Clive Plasma: Movie Reviews [Archive] - Page 4 (2024)

Clive Plasma

December 12th, 2014, 3:37 AM

If you manage to somehow get to 365 (the short film idea is a valid one) and then write up the whole experience within a reasonable length you may well be able to get the attention of the press - they love that kind of stuff. The Guardian website is always putting stuff like that up on their website in Lifestyle. Whether it's paid or not I have no idea.

But either way, continue to get followers and you may end up attracting interest anyway. :yes:

Not a bad idea :yes:

365 won't happen this year though, but once I do reach it I'll do something similar.

I received a message on the blog today, some guy claiming he has done and completed the challenge 7 years running. I genuinely don't know how you would find the time.

Alf

December 12th, 2014, 6:21 AM

I watched the imitation game by the way. I enjoyed it, although I was predisposed to enjoy it since I like all of the main cast. Cumberbatch was very good, but was doing a little too much 'acting' at times and the film was lacking something to make it absolutely top draw (it'd struggle to get into my top 5 of the year), or more so it was perhaps that it seemed a little too made for awards recognition. I did really enjoy it though.

From the clips I've seen I know I'll be irritated by the "Oh, there's Cumberbatch 'acting'".

The Rosk

December 12th, 2014, 9:06 AM

I watched the imitation game by the way. I enjoyed it, although I was predisposed to enjoy it since I like all of the main cast. Cumberbatch was very good, but was doing a little too much 'acting' at times and the film was lacking something to make it absolutely top draw (it'd struggle to get into my top 5 of the year), or more so it was perhaps that it seemed a little too made for awards recognition. I did really enjoy it though.

Why is something is made for awards recognition necessarily a bad thing? Surely that's the point, isn't it? Actually am interested by your point there.

I thought it was a genuinely great film.

Seanny One Ball

December 12th, 2014, 11:04 AM

I bet Clive has seen more than 365 films this year but doesn't include some of them.

It's not a hard target to reach, it's the reviews that must be the bastard.

Clive Plasma

December 12th, 2014, 11:47 AM

I bet Clive has seen more than 365 films this year but doesn't include some of them.

It's not a hard target to reach, it's the reviews that must be the bastard.

I genuinely haven't - it is a lot of hours of film, and it takes up a lot of time. It was the World Cup that screwed me. Taking essentially a month off from watching films to watch football. I didn't factor it in.

That and I have been to 3 or 4 festivals this year, been to Munich, Barcelona, Corsica, Berlin on holidays and I tend to go out most nights. I also got a promotion at work last March/April, and have needed to go to meetings a lot more (20 a month). Watching films on the train stopped once I got given a company car in August so gradually throughout the year I've drifted further and further away from my target.

It's also difficult when I live with one of my mates, and he dislikes the films I watch. His response is 'lets watch a comedy'. Always a comedy. Comedies are few and far between now. He just sits there and plays football manager throughout though, so that means it can't be subtitled because he doesn't actually watch the screen. When we pick one without subtitles, and something happens in the film, we then have to rewind it because he wasn't looking.

I either go off into my room and watch a film and be anti-social, or sit with him and watch some substandard compromise of a film after 2 hours of debating what to watch. Quite often I'll sack off watching a film altogether because I'd rather play fifa, smoke weed and chill out with a mate than get annoyed about his lackluster film viewing.

You're right on the review front though. It's the toughest part. Started out for myself, now with over 2,000 followers and you guys heaping positives on it, I've kept it going.

https://38.media.tumblr.com/3c8e9ea9128ebf3f573572b3dffca67e/tumblr_ngh7hqxwk01tp1soio1_1280.jpg

255) Network (1976)

A television network cynically exploits a deranged former anchor's ravings and revelations about the news media for its own profit.

9/10 - I've held off from putting this review up because it has stuck with me for so long since watching it. I initially struggled to describe the prophetic nature of this film and the relevance it holds today, but I hope this goes some way to persuade you to watch this film.

As the description says, we witness a deranged news anchor, Howard Beale, become exploited by the network for its own profitability and gain. Viewing numbers are key, tragedy sells and personal lives do not matter as the only thing that matters is what the sponsors think and if it can be marketed and sold.

The rallying cry of the news anchor beckons at the oil companies, the ‘mysterious’ global media corporations and the essential worthlessness of the human society in their efforts towards change. It’s relevancy today is incredible, and resulted in one of the most memorable scenes in cinema (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMBZDwf9dok). I can’t imagine ‘journalists’ cheering when a terrorist attack or a robbery happens, but the way a common tragedy or misfortune is milked beyond all comprehension is certainly as apparent today as it is in this film. It is worryingly accurate.

The acting is excellent if not a little shouty, but the sharp script and solid performances allow each character to shine. As they take it in turns to yell their frustrations at the camera as loud as possible in a theatrical over the top manner, it can get a little much. I haven’t had to adjust the volume on the TV between scenes so much since watching Spring Breakers. However, it could just be their unbridled desperation and passion bursting out onto the screen, and it’s not necessarily a bad thing. Desperation to actually be heard, or for ratings, or for love, or for change. Each story arc is as interesting as the next and combined with the unpredictability of ‘Network’ it makes for an extremely entertaining film.

I’m not going to pretend that I knew what else was out in 1976, I can’t pass off a comment like ‘it deserved to win the Oscar for Best Screenplay’, or that ‘they definitely deserved best actor/actress’. They would be ill-founded statements as I haven't seen the other nominees. They all won awards though (see the poster!), and it is a film that needs to be seen. It is a classic, a strangely relevant classic and it is rare that a film achieves this to the degree that Network did.

Highly recommended. (It’s on Netflix)

Mik

December 13th, 2014, 4:51 PM

Why is something is made for awards recognition necessarily a bad thing? Surely that's the point, isn't it? Actually am interested by your point there.

I thought it was a genuinely great film.

Well, I guess its the distinction between something that deserves awards recognition and something that is MADE for awards recognition. Mostly its the fact that the latter has a quality of feeling a little manufactured and forced and consequently seems 'made by the numbers' a bit. Its a bit like one of those youtube videos, a case of ticking all the right boxes. Now, The Imitation Game was very good and I enjoyed it a lot, but it felt into that trap a little too much for it to be a really great film I think. One of my favourites of the year, but a long way below the likes of Interstellar, Nightcrawler, Boyhood and Gone Girl for me.

Clive Plasma

December 13th, 2014, 4:58 PM

Well, I guess its the distinction between something that deserves awards recognition and something that is MADE for awards recognition. Mostly its the fact that the latter has a quality of feeling a little manufactured and forced and consequently seems 'made by the numbers' a bit. Its a bit like one of those youtube videos, a case of ticking all the right boxes. Now, The Imitation Game was very good and I enjoyed it a lot, but it felt into that trap a little too much for it to be a really great film I think. One of my favourites of the year, but a long way below the likes of Interstellar, Nightcrawler, Boyhood and Gone Girl for me.

Haven't watched any of them yet. Just finished off Guardians of the Galaxy and Horrible Bosses 2 today.

Will get started on the others this week. Want to be able to have seen them before the year is out.

MikeHunt

December 13th, 2014, 5:04 PM

Mik

December 13th, 2014, 5:07 PM

Clive Plasma

December 13th, 2014, 8:41 PM

Clutch

December 14th, 2014, 1:37 AM

MikeHunt

December 14th, 2014, 4:38 AM

Clive Plasma

December 14th, 2014, 5:05 AM

Enemy over Nightcrawler? That's nuts. But i look forward to your thoughts :yes:

Enemy just had that edge that I love in film. That edge that means you genuinely have no idea what is going to happen next, it stays with you for a bit afterwards and really makes you think about what the hell just happened. It was fucked. Nightcrawler by comparison looked ordinary, even though Nightcrawler was creepy and fucked up in it's own way, and yet another great performance by Gyllenhall, personally, I favour Enemy.

By the standards of films released in the cinema however, as far as what is considered 'mainstream' and the release/promotion that went into Nightcrawler, I can understand the hype. It is a very very good film.

Mik

December 14th, 2014, 12:59 PM

Ringo

December 14th, 2014, 1:13 PM

Clive Plasma

December 14th, 2014, 1:23 PM

Just watched The Guest. Holy shit is that a fun movie. Number 18 on Empires Top 50 for 2014, and only made $250k at the box office!

I'll put this up in more detail later on with the rest. Worth a watch though, solid 9/10.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0E2Qh6wLS4

The soundtrack is fucking great too.

MikeHunt

December 14th, 2014, 1:29 PM

Clive Plasma

December 14th, 2014, 5:59 PM

Anyone seen this yet? Giving it a whirl tonight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl5Pu3b-V6U

Simmo Fortyone

December 14th, 2014, 7:20 PM

firewall

December 15th, 2014, 8:07 AM

Seanny One Ball

December 15th, 2014, 1:00 PM

Clive Plasma

December 15th, 2014, 1:33 PM

Clive you are a younger less arsey English me by the sounds of it!

I'll take that as a compliment, I guess?

Just finished Gone Girl. Add it to the list of bloody reviews I've got to do.

Initial thoughts on it are as follows;

1) Glad I didn't read the book. Knowing what happened would have ruined the entire film.
2) Rosamund Pike shows yet again she has only 1 facial expression. I don't know how she gets roles.
3) Very well produced, well edited and pretty dark for a mainstream film. Even though it is a book adaptation, it's good to see something like this get so well received.

BBF

December 15th, 2014, 1:40 PM

Clive Plasma

December 15th, 2014, 1:54 PM

Gone Girl spoiler thoughts...

I read that in the book, they delve into a bit of Amys High School life, showing that rather than having a track record of being an psychopathic cunt to just men, she also did it to women too. Of the reviews I've read since, lots of feminists are clinging onto it as some sort of feminist victory due to male oppression, and then there men saying that what we watched was typical of all women.

I would hate to be one of those people. That gets bothered by that type of thing, succumbs to nonsensical arguments about gender because they watched a film they didn't quite like. Or maybe they did like it, and then just wanted to pick fault with it to create an identity for themselves.

Pathetic anyway. Bottom line is, she is a pyscho and that was made clear.

Mik

December 15th, 2014, 4:27 PM

I read the book a while ago and loved it and also loved the film, I dont think that having fore-knowledge of the book really takes the impact of watching the film away.

I also thought that Rosamund Pike was absolutely outstanding in the film though.

Seanny One Ball

December 16th, 2014, 4:41 PM

It was a compliment Clive yoh scallywag.

Rosamund Pike is incredible.

Clive Plasma

December 16th, 2014, 4:58 PM

I really don't rate her. Maybe I'm being too harsh on her in this film though, she just looks so vacant. Same emotion more or less in every scene. Just staring beyond the person opposite her.

Perhaps that was the point.

Watching "Two Days, One Night" tonight. Marion Cotillard - now there's someone who can act.

Mik

December 16th, 2014, 5:25 PM

Clive Plasma

December 16th, 2014, 5:36 PM

Mik

December 16th, 2014, 6:30 PM

Seanny One Ball

December 16th, 2014, 7:56 PM

Donald

December 16th, 2014, 7:58 PM

Seanny One Ball

December 17th, 2014, 10:08 AM

Jack Reacher was alright but it really pissed me off that they used Tom Cruise and claimed that in the books Reacher is just a metaphor for an unstoppable force.

Fuck Tom Cruise.

Mik

December 17th, 2014, 10:29 AM

Clive Plasma

December 17th, 2014, 10:40 AM

I watched 'Two Days, One Night' yesterday. It is one of those films where I just didn't 'get' it. I mean, it is essentially a woman going around asking for her job back for 90 minutes.

It's simple, incredibly natural and well acted, but ultimately dull.

Seanny One Ball

December 17th, 2014, 10:47 AM

Aye Rosamund Pike in that James Bond film was quality.

Sword fight in her bra if I remember correctly.

Mik

December 17th, 2014, 12:23 PM

I watched 'Two Days, One Night' yesterday. It is one of those films where I just didn't 'get' it. I mean, it is essentially a woman going around asking for her job back for 90 minutes.

It's simple, incredibly natural and well acted, but ultimately dull.

But you liked Locke, which was essentially 90 minutes of a guy driving in a car trying to sort stuff out.

Ringo

December 17th, 2014, 12:30 PM

I'm a massive fan of the Dardenne brothers and while I did like it (I mean their films are all so similar in tone), I wasn't so high on Two Days One Night either. Was a little disappointed given the praise I'd seen it get around Cannes time.

Seen Gone Girl and Mr. Turner this week. Really enjoyed both.

Clive Plasma

December 17th, 2014, 12:36 PM

But you liked Locke, which was essentially 90 minutes of a guy driving in a car trying to sort stuff out.

Yeah, true. Locke didn't have that much hype about it when I watched it though, and it made sense. It escalated to a point of tension at the end that actually felt like it meant something, the tension in this film was a silent ballot (not a spoiler, it's established within the opening scene). It wasn't even an anti-climax because there was hardly a build up. It was good like I said, but not deserving of the hype.

I'm a massive fan of the Dardenne brothers and while I did like it (I mean their films are all so similar in tone), I wasn't so high on Two Days One Night either. Was a little disappointed given the praise I'd seen it get around Cannes time.

Spot on.

I'm on 267 now. Got 12 reviews to write up. Will watch a couple more tonight, but the reviews are going to have to wait a little while longer.

Also got Winters Sleep planned for next Monday, and Birdman for the 29th December. Might try and see Interstellar next Monday too as I have a few days off work.

Seanny One Ball

December 17th, 2014, 12:38 PM

Clive Plasma

December 17th, 2014, 3:06 PM

Seanny One Ball

December 17th, 2014, 3:26 PM

Clive Plasma

December 17th, 2014, 5:05 PM

Just finished The Skeleton Twins. Really good film. Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig are great in it, complete naturals on the screen.

Means I have these to type up now;

What We Do In The Shadows
Whitey: James Bulger vs The United States of America
Horrible Bosses 2
Guardians of the Galaxy
Nightcrawler
The Guest
Hello Ladies: The Movie
The Mule
Gone Girl
The Lunchbox
Two Days, One Night
The Skeleton Twins

And a handful of half watched films. So little time.

Seanny One Ball

December 17th, 2014, 5:19 PM

Interesting title with the James Bulger thing.

What is it?

Seanny One Ball

December 17th, 2014, 5:25 PM

Evidently a different James Bulger.

When I worked at BT my boss claimed she had trained Jon Venables and she could tell because he had evil eyes

MikeHunt

December 17th, 2014, 5:57 PM

Hello ladies the movie!

tell me more Clive.

Clive Plasma

December 17th, 2014, 6:37 PM

Interesting title with the James Bulger thing.

What is it?

A documentary following the live court case of one of Americas most notorious Mob Bosses. Same guy that did the Paradise Lost Trilogy Documentary. Really good stuff.

Hello ladies the movie!

tell me more Clive.

Never even seen the series mate, but apparently this movie was made by HBO as a sort of 'send off' for the TV show. It aired at the end of season 2 and was supposed to wrap things up. It was OK.

Edit: Just finished Edge of Tomorrow. Really fun movie that lost me slightly towards the end. Motoring through these now.

Clive Plasma

December 18th, 2014, 10:20 AM

http://i.imgur.com/gfBZ43Yl.jpg

256) What We Do In The Shadows (2014)

Follow the lives of Viago (Taika Waititi), Deacon (Jonathan Brugh), and Vladislav (Jemaine Clement) - three flatmates who are just trying to get by and overcome life’s obstacles-like being immortal vampires who must feast on human blood. Hundreds of years old, the vampires are finding that beyond sunlight catastrophes, hitting the main artery, and not being able to get a sense of their wardrobe without a reflection-modern society has them struggling with the mundane like paying rent, keeping up with the chore wheel, trying to get into nightclubs, and overcoming flatmate conflicts.

9/10 - I have been attempting to put together an end of year list, not only relevant to my challenge but relevant to the actual year, and as a result I’m cramming in as many of this year’s releases as possible in this final month. Having only been released last month, Jemaine Clement and Taika Waititi’s mockumentary about life as a vampire in New Zealand sounded entertaining and ridiculous. Having featuring on a few end of year lists already (even though the year isn’t up), it is clear that this was a film worth seeing whether you are a fan of Mockumentary style films, Flight of the Conchords or Vampires in general. If you hate all of that, it probably isn’t for you.

It’s a simple premise, stretched out over 90 minutes which could have ended up feeling like a single joke from a sketch show being dragged out too long. At times it did feel like that, but only for a minute or two, because every 10-15 minutes a new character was introduced leading to another comical situation. Whether it was meeting Rhys Darby (Murray from FOTC) as a Werewolf or when we meet the newest addition to the ‘gang’ and his human best friend, it’s a revolving door of excellent characters that ends up keeping the movie fresh and funny.

It is a well written, clever deadpan comedy that will draw comparisons to Spinal Tap, The Office and obviously Flight of the Conchords. While the comparisons are valid, it is good enough to stand on it’s own. With a low production value it’s attempt at ‘authenticity’ is believable, it all appears so normal. This is why when you see how stupidly funny and silly it is, the contrasting elements will have you laughing, a lot.

I know the poster has emphasised the word ‘hilarious’ being used in a lot of it’s positive reviews, and it led me to be a bit skeptical as it is such an over-used word. But I can now confidently say that I echo those reviews - hilarious is entirely appropriate for this film, and worthy of being on many end of year lists.

http://i.imgur.com/9ecdDzil.jpg

257) Whitey: United States of America v. James J. Bulger (2014)

Number 2 on America's Most Wanted list after Osama Bin Laden, James 'Whitey' Bulger terrorized the city of Boston for years without ever being charged with so much as a misdemeanor. Bulger was a monster, murdering over a dozen known victims, but did the FBI and local law enforcement give his reign of terror over South Boston a free pass?

7/10 - From the Academy Award-nominated filmmaker Joe Berlinger (Brothers Keeper, Paradise Lost Trilogy) comes 'Whitey', where we go as deep as we can into the trial of James J. Bulger and much like his previous work, attempt to uncover the full story.

You have to applaud Berlinger with this documentary, Whitey made it difficult for anyone to catch him in the act, so creating a documentary around someone who has so carefully covered their tracks is always going to be a challenge. Add to it that you cannot step foot in the court room, nor can you actually meet the man himself, it is no easy task.

While the chilling facts are splashed across our screens in a glossy way, following the narrative and direction of this documentary is as difficult to untangle as the web Whitey created himself. Most documentaries normally have an agenda, a particular angle, but this one just put threw the facts up and left it up to us. Ultimately a court decision was made, so there was closure in that respect, but it wasn't always clear who Berlinger thought was at fault.

That being said, it is incredibly detailed and the level of research is impressive - It bears repeating that this is a truly shocking story and that unless given a wider platform like this, it could have gone largely unnoticed. The corruption, violence and complicated nature of the story are spliced with witness testimonials and interviews, and perhaps most unnerving of all is that still throughout the duration of the trial repercussions of having anything to do with Bulger or the FBI are taking effect while filming.

Overall, it was a comprehensive view of the case and anyone with a vague interest in crime, or more specifically the mafia and government corruption will find this interesting. Although do not expect anything on the same level as Paradise Lost, it is confused and at times becomes lost in the detail.

BBF

December 18th, 2014, 11:02 AM

Hello ladies the movie!

tell me more Clive.

Watched it a couple of weeks ago. It was alright but nothing special. Merchant is naturally funny obvs but it was just a bit predictable for me. That being said I'd pump Nicole Kidman to within an inch of her life.

El Capitano Gatisto

December 18th, 2014, 11:59 AM

Clive Plasma

December 19th, 2014, 4:33 AM

Watched it a couple of weeks ago. It was alright but nothing special. Merchant is naturally funny obvs but it was just a bit predictable for me. That being said I'd pump Nicole Kidman to within an inch of her life.

You sort of forget how bloody tall he is. Just as a person, his entire demeanor is brilliant to watch. But it was when it descended into regular RomCom that it lost it's way. Up until that point it was fairly good.

I'm way behind with watching films for various reasons, but I finally got round to seeing The Hunt. I'd had it on my list to watch from before this thread but I'd support the glowing review in here. It's an incredibly good film, I think I spent most of it watching it a state of absolute tension, I felt tired after it. Mads Mikkelson is one of the best actors around at the moment. I only saw A Royal Affair this year as well and both of them are up there with the best I've seen recently.

Great to hear you watched The Hunt. I've been meaning to watch 'A Royal Affair' - I think you even recommended it to me? It's on Netflix now, so I'll be giving it a go over Christmas.

Clive Plasma

December 23rd, 2014, 1:38 PM

http://i.imgur.com/WJRB7t9l.jpg

258) Horrible Bosses 2 (2014)

Dale, Kurt and Nick decide to start their own business but things don’t go as planned because of a slick investor, prompting the trio to pull off a harebrained and misguided kidnapping scheme.

5/10 - It’s probably best to front this up by stating that there aren’t actually Horrible Bosses in this film, just a nasty guy who is their boss for all of 5 minutes on screen. It’s hardly a spoiler, the trailer would give it away, but it’s worth mentioning given that they have taken the exact same title and yet it bears hardly any resemblance to the first film in terms of storyline, or subject.

However, take this as the comedy/crime caper it is intended to be and fans of the first one will be satisfied. It is more of the same inner group squabbles and ‘crazy’ predicaments; Charlie Day pretty much being Charlie from It’s Always Sunny, Jason Bateman playing the deadpan rational adult (a schtick that gets boring very quickly) and Jason Sudeikis who kind of blends into the background. But among the above average film and their performances, there were just enough laughs to keep you interested, and with the addition of reoccurring characters like Jamie Foxx, Kevin Spacey and Jennifer Aniston for this trio to play off against, there were some genuinely funny moments. Throw Chris Pine into the mix, who had some great scenes, and it felt like the core three were being carried by their supporting cast.

The film does get a bit tedious though, and the laughs aren’t enough for it to be considered ‘hilarious’. It will divide opinion and my recommendation would be that if you liked the first film, give this one a watch. It’s easy, stupid and fun to watch, but just not that good.

http://i.imgur.com/QyagWDil.jpg

259) The Mule (2014)

A first time drug mule is caught by law enforcement.

7/10 - To elaborate on the laughably short IMDB synopsis, this is a story about a simple minded first time drug mule played by the brilliant Angus Sampson, who manages to get on the wrong side of customs as part of a routine drug check. What follows, is roughly 90 minutes of his character, Ray Jenkins, trying to not poo in order to expose the drugs he has stashed in his stomach.

To some, that story might seem on the same wavelength as any of the terrible Human Centipede movies. A film about bodily functions is never going to excite audiences, but this film deserves a lot of credit for elevating something so simple, into a dark and clever film that ended up combining aspects of both a thriller and a comedy. It’s a combination you don’t usually intentionally get - you might get a thriller that is so bad it’s funny, but in this film you feel trapped, unnerved, disgusted and yet overall you still find yourself chuckling away at someone refusing to take a dump.

Unlike the hotel room where most of the film takes place, this was a breath of fresh air, both in it’s originality and creativity. Backed by a great cast, and a clever script, this film also had the courage (or the foresight) to avoid a main cinema release and after a slew of festival runs ended up releasing it on iTunes back in November. It rocketed up the charts and has done quite well for itself. It’s definitely worth a watch, perhaps leave it a few hours after your dinner though.

http://i.imgur.com/RXZJQ21l.jpg

260) The 100-Year-Old Man Who Climbed Out the Window and Disappeared (2014) "Hundraåringen som klev ut genom fönstret och försvann" (original title)

Dynamite expert Allan Karlsson’s life, and the unlikely events following his escape from the old folk’s home on his 100th birthday.

8/10 - Some of my favourite Amazon reviews are the 1 star ones. It’s hard to tell if they are being serious or not. This one, quite simple said, “1 Star - Present - as yet unopened”. Very enlightening. Another said, “Don’t bother unless you are happy reading subtitles!”. Another very good indication as to the quality of this film. Then I saw that the constantly miserable Peter Bradshaw hated it, so I was sold on it straight away.

If you can see past the fact that there is a 30 year old man in so much prosthetic playing a supposed 100 year old man, and can handle Swedish conversations but English narration, then you will see the film for what it is; a slapstick, daft comedy where the accidents and shenanigans rack up to a stupid toll resulting in a Steve Martin meets Fargo hybrid.

As Allan KarlssonIwar Wiklander played by Robert Gustafsson decides to make a break for it on his 100th birthday, he gets all tangled up with the wrong types of ‘bad guys’ headed up unexplainably by Alan Ford (Snatch, Lock Stock, Armando Iannucci (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCIgUSNzSKU)) who just wants his money back. Making friends along the way, completely unfazed by the imminent danger and quietly content with just being old and doing whatever he wants, Alan plods along aimlessly.

It darts back and forth between his incredible backstory and the present day set among the sweeping Swedish countryside in an easy to follow narrative. The script is a little loose and dialogue not that sharp, and I have no doubt that due to that point and the hit-and-miss acting, this probably doesn’t live up to the ‘Best Selling Novel’ in terms of its translation to the big screen. But with it’s accelerating jazzy soundtrack and a sort of Forrest Gump vibe about it, there is still plenty to enjoy about this escapade.

Seanny One Ball

December 23rd, 2014, 7:08 PM

MikeHunt

December 23rd, 2014, 7:16 PM

Pablo Diablo

December 23rd, 2014, 7:38 PM

Clive Plasma

December 24th, 2014, 6:28 AM

I didn't know they made the 100 year old etc. into a movie. I read the book and found it an enjoyable read. Will have to see the movie.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts afterwards.

have you seen the castle clive?

No - It's been on the list for a while since I had that little flurry of Australian films a while ago.

Sounds like it's a fuckload better than Bad Grandpa

It's very different, but the appearance isn't far off.

Clive Plasma

December 26th, 2014, 8:03 PM

http://i.imgur.com/E8O2I3Wl.jpg

261) Hello Ladies: The Movie (2014)

Stuart has recently split up with his girlfriend. When his girlfriend comes to visit LA, Stuart pretends to have a relationship with his tenant to make his ex feel jealous.

4/10 - Middle of the road comedy putting a conclusion on sort of successful series by Stephen Merchant on HBO. The first third seems quite funny, Stephen as Stuart, dangling about like the awkward bloody bloke that he is. How hilarious that he can’t hit on women successfully? What a card. Then it descends into mindless formulaic romcom nonsense, with a predictable ending that will leave fans of the show happy.

http://i.imgur.com/Wig7p8xl.jpg

262) Arthur Christmas (2011)

Santa’s clumsy son Arthur gets put on a mission with St. Nick’s father to give out a present they misplaced to a young girl in less than 2 hours.

7/10 - If you feel like you have exhausted your holiday movie quota for the year, but still have a bit of Christmas cheer in you, then watch Arthur Christmas. A genuinely funny tale that is a welcome addition to the animated Christmas films we all know and love. It’s quick witted, original, sharp and has enough of the heart-warming Christmas sentiment you come to expect from this genre - fun for all the family.

http://i.imgur.com/3FC0mzwl.jpg

263) It’s Such A Beautiful Day (2012)

Bill struggles to put together his shattered psyche, in this new feature film version of Don Hertzfeldt’s animated short film trilogy.

10/10 - Around 10-12 years ago one of the strangest videos started circulating on the internet. Phrases such as ‘I am a Banana’, ‘My spoon is too big’ and ‘My anus is bleeding’ were some of the more quotable lines, and a plethora of odd gifs mainly used as forum avatars were created as a result. For those that haven’t seen the excellent oscar nominated short ‘Rejected’ from Don Hertzfeldt, click here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9l7sxPLhOQk) before watching ‘Its Such a Beautiful Day’, and it might give you a rough idea of what to expect.

This feature length animation is currently on Netflix, and while I encourage you to watch ‘Rejected’, do not be put off watching this if you found that too weird. Where ‘Rejected’ chronicles the breakdown of a failed animator, Beautiful Day explores a similar psychological notion. Using a combination of much simpler animation and narration from the man himself, spliced with moments of maddening colour and white noise, we follow his character Bill through themes of memory, death and reality.

It is somewhat unsettling yet profound, and amidst conveying complex messages about someone losing their grip on their reality, it maintains it’s dark brand of humour that I came to expect. Incredibly original, completely unusual and one of my favourite films I have viewed this year.

Highly recommended.

http://i.imgur.com/7Fm4Lqdl.jpg

264) Two Days, One Night (2014) "Deux jours, une nuit" (original title)

Sandra, a young Belgian mother, discovers that her workmates have opted for a significant pay bonus, in exchange for her dismissal. She has only one weekend to convince her colleagues to give up their bonuses so that she can keep her job.

6/10 - I don't think I 'got it'. Maybe it is because I am not too familiar with The Dardenne brothers style of work, but lack of prior knowledge about the director shouldn't be enough to sway my entire opinion on a film. It's been universally lauded by the critics, citing Marion Cotillard's (Rust & Bone, The Immigrant) performance as one of the best of the year. With that part I am inclined to agree, it's an incredible performance and without her in it I don't believe I would have continued watching the film. She is so natural in her style, it appears effortless and the range of emotions she is able to display makes her simply compelling viewing.

However, despite her best efforts I just could not connect with this film. I felt no tension, no build - all I saw was someone asking for their job back for 90 minutes. I know that comes across as strange, because how can you buy into a person, and not the film, when the film is mainly about that one person? I can't answer that. I felt connected to Cotillard's character, but not the cause.
Mik rightly pointed out to me, that Locke (http://film2014.tumblr.com/post/93957445676/154-locke-2013-ivan-locke-a-dedicated-family), which I highly rated, was essentially a bloke in his car sorting stuff out, a similar line of banality. But in this instance I felt the tension, and it's a great comparison because Tom Hardy and Marion Cotillard are two of the finest people on the screen at the moment. Perhaps it was more relatable, more realistic in it's scenarios, more mysterious as it unfolded. I bought into it, I got it.

I'm happy to admit that perhaps I didn't 'get this'. It's normally the universal comeback from people when you have a different opinion on a film to the majority, but I will beat you to it. I will give it another watch, and as part of the reviews next year I'll be revisiting a lot of these films and many of my favourites, because a lot of them deserve a second, third, fourth viewing.

As for this, if you like subdued french drama, then this is for you. If you like Marion Cotillard (who doesn't?) then this is for you. I like both of those things, but maybe you will have better luck with it than I did.

Mik

December 27th, 2014, 2:40 AM

MikeHunt

December 27th, 2014, 4:27 AM

Clive Plasma

December 27th, 2014, 6:12 AM

Now "the guest" can we talk about it. If not can everyone go and watch it. Thanks. Kisses

It's a fucking dreamy film. What did you think?

Hmph, 'someone', don't even get a proper name check.

Ha, it was pasted from the blog. Sorry bud.

Mik

December 27th, 2014, 7:30 AM

MikeHunt

December 27th, 2014, 9:33 AM

It's a fucking dreamy film. What did you think?

Ha, it was pasted from the blog. Sorry bud.

It was bloody spectacular. I got terminator vibes at points. Great.

Clive Plasma

December 31st, 2014, 12:19 PM

I need a new name for the blog next year - any suggestions?

Also, certain Reviews will be shorter until the backlog of reviews are cleared up.

http://i.imgur.com/W05q0VSl.jpg

265) Gnomeo & Juliet (2011)

The neighboring gardens of Montague and Capulet are at war, but the gnomes, Gnomeo and Juliet, are in love.

3/10 - Another film courtesy of Christmas television, and quite possibly my last remaining Jason Statham film to view. I won’t spend too much time on this; the animation was terrible, the script was OK and I suppose it would be good fun for kids. A great cast of voices probably just doing the film so that they can show their actual kids a film they have been in for once. I highly doubt James McAvoys’ kid wants to sit through Atonement or Wanted.

http://i.imgur.com/p75cTUGl.jpg

266) Boyhood (2014)

The life of a young man, Mason, from age 5 to age 18.

7.5/10 - Unless you have been living under a rock, you will have heard of and quite possibly seen Richard Linklaters’ ‘Boyhood’. A piece of cinema that will no doubt go down in history as one of the ‘greatest’ cinematic achievements made due to the fact it was actually filmed over 12 years and Mason (Ellar Coltrane (http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1294664?ref_=tt_stry_pl)) literally grows up in front of your eyes from scene to scene.

It was always going to be a challenge bringing all the footage together, and I loved the introductions of new technologies, political events and popular culture to give an indication of what year we had jumped to. It did seem a bit obvious, but I favoured it over a classic ‘2 years later…' text splashed on the screen. It was obvious that these kids were ageing, but by comparison to standard text prompts, Linklaters' methods were subtle.

Given the buzz of this film, looking at the posters, the reviews, the way that everyone has been harping on about how simply incredible Boyhood was, I must admit, I felt a little let down. It wasn’t the near 3 hour running time that was frustrating, nor was it that it attempt to cram in almost every teenage movie cliche going for it. I just expected more from it, but I’ll elaborate on that further down.

When you do cover 3 hours and go after most of the teenage cliches, you are going to find pieces of the film, if not the entire film relatable. From the pressures at home, to relationships, to the younger sisters, to school life and how all of that feeds into the building of you as a person - it is all relatable to some extent. Certain aspects will be more relatable than others, but what the film does is prompt you to remember your ‘boyhood’, and that is where it stops, because once you have remembered there is nothing more the film gives you. Nothing new, just a jolt in the mind to remember when something vaguely similar might have happened to you.

This is where my expectations have hindered my opinion on the film. I expected more. More conflict, more emotion, just something a bit more significant to happen than just 'remember when this could have happened to you?'. The script was realistic, effortless and natural. The conflict that did happen was pretty significant, and it was charged with emotion, but it was short lived. The acting was pretty good too, difficult to fault considering Ellar Coltrane was initially untrained and Linklater used his own daughter, but all of that was not enough to keep me fully interested and invested for 3 hours. I get that to inject any of what I am asking into the film, it would have changed the entire films dynamic. It would have made it unrealistic, sensationalist and completely miss the mark on what Boyhood has set out to achieve, and that’s a realistic, simple portrayal of one boy growing up. It achieved that, no doubt about it, but I found the films technical successes far outweighed the films success in terms of storyline and content, and as a result it was highly watchable but ultimately a little bit dull.

Definitely another film I will be adding to my list to watch again next year. Perhaps with readjusted expectations I will be able to appreciate it more, but we will see.

http://i.imgur.com/G5Kh48ml.jpg

267) The Lunchbox (2013)

A mistaken delivery in Mumbai’s famously efficient lunchbox delivery system connects a young housewife to an older man in the dusk of his life as they build a fantasy world together through notes in the lunchbox.

8/10 - A simply charming film that puts other films in the romance genre to shame. It is what you would class as a perfect date movie; it addresses multiple marriages, themes of loneliness, and new found love, all through a mix of indian traditions and food. It is incredibly acted, very understated and only goes to strengthen the emotional ups and downs you come to experience. It will leave you wanting Indian food, and encourage you to look beyond intentional isolation, regardless of the cause. It’s messages are as cheesy as the Paneer in the food, but the film is not.

Highly recommended, and a recent addition to Netflix. Partial subtitles due to mixed languages.

http://i.imgur.com/IVs9I2Fl.jpg

268) Gone Girl (2014)

With his wife’s disappearance having become the focus of an intense media circus, a man sees the spotlight turned on him when it’s suspected that he may not be innocent.

8/10 - This film was a joke, right? I mean, there were so many implausible pieces to it, that I would like to think that by the end of it, any aspect along with our patience and understanding of your typical thriller has been thrown out of the window. Then as a result, Fincher has had a big cackle to himself, gives us a slap in the face for wanting anything serious or even remotely on the scale of Zodiac or Se7en, and proceeds to satirise everything in sight.

If that’s the case, then bravo. The opening third was fantastic cinema, created enough tension and Affleck was the loveable doofus posing in front of his missing wives photo like a star. Every time I see that pose, it makes me laugh.

http://www2.pictures.zimbio.com/mp/VsqxDQivbkcl.jpg

Rosamund Pike was vacant, hardly there either mentally or physically and initially I had that down to a poor performance. Her previous roles have always been so minor, that it was as if she had continued that run of form by becoming a rigid member of the supporting cast. I brought it up on here and got told, 'that was the point', I brought it up again with one of my mates and after a bit of convincing, I went and rewatched segments of the film and realised that her demeanour was wholly intentional. For reasons I will not go into, at risk of exposing the predictable twist, be sure of one thing, that Pike & Affleck are putting their doubters away in this film.

It challenges gender stereotypes, our use of the media for information, the medias behaviour itself and our seeming enjoyment of gratuitous violence. It covers a lot of ground but does it in quite a roundabout way, never too sure of it’s direction. However, the film has made a popular book even more popular, and the film itself has done incredibly well. I would not be surprised to see it on a number of end of year lists, and it is great to see a film in the thriller genre do so well in the mainstream.

In hindsight, I was too harsh on it after first watching it. I am glad I have had time to reflect before sticking this up. It starts out better than it finishes, but you can’t deny that it was a slick looking film with a handful of good performances. Even Tyler Perry took a break from dressing up as a woman to give us a good show. Hopefully this is the first of many thriller films that we see make it into the mainstream, because it’s been bloody ages since something of this sort was shown so widely.

http://i.imgur.com/ntlSHPkl.jpg

269) Virunga (2014)

A group of brave individuals risk their lives to save the last of the world’s mountain gorillas; in the midst of renewed civil war and a scramble for Congo’s natural resources.

10/10 - A fantastic Netflix Original documentary here, outlining and following the re-emergence of a civil war in Congo. Based out of the Virunga National Park, an area so rich with natural resources, that it is under increased threat on a daily basis. We are taken on a journey similar to that of a war movie, or crime thriller. The calm before the storm as it were, is quite simply showing key members in the National Park going about their days and explaining why they do it.

What comes next is shocking and real, and to go into any more detail would kill any form of suspense, shock, or disbelief you may have when watching. It is infuriating to watch, a documentary that by the end of it you will be asking yourself how you can help. Well compiled, intelligent and great a demonstration of investigative journalism - it is a genuinely brilliant piece of film making. One of the most important documentaries produced in recent time, and highly recommended.
http://virungamovie.com

http://i.imgur.com/517SdRSl.jpg

270) A Walk Among The Tombstones (2014)

Private investigator Matthew Scudder is hired by a drug kingpin to find out who kidnapped and murdered his wife.

7/10 - Great to see Liam Neeson in something that doesn’t involve him smashing everyones faces in. It is a run of the mill detective thriller that comes across as sleek and clever, even though it is neither of those things. Very little explanation for a lot of what happens, or any of the characters backstories, which did leave the entire film falling a little flat. Nevertheless, a lot of fun and worth a watch if you want to see something a bit different from Neeson.

Note: Reviews will be shorter until the backlog of reviews are cleared up.

http://i.imgur.com/oUstKbcl.jpg

271) The Detective (2007) [“C+ jing taam” (original title)]

A private detective is drawn into a complex murder mystery when he is hired to track down a missing young woman.

7/10 - A very cool little movie out of Hong Kong. One of those where once the detective gets embroiled in the investigation, the investigation starts to unravel around him in a sea of paranoia and intrigue. However, throughout the entire film you will be left puzzled. There isn’t even the slightest hint as to what is going on until right at the end, and the conclusion is more than satisfying. It is raw, well produced, gritty and shot through this odd yellowy tint that gives it a very unique feel. If you can track it down, give it a go.

Note: Reviews will be shorter until the backlog of reviews are cleared up.

http://i.imgur.com/JNDIUJYl.jpg

272) The Guest (2014)

A soldier introduces himself to the Peterson family, claiming to be a friend of their son who died in action. After the young man is welcomed into their home, a series of accidental deaths seem to be connected to his presence.

9/10 - Probably one of my favourite films of the year. From the mind of Adam Windgard (You’re Next, VHS 2), it is an obvious throwback to the 1970-80’s style of horror movies, combining certain qualities that make it resemble a combination of The Terminator, Red State and Drive. Darkly funny, yet savagely violent, Dan Stevens just seems to effortlessly wander about smirking at people while you just sit and wait for the next crazy thing to happen. It is utterly ridiculous, and the most amount of fun I have had watching a movie in a long time. Highly recommended, and the soundtrack is worth getting too.

Note: Reviews will be shorter until the backlog of reviews are cleared up.

http://i.imgur.com/b3dLKAQl.jpg

273) The Interview (2014)

Dave Skylark and producer Aaron Rapoport run the celebrity tabloid show "Skylark Tonight." When they land an interview with a surprise fan, North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un, they are recruited by the CIA to turn their trip to Pyongyang into an assassination mission.

2/10 - I liked Neighbors, This Is The End and Pineapple Express, but this does not even come close to any of them. There are certain moments that had me chuckling away, but on the whole it was just a terrible movie. Predictable, obvious humour that a school child could have written. It's not worth giving any more thought, I wished I hadn't watched it.

http://i.imgur.com/k0ZXvuPl.jpg

274) Maidentrip (2014)

14-year-old Laura Dekker sets out on a two-year voyage in pursuit of her dream to become the youngest person ever to sail around the world alone.

7/10 - Entertaining but ultimately a bit underwhelming, however you cannot fault the achievement. The film is a great way of proving her doubters wrong, and demonstrating her sought after independence and freedom. The opening scenes, and the negative reviews that have come afterwards citing her 'ego' and 'arrogance', are clearly being mistaken for being self-assured and ambitious. I can't imagine at the age of 14 having the foresight, technical ability and courage to do what she has done, and this documentary is a well edited, intimate portrayal of her incredible feat.

http://i.imgur.com/TXu9G09l.jpg

274) Nightcrawler (2014)

When Lou Bloom, a driven man desperate for work, muscles into the world of L.A. crime journalism, he blurs the line between observer and participant to become the star of his own story. Aiding him in his effort is Nina, a TV-news veteran.

9/10 - What a year Jake Gyllenhaal has had. Prisoners, Enemy and now this, it is a complete turnaround after a few dubious films (Prince of Persia, The Source Code) and with his well documented body transformation for the upcoming 'Southpaw' I have no doubt we will be in for further incredible performances next year.

It is dark and tweaky, and Gyllenhaals performance accentuates those qualities that run deep throughout this voyeuristic thriller. Morbidly funny, it’s satirical take on the news and our thirst for it drew comparisons to ‘Network’ in that tragedy thrives, blood sells and it does not matter how we get it. Only that in Network we view it from a corporate perspective from the 1970s, here we see it from an entrepreneurial side, from a frustrated, hostile oddball who will do anything to succeed in modern society. If manipulating and exploiting news to your advantage is what it takes, as many people do, then that’s what we will do.

Shot all at night in brooding downtown LA, it is one of the more creepier thrillers in recent times. It gives you a sense of disorientation and the frantic nature of which Gyllenhaal’s character races about piles on the tension to a intense degree. Riz Ahmed (Four Lions, Ill Manors, Shifty) is brilliant alongside Gyllenhaal as his new assistant, and upon arrival their chemistry injects a new lease of excitement and uncertainty into the film. His timid nature opposite ‘Lou’ and his extremely articulate, precise yet intimidating dialogue makes for intriguing and unsettling viewing.

I think Enemy was arguably his best this year, but that is just my preference based on just how insane it was, but Nightcrawler is still a brilliant film and vastly different by comparison. The main constant here is Jake Gyllenhaal and his repeatedly great performances, and if you enjoyed Prisoners, Zodiac and Enemy, then this fill will float your boat. He is an absolutely abhorrent sociopath and it is a lot of fun to watch.
Highly recommended.

Still to upload;

* Guardians of the Galaxy
* The Immigrant
* Birdman
* Midnight Cowboy

Mik

January 2nd, 2015, 5:23 AM

While I respect your opinion and your reasoning I completely disagree about boyhood. I don't think that it's just about mason, I think it's about being a father, being a mother, being a daughter...being a family. I don't think that it's made just to be relatable and I think that the small things (to those on the outside) that have great significance on peoples lives are exactly the point rather than needing big moments that would make the film lose a lot of its realism whilst increasing the melodrama.

Yeah Gone Girl is supposed to be stupid. I think that's what a lot of those criticising the film have failed to pick up on. I think they see fincher's oeuvre and see stuff like seven and zodiac that are meticulous in following criminal stories and hold this to the same standards and it's not meant to be that type of film. The novel isn't high art, it's a dumb pulp novel that's twists and turns are for the sake of entertainment rather than creating a puzzling narrative and I think that the film works perfectly at that.

By the way...Source Code under 'dubious films'? It was incredibly popular with critics and developed a real cult audience. I think that more films alongside his recent run of form than along Prince of Persia.

The Rogerer

January 2nd, 2015, 5:31 AM

McBain

January 2nd, 2015, 5:33 AM

Clive Plasma

January 2nd, 2015, 10:10 AM

While I respect your opinion and your reasoning I completely disagree about boyhood. I don't think that it's just about mason, I think it's about being a father, being a mother, being a daughter...being a family. I don't think that it's made just to be relatable and I think that the small things (to those on the outside) that have great significance on peoples lives are exactly the point rather than needing big moments that would make the film lose a lot of its realism whilst increasing the melodrama.

Yeah Gone Girl is supposed to be stupid. I think that's what a lot of those criticising the film have failed to pick up on. I think they see fincher's oeuvre and see stuff like seven and zodiac that are meticulous in following criminal stories and hold this to the same standards and it's not meant to be that type of film. The novel isn't high art, it's a dumb pulp novel that's twists and turns are for the sake of entertainment rather than creating a puzzling narrative and I think that the film works perfectly at that.

By the way...Source Code under 'dubious films'? It was incredibly popular with critics and developed a real cult audience. I think that more films alongside his recent run of form than along Prince of Persia.

Fair point on Boyhood, like I said I'm going to go back and watch it, I think I will appreciate it more on a second viewing. It just wasn't what I thought it would be.

As for Source Code, I didn't like it. I lumped it in there with Prince of Persia for that reason only. Had no idea about a cult following or critics reviews, but those two felt like blips in a good run of films.

Mik

January 2nd, 2015, 10:19 AM

Seanny One Ball

January 2nd, 2015, 2:01 PM

Wait til he reviews Midnight Cowboy, that is going to be good.

I remember the first time I watched that...fucked me up.

I suggest Midnight Express too, nothing like Midnight Cowboy but Brad Davis is dead now and it is his best film.

AWWW Billy!

Clive Plasma

January 2nd, 2015, 2:05 PM

http://i.imgur.com/0exlFKgl.jpg

276) Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)

A group of intergalactic criminals are forced to work together to stop a fanatical warrior from taking control of the universe.

8/10 - Another superhero movie from Marvel, sort of like The Avengers, but not the Avengers. A lot of what I was going to write is covered off in this Honest Trailers (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOyJqGtP-wU)link; the comparisons to The Avengers was always going to happen, but there was one point they acknowledged that emphasises the entire reason I try and avoid this type of sci-fi - the ‘space bullsh*t’ / ‘space mumbo-jumbo’. Essentially language that means absolutely nothing to those watching it for the first time with no knowledge of the comic books, but makes it sound futuristic and cool. It didn’t ruin my viewing, but it annoyed me whenever they would do it.

The other thing they acknowledged, which is the main point I was going to make, is that it really is just a huge amount of fun to watch for the most part. Dave Bautista and his deadpan delivery, Chris Pratt is one funny guy, then Zoe Saldana and Bradley Cooper were great in the supporting roles. They all seem to hit on different levels and it works well. It had enough of the sarcasm, quick wit and self awareness that I come to expect from this genre now, but with equal balance of purpose and character development. It was a really solid movie, until the final act.

It’s no spoiler alert if I explain that this movie ends in some form of gigantic explosive CGI riddled mess. Just like Captain America, and the Avengers, and Iron Man… it’s always the same. I don’t know why they do it. I mean, there has to be a climax to the film, but does it really have to be such an overkill to that extent? I didn’t see it in 3D, so perhaps my position on this is kind of jaded, but it is a shame to see a film that was holding it’s own, felt fresh and original despite being so close to previously released films, and then went into a giant mess at the end.

I can overlook the ending though, and the sci-fi talk, because overall it was one hell of a good movie. I can’t comment on it much more than that: I’m not that big into Marvel, don’t read comics, or have a particular preference of superhero, but I enjoy film and I enjoyed this.

http://i.imgur.com/ODp6CQel.jpg

277) Midnight Cowboy (1969)

A naive prostitute and his sickly friend struggle to survive on the streets of New York City.

9/10 - A true classic, winner of 3 Academy Awards and is the only X-Rated film to have won Best Picture. This isn’t pornography, for those that didn’t know, X-Rated in the 1960’s covered anything unsuitable for the younger generations (17 below), and it was only later on that the X rating was adopted by pornographers. In order to disassociate themselves from that rating, adaptations to other restrictions were brought into play. In this instance, due to the homosexual references, the act of prostitution and the general grim nature of this film, it was a no brainer to release it as an X-Rated film. After winning the awards, it was later reduced to ‘R’ and has remained so, unedited and unchanged, ever since.

Now I was not around in 1969, I have no idea what it would have been like in New York back then, but this film goes a significant way to assure you that if the wrong choices are made without the right knowledge and education, the outlook was bleak and your options were limited. Its appearance is gritty and murky, with the only fractured moments of brightness taking shape in a ‘Warhol-esque party’, making the imminent crash back to reality even more damning. It is not surprising then to realise that this film is often referred to as a ‘time capsule’ of what life was like in late 1960’s NYC. A certain feeling of disillusion is apparent, and in many ways it still exists with major cities today. A move there does not and will not immediately grant you a much better life, after which, unless you act quickly, your options are significantly reduced.

We are treated to two excellent performances; the first is Jon Voight, in his first ever major acting role, later to go on to star in Deliverance, The Champ and Runaway Train. He is a naive ‘cowboy’ intent on making New Yorks finest ladies pay for his services to provide him with a life of luxury. A dream that at least a potential option for him until he meets Dustin Hoffman, fresh after filming The Graduate, a limping, dirty, wise guy who sounds like he is about to cough up a lung the entire film. What emerges out of these two paths crossing is a disconcerting set of events unfolding before our eyes, highlighting two mens struggle to achieve their revised dreams as they become interlocked in one single aim. To explain anymore would spoil the turbulent journey you are taken on, and would devalue the revelations you experience.

The performances alone are worth watching this film, but the way that it is shot and the type of film that it is, it feels like it is years before its time. Shocking in it’s content, emotionally and mentally draining, it is a classic and one that you will not forget in a hurry.

One thing this challenge has taught me, is not to be put off by the date on the film. For a long period of time I would only decide to watch films released in the last decade or two, considering certain films to be ‘too old’. It is clear that after watching this, and a few others along the way, that I have been completely wrong to ignore them for so long. They still stand up to modern cinema now, and if you are on the fence as I was at the start of last year, this film could quite possibly be the one to change your mind.

This is on Netflix UK for a few more days, so catch it quick.

http://i.imgur.com/OdTBOzGl.jpg

278) The One I Love (2014)

Struggling with a marriage on the brink of falling apart, a couple escapes for a weekend in pursuit of their better selves, only to discover an unusual dilemma that awaits them.

7/10 - A bloody weird film. Only 3 people in the entire film, with a storyline that cannot really be explained before the movie without spoiling the entire thing, and contains an ending that leaves what actually happened largely up for debate. I have my theory on it, and if you have seen it, I would love to hear yours.

What I will advise is that if you are tired of the standard ‘romcom’ genre, like something a little more strange, then this is for you. Quietly funny, infuriatingly claustrophobic and oddly spooky, it’s a film that goes places not many, if any, romcoms have gone before. Cleverly shot, and well acted, Elisabeth Moss and Mark Duplass show great chemistry on screen, and with these two taking up the vast majority of the movie, it’s a good thing too.

Available on iTunes to rent now, and on DVD in the US.

Still got The Immigrant. and Birdman to upload for ones officially watched last year. Also seen but not yet reviewed, The Thomas Crown Affair (1968) and Foxcatcher.

Seanny One Ball

January 2nd, 2015, 2:10 PM

Clive Plasma

January 2nd, 2015, 2:13 PM

Cheers. It was such a good film. Difficult to do it justice, but hopefully it encourages some to seek it out via the blog.

I'm trying to type up Birdman but struggling to put into words what I thought of it, it's just bafflingly great.

Seanny One Ball

January 2nd, 2015, 2:16 PM

Is that the Michael Keaton film that I remember someone said was the "performance of a lifetime"?

I love Michael Keaton so...

El Capitano Gatisto

January 2nd, 2015, 2:57 PM

Donald

January 2nd, 2015, 3:09 PM

Seanny One Ball

January 2nd, 2015, 3:19 PM

I love Michael Keaton also, I want to see Birdman. I've watched Multiplicity more times than I can remember because of the sheer volume of Keaton involved.

Ooft Multiplicity is a shocking film too. I remember spending my pocket money renting it, it made me hate Andie Macdowell for wasting mine and Michael Keatons time.
Bad Neighbours has a good bit about Keaton/Bale's Batmen.

Keaton if you're asking.

Mik

January 2nd, 2015, 5:25 PM

Clive Plasma

January 2nd, 2015, 6:54 PM

Donald

January 2nd, 2015, 6:56 PM

Keaton is awesome in anything.

I recall hating White Noise, but I can't remember a single thing about that film.

Clive Plasma

January 4th, 2015, 8:39 AM

New website is live; w (http://movieblort.wordpress.com)ww.movieblort.com (http://www.movieblort.com) as is the twitter www.twitter.com/movieblort (http://www.twitter.com/movieblort)

I'll be copying the reviews here still. Stayed tuned.

Clive Plasma

January 5th, 2015, 8:55 AM

https://movieblort.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/mm_foxcatcher_poster.png?w=470&h=695

Foxcatcher (2014)

The greatest Olympic Wrestling Champion brother team joins Team Foxcatcher lead by multimillionaire sponsor John E. du Pont as they train for the 1988 games in Seoul – a union that leads to unlikely circumstances.

7/10 - First off, if you know nothing about the true story that the film is based on, do not try and seek it out. It will spoil the film for you knowing what is coming. Secondly, this film is shrouded in controversy ever since Mark Schultz, Olympic Gold Medal Wrestler of whom the film is based on, has decided to flip on his previous support for the film and trash it publicly citing, “Everything I’ve ever said positive about the movie I take back, I hate it.”

His reasons are understandable, if not resulting from reacting to something a little irrationally. The anger stems from a certain scene in which a sexual undertone is apparently detected between him and John Du Pont, an undertone that I did not pick up on and nor did many critics. However, a few did, and considering the outcome of the actual story you can forgive him for being angry. A quick check on History vs Hollywood (http://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/foxcatcher/) shows many inaccuracies, but the fundamental question here is whether the story has been told respectfully and honestly, conveying the same messages true to life? You can be forgiven for specific chronological errors, it is all part of artistic licence to condense a story, but if it damages the true events to the extent that they have been completely changed, then questions need to be asked. Mark Schultz feels that this has happened, hence why he is trying to distance himself from it.

From a reviewing perspective, that is neither here nor there. I watched the film to see what all the hype was about, if I wanted to be informed I would have sought out an article describing what had happened and that would have been that. From an ‘entertainment’ purpose, in the loosest of terms considering how dark and strange the film is, it struggles to ever really get going, but that is the point. It is dragged out to nearly 2 hours, and has been portrayed in such a bleak manner with such restraint that it teeters of the brink of boredom, yet it’s relenting creepiness does its best to keep you engaged until the end.

Steve Carell steps away from comedic roles to give a memorable performance as the increasingly odd John Du Pont, opposite Channing Tatum fresh off his 22 Jump Street success who gives arguably his best performance of his career as Mark Schultz. What follows throughout the film is minimal dialogue, intense staring and results in a chilling back and forth between the two leads. It is quietly disturbing, and a fascinating portrayal of real life events.

However, after watching it and getting over the initial shock of what had transpired, I cannot help but think Mark Schultz had a point. The film focussed on his failures, showed his dependencies on his brother, made him seem a lot closer to Du Pont than reality and as such made him come across as a naive man. I’m not one to nit-pick at inaccuracies, it is a slippery slope and one that can ruin movies for you entirely. But perhaps if it was spliced with his successes, told in the correct chronological order and provided more time to the excellent Mark Ruffalo, the ending much like real life, would have been even more shocking. In turn, the bleak film I just endured, might not have been as much of a chore as it felt.

https://movieblort.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/drug_war_poster_xl.jpg?w=470&h=696

Drug War (2012)

A drug cartel boss who is arrested in a raid is coerced into betraying his former accomplices as part of an undercover operation.

8/10 - The well established Johnnie To (Election, Exiled, Triad Election) finds his feet again with the excellent ‘Drug War’. With over 30 producing/directing credits to his name, the standard of films although well executed have been largely sub-par since the standard was set so high with his earlier work. It is refreshing to see what appears to be a more ‘americanised’ film, one that should relate with western audiences but he has still managed to keep himself grounded in his roots, and make significant reference to harsh Chinese drug policies and the people that consistently disobey them.

The film itself is well shot, the acting is good and not too overly eccentric, and the steady build up reaches a climax with a shoot-out the likes of which I have never seen. Nothing too clever here in terms of the plot, simple and to the point, it is a paint by numbers cop and bad guy film. That being said, there is a lot to take in at the beginning of the film, and it may feel like it is too much. Stick with it for the first 20 minutes and it slowly unravels itself into a beautiful mess. It is a slow building film worth it for the end scene alone. If you like this, check out Election and Triad Election, arguably his best work to date and some of my favourite films to come out of China.

http://movieblort.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/tumblr_nhig6zyw791tp1soio1_1280.jpg?w=470

The Immigrant (2013)

In 1921, unfortunate circumstances drive newly arrived immigrant Ewa into a life of prostitution, and a complex, volatile relationship with two men – her conflicted pimp and his romantic cousin.

8/10 - Having not seen any of James Grays previous work, I now hope the rest are as good as this one. His 6th collaboration with Joaquin Phoenix and also starring the consistently great Marion Cotillard, this excellent drama set in prohibition New York will leave you wishing that more films were made like this.

Traditional, straightforward storytelling with minimal ‘twists’ and ‘revelations’, it plays out exactly as you expect it to play out and for once the predictability of a film is welcomed. Although visually grim, there is a certain beauty to the way it is presented. A sort of tint to the film, almost representing that slight glimmer of hope among the seemingly endless trail of obstacles thrown at immigrants.

Impeccably detailed, yet understated in it’s execution, this is a film that deserved more praise and promotion. Although the characters were a little flimsy, and it was a struggle to invest in anyone but Ewa (Cotillard), it provides the genuine escapism that is missing from a lot of films nowadays. It isn't a ‘nice’ film in any sense of the word, but one worthy of your time.

As I said before, I've sacked off the movie reviews in terms of numbers, and will just be continuing as part of my movie website; http://movieblort.com/

If a Mod see's this and can be nice enough to change the thread title to 'Clive Plasma: Movie Reviews' it'd be appreciated. I'll amend the front page to reflect it also.

The Rogerer

January 5th, 2015, 12:36 PM

Clive Plasma

January 5th, 2015, 1:16 PM

Clive Plasma

January 5th, 2015, 3:30 PM

Stuck this up on the website today, probably only relevant for UK readers and a lot of it is repeated reviews I had already posted.

With Netflix taking some 189 titles off today, and not nearly adding enough back on, it can be difficult to find what you want to watch. Especially as Netflix will only recommend you a select few from each genre, depending on what you have viewed before, and on what platform you choose to watch it on.To make things simpler, I’ve scoped out the latest offerings on Netflix UK (added in the last week), and can confidently recommend the following if you are are stuck for what to watch.

http://movieblort.com/2015/01/05/netflix-uk-picks/

Clive Plasma

January 6th, 2015, 5:55 PM

http://i.imgur.com/su9FY0tl.jpg

Birdman (2014)

A washed-up actor who once played an iconic superhero must overcome his ego and family trouble as he mounts a Broadway play in a bid to reclaim his past glory.

For those that have not seen Birdman, you probably shouldn’t read completely on. There will be spoilers ahead, and this is one of those films where you can’t describe it without unearthing a large portion of the plot. For now though, I will attempt to describe what I watched a week ago. It has taken me a week to put my thoughts down, simply because I do not think my words can do it justice.

Alejandro González Iñárritu’s latest film, is in a league of it’s own compared to the likes of his previous outings Babel and Amores Perros. Both of those are worth watching in their own right with their fragmented, overlapping story lines, equally bleak and depressing. But Birdman is an altogether different beast, and takes on a completely different narrative style. It is practically the opposite of his previous work.

For those that have seen Birdman, I hope you are still as baffled and impressed as I am. It is an astounding technical achievement incredibly well acted, a film that defies genres and one of the strangest films I have ever had the pleasure of seeing.

The film addressed celebrity status, the rise of social media, the role of the film critic, the superhero franchises, the desire to be loved and many more aspects; all of which were tastefully executed. As I mentioned before, technically and artistically it is a joy to behold. Filmed to give the impression it was taken in a single shot, set to a drummed score, you immerse yourself in Birdmans world. To elaborate anymore would ruin it for those who want to read no further, and repeat what those of us have seen. It would achieve nothing. But the ending, it left me puzzled. Not in a frustrated way, but it has taken me a while to process what I have watched.

Spoilers ahead…

What had I just watched? Well after some discussion with my friend, we came up with three unoriginal, highly pretentious theories, all highly plausible. Forgive the stream of nonsense about to be spouted.

http://i.imgur.com/z6XRjvSl.jpg

1) He was dead the whole time. The entire film is a dying mans wish of how he bowed out.

I’ll start with the most ridiculous theory. The others make more sense and you will have to trust me on that. To say he was dead the whole time feels like a bit of a cop out, and fits the age old cliche of ‘it was all a dream’, but there is some substance to this to suggest so. He stated to his wife that he tried to drown himself but was surrounded by Jellyfish, he then retreated and essentially saved his own life. We see Jellyfish at the beginning and the end of the film, indicating that perhaps he didn’t pull himself out of the water in time. Additionally, the night before his final show his room was full of flowers and his wife dressed in black, resembling mourning/funeral/death type of situation. It was only after he had made peace with his wife, and with himself, that he went out there and blew his nose off on stage. Why only your nose though, if it is your dream? This is where the pretentious nature begins to creep in…

The shooting of his nose could be his literal interpretation of “cutting your nose off to spite your face”, in this death/dream like state, he wanted to prove that he was insanely committed to putting on a show if given the chance. It is defined as ‘A needless overreaction to a problem’.
Problem = Not taken seriously, Overreaction = shoot yourself in the face.

The pretension continues… The Ed Norton character is everything he wanted to be, and served a purpose in the way he wanted this to play out. He was a character taken seriously, and became much closer to his daughter than he ever could. The rant at the critic was a way of him saying what he wished he had always said to the critics. It is that feeling you get when you think of a great comeback after the moment has gone. The scene of him walking around town in his pants, after being locked out of the theatre, represents his total exposure to the public by literally going into theatre. Finally in the hospital room, his friend Jake heaps praise on him along with everyone else.

All the events are him coming to terms with his own demise. Everyone always shot him down, saying how he was nothing, and only Birdman told him otherwise. The stage-show and everything else was essentially created in his head to justify the end of his life. He throws himself out of the window and instead of looking down his daughter looks up because, well, she finally looks up to him.

Too much? Well, how about only part of it is real…

http://i.imgur.com/j6LLCtSl.png

2) Everything is real until he shoots himself in the face, then he actually does take his own life.

Upon shooting himself in the face, the camera cuts away. It is the only time the camera cut away for the entire film. As I said before, in the hospital room his daughter now cares for him, critics love him, his wife loves him, Jake thinks he is incredible… it’s finally all come together. What an idealistic view, but when you are dreaming/dead of course it comes together how you imagined. The comet in the sky could represent the bullet through his head, and taking the mask off is him leaving Birdman behind, and jumping out of the window signifies him finally letting go…

It is more realistic than the last theory. However, this I believe is the most accurate…

http://i.imgur.com/9GLcvurl.jpg

3) Only parts of the film were in his head, and the main target was us, the audience.

His “special powers” and Birdman antics were part of compounded stress built up by money problems, mental issues and social perception.

The result is that he tries to take his own life, but can’t even do that right. In an ironic twist of fate, he is now lauded for it. We, the hungry masses and the media, love him for it. We tweet, record, write and lap it up. We cant see that he’s fucked up, we just see it as art. Is that not the same for a lot of entertainment these days? The most popular YouTube videos are idiots injuring themselves, the most popular entertainment shows are ones where the mentally ill are judged first and the best go through, and all of it is exacerbated and goaded on by the use of social media. That is how success is measured in a sea of likes and retweets.

Aware of his new found/restored celebrity status, he gives us one final ‘fuck you’. This time he will not mess it up. He leaps out of the window, to finally end it all. He kills himself.

His daughter looks down, and he is splattered all over the pavement. She then looks up because she’s finally seeing him what for he thought he was, Birdman.

http://i.imgur.com/luvduAPl.png

I have no idea if anything is right, or it’s been completely over thought, but it is a fascinating film when you break it down. It is one of the great things about a film that leaves it so open to interpretation. One you want to go back and watch time and time again.

You could however just chalk it up to ‘Magic Realism’ and say that everything that happened actually happened. It’s not a bad fallback option when you realise you have spent the best part of a week overthinking a film, perhaps sometimes it is best to just ‘accept’ it…

What do you think?

Clive Plasma

January 7th, 2015, 12:13 PM

Been busy with work recently, but tonight I will try and put up the following reviews;

The Drop (2014)
The Thomas Crown Affair (1968)
A Dirty Carnival (2012)
Stir (1980)

I seem to be losing followers on the Tumblr website, I've noticed more and more than all they care about is GIFs and it was pure potluck that I acquired so many followers.

Anyway, the other one is going well and I've had nothing but positive feedback on it - www.movieblort.com - I will probably make a FB page soon, it seems to be the best way to gain traction, but is also an embarrassing way to highlight how little people give a shit about what you write.

The Rogerer

January 7th, 2015, 12:54 PM

Clive Plasma

January 7th, 2015, 1:01 PM

Yeah, I see that. Quite often the reviews get reblogged and the actual review removed.

Whiplash leaked out 2 days ago too, and I didn't see one comment on the film at all. Just reblogs of GIFs and the odd quote. They were more excited to reblog and create GIFs than they were that a great movie had leaked out.

The Rogerer

January 7th, 2015, 1:03 PM

Clive Plasma

January 7th, 2015, 1:12 PM

Ringo

January 7th, 2015, 1:33 PM

Beer-Belly

January 7th, 2015, 1:38 PM

I wanted to see Birdman in theaters, but it was only in my area for a week or so. The screener will have to do.

Inherent Vice is supposed to be released everywhere in the States on Friday, but neither theater near me will have it for some reason. God forbid they get rid of Annie or whatever the fuck so they can play a movie that's getting heavy awards consideration.

Clive Plasma

January 7th, 2015, 2:45 PM

Fucking hell. Loads of them. The gifs are coming. No Interstellar though?

Birdman is worth seeing in the cinema, but that's the thing, if it was only about for a week or so what choice to you have? Wait months and months for the DVD or travel however far to see it in another cinema.

I'm most interested in Selma, purely as American Civil Rights Movement was essentially a year of my studies at University. I'll see that in the cinema, along with American Sniper.

Beer-Belly

January 7th, 2015, 2:57 PM

I don't even think Birdman has a release date for DVD/Blu-Ray.

I don't understand why limited release films aren't on VOD services. Keeping big blockbusters in theaters makes sense, but there are plenty of people who don't live in metropolitan areas that would like to see smaller films without having to drive to a big city.

Mik

January 7th, 2015, 6:47 PM

Clive Plasma

January 10th, 2015, 8:12 AM

http://i.imgur.com/cqNA2Yel.jpg

283) The Drop (2014)

Bob Saginowski finds himself at the center of a robbery gone awry and entwined in an investigation that digs deep into the neighborhood’s past where friends, families, and foes all work together to make a living - no matter the cost.

8/10 - From the director of the highly rated ‘Bullhead’, Michael Roskam, comes this brooding urban crime drama set in Brooklyn, New York. Very subdued, it is a patient build up with an unlikely pay off that enables this film to succeed. While Dennis Lehane’s storyline leaves little to the imagination, and the characters are barely developed, Roskam has been saved by the individual performances of his two leads.

It stars James Gandolfini in what would be his last major role, as a puffing, discontent bar owner whose history constantly plagues the present day. It was a notable performance, and one that I am sure he would be happy he went out on. ‘Enough Said’ was an excellent film too, and showed this incredible actors true range even right at the end. A star gone too soon.

Working alongside him was Tom Hardy, an actor with a lot of great films under his belt, and ‘This Means War’. The guy is on a roll, and it really is another stand out performance from the rising actor. He plays the role simply, but effectively. You never know what is quite there with Bob, he comes across as a bit one dimensional, but as the film unfolds you realise that we have a deeply complex character of which we know very little about. Plus, he has a little pitbull puppy with him for the majority of the film… so there’s that too.

https://movieblort.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/tom-hardy-and-a-dog-in-the-drop-e1420487781884.jpeg?w=940&h=262

It is a clichéd crime thriller, but full of tension and a decent conclusion. The great performances and cinematography lift this from being your average run of the mill crime film that you might expect Ray Liotta to star in, to a film that Gandolfini can be proud to have starred in.

Still available in select cinemas.

http://i.imgur.com/gwR6miNl.jpg

284) Stir (1980)

Filmed in the Clare Valley, Gladstone and the Flinders Ranges in South Australia, this prison movie was inspired by the true life prison riot at Bathurst Jail in 1974 and its subsequent Royal Commission into New South Wales Prisons.

8/10 - For those that have been following this blog for a while, will know that I have been working my way through Australian cinema for some time now. Animal Kingdom, Snowtown, Romper Stomper, (http://movieblort.com/2014/01/14/21-romper-stomper-1992-7-10-described-as-the/) Chopper, The Rover (http://movieblort.com/2014/09/15/200-the-rover-2014-10-years-after-a-global/), The Proposition (http://movieblort.com/2014/09/15/199-the-proposition-2005-a-lawman-apprehends-a/), Mystery Road (http://movieblort.com/2014/02/16/46-mystery-road-2013-an-indigenous-detective/) and the excellent Wake in Fright (http://movieblort.com/2014/01/08/11-wake-in-fright-1973-8-10-described-by-my/) to name a few. A substantial amount of those recommendations come from my friend Matt who lives in Australia, and with his recent foray into Prison Films, this film ‘Stir’ was suggested as a ‘must watch’ because ‘there are some amazing fucking lines in it’.

He wasn’t wrong, you would have a field day trying to limit your favourites. But there is a lot more to it. It is a no frills approach to prison drama, without overdoing it on the violence or making a big deal about any particular one incident. This film is not one incident, it is an amalgamation of events culminating in a full scale riot. You can be sure of the films authenticity, the screenplay written by an actual Bathurst inmate Bob Jewson, directed by a first time director, it is rare we get to see this level of naturalism in a prison film.

The events and treatment are shocking, and the fact that they actually happened emphasises that even more. However, it is more than just shock value; there are some excellent performances from both prisoners and guards, many separate story lines that make up the single narrative, and among the bleakness still manages to inject some dark humour. It really is a well rounded film. Whether you are fans of the classics like Cool Hand Luke, or enjoyed the brilliant Starred Up (http://movieblort.com/2014/03/23/80-starred-up-2013-a-troubled-and-explosively/), then this film is essential viewing.

Simmo Fortyone

January 10th, 2015, 11:26 PM

Clive Plasma

January 11th, 2015, 6:12 AM

Huh. I have never heard of that movie. Will have to chase it up :yes:

The whole thing is on Youtube, the DVD's are quite tricky to locate seeing as whenever I search for it I end up getting loads of results for Stir Crazy.

MikeHunt

January 11th, 2015, 6:47 AM

Clive Plasma

January 11th, 2015, 7:39 AM

https://movieblort.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/mv5bmtc5mzc3oduyml5bml5banbnxkftztgwndk0odc1mje-_v1_sx640_sy720_.jpg?w=940&h=1340

285) A Dirty Carnival (2006)

Byung-du is a 29-year-old career criminal, working for the middle-rank enforcer Sang-chul. Burdened with a terminally ill mother and taking care of younger siblings, Byung-du is feeling financial pressure as a substitute patriarch. When the big boss President Hwang is cornered by a corrupt prosecutor, Byung-du is offered to carry out a whack job to earn the big man’s trust. However, his real trouble begins when friend Min-ho, an aspiring movie director, asks him to be a consultant for the latter’s debut film.

9/10 - South Korean cinema has a reputation since the start of Tartan Asia Extreme for being mercilessly violent leaving the remakes for US audiences look like a kids film by comparison. For those that have gone beyond those titles that have fuelled that perception, will have realised that not only can they make savagely violent yet thrilling films, their understanding of the gangster genre is second to none.

Socially recognised as a normal aspect of life, the gangsters are feared by many, respected by some, despised by most. In this film as the description states, we follow a gangster at the start of his career trying to establish himself further up the hierarchy. What takes place is not a life of glamour, drugs and copious amounts of money, but rather a spiralling view of various circles of this mans life all being affected on a deeply emotional and somewhat physical level by the actions he takes on a daily basis. Family life, love life, gangster life and social life are all intertwined across a 2 hour film that will leave you exhausted by the end.

Do not yet the 2 hour timeframe put you off though. As they move from job to job, interspersed with the occasional Karaoke bar, the excitement and tension levels reach tipping point across a couple of insane fight scenes. Bats, axes and knives are all used to inflict pain on the rivals, but death is not the end goal. Death is saved for more intimate, subdued moments – there is no glorification here.

http://i.imgur.com/OModmnGl.jpg

One of the unique aspects of this film, is that the story within the film itself is being recreated by Kim Byung-du’s friend, an aspiring film director. A surreal parallel storyline emerges where for instance, the fight scenes are addressed and in the film dismissed as too unrealistic. A subtle nod to the effort the actual film has made to make their own fight scenes realistic, among many other aspects they included. No doubt plenty of research into gangster culture went into making this film, and while realism is often associated with being ‘boring’ or ‘dull’ by many, this film is far from it.

For any avid lover of the gangster genre, this film is essential viewing. If you are looking for a film to take yourself away from the recognised Korean classics and branch out, then this is a great place to start. It is superbly acted, beautifully shot, characteristically brutal and although difficult to follow at first, the multiple story arcs associated with the central character make a nice departure from the linear, simplistic gangster flicks you encounter all to often.

Highly recommended.

Mik

January 11th, 2015, 9:02 AM

https://movieblort.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/mm_foxcatcher_poster.png?w=470&h=695

Foxcatcher (2014)

The greatest Olympic Wrestling Champion brother team joins Team Foxcatcher lead by multimillionaire sponsor John E. du Pont as they train for the 1988 games in Seoul – a union that leads to unlikely circumstances.

7/10 - First off, if you know nothing about the true story that the film is based on, do not try and seek it out. It will spoil the film for you knowing what is coming. Secondly, this film is shrouded in controversy ever since Mark Schultz, Olympic Gold Medal Wrestler of whom the film is based on, has decided to flip on his previous support for the film and trash it publicly citing, “Everything I’ve ever said positive about the movie I take back, I hate it.”

His reasons are understandable, if not resulting from reacting to something a little irrationally. The anger stems from a certain scene in which a sexual undertone is apparently detected between him and John Du Pont, an undertone that I did not pick up on and nor did many critics. However, a few did, and considering the outcome of the actual story you can forgive him for being angry. A quick check on History vs Hollywood (http://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/foxcatcher/) shows many inaccuracies, but the fundamental question here is whether the story has been told respectfully and honestly, conveying the same messages true to life? You can be forgiven for specific chronological errors, it is all part of artistic licence to condense a story, but if it damages the true events to the extent that they have been completely changed, then questions need to be asked. Mark Schultz feels that this has happened, hence why he is trying to distance himself from it.

From a reviewing perspective, that is neither here nor there. I watched the film to see what all the hype was about, if I wanted to be informed I would have sought out an article describing what had happened and that would have been that. From an ‘entertainment’ purpose, in the loosest of terms considering how dark and strange the film is, it struggles to ever really get going, but that is the point. It is dragged out to nearly 2 hours, and has been portrayed in such a bleak manner with such restraint that it teeters of the brink of boredom, yet it’s relenting creepiness does its best to keep you engaged until the end.

Steve Carell steps away from comedic roles to give a memorable performance as the increasingly odd John Du Pont, opposite Channing Tatum fresh off his 22 Jump Street success who gives arguably his best performance of his career as Mark Schultz. What follows throughout the film is minimal dialogue, intense staring and results in a chilling back and forth between the two leads. It is quietly disturbing, and a fascinating portrayal of real life events.

However, after watching it and getting over the initial shock of what had transpired, I cannot help but think Mark Schultz had a point. The film focussed on his failures, showed his dependencies on his brother, made him seem a lot closer to Du Pont than reality and as such made him come across as a naive man. I’m not one to nit-pick at inaccuracies, it is a slippery slope and one that can ruin movies for you entirely. But perhaps if it was spliced with his successes, told in the correct chronological order and provided more time to the excellent Mark Ruffalo, the ending much like real life, would have been even more shocking. In turn, the bleak film I just endured, might not have been as much of a chore as it felt.

I agree word perfect with this review. I liked this film, but I felt that it was too deliberately slow and drawn out and too minimalistic, I felt that the amount of story was there could've been covered a lot better in around 100 minutes rather than two hours. Then I went online and read the real story (I knew some of the story having an interest in MMA and therefore amateur wrestling too) and found it very peculiar that the director had chosen to focus the story that way and involve so much creation in what was already an interesting story as it is. In fact the real story is more interesting that the focus he chose to take. I find it bizarre to misrepresent a real person who still exists in that way while telling a 'true story' based on their biography. To a lesser extent I do think that Mark Schultz is a bit of a homophobe on the basis that he seemed quite happy with the film (the performances and the story although he said that it wasnt accurate about the characters and the relationship) until he read that it had been interpreted that he had a homosexual relationship with Du Pont...at which point he went absolute batshit with his hate of the film.

I can understand why though, I dont know why the film choses to suggest that he had a submissive relationship to everyone in his life and in particular an abusive sexual relationship with the guy who murdered his brother...when NONE of that happened. Thats not really very fair at all for a film that purports to be a true story.

I did think that the performances were strong, but the film didnt grip the way that the trailer did and Du Pont's creepiness wasnt built the way that it should've been from the true story. When he shot David, at my screening people jumped out of their skin because they didnt expect this impotent old try hard rich guy with clear mammy issues to have done that, that should not have been the case. It didnt do a good enough job of digging into the characters and their motivations for me, I think that it should've had more dark humour in it too, make it that slow and minimal and serious really amplified the fact that nothing was going on for long parts of the film. Its surprising as I thought that he was absolutely the right director for the job considering Moneyball and Capote, but as it transpires I would've been more interested in seeing someone else's adaptation.

Ringo

January 11th, 2015, 9:29 AM

Agree with pretty much all of that Mik, although I perhaps liked it a bit more than you did. Found Carrell pretty terrifying and there's something compelling about both Tatum and Ruffalo in the movie. Ultimately felt like it promised more in the early stages than than it ended up delivering.

Wanted to see what DuPont was really like and found this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4WOqUkJmFQ

Also Kurt Angle talking about it all, as he had trained under Dave Schultz at Foxcatcher...

spoilers because there's spoilers in the title and what he discusses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jV2U7SA_YuI

Clive Plasma

January 11th, 2015, 11:00 AM

I agree word perfect with this review. I liked this film, but I felt that it was too deliberately slow and drawn out and too minimalistic, I felt that the amount of story was there could've been covered a lot better in around 100 minutes rather than two hours. Then I went online and read the real story (I knew some of the story having an interest in MMA and therefore amateur wrestling too) and found it very peculiar that the director had chosen to focus the story that way and involve so much creation in what was already an interesting story as it is. In fact the real story is more interesting that the focus he chose to take. I find it bizarre to misrepresent a real person who still exists in that way while telling a 'true story' based on their biography. To a lesser extent I do think that Mark Schultz is a bit of a homophobe on the basis that he seemed quite happy with the film (the performances and the story although he said that it wasnt accurate about the characters and the relationship) until he read that it had been interpreted that he had a homosexual relationship with Du Pont...at which point he went absolute batshit with his hate of the film.

I can understand why though, I dont know why the film choses to suggest that he had a submissive relationship to everyone in his life and in particular an abusive sexual relationship with the guy who murdered his brother...when NONE of that happened. Thats not really very fair at all for a film that purports to be a true story.

I did think that the performances were strong, but the film didnt grip the way that the trailer did and Du Pont's creepiness wasnt built the way that it should've been from the true story. When he shot David, at my screening people jumped out of their skin because they didnt expect this impotent old try hard rich guy with clear mammy issues to have done that, that should not have been the case. It didnt do a good enough job of digging into the characters and their motivations for me, I think that it should've had more dark humour in it too, make it that slow and minimal and serious really amplified the fact that nothing was going on for long parts of the film. Its surprising as I thought that he was absolutely the right director for the job considering Moneyball and Capote, but as it transpires I would've been more interested in seeing someone else's adaptation.

As I said in the rep, glad to hear someone else agreed. My mate just texted me with exactly the same thoughts and scoring having not read any of this. The captions of the reviews on the film are massively misleading and everyone seems to be loving it. It really really overhyped.

Simmo Fortyone

January 11th, 2015, 10:41 PM

Beer-Belly

January 11th, 2015, 11:17 PM

I'm going to need to see Birdman a few more times to wrap my head around it. All I can say is that everyone involved should feel proud.

I'm just going to imagine that Riggan flew away.

Beer-Belly

January 12th, 2015, 6:30 AM

But what probably happened was...

Sam saw Riggan's dead body on the ground and realized she got the beach house.

Mik

January 12th, 2015, 6:54 AM

I think that its more that...

Sam saw Riggan dead on the ground and finally saw him as a heroic figure because he did something that she didnt have the 'courage' to do.

Beer-Belly

January 12th, 2015, 7:12 AM

But the beach house was mentioned earlier in the film. Seems like a Chekhov's gun type of deal.

I'm still desperately holding on to the idea that Riggan flew away and that Sam was amazed by it.

Mik

January 12th, 2015, 7:19 AM

I think that you're allowed to interpret it in a few different ways, its ambiguous deliberately I think.

I also think that we should be discussing this in a 'Birdman' thread rather than Clive's thread.

Clive Plasma

January 12th, 2015, 2:35 PM

Cheers for changing the title btw, whoever did that (assuming Mik).

Bit slow on the uptake of this, but only just realised I can get American Netflix through my Apple TV. Unbelievable amount of foreign cinema on there. All this time I've been sourcing these films on DVD, but for whatever reason a lot of them don't get Region 2 distribution.

Last night I watched 'The Trap' aka 'Klopka'. It's available on Youtube too, but it really was something special. I'll stick the review up in due course, but I urge you to check it out regardless.

Clive Plasma

January 13th, 2015, 6:18 AM

http://i.imgur.com/KVdSiQml.jpg

Kid Cannabis (2014)

An eighteen year old high school drop out and his twenty-seven year old friend start trafficking marijuana across the border of Canada in order to make money and their lives are changed forever.

6/10 - I’m usually skeptical of films that are ‘based on a true story’, and despite the poster resembling what Netflix likes to call a ‘late night comedy’ i.e. awful ones, I had heard good reviews about this and felt like it was worth a shot.

This film never intended to change the world, nor did it slip into that horrendous slapstick comedy style with profuse ramblings about tits, poo and weed. It remained realistic and true to the story from what I can establish from the extensive article featured in Rolling Stone (http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/meet-nate-norman-americas-kid-cannabis-20130606?page=6) (which is definitely worth a read after the movie). It rises above what you expect from it. There is plenty of nudity and it is funny in parts, but you don’t feel stupider for watching it. So often these types of movies just descend into screaming matches with cheap laughs, when in reality this movie is hardly a comedy at all.

This is actually well written, it does not feel like it has a B-Movie director, the main actors are all believable and there are even some notable cameos (Hellboy & Dr. Cox from Scrubs). This would be a prime candidate for not judging a movie by its poster - it is an interesting story and you can do far worse than this movie if you are looking for something easy to watch.

http://i.imgur.com/J36peayl.jpg

The Trap (2007) Original Title: Klopka

An ordinary man, forced to choose between life and death of his own child. Kill someone in exchange for the money for your child’s operation. What would you do?

9/10 - Would you kill someone you have never met before, for someone you have never met before, to save someone you loved? This is what is positioned to us in ‘The Trap’, as a hard working, honest man has the cards stacked against him. His life was going well, as well as it could be in post-communist Serbia. Despite being poor, he has a happy family, a steady job - he see’s light at the end of the tunnel. However, the gulf between the rich and poor has never been more prominent, which is why when his child falls sick, he has a very important decision to make. Both morally, emotionally and economically. What follows is bleak and unforgiving, but nonethelsss excellent cinema.

It is a beautifully shot film, depicting a desolate and cold environment for our lead, Mladen, to make his decision. Whether it was intentional, it is quite fitting that the area he lives in represents his emotional situation so well. The plot is exceptional, addressing the key theme of the film early on but being restrained enough for the mystery to unfold effortlessly and naturally. It is not without shock, the unclear direction of the story and the consequential events leaves you with your mouth wide open all to often.

The decision is difficult enough as it is, but it is a standard question that has been featured in many different genres of film from spy films to comedies to thrillers to horror - You have to save yourself, someone you love, or someone dies. How is it then that such a simple premise is executed so well? Aside from the twisting plot and the bleak cinematography, the performances by Nebojsa Glogovac and Natasa Ninkovic are first rate and elevate this film to something else. The sheer emotion that these two leave on the screen makes this film what it is. We as an audience are let in to witness this turmoil Mladen faces; A difficult moral decision, conflicted and torn for so many reasons, you empathise but cannot side with him.

Ultimately a life has to end, but is there really a right answer as to how this plays out? What makes the film unique, is that the lines of good and bad are blurred inherently within the society this takes place. It is difficult to watch the events unfold. He is a victim of circumstance, and has a decision nobody wants to make.
Highly recommended.

Pablo Diablo

January 13th, 2015, 4:45 PM

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts afterwards.

No - It's been on the list for a while since I had that little flurry of Australian films a while ago.

It's very different, but the appearance isn't far off.

So just watched 100 year old etc... Now I read the book a while ago. But from watching the movie I think they did a pretty good job of translating into onto film. Sure some bits were cut out but when I read the book I mostly remember it for i being as you said a slapstick sort of affair. Definitely an enjoyable movie it was even if the prosthetic was a bit laughable in its own right.

Clive Plasma

January 14th, 2015, 5:11 AM

http://i.imgur.com/vC8MvXsl.jpg

Inside The Hunt For The Boston Bombers (2014)

In April 2013, chaos erupted in Boston near the finish line of one of the world’s oldest and most prestigious marathons. It was the worst terrorist attack on the United States since 9/11 and led to one of the most extensive and public manhunts in American history. Now, as the one-year anniversary approaches, National Geographic Channel presents a special two-hour event, Inside the Hunt for the Boston Bombers.

6/10 - A fairly detailed look at one of the worst events in recent US history. Combining both reenactments from those involved, live footage and interviews it provides a good overall view of what took place. It did at times seem like they were going through the motions of what happened in too much detail, not to the extent that it was unwatchable, but a dialogue not to dissimilar to this took place frequently; “we saw the guy had a white hat, so we called him white hat because he had a white hat, next to white hat was another guy who also had a hat on but this hat was not white, it was black, so we called him black hat." It was like I was watching Nathan For You’s spoof documentary ‘Simon Sees (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvrcHpipzmA)' whenever they interviewed the FBI.

However, it is incredible that they found the bombers and some of the scenes are truly disturbing. It is a testament to spirit of the people of Boston, the length of which they went to and the level of co-operation they had with regards to lockdown that it is simply unknown if another city would react as cohesively as Boston did. It is truly disgusting what happened, unfortunately we live in a world where incidents like this do occur. You only need to look at what recently happened in France or the latest massacre in Nigeria (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/09/boko-haram-deadliest-massacre-baga-nigeria) (which is horrible that it can be referred to as the latest one), and get a shocking reminder of how sick some individuals can be.

Certain interviews and drawing it out to nearly 90 minutes (no adverts) diluted the impact that a documentary like this should have, but this is worth a watch. It is nothing revolutionary, but a startling presentation of a horrible act of violence.

http://i.imgur.com/rT6ICpol.jpg

The Believer (2001)

A young Jewish man develops a fiercely anti-Semitic philosophy. Based on the factual story of a K.K.K. member in the 1960s who was revealed to be Jewish by a New York Times reporter.

8/10 - Before The Notebook, Fracture and Half Nelson, Ryan Gosling starred in ‘The Believer’ as Jewish Nazi, Danny Balint. A young, impressionable man with a past he wants to hide and a future he wants to cement. It is a frighteningly believable performance by Gosling, he acts with such intensity and purpose that when he descends into one of his anti-Semitic rants you at times forget you are watching a film. He portrays the extraordinary extremist views found quite often in Louis Theroux (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x27906j_louis-theroux-louis-and-the-nazis-part-i_lifestyle) type documentaries, with the key differentiator being that Goslings character, based on a real person, is actually a highly intelligent, articulate person.

Aside from the excellent performance from Gosling, the plot itself is significantly underdeveloped. We do not really understand why he is a Nazi, why the girl he likes is infatuated with him or what the consequences are for certain actions he takes. There are many plot holes, many pieces of the puzzle left unexplained, but if you can overlook those points you are left with a film with enough substance to it for it to be suitably compared to the likes of American History X. Comparisons to it will always happen, considering how closely released they were and how both tackle such sensitive subject matter. But with a smart, sharp script and a performance by Gosling on a parallel with Norton’s in American History X, both are equally worthy of high praise.

If you are not sold on Gosling as an actor, as I know many people are not, then I urge you to watch this film. It is arguably his best performance despite it being one of his earliest. A far cry from the shuffling smirkfest he usually puts out, this film is exceptionally powerful with its only weakness being the unanswered gaps in the story.

Clive Plasma

January 28th, 2015, 6:25 AM

Been a bit absent as of late. Keeping busy with work and trying to sort out a change in career path means that I actually have to do stuff during the day now rather than piss about on here.

I have a huge backlog of films, but here's what I've written up;

http://i.imgur.com/RGB6Nofl.jpg

The Babadook (2014)

A single mother, plagued by the violent death of her husband, battles with her son’s fear of a monster lurking in the house, but soon discovers a sinister presence all around her.

8/10 - Touted by many as one of the ‘genuinely, literally, scariest film of all time’ or at least in the last 10 years, I was shocked when I spent the most part of this film laughing at it. What’s important to remember that being scared varies from person to person, some people get scared very easily and others can laugh in the face of murky, shadowy monsters. I am in the latter camp of people. I have seen all sorts of horror films and unfortunately the element of being scared has nearly all but gone for me, which is a shame. The only remaining feeling is queasiness as I found out when I watched ‘Maniac (http://movieblort.com/2014/09/02/184-maniac-2012-as-he-helps-a-young-artist/)' last year. But I will preface this by saying that if you are the type of person who gets scared by films such as Insiduous, The Exorcist, Kidnapped, Sinister & The Strangers whereby things lurking in the background manifesting themselves into jumpy, obscure, nightmarish beings (real or fake) give you the heebie jeebies, then a word of warning: this film will mess you up.

From a technical perspective, the film was excellent. As the mood got worse, darker and creepier, as did the house and the scenery around it. It created a sense of claustrophobia, a prison type environment, a dirty unwanted situation to be a part of. Essie Davis gave a great, raw and emotional performance as the traumatised single mother, some have suggested that she should have been in with an Oscar nod, and others have stated that Oscars tend to ignore the horror genre entirely. It is for a different discussion, but compared to the others in the category she could have held her own. Despite wanting to throw him off a cliff every time he was on screen, Noah Wiseman played his part perfectly as the increasingly annoying son ‘Samuel’, as I would later come to realise, this was not entirely his fault.

The Babadook had every aspect required to succeed; it did not rely on gore, nor cheap scares, or shock value or any of the standard trash you see paraded about by the plethora of horror films usually released over the Halloween period. Jennifer Kent created a genuinely unique horror film here, and it is worth of a watch for all fans of the genre.
Unfortunately, as I will explain below, it took me a couple of views to realise this.

I did not want my lack of fear to obscure the review of the film itself, but it did. I finished watching it and thought ‘well, that was bloody average’. I put this down to the ending, which appeared to be a literal explanation for what had just happened rather than any air of mystery or intrigue. I saw it as a very simple film, one they had almost tried too hard to explain to me.
I was completely wrong.

[Spoilers below]

After digging about afterwards to try and see if any others had experienced what I had, a feeling of disappointment, I found I was in the minority. It was then I started to read some of the theories (http://www.reddit.com/r/TrueFilm/comments/2l495c/the_babadook_discussion/), and everything fell into place. This film is far cleverer than I initially gave it credit for, and the layers of unsettling emotional and mental instability that are compounded to create this ‘Babadook’ were frighteningly real.

I had no idea that the reason her son was acting up from the beginning, was because she had been abusive to him all along. She had been the Babadook long before the Babadook, the book, had existed.
This would explain why he was so well prepared with his weaponry for the Babadook, because it had happened before.
I didn’t put two and two together, and realise that as a children’s author, she made the book to attempt to explain to Samuel in a way he would understand, why she was acting the way she was.
The ending with the worms in the basement indicates that the Babadook still exists, but the Babadook being a manifestation of grief and stress and being locked in the basement, shows that it has simply been stored away. It is where her husbands things were. The worms weren’t for anyone, it was a coping process for the two of them and established fear in Samuel so that he would not go into the basement again.

Ultimately I had understood that she was the Babadook, but what I failed to realise was the extent of which she contributed to its existence. It is a stark portrayal of depression, anxiety, grief and resentment showing what can happen to those faced with loss of loved ones or single parenthood. With the combination of the two, it can at times be impossible to cope. Essie Davis’s character succumbed to her inner demons, and had no way of explaining it or coping with it without resorting to nightmarish fantasy. Eventually her maternal instincts took over, and she was able to get on with her life for the most part. Grief never completely goes away, it will always be in the back of your mind, or in this case, the basement.

The fear in this film appears on second viewing, knowing what I know now, it is one of the more emotionally challenging horrors I have seen in recent times.

http://i.imgur.com/aX5oIpJl.jpg

Rapt (2009)

A rich industrialist is brutally kidnapped. While he physically and mentally degenerates in imprisonment, the kidnappers, police and the board of the company of which he is director negotiate about the ransom of 50 million euro.

7/10 - An interesting French crime thriller based on an actual kidnapping of a wealthy industrialist, who after being taken away, is suddenly victim to not only what the kidnappers put him through, but an unfortunate amount of ‘gossip’ and reputation tarnishing stories splashed all over the press. What follows is an odd game of balancing the books, does he get released? Is he worth releasing? What cost does it become too much? Between the business, his family and the police, there is no one right answer and seeing it play out makes for entertaining viewing.

Without this moral proposition, we would probably have been left with a standard kidnapping film. Negotiation and fighting is more or less non-existent here, unrealistic nonsense has been shaven away to produce one of the more believable kidnapping films out there. It is well paced, methodical, expertly structured and what it lacks in head smashing chase scenes and quirky one liners, it makes up for in prolonged feelings of hopelessness and a consistently tight script.

The film looks classy, the acting is near perfect and the overall story is one that I can buy into. However, for all it’s positives, it is a largely forgettable film, and one that while I would happily recommend it to lovers of either french cinema or crime thrillers, I personally will not be running back to watch it again in a hurry.

http://i.imgur.com/bYmRUxDl.jpg

Love Is Strange (2014)

After Ben and George get married, George is fired from his teaching post, forcing them to stay with friends separately while they sell their place and look for cheaper housing — a situation that weighs heavily on all involved.

9/10 - A slow and simple film depicting the strength you can find in a relationship when life throws obstacles at you, and the difficulties faced in gaining perspective and understanding while making small but necessary sacrifices for family. The film is crisply shot, long and artistic cinematic shots, set to a tinkering piano backdrop (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gH6BROnIYQA) in lower Manhattan, it is a very mature affair and a breath of fresh air.

Molina and Lithgow were outstanding in every scene they shared, there seemed to be a genuine tenderness and you felt their love for one another. The topic of same-sex marriage is still a relatively contested issue in the states as I understand it, but at no point did this become just about that. It was almost a given that they would get married, it was normal, it happened, people got on with it and celebrated it. I think this was the correct choice to go down that path, and a far stronger message than making that moment controversial. It demonstrated that really there is no difference, and while it is a big deal, it really only should be a big deal for those actually involved. The controversy as it were, was brought up in a different environment, showing that the battle is not nearly over.

Marisa Tomei and Darren E. Burrows played the supporting roles well, and acted as a great second dimension to the film as they struggled to handle their sons behaviour as well as Lithgow occupying their living space temporarily. The tension in this instance was accentuated by the situation they had been placed in; little mannerisms and quips chiseled and grated away. As the viewer you are torn, initially it started out quite funny to observe, but looking on at this situation you can relate to it, you feel both sets of frustrations and end up being able to empathise with both sides. People like this are only human, and so unaware that these things are getting to you that it continues and gets worse. Once you have this feeling in your head, it is difficult to shake it off and regain perspective.

It is a tender yet bittersweet tale, an expertly told story regarding the importance of family, the trials and tribulations of marriage and above all else, how nice it is to find ‘true love’. This is not your typical romantic drama, nor is there anything ‘strange’ about it.

http://i.imgur.com/vgYvEuil.jpg

The Theory of Everything (2014)

This is the extraordinary story of one of the world’s greatest living minds, the renowned astrophysicist Stephen Hawking, who falls deeply in love with fellow Cambridge student Jane Wilde.

8/10 - Putting aside all the controversy surrounding this years Oscar nominations/snubs, and the fact that a large portion of the films this year seem to be biopics, this film really is remarkable and it is largely down to one factor: Eddie Redmayne.

His embodiment of Stephen Hawking is frighteningly accurate, from the moment he is on screen to the moment he leaves it, you often forget you are watching an actor play him. I read an article before watching the film, about the notion of ‘cripping up (http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/13/eddie-redmayne-golden-globe-stephen-hawking-disabled-actors-characters?CMP=fb_gu)’, stating that Eddie Redmayne playing someone with ALS/motor neurone disease is the same as a white person blacking up. It is hardly the same. There are plenty of excellent black actors out there, you wouldn’t black up Tom Hardy and have him play Martin Luther King just because he’s a good actor. You would choose a good black actor. With regards to Stephen Hawking, he was able-bodied at first. Having someone who is ‘crippled’ would not have worked, because they would have had to be able-bodied in the first part of the film. It does raise a point though, that perhaps casting directors need to look further afield than a famous actor who can ‘do’ something others naturally have, but it was a bullshit way of referencing that point.

It was a poor article that referenced something that nobody was thinking. Pure click-bait to jump on the bandwagon of success this film is rightfully enjoying. Eddie’s performance is simply incredible, and he elevates this film from romanticised dross to something a whole lot more meaningful. The disease is crippling, and you feel his pain. Not only upon discovery, but the gradual degradation of the human body to a motionless and speechless individual is an awful sight to behold, and Redmayne conveyed and delivered that perfectly.

I did expect more of the film to be relating to his scientific successes, I wanted all the thoughts of his genius brain to be dumbed down for a mainstream audience member like myself, and somehow walk out with all the knowledge of space and time etched into the front of my mind. Instead I got a love story, and felt like weeping every time Eddie Redmayne was on screen. Adapted from Jane’s memoirs, “Travelling to Infinity”, the film to my surprise focussed largely on the love story of Jane & Stephen. It was a rose tinted perspective, tastefully executed, displaying how love can triumph over physical disability, for the most part. It did however leave me a little bit confused by the end; it almost seemed too perfect. I cannot for one second believe that they did not fight, that Jane did not break down, that Stephen did not chip away at her, that everything was as perfect and calm as they made out. Digging about afterwards shows my assumptions to be true. Perhaps it was done as to not tarnish the reputation of a man who is largely recognised as one of the cleverest individuals in the world, and who has gone to the effort to keep his personal life out of the spotlight for so long.

It had a nostalgic feel to the film, slightly blurred at times with excellent use of fashion and technology to indicate what era of his life we were in. Felicity Jones was fantastic as Jane, but never got to shine quite like Eddie did. Jane was a straight talking, clever, calm and well articulated woman, but it was not displayed enough. Her academic achievements were not emphasised nor were the arguments or discussions where she stood up to Stephen, instead she stood quietly and humbly got on with her life however she could. You felt her frustrations, but they were never fully shown, and in by doing so it detracted from her strength and resilience.

To delve any deeper into the film would be repetitive, if you take it at face value and don’t go into the facts, it is an extraordinary love story with two great performances. If you are interested in the non-romantic, much more science focussed portrayal of Stephen Hawking battling against the odds of his disease, I would like to point you in the direction of Benedict Cumberbatch’s portrayal (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hawking-DVD-Benedict-Cumberbatch/dp/B0002W0YKW) of the man himself, aptly titled, “Hawking”.

http://i.imgur.com/Ihs5cA9l.jpg

My Stuff (2013) Original Title: Tavarataivas

Petri Luukkainen conducts an experiment with his own life. He packs all his things and puts them in storage. At first naked in an empty apartment, he only allows himself to retrieve one item per day.

7/10 - Not too much to say on this one, other than it is an interesting concept that we can all take a little bit from. Petri carries out this experiment to establish how much ‘stuff’ he actually needs, how much is required to live and how much of it is just there for the sake of it. It’s much less a documentary, more a film starring himself. It’s helped along by the fact that Petri just such a likeable character. He laughs in the face of his own challenge, the way he interacts with his family is fun to watch. He spends the remainder of the time wondering why he is even bothering to do it and how in some roundabout way it does raise certain questions about his life choices, and highlights what isactually missing.

After watching the documentary, you look at your ‘stuff’ a little bit differently. Do I need that? Why do I even have that? Not only that, but you start to question future purchases. Are they necessary? Where will it go? As he said in an interview;

"All I want to do is get people to think about what they have and what they need, because it’s not something I thought about at all before I did this film.”

Well Petri, it did its job. I now second guess everything I buy and want to throw out almost everything I own.

Mik

January 28th, 2015, 7:18 AM

I agree with your reviews of both The Babadook and The Theory of Everything. I think we watch and then read about films afterwards in quite a similar way.

I would say though, dont forget that there arent definitive answers out there. The stuff in the spoilers about The Babadook are just people's interpretations, they may be ones that you agree or disagree with, but they are no more or less valid than your own interpretation when you first saw the film. I do think that reading about a film afterwards can help shape your own judgements, but it doesnt do anything towards giving you 'right answers'. I often do find that I dont entirely make my mind up on a film (I can judge whether I enjoyed it or not, whether I thought it was good or not) until I've had time to think about it and go away and read and research about it, listen to interviews etc afterwards.

Clive Plasma

January 28th, 2015, 7:30 AM

I agree with your reviews of both The Babadook and The Theory of Everything. I think we watch and then read about films afterwards in quite a similar way.

I would say though, dont forget that there arent definitive answers out there. The stuff in the spoilers about The Babadook are just people's interpretations, they may be ones that you agree or disagree with, but they are no more or less valid than your own interpretation when you first saw the film. I do think that reading about a film afterwards can help shape your own judgements, but it doesnt do anything towards giving you 'right answers'. I often do find that I dont entirely make my mind up on a film (I can judge whether I enjoyed it or not, whether I thought it was good or not) until I've had time to think about it and go away and read and research about it, listen to interviews etc afterwards.

Thanks Mik.

I completely agree, I wasn't for one second implying that those were the only answers, but after reading up and watching it again, and again, those were the ones I thought to be most plausible. I tried to not make it too 'preachy' and via Wordpress I've had a lot of comments saying how similar people felt to me after watching it. Maybe in the future I will make that disclaimer of it just being 'optional theories' a bit more explicit.

One comment that bugged me was this one;

....If you make a film that is so obtuse you have to search internet forums to discover why it isn’t a load of rubbish, then your film is probably a load of rubbish.

and then went on to say;

I think having a particular interest (in this case, the interest is in watching and subsequently dissecting horror films) and developing a portfolio, if you will, of experience in this pursuit, you are more aware of where your interests lie within the genre. I.e. this style of film didn’t resonate with me, which is not to say that it was not a fascinating and deep viewing experience for others.

I have to admit, I’m a shameless fan of the movies that are able to incorporate the classic horror tick boxes (gore / monsters / crime / etc.) in an otherwise psychological thriller theme without being so demure that the viewer either has to look up what the f is going on in an internet forum, or pretend that they knew the underlying theme all along. For me, The Babadook had a lot of potential (and perhaps I just didn’t catch on at the right point during the film) but the plot (which is the interesting part!) was about as obvious as the value in watching any film with Cameron Diaz in it (i.e. not obvious at all).

Thoughts? Comes across as a bit of a horror know-it-all, but I don't think researching a film afterwards to find deeper meaning devalues the film in any way at all...

Mik

January 28th, 2015, 9:52 AM

I wasnt meaning about your judgements really, I was talking about what you appear to have drawn from other people's judgements. It came across like you believed what other people to have said as being the 'correct' interpretation, rather than...like you say, the one you believe to be the most plausible.

I think that The Babadook is a complete polarising film for horror know it alls. You either see the references and the cine-literacy from the film and appreciate it, or feel that its derivative and was done better elsewhere and it turns you off. Personally, I don't think that there is any such thing as over-analysing a film. I used to when I was at uni, but not now, now I find it to be fascinating. I'm a strong believer that you get out of a film what you put into it and its easy to forget that there are hundreds upon hundreds of people that work on making sure that everything in a film is there for a reason, so to pretend that anything isnt deliberate and worthy of analysis is just being naive.

Now the matter of whether that improves your appreciation of the film or whether it ruins the films for people is down to individual preference I would say.

Clive Plasma

February 4th, 2015, 6:35 AM

http://i.imgur.com/Yh7hEicl.jpg

The Riot Club (2014)

Two first-year students at Oxford University join the infamous Riot Club, where reputations can be made or destroyed over the course of a single evening.

8/10 - ‘The Riot Club’ is based on Laura Wade’s play “Posh”, which in turn is based on the notorious ‘Bullingdon Club’ whose members have included none other than the easily detestable David Cameron, the ever shapeshifting George Osborne (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcy8uLjRHPM), and the lovable idiot Boris Johnson. What unfolds in the film is a freshers week the likes of which you were glad you were not a part of. Downing drinks filled with spit, having your room vandalised, and being crowned a ‘total f*cking legend’ for pouring port over your head like some hilarious daft sod. To watch on in the film was similar to how I watched on at university; confused, but entertained. I was quite happy taking full advantage of the £1 drinks and being glad I was actually able to wake up the following day.

Having grown up around Oxford there was something all the more real about watching a bunch of toffy rich kids take advantage of their positions in society. It is incredible how self-entitled people become given that they had absolutely no say in where they were born. I had no direct interaction with individuals like this, but you would see them occasionally when you went into the city centre, and overhear their nonsense on the table next to you, gulping back a delicious ale in The Turf Tavern.

From interviews I have read, although the characters are somewhat fictitious, the cast were quite shocked to learn that this group exists and the attitudes, initiations and behaviours are all real in isolated instances. This contributes to one of the main strengths of the film, in that whether you have been to university or live near Oxford, it is largely irrelevant. It is scarily believable, and it is what makes the large portion of the film set in the quaint country pub all the more unnerving.

The young cast does well to convey this blatant stereotypical view of the upper class, although it lacked in subtlety, it was the over the top caricatures of these individuals that I bought into the most. These are not your ordinary students – a self entitled club who believe they are the 1%. It makes sense to accentuate their ridiculousness and blow it wildly out of proportion, because to add any aspect of normality to them would have made them more like ‘us’. As a result, what starts out as a ‘coming of age’ comedic tale of ‘banter’ and ‘tomfoolery’, results in one of the most drawn out and uncomfortable viewing experiences I have had in a while.

The actions that take place turn this into a sharp thriller of a film, an intriguing portrayal of entitlement, privilege, and how the consequences of our actions impact people differently, depending on who you know. Cleverly filmed, a good script and an original premise – It lacks any real answers, but it is excellent entertainment.

http://i.imgur.com/XG9aUbpl.jpg

The Brass Teapot (2012)

When a couple discovers that a brass teapot makes them money whenever they hurt themselves, they must come to terms with how far they are willing to go.

6/10 - The premise of people injuring themselves for money is not all that original, look at Jackass and Dirty Sanchez for example – people have been doing it for years. Due to The Brass Teapot being entirely fictional, the concept of getting hurt for money can elevate itself beyond slapstick, cringeworthy humour and take on a much more fantastical view of ‘no pain no gain’. From Orthadox Jews to redneck no-hopers, and a plethora of different ways to experience pain, this film was always going to be an intriguing watch.

Juno Temple (Killer Joe, Horns (http://movieblort.com/2014/11/10/238-horns-2013-in-the-aftermath-of-his/), Dirty Girl) was excellent in this film as the disillusioned graduate with a Masters in Art but nowhere to apply her years of work. She greets the screen a certain deviousness and unpredictability which for those who have seen Killer Joe, will know she can pull off so well. Michael Angarano, the real-life partner of Juno Temple, plays the likeable, overqualified dreamer and between the two of them they manage to make the film quite watchable. It comes across as a fresh faced and fun indie comedy with a lot of potential.

It is by no means a perfect film. The script teeters between dark comedy and romantic drama, but it does rely heavily on violence to pad it out. That being said, the violence isn’t slapstick, and there is a method to the madness, however there comes a certain point where enough is enough. The film is expanded from a short story which you can tell, because by the final third of the film, it feels repetitive, drawn out and you suspect that there is no conclusion in sight. Which is a shame because it isn’t that bad overall. If it managed to sustain the momentum it had in the first place, and inject a bit of depth to the proceedings, it could have been something really good.

The film currently holds an unfairly negative scoring on Rotten Tomatoes (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_brass_teapot/). While ratings aggregation websites like Rotten Tomatoes are good, it is always worth taking them with a pinch of salt. There is a decent explanation from Drew over at Hitfix (http://www.hitfix.com/motion-captured/the-curious-case-of-rotten-tomatoes-and-the-brass-teapot) as to why the film has been so poorly rated after he was approached directly by a publicist for the film. Whether it was right to beg for positive reviews is neither here nor there, it’s a bold move that should hopefully see it pay off over time if not for this film but for future films by Ramaa Mosley. A limited release, an imbalance of initial bad to good reviews and the fact that quite often critics don’t tend to review films once they have been out for a couple of years have lead this film to plummet in the tomatometer.

It was made on a small budget, with a likeable cast and certainly has it’s moments. Give it a chance, and don’t be put off by the ratings.

http://i.imgur.com/V7ph5Mkl.jpg

A Company Man (2012)

A faded pop star (Lee Mi-youn) gives a contract killer (So Ji-sub) a reason to want to quit the assassination business.

5/10 - Another Korean film to throw into the ‘action/thriller’ pile, but in this instance it does not live up to the usual standard I come to expect from this type of film. Think ‘A Bittersweet Life (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P4YG73KHHo)‘ only more guns and less stabbing.

There is little to say about this film without just going over the plot. A plot that is largely forgettable, very predictable and offers nothing above the ordinary for the audience. It is a real shame because So Ji-sub was excellent as the suit wearing, ass-kicking hit-man, and it has got me even more excited to get round to watching Kim Ki-Duk’s ‘Rough Cut’ in which he plays the lead. It felt like he was wasted in this film, supported by a mediocre cast and provided with a simplistic story to act out, there was little room to shine. That little room he had usually appeared in the action sequences which although inconsistent and infrequent were entertaining overall. The gunfight in the final third was a joy to watch, if not a little messy, but it only added to it’s appeal.

I’m not one to continuously draw comparisons, but it is so difficult when there are many better films in this genre out there to be viewed. ‘A Bittersweet Life’, ‘The Man From Nowhere’, ‘The Yellow Sea’ and ‘The Chaser’ are all worthy of your time, each one different and compelling in their own unique way. Each of the films are memorable, they make you feel uncomfortable at times but ultimately excite you as an Action/Thriller should do. This film falls short, in a genre that has launched Korean Cinema to a much wider audience, we are now aware of their potential, and this simply did not live up to that.

Good, but not good enough.

http://i.imgur.com/E7G5oGSl.jpg

Carancho (2010)

The shady past of an ambulance-chasing lawyer threatens his unlikely romance with an idealistic doctor.

9/10 - I’m not exactly well versed in South American cinema, my knowledge stretches as far as ‘Amores Perros’, ‘To Kill A Man’, ‘El Topo’, ‘City of God’ and ‘The Secret In Their Eyes’ to name a few, but overall my knowledge is limited. When reaching out for suggestions on what to watch, this film fell into my lap and I was pleasantly surprised when I realised it starred none other than Ricardo Darin from the excellent ‘The Secret In Their Eyes’. I was off to a good start.

‘Carancho’ translated as ‘The Vulture’ summarises Darin’s role in this film, as an ambulance chasing lawyer (Sosa) who makes his money off other peoples misfortune, trapped in a continuous cycle of deceit and depression. In a country where some 8,000 deaths and 120,000 people are injured on Argentinian roads every year, what takes place is all clearly very real, which makes it all the more unforgiving to watch. Darin is captivating on screen, believable and likeable despite his shady occupation. It is difficult to think of anyone else more suitable for the role, and a stern reminder of the caliber of actor that he is. Opposite him, is the director Pablo Trapero’s wife Martina Gusman (Lujan), who plays the junior medic expertly well, desperate to escape the cycle she is trapped in. No sleep, overworked, under-rewarded, her desperation is similar but so very different to Darin’s character.

It is no wonder then that these two cross paths. Both chasing accidents but with very different agendas, yet both in similar personal situations. Taking place mostly at night, those who have recently watched Nightcrawler (http://movieblort.com/2014/12/31/275-nightcrawler-2014-when-lou-bloom-a/)will know just how claustrophobic a film with little or no light can be. This is only heightened, much like Nightcrawler, by the constant visual representation of accidents and questionable money fuelled actions. It is uncomfortable and disturbing viewing, keeping the viewer edge, and ultimately stops the film from disintegrating into a predictable love story.

While the plot becomes a little detracted as it builds to it’s conclusion, many of its flaws can be overlooked in favour of it’s gripping realism and excellent direction. Referring back to my limited knowledge of the region, I will admit that I am unsure if this film is acting as a metaphor for the level of corruption across more than just these types of lawyers and the rise in these types of claims. You often see corruption as a common theme in this region, but to tar them all with the same brush and the same aim would be potentially unfair. However, irrespective of the specific, isolated political and social messages contained in the film, there is a rare emotional and psychological depth to Carancho that makes this an exciting, disturbing but enthralling film noir.

Highly recommended.

Mik

February 4th, 2015, 7:00 AM

Clive Plasma

February 4th, 2015, 7:14 AM

You'll like this film then... (semi NSFW)

https://31.media.tumblr.com/62915f9084a9fb43c0e00cbad3de2d30/tumblr_inline_nj37gs2bsr1swgu2h.png

Ringo

February 4th, 2015, 8:05 AM

Carancho :yes: It's a film that I was initially a little disappointed by but it really stayed with me.

I could watch Ricardo Darin in anything. Amazing man. Fully recommend Nine Queens and XXY. Son of the Bride is also rather sweet.

Clive Plasma

February 4th, 2015, 10:55 AM

Donald

February 4th, 2015, 11:29 AM

Clive Plasma

February 11th, 2015, 6:10 AM

I've put this together for the blog - click here to view them all, it's too much formatting to copy them all here;

http://movieblort.com/2015/02/11/25-alternative-valentines-day-movies/ ;

25 Alternative Valentines Day Movies

https://movieblort.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/it__s_kind_of_a_funny_story_by_fruitloopcreamsoda-d502146.jpg?w=470&h=322

Choosing a film to watch with your significant other, regardless of it being Valentines Day is a difficult task. He likes Sundancey-Indie, Mumblecore films and you like Musicals. She likes horror films and you would rather watch a documentary. Inevitably by the end of the film, one of you is not paying attention, playing on your electronic device of choice or messaging your single mate who is whining about how they are single rather than doing something about it.

I’ve decided to put together an alternative choice of films for Valentines Day. These are not all focused specifically and primarily on ‘romance’ as such, nor do they follow the formulaic patterns of the romcom genre. They are not your typical ‘The Notebook’, ‘Titanic’ or ’50 First dates’ style films, and there is nothing wrong with those. However, these all have a strong element of ‘love’ in them, and in writing briefly about each of these, I hope to not only settle the dispute ‘what film?’, but put films you may or may not have heard of in the mix when you decide what to curl up on the sofa watch.

Most of these films are available online, others can be found dirt cheap as resold DVD’s on Play/Amazon and there are of course other less legal ways of acquiring them. However you do it, seek these films out. Where there is a will there’s a way. Do it in the name of love.

Finally, I will be the first to admit that I haven’t seen all of the films that apply to this self-made list (Notable omissions include Blue is the Warmest Colour, Shame and 500 Days of Summer – all of which I haven’t seen). Once you open it out, there a lot of films that have some element of ‘love’ in them.

Nevertheless, in addition to mine below, what are your favourites? Leave them in the comments, or tweet me @movieblort (https://twitter.com/movieblort).

Clive Plasma

February 12th, 2015, 9:58 AM

As an ongoing feature on my blog, I will be asking people to write guest entries for Movieblort. It is a great way to share the burden of keeping this up to date, and to receive reviews from people who wouldn’t normally review but whose opinions on film I respect.

First up, a review of Mr. Turner from James. Follow him on Twitter@imdabestman (https://twitter.com/imdabestman).

If you fancy contributing, let me know here or on Twitter.

http://i.imgur.com/HO9gPLvl.jpg

Mr. Turner (2014)

An exploration of the last quarter century of the great, if eccentric, British painter J.M.W. Turner’s life.

8/10 - A lot has been made of Mr Turner’s ommision from the BAFTA nominations for Best Actor and Best British Film and rightly so.

This is the sort of picture that lingers on your mind, the character of Joseph Mallord William Turner is so beautifully and grotesquely fleshed out by Timothy Spall. Every minute of its 150-ish duration is there for a purpose, Spall builds Turner into a contradictory three-dimensional character and to a much more impressive degree than other nominees this year (sorry Eddie Redmayne). There is understandable contempt for his mistress, yet he is distant from his children, despite being close to his own Father, and a competitive nature fleshed out in a terrific art gallery scene.

Mike Leigh and Timothy Spall prepared and developed the character and film for more than a decade and that sort of dedication is there to be seen on-screen. The cinematography by Dick Pope (referred to Dick Poop in the Oscar Nods (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8PwzBGpEbY)) was sublime, each shot of the landscape has clearly been modelled on Turner’s work and the enclosed indoor scenes are claustrophobic, but yet they feel familiar much like a living room, as is often the case with Mike Leigh’s work.

Mr. Turner feels exhausting over its running time but it is lifted by moments of humour and terrific supporting turns from all involved. However, the picture will not work for some people. The lack of a driven plot will aggravate some, but much like the critically acclaimed Boyhood, it is intriguing to watch an individuals life unfold in front of your eyes. Mr Turner differs in its decision to focus on one character, whereas in Boyhood where you watch Ellar Coltrane and his sister grow, in Mr Turner you experience the opposite as you watch him diminish and leave his legacy behind.

Mik

February 12th, 2015, 10:41 AM

Clive Plasma

February 12th, 2015, 10:56 AM

Mik

February 12th, 2015, 10:59 AM

Donald

February 12th, 2015, 11:06 AM

Clive Plasma

February 12th, 2015, 11:27 AM

Anything, I see most of the big releases at the cinema, just give me an assignment and I'll do it.

Have you seen Jupiter Ascending yet? I'm keen to hear people's thoughts on that. I heard it's terrible. That or Ex Machina...?

I'll review horror films, preferably on HBO or Netflix or Prime.

I try and steer clear of horror films on the blog, so perhaps it would be good to have it branch out a bit. I'll grab one off Mik, I have a couple of other mates who want to give it a go too. Then I'll see how well they go down. Whether I ask people to do it weekly, or fortnightly - It's a stepping stone to making a 'team' of contributors I guess.

I don't make anything off the website, it's just increased exposure and giving people something else to read, and a platform for others to write on.

Mik

February 12th, 2015, 12:08 PM

Clive Plasma

February 12th, 2015, 12:35 PM

Do one for Jupiter Ascending when you see it next week if you wouldn't mind? If you have a twitter/blog or something you want to promote, I'll include in the post like I have done the other one.

http://i.imgur.com/4GDATAfl.jpg

Taken 3 (2014)

Ex-government operative Bryan Mills is accused of a ruthless murder he never committed or witnessed. As he is tracked and pursued, Mills brings out his particular set of skills to find the true killer and clear his name.

3/10 - After the turgid outing of Taken 2, we are treated to more of the same from the head smashing, gun shooting, seemingly indestructible Liam Neeson in this creatively titled, ‘Taken 3′. I have no problem with the Taken franchise. I look back on the first outing with fond memories, as I lost count how many times he messed up someones face with a multitude of different objects. The second one, where his daughter who can’t run (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz-vA5omI2U) in Taken 1 or drive properly in Taken 2, suddenly develops the ability to run and drive amazingly well, on the wrong side of the road, with a manual (stick-shift) car, and assist Neeson in trying to retrieve his wife, who was, you guessed it… Taken. It was tolerable, but turgid nonetheless.

I was pleasantly surprised then, when I learned that Taken 3 would not have the same extensive Turkish family, and that someone wouldn’t be kidnapped and that it was the final one in the trilogy. I was also happy to see that Forest Whitaker was to star as Neeson’s antagonist, in a role I hoped would be similar to Lieutenant Jon Kavanaugh in The Shield against Vic Mackay. While all of the above came true, and I was pleasantly surprised, what ruined the entire film for me was the editing and cinematography.

Never have I felt more disorientated and more sick then watching Taken 3. Legitimate motion sickness with a headache was all I got from this film. Olivier Megaton should not be able to direct again. In the first chase sequence, I sat there watching as Neeson leaped over fence after fence, shooting his way to safety. What I also sat and watched was over 80 hard cuts of footage. Every half a second, it cut to another camera angle. Combine that with the handheld cameras to give a sense of the chase, you didn’t know whether Neeson was even in the frame let alone still running about like a mad man.

Set aside the chase sequences, and you are still left with an awful looking film. Big, swooping shots from the sky panning quickly inside buildings then back out again, to only come back and end up in another chase sequence with a billion hard cuts. This ‘technique’ or lack of, has probably occurred in other films I have seen – perhaps even in the first Taken, but none have been as apparent as this one. It makes it borderline unwatchable.

What is somewhat redeeming is that it lived up to expectation, low ones at that but I knew what I was getting in for. Whitaker was OK as the meticulous detective, Neeson was as grumbly, fighty and angry as usual, his daughter was an idiot and the storyline was as ridiculous as it ever is. It’s more or less the same, just slightly varied from it’s tried and tested formula of ‘taking’ someone, and it’s not a bad thing if you like these films.

A 10% rating on Rotten Tomatoes is a little harsh, but they aren’t far off the mark. It was lazy, tedious and uninspired. Yet, if they made a Taken 4, I would still watch it.

Seanny One Ball

February 12th, 2015, 8:49 PM

The second Bourne film had me nearly puking in the cinema from motion sickness.

Absolute garbage film to boot.

Beer-Belly

February 12th, 2015, 9:07 PM

Clive Plasma

February 13th, 2015, 5:03 AM

Glad I'm not alone then. I haven't experienced that before.

Enter The Void is one of the most disorientating films out there, and yet I felt fine. Taken 3, I felt ill for ages afterwards.

Clive Plasma

February 17th, 2015, 5:41 AM

http://i.imgur.com/RVCRsLal.jpg

Wild (2014)

A chronicle of one woman’s 1,100-mile solo hike undertaken as a way to recover from a recent catastrophe.

7/10 - I finally got round to watching Jean-Marc Vallée’s (Dallas Buyers Club) most recent outing ‘Wild’, based on the memoirs of Cheryl Strayed, and while Reese Witherspoon’s performance is worthy of the recognised Oscar nod, the film is not in the same league as the other contenders.

Similar to the previously reviewed ‘Tracks (http://movieblort.com/2014/12/03/246-tracks-2013-a-young-woman-goes-on-a/)‘ the film follows a young woman as she decides to escape her life, leave it all behind her and go on a challenging trek in an uncompromising environment. Similar to ‘Tracks’, little happens on the walk itself and for the majority of the trek we are simply treated to lovely scenery. Where it differs, is the way in which ‘Wild’ evolves it’s storytelling techniques, branching out into unconventional methods combining both inner thoughts, memories and flashbacks with present day encounters. It all sounds fairly tried, tested and conventional, but for once this is not spoon-fed to us nor is it predictable. It was certainly different, in a tweaky, nostalgic, hallucinogenic kind of way. This technique really excelled when Witherspoons character began talking out loud in her head, and her interior monologues manifesting into actual spoken conversation with herself. Those that have been on long hikes or treks, will instantly be able to relate – it’s actually a nice feeling, rather than plugging your ears with music, to thrash out a conversation in your own head is a cleansing process. It was captured perfectly, which is no easy task.

While the dangers of an isolated, vulnerable and naive female on a hike were played up at times, there was never any time I felt Cheryl was in danger. Despite every single man she met being portrayed as a potential rapist, I just did not see it playing out that way. Much like ‘Into the Wild’ and ‘Tracks’ there needed to be an emotional investment in the individuals plight – in this instance the peril on this journey started long before the walk began, as the ‘catastrophe’ was a combination of life altering decisions and events that led to her emotional and physical breakdown. As a result, the walk itself is inspiring but dulled down in comparison, perhaps this is down to Nick Hornby’s interpretation of the memoir, but the achievement of walking the distance was underplayed, and the flashbacks frequent but repetitive.

If it were not for Witherspoon under the guidance of Jean-Marc Vallée, this film would have been a self-indulgent snooze-fest with little to offer. Stubborn, determined, aggravated, fragile and underprepared, it comes across in every facial expression, every word she utters and every step she takes on this trek. She injects subtle humour into her role effortlessly, contrasted with the bottom of the barrel scenarios she found herself in prior to the trek, it was captivating to watch and it elevated the basic script to something worth investing in.

Despite that investment, I still lacked any real emotional connection to the film. Good editing, a nostalgic soundtrack and beautiful scenery could not stop the overall film from feeling simple and mediocre. I am sure that is the exact opposite they were going for, when a woman who overcomes many odds walks 1,100 miles solo in the desert and snow, but the message was unclear for the most part. Of course there are literal and metaphorical messages at work, as she puts ‘one foot in front of the other’ on a ‘journey’ of self discovery, but the walk itself was a rather tame affair overall.

McBain

February 17th, 2015, 6:10 AM

Watched a few films lately:

Gone Girl - 8/10 - Excellent and well and truly fucked up. Anti-climactic ending.
Interstellar - 7/10 - Over-rated in my view and nonsensical but still a good watch.
Under the Skin - 8/10 - Bizarre, distressing but compulsively watchable.

Clive Plasma

February 17th, 2015, 7:58 AM

Still yet to see Interstellar. What were your thoughts of it on a smaller screen?

Just booked my tickets to see 'The Duke of Burgundy' this Friday;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-xIMBnclyA

Going to watch 'Katalin Varga', 'Belle De Jour' and some Alain Robbe-Grillet films this week in prep for it.

Got about 7 or 8 drafts of film reviews for the website yet to put up, so might just blitz them tonight instead.

Donald

February 17th, 2015, 2:14 PM

Two Faces of January - 8/10 - Great film, loved Viggo's performance.

Stephen King's A Good Marriage - 5/10 - Had read the story a few years ago, felt it was too weak to fit into a full length film, would have made for a better episode of a TV show. Still, loved Joan Allen in this film.

Clive Plasma

February 18th, 2015, 4:40 AM

http://i.imgur.com/40NcHe4l.jpg

The Thomas Crown Affair (1968)

A debonair, adventuresome bank executive believes he has pulled off the perfect multi-million dollar heist, only to match wits with a sexy insurance investigator who will do anything to get her man.

7/10 - I always feel a bit strange reviewing films that are old as I quite often think, “What else could I possibly add that hasn’t already been said?”, and secondly, feel as though I am so late in getting round to watch it that it’s almost embarrassing to put up! However, in the hope that I have something constructive to say and that someone reading this out there has not seen this film, I will continue to give my two cents.

I was drawn to watching this on Netflix before it was promptly removed a few weeks back for two reasons – the first of which was Steve McQueen, notable for many performances in his time but arguably his most well known would be that of Capt. Virgil Hilts in The Great Escape. Having seen none of his other films (leave the barrage of abuse in the comments below (http://movieblort.com/2015/02/17/the-thomas-crown-affair-1968/)), this seemed like a good option for the second McQueen film I sit through. Secondly, having been introduced to the excellent Network, I jumped at the chance to see Faye Dunaway grace my screen once more. The combination of these two seemed like a match made in movie heaven.

The film itself is an excellent example of nostalgic class and style over substance. Like a 40 year old man who just discovered star-wipe on Powerpoint, The Thomas Crown Affair abused it’s editing capabilities making it one of the most over-edited films I have ever sat through. Wipe, leading into multi-screen, into screen wipe, it continued over and over again until it became laughable. The costumes, the backdrop and the music were at least suitable and well thought out, but it all seemed rather forced and over the top. Nevertheless, it was not offensive to the eyes. For someone who does not watch a lot of ‘old’ films, this was a pleasant change of pace from the norm.

The performances from the two main leads as I touched upon earlier, were excellent. I have read that McQueen was at the height of his career at this stage, and it shows. His bravado and machismo shone through, he was every bit as suave and cool as I thought a rich tosser should be. I loved to hate him. Dunaway’s intelligence, meticulous eye for detail and outright sex appeal made her a dream to watch on screen as a rule-breaking, gorgeous investigator who is only in it for money, she was the biggest challenge McQueen’s character had ever faced. The chemistry displayed between these two, carried the standard, unimaginative heist storyline to new heights. It was their personal back-and-forth rather than the investigation that kept me interested, and nowhere was this more apparent that the infamous chess scene, seen here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBXPgNhxmjs)parodied in Austin Powers.

This romantic heist movie is definitely more romance than heist, and everything in the film aside from Dunaway and McQueen were mere formalities to watch these two on screen. It lacks substance, is slightly anti-climatic, but it exudes style and showcases two great actors of this era. Aside from the over-excited editing, it is a thoroughly enjoyable film. I can see why The Thomas Crown Affair is definitely what you call, ‘a classic’.

I’ll get round to watching the remake in due course. If you haven’t seen the original, this is worth your time.

McBain

February 18th, 2015, 5:05 AM

Clive Plasma

February 18th, 2015, 5:21 AM

Thanks McBain. I can only keep trying. Unfortunately I don't think I use as many labels or have the depth of knowledge of film that people look for.

Read Mark Kermodes review of 'Love is Strange' for example: http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/feb/15/love-is-strange-review-mark-kermode

He is a reviewer I look to for recommendations, but even in this review I felt out of my league;

I was reminded not only of the films of Yasujirô Ozu, Woody Allen and Maurice Pialat (the declared touchstones of director Ira Sachs and his co-writer, Mauricio Zacharias), but also of Sam Mendes’s underappreciated Away We Go (http://www.theguardian.com/film/2009/sep/20/away-we-go-review), in which parents-to-be John Krasinski and Maya Rudolph visit their variously fractured friends and relations, discovering en route that the only certainty in life is each other.

I have no idea who Yasujiro Ozu is or Maurice Pialat. I suppose that is the point - that the reader then goes off and looks for these directors? It also seems a tad condescending though?

The next three paragraphs simply explain the plot, but it's written as if it is poetry... it's a great read, but remarkably pretentious.

The remaining three paragraphs comment on the way it looks, the editing, and then the music. Nothing on there about the acting. Plenty about the plot.

It hasn't given much away but overall I don't feel anything for the film after reading it.

Mik

February 18th, 2015, 5:54 AM

Clive Plasma

February 18th, 2015, 6:06 AM

Of course. It wasn't a criticism and I love his writing style, but it is often intimidating to read reviews like that. Perhaps it was a bad comparison, but I'm simply trying to provide a half-way point between that type of review and the gibberish ridden 3 sentence reviews found in the likes of Shortlist.

I'll never get to that level of intelligence in terms of writing, or knowledge on film. As long as people like Kermode exist, reviews like mine will always be viewed as 'the guy with a blog' though.

However, the one reviewer who annoys me no end is Peter Bradshaw. See his review of the same film;

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/feb/12/love-is-strange-review-john-lithgow-alfred-molina-gay-couple

5 paragraphs describing the entire plot. Less a review, more a synopsis?

Alf

February 18th, 2015, 6:09 AM

Mik

February 18th, 2015, 6:28 AM

Ringo

February 18th, 2015, 6:31 AM

I never read Bradshaw's reviews - they're all like that. I really enjoy him on the Guardian Film Show though, which I generally listen to as a mini podcast.

For the record, I don't know Maurice Pialat either but Ozu is a great. Tokyo Story is a benchmark, was voted the best film of all time by BFI.

McBain

February 19th, 2015, 5:12 AM

However, the one reviewer who annoys me no end is Peter Bradshaw. See his review of the same film;

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/feb/12/love-is-strange-review-john-lithgow-alfred-molina-gay-couple

5 paragraphs describing the entire plot. Less a review, more a synopsis?

:yes:

That's why I like yours. My friend also has his own blog/website (it's called the Tracking Shot, you may have heard of it) and I often feel he writes too much and gives too much away in terms of what happens.

Clive Plasma

February 19th, 2015, 6:17 AM

Cheers pal.

I watched this last night. Really good film by Ken Loach, who did the other film I recommended for Valentines Day called 'Ae Fond Kiss'.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcQIvmR21VU

Forced subtitles due to the Glaswegian accent, but otherwise it was pretty solid.

Full thoughts up later on.

Clive Plasma

February 21st, 2015, 3:00 PM

Sorry if the font is slightly out on this. I still haven't mastered the nack of copying from Tumblr/Wordpress to Safari. Seems to always mess it up.

http://i.imgur.com/jyuoSS4l.jpg

The Duke of Burgundy (2015)

Sex, bondage, and butterflies: two women explore the extremes of carnal desire in this kinky, deliciously twisted tale of erotic obsession. In a crumbling European estate, butterfly researcher Cynthia and her lover Evelyn repeatedly enact a sadomasochistic role-playing game, with Cynthia as the stern mistress and Evelyn her subservient sex slave.

10/10 - As the description on my blog says, I’m not the most educated on film history. I watch a lot of movies, but when you start to delve deeper into really niche genres I will struggle to hold my own. I don’t view it as a negative trait though, because when researching into ‘The Duke of Burgundy’ prior to watching it I unearthed two things. The first of which is the excellent director Peter Strickland, of whom I had not heard of until now. In preparation for the film I watched ‘Katalin Varga (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PTjObn2W5I)‘, his first film made a very small budget shot in Romania, in Hungarian, despite not speaking the language himself. It was a strange, atmospheric and eerily haunting rape-revenge film, I am yet to review it, but I was blown away. The second revelation when reading about his influences (http://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/news-bfi/features/peter-strickland-six-films-fed-duke-burgundy?) on The Duke of Burgundy, was just how vast this genre of 60/70’s erotica was. I have Belle De Jour and the Alain Robbe-Grillet DVD boxset but this is as far as my knowledge went. There is nothing quite like the feeling when you unearth an entire sub-genre you had little to no idea about, a film you did not know existed and a director you had not heard of.

There’s no shame in being ‘uneducated’, it makes it all the more exciting when you discover something new.

En route to the film I had a copy of Time Out and Evening Standard, both of which had made it their film of the week, both of which described everything that happened in the film. However, what shocked me was that a film of this appearance was being given such a platform to such a wider audience. It is certainly not ’50 Shades of Grey’. As was described in the introduction last night, “50 Shades of Grey is Ann Summers, The Duke of Burgundy is Agent Provocateur“, much to a loud scoff of laughter from the audience.

http://i.imgur.com/SubYr5Vl.jpg

It is exactly that though. A decadent piece of alternative erotica, following a short time period of two women, both butterfly and moth enthusiasts, who explore their sensual, emotional and physical desires through a series of S&M role-plays. It is impeccably shot, with no definitive time period assigned to it. We don’t need to know. It gives it a sort of fairytale like feeling to it, immediately immersed into their world and there is little explanation for the events that take place. No backstories – things just happen. Do we always need a reason? Strickland was keen to establish this in the Q&A, as he said, “there’s always a backstory, always an excuse… she was a crack addict, that’s why she likes S&M”. In addition to that there are no men in the film, at all, not even in the statues in the garden. A deliberate choice by Strickland, because a film about S&M and the balance of power would be immediately thrown off by the inclusion of men. It creates unnecessary arguments and by keeping at a level playing field, so to speak, the power is universal and the assignment of it all the more intriguing. To distance himself further from the erotica genre, there is no nudity in the film either. A strange choice, but it keeps the focus on the characters and their surroundings, rather than letting it sink into turgid mummy porn. Instead of a plethora of latex and leather, they are dressed in dated yet elegant clothes, and a series of lacy, silky and tasteful lingerie outfits appear in the more kinkier scenes. Corsets, fishnets, heels and boots aplenty in this film – but tasteful nonetheless.

The appearance of the film is only heightened by the accompanying score (http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/listen-stream-the-entire-duke-of-burgundy-soundtrack-by-cats-eyes-watch-2-clips-20150220). The regal European home set in the middle of nowhere, the endless cycle of role-play and the infatuation between the two leads each has it’s own piece of atmospheric, shoegazey, folk-like music assigned to it, mirroring the mood exactly. This score is spliced between Stricklands infamous use of whitenoise like sounds, this time the sounds of the butterflies and moths amplified to a disorientating level, cut up with insane visuals that break up the routine nature of the film itself. Surreal, strange and unexpected at times – it is at this stage the casual viewer may finally lose the plot.

http://i.imgur.com/dpIeygPl.jpg

That is if they haven’t left already. In a throwback to 60’s/70’s style porn, the acting as described by Sidse Babett Knudsen who plays Cynthia in the film, was ‘deliberately bad’ during the Dom/Sub/S&M scenes. You notice it more as the film progresses, the difference between the chemistry and level of emotion demonstrated when they are ‘in the zone’ and when they are just being a couple is quite significant. Chiara D’Anna who plays the submissive, Evelyn, is charming, young and seemingly naïve – it is incredibly convincing and only adds to the films intrigue. The two leads here are excellent, and it is largely due to Strickland’s creative mind that they are able to be as interesting as they are. The focus in this film is not on the S&M, but rather on the relationship itself. As he said in the Q&A, what he wanted to achieve was to have something that is perceived to be ‘abnormal’ or ‘strange’ and put it into a world where it was perceived as the norm. An example of doing so was to set their S&M activities against the backdrop of a small society of butterfly and moth enthusiasts, not only did it make for immensely striking imagery and metaphors I am not concerned about unearthing, but it made the former activity seem normalised. In doing so, we view Cynthia and Evelyn in an altogether different light.

With the focus on the relationships the film becomes a talking point not for S&M as a practice or hobby, but a talking point for the position and shifts of power within relationships and the willingness to concede to please the other. To give any more away would spoil the film, but while on the surface it may seem like an art-house styled film, trying too hard to be alternative – I can assure you, it isn’t. It does not take itself too seriously, there is a string of humour that emerges not out of awkwardness or cheap laughs, but out of the honest portrayal of a relationship dynamic. It just so happens that they are into Domination, Submission and S&M and that these elements form the foundation for their exploration of each others wants and desires.

Essential viewing for fans of the genre, the director, or even a complete newcomer like myself. You won’t see a film like it for a long time.

It is available at the Curzon cinemas, but also available VOD. (http://www.curzoncinemas.com/films/details/2873/the-duke-of-burgundy/)

Clive Plasma

February 22nd, 2015, 7:32 AM

http://i.imgur.com/NjGcxv0l.jpg

Unbroken (2014)

After a near-fatal plane crash in WWII, Olympian Louis Zamperini spends a harrowing 47 days in a raft with two fellow crewmen before he’s caught by the Japanese navy and sent to a prisoner-of-war camp.

​6/10 - I have been holding off on reviewing Unbroken for a while now. Not for any particular reason, a combination of letting the dust settle after the Sony hacking scandal, and that simply put I just have not felt the urgency to promote it nor any compulsion to discuss it. However, with the Oscars tonight and Unbroken up for 3 (Cinematography, Sound Mixing and Editing) it seemed fitting that I might as well throw my thoughts out there for all to see.

The film directed by Angelina Jolie and written by the Coen Brothers, follows Jack O’Connell as Louis Zamperini, an Olympic athlete who enlists for the army only to wind up as a Japanese prisoner of war. The Japanese took a huge gamble (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/sep/07/japan-imperialism-militarism) heading into World War II alongside Germany, and as they lost millions of lives in their war effort, they also maintained some of the worst Prisoner of War Camps ever to be recorded. Their ideology in the war and after was one of fighting until the death, a theory of no surrender, but it was their extreme aggression towards Westerners and their allies that set them apart. The treatment of soldiers and civilians who were either captured by Japan, or acquired from the Soviet Camps, was appalling and shrouded in controversy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvlEecFo3fg

These camps made up their own rules, ignored the guidelines set out by the Geneva convention and ensured that those civilians and soldiers who were captured were made to realise who they were dealing with. Very rarely was English spoken, beatings were regular, food was scarce and the tasks were long and arduous. There are interesting first (http://ww2today.com/12th-october-1942-brutal-treatment-in-japanese-pow-camp) hand (http://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2007/sep/01/weekend7.weekend2) accounts (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/10382906/Burma-Railway-British-POW-breaks-silence-over-horrors.html) of this, many scary and horrifying stories but the facts remain consistent. It is no surprise then that when this film was being made, the denial of atrocities such as cannibalism (http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/unbroken-japan-still-in-deep-denial-over-cannibalism-against-us-soldiers/), human experiments and torture has come to fruition. The poor treatment of the POW was not exclusive to Westerners either, as many accounts show harrowing actions taken against large quantities of civilians in China, Philippines and Indonesia.

It is a shame then, that a film about someone who has endured some of the worst possible treatment a human-being can withstand materialises into a tiresome movie too obviously attempting to tug at your heart strings. There are some truly great POW movies (http://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/news-bfi/lists/10-great-prisoner-war-films) out there, that handle the cases with sensitivity and subtlety. However, despite the film looking and sounding good (see the Oscar nods for reference), it has clearly and rightfully been picked up on that it’s agenda was to emphasise so much on the pain endured to shock audiences rather than add any substance to a film about an astounding individual (see lack of Oscars for Direction/Screenplay etc).

http://i.imgur.com/C3Rr9ODl.jpg

The film did allow Jack O’Connell to grace our screens again, which is no bad thing. Plucked out of obscurity to star in Skins, giving an excellent performance in the downright horrible Eden Lake (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6j3K4MmOKs), to another captivating lead role in Starred Up (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE4ziBfu0JA), he has acquired deserved recognition as the next BAFTA rising star (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-30707900). He is destined for great things, and his performance in this film is no different to his others. He becomes Zamperini, you feel his pain but as the film title so conveniently gives away, he remains ‘unbroken’. With the ending provided for us before even viewing, the performance can only do so much to detract from this repetitive, overbearing film. We were offered little insight into why the Japanese behaved in that way, why they were being captured and any shred of character development was left just as that – a shred.

There was a clear opportunity to explore this with the Sergeant in charge of the camps he occupied Mutsuhiro Watanabe a.k.a ‘The Bird’. Zamperini was his favourite prisoner, his ‘number 1′, and he made Zamperini’s life a living hell. But why? What was his motivation? Was it just him? And did Zamperini just take it? The answer is No (http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2014/12/24/unbroken_movie_fact_vs_fiction_how_accurate_is_the _louis_zamperini_biopic.html), there were many omissions, but to use this as an example, a simple inclusion of the plot to try and kill ‘The Bird’ could have added a glimmer of hope and something for the audience to hang on to. Instead, it remained bleak and heavy.

http://i.imgur.com/kU54oNYl.jpg

Zamperini is clearly a remarkable man, and as with many biopics there will always be omissions or artistic license. He withstood punishments that would have and did kill 1 in 3 people in these camps. Unbroken is a movie that focuses on that, it focuses on the extremes and despite Zamperini being ‘unbroken’ all I saw on screen was a man actually being broken. If being punched in the face, malnourished, tortured and beaten within an inch of your life doesn’t kill you then they just carry on. A focus on the larger picture would have elevated this film beyond a biopic of a man who simply did not die, because he was much more than that, and it was much more than that.

I have a tremendous amount of respect for Zamperini, entering a war does not give others the right to treat individuals the way that he was treated, but the film was average at best. I will seek the book (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Devil-My-Heels-Olympians-Astonishing/dp/0062118854/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8), and perhaps then I will get a truer and more honest idea of what this man was like.

Mik

February 22nd, 2015, 10:25 AM

Clive Plasma

February 22nd, 2015, 10:30 AM

Thanks Mik.

How does that work with your unlimited card? It's still showing at quite a few cinemas.

Mik

February 22nd, 2015, 10:34 AM

Clive Plasma

February 22nd, 2015, 10:41 AM

I take it you never stream/download films then?

On a side note, when I went to watch 'The Duke of Burgundy', they showed a long clip from Oscar nominated 'Wild Tales'...

This looks fucking excellent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUnXv6R2HI8

Mik

February 22nd, 2015, 10:45 AM

Seanny One Ball

February 22nd, 2015, 10:50 AM

Jack O'Connel is great but Starred Up was one of the worst prison films ever made. I don't think they so much as tick boxes as hurl cliches together and bind them with incessant foul language that even a prisoner would have to realise was just bollocks. I bought that off the back of you two enjoying it and watvhed it with my folks. On repeat vieving it just gets worse.

Ben Mendelsons accent ugh....

Clive Plasma

February 22nd, 2015, 12:27 PM

Clive Plasma

February 22nd, 2015, 12:27 PM

Oh I'll happily download and stream films when they are out. I wasnt aware that there was a free download of The Duke of Burgundy around anywhere.

I was referring to Unbroken, which has been out for weeks. The Duke of Burgundy only came out on Friday, so it won't be out for a while.

Jack O'Connel is great but Starred Up was one of the worst prison films ever made. I don't think they so much as tick boxes as hurl cliches together and bind them with incessant foul language that even a prisoner would have to realise was just bollocks. I bought that off the back of you two enjoying it and watvhed it with my folks. On repeat vieving it just gets worse.

Ben Mendelsons accent ugh....

Seriously?! You're the first person I know not to like it. That's a shame. I loved it. Oh well, can't win them all...

Seanny One Ball

February 22nd, 2015, 1:20 PM

It gets away with most of it because of Rupert Friend and Jack O'Connel but it is one of the least realistic and most gratuitously violent, obscene films I have ever bought expecting to have a new shine on an old topic.

£20 down the pan.

Seanny One Ball

February 22nd, 2015, 1:26 PM

I can actually round it down to the script and the plot.

The acting and choreography are both very good.

Seanny One Ball

February 22nd, 2015, 1:28 PM

Clive Plasma

February 22nd, 2015, 1:32 PM

It's that type of entertainment though isn't it. Like Ill Manors, Neds or Football Factory. Present the extremity of a particular segment of British hooligan-type society, and build it up to the height of ridiculousness, and it becomes entertainment.

Can't win em all SOB? Try this website: http://www.prisonmovies.net - and watch that Australian film 'Stir' (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A__Lrfk2xKM) I put up a few months ago. It's great.

Seanny One Ball

February 22nd, 2015, 2:10 PM

Oh I wasn't having a go at you I mean it's personal taste after all.

I just like my mindless violence to admit that it is mindless violence.

Roger Ebert was clearly on his way out with his rating.

Clive Plasma

February 22nd, 2015, 2:54 PM

Oh I wasn't having a go at you I mean it's personal taste after all.

I just like my mindless violence to admit that it is mindless violence.

Roger Ebert was clearly on his way out with his rating.

Of course.

If you like mindless violence, I highly recommend 'John Wick' if you haven't already seen it.

I'll have a review up of that next month.

Got any other weird films to recommend on the same lines as Taxidermia?

Seanny One Ball

February 22nd, 2015, 3:01 PM

I was just about to suggest that you watch Berberian Sound Studio if you have not already. It is visually nothing like Taxidermia but without a shadow of a doubt it's just as strange.

Toby Jones is excellently curious as the odd little sound engineer who descends into madness.
Kermode apparently loved it too although I am yet to read a single review.

I take it Taxidermia may well be the strangest film you saw in your year?
It is easily the most mental film I have ever seen in my life!

Clive Plasma

February 22nd, 2015, 3:04 PM

One of the strangest films for sure. 'It's Such a Beautiful Day' was one of my favourites, and one of the strangest.

I've seen some weird ones in my time though, it will take some beating.

I've seen Berbarian Sound Studio - not entirely my cup of tea. I watched Katalin Varga and enjoyed that though.

Feeling a bit of a greek vibe, so might watch this tonight;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyfGZpzoDDc

or this;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i2xl_vo88w

or this;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJNCL9GKL6k

Seanny One Ball

February 22nd, 2015, 3:36 PM

Clive Plasma

February 22nd, 2015, 3:46 PM

Mik

February 22nd, 2015, 3:59 PM

I was referring to Unbroken, which has been out for weeks. The Duke of Burgundy only came out on Friday, so it won't be out for a while.

Oh, I was talking about your Duke of Burgundy review, didnt see your Unbroken review as that was one a new page for me, I saw Unbroken when it came out, didnt really like it at all.

Clive Plasma

February 22nd, 2015, 4:10 PM

Oh, I was talking about your Duke of Burgundy review, didnt see your Unbroken review as that was one a new page for me, I saw Unbroken when it came out, didnt really like it at all.

Ah right, well seems like we're on the same page then.

And cheers again for TDOB review plaudits. Strickland was hammered at the Q&A, but it hearing his thoughts definitely helps in shaping the review.

You can rent it on Curzon Home Cinema?

Seanny One Ball

February 23rd, 2015, 12:06 PM

Wrong thread pal

It sure is!

Clive Plasma

February 24th, 2015, 6:46 AM

"As an ongoing feature on this blog, I will be asking people to write guest entries for Movieblort. It is a great way to share the burden of keeping this up to date, and to receive reviews from people who wouldn’t normally review but whose opinions on film I respect".

Here’s another review from James, who initially threw his two cents in on Mr Turner (http://movieblort.com/2015/02/11/guest-entry-mr-turner-2014/). Follow him on Twitter @imdabestman (https://twitter.com/imdabestman).

If you fancy contributing, hit me up on twitter (http://www.twitter.com/movieblort) or leave a message below."

http://i.imgur.com/9nBkO7wl.jpg

The Imitation Game (2014)

During World War II, mathematician Alan Turing tries to crack the enigma code with help from fellow mathematicians.

7/10 - “The Imitation Game” trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5CjKEFb-sM) looks like a film specifically aimed at the Oscars, triumph over adversity being its major feature (see Unbroken (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kk1M_HwmFMM)). Fortunately, this has much more about it and a lot of that is down to impeccable acting from the very strong cast. The film plays like a two-hander switching its focus between the events at Bletchley Park, where Alan Turing (Benedict Cumberbatch) strives to break the Enigma encryption device and the tragic events of his later life, which focused on his homosexuality. Needless to say that much is owed to how fascinating and shocking the story is.

For those that do know the whole story, rest assured it is told efficiently thanks to careful direction from Morten Tyldum. Looking at this and his last film “Headhunters” in isolation, he’s certainly a talented director and I like that his films are generally free of flab. Where this was a major strength with “Headhunters” (the plot holes barely have time to register thanks to brisk pacing), I feel that “The Imitation Game” could even have benefitted from an extra 20-30 minutes in the company of the character, understanding more about the psychological traumas he suffered.

This was a very enjoyable film, but when put in context with some of the other films that have been Oscar-nominated (in particular Selma) it feels lightweight. Selma chose to focus on a particular moment in Martin Luther King’s life and it was all the better for it. A braver, less-obvious choice of focusing on the latter part of Alan Turing’s life could’ve made the film more emotionally engaging, whereas it seemed like it was a little bit tagged on. It is certainly alluded to but was simply brushed over after the amount of time dedicated to cracking Enigma, as these later moments in his life have some of the emotional resonance lacking throughout the rest of the picture.

Benedict Cumberbatch was deserving of his Oscar nomination as he feels like a real person rather than an impression or the idea of Turing. Keira Knightley also does a superb job of a role that could easily have been side-lined or caricature, turning Joan Clarke into an interesting and likeable character. Overall, it is a beautiful depiction of an extraordinary human being who has undoubtedly had a lasting impact in all of our lives one way or another. The film is entertaining definitely, but falls short of definitively depicting Turing’s achievements and tragedy.

http://i.imgur.com/8XpEe9al.jpg

Are You Here (2014)

Two childhood best friendsembark on a road trip back to their hometown after one of them learns he has inherited a large sum of money from his recently deceased estranged father.

This was a comedy film that had largely escaped me. I had seen it advertised online a few times, but I don’t believe it had much in the way of promotion and I can sort of see why. It’s very easy to slag off a film so I will try and restrain myself, but despite its new release on Amazon Prime and the Mad Men credit, I would advise not to watch this film.

This sub-standard stoner buddy comedy doesn’t quite find it’s footing. On paper it sounds like it would at least be the slightest bit interesting, but it teeters between emotional drama and comedy as Zach Galifianakis’s character struggles to cope with his fathers death and discovery of his ongoing bipolar disorder. It sounds hilarious already, doesn’t it? The depressing storyline offers little to work with, it is a complete mess and it brings absolutely nothing new to the table. Every attempted joke lands flat, it is hard to tell if they are even jokes at times and it is films like this that make me question whether I should review every film I watch – or just the good ones.

I know what you’re thinking though, how can this cast miss the mark so badly? I am unsure too. It falls down largely to the script, but a certain aspect of this has to go to the casting – if you’re going to typecast someone, at least make sure they fulfil that role properly. Galifianakis is fat, high and whines a lot. He has shed all the fun loving aspects we knew him for in The Hangover films. Owen Wilson just mumbles his way through every scene, he may have actually been high for the most part of it. He seemed less interested in it than I did. Finally, Amy Poehler isn’t in it enough, although having said that, she was cast in a role completely the opposite of what she suits – she was a bitchy, nagging older sister with no comedic element to her whatsoever.

This film was wrong on so many levels. It lacks a coherent plot, any type of meaning and any type of comedy. It quite simply was not funny, at all, and if you are going to rent a film on Amazon you could pick almost any other film and it would be better than this.

Clive Plasma

February 26th, 2015, 6:31 AM

http://i.imgur.com/s0VSKCXl.jpg

Her (2014)

A lonely writer develops an unlikely relationship with his newly purchased operating system that’s designed to meet his every need.

I had been meaning to get round to watching ‘Her’ for a while, and I had high hopes for it based on those that had recommended it to me. I watched it, and ended up including it in my 25 Alternative Valentines Day Movies (http://movieblort.com/2015/02/11/25-alternative-valentines-day-movies/). For those that haven’t read that, go and check it out. Regardless, here are my thoughts on it, beyond the few lines I wrote briefly a couple of weeks ago.

Her is from the creative mind of Spike Jonze (Jackass, Where The Things Are, Being John Malkovich, Yeah Right!), where Joaquin Phoenix plays Theodore Twombly, a sad and lonely individual who has a job writing letters of affection for those that are unable to do so, at least to his standard. Set in an unspecified year, he strikes up a relationship with his Operating System (OS) because Artificial Intelligence has evolved that far, and it spirals out from there. He embodies this somewhat pathetic, whining version of a broken man perfectly, dependent on technology, heartbroken from a previous relationship. The parallel to modern man despite being set in the future is there – he is a human after all, but most guys have either been there or know someone who has preferred to stay in and play video games rather than confront his emotional hurt head on. His performance is exceptional, carrying the film with his all too real qualms about relationships and the dating scene. In these moments it becomes much less a sci-fi romantic comedy, but a drama holding a mirror up to present day perceptions and attitudes towards lust, romance and attraction.

The OS he falls for is voiced by Scarlett Johansson, who manages to somehow bind the film together with her seductive voice. You do not see her, for she is simply that, a voice for an operating system. Think of it as ‘Siri’ or the annoying thing from the adverts where people begin their sentences with “OK google…”, only she is not there to purely answer your questions on how to sort out dinner once you have burnt it. Technology has moved on, and she takes on a much more involving role in your life. She is funny, likeable and seems to be every bit as human as you and I, only she isn’t. Her injection of positivity is not only a welcome break for Mr. Twombly's repeated negativity, but for the viewers as well. It has to be heard to be believed, but by the end of the film even a little bit of you has fallen for this sultry voice.

The film takes on an odd appearance, like watching it through an Instagram filter, it’s part desaturated with spurts of bright colours and provides an almost dreamlike sensation. The future looks clean, simple and smart, a minimalist world where it all seems too perfect. Subtle changes have been made to show that society has not simply stood still as technology has evolved. Fashion being one of those aspects, confusing at first, but it appears that high waisted trousers will be all the rage in many years from now.

Despite being set in the future, it is largely relevant to present day. It’s themes of companionship, loyalty and loneliness are apparent now and technology can only do so much to assist us in attaining happiness. In a world of handheld devices and 24/7 monitoring, with cameras capturing almost everything and technology advising your every move, what is apparent about this borderline dystopian, Black Mirror style future is that it not beyond the realm of possibility. We are almost there. Our future, if anything like this, is a world dependent on technology where those that want to experience real emotion are shunned to the side, and we turn to programmed happiness instead.

This film struck a chord with me the likes of which I haven’t experienced before. It was sad, sympathetic but funny, and spliced with moments of overwhelming happiness. A sharp script and two great performances among many other factors make this film a joy to watch. I highly recommend you watch this, then put down your phone/laptop/tablet and go and interact with some real people.

El Capitano Gatisto

February 26th, 2015, 7:41 AM

Jack O'Connel is great but Starred Up was one of the worst prison films ever made. I don't think they so much as tick boxes as hurl cliches together and bind them with incessant foul language that even a prisoner would have to realise was just bollocks. I bought that off the back of you two enjoying it and watvhed it with my folks. On repeat vieving it just gets worse.

Ben Mendelsons accent ugh....

I thought Starred Up was awful too. So many cliches, excruciating dialogue and a central character who was just absolutely loathesome. I got interrupted watching it near the end and never had any urge to put it back on again to see the rest of the film. So bad.

Clive Plasma

February 26th, 2015, 8:20 AM

Beer-Belly

February 26th, 2015, 8:22 AM

El Capitano Gatisto

February 26th, 2015, 10:03 AM

I'm intrigued, not because I disagree or am by any stretch saying this is the best one out there, but what you (ECG) and SOB would class as your favourite prison based films then?

Shawshank Redemption, Scum, The Green Mile, Cool Hand Luke, A Prophet off the top of my head. The Last Castle was ok if a little silly.

I don't know if Bronson, Hunger and In the Name of the Father because of the semi-biopic related subject matter rather than the prison experience being the focus of the film itself.

I quite like The Escapist for most of it until it completely copped out at the end. It had a great cast but those sorts of endings invariably make me think "fuck off" because of the terribly lazy story-telling involved.

Clive Plasma

February 26th, 2015, 10:30 AM

Shawshank Redemption, Scum, The Green Mile, Cool Hand Luke, A Prophet off the top of my head. The Last Castle was ok if a little silly.

I don't know if Bronson, Hunger and In the Name of the Father because of the semi-biopic related subject matter rather than the prison experience being the focus of the film itself.

I quite like The Escapist for most of it until it completely copped out at the end. It had a great cast but those sorts of endings invariably make me think "fuck off" because of the terribly lazy story-telling involved.

For purely selfish reasons I was hoping for some that I hadn't seen, but all of the ones you have listed are excellent choices and much better than Starred Up.

Did you ever get round to watching Cell 211, that Spanish film I watched about this time last year?

I've still got Carandiru and The Bridge on the River Kwai on my list to watch.

Also, I referenced it in the Unbroken review, but BFI has a good list here it seems of Prisoner of War films;

http://www.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/news-bfi/lists/10-great-prisoner-war-films

El Capitano Gatisto

February 26th, 2015, 11:12 AM

I haven't seen Cell 211 actually, I have it on my lovefilm rental list. My film watching has been seriously hampered by a terrible internet connection, no decent local cinema and long working hours unfortunately so I'm way behind.

I had forgotten Carandiru actually, I saw it in the cinema back when it came out but haven't watched it since. I do remember being really impressed by it at the time.

Ringo

February 26th, 2015, 11:32 AM

Great prison film: Down By Law. Also a big fan of Rescue Dawn which kind of counts.

Like everything ECG mentioned too.

Kdestiny

February 26th, 2015, 11:45 AM

Seanny One Ball

February 26th, 2015, 3:49 PM

I'm intrigued, not because I disagree or am by any stretch saying this is the best one out there, but what you (ECG) and SOB would class as your favourite prison based films then?

Coolhand Luke, The Shawshank Redemption, Brubaker, Animal Factory, Scum...

I agree that The Last Castle was daft but it was also great, Redford makes my list twice.

Brubaker id great.

Seanny One Ball

February 26th, 2015, 3:53 PM

Clive Plasma

March 1st, 2015, 7:34 AM

http://i.imgur.com/T2p6RP8l.jpg

Steve-O: Demise and Rise (2009)

What was once a semi-underground cult following growing out from MTV and skate videos, has over the years transformed into insane movies, spin-offs, comedy tours and legendary status for the Jackass crew. Video websites had only just started to come into popularity back in 2000, and Youtube wasn’t even around yet. Small clips of people doing stupid stuff usually looked like it was filmed on a potato and uploaded to any number of obscure websites and P2P platforms, deeming it impossible to understand if it was fake or even what the hell was going on.

Then came along Jackass and it changed the entire game. Stupid stunts and skateboarding was actually being commissioned by MTV. Cue a huge number of rip-offs, people being hurt by trying it at home and some genuinely funny parodies like Crazy Monkey, where challenges such as running with scissors and drinking Orange Juice after doing your teeth was about as extreme as it got.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khUJc7Lx1iE

On the surface these guys all seemed quite happy. You were getting paid to dick about with your friends, and providing it was funny and nobody got seriously injured, what could possibly go wrong? I accepted it at face value, I simply assumed that the majority of them were fine and as with most quick rises to fame drink, sex and drugs simply formed part of the rock & roll lifestyle they had managed to acquire. Being based in the UK though, and having never visited the TMZ website in my life, it came as quite a shock when I was sent a link (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucxLj3ercds)to the 2009 TV Movie titled ‘The Rise & Demise of Steve-O”.

I had known about his ‘Rise’, but his ‘Demise’? What could that possibly be about? This is a guy who spends his life touring the world, making movies and numerous side projects and self-released DVD’s. He always seems happy, and is portrayed as the crazy one in the group. If there’s a stunt worth doing, he’ll do it. So what on earth is this about?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xRacr4_aSk

https://movieblort.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/steve-o-the-demise-and-rise-full1-e1425205720643.jpg?w=940&h=604

This documentary chronicles the fast track to superstardom that he achieved, and the intervention made by his Jackass friends that lead to his sobriety and ultimately saved his life. With celebrity status to the extent that Steve-O achieved, a lot of money came along with it too. This then materialises into huge parties, recreational drug use turns into larger quantities of harder drugs, and it slowly begins to spiral wildly out of control.

What is unique about the Steve-O documentary and his situation, is that unknown to us as the casual viewer, was Steve-O’s dependency on being filmed. When Jackass and it’s related projects took breaks, Steve-O could not handle not being able to perform. As such, he recorded every single thing he did, all the time, and took a scary about of Nitrous Oxide (straight from the canister which can collapse a lung!) to create a delusional drug fuelled world for his antics during the ‘off-season’.

The end result, is a documentary of a man who has been completely destroyed by self-inflicted drug use as a consequence of immediate celebrity status. Combine this with a level of paranoia and self-imposed expectation to maintain this illusion that he was always this ‘Steve-O’ character from Jackass. He ends up doing stunts, being crazy, a party animal, but being a Jackass… all the time.

Now I wouldn’t normally post about Jackass, but growing up with it as a fixture on my TV schedule compelled me to write about the Steve-O documentary. It is a truly disturbing thing to watch, and very rarely do you actually get to witness a downward spiral in the intimacy and frankness that Steve-O has chosen to show. This has largely slipped under the radar for me, and I hope that by giving it some light it promotes it to those that have missed it. More importantly, I want to give delayed credit to a man who has somehow managed to turn his life around after entertaining me for so many years.

Give it a watch, and see more about the man you thought you knew.

Seanny One Ball

March 1st, 2015, 2:48 PM

I'll definitely look into that.

Nitrous is shit though, watching people suck it down then go blue in the lips is never entertaining.

MikeHunt

March 1st, 2015, 2:52 PM

Sancty

March 1st, 2015, 3:12 PM

Seanny One Ball

March 1st, 2015, 3:14 PM

Clive Plasma

March 1st, 2015, 5:45 PM

Didn't you used to rate the films out of 10? If so, why the change?

I still do on the website, only by their categories for browsing purposes; http://movieblort.com/ratings/

I think I just found the rating system detracted from the writing I was trying to do - I would rather that be the focus compared to "what did you last rate 9/10?".

Also, it's all a bit subjective, and then provides people the opportunity to nitpick and say things like "I can't believe you rated John Wick the same as Boyhood, Boyhood was a masterpiece", or something to that effect.

How do you make up a rating anyway? "Solid 8 out of 10", how did i come to that? Finger in the air? Also, I've often looked back at ratings and wished I hadn't given them that score.

In answer to your question, there wasn't any conscious decision to not do it. No particular defining moment. I quite like writing about the films now and not having to second guess the score or anything. But if you really still want to browse by what I would deem my favourites, the ratings tab is always there to help.

Clive Plasma

March 1st, 2015, 5:58 PM

Update: Added links to the videos that didn't carry over.

Upcoming reviews;

John Wick
Wild Card
Big Hero 6
Katalin Varga
Cheap Thrills
A Hard Day
All This Mayhem
A Most Violent Year
Insomnia

MikeHunt

March 1st, 2015, 6:06 PM

Sancty

March 1st, 2015, 6:20 PM

I think he said it was because he hates you

It's nice that I have that big of an impact on his write-ups.

I still do on the website, only by their categories for browsing purposes; http://movieblort.com/ratings/

I think I just found the rating system detracted from the writing I was trying to do - I would rather that be the focus compared to "what did you last rate 9/10?".

Also, it's all a bit subjective, and then provides people the opportunity to nitpick and say things like "I can't believe you rated John Wick the same as Boyhood, Boyhood was a masterpiece", or something to that effect.

How do you make up a rating anyway? "Solid 8 out of 10", how did i come to that? Finger in the air? Also, I've often looked back at ratings and wished I hadn't given them that score.

In answer to your question, there wasn't any conscious decision to not do it. No particular defining moment. I quite like writing about the films now and not having to second guess the score or anything. But if you really still want to browse by what I would deem my favourites, the ratings tab is always there to help.

I get it. It just helps from the readers' perspective (well mine, anyways) what the overall impression of a film was. It can be rather nebulous determining just how good or bad a film is when everything is qualitative.

Clive Plasma

March 1st, 2015, 7:49 PM

I absolutely hated a most violent year. I don't think I've ever been so bored by a film in my life.

I thought it was OK. Not very violent, not very exciting, not very anything. Style over substance. I kept hoping it would escalate but it never did.

I might not ever review it, I watched it a month ago and I still can't be bothered.

I get it. It just helps from the readers' perspective (well mine, anyways) what the overall impression of a film was. It can be rather nebulous determining just how good or bad a film is when everything is qualitative.

Maybe I'll change it to a 'Yes' or 'No' to determine if you watch it then, or put the rating at the bottom of the page. I'd like to think that the qualitative descriptions provide enough of an insight as to whether something is worth watching.

It's an interesting thought though. I'll throw it out there and see what the general consensus is.

Clive Plasma

March 3rd, 2015, 5:41 PM

http://i.imgur.com/nDvPCGGl.jpg

Kkeut-Kka-Ji-Gan-Da (A Hard Day) (2014)

Detective Gun-Soo skips out on his mother-in-law’s funeral to attend to a crisis at the police station. While driving to the station a man appears out of nowhere and Detective Gun-Soo crashes into him with his car. The man is dead and Detective Gun-Soo panics. He drags the dead man to his car and throws him into his car trunk. Detective Gun-Soo’s hard day is just beginning.

For those that have been following Movieblort for a while will know that I have a particular soft spot for South Korean cinema. I have attended the South Korean Film Festival in London for the past 2 years, and I am still making my way round the classics, alongside many of the ‘Tartan Asia Extreme’ films that really thrust South Korean cinema into the limelight. This film hit the festival circuit both at Cannes and the London BFI Film festival among many more, but it is only now that it has become available on Amazon Prime do we have the pleasure of viewing this in our own homes.

The film, as per the description, would be dubbed as a ‘crime thriller’. It has all the makings to rank alongside fantastic films like ‘A Bittersweet Life’, ‘The Chaser’ and ‘The Yellow Sea’, but there would be some who might argue that this genre has been played out in South Korean cinema. We have seen it all before, and that there is only so much gratuitous violence and axe shots to the chest that we can handle as an audience. I’m here to let you know that ‘A Hard Day’ does not fall into that common ground we have grown so accustomed to, and provides a welcomed break from the norm. What we have here is an stylistic, action/comedy/crime thriller the caliber of which the US attempts in this space would only dream of emulating (Excl. John Wick).

Lee Sun-Kyun puts in a respectable performance as Det. Gun-Soo, a man whose day is about to go from bad to worse. The intensity and panic he displays, while simultaneously not giving so much of a drop of remorse while covering up his accident, only adds deeper value to the levels of corruption within the law enforcement we come to understand throughout the film. His character is a victim of circumstance, but as is quite often the case, how good is the good guy? Forming the other half of this awful day, is the mystery adversary, who threatens to pull the rug from under him and ruin his day even further. This is the basis for a brilliant 1 on 1 battle of mind games culminating in a finale that is both stupid and satisfying.

http://i.imgur.com/6LBigOSl.jpg

Much unlike the nausea inducing Taken 3, A Hard Day is handled expertly by director Kim Sung-Hoon and cinematographer Kim Tae-Sung. From wide panning shots and intense close ups, the slick stylistic feel of the film is maintained without need to resort to a multitude of hard cuts and handheld cameras. I can only imagine that the job has been made all the more easier, for they are not trying to make a 62 year old look exciting as he huffs and puffs over mundane obstacles.

The action in this film appears to be well thought out, realistic and suited the tone of the film. We were not suddenly treated to an expertly choreographed battle, nor a flood of 40 knife wielding gang members, instead it was the brutal and unforgiving realism that made the scenes what they were. Bashing each other in the face with fists, smashing heads into blunt objects and rolling about uncoordinated on the floor may not sound all that glamorous, but it was a refreshing change.

The bleak South Korean humour compounded with the mysteriousness of the adversary keeps you in limbo for the first half, you are laughing away at a criminal and his predicament but still have no idea who to root for. The second half explodes into a frenzy as the detectives opposite number is revealed. An impressive, well paced sequence of one-upmanship consisting of continued mind games and spurts of action drives up the films intensity to it’s delightfully silly conclusion. It gets a little ridiculous, the script is far fetched but funny, but above all else it is a fun and exciting contribution to the genre.

Seanny One Ball

March 3rd, 2015, 6:22 PM

Props for the Tartan video shout out.

Bundy!

Tainted Eclipse

March 3rd, 2015, 10:03 PM

I'm intrigued, not because I disagree or am by any stretch saying this is the best one out there, but what you (ECG) and SOB would class as your favourite prison based films then?

Brute Force (1947) and Le Trou (1960, french) are fantastic.

Clive Plasma

March 4th, 2015, 9:31 AM

Props for the Tartan video shout out.

Bundy!

Was that released on Tartan?

Off the top of my head I still have Memories of Murder, The Death of Mr. Lazarescu, A Tale of Two Sisters, Sympathy for Lady Vengeance and a few more that I need to watch on that distributor.

Clive Plasma

March 4th, 2015, 3:54 PM

http://i.imgur.com/yWxshoCl.jpg

All This Mayhem (2014)

All This Mayhem is a searing account of what happens when raw talent and extreme personalities collide. In this unflinching, never-before-seen account of drugs and the dark side of professional skateboarding, brothers Tas and Ben Pappas’ intense bond and charisma take them from the pinnacle of their sport into a spiraling world of self-destruction.

I have been a fan of skateboarding as long as I can remember having satellite TV. The Extreme channel brought skating into my house, and my enthusiasm for it’s growing popularity was only heightened by the fingerboard fad resurgence of the late 90’s, alongside Tony Hawks Pro Skater on the Playstation. I couldn’t skate myself, but I appreciated it as a sport to watch, counting down the months to get Girls infamous Yeah Right (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkRQ-PSnbdk)! and waiting for the Gravity and X-Games to come around each year.

My knowledge stretched as far as that however, and this documentary from the producers of Senna and Exit Through The Gift Shop (James Gay-Rees & George Pank) had me intrigued from the beginning. Tas & Ben Pappas, two brothers from Australia, both at the top of their game in Vert Skateboarding when it was experiencing it’s boom in popularity, were completely unknown to me. I clearly arrived late to the party on this one, but it struck me as strange that they were not around anymore and why I had not seen them in any THPS games.

The documentary chronicles these self-proclaimed bogans/hillbillies from Australia, as they make their switch from small vert ramps at home to attempt some of the best skate competitions in America. The American Skateboarding Dream. Skaters at the top could be taking home thousands of dollars in competition winnings, not to mention the additional sponsorship deals. We get to see this dream become somewhat of a reality, as the two brothers begin to establish themselves in competitions. Depicted through a series of cleverly compiled sequences demonstrating unrelenting tension, we watch as they slowly rise up from the bottom. While on this journey, they adopted the lifestyle every other teenager/young adult would have done in their situation – living in a house with your friends, having everything you ever wanted, all because you’re earning money to do what you love to do.

Much like the Steve-O (http://movieblort.com/2015/03/01/jackass-the-rise-demise-of-steve-o-2009/)‘ doc, there is an impending fall after this rise to success, but the fall in this instance is much, much, harder. I will spare the shocking detail, as there is so much to this tale that I would rather not spoil, but we are provided with an extremely frank and honest look at drug addiction and it’s unfortunate ramifications on young, impressionable stars. The end result is a tragic story, spliced with early archival footage of their rise and interviews with those who witnessed their sudden fall from grace. It is gripping viewing from start to finish.

What perhaps is more interesting though, are the pieces that are not explored fully in the film. Their rivalry with Tony Hawk in competitions that clearly seemed to favour him, their current hatred of the X-Games and all it stands for now, and the relationship they had with their father. These are just a few of the points that were touched upon but never taken any further, and consequently the documentary represents an extremely one-sided view. I can see why some may view this as almost glorifying their fall from grace, and it does seem at times that the drugs are to blame rather than poor personal choices, but I can only assume it was not their intention to do so.

An imbalanced, but highly interesting documentary for anyone to watch, highlighting the fragility of humans when combined with perils of fame and fortune.

7/10 - Available on iTunes & Amazon Prime

Seanny One Ball

March 4th, 2015, 6:00 PM

Clive Plasma

March 5th, 2015, 5:25 AM

Exit Through The Gift Shop is a quality docu. I love your docu reviews mate, definitely give this a go.

You'll like my March compilation post then. Top 20 Docs currently on Netflix UK. Trying to do one a month, as it seems to provide the most traffic to the website, but I don't want to become a Buzzfeed list ridden website.

I've watched Exit Through The Gift Shop - completely agree, great doc.

Clive Plasma

March 5th, 2015, 9:38 AM

http://i.imgur.com/0VYnPBCl.jpg

Cheap Thrills (2014)

A scheming couple put a struggling family man and his old friend through a series of increasingly twisted dares over the course of an evening at a local bar.

We’ve all been there, sat in the local pub discussing what you would and wouldn’t do for money. In fact, one example I have is where we were sat in the garden of our pub, and the challenge to soil yourself for money was brought up. Of course people started at the top, “a million quid” someone exclaimed, which then began to wind down to an actual value worth exploring, “twenty quid?” they said. With 8 of us there I called them on their claim, and to our collective astonishment they pooed in their pants for £20. What motivated him to actually go through with it, I have no idea – bravado, fear of backtracking, or he just wanted to see if he could go through with it, but the common theme here was money. Everyone has a price, and that is the basis for this movie.

Cheap Thrills is the type of dark comedy horror film the casual horror fans have been calling out for. There is no torture porn in this, for the horror and shock value comes from the winding path of escalation this film takes you on. Pat Healy is Craig, a financially drained individual with a family to support, and it becomes apparent very quickly upon meeting the extremely minted Violet (Sara Paxton) & Colin (David Koechner) that his desperation will lead him to a dark place. Egged on by his reacquainted high school pal Vince (Ethan Embry), the games begin to see who can walk away with the most amount of money.

A simple premise, and one that you think leads to an obvious conclusion. Especially when you view the trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPMKb2ubuDQ), a trailer that appears to give away the entire plot and all its associated twists. I can reassure you however, that the trailer only scratches the surface. This low budget movie armed with a small cast manage to establish a jovial tone early on, but once it switches up a notch, the horrific and disturbing acts really test your stomach turning limits. It is extremely clever, the tension at times is unbearable but its ability to teeter between dark comedy and horror while remaining entirely plausible enables this movie to exceed expectation. Enhanced by the grotesque sound effects and vivid yet convincing imagery, it is a formidable movie within this genre.

The similarities here between reality TV are astutely observed, with those at the bottom of the pecking order humiliated for the rich’s amusement. Similarly, you could argue that this battle of rich vs poor extends far beyond Reality TV, and expands to cover society as a whole. Despite leading a good life, and their good intentions, cash will always be king. The desperation associated to obtaining this cash varies from person to person depending on circumstance, and just as some will shit themselves in the pub for £20, others will do much worse for much less.

Cheap Thrills is exactly what this film delivers, and I loved it.

The Rogerer

March 9th, 2015, 9:51 AM

MikeHunt

March 9th, 2015, 6:29 PM

Jumping back, but Good Vibrations was on BBC at the weekend and may hopefully be on iPlayer. It was a fantastic film, aside from being about Northern Ireland which is really just incidental in the story, but just a vibrant, energetic, convincing and warm telling of a true story.

I didn't know where to put this but was just going to say it's on iplayer for the next couple of weeks. Anyone who hasn't watched it please do it great.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05569p9/good-vibrations

Clive Plasma

March 10th, 2015, 5:54 AM

Great shout. Really enjoyed that film.

Speaking of iPlayer, there's a handful of great documentaries on there under the 'Storyville' heading; Indias Daughter (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b05534p0/storyville-20142015-19-indias-daughter) aired the other day, and I just finished watching 1.7 Billion Dollar Fraud: Full Exposure (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b054f7qp/storyville-20142015-18-17-billion-dollar-fraud-full-exposure) which was this mental documentary on the Olympus scandal - it was comparable to Enron.

Also, Adam Curtis's new one 'Bitter Lake' (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p02gyz6b/adam-curtis-bitter-lake) ​is out, but I haven't found 2 hours to watch it.

The Rogerer

March 10th, 2015, 6:21 AM

Mik

March 10th, 2015, 11:46 AM

Clive Plasma

March 10th, 2015, 12:48 PM

http://i.imgur.com/LG1KnS5l.jpg

Appropriate Behavior (2015)

Shirin is struggling to become an ideal Persian daughter, politically correct bisexual and hip young Brooklynite but fails miserably in her attempt at all identities. Being without a cliché to hold onto can be a lonely experience.

A self-depreciating relationship drama set to tick the boxes of the many Brooklyn Hipster comedies (http://www.indiewire.com/article/are-there-too-many-indies-set-in-brooklyn), the film is an intriguing debut. Lead, Writer and Director Desiree Akhavan stars as an Iranian bisexual, Shirin, seething from a break-up with her girlfriend Maxine (Rebecca Henderson). Conflicted about the past, unable to talk about the present with her traditional Iranian parents, she is left with only her friend to assist with getting over the break-up.

The series of monotone, mumbling, narcissistic scenes focused on Shirin and her sheer awkwardness, are interjected with moments of candid honesty and a refreshing outlook on Shirin’s attempt at a new life. From underwear shopping, to dating, sex life, getting a new job and the standard competitive one way rivalry with the ex, all come together to make some truly funny scenes. Instead of opting for the outrageous and lurid cheap laughs, it moves more along the lines of the humour found in Obvious Child and is widely referenced as a comparison to Girls (can’t comment on ‘Girls’, as I don’t watch it.). Human, deadpan, honest and believable scenarios that although may seem a little ridiculous, when depicted as they are in ‘Appropriate Behaviour’, they appear to be convincing.

For all it’s comedic plus points, it does remain relatively bland throughout, and for all the potential conflict of a break-up along with the clash of traditionalism meets modern sexuality, very little is actually explored to it’s fullest potential. It chops and changes between past and present, as we witness the chaotic attempt to piece her life back together combined with the inevitable downfall of the relationship – it all makes for rather familiar but somewhat disorientating viewing. However, perhaps that was the point. To create something seemingly normal, to not delve to deep into any particular topic and ultimately portray an individual living in New York. Just that. Nothing more. The things that happen – it’s just life.

There is enough in this film to showcase the talents of those involved, and I will keep an eye on what Desiree chooses to do next. The moments of quick wit and crudely frank humour elevate this film to be much more than your standard, drab break-up movie. It was largely a fun movie to watch, but it was a little too focused on the mundane and the negative for it to hold my interest. The chronology of the film restricted how invested you could be come in it all, knowing the eventual outcome only made the flashbacks scenes seem wasteful. Personally, I would have liked a tighter focus on the family, the new job and the present day dating game which would have provided more of the excellent comedic moments that were on offer, and less of a focus on an angsty Brooklynite complaining about the past.

No doubt it will see success in the cinema, but it was a tad too inconsistent for me.

Clive Plasma

March 12th, 2015, 3:12 AM

http://i.imgur.com/9xCo1xil.jpg
Katalin Varga (2009) (http://movieblort.com/2015/03/11/katalin-varga-2009/)

In a remote rural village in the Transylvanian mountains, Katalin Varga is cast out of her home in when her husband discovers that her son Orban is not his. Taking Orban with her, Katalin sets out on a long journey to track down and punish the men who raped her 11 years earlier.

9/10 - Reading into The Duke of Burgundy (http://movieblort.com/2015/02/21/the-duke-of-burgundy-2015/) prior to seeing it last month, I was inclined to look into the director Peter Strickland and his previous work. Katalin Varga is his debut feature, set in the Hungarian-speaking part of the Romanian region of Transylvania, it seemed an odd choice to have your first film not appear in your native language. A decision perhaps to draw on some socio-political parallel I am unfamiliar with, but one that consequently created many benefits from an atmospheric and aesthetic perspective.

This slow burning, folk thriller follows Katalin Varga (Hilda Péter) as she attempts to track down the men who raped her from her past. This is not your typical thriller, there is no sense of impending torture or expected drawn out brutal vengeance. It’s stark realism is what makes this film all the more intriguing, as Hilda Péter displays all the actions and emotions of a calm yet traumatised victim. She is extraordinary in her portrayal of Katalin, achieving just as much in a simple half smile as she does in the strange extended monologue. The role of mother and the victim all wrapped up into a seductive and vindictive woman carries the film through to it’s shocking conclusion, and it is a passionate performance that is difficult to shake off.

The above is enhanced by the atmospherics, which create a sort of dream like world for this to take place in. It makes for a unique viewing experience as we drift from scene to scene, across the beautiful landscapes that are somehow enhanced by the low budget, as the weird noises, local music and long silences enable the viewer to lose focus with reality, only to snap back into the regular narrative. You become absorbed into the film, immersed in the storytelling as the inauspicious atmosphere swells around you.

It is a powerful movie, filled with eeriness and impressive performances and yet it manages to steer clear of the bad habits found in conventional revenge thrillers. The tension is unbearable, the plot is unpredictable and the outcome is unforgiving. Katalin does what many other women would do in her situation if they could, and seeks closure via the route of revenge. Whether there is a deeper underlying message here I am unsure, but this tragic tale is extremely poignant and exceeds with it’s simple storytelling and entrancing delivery.

Strickland is one of the most exciting filmmakers out there at the moment, and I cannot wait to see what he does next.

http://i.imgur.com/g8mtK8ml.jpg

Big Hero 6 (2015) (http://movieblort.com/2015/03/11/big-hero-6-2015/)

The special bond that develops between plus-sized inflatable robot Baymax, and prodigy Hiro Hamada, who team up with a group of friends to form a band of high-tech heroes.

9/10 - I try and save watching animated films until hangover days or weekends, for obvious reasons watching an inflatable robot make an ass of himself or a bunch of penguins go on a mission is easier to stomach than some obscure Korean thriller. Putting off watching Big Hero 6 was no easy task though, from the creators of Wreck It Ralph, this film has absolutely smashed it. To quote wikipedia, it has grossed over $604 million in worldwide box office; it won the Academy Award for Best Animated Feature and received nominations for the Golden Globe Award for Best Animated Feature Film, and the BAFTA Award for Best Animated Film. Now while I was a little annoyed at the Lego Academy Award snub, my annoyance has been displaced by a huge grin after watching Big Hero 6.

Born out of a small unheard of comic book owned by Marvel, there is enough of Disney and Pixar in here to like, but there is an element that thinks they are simply cashing in on the superhero hype. Regardless, there is a certain likability about an inflatable robot nurse who delivers inadvertent comical one-liners with unknowing bluntness, and has the slapstick comedy elements dialled up to the max. It is this loveable hero of the film, Baymax, that provides the perfect balance of lighthearted fun alongside futuristic action-adventure which really allows the film to shine. Without Baymax, we are left with a really good looking film, but one that brings nothing new to the table.

Thankfully, his big emotionless face is there, and he is funny.

http://i.imgur.com/dfewkLUl.jpg

Graphically, it is up there with the likes of Up, Bolt, Monsters Inc and The Incredibles. Sharp, crisp, creative, colourful and vibrant, it is everything you expect it to be and more. The impeccably detailed world has plenty to catch the eye, and maintain the attention span of most age groups. It provides a perfect canvas to tell the story, one that is rife with all the expected Disney features as its main characters deal with the very human, emotional challenges in what appears to us as a very non-human, unfamiliar world.

In the final third it falls victim to the superhero mess, and results in a sea of explosions and fighting. It is here it loses all of the emotion, all of the humour, all of its momentum and becomes solely focussed on providing us with an explosive finale the type of which I couldn’t care less about. However, perhaps it was that I was still drunk, or that I was still giggling away from some of Baymax’s one-liners, but I can’t hold that against a film with this much heart. It is a really solid outing from Disney, with a great story to tell – refreshingly simple yet with so much more to it. Much like Baymax’s face.

Clive Plasma

March 12th, 2015, 10:19 AM

http://i.imgur.com/Lr6S2kbl.jpg

Poster from myrmorko (http://myrmorko.deviantart.com/)

Guest Review: Still Alice (2015)

A linguistics professor and her family find their bonds tested when she is diagnosed with Early-onset Alzheimer’s Disease.

9/10 - “Still Alice” tells the story of Alice Howland a professor of linguistics who gets diagnosed with early-onset Alzheimer’s disease. The film is told almost entirely from Alice’s point of view and Julianne Moore is on screen in almost every scene. Getting the obvious out the way, Julianne Moore is absolutely terrific as Alice. She deservedly won the Oscar, the BAFTA and all the other awards. Moore inhabits Alice completely and the scenes where she doesn’t recognise streets, family members and her home are utterly believable. It is a testament to the filmmakers that for a film about (the inevitability) of Alzheimer’s disease that it manages to be triumphant and anything but depressing.

A lot of the plaudits also need to go to the directors (Richard Glatzer and Wash Westmoreland). This could easily have been told from the family’s point of view, showing all the scenes where they struggle to comprehend what is happening to Alice and leaving us to forget about the real victim. It is canny that the filmmakers have chosen to focus on the way it would feel to suffer from Alzheimer’s. The clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v06K9RJj9LI) that has been doing the rounds featuring Kristen Stewart asking her Mum about what it’s like living with Alzheimer’s is talismanic for the film. It feels honest and the sort of conversation that you would have with a member of your own family.

It is not sentimental and the loneliness of it is subtly communicated through Denis Lenoir’s photography. He blurs the background and focuses on Alice as she forgets where she is or where she is going. This perfectly encapsulates the feeling of isolation she is going through. The interactions with the family as a group also work really well, they feel genuine especially with the subtle differences between how each of the family members react. The contrast between Kate Bosworth and Kristen Stewart’s reactions is particularly striking, and Alec Baldwin really puts in an excellent supporting turn. His initial anger and indignation, then movement towards acceptance of the inevitable situation in a matter of two or three scenes is well juxtaposed and devastating.

The film later jumps time frame as Alice’s condition takes over which is to the films credit not jarring and according to my better half (a doctor who has had to deal with Alzheimer’s) an accurate representation of what it is/would be like for the sufferer of the disease. The title is prophetic that even through all of the struggles and loss of memory, she is Still Alice and flashes of her former self pop up just as we think hope is lost.

As Julianne Moore has echoed in her award acceptance speeches, hopefully the medical research will be done to ensure that fewer people have to deal with this terrible disease and we will look back on this film as what once was other than an inevitability.

Review by James, who initially threw his two cents in on Mr Turner (http://movieblort.com/2015/02/11/guest-entry-mr-turner-2014/) and The Imitation Game (http://movieblort.com/2015/02/23/guest-entry-the-imitation-game-2014/). He’s becoming quite a permanent fixture on the blog now.

Clive Plasma

March 19th, 2015, 7:55 AM

http://i.imgur.com/RRXpPlul.jpg

Force Majeure (2014) (http://movieblort.com/2015/03/19/force-majeure-2014/)

A family on a ski holiday in the French Alps find themselves staring down an avalanche during lunch one day; in the aftermath, their dynamic has been shaken to its core, with a question mark hanging over their patriarch in particular.

9/10 - “Force Majeure (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saNvY4tD3wA)“, takes all the sheer awkwardness of that shit-eating grin from Ben Affleck in Gone Girl (http://movieblort.com/2014/12/30/268-gone-girl-2014-with-his-wifes/), and drags it out to nearly two hours in an unflinching yet realistic portrayal of the relationship dynamic on holiday. No matter how solid your relationship is, holidays can be pressurised environments despite its intentions usually being the exact opposite. Small arguments materialise into larger ones, and with no work to occupy your day, your free time turns into deep thought which if not discussed properly can turn into upset and discontent. This is even more so present when the purpose of the holiday is to ‘fix’ things.

Which is why when you take a regular ski trip, but throw in the added factor of an avalanche that nearly wipes out the entire family, it adds an unpredictable depth to this dynamic. It amplifies the tension between the man, wife and their family on a holiday, but the extremity of the situation enhances the existing cracks to an unbearable degree.

The appearance of “Force Majeure” is as beautiful as the landscape it is set within. Each day opening with a flurry of classical music from Antonio Vivaldi (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGdFHJXciAQ) set against the clunking of the machines and explosions of the controlled avalanches as the resort prepares for its day. The routine is mirrored as the family prepares also, only in this instance the explosions and clunking are yet to come shown as the gradual deterioration of their relationship. A large credit of this films success goes to the editing, as ‘Force Majeure’ appears effortlessly bound together injecting new energy into every day despite the tedium of marital bickering.

The film is a great watch, but as I find with many films it causes a tremendous amount of self-evaluation. What would I do in that situation? You will probably feel the same, and it is a powerful thing for a movie to make you question yourself. This realism is only emphasised by the performances across the board, all seemingly natural and relatable, which results in a very humanistic approach. Darkly comical, highly intricate but ultimately an uncomfortable watch. There is a little bit of all of us on screen here, whether we like to admit it or not.

Clive Plasma

March 20th, 2015, 7:27 PM

http://i.imgur.com/Hh6R7DIl.jpg
It Follows (2014) (http://movieblort.com/2015/03/20/it-follows-2015/)

Poster by Richey Beckett (http://alternativemovieposters.com/amp/it-follows-by-richey-beckett/#prettyPhoto)

After a young girl gets involved in a sexual confrontation, she is followed by an unknown force.

This is a film that alongside The Babadook (http://movieblort.com/2015/01/21/the-babadook-2014/) has been touted as one of the best horrors in recent years (http://boingboing.net/2015/03/16/why-it-follows-is-the-best.html). It’s strange when such an encompassing phrase gets banded about like that, usually the person making the claims hasn’t seen every horror that has been out in recent years, so a judgement that wide and vague should probably be withheld. It puts pressure on the film to live up to viewers extremely high expectations, whereas a film like this, you’re better off going in with no expectations. It will surprise you.

It Follows is a different type of horror film. One that you would not expect to smash the indie box office on it’s opening weekend, and have such a good theatre run that the VOD release date has been pushed back. This film does not follow conventional ‘jump’ scares, nor does it rely on relentless gore, there is hardly any context to it and the people in the film aren’t idiots. Instead, this simple idea that something and/or someone is out to get you and only you, born out of a reoccuring nightmare (http://www.indiewire.com/article/it-follows-director-david-robert-mitchell-on-sex-in-horror-films-and-the-current-state-of-the-genre-20150304) from director David Robert Mitchell, is as horrifying as it sounds. A ‘being’ that will kill you if it gets near to you, ‘slow but not stupid’, is sexually transmitted and can take many human forms. The resulting effect is one of intense paranoia, uncertainty and ambiguity. We don’t know the what this is, and that’s why it’s horrible to watch.

http://i.imgur.com/XJRQddml.jpg

This dreamlike state from Mitchell translates onto the screen extremely well. The characters wear inconsistently fashionable items of clothing, technology is mixed and cars are varied. There is no indication of the era or place it is shot in, much like a nightmare, the finer details have been removed, and the ambiguity continued. It makes little sense – but it doesn’t have to. The unease and paranoia of this unfamiliar environment is heightened by the incredible cinematography (http://filmmakermagazine.com/93395-meta-hairy-david-robert-mitchells-it-follows/); long wide shots, mixed with a couple of 360/540/720 degree turns, your eyes immediately scan the periphery looking for anything out of the ordinary. It is beautiful to watch, but the tension is deeply unsettling. The synth-ridden score by Disasterpeace (http://music.disasterpeace.com/album/it-follows) also adds volumes to the suspense. The atmosphere is intense, there is danger brooding, each piece of music perfectly crafted to suit the mood of the film. Listening back to any of the track (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyACdmYe-4A)s gives me the chills knowing what it accompanied on screen.

http://i.imgur.com/7pMAkHTl.jpg

Maika Monroe (http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/maika-monroe/34269/maika-monroe-interview-it-follows-the-guest-and-more) (The Guest) is brilliant as ‘Jay’, the primary victim in all of this. Innocently going about her teenage existence when thrust into infinite peril against her will. She has a certain likability, as do the rest of her group. They help each other, there’s no cattiness, there’s no idiocy (aside from one frankly ridiculous albeit highly enjoyable scene), and they band together to try and work out a way to make ‘it’ leave them alone. Monroe puts in a thoughtful and powerful performance, and with this film and The Guest under her belt, I am excited to see what she takes on next. The remaining cast members were good, but this was always going to be Monroe’s film, and she stole the show.

It Follows, The Babadook and The Guest mark a new-wave of intelligent, uneasy and impressive films. Audiences now are craving this type of scare, one that invades your privacy, one that makes you feel weird and tweaky. But this scare has always been about, it is just that it has been overshadowed by the nonsense promoted around Halloween time in the cinemas. The films with extreme gore, wet haired ghoulish looking girls and the idiots that run into the face of danger will always be here, and they will always have their audiences. It’s important not to get carried away when a film that’s slightly different comes along, and suddenly it’s the best horror film ever made.

It Follows is a good film. It’s unique take on sex within horror, using it as a catalyst for impending unstoppable dread was impressive to say the least. However, I laughed at parts of it, I got chills at others and I felt uncomfortable – still, it lingered over me long after I got home, but I wasn’t scared. Different people react differently to horrors, being scared is all subjective, but don’t let that put you off. All the more reason to see it. Go in with an open mind, ignore the hype, and on your walk home make sure to keep checking over your shoulder. Just in case…

Seanny One Ball

March 22nd, 2015, 3:58 PM

Nightcrawler
Equaliser
Fury
A Walk Among The Tombstones
Lincoln
A Good Day To Die Hard
About Schmidt
Philomena
Lets Be Cops
Calvary

I bought and watched all of these in the last week and quite a few more.

Philomena was probably my favourite overall because it was wonderful, a solid 10/10 film which just blew me away and knocked seven shades of shit out of me emotionally.
What a wonderfully far ranging film.
I'd say the same of Calvary really but it is much, much darker.

MikeHunt

March 22nd, 2015, 4:02 PM

I watched Calvary last night. how bloody good was chris o'dowd? i'm absolutely in love with Kelly Riely, ever since eden lake. beautiful.

back to the film, outstanding as a character piece. my only critisim would be that there was maybe a one or two characters that weren't really needed and made the story slightly more clumsy. 8/10 for me.

Seanny One Ball

March 22nd, 2015, 4:12 PM

Yeah I thought overall it was gripping stuff but I have to admit Kelly Reilly was the weakest part of the film for me.
I really don't like her acting style or the way her character was written. It was a bit too "downbeat Girlmore Girls" for me.
O'Dowd was a phenom in there, I also absolutely loved the other priest who had no integrity :lol:

I need to see The Guard off the back off this. Apparently it's brilliant too.

Oh I forgot to say I watched Filth too.
Filth is an odd and not particularly good film but James McAvoy was utterly magnificent. I have never seen an actor I don't like pull it out of his arse the way James McAvoy did there. That's one of the best single performances I have ever seen.

MikeHunt

March 22nd, 2015, 4:15 PM

did you recognise the bar owner?#

https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-xfp1/t5.0-1/50554_124008140124_5188264_n.jpg

El Capitano Gatisto

March 22nd, 2015, 4:51 PM

That's Pat Shortt, very good actor and comedian. The Garage is a pretty good film, bit of a different one for him in that it's pretty grim and not at all comedic.

I haven't seen Calvary yet.

McBain

March 22nd, 2015, 7:58 PM

I watched Nightcrawler and The Punk Singer this weekend. Both very good in very different ways.

Nightcrawler was a terrific performance by Gyllenhaal, who continues to be one of my favourite actors. Unsettling and very dark. 8/10

Punk Singer is a documentary about Kathleen Hanna, the lead singer of feminist punk band Bikini Kill, and Le Tigre. This was a really interesting look at a woman with a lot of balls. I must admit, the new wave feminism thing has started to irritate me of late, and this film helped to open my eyes to some of my own prejudices and privileges. It's also a great look at alternative music and culture and how they run side by side with political movements. 8/10

Clive Plasma

March 23rd, 2015, 5:57 AM

Nightcrawler
Equaliser
Fury
A Walk Among The Tombstones
Lincoln
A Good Day To Die Hard
About Schmidt
Philomena
Lets Be Cops
Calvary

I bought and watched all of these in the last week and quite a few more.

Philomena was probably my favourite overall because it was wonderful, a solid 10/10 film which just blew me away and knocked seven shades of shit out of me emotionally.
What a wonderfully far ranging film.
I'd say the same of Calvary really but it is much, much darker.

I really enjoyed Nightcrawler, Walk Among The Tombstones, Lets Be Cops and Lincoln.

The rest I am still due to get round to watching. Calvary and Philomena I need to be in the right mood to watch, but both have come highly recommended.

What was Fury like?

I need to see The Guard off the back off this. Apparently it's brilliant too.

Oh I forgot to say I watched Filth too.
Filth is an odd and not particularly good film but James McAvoy was utterly magnificent. I have never seen an actor I don't like pull it out of his arse the way James McAvoy did there. That's one of the best single performances I have ever seen.

I fucking love The Guard. Really good film. Hated Filth, it was just absolute nonsense.

Punk Singer is a documentary about Kathleen Hanna, the lead singer of feminist punk band Bikini Kill, and Le Tigre. This was a really interesting look at a woman with a lot of balls. I must admit, the new wave feminism thing has started to irritate me of late, and this film helped to open my eyes to some of my own prejudices and privileges. It's also a great look at alternative music and culture and how they run side by side with political movements. 8/10

I used to love Le Tigre. Will check this out - is it on Netflix?

Mik

March 23rd, 2015, 7:17 AM

Clive Plasma

March 23rd, 2015, 7:22 AM

I'll be sticking up the reviews of Wild Card, John Wick and Paddington soon. Trying to tie them in with their wider releases.

Also, I watched Captivated: the Trials of Pamela Smart, which is an HBO documentary - very one-sided, but worth a watch.

Finally, last night I watched 'Sparrow', probably the most un-Johnnie To film of all Johnnie To films. Made minimal sense, but loved it.

Ringo

March 23rd, 2015, 8:07 AM

Seanny One Ball

March 23rd, 2015, 4:28 PM

I really enjoyed Nightcrawler, Walk Among The Tombstones, Lets Be Cops and Lincoln.

My favourite out of the four was Nightcrawler by a wide margin. I mean it wasn't a particularly realistic film but Rene Russo and Jake G's chemistry was off the charts. I absolutely loved it but spent the whole time not relating to the protagonist at all. I pretty much hated the dude but the film was just incredibly well done.
Two thumbs up for Jake, that's me pretty much full U-turned on him and Gosling.
Tonight I watch The Place Beyond The Pines, hopefully get to see Drive soon when I get a copy because I liked Only God Forgives a lot and it's the same director apparently.

Lets Be Cops was fucking hilarious. No idea why it got shat on when it came out because I was howling.

The rest I am still due to get round to watching. Calvary and Philomena I need to be in the right mood to watch, but both have come highly recommended.

Calvary is a slow burner that is darker than Hades but so well performed and written that it's just a joy to watch.
Philomena is a journey of an affair. I doubt I've ever swung so wildly between emotions as I did when watching that and I was blown away completely by Coogan. I knew he was a fine actor from 24 Hour Party People and The Look Of Love but man he really smashed it in Philomena. Judi Dench is spectacular as always but that film is a real work of art.
I don't think I've loved a film as quickly and as completely as Philomena besides The Grand Budapest Hotel.

What was Fury like?

Fury is one of the least romantic war films I have ever seen, possibly the least besides Platoon and Saving Private Ryan.
It's certainly up there in terms of violence and atmosphere.
It seems to be deliberately showing the team at their very worst and full of all the genuine bigotry and hang ups that are missing from so many other blockbuster war movies. I mean it gets hinted at plenty, films like Casualties of War get right into it but it's the way it's done in Fury that really sets it apart.
It's a completely visceral film and dare I say it it sold me on Shia Laboeuf as a serious and legit talent. He's superb in it as is Brad Pitt, hell everyone involved is acting their socks off but I think the film belongs to Logan Lerman.
I had never seen that kid in anything before, possibly because I'm a bit past the age for Percy Jackson but honestly I was impressed with his chops so I'll look forward to where he goes from there.

I fucking love The Guard. Really good film. Hated Filth, it was just absolute nonsense.

I will get on it. I'm sure I've missed it on tv a while back. :yes:
Filth was a good storyline and a superb(and I really cannot stress that enough) solo performance from James McAvoy but the other performances and the whole production side of things was offputting in the extreme. There were some straight up bad actors in that film. Poots was alright but I'd pretty much forgive her anything, even taking a dump right in my eye.
I preferred Bunty when Spud was covering her and her parents in shite in Trainspotting.

Seanny One Ball

March 23rd, 2015, 4:55 PM

I actually watched a fuckload more films than that but I figured 47 Ronin, Tammy, Survivor(Says Kevni Sorbo on the back, Kevni! Now that's production value!) and whatever else I bought and watched were forgettable enough to ignore.
Virmicious actually bought me This Is Spinal Tap on Blu Ray so I saw that for the first time ever recently.
That's a fucking funny film, I also now have all of the songs stuck in my head. Nobody told me the songs were so good.

47 Ronin was ok actually until the ending, I was all "Oh great NOW you decide to take the film seriously right at the end when everything seems to have gone well".

I did a Donaldpleasance and started to arrange my stuff into categories. Forget Alphabetical, I'm going by genre.
I clearly have too many comedy dvd's though, it's all comedy or action with the odd handful of class thrown in.

Forgot to say I saw From Paris With Love last night and it was just atrocious. Possibly the worst action film I have seen in the last ten years, in fact that is fairly likely. Bad acting, shitty dialogue and a plot that made about as much sense as the entire Chinatown scene in France.

Clive Plasma

March 23rd, 2015, 5:41 PM

http://i.imgur.com/SSvsaYll.jpg

Wild Card (2014) (http://movieblort.com/2015/03/23/wild-card-2015-review/)

When a Las Vegas bodyguard with lethal skills and a gambling problem gets in trouble with the mob, he has one last play…and it’s all or nothing.

2/10 - I have seen every single Jason Statham film to date. His back-catalogue features some truly memorable films; Look back to Crank, Snatch, Mean Machine, Lock Stock and his Transporter trilogy where you will find him oiling himself up (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot2RkUSRjmg), beating up dudes with his hose (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LEbh7ixZQ_s) and taking on a load of men at once in a factory (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKQYK7PYQpQ) (ahem), and you will be entertained for the entire duration of his time on screen.

He has become somewhat of a cult icon for his straight-talking, stereotypical English geezer accent, and comedic one-liners, while simultaneously possessing the ability to get out of any situation and batter everyone in sight. However, more recently, the films have simply not clicked. War, The Mechanic, Parker, Death Race, Revolver, Killer Elite etc… all distinctly awful in their own right, and now Wild Card can join that list. They all feature what we expect from Statham, so why is it that they are so bad? If you don’t take them too seriously, many of them become b-movie good, but Wild Card firmly belongs in the bad pile.

What happens to the scripts Statham rejects? To his credit, no matter how bad the film, you cannot think of anyone doing a better job. Who else can fit into that suave, “fackin Lardarn” caricature as well as he can? It won’t be Danny Dyer. Considering how many films Statham churns out, I wonder if in a room in his house he has a giant pile of rejected scripts, each more ridiculous than the last, and will never see the light of day until someone with lower standards comes along. Why won’t he just reject them?

In Wild Card, he plays a recovering gambling addict / bodyguard, and is a remake of the poorly received 1986 film Heat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_(1986_film)) (not to be confused with the 1995 film (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0113277/) of the same name, which is excellent). It is far from original, the script is anything but strong and yet he still did it. Look at Death Race (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0452608/), another remake of a film (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072856/) that was initially poorly received. Jason Statham plays a Nascar Driver, framed for his wife’s murder to drive around a prison in order to secure his freedom. In Parker (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1904996/) he takes part in a jewellery robbery opposite Jennifer Lopez. In War (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499556/), Statham plays an FBI agent out to seek vengeance for the hitman who killed Jet-Li’s family only it turns out to be Jet-Li himself. I don’t even care that I ruined it for you, it’s terrible. These all sound ridiculously poor, and they are – so there must come a point where you say enough is enough? I by no means am saying that he shouldn’t do them, but it’s quality not quantity.

Another part of the problem lies within his surrounding cast. Aside from the odd strong supporting role (Stanley Tucci), the remaining cast simply form your stereotypical greasy bad guys or troubled women in need of some Statham loving. In Wild Card, Statham yet again does what he does best; he beats people up with credit cards and a spoon, makes mugs of everyone he meets and fulfils his obligation of simply being ‘Stath’.

People haven’t fallen out of love with action films – no matter how terrible they are audiences keep on paying to watch Liam Neeson mumble and fight his way through a variety of situations (http://screencrush.com/liam-neeson-mad-lib/). In Wild Card the action is exactly as you would expect; fast paced, well put together, creative, violent, but infrequent. A possible 2 or 3 fight scenes in total, slotted between uninteresting dialogue about an uninteresting, predictable plot.

These scenes of action would be all well and good, if the drama in-between were able to sustain my interest. But here lies the basic problem of many Statham’s choice of films: they’re just not that good. If you want to make an action film, make an action film. If you want to make something dramatic and interesting, actually make it dramatic and interesting. If you want to make both, make both but ensure it’s consistent.

Wild Card really isn’t really anything, but tries to be everything.

Clive Plasma

March 23rd, 2015, 5:42 PM

Virmicious actually bought me This Is Spinal Tap on Blu Ray so I saw that for the first time ever recently.
That's a fucking funny film, I also now have all of the songs stuck in my head. Nobody told me the songs were so good.

For the first time?! Incredible. One of my favourite films of all time.

McBain

March 23rd, 2015, 8:02 PM

I used to love Le Tigre. Will check this out - is it on Netflix?

I have no idea mate, soz.

McBain

March 23rd, 2015, 8:02 PM

For the first time?! Incredible. One of my favourite films of all time.

Same here! Absolute classic.

Seanny One Ball

March 26th, 2015, 10:08 AM

I had seen clips from shows that list top comedies but yeah I'd never actually seen it.

Virm is in my heart forever because of that.

Clive I take it you've seen Hummingbird? That was some daft Statham fun.

Clive Plasma

March 26th, 2015, 12:07 PM

I had seen clips from shows that list top comedies but yeah I'd never actually seen it.

Virm is in my heart forever because of that.

Clive I take it you've seen Hummingbird? That was some daft Statham fun.

I have indeed, I didn't really rate it though.

Seanny, I'm putting together a "Top 10 movies that will ruin the mood/10 movies not to watch with your partner", kind of like an anti-romance film list but based around some form of relationship, I'm trying to avoid just listing the most horrible horrors.

So far the list is;

1. Irreversible (BF + GF)
2. Audition (Man & Wife)
3. Nymphomaniac 1&2 (Multiple Relationships)
4. Maniac (Original or Remake) (Dating)
5. Side Effects (Man & Wife)
6. Eden Lake (Man & Wife)
7. Hard Candy (Paedo + Victim)
8. Enter The Void (Brother & Sister / Dating)
9. Taxidermia (Multiple Stories - Man & Wife eating is my favourite)
10. Requiem for a Dream (BF & GF)

Any you would add?

Clive Plasma

March 26th, 2015, 5:57 PM

http://i.imgur.com/WYG5ghAl.jpg

Paddington (2014) (http://movieblort.com/2015/03/26/paddington-2014/)

A young Peruvian bear travels to London in search of a home. Finding himself lost and alone at Paddington Station, he meets the kindly Brown family, who offer him a temporary haven.

Growing up I remember watching the original Paddington Bear cartoons (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNZ3i9utHl4) and then it materialising into the stop motion animation version (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGDYaR98rYE). I’m not quite sure where I watched them, whether they were on BBC or I was simply put in front of an old VHS growing up, who knows, but the memories are there in some shape or form. It’s always interesting then when ‘they’, as a loose term for cinema and all it’s modern day technology, take your fond childhood memories and modernise them. Take Garfield, Scooby Doo, Alvin & The Chipmunks and Yogi Bear to name a few, all of which have been relatively mediocre. They either haven’t got the original charm, silliness, innocence or the CGI just makes it feel off.

It could explain why, going in with this preconceived notion that perhaps Paddington would fall into the same lower bracket as the remakes before it, that I finished watching it and felt that by comparison it had done a pretty solid job at keeping Paddington, well, Paddington. With rumours circulating beforehand around it’s classification (PG?!), there was a worry that it had been changed for the worst. Instead we are treated to a terrifically British film, with all the warmth you would expect from a film about a big cuddly bear.

The casting is excellent; from Ben Whishaw’s soft voice for Paddington, to Hugh Bonneville and the always charming Sally Hawkins who play Mr & Mrs Brown, with the nosey neighbour played by Peter Capaldi and Nicole Kidman as the pantomime-like villain meets Cruella Deville taxidermist, it is a true joy to watch this all-star cast come together for something so pleasant.

Although the plot was predictable, it didn’t stop Paul King and Hamish McColl having a laugh with the film as we went along. Rife with slapstick humour enough to please the inner child in all of us, with Paddingtons sheer clumsiness combined with his complete innocence, you laughed at him yet sympathised when things went awry. It was a guilty childish laughter, it just sort of escaped from me even though I felt like I shouldn’t have been laughing. It isn’t his fault he is a bear living in London, what a preposterous idea, of course he doesn’t know how to use sellotape or a toothbrush. Look at him try.

http://i.imgur.com/8Ka6LCTl.jpg

[Minor spoilers for numerous films ahead]

However, there are moments of seriousness, one of which occurred right at the beginning of the film when explaining Paddingtons backstory for leaving Darkest Peru involving a death of one of the characters. An odd choice I thought, for a childs film, to include what could be perceived as such a traumatic experience so early on. After giving it some thought, I remembered back to Big Hero 6 (http://movieblort.com/2015/03/11/big-hero-6-2015/) where something similar happened at the beginning there too. Then they came flooding in; Finding Nemo, The Lion King, Tarzan, Snow White… all of these films contained deaths in them.

As expected, my thought was far from original, to the extent that the British Medical Journal researched and published a paper (http://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g7184) last December on it titled ‘Cartoons Kill’! It’s an interesting read, but their overall conclusion consisted of;

"Rather than being the innocuous form of entertainment they are assumed to be, children’s animated films are rife with on-screen death and murder."

What did all of this mean? My theory: Aside from using it to teach somewhat valuable, emotional lessons to children on how to deal with grief (despite the nature of the killings consisting of “three gunshot deaths (Bambi, Peter Pan, Pocahontas), two stabbings (Sleeping Beauty, The Little Mermaid), and five animal attacks (A Bug’s Life, The Croods, How to Train Your Dragon, Finding Nemo, Tarzan)”), it could be used as a method to settle the kids down only to build them up. Most of these happen at the beginning of the film – you take a hyper kid and their hyper friends, stick them in a film and where can you go from there? The answer: Death. Then they’re settled, they’re in shock and the only way to go from there is up. You take them up the only way a children’s film knows how.

[Spoilers over]

http://i.imgur.com/kjbnzKNl.jpg

A slight detraction I know, but one I found worthy of inclusion regardless. Nevertheless, it supports my view of Paddington itself, in that by bringing the mood down early doors, it was able to build up this pile of foolish, silly and good natured fun, that left me grinning from ear to ear. It is a film that is near impossible not to like. I am sure there will be it’s detractors, those that feel the bear looked less like a teddy and those that feel it has ruined their childhood.

To those I say, get a grip. In my humble opinion, it is utterly charming, effortlessly enjoyable and one of the better adaptations in recent years. If you want to watch something to warm the inside, you cannot go far wrong with a marmalade eating, calamitous yet sweet bear whose profound and carefree nature is something we could all take a piece of. In fact, I’ll leave you with this quote from the bear himself;

"Mrs Brown says that in London everyone is different, and that means anyone can fit in. I think she must be right – because although I don’t look like anyone else, I really do feel at home. I’ll never be like other people, but that’s alright, because I’m a bear. A bear called Paddington."

How adorable, you big silly bear.

Seanny One Ball

March 27th, 2015, 12:45 PM

Seanny, I'm putting together a "Top 10 movies that will ruin the mood/10 movies not to watch with your partner", kind of like an anti-romance film list but based around some form of relationship, I'm trying to avoid just listing the most horrible horrors.

So far the list is;

1. Irreversible (BF + GF)
2. Audition (Man & Wife)
3. Nymphomaniac 1&2 (Multiple Relationships)
4. Maniac (Original or Remake) (Dating)
5. Side Effects (Man & Wife)
6. Eden Lake (Man & Wife)
7. Hard Candy (Paedo + Victim)
8. Enter The Void (Brother & Sister / Dating)
9. Taxidermia (Multiple Stories - Man & Wife eating is my favourite)
10. Requiem for a Dream (BF & GF)

Any you would add?

I would add the following:

Michael (paedo and victim)
Benny's Video (that's one bad date)
Dogtooth (parentally sponsored brother and sister kink)
Spanking The Monkey (mother and son...)
Gone Girl (I know what happens now because I've seen it but imagine how much you'd doubt the woman you were watching it with after the batshit started)

Clive Plasma

March 27th, 2015, 12:59 PM

I would add the following:

Michael (paedo and victim)
Benny's Video (that's one bad date)
Dogtooth (parentally sponsored brother and sister kink)
Spanking The Monkey (mother and son...)
Gone Girl (I know what happens now because I've seen it but imagine how much you'd doubt the woman you were watching it with after the batshit started)

Damn, Michael and Dogtooth are nasty, horrible films. Definitely worthy of being added to the list.

Seanny One Ball

March 27th, 2015, 1:04 PM

I enjoyed Dogtooth but I found Michael to be something I was committed to purely because I had to know how it turned out after I'd turned it on and realised what the fuck I was watching.
Dogtooth just gives me the heebies and I question the artistic merit but it was actually an interesting story. I think if you want to call a film nasty or horrible you're really talking more about A Serbian Film or things like Funny Games.

I remember reading a review for Michael where the writer says something like "what is up with Austrian film makers?" and I think to be honest he has a fair point.

Seanny One Ball

March 27th, 2015, 1:25 PM

I'd throw Pain & Gain onto that list too because if I ever date a woman who isn't horrendously appalled by that piece of shit film then I will probably have to leave her.
I bought it this week because I read a Kermode piece slating it and I thought "that sounds marvellous" so I got it for £3.

I want my fucking £3 back.
A film that tries to make comedy out of some of the most messed up crimes I have ever heard of...yeah great idea.
I knew Mark Wahlberg was a bit of a dickhead and would act in anything if it handed him some cash but Ed Harris?! Really?!

I did nearly piss myself laughing at Tony Shalhoub though.
That guy made all the bad points so much worse by making the one good point so much fun.

Clive Plasma

April 2nd, 2015, 8:33 AM

http://i.imgur.com/Jlh81wbl.jpg

Sparrow (2008) A.K.A Man Jeuk
(http://movieblort.com/2015/04/02/sparrow-2008-review/)
A mysterious woman (Kelly Lin) captivates four professional pickpockets (Simon Yam, Law Wing-cheong) in Hong Kong.

8/10 - Johnnie To is renowned for his particular style of cult-gangster films, and it was only last year that I discovered him. Having only seen Election 1 (http://movieblort.com/2014/05/06/102-election-2005-original-title-hak-se-wui/) & 2 (http://movieblort.com/2014/09/16/203-election-2-aka-triad-election-2006-hak/) as part of my 365 movie challenge, and then Drug War (http://movieblort.com/2015/01/04/drug-war-2012/) earlier this year, it was a great introduction to the prolific director from Hong Kong. His films on the whole are usually quite violent, often based around the endless battle between triads and detectives, but always remarkably stylish in their execution. These films are anything but one-dimensional, as they all explore social and humanistic themes that transcend the confines of the gangster world. Sparrow drops the violence, but maintains the style and exploration of emotions in what was a somewhat different direction for Johnnie To.

In Sparrow, we follow a mysterious Femme Fatale played by Kelly Lin, as she enters 4 highly skilled pickpockets lives through a series of encounters. She is beautiful, and while they are stealing wallets, she has stolen their hearts and minds. However, there is more to her than just looks, and the simple nature of her mere existence keeps you guessing. Strange men following her or remain the background of most scenes, and she is constantly running from them, what is her story? What is her background? And why these men?

Some of the questions remain unanswered during this film, but with its jazzy soundtrack, intriguing characters, and its disorientating yet captivating finale, it enables you to bypass the plot holes and inconsistencies. For this is a film where style has trumped substance, and the grim, violent, substance that I am more commonly exposed to within Asian cinema remains largely off screen. Instead, this gang of low-level pickpockets injected with the trademark sense of awkward, self-depreciating humour as a result of their predicaments, makes this appear as more of a comedic crime caper than an intimidating, organised crime classic.

It is not an axe wielding triad film, and I am thankful for it. Arty, energetic, funny and full of surprises, Johnnie To is anything but a one trick pony.

Clive Plasma

April 3rd, 2015, 2:38 PM

New Post

11 Movies That Will Not Set 'The Mood'- http://wp.me/p5yG8j-m0

Beer-Belly

April 4th, 2015, 12:49 PM

Eden Lake seems interesting.

Did you ever get around to watching Backcountry?

Clive Plasma

April 5th, 2015, 10:34 AM

Eden Lake seems interesting.

Did you ever get around to watching Backcountry?

Eden Lake is pretty fucked - great film.

Not watched Backcountry yet - did you watch it? Slowly working my way through the Fast and Furious franchise at the moment.

Beer-Belly

April 6th, 2015, 10:09 AM

Eden Lake is pretty fucked - great film.

Not watched Backcountry yet - did you watch it? Slowly working my way through the Fast and Furious franchise at the moment.

I haven't seen Backcountry yet. I love man vs. nature movies though, so I'll see it at some point in the near future.

I've done a bit of an about-face on It Follows over the last week. My issues with the third act still remain, but the film gets so much right that I'm willing to overlook them. I can't help but feel like I would have liked it more if I had experienced it by myself with all the lights turned down.

Clive Plasma

April 6th, 2015, 10:18 AM

I haven't seen Backcountry yet. I love man vs. nature movies though, so I'll see it at some point in the near future.

I've done a bit of an about-face on It Follows over the last week. My issues with the third act still remain, but the film gets so much right that I'm willing to overlook them. I can't help but feel like I would have liked it more if I had experienced it by myself with all the lights turned down.

Good to hear. I might give it a go tonight. Currently half way through 2F2F, much more entertaining than the 1st one.

Also saw Buena Vista Social Club at the Royal Albert Hall last night, and did a 'revisit' of the documentary about them here; http://movieblort.com/2015/04/06/buena-vista-social-club-1999-revisited/

I watched it as my 12th film last year on the challenge, but going back and rewatching a documentary on a band after seeing them live gave it a whole new perspective and appreciation.

Beer-Belly

April 7th, 2015, 4:36 AM

Clive Plasma

April 7th, 2015, 5:24 AM

On the IMDB forum there were some links to various stories about people being mauled by a bear. I don't think there was any one particular story they can reference, but apparently the one the director remembers is when the attack happened, both escaped, and the wife died in the canoe on the way back.

Completely different to the film, so...

Yeah, traumatising attack. Looked like it was a real bear, could it have been with a camera set up in the tent and cleverly edit the footage?

The ending got to me though, they should have dragged that bit out a bit longer...

Beer-Belly

April 7th, 2015, 5:52 AM

Clive Plasma

April 7th, 2015, 12:44 PM

John Wick (2015)

http://i.imgur.com/LVESDWzl.jpg

Here: http://movieblort.com/2015/04/07/john-wick-2015/

Donald

April 7th, 2015, 1:04 PM

Damn I love Taken 3 and John Wick. Seriously good fun.

I think my favorite moment from John Wick was thinking "That guy looks an awful lot like Kevin Nash" and then finding out it was Kevin Nash.

Simmo Fortyone

April 7th, 2015, 6:44 PM

New Post

11 Movies That Will Not Set 'The Mood'- http://wp.me/p5yG8j-m0
500 Days Of Summer could go on that because it's advertised as a quirky rom-com (and some people watch and think it still is), but it's about a guy's damaging attitude towards women and relationships. A tad subtle compared to your other choices though.

Clive Plasma

April 8th, 2015, 4:02 AM

500 Days Of Summer could go on that because it's advertised as a quirky rom-com (and some people watch and think it still is), but it's about a guy's damaging attitude towards women and relationships. A tad subtle compared to your other choices though.

Haha, really? I wouldn't have guessed. Never been bothered to watch that film. Is it worth it?

Mik

April 8th, 2015, 9:48 AM

Seanny One Ball

April 8th, 2015, 10:04 AM

I saw Paper Heart and thought 500 Days would probably wreck me so I avoided it.

I wonder how many steroids JGL has done between then and Don Jon...?

Oh Mik I forgot to tell you I finally got round to watching the Red Riding Trilogy. Did it in a one night sitting and despite it being a gruelling and emotional journey that found inventive new ways and angles to slap me around from I absolutely loved the atmosphere.
The films themselves could easily stand alone without too much explanation into surrounding events as well so it could be picked up and left after each part but I read somewhere that it's a trip if you do it all in a row so I did. Garfield was superb, Considine was his solid, dependable self and Mark Addy was there to bring it full circle with a much more damaged character but a truly revealing plotline.
I might have to get my hands on the books.

Appropriate Adult had me gripped for the first 100 minutes and thoroughly angry at the daft cow for the last 20 or so. Dominic West and Emily Watson were top class though, the whole thing was great but the truth at the end was just enough to get me raging that someone could fall for the likes of Fred Wests lies!