I recently saw two music-centred movies, "8 Mile" and "24 Hour Party People". In both cases, I got a lot of the film that I expected to get from the other movie. First off, I thought "8 Mile" would centre on working class people whose lives revolved around the music. And it does, but there's another primary character whose role I hadn't expected would be so prominent. Detroit. More than anything else, this movie is about scenery. It's the disgusting slums of Detroit, with the crumbling houses, disintegrating trailer parks, and the streets choked with graffiti that drive the characters to do what they do -- find a way out. The film graphically demonstrates that the battles may be about rapping, but they're no game. Succeeding in battles is an act of desperation. It's either win, or be resigned to walking down those ugly streets for the rest of your life. Win, and maybe get the hell out of your crappy life, or live in Detroit forever.

"24 Hour Party People" seems to employ a cast of thousands. For two hours, musicians, producers, and various Mancunians punters swirl in and out of the film, which is certain to confuse any viewer who isn't familiar with any of the history or the music. With only one lead character -- Steve Coogan's awesome portrayal of impresario Tony Wilson right down to the intonations in his voice -- I figured the cohesive force would be Manchester itself. The on-site filming, the factories (no pun intended), a painstakingly recreated set of the legendary Hacienda, these would be present in lieu of prominent supporting characters. But again I was wrong. This is first and foremost a film about music (Coogan bluntly says so in the film) and about the people who made it. There are clips, flashbacks, snippets of important happenings from Manchester past, and very little focus on the city itself other than being repeatedly told how important their music scene was. And if Coogan hadn't said so, or if you weren't into the scene back in the day and could therefore vouch for the accuracy of these boasts, you would never believe it to be true, since how could such incredible music history have come together when everyone streaks around completely wasted most of the time acting like assholes? Well, that's exactly what DID happen, despite the lack of any and all good business sense. That is the whole point, after all.

On a completely different note, I want to comment on the historical accuracy of the film. As for the timeline, I was completely lost for most of the movie. They'd play a song, I'd ground myself by recalling what year we must be in based on the song, but invariably the next scene would be something that I could swear had happened a year earlier or later, the next scene would jump another few months one way or another ... none of this bothered me too much, since it just adds to the overall chaotic tone of the film. Then there's the scores of little things they nailed down. Joy Division were playing "Love Will Tear Us Apart" onstage at one point, and the recreation was unreal. Far beyond dressing up "Barney" in his white shirt and skinny dark tie that he wore onstage throughout that time period, "Ian"'s guitar looked PRECISELY like the one the real Ian played in the video, and it was even HELD the same way that Ian held it (another side comment: "Ian" did well to clone Ian's dancing mannerisms, but some of the intensity I felt was misplaced. "His" gripping the mic with veins bulging was a shade too much Henry Rollins for me). But the version of the song that was being played was the remixed single version (the one on "Substance"), which was put out after Ian died and was never played live! That happened a fair number of times -- they'd get a whole load of little details exactly right but miss out on one or two other little things.

All the nitpicking is admittedly a bit of overkill. This film is fun fun FUN and the incredible character and setting recreations are plenty enough to almost make you feel as if you were there ... a wonderful fantasy for those of us born on the wrong side of the pond.