Change Your Image
adamjohns-42575
Reviews
The Wrong Man (1956)
Not much wrong with this one.
The Wrong Man (1956) -
I could see why this film was added to Stephen Schneider's Top 1001 Films To Watch list, because the story definitely brought something a bit different to the screen. Overall I liked it and the message it was sending. The way that it depicted how a false accusation could cause so much trouble for an innocent man and how "Innocent until proven guilty" didn't seem to be in every policeman's vocabulary.
As it was based on a true story I did have to wonder if the procedures used to determine his innocence or guilt and how he was treated in general were the way that the police did things back in 1953, because it all seemed very peculiar, even by the different standards of that time that I was aware of.
And even though there was something creepy about Manny (Henry Fonda) that made me wonder if it actually was him that had robbed the places and whether he might not be "The Right Man" I couldn't help but feel sorry for him. Perhaps it was the fact that Henry was quite wooden in his performance that made him a bit odd, but even though I could feel the tension for the poor man and his distress at the lack of interest and support that he received once the trial started, it was mostly through the direction and editing rather than Mr. Fonda's acting that I could sympathise with, because there was very little emotion portrayed by him.
I was also reminded of 'Witness For The Prosecution' (1957) where the defendant wasn't as pure in his intentions as I was lead to believe at the beginning of that film. That put a doubt in my mind about Manny as well. Although the title itself essentially proclaimed his position before I even started watching.
There was nothing in the construction of this film to report on for good or bad regarding lighting, sound, costume, location, set and so on. It did what it needed to without exceeding expectations or missing the mark entirely.
How do you prove your innocence in a world that's already condemned you and when your wife cannot be with you to support you? Watch this film and you might see.
I'd like to see a remake, because I really believed that the story had something to it and deserves another try, but if not this one will do nicely enough.
645.82/1000.
The Long Goodbye (1973)
"So long, Farewell, Auf weidersehen. . .!"
The Long Goodbye (1973) -
While I could appreciate that they were trying to set up what sort of character Philip Marlowe (Elliott Gould) was going to be, I did feel that the opening "Cat Food" scene went on a bit too long.
And apart from the extra long time it took to finally get started, I also didn't like the way that the back and forth with the police went when Marlowe was arrested. It was all over the top of each other and chaotic with the sound in general being cacophonous and unclear. There were too many overlapping noises. This was a problem throughout.
I wasn't overly impressed with John Williams out of tune and shrill musical tracks either. Using the titular song repeatedly seemed clever to start with, but then it got to be annoying and by the time the film got half way through I was sick of it.
IMDB has this one down as a comedy, but I definitely didn't feel that. It seemed to be more that Marlowe had a dry sense of humour and that was just his character, not that any jokes had been written in to the script, which for me is what a comedy is.
With a different Director he might have worked in the role, but it was just a bit all over the place for the story to flow properly and for his wit to translate.
I couldn't understand why Marlowe wouldn't just be honest with everyone. It would have made a lot more sense and have been easier on poor Jo-Ann (Jo Ann Brody).
And how did he come to his decisions about what was actually going on, because they definitely didn't show his thought processes or Detective work in any constructive way.
He could have stood to smoke less too, because it almost came across as if they were trying to show how many things you could light a match from.
His investigation of Roger Wade's (Sterling Hayden) disappearance, whilst also trying to work out why his own best friend, Jim Bouton as Terry Lennox, had murdered his wife and then killed himself was a jumble that involved some very shady people.
Henry Gibson had always seemed to play some weird and evil characters in other films, but his Dr Verringer in this one was really creepy and not that necessary, except perhaps as a Red Herring.
And when Mark Rydell as Augustine the gangster arrived the story got really irritating, especially when Phil wouldn't tell him what he knew, even to save his own skin. It wasn't bravado, it was stupid and others suffered the consequences.
Even Sterling Hayden couldn't save the film in his role of Roger Wade. I hadn't realised that he was so tall.
And to start with I couldn't tell if Nina Van Pallandt as Eileen Wade was an incredibly natural actor or really wooden, but I did decide shortly after that she was just bad. I certainly didn't feel that she was overly concerned about her missing Husband Roger.
It was such a typically 1970's production, but with all the bits that made films from that decade bad and with none of the bits that made some of them good. The dialogue was terrible and almost felt ad-libbed at times, but not well.
To be honest and especially after the first ten minutes, all I really cared about was whether the Cat (Morris The Cat) was okay.
I was so close to turning it off halfway through that I even came right out of it, back to the Home Screen. I stuck with it to find out how it all connected, but I really wished that I hadn't. However, by then there wasn't long enough left to bother turning it off.
Sadly it really wasn't worth it. What a terrible ending and then a really unlikely conclusion after that.
Sometimes I wonder what Stephen Schneider was thinking when he wrote his list of 1001 Films To Watch, because I've been unimpressed by quite a significant amount of them. This one was another disappointment, because although I generally love Mr. Gould the treatment here just didn't work.
Give me Bogart's Marlowe instead.
278.91/1000.
Ultimo tango a Parigi (1972)
Gross
Last Tango In Paris (Ultimo Tango A Parigi)(1972/3) -
I can't be the only person who spent the first twenty minutes of this film trying to get the subtitles to come up for the French spoken dialogue? I just couldn't imagine that it was actually supposed to be like that and how was I supposed to enjoy it when I couldn't understand half of it? I felt that I was losing so much of the tension building and thought provocation without that knowledge of what was being said between them. Was it a chance encounter or had they arranged for these strange meetings?
Because of that I was frustrated by everything else too. The previously sexy Marlon Brando in his role of Paul was pretty gross as well.
This may have been a groundbreaking film for the perverts who needed to get their rocks off without going to one of "Those" cinemas, but for me it just felt cheap and sordid, an attempt to push boundaries that I may have found revolutionary or titillating back in 1972 (If I'd been born), but I certainly didn't think that it had stood the test of time, especially when considering films like 'Shame' (2011) and even the TV series 'Queer As Folk' (1999), both of which pushed boundaries whilst also having a story and graspability.
Overall it annoyed me so much that I turned it off. That and I felt that it really wasn't going to be my type of thing anyway. Maybe the good stuff happened after the first hour, but I couldn't wait that long.
Unscored as Unfinished.
Gilda (1946)
"Put the blame on Mame!"
Gilda (1946) -
Ooh what a temptress Rita Hayworth was in her titular role of Gilda. Although her charms have never really had that much effect on me, I actually really enjoyed her performance in this one. She played Glen Ford in his role of Johnny like a fiddle and didn't care when any of the strings snapped. Meanwhile her Husband Balin (George Macready) had his own secrets and while he knew that there was something in Johnny and Gilda's past he let it play out.
Actually I felt that there was a lot of tension built because everyone knew that something was going on with each of the others in the love V (Not a triangle, because that implies it's complete on all 3 sides), but no one would admit to anything or even be truthful about the simplest things for that matter. And while that would normally have annoyed me, have me screaming at the TV "Just tell them", it didn't in this one for some reason.
Some of them had more secrets than others which certainly kept it interesting and I was keen to find out what they all were.
And there were so many other suspicious characters creating intrigue too. Why are there German's in the casino so soon after World War II and how come that little man always wins at roulette when he bets on number two?
I liked the narrative, it wasn't too over complicated despite all of the side stories and seemed to answer most of the questions raised by the conclusion of it.
Their ending together was a bit too convenient, but that was all.
This would be a great film to remake now, set at the same time or modernised, but I wonder whether you would get someone to play the parts so well. George wasn't overly amazing, but Glen did a good job, just not as good as Rita.
628.21/1000.
Things to Come (1936)
Entertaining.
Things To Come (1936) -
It was startling to think that H. G. Wells could see our future even back then and despite his almost ridicule of what he depicted we still didn't learn anything.
Wars and plagues ravaged the planet, but those that remained still found a need to fight instead of learn from the mistakes and rebuild.
Eventually it came to be that society did learn and built a brighter better world for everyone and yet there was still one idiot that stirred up trouble.
I did feel that it was a shame that our future/present didn't become the ideal depicted here, because the film did kind of show that we could do it if we put our minds to it. Perhaps we need to face near extinction for it to happen, oh wait, aren't we on the brink of that anyway?
In general some of the acting was pretty bad even for 1936. Surprisingly Ralph Richardson wasn't exactly on top form in his role of The Boss while some of the others didn't even seem to be trying, but the story saved it regardless.
Funnily enough for a film from 1936 the special effects were really quite good. I certainly would have believed them if I'd been around back then.
The montage of building the new world, showing clean factories and "Futuristic" looking buildings was a bit long though, but not so bad that it was unbearable.
As it came to an end there was a sense of balance as it suggested that advancement for the sake of it could also be damaging, although my gut still told me to stick with Raymond Massey as Cabal.
I supposed that you could say it was a sort of precursor to 'Cloud Atlas' (2012), especially with its repeated use of the same actors as descendants of their first depictions and the similar themes.
I was surprised to see that the only attempts to make it again were a futuristic effort with Jack Pallance* and a dodgy 70's porn looking thing, but it is definitely due for a remake. It's too scary to think how true the subject matter is in our current time of uncertainty though, with floppy blonde haired idiots gaining support overseas while a Napoleon complexed man in mid Europe is determined to have war and I can't even remember which Prime Minister we're on in this country.
As for this film though, it actually wasn't a bad little effort. I will definitely look out for the book now.
619.05/1000.
*The Shape Of Things To Come (1979)
Modern Times (1936)
He don't have much luck!
Modern Times (1936) -
It was an odd combination of sound and silence but I liked it.
An early commentary on the abuses of power in industry and the treatment of the common worker, Charlie was once again standing up for the little man and in a way that I felt was more appropriate than some of his other attempts - The Great Dictator (1940) & Monsieur Verdoux )1947).
I liked that Chuck was still not really very talkative and that most of his comedy was physical, while the others delivered the lines to go with his shenanigans. In my opinion this balance worked where his later efforts to include the slapstick and cutesieness in his talkies didn't.
The Tramp being shy and almost mute was one of his endearing qualities.
As the story developed and The Tramp moved on to other jobs, met a girl (Paulette Goddard) and went roller skating, there was plenty of fun to be had.
I didn't know why Sammy Stein as the Turbine Operator at the first factory was topless all the time though, but I enjoyed it and I also liked the clever effects that, for the time were very well done and some of the mechanisms were very interesting too.
It wasn't the best of his silent movies - I still giggle at the boxing scene in my favourite of his films 'City Lights' (1931) as and when it strays back in to my thoughts - but this was definitely a valiant effort and one to be enjoyed again and again. I'm so pleased that I bothered to invest my time with these films, because it really wasn't a waste at all.
666.77/1000.
Just Call Me God: A Dictator's Final Speech (2017)
Too Weird.
John Malkovich: Just Call Me God (A Dictator's Final Speech)(2017) -
My first reaction to this work was that I hoped the organ music sounded better in the actual theatre, because it sounded awful on TV.
And then just like that I thought Wow, because I couldn't believe how quickly I decided that I couldn't watch any more of it. I had expected it to be slightly odd, because and I mean no offence to him, but John Malkovich has always played some quirky interesting characters, but this was childish, silly and his dictator character was sooo angry it was almost uncomfortable to watch.
Perhaps if I'd put up with it longer I would have been surprised by some fantastic ending, but I prefer my films, TV programmes and stage plays to keep me entertained all the way through, not just at the end.
Unscored as Unfinished.
The Jesus Rolls (2019)
Boring and idiotic.
The Jesus Rolls (2019) -
I only watched this film because of the cult status of 'The Big Lebowski' (1998), which contained the character of Jesus played by John Turturro and reprised here. I liked that film, but this one probably wouldn't have been something that I would have bothered about otherwise, purely based on the synopsis.
Sadly my initial idea that it wouldn't be something I liked was confirmed within minutes, because it was all just nonsense and the characters were idiots. As such I just couldn't dedicate my time to it when there are so many other great films and shows to watch.
Even though I love Bobby Cannavale, he just wasn't enough in his role of Petey to keep me watching.
Unscored as Unfinished.
The Three Caballeros (1944)
Enjoyable enough.
The Three Caballeros (2) (1944) -
As this cartoon started out I felt that it was definitely better than its predecessor 'Saludos Amigos' (1942). It seemed to have more structure and in general a bit more fun that was still as enjoyable today. It didn't seem to be trying to force the geography lesson as much as the first attempt, but let it flow more organically.
I did still feel that it would have been better broken in to three smaller stories though, because it was a lot to take in one go. These sorts of things are cute for fifteen minutes, but lumped together they can be a bit same old, same old.
I liked the animation, although there were many times where I felt that it could be something for stoners to watch when they're on a trip, because it was a bit bright and psychedelic in some moments.
One of the positives I thought was that it would be good for kids who spoke the other languages depicted, although I was quite lost not knowing the languages at all. I know if I was a kid watching Disney films, I wouldn't want it all to be dubbed or subtitled, so it seemed inclusive to a degree at least.
The live action bits however went on a bit too long for me, especially as it got closer to the end of the film when I started to feel that I was ready for Donald (Clarence Nash), José (José Oliveira) and Panchito's (Joaquin Garay) journey to come to an end.
And actually the last five minutes or so of the Mexican bit was really trippy and a bit rapey too, with Donald lecherously chasing women around.
Generally it was not the worst cartoon I've seen and I thought that kids would enjoy the bright colours and cheerful characters, but I felt that if I was watching it with a child that I would have to tell them what a naughty Duck Donald was for being so pervy.
563.52/1000.
Gandhi (1982)
I got a bit political with this review.
Gandhi (1982) -
I came to this one quite a long time after its initial release and so I had seen many other films that had covered the same sort of topics. As such I am now quite frankly sick and tired of films about inequality, whether that be in the form of racism, sexism, homophobia or discrimination of any sort, not because the subject is boring or necessarily makes a bad film, but purely because it still exists and has ever existed. I am so exhausted of this world full of hate and I felt that I might have enjoyed this film more if I could have looked back on the need for Gandhi's actions as something that is no longer necessary, something that was a thing of the long gone past, but I just know that we're still not really much further on from where we were as a species when he left us in 1948.
A few months ago I started watching a film, that was set much more recently, called 'Jai Bhim' (2021) in which a caste system in India was very much still in place. The violence shown in much more detail than in this film was so intense that I had to stop it half way through to watch the rest when I can endure the hate and evil with more strength, because it physically upsets me and messes with me mentally that these behaviours have ever been acceptable, let alone are still considered acceptable by some today. But essentially it's still the same problem in a different time. In fact, from what I could tell, the storyline of 'Jai Bhim' bore a strong similarity to storyline in this film.
I'd been holding on to 'Gandhi' for a while, but I finally had enough time and felt ready to watch it in its epic length. I might have been put off by the more recent rumours of Gandhi not actually being as holy and nice as he was depicted in this film by Ben Kingsley, no matter how well he did in the role. I certainly didn't see Ben as an actor, I only saw Gandhi so that said a lot about his performance
I really hate discrimination of any kind, so I didn't enjoy the theme of this film right from the beginning. I've never understood how anyone could look at another person and think them unworthy of the same rights, let alone governments doing it.
How is the message still not clear? It really shouldn't be so hard to love one another. I'm a British white man so I have never really faced any racism except that of my Welsh and Scottish friends deliberately supporting any sports teams except the English, but I have felt adversity in the form of homophobia and again it just doesn't make sense to me.
That feeling of fighting that was so obvious and ultimately the drive of this film made it a bit draining. Who really needs to see people having to fight over and over again for their freedoms and even sometimes just fighting? The world has enough of that in real life, just watch the news.
I could however see why this effort by Richard Attenborough was so successful and so well revered at its time of release and why it has remained a classic that appears on no less than 3 of the top films lists that I am crossing off, but because I was watching it for the first time over 40 years later and because it wasn't a story that I enjoyed as such, I can't say that it would be a film that I would return to in any great hurry.
It was only a bit dated by today's standards so I couldn't really say that there was anything at fault with it except for the very subject of it and that itself was possibly for only me personally. I just don't like to see such nastiness in the world, although I could only imagine how horrifically realistic it would be if his story was made today. Would it perhaps include Ghandi's own alleged racism though and the servants he was alleged to have had too?
General Dyer's (Edward Fox) part in it made me incredibly nauseous and even more angry. I am sad to say that until I read the IMDB Trivia I hadn't known whether it was an event that had really happened or not. To find out it was filled me with bile.
I did feel that it must have been hard for the British actors to play the pompous asses that were so ignorant to what they were doing, but I also felt a great shame that citizens of my country or the world had ever acted like that. It was all depicted as so matter of fact, like "We have conquered you so you will do what we say even in your own country!". Grrr!
And the way that the people's minds changed so easily with every slight just proved that we are all just inherently evil and that there is no hope for the human race. The atrocities depicted in Calcutta were no different to those that are happening in the world now.
As a biopic of such an historically important man I felt that it covered all that it needed to of his life, even without any information about his time as a child and younger man. And of course it included the momentous events that he brought to be as well making it a double edged story with a good balance of the man and the achievements felt globally because of his actions/inaction.
Based on this depiction I might consider him to be a logical man probably more than spiritual, because it didn't harp on about his religious beliefs too much, but instead showed that he was trying to change the politics of the world while being as peaceful about it as he could, which to me just made sense.
If it wasn't such a long film, watching it would make a good drinking game. Every time someone really famous appears you take a shot. There were lots of them so I'd be sloshed within the first hour and dead before the end of the second, but it might make it more bearable?
It does score higher for being a well made film and despite my dislike for the subject matter, but I have had to take that in to account. Perhaps with a bit more light to balance the dark I might have given it an extra point.
769.29/1000.
Close (2022)
Absolutely heartbreaking.
Close (2022) -
It's definitely better that we live in a world where people stop to think about what they should actually say, although it is a miracle that we as a race ever survived this far without a mindset along those lines until recently. But what this film did in abundance and probably primarily above all else was to show the spiral and the awful things that can come from carelessly spoken words, what they can do to a friendship and how easily the innocence of youth can be lost, just like that.
It started with the two leading boys playing happily and without care about what others thought of them or how they interacted, because no seed of doubt had been planted. Perhaps an experienced adult might look at their relationship and see something more than friendship, but that wasn't essentially explored and I felt that the whole emotion of the story was better for that not knowing either way whether they loved each other like that or not. It wasn't the point that the film was trying to make.
With the start of secondary school things progressed and the tension in their friendship developed. Poor Remi played very well by Gustav De Waele made me so sad, because I really felt what he was going through.
As things moved on further and Leo took the spotlight more I could clearly feel with him too. Eden Dambrine in that role, who had apparently been spotted on a train by the Director, should go far as an actor, because I couldn't help but get sucked in to what was going on his life, by his actions, inactions and what he did or didn't say. Clearly he has a natural talent for acting.
When the TV synopsis said that the film would contain scenes that some might find upsetting I thought that there might be bullying, rape or bloody violence. I didn't think that it would be something so soul crushing.
It kept the pain going so that just when I thought I'd stopped crying and things were going to get better I found that I was reaching for the tissues to blow my nose again, but in a way that was pure and necessary, perhaps even cleansing to a certain degree.
It was a real close up of grief and depression under a microscope. It washed me out a bit, but I didn't feel as if it had been a bad experience at all. Some might say that it was cathartic.
I did get the impression that the translated subtitles weren't always giving me an accurate reading of what was being said and as such I thought that I might have been missing even more substance.
My only other criticism was that there was a bit too much of the Ice Hockey moments, but that's just nitpicking to give some balance to a review that really is only complimentary
It was so naturally filmed and simply acted, slow, but thoughtful and very engaging. A few days later and I'm still feeling the sadness of it, but I would definitely recommend it and although I wouldn't want to watch it every week like 'Star Wars' (1977) or 'The Rocky Horror Picture Show' (1975) it had its own appeal that perhaps only needs to be seen every ten years or so.
909.15/1000.
The Boston Strangler (1968)
Strangled!
The Boston Strangler (1968) -
This film didn't feel as threatening as a piece about a serial killer should.
I didn't feel the danger at all, although the women who opened their doors to the murderer really got on my nerves, as if the reports about them hadn't been all over the news and surely discussed amongst the masses. People across the globe probably took precautions against the danger, reminded that these people are out there everywhere so that depiction made it hard to feel sorry for them and with the exception of Dianne (Sally Kellerman) they didn't really explore the women in any detail to really feel anything for them at all, except as supporting artists that moved the story on. It didn't seem to be focussed enough on any person or group of people to see whose perspective it was supposed to be from. It was very bitty and as such a bit inconclusive for everyone, with no one to specifically get behind as the champion of the piece.
It was also annoying to know in advance who the "Strangler" was played by, because there was no excitement then regarding those interviewed in the investigations during the build up. I knew which actor I was looking out for and what the murderers actual name was, so I would advise those coming to it fresh not to read anything more about this film or the strangler before you start.
It did seem to show that the detectives on the case were doing all they could to find the killer and that was probably the clearest part of the film, but even then, because of the script and terrible sound quality it was difficult to follow.
Even from the beginning the split screen idea was really quite distracting and combined with George Kennedy, famous for his role in the 'Naked Gun' (1988/91&94) films, here playing one of the Detectives tracking the strangler it made things seem a bit comedic too.
As the film progressed the messing with the multiple pictures actually became very irritating and artsy fartsy just for the sake of it. I couldn't tell why people weren't reacting to someone else suddenly being in the same room, because it wasn't actually the case, but just the way the two camera views blended together, especially difficult to distinguish due to the late 1960's dark filming style and filters.
I felt that the whole film was actually a bit unclear and even the dialogue was jumbled at times. Overall it was just not that well made. Some of the acting was bad, some seemed indifferent, but nobody stood out as delivering something special.
I was also annoyed that the Psychic, Hurkos' (George Voskovec) error was never explained, which was very frustrating. It was another thing that just wasn't wrapped up.
I didn't and still don't know the full extent of the stranglers mental health issues, but I did feel that they were perhaps a tad too sympathetic towards them in this telling of the story. I know I would have been pissed with this depiction if one of my family had been killed by them only a few years before the film was made.
In modern terms I supposed that you could compare him to 'Moon Knight' (2022) if Oscar Isaac's characters had a thing for strangling people.
My only other note was that after a while it became really obvious that they'd doctored the nose of the killer to make them look different and to distinguish them from their previous mostly comedic characters.
I might be tempted to watch one of the Made For TV interpretations of the story to see if they did it more justice and offered a clearer explanation of the events, but I'm certainly not in any hurry to do so. However I doubt that I will watch this one again.
475.69/1000.
The Far Country (1954)
Swing and a miss.
The Far Country (1954) -
This definitely wasn't my favourite James Stewart film. His performance as Jeff was fine, but the character really wasn't very likeable which made it hard to take an interest in him. I'm not saying that Jim should only have ever played nice guys, but this one wasn't even a loveable rogue type, he was just indifferent and selfish and even his redemption arc was based purely on revenge and not because he wanted to be a better person.
His cattle herding and gold panning partner Ben was played by Walter Brennan who was done, but really didn't deliver anything new either.
And Corinne Calvet as Renee was really quite annoying too, more like a panto character than a screen actor.
As for Jeff's alleged romance with Ruth Roman in the role of Ronda I just couldn't see it. There was no depth, no passion and no apparent interest on Jeff's part, because he was so self centred that she seemed to be just another thing that existed in the world to be used by him like a shovel or a coffee pot.
The whole film was just a bit of a jumble, one minute cow herding, the next murder, then gold hunting. Nothing really made sense, because the script was a bit lame and it didn't have a clear path. When something finally did happen, it was over quickly and that was the end of the film.
I usually love James, but this story of the Wild West, the gold rush and corrupt law enforcers just didn't have the excitement that it needed and the direction seemed a bit wishy washy.
466.75/1000.
Eric & Ernie (2011)
I definitely didn't think that it was "RUBBISH!"
Eric And Ernie (2011) -
I remembered enjoying this greatly when I first saw it, for its strong castings and wonderful humour, but I had begun to doubt myself after rewatching 'Rather You Than Me' (2008), the similar Frankie Howerd BBC biopic, which didn't resound as well as I had recalled.
My fears were needless though because I thoroughly loved this exploration of Morecambe & Wise's early years.
The script and direction cleverly sculpted the path to define where and how some of the humour might have been formed and used suggestions to represent what I knew that the two jokers became.
Vic Reeves (Jim Moir) and Victoria Wood worked really well as Eric's parents and again I could see how they shaped Eric's onstage persona. I didn't think that the smoking suited her though, looking as if she was an actor with a prop and that she didn't really like it. It sounds nitpicky, but it really jarred for me. I was surprised to see very little about Ernie's parents though.
As for Daniel Rigby as Eric himself, he absolutely stole the show. He had clearly studied the man to get all of his inflections and mannerisms. It was hard to remember that he wasn't the actual comedian in question.
Bryan Dick in the role of Ernie was good too, but he didn't quite pack the same punch. The younger incarnation played by Josh Benson could have been something from an old Wise family home movie though, because he nailed Little Ern.
Overall I felt that the casting was spot on, they all looked and acted like they belonged in that era. I never once thought that I wasn't watching something from that time. The sets, costumes etc were all appropriate too.
Although it was essentially a very well done drama I also loved the humour throughout. I could absolutely see those kids growing into those teens in to those men that I've laughed at for years and how the jokes and affectations matured into their acts.
From their earliest days of pageantry to their first appearance on BBC, It was a very worthwhile piece about a pair of comic geniuses that was highly entertaining. A masterpiece in how to do a biopic properly and one that I would have liked to have seen a sequel to.
919.81/1000.
The Amityville Horror (1979)
Boo!
The Amityville Horror (1) (1979) -
As someone who's not a horror fan I made it through this one without ever feeling particularly scared, because 45 years after its original release it just didn't have the fright factor that it might have done at the time and it didn't help that I couldn't really get that invested in the story either.
While it didn't give me anywhere near enough enjoyment to warrant me sitting through the 100 sequels that followed, I might be tempted to sit through the 2005 remake, mostly for sexy Ryan Reynolds, but perhaps also to see if they did a better job with the effects and the tension of the drama that was missing in this one.
The horror itself was all too subtle really, even for me. And it was still all just a bit tame at the end when the ghostly, demonic occupants of the house really went for it to get the new residents out. Also the weird pig thing was just a very odd choice and had no place in the story as far as I could tell, not being set on a pig farm, focussed on a possessed stuffed toy or something similar.
I felt that it took them an inordinate amount of time to empty their boxes and fully move in too. Whether that was a metaphor for how they subconsciously didn't actually want to live there who knows, but it just seemed like the set dressers and continuity people had forgotten how much time was supposed to have passed.
I also couldn't work out why the Police Sergeant Gionfriddo (Val Avery) was keeping an eye on their house or why he then followed the priest? Although Father Richard Bolen (Don Stroud) did come across as if he should be on a register somewhere?
That whole investigative side of the story was very vague and without enough other context or a resolution felt irrelevant to the rest of the tale.
Other than that I thought that there were some interesting costume and hair choices for Margot Kidder as Kathy Lutz. Were they going for a catholic school girl vibe? Those pigtails? That skirt? Very peculiar.
And I can't be the only one that thinks James Brolin, who played George Lutz, looked like Christian Bale or vice versa? Someone should do a DNA test.
For me a horror film needs to have a good storyline and then be backed up with good performances direction and special effects to keep my interest. This one should have been a good story and for the late 1970's the acting abilities, of the adults at least, weren't that bad but somehow nothing really gelled together.
Maybe it was based too much on the book which was allegedly a fabrication by the Lutz family who were living in the house when these things supposedly took place, but it definitely needed some refinement for the screen and a better screenplay/script in general. Perhaps the weird pig would have made more sense and I'll find out why if I ever read the novel? I also think it needed more interaction with the kids to really drive the fear.
Not one for my rewatch list but maybe the remake will get a try?
516.17/1000.
Limelight (1952)
Disappointing.
Limelight (1952) -
I still titter to myself when I think of the boxing match in 'City Lights' (1931) and I was surprised in general to find out just how much I enjoyed the silent films made and performed by Charlie Chaplin, but I don't think that his spoken word efforts have been quite as enjoyable.
Maybe his style of slightly exaggerated actions and his affectations just didn't translate across to the speaky, but in this particular one I didn't really rate his performance at all. His character of Calvero was wooden at times and his delivery was a bit paint by numbers, without any real heart to it. Going through the motions and lacking E-motion.
The production was all very twee and basic and certainly seemed to have been made with a budget much smaller than his previous efforts.
The fake Thames backgrounds for instance were so badly done and not even necessary for the story to work.
And Chuck looked really creepy as the clown in the Columbine ballet scenes.
I did think that the story of a fading clown helping a damaged ballerina back in to the world of entertainment, whilst also trying to get back on his own feet had potential, but the delivery was just not there. The comedy elements that the Tramp like clown performed were just not funny, as if Charles had tried so hard to make this story serious that he'd forgotten that the comedic moments should still be hilarious to balance that out.
The flea circus dream bit was quite embarrassing to watch, especially when I considered the genius comedy that had come from him before. In fact the next flashback/dream was daft too and even his "Final Act" with another Hollywood icon Buster Keaton was just not worthy of their genius.
I also felt that the timing was odd for them to be putting on shows and touring Europe in 1914, while a war, which they even acknowledged, was raging, unless I missed the point where it said "4 Years Later" or something?
I could absolutely see this working if it was remade today with a few tweaks, because the story was sweet and worthwhile, but I do feel that a new version would have to acknowledge Calvero's own real feelings towards Terry The Ballerina (Claire Bloom) to show how hard it was to set her free, which was one of the huge things that let it down on Calvero's part for me.
Maybe Chuck should have stuck to making silent films, even after they'd gone out of fashion or at least the Tramp's shenanigans could have all been treated that way to keep them relevant, while the supporting cast maybe did the talking. Its too late now I suppose, but I do know that I will probably not look to see this one again, while I will definitely search out 'City Lights', 'The Kid' (1921) and 'The Circus' (1928).
447.45/1000.
Crazy Rich Asians (2018)
Meet The Parents!
Crazy Rich Asians (2018) -
This was a very basic and typical romance with a trope akin to so many of the genre and with nothing specifically very different about it. The only thing that was perhaps unusual was that it was set in Singapore and with Asian families. I'm sure that there must be hundreds of films like it made by the people of Asia and shown there all the time, but this felt like the first time mainstream international cinema had done it (By that I mean the UK and the U. S.), but that still didn't make it special enough to stand out in any way. There really was nothing new here story wise.
In fact with its disapproving parents and family dynasty's it could have been set in the time of 'Mulan' (1998/2020) and worked exactly the same.
I suppose that I was a little bit surprised to see these more old fashioned values still being explored in a 2018 film. I know that Asian culture is full of tradition and that it is very important to them, but there also seems to be a great intelligence and forward thinking in that part of the world too. Maybe it was just an example of one family in order to try to find some drama, but I personally prefer a love story where the couple aren't constantly fighting or upset over what their parents think and can just get on with their own relationship trials.
With that said, I didn't not enjoy this one (I hate to use a double negative, but that really is the way I want to say it). It just didn't really need to be made. 'Bridget Jones Diary' (2001) and 'Pretty Woman' (1990) basically deliver the same thing and with a bit more heart and soul.
All of the actors did a good job except perhaps one of the Cousins that I don't even remember the name of, but the leading men all had a charm and sex appeal about them as did the ladies if you like that sort of thing. Gemma Chan as Cousin Astrid was particularly good, but I was disappointed that Michelle Yeoh, whom I had loved as the more eclectic Santa in 'Last Christmas' (2019), was straight back to her standard angry and serially serious role type in this one, even if she does do it well. No one else made any specific impression of note and of notes in general I wrote very few, because there was little to comment on either way.
It was a standard "Taking the girlfriend home to meet the parents" schtick complete with backstabbing friends and family, whilst various other things are going on in the family unit too. I can't say that I won't ever watch it again, but I don't think that I will search it out any time soon.
629.65/1000.
Deadpool (2016)
I'm very tempted to read the comics now.
Deadpool (2016) -
I really loved this film, it had so much in it to enjoy and really seemed to bring Comic Books and Superhero's to the action genre in a much more typical way. It wasn't just the swearing, nudity, violence and massive explosions, alongside the fantastic science fiction, because it had a certain edge to it as well, like Axel F (Eddie Murphy) in 'Beverly Hills Cop' (1984) or John McClane (Bruce Willis) in 'Die Hard' (1988) and the fourth wall breaking, which was generally hilarious really added another layer as well.
It was a great comedy anyway, his crazy certainly matched mine and it was combined with a superb soundtrack that tied it so well together and helped to give an idea of how things were going to go down or rather that anything could happen, because Deadpool was just so unhinged that he might defecate in to someone's neck whilst 'The Care Bears' theme tune played, although I was thankful that he didn't.
I loved Ryan Reynolds in the leading role, he delivered those throwaways to the camera in such a proficient way and really drove the character, but I also really enjoyed the supporting cast. Karan Soni as Dopinder and Leslie Uggams in the role of Blind Al really gave Mr. Pool great people to bounce his banter off of. Also, and I don't say this often because I'm in to fellas, but Morena Baccarin was beautiful and I loved her character of Vanessa too.
However I felt that Colossus (Stefan Kapicic) was wrong for me. He was too much of a Russian caricature and they played too much on the nice guy that he has always been in the comics. Yes he was a gentle giant, but still actually human and not just a mountain of metal man. His depiction in 'X-Men' (2000) might have worked better here too for its more believable grounding in the real world to balance Deadpool's extremeness.
And he may be incredibly sexy to look at, but for me Ed Skrein really wasn't the best actor for the role of Francis/Ajax. His mockney seemed too forced, although he was clearly evil.
As origin stories go it did a great job of explaining how Wade Wilson came to be Deadpool, the way that his abilities manifested and his reasons behind his choice to be a vigilante. Considering DP only has a quarter of a page in the Marvel Encyclopaedia I'm pretty sure that this film will immortalise him for many years to come.
872.89/1000.
Dumbo (2019)
I never thought that I would give it an 8!
Dumbo (Live Action) (2019) -
I watched the latest "Live Action" Disney attempt to remake 'Pinocchio' (2022) and hated it, so before I decided to watch this one I had a look through the Synopsis and Cast on IMDB. I was incredibly surprised to find that Timothy Q. Mouse did not feature in the cast list, but many other names had been added that I definitely didn't recall from the original. As such I went in to it with some trepidation as to how this film was going to turn out, but I have to say that I found it to be a highly successful reinvention. A better interpretation of the original idea than the 1941 cartoon in my opinion and a million times superior to 'Pinocchio'.
I really liked the additional storylines that were utilised to flesh out the characters that had otherwise, for the most part, been pretty silent in the original attempt.
Colin Farrell's character of Holt Farrier who had returned to the circus where his kids had been left alone since their Mother's death after his time away as a soldier in World War One could have been atypical in that returning military man role, but it was a softer, kinder and more thoughtful father type that he played which was nice and fitting.
He found that the Circus Master Max Medici (Danny DeVito) had sold the horses that he used to ride and that Medici had now put Farrier in charge of a new pregnant elephant that he had recently bought. What followed was basically the same story of a small elephant born with big ears who learned how to use them to fly, slightly adapted to provide the real actors with a script due to the absence of the animals voices. This time the story was told from the human perspective.
But halfway through I found that the main bulk of the story was already done.
Whether the tale that followed was in the original novel I cannot at this time say, but the whole treatment of the story didn't take away from what I did know and only added some decent substance to further what was a pretty simplistic adventure otherwise and continued the tale to make it a bit more worth the ticket price.
Okay, so I might have liked it if Timothy Mouse had a larger part and that he and the other animals had retained their voices, because talking animals have always been a part of Disney for me, but I could appreciate the choice not to go in that direction with this film.
It was very typically Tim Burton in its stylisation and delivery, but I have to say that it favoured his better works, with obvious comparisons to be made to 'Big Fish' (2003).
It could also easily be compared to 'The Greatest Showman (2017) and there were moments when I thought that the Mermaid (Sharon Rooney) or Rongo The Strongman (Deobia Oparei) might burst in to a version of 'The Greatest Show' song at any moment.
In some ways the same camaraderie that featured in both 'Big Fish' and 'Showman' were featured in 'Moulin Rouge!' (2001) too and that was all very clear in the way that the Circus was a family unit in this film, with the same sort of settings, time frames and stylised production.
The lighting was a bit too dark at times though, which has been a consistent problem that I have found with films lately.
I would say that it is a bugbear of mine that these films are all claiming to be "Live Action" yet they are clearly filmed on a set and/or in front of a green screen with extreme CGI elements painted in around the real actors, because it seems to defeat the object of what "Live Action" is.
It's like putting live people in to a cartoon rather than polishing a real film with CGI to enhance it. In fairness I liked what they did mostly.
The fairground in particular was too modern and fantastic as far as I could tell. More akin to the steam punk ideas of today than those of the actual 1920's.
However, I liked how the original films songs were worked in to this one without making it a musical, although again I didn't think that it would have hurt for that element to remain a part of the proceedings. I certainly preferred this depiction of the 'Pink Elephants On Parade' though, because that scene and song had felt so wrong and out of place in the 1941 film and it did seem a bit wrong to show a young "Child" getting drunk.
The main soundtrack otherwise was obviously Danny Elfman for a Tim Burton film. I felt that I recognised refrains from 'Edward Scissorhands' (1990) and 'The Nightmare Before Christmas' (1993) in some moments. That didn't hurt anything though, because Mr Elfman has always delivered appropriate music and this was no exception.
I really did like this film as a whole and I was happy to have been proved wrong by my pre-judgments. Until recently I would have said that the first Disney take on Dumbo's story was terrible and I only came to the conclusion that it wasn't so bad after all when I watched it for maybe the third time in my life and could see some of its sweet simplicity, but I can cheerfully say that I would recommend this new version and repeatedly watch it again in the future.
784.85/1000.
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969)
Fun, but a tad slow.
Butch Cassidy And The Sundance Kid (1969) -
I'm sure that many people will disagree with my opinion on this one. Maybe it will hold a special place in their heart, because they remember seeing it in the cinema or watching it with their parents, but I'm afraid that I found it hard to get excited by watching it for the first time in 2024. In fact it seemed pretty tame even by the standards of 1969.
I quite liked the stylised way that the film was made, but it did make the story drag a bit, with diversions for bike rides and conversation instead of gun fights, shenanigans and whoring, as with a typical outlaw flick. It was really quite slow to start.
Paul Newman always played his characters so well and with such charm and Butch Cassidy was no exception. But unusually for me I also liked Robert Redford's enigmaticism as The Sundance Kid too. It was a bit like watching Paul as 'Cool Hand Luke' (1967) or Rob from 'The Sting' (1973) so none of their performance was unexpected.
I could give or take Katherine Ross in her role of Etta, she neither seemed to add or detract from the story, although the bicycle ride was sweet and something different from the usual western films that I've seen.
If I'd been writing this screenplay though I probably would have made it a more obvious love triangle situation to add some extra drama, because bank robberies in westerns are a dime a dozen, where the romances, as it was here, tend to be something very simplistic and not exactly tender or loving. It might have added an extra layer to the plot and the romantic style of the filming, but I'm not sure how true it would have been to the real story of these heroes of the Wild West.
Although I have seen many films about, Billy The Kid, Pat Garrett and Wyatt Earp I didn't actually know anything about these two outlaws for me to say if the depiction was accurate, but I also don't feel as if I know much more now, because this interpretation could easily blend in with others of the Western ilk that I have seen due to its lack of nothing new.
I did find it odd that it almost seemed as if Butch and Sundance didn't even really know each other that well, which made their friendship seem a bit fake or maybe too new for them to have such faith in each other. Like asking Brian from accounts to be your wingman on your first night out with a new company, only to find out that he has no luck with the ladies. The relationship hadn't established enough to build their knowledge of each other, which belied the stalwart dedication between them. In that respect I might have appreciated more of their origin story, rather than jumping straight in to their later exploits.
Weirdly the musical track, with its inclusion of B. J. Thomas' 'Raindrops Keep Fallin' On My Head', worked, especially alongside the sepia photo montages. However it did feel as if the script should have been a lot more comical to go with it, more akin to 'Cat Ballou' (1965) perhaps. The actors in the leading roles were well known for making people laugh after all.
It just wasn't as action packed as I felt it should have been either. A large part of the film seemed to just be the titular characters running away a lot.
I also noted that even I could probably have tracked them across the country with all of the noise and dust they were kicking up. It was a surprise that they hadn't been caught previously.
In general though the film was alright, but it didn't wow me. Perhaps I'd expected too much from it. The characters are legends of course, as are the actors, so I felt that this particular interpretation had a reputation to live up to and it didn't.
600.89/1000.
Ted & Noel (2023)
It could have been important.
Ted & Noel (2023) -
Ted was obviously not dumb, because of what and how he was fighting for his cause, but his quiet and soft demeanour didn't necessarily show his intelligence or determination. That may have been partly camera shyness, but that meant that I found it hard to focus on what I was seeing. It became a tad dull, although I did want to know how it was going to go. Which generally wasn't anywhere in the end.
I was shocked to find that seniors in homes were treated so badly, especially in such recent history, so I did feel for Ted's cause following the mistreatment of his ex Noel in his care home, where he had suffered with Alzheimers. To hear of many elderly patients going back in the closet when they reach that point in their lives was awful to consider too.
However, quite honestly by the end of the film I just thought that it was bland and didn't really empower the cause it was representing. It made me go "Ahh bless that poor man" instead of "What can I do to stop this!?"
512.31/1000.
Hamlet (2009)
"There Are Four Lights!!"
Hamlet (David Tennant/Patrick Stewart) (2009) -
I was really torn by this production, because there were elements that I did enjoy, but I also found other things more tough to get along with.
It was likely that I'd had too high an expectation due to my love for Patrick Stewart and David Tennant as actors, but I was rather disappointed by Patrick in his role of Hamlet's usurping Uncle. I openly admit that I'm not the greatest expert on Shakespeare, but to me his delivery felt flat and emotionless. Too much like the personage of Captain Picard*, who kept himself removed from his crew to manage them with authority more easily, and not enough like a wicked and murderous conniving King. Perhaps the delivery was just too subtle, but I didn't think that his heart was in it. He was still good, but not the Shakespearean brilliance I had perhaps expected.
I did however like his portrayal of Ham Senior's Ghost, despite his slightly too solid interactions with his son, which detracted the spooky ethereal element of their meeting.
As for David Tennant as the titular character, he was better in this than I thought he was as the titular 'Richard II' (2013), but there was still a lot of The Doctor** in his delivery. In fairness, he must have put a lot of himself in to the time travelling role, that it would be very hard for it not to stand out in his other performances, there are after all many hours of him as The Doctor recorded, whereas most film roles only normally last 2-3 hours.
His portrayed madness was at times quite genius though and it definitely wasn't a bad performance.
As I mentioned I was torn by the production and some of that was due to the modern style of it. The CCTV imagery wreaked of a Crimewatch reconstruction and even reminded me of some of the early years of William Hartnell's 'Doctor Who' (1963-89) with its black and white top angle. It just jarred with the rest of it.
It also felt like an early 1990's drama made very cheaply or a film made specifically for schools. Certainly at the beginning I considered it to be akin to an episode of 'Dynasty' (1981-9) made with a BBC budget instead of a supersized American one.
As it progressed, I grew used to it all and it didn't hurt it too much, even though there were times when it was a bit too obvious that they were just using the same set from different angles, there was a specific bedroom mirror that appeared in the main hall for instance.
The generally exclusive use of the set then made the one scene filmed outside seem even more juxtaposed and in a bad way. I do tend to prefer these stage to screen filmings better when they are in fact filmed on a stage as it would be for the audience at a theatre. These other attempts can come across a bit too contrived otherwise and hit differently.
When various characters addressed the camera as Shakespearean actors have so often spoken to the audience it also seemed very wrong, as if it couldn't make up its mind to be TV or theatre.
I did like Ham's handheld camera moments though, somehow they felt fitting as a way around the talking to camera idea.
Oliver Ford Davies was enjoyable in his role of Polonius and I thought that Penny Downie was good as Queen Gertrude as well. I also really liked John Woodvine, who was superb as the Player King and could have stolen the whole show if his part hadn't been so small (Ooh Matron).
However, I didn't like the choice to include the clowns as part of that play within the play, it was too silly compared to the rest of it and although the Gravedigger (Mark Hadfield) was good, his performance was a tad too pantomimic too, at least it felt a bit out of sync with the rest.
There were moments where I felt that some of the cast were reading from a teleprompter or perhaps a script taped up behind the camera? They just didn't seem to focus on those that they were talking to and instead kept looking above the camera or to the side of it.
The sound wasn't always too good either. Whispering that wasn't projected for all to hear and a stairwell that echoed and distorted the speeches for instance.
Excluding 'The Simpsons' (1989-) this was the third version of the famous play that I have watched and I have to say that I must really like the story and the beautiful prose, because it does always keep me gripped, partly because of the subtitles which I'd be lost without, but also that there is just such a variety of emotions on display to be enjoyed. I felt especially that the scene in Gertrude's "Closet" (Bedroom) was intense and very well done.
In general the story of young Hamlet, tasked by the ghost of his Father with killing the man who stole his throne, his Uncle, was filled with ups and downs and moments that were full of drama and passion in more than just the way of revenge, but as stated I'm just not sure that Shakespeare as a play, rather than a more structured realistic film, translated certainly in this instance to being recorded anywhere but a stage. The only one that has succeeded in this that I've seen so far has been 'Romeo & Juliet' (2021) with Josh O'Connor and Jessie Buckley.
There is something about the restrictions of the stage that were almost written in to the Bard's stories and of course most likely in the stage directions, so it's harder to fall under the spell of it all in this half and half way.
My only other note was that I did have to wonder if they had filmed each scene in one take, because I know that I wouldn't have liked to have reset over and over to achieve it, to get the same power and passion behind most of the scenes or even to have to reset the props etc at times.
Overall, it was still a very good version of the story, but I just felt that there were a lot of things that could have been more well thought out. I think that I preferred the 2016 interpretation with Paapa Essiedu in the lead role. That one felt more accessible too and had more humour which tended to round it out a bit, because it was frequent and provided balance for the serious moments.
It's a very long play to sit through, even with the ability to pause it for a pee break, but there is a reason why it has always been so well revered. I grow to appreciate our bard Will more and more and this was certainly a respectable working of his greatest tale.
710.95/1000.
*Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987-94)
**Doctor Who (2005-22)
Children of Men (2006)
Definitely worth watching.
The Children Of Men (2006) -
Perhaps when this story was first written and 2027 was further away than just three years, things hadn't seemed so bleak in comparison to the world depicted here, but since that time the world in which we do live has become so similar to that shown, although maybe not quite as extreme just yet, that it was tad scary to see how easily we could fall in to this horrific "Dystopian" future right now. It was all a bit too true!
With that said, I did feel that the general concept and delivery of the tale was well done and didn't terrify me quite as much as some of the other films I've seen of the same ilk.
The actors all gave good performances and Michael Caine in particular always puts a smile on my face, because although I wouldn't necessarily say that he has a lot of variety, what he does play has always been done with ease and skill.
I probably should have watched this with time to see something cheerful afterwards before bedtime, because it did hit a low note with its contents that showed what a horrible world we currently live in.
Clive Owen's character of Theo got roped in by his ex to assist the only known pregnant woman to a safe place. Years of no births had left the planet in a strange state that saw animosity towards immigrants elevated and factions fighting factions all over, while Theo had almost given up on it all, so it was nice to see his change of heart as well as the tension of the story as he and Kee (Clare-Hope Ashitey) faced challenges on their journey to an alleged safety.
I have to note that the editing towards the very end, during the scene in Bexhill, was very good. So much so that I could notice it for its brilliance, but not so much that it distracted me.
It was a great story, told well, if a little bit frightening in our current climate. It was probably meant as a warning, but some people must surely be using it as a way of life and a template for their supremacist futures, which is more than a tad worrying. As Freddie Mercury once sang "If there's a God in the sky looking down, what can he think of what we've done to the world that he created?".
I would have scored it higher if there weren't so many others like it out there to see and if it had added something specifically amazing to the trope, but I did enjoy it.
769.08/1000.
Fisherman's Friends: One and All (2022)
Fishy, but not Friendly.
Fisherman's Friends: One And All (2) (2022) -
As with the first instalment (2019) I did feel that the production had represented the Cornish as incredibly backwards. They really heightened the yokel local thing too much making the Fisherman's Friends look a bit stupid and not just charming characters as I'm sure they probably are in real life.
I didn't like the territorial behaviour bordering on racism though. I think that it's fine to take pride in the area where you live and might have been born in, but at times their idea that everything that wasn't Cornish was rubbish came on a bit too strong. Things like that could damage tourism in the area, because people won't feel welcome.
Jim's (James Purefoy) angry attitude got boring after a while too. Certainly at the beginning I didn't like his character and I couldn't feel for him or get behind his reasoning either. His attitude towards Morgan (Richard Harrington) was just blind prejudice. It wasn't exactly easy to cheer any of them on for that matter with them all being such terribly silly stereotypical caricatures of Cornishmen.
And Gareth (Joshua McGuire) stood out a mile as someone who did not belong in the music industry in a completely different, but still stereotypical way. The city folk all came across as ignorant to anything outside the metropolis walls too.
Maybe the original script about a trip to Australia had more going for it and the revisions that were made due to Covid striking were the reason that I just didn't see the point of this one. It really didn't have enough going for it to make it worth producing. Especially in a century where sequels have really got to stand up by themselves. It might have worked as an episode of 'Doc Martin' (2004-22) or something similar, but not as something that people paid good money to see at the cinema.
At times I could see that it was a bit cobbled together from pieces of another storyline. It followed the group as they continued with their lives on tour, having found fame in the last film and then their struggle to get their second album produced, while Jim struggled with alcoholism and grieved for the loss of his Father, but although it finished on quite a nice high, it didn't really go anywhere in a specifically interesting way.
I do tend to think that a lot of British films - 'Calendar Girls' (2003) and 'Kinky Boots' (2005) all follow a similar underdog line and this one was no different. I found it even more akin to 'The Full Monty' (1997) in story, as well as in production style and general concept than I had with the 2019 effort. Small town lads auditioning for someone to join their group, while their lives are falling apart, so they can ultimately perform something on stage.
It was a bit silly and some of the supporting artists were not brilliant.
I also thought that it was inconsistent as to what time of year it was too, one minute sat by a fire and another in the sunshine in short sleeves, then back to an overcast sky, which I suppose is typical British weather, but not traditionally how a film is made.
And I know I was there on the day it was recorded (Look for me in the back row at the Minack Theatre), but despite my knowledge that the weather was bloody miserable that day it was clear that they were heavily lighting the "Friends" to the point that it looked Green Screened, which actually seemed to happen quite a lot throughout. And at times I wasn't sure that they were filming the same harbour? The long shots didn't look like the one where Gareth was sunbathing, but maybe it was just the angle.
I also couldn't shake the thought that the incidental background music had reminded me of the song 'Grandma' by St Winifred's choir. It was distracting to try and piece together how the lyrics went with the tune, but that was probably just me.
My final criticism was that I didn't feel that there had been enough interaction and friendship between Jim and Leah (Jade Anouka) for her to say "Proper Job" at the end. She hadn't earned it as Daniel Mays had in the last film. And that was kind of the crux of my overall issue with the film. There was just too much disparity with the country versus city storylines, as if the city part had mostly been forgotten about, because the rewrites had not been able to bring it all together and there was no savvy agent really pushing for the band and bridging the gap between both worlds.
It wasn't a horrible film though, there was very little to offend the general viewer and it was definitely a better effort than 'Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again!' (2018), but although it featured my debut acting performance (Please don't blacklist me, I need this work) and I'd love to say it was great I just couldn't see it as anything more than maybe that episode of 'Doc Martin' A TV special, but not a special film.
443.46/1000.
Pinocchio (2022)
When I Wish I hadn't bothered.
Disney's Pinocchio (Live Action) (2022) -
When most of the cast still need to be animated/CGI'd can we really call it a Live Action film? Especially as the majority of the set still looked artificially created too, although the scenery work was well done either way.
Some of the characters were not so well done though, especially Honest John the Fox (Keegan-Michael Key) and Gideon the Cat and it was clear that their voices were coming from elsewhere, like bad ventriloquism.
Joseph Gordon Levitt was a good choice as the voice of Jiminy Cricket, but he would have been better in the role if he'd had a better script, because at times it was very basic.
And actually the film, for an effort made in 2022, was really quite childish in general. And yes I realised that it was aimed at children, but I mean that it felt like the childish style of very basic kids productions that are farcical and slapstick in a very old fashioned way.
Even Tom Hanks interpretation of Geppetto was too exaggerated and daft. In fact there was very little subtlety to any of the live actors performances. I didn't like the Blue Fairy (Cynthia Erivo) either. And Luke Evans as the Coachman and the kids on the coach were like something from a pantomime too. I was a bit embarrassed for him.
Even within the first ten minutes I felt that the film had been padded out just for the sake of it, but without the need for it in those moments. Because whilst I did feel that the original 1940 offering needed better pacing and a few more pauses to let the story land, it didn't need to drag the opening out any longer.
I did like the small montage that came before Pinocchio was sent to school, because I had felt that the morning of his awakening was too quick for Geppetto to pack him off when I saw it in the original.
I actually didn't mind the changes that were made to the story line as the additions seemed to make the whole thing more structured, the new characters and moments may even have been straight from Collodi's original story, but the general production otherwise was just terrible in my opinion.
I was tempted, very tempted, to turn it off by the time it got to the Circus, because it was just such a lame delivery.
And it was incredibly dark at times. So much so that I couldn't even see what was going on. I'm all for realism, but not to the detriment of the visual. I couldn't even tell it was Luke Evans to start with because it was sooo bad. Make it a full moon if it needs more light, we the laymen won't know that it wouldn't be that bright!
The modernisation also took away any charm that the other one had, as if they hadn't cared about making errors regarding the time it was set or by putting in funny bits that just didn't fit with the rest of the film.
Like why did they turn Pinocchio in to an outboard boat motor?
And why did they CGI the root beer for crying out loud? And did they really need to make Monstro an actual Monster instead of just a whale?
The story followed the same basic path, that I'd seen in the original, Pinocchio's creation and his straying from the right path because his conscience was never around when he needed him. He found trouble at the circus and on Pleasure Island while his Dad was desperately searching for him, which in itself wasn't the worst story, but this version really cheapened it and made it unlikeable.
410.05/1000.