#61-70

Finn Faces 7/?

Helvetica (Hustwit, 2007) DH: #65 Synopsis: The history, connotations and effect of the world's most popular font, Helvetica (hint: what you're reading is also Helvetica). The year 2007 marked the 50th anniversary of the Helvetica typeface. To most people, this little nugget of information (#fact if you will) means very little. Begin to show them however just how ubiquitous and ever-present Helvetica is in their everyday lives and you'll have their interest. Hustwit certainly got mine very early on. From street signs to Nike advertising campaigns, from littering notices to shop billboards, Helvetica is omnipresent. We must see thousands of words and phrases a day that use the Helvetica typeface, yet far from wonder why the typeface is always identical, we don't even recognize they are in fact the same typeface. Hustwit's 'Helvetica' delves into this gap, one that didn't exist for the viewer before the film started, but quickly engages our curiosity: why is it used so uniformly? why does it look so...clear? what does that say about us? where did it come from? who creates this stuff? It is a courageous director who opens that can of worms, but Hustwit takes to it with relish. Taking us back to Switzerland in the 1950s, the field of typography is laid out in full by a panoply of talking heads ranging from modern-day typographers, to graphic designers, to mere (and I use that reluctantly) artists. Perhaps fittingly, the issue of Helvetica's omnipresence remains the centre of attention for all those interviewd, how can they explain away the veritable phenomenon it has become? The range of responses elicited conveys a certain chasm in the field, the 'neutrality' that arises as the font's attraction is as much a joy and example of sheer artistry to one artist as it is depressing and mere bourgeois subterfuge to the next. The discussions of the aesthetic of the font, and of others' (failed) attempts to move beyond it, do risk at times moving beyond the film's appeal to the layman, but are forgiven for the passion they betray of the filmmaker and his subjects. As a font, Helvetica is more than simply an inspiration for the corporations that depend on its neutrality and aesthetic to promote their goods. It is an instrument that both lures figures into the design industry for want of its use and pushes those opposed to its capitalist connotations into usurping its ideals and creating their own fonts. Thus far, few have been successful and Helvetica reigns supreme on the street; have we reached the 'end of history' for typography? Helvetica may be its perfect form. Concluding Thought: Nothing to do with typography, but who knew 'Helvetia' in Latin was Switzerland? (#fact)

Superhero Me (Sale, 2010) DH: #68 Synopsis: Short on finances but rich in charm and geekiness. Sale embarks on mission to transform himself into the caped crusader of Britain's Sutton and Epsom, enlisting the support and tutelage of established (and the occasional novice) superheroes along the way. ----------- Apology: If I had a strict set of criteria, one which took into account budgets, Sale's 'Superhero Me' would be higher on my hierarchy. However, as it is, I do not and so it founds itself down the list. Please bear that in mind though if weighing up whether to see it (also, any text which uses Mariah Carey as an epigraph is always going to struggle to win me back thereafter). ------------ If able to forgive the high school plot and technology, Steve Sale's charming tale of his pursuit of local superhero status is a hugely gratifying and warm exposition of potentially the world's geekiest subculture. The director, soon-to-be revealed as 'S.O.S', Sutton and Epsom's newest (and very much only) loud-alarm-wielding crime-fighter, fulfills the conventional 'ordinary Joe' origins of the superhero almost too well. A music technician by trade, Sale's project appears to arise out of a combination of genuine love for film-making and an unconscious desire to avoid the planning of his wedding (due to periodically conflict with his superpower obligations). It must be said - the support of his fiance is the equivalent of any comic spouse I've ever read. Some questions remain unanswered; why the impulse to transform into a superhero by night, in an admittedly very safe-looking town, is never adequately explained - other than a general desire to know how to do so. Similarly, whilst the 'how' to transform is detailed in depth, the more interesting question of why towns like Gotham have and need Batman is never explored. Nevertheless, that much is forgiven when the film's real stars emerge, the motley crew of associated superheroes already in operation worldwide. Though partially ridiculed when juxtaposed with Sale's foredoomed attempts to create his own identity in their image, the men and women taking the law into their hands are shown to be honest, civic-loving neighbours frustrated into helping out where the state is unable or unwilling. I don't think this was Sale's intention initially, but the film is far better for it - Sutton and Epsom doesn't need S.O.S, but there are towns and cities where the work of its 'superheroes', not necessarily in costume but always of their own initiative, are crucial and deserving of documentation. Concluding Thought: Sale won't do much to change the Hugh Grant bumbling Englishman stereotype.

Lighting will strike many times with Joan Rivers, as it does in the neat climax to this film. She doesn't work herself senseless doing gigs in rural Minnesota simply for the money (as she tries to infer), she craves the adulation. Melissa Rivers describes the many comedians she has met as sharing the same insecurity complex that no doubt affects her own mother; seen shuffling around nervously before shows, agonizing over particular words in reviews and lambasting the number of writers Jon Stewart has vis-a-vis her own, the similarities to Conan O'Brien's 'Can't Stop' are unmistakable. Entertainers are their own species. If you are familiar with Rivers and her work, you'll enjoy this. If not, Conan's has more to offer. Concluding Thought: Maybe I'm just cynical, but 2012 needs to be the year of documenting those who hate their jobs. Enough of the Cunninghams and Rivers of this world.

Intended as a joke, there is nevertheless a very apparent problem with Broomfield's blundering style; he has yet to find a way, either personally or in the edit room, to emphasize crucial points when they are made. He is like the school maths prodigy who solves the riddle tormenting the world's academics with a shrug of his shoulders and a move to the next. He swindles an interview with Suge Knight with then interviews him with same intensity he does anyone else, yet no prosecution lawyer worth his salt approaches the defendant in the same manner as his key witness. Broomfield's case (in all his films) would be a lot stronger if he acted like he was getting closer to, or had in his grasp, the winning pieze to the puzzle - rather than adopt his typically comatose style that infers he is never any closer to the resolution than when he started. It doesn't render this a bad documentary, just one that is not as good as it could have been. Concluding Thought: Broomfield's blundering style will always affect one's impression of how close he is actually getting to something meaningful. 

Concluding Thought: You don't have to be a Beatnik to recognize the wonder of Burroughs' 1986 Thanksgiving Prayer...