody with brief accents of the other timbres. The final movement – Tema con Variazoni – sets out the melody, unusually, in the bassoon but the 9 variations that follow move further and further from the original motifs. Although the orchestra had by now found their feet and settled into the music, the piece failed to capture the drama and excitement of the Shostakovich.

The overriding theme of the evening exploring textures and colours for strings was an intriguing one, as we journeyed across Europe in stunning and contrasting pieces. Although the evening petered away towards the end, the audience remained captivated by an enigmatic performance from both soloist and orchestra.