Rom-com with a Christmas Carol twist, very watchable but quite predictable!
Mrs Doubtfire (1993) is probably the earliest memory of Pierce Brosnan, but he is best known as James Bond, presenting arguably his best performance in Goldeneye (1995). Brosnan's ability to capture the audience flows into Dante's Peak and helps bring alive the complexities of human emotion. Working alongside Linda Hamilton, best known for her role as Sarah Connor in Terminator 1 and 2 (1984;1991), the couple deliver a thoroughly believable connection in what is otherwise a fantastic display of special effects.
The film however, loses strength through the performances of Jamie Smith and Jeremy Foley as Hamilton's children. At 10 years and 14 years, the two actors had much to learn about capturing their audience as their performance lacked belief. Nevertheless, many of their scenes were supported by the more experienced actors, who help maintain the films credibility. Ironically, for me, Elizabeth Hoffman provides the most authentic performance in her role as the Grandmother to the kids.
For lovers of action, the film provides enough effects at a high tempo to entertain, although you'll have to wait until midway through the film where the tension peaks. For lovers of charcter development, the roles maintain superb authenticity throughout, making you believe in the threat of Dante's Peak. For the squeamish, there is very little to worry about, with limited graphic displays of injuries.
The story is cleverly written to allow for the audience to be sucked in and engage with the characters. Dante's Peak has a delicate balance of character development and high paced action to make it an extremely enjoyable watch.
Whilst looking into the seismic activity of a dormant volcano, Harry Doltan (Brosnan) finds himself battling between his geological experience and the dismissive experts he works with. Whilst trying to convince all that the cosy Washington State town needs to be evacuated, he is forced to befriend the town mayor, Rachel Wando (Hamilton), and gain her trust and respect, then convince her to evacuate before it's too late.
If Bryan Singer's underrated 'Valkirye' was a vintage decanter of smooth, sweet Vermouth on the rocks, then 'Inglorious Bastards' is Cabernet Sauvignon in a Riedel Overture glass, spiked with ten sachets of Vodka lemon alchopop. But since I don't drink; the aforementioned comparisons are based entirely on conjecture, speaking of guesswork, there's a fair bit of it involved in Quentin Tarantino's latest, including, among others; the question: What was he thinking? Q's long gestating, 'Dirty Dozen'-esque WWII opus has been in the pipeline for over a decade now; but was it worth the wait? Yes and No. Set in Nazi occupied France and broken down into chapters, 'Inglorious Basterds' features a three-pronged narrative; one story focuses on our titular heroes: an American Jewish guerrilla army (or "terrorists" as the Reich calls them) operating behind enemy lines and led by smirking Southerner Aldo Raines (Brad Pitt). Another tells the tale of Shosanna (Mélanie Laurent) a French Jewess who narrowly escaped the ethnic cleansing of her family by Nazi troops; led by the loquacious, Dr Moriarty-esque Col. Hans Lander (Christoph Waltz) both of which conclude with the serendipitous culmination of Shosanna and the allies plan to assassinate top Nazis during a movie premiere of Goebbels latatest propaganda piece: 'Nation's Pride'. Now as a lifelong Tarantino fan, I expect a standard above and beyond the rank and file hacks who populate that creatively stagnant hive we call Hollywood; and whilst no one expects the manic auteur to better 'Pulp Fiction', all hope that he'll go onto direct something on a par with 'Reservoir Dogs' or even 'Jackie Brown' in the near future; for 'Inglorious Bastards', interesting though it may be, doesn't quite cut it. That said, one can't ignore some noteworthy artistic choices such as putting German and allied combatants on the same level in terms of their brutality and ruthless professionalism or the plot to burn down the cinema on "Nazi night" as Shosanna describes it, which alludes to an Old Testament verse about Jeru gathering idolaters into the temple before setting it ablaze. And whilst I hated some of the comical asides (e.g. pantomime Hitler) I laughed out loud at others (e.g. Pitt's team trying to pass for Italians and Lander's off the wall interrogations).
Quentin Tarantino's comic phase began in 2003 with 'Kill Bill' (highly enjoyable fluff) continued with Grindhouse experiment 'Death Proof' (watchable, not great) and a guest spot on 'Sin City' (superb film, though directorial collaborations tend to any blur any individual efforts). Strangely enough, Tarantino's most true to form work in recent years hasn't been in film at all, but on TV; in his excellent 'CSI' double bill: 'Grave Danger'. Now Quentin used to have an acute awareness of less being more, but here; scenes that could've been quick and effective are prolonged in an operatic manner with slo-mo and grandiose score (most of which is borrowed from other films and proves quite distracting). The fact that neither devices are used to illicit irony, suggests that the feted auteur may be getting a bit slack in his dotage. Narrative coherence, never a problem for Tarantino before, also comes into question with a surprising oversight: Hugo Stigliz (Til Schweiger) is a Nazi conscript turned notorious Nazi killer who assassinated 13 SS officers and was busted out of prison by the Basterds, and yet no one, including Nazi top brass, seems to recognise him in the bar basement scene! Speaking of the bar scene, it is, despite the aforementioned error, the film's strongest chapter and though it runs for an absurdly long 25 minutes, is never boring and boasts an excellent, intentionally stilted, performance by Michael Fassbender as British spy and erstwhile film critic Lt. Archie Hicox. This brilliantly conceived and directed scene manages to encapsulate all the drama, dark humour, suspense and violence one could hope for in a Tarantino movie. The bar scene is almost like a short film in itself and, if nothing else, is a mini master-class in how to create tension on screen.
Now if one had to choose; I'd say Enzo G. Castellari's correctly spelt and unpretentious B-movie 'Inglorious Bastards' (1977) is much more entertaining than Tarantino's flick, though in all fairness, the most the two films have in common are the title and time period. Personally, I think Tarantino could've made a better movie by not showing the Basterds at all, focusing instead on Fassbender, Waltz and the Nazi sniper depicted in the film within the film; 'Nation's Pride'. Keeping the circumcised death squad a mystery; known only by their grisly deeds like the alien in 'Predator' or the creature in 'The Keep', would've lent the movie an air of peril and sobriety. Instead, what we have here is a spluttering, if compulsively watchable, work of half measures and small victories; it's ironic twist on Shoah mentality is commendably original and visually impressive though overall; the film only hints at angles already addressed in expert fashion by Sam Peckinpah 33 years ago in 'Cross Of Iron'. Ultimately, it's a hit and miss affair; unique? Certainly but it takes as much as it gives, is often flat and severely lacking in any repeat viewing potential. There's a scene in which Aldo Raines, having carved a Swastika into the forehead of another hapless victim with his Apache hunting knife, moves back, cocks his head to one side and triumphantly declares: "I think this may be my masterpiece", for Tarantino's sake; I certainly hope 'Inglorious Basterds', isn't his.
Surly Jewish moneylender gets ruthless, young Gentiles to work for free in dubious get-rich-quick scam, yes; it's 'The Apprentice'. When it comes to 'The Apprentice', my analysis becomes as crude & superficial as the programme's MO: I have a vague recollection of those who endured the ritual indignities of televised serfdom; who convulsed in the trenches of despair only to come under sniper fire from lacertilian coffin dodgers like Nick Hewer and Margaret Mountford. Eager young things put to task in a grotesque theatre of corporate banality, and for what? The grand prize of getting to work in one of SirAllen's clapped out business ventures. I'll never forget the look on Michele Dewberry's ("winner" of Season 2) face when informed that she'd essentially be running a second hand PC shop, it was, to quote the French on their failed occupation of Indo-China and Vietnam: "The biggest nothing ever fought for". On a separate note, my one off encounter with 'Viglen' nee 'Amstrad PLC' back in 1998 was without incident and a largely pleasant experience, and as with many corporations; it's not the boss who's the worst but middle management, grovelling plutocrats and other henchmen or henchwomen. My hypothesis is that 'The Apprentice' will, someday, come to represent one facet of what was wrong with our society in the 00s; of course that time will only arrive when the masses do an about turn and dismiss those who abuse the means of production. And when they do, I suggest they co-opt SirAllen's own words: "You're fired".
It has been said that Val Kilmer in 'Batman Forever' offers the best rendition of the caped crusader, but I strongly disagree.
Despite that, the film is still moderately entertaining, especially when Jim Carrey is on screen as 'The Riddler', played in his unique way. Tommy Lee Jones and Nicole Kidman are not disappointing either, but they do not particularly impress.
Overall, I would not recommend this film to anyone but avid Batman fans and even then, it would be done so at arm's length.
At last, the story of Batman gets the tone and script-writing talent it deserves in 'Batman Begins'. As the title suggests, this film does not assume Batman's existence in Gotham City and dwells more on the past and the "making of" than his current activity.
Although there will be many who still love the Batman films of old, it is my opinion that this new addition is far and away the better direction to take concerning that particular caped crusader.
Christopher Nolan has proven himself to be a genius in the realms of cinematic direction and Christopher Bale, for once, lives up to the hype about him.
A must-see, and at this price (1-disc version) it's a must-buy.
Having not seen a James Bond film since 'Goldeneye' and not having seen many that preceded that one, you would be hard-pushed to call me a James Bond fan. However, 'Quantum of Solace' was, indeed a very enjoyable film. Maybe more akin to its rival films than the James Bond of old would have been, which can be viewed in either a positive or negative light, the air of realism is much more apparent now. However, this is not to say they have cut out ALL of the unbelievable parts. Not at all. Mr. Bond still has his moments but it is not necessarily so predictable or cringe worthy as the typical Bond film.
Well worth a look, even if you're not a Bond fanatic.
Having just watched this film again for (at least) the seventh time, I can vow that 'Seven' is a film that everyone over the age of 18 and without serious mental health issues should see. It is intelligent, thrilling and poignant. It can be watched and thoroughly enjoyed without thinking further than it just being a film, but if you so wanted to delve deeper the substance is there. And, surprisingly to some, that substance does not come from attacking The Bible or any other kind of mythology. It comes in the form of a spine-tinglingly clinical view of society today because we do see a sin broken on every street corner but we ignore it.
However, despite this, 'Seven' is far from pretentious and bombastic. It is simply superb.
Seven stars.
Out of boredom comes the desire to watch any old rubbish. But sometimes that rubbish turns out to be a gem that you really shouldn't have thrown away.
'Thick as Thieves' is, however, not one of those times. Although it is not utter tripe, it is by no means cinematically brilliant. It is entertaining and, in parts, spoilt by Freeman's genius, which is marred slightly by Banderas. However, the plot is surprisingly interesting, with a few twists that it's seemingly typical exterior does not prepare you for.
Overall, it's worth watching if you're a fan of heist movies and/or Morgan Freeman but not because it's his best performance ever.
Nothing spectacular, just a pretty simple film about a few friends on a night out - that essentially is the plot.
The characters all have dead end jobs, which they hate, in fast food and retail, so spend the weekend playing.
All of the characters are really believable and down to earth, Danny Dyer's character, Moff is especially funny.
Mainly focusing on the wild, drug-addled events of the night than really touching on any of more the emotional sub-plots, such as Koop's mentally ill dad and his and Nina's relationship trouble. I think these things are ignored because the film is purely about forgetting your troubles and having a blast. I'd definitely recommend this film, it's a cult classic and for good reason.
Just when I thought I couldn't sink any lower, I found myself spending a Friday night watching GI Joe: The Rise of Cobra - a movie so inane that it had me harking after the lyrical witticisms of the He-Man and She-Ra Christmas Special (Skeletor has his heart warmed by a blue alien puppy, it's really rather moving actually).
With so much money having been spent on special effects, there wasn't much left to develop a "plot" per se but this is, roughly, what was happening between explosions: A weapons expert by the name of James McCullen (Christopher Eccleston) has developed a nanotechnology-based bomb that is capable of destroying whole cities. Oh, and McCullen had some sort of treacherous Scottish ancestor who had his head encased in a smouldering metal mask as punishment for some nefarious act against the French, which might, just might, be a foreshadowing of things to come. But that's enough historical back-story for now, this is a movie so it's not supposed to be educational.
Back to McCullen's bombs. He sells four warheads to NATO, then for some reason he needs to get them back and so still sends them out to be delivered by a crack US military troop led by Duke (Channing Tatum) and Ripcord (Marlon Wayans) BUT craftily sends his own team of expert soldier types led by the Baroness (Sienna Miller) to steal the warheads back. This allows for far more choreographed fight scenes than simply switching the package prior to dispatch would. The Baroness manages to gain possession of the warheads but not before Duke has recognised her to be his ex-fiancée Ana-Maria who broke it off with him after becoming rather peeved about him getting her brother killed. Just as this shocking revelation is sinking in, the GI Joe team arrive (all the old Hasbro favourites - Scarlet, Snake Eyes, Breaker and Heavy Duty), some snappy dialogue is exchanged and, 80s power montage cut short, Duke and Ripcord join up with the Joe squad.
Won't someone please think of the warheads?! McCullen wants his warheads weaponized. Lots of people shout as much lots of times during the movie. Heh, given that they are warheads, surely weaponizing them would be rather redundant? If they weren't already weaponized, wouldn't they just be somewhat overly large flasks? Luckily, logic has no place in the world of GI Joe. Conveniently, the Baroness' husband (the Baron?) is a top-notch billionaire French (told you so!) scientist who happens to have his own particle accelerator. Hubby is innocently accelerating particles hither, thither and yon when the Baroness and her villainous bunch burst in and demand that he WEAPONIZES THE WARHEADS. Deciding against offering a scientific rebuttal, hubby waves the warheads next to the particle accelerator in a vaguely weaponizing fashion.
Several other things then happen and they may be sort of meant to be linked. The Eiffel Tower (told you so again!) is destroyed in order to demonstrate something to someone. Not only is the Baroness actually Ana-Maria who was actually engaged to Duke before he seemingly got her brother killed although her brother wasn't actually killed and is actually The Doctor who is actually working for McCullen, Storm Shadow who is also working for McCullen is actually the evil former foster brother of Snake Eyes. Small world! Oh, and there's something to do with ice. Ice sinking and destroying things. I'm going to be very careful the next time I put an ice cube in my coke in case it sinks to the bottom of the glass and destroys the table that the glass is on.
GI Joe should come with a health warning - you could seriously injure yourself trying to suspend your disbelief to the necessary levels to survive through the whole thing.
It was one of them films that, although easy to watch, kept you engrossed all the way through.
There are some very funny one liners and the acting of Sandra Bullock especially is really good.
The storyline is a little bit predictable but as are all of these types of film.
All in all a good relaxing film to watch and I would highly recommend it.
Watchmen is a gritty and visually wonderful epic, but like the superheroes it conveys it also has its flaws!
Slumdog Millionaire is a great movie full of amazing colour, energy and spirit - hugely enjoyable!
If you thought that the wrong turn could go no further then you were wrong. This film is completely different from the other two. The people hunted down are not running in fear and they give three finger and his family a challenge! This film is riveting right up until the very end, though it is very gory at times. I would recommend it to those who love their horror films filled with blood and gore.
Three-finger and his family are on their hunt again, but this time they try to hunt down a gang of escaped convicts. Have they finally met their match?
Bill Douglas' very British film about the Tolpuddle Martyrs - 1830s Dorset farm labourers who formed a union to protest against subsistence wages, only to be deported to Australia for their troubles - is an understated epic, that wisely foregoes an excess of historical detail and political polemics. Instead the film is a very poetic and visually striking account of the birth of the modern British labour movement, and as such is a fascinating piece of historical cinema; in addition to this the film is billed as a 'Lanternist's Account', and explores various modes of pre-cinematic modes of storytelling, which is a fascinating subject in itself. Don't let the three hour running time put you off - I found the film to be gripping from start to finish.
While it avoids any obvious hectoring or political rage, Douglas' views on the hypocrisy and inequality of the British class system are readily apparent and we are always on the side of the unionists. There is a deeply felt concern for the suffering of the innocent, or those down the lower ends of the social ladder, and the skill of 'Comrades' is to get this across to the viewer without too much dialogue or obvious, sentimental, manipulation.
It is a tragedy that this was Bill Douglas' last film - he died of cancer soon after - as this is a striking, intelligent and unusual film about a neglected piece of history. Essential.
Memento follows Leonard Shelby as he searches endlessly to find the person who raped and murdered his wife, and then kill him. At the same time of his wife's murder, Leonard suffered an injury that has now rendered him unable to form new memories. He has no short term memory, which is what makes this film so original.
The film has pretty conventional film noir narrative, but throwing in Leonard's "problem" and structuring it backwards means that every scene brings a new revelation. Leonard's constant confusion is transferred to the viewer, for example in a scene where he finds himself running and doesn't know why, then realises he must be running away from someone, but doesn't know why. This particular scene uses a unique balance of light-hearted humour and suspense, which shows the quality Nolan's writing.
Working together again after The Matrix, Carrie Anne Moss and Joe Pantoliano's strong performances really add to the overall viewing experience, equally the shared confusion of the audience and Leonard, allow Pearce to put real personality into his role.
A Very Good Boxset that's worth Buying - Full of drama, suspense, funny moments, Sad moments and feel good moments
The Fourth Kind is a smart thriller, that will affirm your believe in extraterrestrials - if you're into that kind of thing!
With a Blair Witch Project-style, this low-budget film works hard to make you believe that what you are watching is factual and that the interviews and video footage are also real. At times the film finds it hard to grasp onto the illusion of reality but it does deserve praise for its attempts.
Verdict
It's never going to win any major film awards but The Fourth Kind is an intense cinematic depiction that relies heavily on audience participation. All abductions take place off screen, so the viewer is encouraged to imagine what the victims have gone through, which leads to a feeling of haunting suspense!
Bright Star is a marvelous film that's in a different class compared with other bio-pics. It tells of one of the greatest love stories in English literature and is told from the unique perspective of Fanny Brawne, making it fresh and intense. As you would expect, this film is poetic, but it isn't overly precious about it, as Campion simply scatters verse throughout the film.
With outstanding performances from all the cast, stunning cinematography and superb attention to detail - especially with the costumes, Campion has managed to produce a spirited and soulful account of Keats' life and a movie that is completely intoxicating.
Verdict
Well worth a watch!
This site uses cookies.
More details in our privacy policy