ReportWire

Tag: ralph fiennes

  • Iron Maiden’s ‘The Number of the Beast’ Plays in Horror Film ’28 Years Later: The Bone Temple’

    Iron Maiden’s track, “The Number of the Beast,” blasts through a climactic scene in 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple. The horror movie hit theaters on Jan. 14. Actor Ralph Fiennes dances on human bones while the song roars, trying to persuade a bloodthirsty cult he’s Lucifer himself.

    Critics loved it. “The scene involving Iron Maiden and Ralph Fiennes is jaw-dropping. You go, ‘wow!’ It was pure cinema,” said Mark Kermode on Kermode and Mayo’s Take.

    Iron Maiden told Planet Rock, “We were delighted to be offered this placement prior to the shooting of the last two (28 Years Later) movies, and whilst we knew it was a pivotal scene, we couldn’t have foreseen just how incredible it was going to be.” The band added that they felt the British tone of the series made it worthwhile. Danny Boyle, Alex Garland, and director Nia DaCosta sealed the deal. Iron Maiden rarely allows others to use their music.

    “The Number of the Beast” served as the title track for the band’s third album in 1982. It marked the first with singer Bruce Dickinson. Bassist Steve Harris wrote it after a nightmare following a viewing of Damien: The Omen II. “We knew when we were making the album that it was special,” Dickinson said in a 2011 interview with Music Radar. “And you can hear that excitement on the record.”

    The album reached No. 1 in the UK in April 1982. Manager Rod Smallwood told Classic Rock the record sold 1.5 million copies in its first six months. The recording budget was just £28,000 ($37,569).

    The song sparked controversy in the US. “It gave us loads of publicity. The kids who did want to buy our records were like, ‘Oh, cool! The religious right are burning their records! I better buy half a dozen!’” Dickinson said in 2005. Iron Maiden will play at Knebworth on July 11. Support acts will include The Darkness, The Hu, Airbourne, and The Almighty.

    Laura Adkins

    Source link

  • 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple’s Surprising Twist Makes It So Great

    28 Years Later: The Bone Temple, the next entry in the 28 Days Later franchise and a sequel to 2025’s 28 Years Later, is out now in theaters. While the film retains many of its horror elements, it does feature some surprising twists that take the franchise in new directions, and could have big implications going forward.

    What surprise twist in 28 Years: The Bone Temple makes the movie so good?

    28 Years Later: The Bone Temple picks up almost immediately after the end of 2025’s 28 Years Later. Spike (Alfie Williams) is now a member of the Satanic group led by Sir Lord Jimmy Crystal (Jack O’Connell), and joins other children as a member of his “fingers.” Meanwhile, Dr. Ian Kelson (Ralph Fiennes) continues his work of maintaining his titular Bone Temple, a makeshift memorial to the many people who were victims to the Rage Virus during its outbreak. It’s here that the film really shifts from what the franchise is best known for.

    While much of the film does focus on Jimmy, his fingers, and the brutal things they do in the name of “Old Nick” (Satan) and Jimmy, the movie hangs heavily on Kelson and his relationship with Samson (Chi Lewis-Parry), an Alpha leader of the infected who is introduced in 28 Years Later as a fully nude, incredibly strong zombie that leads all other infected. Throughout 28 Years Later, Kelson would sedate Samson with morphine, allowing him to freely interact with the Alpha zombie.

    In The Bone Temple, this continues. Unlike 28 Years Later, which features Samson being subdued as he’s going to attack Kelson, Samson instead becomes addicted to the morphine and seeks out Kelson to get sedated. It’s here that things take a turn, as Samson begins to have flashbacks to his life before becoming infected with the Rage Virus. Kelson also begins to wonder if there is a potential cure or “fix” for the Rage Virus.

    Toward the end of the movie, as Kelson’s supply of morphine dwindles, he plans to kill Samson in an act of mercy, but Samson shocks Kelson by speaking. It’s the first time we’ve seen an infected act like this in the entire franchise, and Kelson theorizes that the Rage Virus is a form of psychosis, which he thinks can be treated via antipsychotics. He soon begins trying to cook up a cure for the virus, which he gives to Samson. The cure seems to work, as Samson not only regains his consciousness but remembers his childhood in the process.

    At the end of the movie, Kelson is stabbed by Jimmy, who himself is crucified upside down by Spike and Jimmy Ink (Erin Kellyman), another member of the group. As the two die, Samson returns, this time fully human, and takes Kelson with him, thanking him in perfect English in the process.

    Although touching throughout the movie, the moments between Kelson and Samson are much bigger for the overall picture of the 28 Years franchise. Throughout the entire franchise, no cure or fix seemed to work for the Rage Virus, with the only method of containment being to fully quarantine places where the infected were. A potential fix for the Rage Virus existing changes not only what can be done about it, but also how the survivors left across England can fend for themselves from those afflicted by it.

    In a franchise that has come to be known for its incredibly dour and sad moments, and one that shows off just how brutal things can be, it’s an incredible twist. Not only does Dr. Kelson’s optimism shine through, but it may also have been enough to come up with a potential cure for the virus itself. Of course, with Kelson no longer around, it’ll be interesting to see whether or not the cure for the Rage Virus ever comes up again, or if Samson is the only infected to ever be given the chance to be saved.

    Anthony Nash

    Source link

  • ’28 Years Later: The Bone Temple’ Review: A Perfect Entry Into the Franchise

    It isn’t easy to take a franchise and introduce new characters and make them as exciting as the original film. But both 28 Years Later and now The Bone Temple have shown us how rich the world of 28 Days Later really is.

    The Alex Garland written film follows the story of Jimmy (Jack O’Connell) and his Jimmys. Through the unique lens of Nia DaCosta. At the end of 28 Years Later, we got to see what Jimmy (a character we met briefly in the beginning of the film) was doing now. But through all of The Bone Temple, we’re seeing both the darker side of the post-apocalyptic world mixed with the hopeful.

    Dr. Ian Kelson (Ralph Fiennes) represents the hope in the dark times. In the first 28 Years Later film, he was a guide for Isla (Jodie Comer) and Spike (Alfie Williams). And in many ways, his role in The Bone Temple explores the deeper motivations of why Kelson wants to exist in this world in the way he is. And both Kelson’s storyline and the Jimmys storyline come together in a beautiful way to show an audience how differently people can react to things like a global outbreak.

    The terrifying world of the Jimmys

    Not everyone takes to life in the apocalypse in the same way. Some, like Dr. Kelson, are trying to be a force of good in the world. The Jimmys represent the opposite of that. Spike finds himself among their ranks and only one Jimmy (played Erin Kellyman) really has the time and compassion towards Spike that he really needs. Instead, most of the Jimmys thrive in chaos.

    Their leader, Jimmy Crystal, wants to take whatever he can and it leads to destruction and pain. No matter where he goes or what he does, he takes and takes and forces the Jimmys do it for him. It shows the darkside of things like the end of the world. He could easily be someone who allowed others to to join them, to build a community. Instead, he uses the fear of the world to his advantage.

    And DaCosta and O’Connell don’t shy away from the darkness that is within Jimmy. He believes himself to be the son of the Devil and you can see how that idea has corroded his mind. There is no hope for “goodness” within him and it makes for an incredibly compelling villain opposite both Spike and Kelson.

    Compassion and Dr. Kelson

    It would be so easy for Kelson to give up but a lot of his work with Samson (Chi Lewis-Parry) is hopeful. He believes in humanity and even the infected in a way that everyone else has seemingly given up on. In the 28 years since the outbreak happened, Kelson hasn’t lost hope and that is part of what made his section of 28 Years Later so brilliant.

    I loved the Kelson section of that film so it wasn’t really a surprise that I came into The Bone Temple with the same love for the character. And it ended up making what DaCosta and Garland are doing with The Bone Temple that much more special.

    28 Years Later: The Bone Temple is in theaters on January 16.

    (featured image: Sony Pictures)

    Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

    Image of Rachel Leishman

    Rachel Leishman

    Editor in Chief

    Rachel Leishman (She/Her) is the Editor in Chief of the Mary Sue. She’s been a writer professionally since 2016 but was always obsessed with movies and television and writing about them growing up. A lover of Spider-Man and Wanda Maximoff’s biggest defender, she has interests in all things nerdy and a cat named Benjamin Wyatt the cat. If you want to talk classic rock music or all things Harrison Ford, she’s your girl but her interests span far and wide. Yes, she knows she looks like Florence Pugh. She has multiple podcasts, normally has opinions on any bit of pop culture, and can tell you can actors entire filmography off the top of her head. Her current obsession is Glen Powell’s dog, Brisket.

    Her work at the Mary Sue often includes Star Wars, Marvel, DC, movie reviews, and interviews.

    Rachel Leishman

    Source link

  • Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson to Return for ‘Hunger Games: Sunrise on the Reaping’

    Jennifer Lawrence and Josh Hutcherson are returning to the games.

    The two stars, known for their roles in Lionsgate‘s original Hunger Games films, will appear in the forthcoming prequel movie The Hunger Games: Sunrise on the Reaping, The Hollywood Reporter has confirmed. Lionsgate releases the new feature in theaters Nov. 20, 2026.

    Lawrence will reprise her role as Katniss Everdeen, while Hutcherson will return as Peeta Mellark, with the pair likely appearing in a flash-forward. No details have been disclosed.

    Francis Lawrence directs the movie adaptation of Suzanne Collins‘ best-selling novel. The previously confirmed castmembers of Sunrise on the Reaping include Ralph Fiennes as President Snow, Jesse Plemons as Plutarch Heavensbee, Kelvin Harrison Jr. as Beetee Latier, Kieran Culkin as Caesar Flickerman, and Elle Fanning as Effie Trinket. Joseph Zada, Glenn Close, Mckenna Grace, Maya Hawke and Whitney Peak round out the core cast.

    The book Sunrise on the Reaping takes place in Panem on the morning of the reaping for the 50th Hunger Games, 24 years before the events in The Hunger Games, the first novel that published in 2008. The franchise’s first five movies have surpassed $3.3 billion at the worldwide box office, with the initial four films led by Lawrence as Katniss, Hutcherson as Peeta, and Liam Hemsworth as Gale Hawthorne. The film series kicked off with 2012’s The Hunger Games.

    Lawrence and Hutcherson’s most recent entry in the franchise was 2015’s The Hunger Games: Mockingjay — Part 2, which ended with the pair married with children. Lawrence earned a Golden Globe Award nomination this week for her role in Die My Love, while Hutcherson currently stars in Five Nights at Freddy’s 2.

    Francis Lawrence helms the new movie from a script by Billy Ray that adapts Collins’ book. Nina Jacobson and Brad Simpson produce for Color Force, while Cameron MacConomy executive produces.

    Sunrise on the Reaping is a sequel to 2023’s The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes, which starred Rachel Zegler, Tom Blyth and Hunter Schafer.

    Lionsgate did not respond for comment.

    The InSneider was first to report on Lawrence and Hutcherson being involved.

    Ryan Gajewski

    Source link

  • Video: ‘Conclave’ | Anatomy of a Scene

    Video: ‘Conclave’ | Anatomy of a Scene

    “Hi, My name is Edward Berger and I’m the director of the movie “Conclave.” So we’re about 30 minutes into the movie. We’ve set up the place as the Vatican and the Pope has died. And now Cardinal Lawrence, the character played by Ralph Fiennes, is the Dean of the College of Cardinals, meaning he has to organize the coming election of the new pope. And now it’s his big day because it’s the first day of the conclave, meaning all the doors are being shut. The cardinals are going away into the Sistine Chapel to vote for this next pope. And Ralph Fiennes gives the introductory speech, a homily. And we chose this piece of music at the very beginning. It’s actually the only music that isn’t composed. Everything else is composed in the movie. So it’s the only kind of source music sung by a choir. And it is the only piece of music that is played in the Sistine Chapel for hundreds of years. And I found this fact on a 6:00 AM morning tour. We went to the Sistine Chapel on a guided tour with and it was empty. It’s the only time that it’s empty. If you go at 6:00 AM and the guide told us that this was the piece of music. So I looked it up and found it and found it immensely moving and beautiful. So I decided to put it into the movie. So Ralph starts out the speech in Italian, and Ralph spent a long time practicing Italian, and he was actually very, very adamant. We always had a dialogue coach or someone like an Italian woman there who listened to his diction and everything. She was very satisfied of how he performed it because also he was super meticulous that it felt believable that he’s lived there for 25 years and has practiced Italian for 25 years. So we paid a lot of attention to that. But then at some point, something comes over him, a feeling. And he stops. And then he switches into his natural language, which is English. “But you know all that.” “Let me speak from the heart for a moment.” And delivers a speech about really his true feelings, and that is doubt. He expresses his doubt about his own faith, about his own purpose in the church, about the Church in general, about what he thinks the next pope should be like, someone who accepts doubt and gives in to doubt. And that intuitive speech, that giving into it raises a lot of eyebrows. In this scene, you will notice, we’re usually fairly wide on Ralph in the beginning when he speaks Italian. We’re from behind. We’re from a profile. And then as soon as he speaks from the heart, as soon as his speech changes, we go in for a close up, a very frontal central close up, and the camera starts moving. And then it’s actually just one shot. “Certainty is the great enemy of unity.” “Certainty is the deadly enemy of tolerance.” It’s just one shot, uninterrupted small push in on Ralph as he speaks and he loses himself within his words and he doesn’t notice anyone around him. And only then, once he’s finished. We cut to the reverse of a wide shot of all the cardinals listening. “If there was only certainty and no doubt, there would be no mystery and therefore no need for faith.” “Let us pray that God will grant us a pope who doubts.” The scene sets Ralph Fiennes up as a character to be reckoned with. He delivers the speech that comes from his heart and other Cardinals, especially the ones with ambition to become the next pope, suddenly fear that there’s a new contender in the room. And that is the climax of the scene.

    Mekado Murphy

    Source link

  • ‘Conclave’ Review: Ralph Fiennes Gives a Career-Best Performance in Edward Berger’s Gripping Vatican-Set Drama

    ‘Conclave’ Review: Ralph Fiennes Gives a Career-Best Performance in Edward Berger’s Gripping Vatican-Set Drama

    Director Edward Berger, who made one of the best movies of 2022 with a vivid adaptation of All Quiet on the Western Front, shifts gears rewardingly to a movie set almost entirely inside the Vatican. Conclave, adapted from the popular novel by Robert Harris, demonstrates Berger’s versatility and also offers one of the best roles of his career to Ralph Fiennes, who is supported by an expert ensemble.

    The recent Oscar-nominated movie The Two Popes also took us inside the Vatican to examine the true story of the ascension of Pope Francis (played by Jonathan Pryce). That was essentially a docudrama, whereas this film is pure fictional speculation about the behind-the-scenes machinations involved in choosing a new pope after the death of the previous pontiff. Fiennes plays the Dean of the College of Cardinals, who is charged with overseeing the election.

    Conclave

    The Bottom Line

    A riveting peek behind the curtains of religious power.

    Venue: Telluride Film Festival
    Cast: Ralph Fiennes, Stanley Tucci, John Lithgow, Isabella Rossellini
    Director: Edward Berger
    Screenwriter: Peter Straughan

    2 hours

    Screenwriter Peter Straughan (Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) keeps the story moving swiftly. A collection of intriguing characters supports Fiennes’ Cardinal Lawrence. He feels a close bond with an American cardinal, charmingly played by Stanley Tucci. Both men are suspicious of the Canadian cardinal played by John Lithgow, who is campaigning feverishly to be the next pope, but who seems motivated more by personal ambition than by any humanitarian or spiritual impulses.

    A surprising contender is a cardinal from Nigeria, played by Lucian Msamati, and many in the Vatican see possibilities in the election of the first African pope. But there are other, more conservative cardinals like the Italian contender, played by Sergio Castellito, who would do almost anything to stop this upstart from dismantling the European hierarchy.

    And then there is a mysterious newcomer from Kabul, played by Carlos Diehz. None of the cardinals even knew of the existence of this priest, who was apparently invited to Rome by the former pope before his death. And many of them are wary of a Catholic priest from a predominantly Muslim part of the world. Old prejudices die hard.

    As the power plays grow more intense, a nun played by Isabella Rossellini turns out to have an important role in challenging the male hierarchy of the Catholic Church. The film raises timely issues of sexual and racist prejudices within organized religion, while also acknowledging the sexual scandals that have rocked the Church in recent years.

    Fiennes gives a superb performance as a man beginning to have doubts about his faith as a result of all these scandals, and when he emerges as a top contender to be named pope, his crisis of conscience intensifies. We can see that he may be the most qualified candidate, partly as a result of these thoughtfully articulated doubts, but he may not have the stomach for the job.

    Berger does a fine job controlling all of these performances, and he also creates a rich atmosphere for the production. The Sistine Chapel and other parts of the Vatican were reconstructed at Cinecitta Studios, brought to life by cinematographer Stephane Fontaine and production designer Suzie Davies. Although the elegant, cloistered world of the Vatican is invitingly captured, a more violent world intrudes when a terrorist bombing in Rome comes much too close for comfort. Editor Nick Emerson keeps the action hurtling forward. Composer Volker Bertelmann, who won an Oscar for his score for All Quiet on the Western Front, demonstrates his expertise as well as his versatility with his work here.

    Even viewers who may guess the identity of the next pope will be surprised by the final twist, which is very much in keeping with the film’s ambition to bring the certainties of the past into an unpredictable, dizzying, but essential new future.

    Stephen Farber

    Source link

  • The Rich Eat: The Menu

    The Rich Eat: The Menu

    At the crux of every basic class divide is food. It is the most essential unit of life, and yet, it took little time at all after the world became “civilized” for it to become the first source of division between the haves and the have-nots. Over the centuries, especially in America, it created the ironic phenomenon of poor people being, frankly, fat (“unhealthy,” if you prefer) and rich people being thin beacons of wellness. Because rich people can afford to sidestep the overprocessed foods that the broke can actually afford. Shoveling their faces with it every day to sustain themselves. What’s more, they would never dream of paying/wasting top dollar for minuscule portions at a fine dining restaurant, the cost of which is more than they make in a month.

    With this sense of a historically-rooted class war in food, former The Onion writers-turned-screenwriters Will Tracy and Seth Reiss bring us The Menu. And no, it’s not entirely “coincidental” that the fine dining restaurant they use, called Hawthorn, as their backdrop for brutal “satire” (read: unbridled honesty) is located on a remote island. For the idea that planted the seed of the screenplay arrived when Tracy himself took a boat to a restaurant on an island off Norway (it could have been many establishments, but Cornelius comes to mind, though that’s probably too “gauche”). With that herculean effort (by restaurant-going standards), Tracy started to have some paranoid feelings about being on an island with only a handful of other diners, prompting him to wonder if this was the kind of extreme emotion worth writing about with his go-to partner, Reiss. Indeed, it was. Not to mention perfectly-timed for a market that has eating the rich on its mind. But if one was hoping for another cannibal movie (on the heels of Bones and All), don’t get your hopes up. This is not a literal “eat the rich” film, so much as a mock-their-absurd-self-importance-which-extends-into-food film. Timely, to be sure, for if it has been the year of anything in cinema, it has been the year of eating.

    Whether that meant “keeping it down” or not. For there was the now-legendary vomiting scene after the passengers consume improperly-refrigerated shellfish in Triangle of Sadness (The Menu’s less-than-“distant” filmic cousin, complete with a captain that reminds one of our chef in The Menu). Then there was the cannibalistic notion of an “eater” in the aforementioned Bones and All. And, released the same day in U.S. theaters, The Menu. Maybe it’s because, somewhere in the subconscious of the average person, an awareness is dawning about food scarcity. Another food irony (in addition to the poor and destitute often being overweight) is that if this is the year of eating in cinema, it’s also “the year of unprecedented famine,” per the World Food Programme. An organization that also noted of alarming 2022 famine statistics, “The number of those facing acute food insecurity has soared—from 135 million to 345 million—since 2019.” At such a ballooning rate (thanks to climate change, war and a pandemic), the implications of what that could do to further cement class warfare imbue one with Children of Men-esque visions for the future. Visions that no doubt present a certain moral quandary to any chef that caters to an affluent clientele. Just as “celebrity chef” Julian Slowik (Ralph Fiennes, looking his most Liam Neeson-y yet) does.

    Part of that celebrity comes from the fact that he charges thousands of dollars for the “experience” of taking a boat to the island where his restaurant is perched (Norway-style, so to speak). And blowhards like Tyler Ledford (Nicholas Hoult) are only too happy to pay the price. Unfortunately for this “foodie fanboy,” Slowik discriminates against single diners—meaning you can’t just sit at a table alone. So it is that he brings along a replacement “date” named Margot Mills (Anya Taylor-Joy) when Tyler’s original plus-one backs out. This resulting in a flinching reaction from the restaurant’s stoic maître d’, Elsa (Hong Chau), and even more of a grimace from Julian himself.

    Margot’s presence has tampered with his last menu masterpiece. The one he wants to call “egoless” for the first time since he started his career (which commenced with slinging burgers for the plebes, a detail that Margot will use to her advantage by the end). But to do so would be another form of self-delusion, almost on par with the rich telling themselves they worked hard for the money (try claiming that to the actual working class performing their day-to-day job requirement horrors). Which is why Reiss commented that such a statement was about Julian “wanting to say to himself that tonight is completely egoless, but if we take a step back, how could this monumental night that you want to be your masterpiece, how could it not be ego-filled?”

    The only egos that must ultimately be put aside by the end of the night are that of the patrons, including, in addition to Tyler and Margot, food critic Lillian Bloom (Janet McTeer), her sycophantic editor, Ted (Paul Adelstein), Hawthorn regulars Richard and Anne Liebbrandt (Reed Birney and Judith Light), George Díaz (John Leguizamo), a washed-up Hollywood star, his assistant/girlfriend, Felicity (Aimee Carrero), and tech business trio Soren (Arturo Castro), Bryce (Rob Yang) and Dave (Mark St. Cyr). With each part of the movie divided into courses, the food that gets served (or doesn’t… namely, bread—because rich people don’t deserve to enjoy what the poor have no choice but to live on daily) becomes increasingly part of something like performance art. Complete with Julian’s sous-chef, Jeremy Louden (Adam Aalderks), killing himself in front of the patrons to bring them a dish called “The Mess.” What Julian deems, more specifically, as being emblematic of the mess we all make of our lives as we try so hard and so stupidly to please people we’ll never even know (that goes for plebes in addition to famous people) and who will never actually care about all the work we put in to please.

    By this moment in the film, it’s clear Fiennes is having the time of his life in the role, and it’s difficult to imagine anyone else playing it. Unlike Taylor-Joy, whose character was originally meant to be portrayed by the aesthetically and vocally similar Emma Stone. Talking of similarities, The Menu’s kinship with Triangle of Sadness is notable throughout (complete with the idea of filming the bulk in one location; in the latter’s case, that’s on a yacht). Both are an unshrinking attack on the rich, each premise toying with what can happen when that class’ money no longer has clout. In both cases, that transpires within the context of an island, where all “real-world” power can be stripped away. And oh, how Julian is happy to strip it. After all, chefs are the biggest power-hungry control freaks of anyone.

    As for the original director attached to the film, Alexander Payne, Mark Mylod might have been destined to do it instead by sheer virtue of having previously worked with Tracy on an episode of Succession (one that fittingly centered on a dinner party) called “Tern Haven.” Tracy confirmed that reteaming with Mylod assured further seamlessness on set, noting, “…it’s just great to have someone whose tastes I trust and [whose] working process [I knew].” That sense of trust between writer and director is undeniably part of what makes The Menu come across as such a confident serve.

    And what Julian aims to serve up by the end of the night (apart from tortillas etched with some highly specific and incriminating memories of each patron) is a clean, simple dose of karmic balance. With the rich even getting off more than just a little on being abused by the climax. For it’s almost as though they’ve been surrounded by obsequious “yes” people their entire lives and they just want to experience Truth for once.

    To this end, Margot herself is the antithesis of a sycophant for Julian, undermining him at every turn with her “that don’t impress me much” expressions and commentary about the meal. It is through this “tell” that Julian can surmise she is not “one of them.” She bears the mark of someone who serves, not someone who is served; therefore, she is but a spy among the rich’s kind as opposed to being of their kind. And so, by the end of the night, per Julian’s insistence, she must take her rightful place on the side of the “givers,” not the “takers.” Or the cooks and the eaters, as it were.

    Genna Rivieccio

    Source link

  • Meet the Chef Behind the “Slutty,” Delicious Cheeseburger of ‘The Menu’

    Meet the Chef Behind the “Slutty,” Delicious Cheeseburger of ‘The Menu’

    Spoilers for The Menu ahead.

    If you’ve seen The Menu, you’re still probably craving that cheeseburger—that mouthwatering nostalgia trip that Margot (Anya Taylor-Joy) realizes is the key to getting out of the film’s dinner-from-hell alive. She stumbles upon an old clipping of chef Julian (Ralph Fiennes), who’s imprisoned his rich and vapid clientele for a tasting menu of increasingly humiliating and deadly contents, in which he’s making a cheeseburger as a young cook—a moment hearkening back to when he actually loved cooking, and why he loved doing it, long before he started plating fancy dishes for fancy people. It’s the chef he misses. And it’s the chef she has to bring back to survive.

    Director Mark Mylod structures The Menu as a near-real-time dramatization of the dinner, meaning we see Fiennes et al. prepare, serve, and eat the food, course by course. Authenticity was paramount. Mylod brought chef Dominique Crenn on as a consultant to devise and design Julian’s brilliantly ridiculous menu. Then came chef John Benhase, a partner at Starland Yard in Savannah, Georgia, to consult on the authenticity of the cooking and serving. It’s his “slutty” cheeseburger recipe—the recipe suddenly on BuzzFeed, inspiring countless post-viewing burger orders, that all but oozes off the screen—that Fiennes ultimately cooked for The Menu’s delicious climax.

    Vanity Fair caught up with Benhase to learn everything there is to know about that burger.

    Vanity Fair: Thank you so much for taking the time to talk about your suddenly famous cheeseburger.

    John Benhase: Who knew, right? Just a cheeseburger.

    Yeah. I mean, just to start really broadly, how has it been? Have people been coming up to you? How have you gauged the reaction?

    More than anything, I think seeing it in the theaters for the first time and hearing the collective moan at that part of the movie, I was like, “Oh yeah, people really like this. This is good.” But I mean, it’s just a really good cheeseburger. It’s been funny seeing it on BuzzFeed and stuff like that.

    In terms of getting involved with the movie, how was this project described to you and what was your degree of involvement?

    They needed a kind of culinary authenticity consultant. So my main job going into the film was to make sure all the actors and background actors and then the writers and the director had all the tools they needed to make sure that they really looked like they knew what they were doing, since the restaurant and kitchen are such an integral kind of character in itself to the film. So just making sure that every single aspect was accurate and people knew how to move correctly within the space and what they were cooking and why they were cooking it. Then the cheeseburger was a happy accident byproduct of being on set.

    How so? 

    It was pretty random. I was sitting in Video Village with the two writers and they were talking about the burger. I’m sure that Chef Dominique could have made the most beautiful burger that anybody had ever seen, but they wanted a kind of nostalgia—for lack of a better word, the slutty burger. I probably spoke out of turn, but it was a really wonderful collaborative team, so I felt comfortable doing so and just was like, “Hey, I think if we do this burger this way, then it’ll be a perfect fit because it still is such a process-driven burger.” It’s not just slapping a couple of patties on a grill and flipping them a couple times. It can be this labor of love. That’s part of what makes it work within the film. And also, obviously Ralph Fiennes doing such an amazing job doing it. It just looks like he is having the best, most transformative time making that burger again.

    Courtesy of Searchlight Pictures.

    David Canfield

    Source link

  • Anya Taylor-Joy had a ‘life-changing’ experience on ‘Furiosa’ | CNN

    Anya Taylor-Joy had a ‘life-changing’ experience on ‘Furiosa’ | CNN



    CNN
     — 

    Anya Taylor-Joy is staying busy.

    “The Queen’s Gambit” star appears in the prequel to “Mad Max: Fury Road,” called “Furiosa,” and can be seen in “The Menu” alongside Nicholas Hoult.

    Taylor-Joy says she’s getting lots of offers but is selective about what she chooses.

    “All these characters were coming to me that I needed to play, and now, having done this for seven years, I’m in a position where I have to be way more picky about what I choose,” Taylor-Joy told The Hollywood Reporter. “I do think that one can spend their passion, and you want to make sure that you’re putting your passion into things that you care about so that it’s actually refueling that well rather than just taking from you. I never want to fall out of love with my art.”

    One of those roles was in “Furiosa.” She just wrapped filming a few weeks ago and said it was an experience she will never forget.

    “It will take me the full two years before the movie comes out to even begin to process what I just left 12 days ago. [‘Furiosa’] was the most life-changing experience that I’ve ever had, with such talented artists. I really felt like I grew so much, but yes, it’s wild. It’s utterly unique,” Taylor-Joy said.

    Taylor-Joy stars in the film alongside Chris Hemsworth, Tom Burke and Nathan Jones.

    Source link