Neither a yes or no from me, just somewhere in the middle.
September 22, 2014 at 01:22PM
Films rated as I see them
The scores mean something like the following:
5 - Outstanding,
4 - Good,
3 - Alright,
2 - Not so good,
1 - Bad
(C) - Cinema, (D) - DVD, (T) - TV, (R) - Recorded from TV, (I) - Internet/Xbox, (S) - Sky, (B) Blu Ray
Neither a yes or no from me, just somewhere in the middle.
There is always a danger that when you finally catch up with a much loved or respected film that you fail to understand what all the fuss was about. I've certainly felt that way before so it was with some trepidation that I finally found myself watching The Great Escape for the first time. Without any personal or nostalgic connection I wouldn't go as far as calling it great but it certainly was an enjoyable way to spend a Sunday afternoon. Of course I was familiar with many of the moments and it was a shame that the ending was given away in a question on The Chase a few weeks ago (there is no statute of limitations on spoilers), otherwise I may have come away even more impressed.
There are so many laugh out loud moments in the first ten minutes it's a bit of a shock to find that Pride isn't an all out comedy. The film manages to tackle a (largely unknown) serious true story with warmth and heart which makes it an extremely emotionally engaging film, as a cliched poster would not doubt claim "you'll laugh, you'll cry".
If there are problems it's that the outcomes are entirely predictable. It's a shame that the word formulaic has such negative connotations because a formula exists to to make something to perfection and Pride comes pretty close.
Even a suggestion that this may be a return to form for Luc Besson was enough to hook me in. Things start of well with a good opening with an English speaking Pilou Asbæk followed by one of the best scenes of the year as Lucy finds herself in a hotel room with a mysterious locked briefcase. Unfortunately things start going wrong soon after, ironically the more Lucy untaps her full potential the dumber the film becomes. It's hard to sympathise with Lucy after she performs what seem like unnecessary acts of violence. It's also difficult to take her powers seriously, it may be intentional that they seem so far fetched and unbelievable to our normal human brains but it only comes across as silly. Smarter writing could've easily conveyed the same intention in more believable ways, I also struggle with the believability of various X-Men's powers but they are presented in a context that you buy into and go along with. It seems many people completely lose patience by the time Lucy unlocks the full potential of her brain but I actually came back on board here, far-fetched to the point of enjoyment and bizarrely reminiscent of The Tree Of Life and 2001, whereas most of the rest of the film feels like the dull generic action films Besson has been producing for the last decade.
Plus it works as a prequel to both Her and Under The Skin which is perhaps the most unintentionally fascinating thing about Lucy.
I'd never heard of Mikio Naruse and therefore Floating Clouds but when it was shown on Film4 recently the word "masterpiece" was being thrown around on Twitter. I thought I'd like it, sweeping generalisations aside, I like Japanese films and culture but it didn't work for me. Nothing about it grabbed it in any meaningful way. I saw nothing masterful and didn't care about any of the characters. Perhaps I was in the wrong mood, maybe I am just a philistine, it's possible I wasn't paying attention but unfortunately I doubt I'll give the film another chance to see if I was wrong.
Oh dear. I'd heard some bad reviews but I still wasn't expecting this to be so damn boring. Watching the original film last week I was surprised how fresh everything still seemed nine years later, here everything already feels tired and clichéd. It doesn't even look that great with inconsistent styles being more distracting than engaging. In fact all the things that people complained about in the first film are true here: most of the violence is unnecessary, women are treated badly and have lost their clothes, it drags on for too long and is mostly just boring.
Despite all the wonderful Wonka-esque factory setting and strange characters there isn't really anything that lifts the darker than expected story to anything remotely special.
Earlier this week I gave a harsh 1.5 star rating to War Horse mostly because it was made by talented people but the end result was a horrible mess and huge disappointment. I had no expectations from Tower Heist and whilst I can't begin to claim it's a good film I was happy to sit through it and be mildly entertained along the way.
This review reportedly contains spoilers.
I really wanted to like Two Days, One Night more. Glancing at other reviews and hearing other people on the way out it seems that there are plenty of people for whom the film really worked. I'm not alone in my disappointment, one disgruntled partner on the way out complained that it was basically the same 10 minutes repeated for 90 minutes and whilst that is an exaggeration it's based on a truth. The problem when a film doesn't grab you is that all the bad points seem to bubble up to the surface. I was completely prepared to overlook what seemed like an improbable (and illegal?) set up to serve up a central conceit to tell a story. I hoped the film would offer an interesting yet mundane look at weekend life (something the Twitter account @satscenes does really well) but each visit does end up being essentially the same. Sandra arrives at the house, all the women are at home but then men are out doing something else. Despite looking up most of the addresses in the phone book, no one thinks to ring to either check anyone's at home or just do the conversation over the phone. There's little conflict, most people are in the same situation and so we move onto the next.
One of my problems isn't with the film but how the term "bonus" has become completely misused by society; it's supposed to be something extra not something to rely on and so everybody's dilemma feels less real.
Disappointing then because I ended up being annoyed by both Sandra and the film in many small ways which all added up. The ending is really well done and it would make an excellent short film.
* spoilers follow*
How is what Sandra doing any different from the foreman rigging the first vote? Half the film she tells others how people are going to vote and then suddenly it's a secret ballot but at the end the two groups visibly split and identify themselves. Despite facing redundancy, they eat out in a restaurant, stop for ice cream, buy small bottles of water from a corner shop on a hot day spent in a car. Even the title is confusing, it's supposed to be Saturday, Sunday and Sunday evening when she's talking to people but it doesn't feel like those are full days and Sandra spends most of the time sleeping, which I know is related to her depression which is handled quite well but not really integrated into the story well enough.
If I'd known War Horse was this bad I would have happily let it slip through the cracks and remain unseen. Even now it seems inconceivable that a Spielberg film, co-written by Richard Curtis with a great cast could end up so spiritless and dull. In places the script sounds like it was written by a ten year old with some truly awful lines and at least two "oh pur-lease" moments (which I've instantly forgotten).
The opening scenes are terrible, essentially an hour about ploughing a field. Worse, despite being shot on location, everything looks like it was filmed on green screen and has a terrible unnatural look. It looks like something out of Lord Of The Rings and not in a good way. The music in these scenes is also overbearing so John Williams can also add his name to the list of people who should be ashamed of themselves.
Things do improve once the war starts and there are occasional moments when the film looks like it's being directed by someone of Spielberg's calibre. Unfortunately there's another unnecessary diversion with a bland sequence at a windmill which adds nothing apart from minutes to the already excessive running time.
Many scenes feel too theatrical and don't translate to film, the more cinematic scenes also seem out of of place which means very little of the final product works. I starting wondering if they'd recorded a voice for the horse (I imagined Morgan Freeman) but realised that it was too ludicrous; at least that would explain why they thought the finished film wasn't as bad as everybody else seems to think it is.
If War Horse has been made by anybody else it probably wouldn't have seemed as bad but everybody involved in this film is capable of so much more and this is a huge embarrassment.
In nine years I don't think anything else has come close to capturing the style of Sin City. It many ways it's a shame that the over the top violence distracts from stunning look of the film. This really is one of the most beautiful films I've seen and a rare occasion when an effects lead film stands the test of time. Unfortunately there's too much story for one film which means things drag on but I also wouldn't know what to lose. Perhaps if Sin City were being filmed today it would be as a TV series and I have a feeling that the episodic format would have been a better fit.
So many films spring to mind when you think about Robin Williams but for me the one that will always have the strongest association is Good Morning Vietnam. It's not my favourite of his films, it's not even a film I'm that familiar with having perhaps only seen it twice before. When I think of Robin Williams I hear him as Adrian Cronauer because of the soundtrack album. It was one of the first CDs I bought and it's still one that I frequently listen to. All the songs are great but it's William's radio segments between the tracks that I've heard over and over and are firmly lodged in my head. It was a bit of a surprise to find most of the CD segments appear in one of the opening sections of the film, others are edited slightly different but all are so familiar and still funny even though the film isn't really a comedy. Once again it's hard to imagine anyone else in the role and one reason I think that this may be Williams at his best, is that he never slips into mawkishness that unfortunately touched so many of his other roles, even the great ones like Good Will Hunting.
I'm not reviewing (or rating) this viewing because it was on in the background and didn't have my full attention. Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be a way to remove the rating from a subsequent review of a film so the four stars are from my previous viewing.
There's nothing particularly wrong with Svengali but there's also nothing that special either. Painted with broad strokes, the predictable story doesn't offer anything new but is executed with just enough enthusiasm and a great list of substantial cameo performances to make it worthwhile.
Followed by a Q&A with Alan McGee & Paul Dixon
Just as enjoyable, if not more so, on a second viewing.
The BBC screened Good Will Hunting as a tribute to Robin Williams and like The Fisher King it was a film I remember liking but really couldn't remember much about. The first surprise was seeing Kevin Smith and Scott Mosier (now of Smodcast) as co-executive producers. Then the surprise of not just how young Damon and Affleck are but just how they managed to write such a good film at such a young age. The story itself is fairly straightforward but it's filled with such heart it's impossible not to like. It wasn't surprise to rediscover Williams was great in his Oscar winning role, it's more of what he does so well but once again hard to imagine anyone else being anywhere near as good.
I'd been wanting to watch The Fisher King again for some time and now in the shadow of Williams untimely death it seemed like the right moment. Gilliam's continued quest for the Holy Grail may be his least Gilliamesque film but it may also be one of his most moving. It's hard to imagine anyone else more suitable than Williams playing the part with such sadness, energy and humour. Perhaps emphasized by the real life news it was also a surprise to see the film is mostly about depression, something I certainly didn't remember from my first viewing many years ago.
A fine introduction to the mysterious Maier but it left me wanting to know more. As explained in the film the bulk of the collection is now with one person who's making his own film (Finding Vivian Maier?) so doesn't contribute here.
Can A Song Change Your Life? I really hope so, I hope part of what makes anything great is that it affects you in someway and makes you feel or act differently. Begin Again (formerly known as "Can A Song Change Your Life") certainly changed me, those 105 minutes were perhaps the happiest I've felt in a long time (which perhaps says more about my life than the film) and put me in a great mood until the literal storms arrived the next day.
Begin Again wasn't on my radar of films to look out for. That forgettable title, the generic bus posters, "and James Corden", even the pairing of Keira Knightley and Mark Ruffalo sounded too rom-commy (although this is unfair as neither have really gone down that path before). It was only when I found out that the film was the follow up to Once (why wasn't that mentioned in any of the advertising?) that I became interested. Then word of mouth and reviews started claiming it was good, usually surprisingly good (more evidence that the marketing campaign really got this wrong). I still wasn't sure if it was worth a trip to the cinema though, I put it off but at the last minute decided to go and see the final screening before it disappeared and I am so glad I did.
I'm fairly sure it will be my favourite film of the year. There are other films that I know are "better", those receiving all the critical acclaim and awards but none of those made me feel the way this film did. I'll happily admit there are many things wrong with Begin Again but none of them stopped my enjoyment. Throughout the film there were many times when I was on the edge of the seat, not really for the story (as was the case earlier this year with Godzilla) but praying that writer-director John Carney wouldn't screw it up. Carney constantly flirts with cliche, teasing his way through a scene so the outcome feels inevitable but then always make the smart choice. It often feels the filmmakers are standing up to the studio system and cookie-cutter story telling in the same way the characters stand up to the record label, refusing to sell out and do what they know is right in their hearts.
The day after I saw the film I caught up with the Guardian Film Podcast (I’m weeks behind) and they happened to be reviewing the film. None of the (older male) critics sounded as if they liked it and it genuinely made me sad that they didn't “get” the film in the same way I had. One issue I agreed with is that the music isn't as strong as it needs especially when there are a good and bad versions of the same song it wasn't immediately clear. This should be a bigger problem but it doesn't detract from the story because the characters always know and react to the songs in the correct way. There is also too much of Adam Levine singing and I can’t see his songs growing on me like I think the rest will (I've already bought the soundtrack) but perhaps that was the point.
There is so just so much more to enjoy. Ruffalo is completely fantastic (although at one point he says something along the lines of “You wouldn't like me when I'm angry” which was a little distracting) there’s a scene in the park, where I don't think he even speaks, which is one of the greatest performances I've seen. The rest of the cast are great, even James Corden didn't annoy. The introduction of Ruffalo's character is a wonderful start to the film but when it's explained it's just pure cinematic magic. Even when the film ends it continues to be great by having a fantastic scene over the credits topping the whole experience off perfectly.
I can't wait to see it again.
A waste of time. Neither the jokes or the songs work. Go and watch the original instead or even better season 4 of Curb Your Enthusiasm.
After hearing so many surprisingly good things this was quite the disappointing. The first half, if not the entire film, is incredibly formulaic (although I've never seen it with male strippers before). Things pick up both stylistically and story wise in the second half but there's not enough to live up to the praise or Soderbergh's reputation.
I didn't expect Guardians of the Galaxy to work. It sounded like a hard sell: a crazy concept based on a largely unknown series, no big names on screen and the trailer looked like a horrible mess of style and tone. I fully expected it to be a huge flop so it was a pleasent surprise then when all the good reviews started appearing and the film opened with some of the biggest box office takings of the year. All this meant that for the first time in a long time I was actually quite excited to see a film.
There's an awful lot to like but taken as a whole I'm not sure it works as well as Avengers, Iron Man 3 or even The Winter Soldier. The strengths are in the characters, their interactions and the dialogue which not only feel genuine but also fresh in an over saturated genre of comic book action films. Unfortunately these are mixed up with mostly uninspiring action sequences (only the prison break really stands out - and that's not even the best prison break of the year), dull and confusing villains (who's he again?) and a muddled plot (although not understanding what was going on had little impact on the enjoyment of the film). Perhaps the biggest let down is yet another final sequence on a collapsing space ship above a populated city; isn't there somebody overseeing the Marvel Universe who could've stepped in and mentioned that this had already been done in at least two of the other films.
Despite all the flaws when it's good it's really good and a whole lot of fun. I suspect a lot of people will end up liking and revisiting the film over the coming years and I'm left with high expectations for the sequel.
Solid and classic science fiction which is very much of it's time but also doesn't feel dated. Although after Airplane it is hard to take the control room sequences seriously, "What a time to run out of sugar".
At one point (it's a scene with a drawbridge) it becomes really apparent how the rest of the film is going to unfold. Yet, despite this obviousness, What Maisie Knew remains a surprisingly original tale about childhood and divorce. The biggest surprise is that this story hasn't been told before (although I'm sure it must have come up in the world of soap operas), twisting the usual expectations and caricatures to deliver something that is predictable but also refreshing, full of charm and wonderful heartfelt performances from all of the cast especially Onata Aprile as Maisie.