Change Your Image
armo_852
Reviews
Signs (2002)
Not as good as 'Sixth Sense', much better than 'Unbreakable'
SPOILERS The three M. Night Shyamalan films I have seen have relied heavily on the use of prolonged suspense. This tactic may seem to some very slow and boring, and this was certainly the case with 'Unbreakable', one of the worst films I have ever seen. As is often true, the first is the best and 'The Sixth Sense' is by far and a way the superior film of the three. But 'Signs', on first time viewing anyway, is worth the watch.
Shyamalan does manage to create tension here, in parts, but it does veer towards dire 'Unbreakable' territory too. The film's best moments are undoubtably the scenes where the aliens are present BUT off-screen. This leaves room for audience imagination and this is always more nerve-wracking than any visuals on screen. Therefore the most effective scenes are when Gibson is wandering around in the corn at night, with hidden aliens around him, the alien trapped in the pantry scene and the start of the final attack, as the trapped family hear aliens scurrying over their house.
But like so many films down the years, as soon as the supernatural menace is revealed to the audience the tension drops considerably and consequently the film is less interesting. The representation of the aliens is so stereotypical. The thin, green figure that is clearly based on humans. The whole sentimental thing fails to convince too. The 'swing away' finale is cringeing viewing and the recollections of the children's birth could have been much more subtle.
The discussion on the couch that people are separated into two categories, those who believe things are meant to be and those who simply think it's coincidence is valid and reasonable, but not really appropriate in the context of seeing what could be alien spacecrafts on the TV. What has coincidence got to do with anything? It's whether the images are real or not that should be the discussion. It is only in the 'swing away' climax we realise the reason for the inclusion of the coincidence discussion.
However I don't want to rip into this film that much because I did enjoy much of it. And it does have one genuine moment when the audience jump in shock and that is when the dog suddenly barks at the kids when they are playing. Typically the most effective shock does not include the human-like aliens, and that is no coincidence.
Les triplettes de Belleville (2003)
Delightfully Different
POSSIBLE SPOILERS I have seen a great deal of films in the past year but there are few that could rival my enjoyment of 'Bellville Rendezvous'.
The images are a joy to behold and more than make the film worth watching on their own. Inparticular the stick legged dog Bruno and the square-shouldered mafia henchmen are marvellous creations. This film is also evidence that a film does not necessarily need dialogue for characterization and for the audience to become involved with them.
It is not just the visuals though. The title song will leave you humming it for hours on end. I am sure that the plot will seem to some people weak and tedious but there is more intelligence in the plot here then any Matrix sequel you show me.
It is exactly how far-fetched the animation, plot and characters are that sets this film apart and how character traits that are so simple but funny to begin with that prove significant in the final chase. Madame Souza's mismatched feet is just one example of this.
But possibly the greatest moment in this masterpiece is when the mafia henchmen leave their inferior bosses to be blown up at the start of the escape. So many villains in films escape to safety by the fact their henchmen nobodies sacrifice their lives. But by the henchmen putting their own safety before their boss's and leaving them to die is just what these people would do in reality. It is a true reflection of human nature.
So maybe it isn't so far-fetched after all. Genius
Carrie (1976)
More than just a horror film
SPOILERS POSSIBLE When I first saw this film (only about three or four years ago) I was not overly impressed. It seemed to take an age to get interesting. That's why I was baffled by Stephen King's taste in films, despite what an exceptional author he may be (IT is his best novel). He supposedly loves this film, yet hates Stanley Kubrick's 'The Shining', which is undeniably a masterpiece.
However having recently viewed 'Carrie' for the second time my opinion of the film has changed. It is still nowhere near the film 'The Shining' is but I do appreciate it a hell of a lot more.
'Carrie' is not just horror, in fact King and De Palma have stated it isn't horror. Of course it is horror. But it is also a teen high school 'coming of age' film. It is one of the first films to focus so intently on the goings on of the school institution and how young individuals cope with their transition into adults. This is the part I found slow first time around, and in parts still is.
However Carrie (a perfectly cast Sissy Spacek) has more problems than the average teen or even of the average bullied, loner teen in that she has a religiously obssessed and psychotic mother and, oh yeah, the power of telekinesis. This difficult stage of a young person's life is even more difficult for her but up until prom night she is able to bottle all these problems up.
The massacre of prom night is pure horror and brilliantly handled by De Palma. The tension is expertly prolonged as Amy Irving's character follows the path of the rope to the bucket of blood and then as the mob laugh in silent slo mo at Carrie's humiliation. The violence is not just Carrie letting loose all the frustrations and anger in her life but also De Palma letting loose after trying to build it all up so gradually. It's almost as if he thought what the hell, I've managed to contain this for over an hour, now i'm just gonna let her rip! The crucifiction of her mother with the kitchen utensils is equally shocking. The jump ending is excellent too.
And yet, regardless of the undoubted evil Carrie allowed herself to be taken over by (which proves her mum right with the point about her having the devil's power) we are willing her on. And that is even scarier.
It does have many flaws (such as the inadequacy of Nancy Allen and Travolta's death and the actual way the schemers get Carrie to the stage at the prom in the first place) but it is top rate horror in the final half hour. 'The Shining' has no flaws by the way.
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
A very welcome Return to Form
This final film was all I could have hoped for and more. Let me just briefly state my opinions on the previous two.
I enjoyed The Fellowship of the Ring. It was fantastic entertainment and a significant milestone in film history. The Two Towers was vastly overrated. I simply could not become involved with what was going on (because basically there was not a hell of a lot going on) and it was a real let down for me.
The Return Of the King is also a return to the brilliance of the first film. It is captivating from the offset, with a very intriguing but well realised set piece where Smeagol becomes first acquainted with the all powerful ring. Unlike 'Two Towers' this film never loses track of what it is working towards and it really fills you with anticipation of a grand finale.
The complete cutting out of Christopher Lee's Saruman was immensely brave as he was the main source of evil in all we had seen before. However his absence did not detract from the enjoyment of the film so it has to go down as a correct decision.
There are so many truly awe-inspiring moments that I simply have no room to give them all full justice. The spider section is the best in the film and is only rivalled in the trilogy by the cave sequences in the first film. The creation of the spider may even be more impressive than the creation of Gollum as she was totally convincing and fear-inducing. Oh yeah and the battle of Minas Tirith was far more engrossing than that of Helm's Deep.
Very few weaknesses. Like Two Towers I felt the Liv Tyler character was not really that necessary, or maybe she just needed to be portrayed as a more vital part of the narrative. There was a half-hearted attempt at this by saying failure to succeed in the quest would mean her death, but this could easily be applyed to everyone else as evil would rule the world. If I was Aragorn the blond Eowyn would have been my choice for a woman hands down.
My final point will probably be picked up on by many others. The sentimental ending definitely went too far. After such an epic trilogy it obviously needed to be rounded off well with this tearful feel good ending but there was really no need for so much of it. Why on middle-earth did we need to see Sam settling down with his wife and kids? I don't like saying this but I was begging the final credits roll at this point before it got so ridiculous that Gandalf gets it together with a lady wizard!
No, I apologise for that last remark because this was an incredible feat in film-making and undoubtedly will go down as such.
The Jackal (1997)
Good but I wanted Willis to win
SPOILERS I liked this film. OK at times it seemed to go along quite slowly but every scene with Bruce Willis was electrifying. For this reason I found myself wanting The Jackal to succeed in his assassination attempt. This is obviously not what the film should be doing, leaving the audience wanting the antagonist to win the day but there just seemd to be no empathy with the other characters.
Richard Gere's character's emotion at the death of Diane Venora was totally uncalled for. They only actually spoke properly in a conversation once in the film. And anyway he would not be the first to approach her, he's a convict for heavens sake! I also hated the ending with his old bird saving him. She would never have been there. And in the chase prior to that why didn't Willis just turn round and kill Gere in the tunnel. He's a killer and excellent shot, as he proved earlier. There was no need to run off because it was only Gere chasing him, not an army of men.
However Jack Black's torture was sublime and by far the best scene in the film. And as I said before every scene with Willis in, bar the resolution was first rate. Enjoyable action fare overrall.
The King of Comedy (1982)
Robert De Niro: Greatest Actor Ever
SPOILERS Robert De Niro is the greatest actor to have walked the Earth. I simply cannot begin to comprehend why people would ever think Al Pacino. Pacino is excellent in certain films such as the first two Godfathers' and the one all Pacino fans harp on about Scarface'. But De Niro's performances, not necessarily his films, are more varied and yet so consistent. For a true measurement of the gulf in talent between these two,watch Heat'. Pacino spends the whole movie needlessly bellowing at the top of his lungs.
Anyway, in regards to this film, this is De Niro's best performance to date. There has been so many incredible performances as a variety of different characters, from the villains he is known best for in Raging Bull', Cape Fear' and Taxi Driver' to breath taking realisations in Awakenings', Heat' and The Deer Hunter'.
Yet it is this portrayal as man who has such a misguided interpretation of reality that stands out as his greatest achievement.
The film itself is a near masterpiece and it is scandalous how it was not received well. Barely anybody is aware this film exists and that is so hard to believe considering just how good it is. It invites the audience to laugh at how Rupert Pupkin tries persistently to get his foot in the door at Jerry Lewis' studio. But it is also makes for uncomfortable viewing as De Niro's performance is so chillingly realistic you can't help but feel for him and you're just as desperate for him to succeed as Pupkin himself.
Now , honestly Pacino fans, could he ever pull anything like this off?
Dog Soldiers (2002)
There is no spoon!
POTENTIAL SPOILERS Horror in the past couple of years has really struggled. It has had to resort to remaking classics (Texas Chainsaw Massacre)or trying to combine horror icons into one picture (Freddy v Jason). Some of these can be good but they can never go down in history as landmark horror like the films that inspired them.
Dog Soldiers is not a classic but it does what it sets out to achieve sublimely. This film is totally original and brilliantly British. There are countless references to other great movies from 'The Evil Dead' (the closing shot through the doorway) to the ingenious 'Matrix' quote, 'there is no Spoon' when the character Spoon is splattered all over the cottages kitchen.
Neil Marshall's first flick deserves much praise for cleverly combining horror and comedy as other films have done so well in the past (Scream, the first and best at doing this, The Faculty, which included sci-fi as well, and even the near perfect Donnie darko, which had so many genres it was a baffling masterpiece). 'Deathwatch',with a fellow first time Brit directing, tried almost exactly the same formula as this and certainly failed as he couldn't to create tension and had characters you basically couldn't care if they lived or died.
The acting is first rate,particularly Mckidd and the ever excellent Sean Pertwee, and this helps to create characters us British can really relate to. I'm not surprised it was not received too well in the States as the British values, such as football, shine through on numerous occasions. Immensely enjoyable 8/10
Jurassic Park III (2001)
Why oh why oh why!!
What is it about Hollywood that they keep making lacklustre sequels and tar the image of some true classics? JP3 is just one example. There are many more. 'Alien Resurrection, Star Wars (Both prequels, inparticular Episode 1), Beverly Hills Cop 2 & 3, Matrix Reloaded, Terminator 3, American Pie: The Wedding and not forgetting the Jason Voorhees/ Michael Myers/Freddy Krueger franchises are a handful of sequels that are mediocre at best and should never have been made. All the earlier films in these franchises were genuine classics.
POSSIBLE SPOILERS The original Jurassic Park was a stunning, groundbreaking feat in film-making by the legend that is Steven Spielberg. I loved it. The second was a welcome follow up, up until the farcical finale. They should have ended 'The Lost World' when they leave the island and left the Jurassic Park films alone. Instead we have a T-Rex made to look comical and totally undignified, chasing buses, drinking from swimming pools and eating dog kennels.
And then theres JP3. Where to start. It has to be with Spinosaurus. Spinosaurus! What is that all about? It eats a mobile phone and kills the star of the first two, the T-Rex. Rapters having a conversation with each other! What will they do in the 4th? Strut around with mobiles and pagers, and give each other a call when they spot potential prey! Spino already has one.
The pterodactils (the ones with the wings for non-specialists) section was a worthy addition and should have been given more attention before this when these films had an ounce of respect.
Oh just a couple more things. If a dinosaur has swallowed a phone it would digest in its stomach. You would not hear it ringing from inside a dinosaur's belly. Why don't the rapters just eat them at the end, after they successfully negotiate the return of their eggs? They just leave them to escape with the navy who, without being noticed, magically turn up in boats and helicopters on the other side of a few trees .
As you have probably grasped by now this film frustrated me somewhat and is just as frustrating now as it was when it came out. Shambolic.
The Beach (2000)
Way behind Trainspotting and Shallow Grave but not that bad
Shallow Grave was great, Trainspotting genius, The Beach, uhh mediocre.
POSSIBLE SPOILERS OK, the positives. The Beach has a totally original idea, some convincing performances, a reliable director and absolutely stunning visuals.
So why did I come away unconvinced? With those positives I should be raving about this film as I was of Boyle classics 'Trainspotting' and 'Shallow Grave'. Maybe I expected too much. Maybe it was the absence of Ewan. Or maybe The Baech is just not as good
The stage where Di Caprio (who did, despite what some will have you think, put in a solid performance) goes mad in the woods happens far too rapidly. After being so deliberate and careful with the hour prior to this Boyle is careless here, as it appears Di caprio's character just suddenly snaps over one night alone in the woods. Boyle is better than that, as Christopher Eccleston's descent into madness in 'Shallow Grave' proves.
The film from this point seems to lose what it was aiming towards and is messy and ridculous leading to the final confrontation. The best bits seemed to originate from the fear and vicious attack of the sharks. The consequences for the wounded make for compelling viewing but are not central enough in the narrative and are therefore only brief. Inparticular when they are first swimming over to the 'paradise' island and the prank the couple play on Di Caprio about seeing 'a fin'. It is a superb example of paranoia and was well acted
The first half of this film is far better than the second. For a more accurate and complete demonstration of Boyle's directorial talents view the afore mentioned Ewan McGregor thrillers