Change Your Image
jongreatorex
Reviews
The Reckoning (2023)
Grave misinterpretation of a child's suicide.
If you watch the BBC's current offering of 'The Reckoning' starring Steve Coogan, you can see the manner in which the production company have skewed the tragic suicidal death of Samantha McAlpine in 1971 to be somehow sensationally connected to the monster Jimmy Savile.
This is wrong because the real perpetrators, (and it takes simple intelligence to discover their names in the BBC redacted documents that were made publicly available); can now breathe easy.
Google her name and you can follow the paper trail to discover the real Radio One DJs involved.
Savile was indeed a horrible man, but their were others in the BBC during the early seventies who prayed upon innocent girls
Incorrect on many levels.
Devil in Ohio (2022)
The Title Font Tells All...
OK, so you have a mini-series and a considerable budget. You are aware that the novel was so-so for the teen market; but you're not so sure about the lackluster screenplay.
Dilemma !
Some 'bright' advertising spark comes up with an interesting diversion - "Why don't we play around with the film's font, eh ?"
Brilliant !
"This is the plan. Rather than simply render 'Devil in Ohio' on the promotion, let's play around with these three words to make it 'cooler' ?
"Why don't we start the title with a capital 'D'; albeit transcribed like something from an early bible. But, and here's the start of the 'wohness'; let's make the following 'E' strange and beguiling - give it an out-of-the-ordinary elongated bottom tail, foreboding and mysterious. The 'V' and three remaining 'I's' we'll keep to the King James bible font, otherwise people wouldn't be able to read the full title properly. But...and here's the genius, let's make the final 'L' of this first word into a pictogram of Devilish deviancy.
Then, for the boring word 'In', we can always mirror the letter 'N' to make it appear 'unnatural' and grossly mysterious.
Finally, for 'Ohio', we can not only substitute the deformed, upper case first letter, and substitute it for the larger last, but we can also include a random 'H' in there.
To make it equally appalling, sorry, appealing, why don't we include a daylight wide shot of a cross-ways in a maize field that doesn't actually appear in the series itself ?"
Thank you for the money - this one took a great deal of time to assimilate.
The Gentlemen (2019)
Hugh Grant 'un-typcast' (sic)
Yes, let's agree. This is most definitely a GR film - it possesses all of his trademarks, (which appear to have monetarily increased over the years), but definitely 'Mr Machismo'.
What delighted me was a stand-out performance by Mr Grant. Even without the 'foppish-boy' looks of yesteryear, (sorry, we're the same age, so I can empathise with the wrinkles and hair colour); the Oscar Wilde acerbic nuances and the 'Golly, gosh, 'crikey' or 'my days', vocabulary is replaced by a rhotacism that encapsulates his character. I desperately wanted him to remove the dark glasses because I could faintly see his eyes, behind them, adding more insecurity to his bravado. Tonal qualities; pace; intonation; timing; diction; enunciation; reaction and colloquial/demographic expression were all there in a completely believable manner.
Put to the back of your minds 'Notting Hill; L. Actually, and 'Bridget' - this is proper acting, and at last we have an actor who can realistically play 'Character', rather than their own interpretations of themselves. FILM: Typical GR. (Have a go at a comedy, burly man) 8/10
Hugh: 10/10 - now you are becoming a 'proper' actor.
Belfast (2021)
Judi Dench - YES !!
OK; I have been aware of 'Dame' J. O. D's peerless performances for all of my life. No, I did not have the good fortune of seeing her early Shakespearean outings, ranging from Juliet, through Ophelia to Lady Mac. Nor did I witness her acclaimed Sally Bowles in 'Cabaret'.
No, for me, Dame Judi has been synonymous with 'upper class'; unassailable female roles: Shakespeare in love; Jane Eyre; Bond's 'M'; in fact any English high society socialite during the Victorian Era. With her somewhat R. P. voice and possibly unintentional air of superiority, I confess that she did appear supported by a broom handle.
What an absolute joy, therefore, to watch her performance of Granny in 'Belfast' - to see and believe 'why' the esteem has been lauded upon her. Disconcertingly odd to see her physical persona - completely at odds with other performances I have witnessed. But what an actress ! You know the adage that foppish Hugh Grant seems type-cast in much the same way that Jason Statham always appears to play himself ? Well, take Dame Judi and provide her with a gritty character, an un self-conscious script and you reveal the true talent of the actor. Being a Kate Winslet/Emma Thompson aficionado, Judi Dench Proved to me, last night, why she is considered one of the greatest of her generation.
Marvelous.
The Last Duel (2021)
Thetford Forest once again...
Gladiator's opening scene between the Romans and The Huns was shot in Thetford Forest, in the east of England. A comfortable, out-of-studio location for Mr. Ridley Scott.
The opening of 'The Last Duel' may have expected the grandeur of the former, set in a fighting quadrangle just outside 'Notre Dame'. (Incidentally, there was no need for scaffolding - it was built 200 years before), yet the reliance on 'looking down' on the action bothered me.
I'm very familiar with Mr. Scott's tracking shots from earlier films, where the audience was engaged with the action. But here, the CGI ruined, for me, what would have been a visceral film. There's no need for an extra to walk a cow through mud, while children play a choreographed game of 'chase' behind. Nor the plethora of artificial 'beasts' being turned over an obvious gas-fired spit.
And the actors: Well, we know that Jodie Comer has probably the most mesmerising, darting eyes and scrunched forehead of upcoming actors - her ability to step out of being Ms Comer and inhabit character is remarkable for a 28 year-old performer. Matt Damon, being one of the authors of 'Good Will Hunting' has always been high in my estimation - one of the most articulate scripts I have ever taught. Adam Driver, sadly, is unconvincing in this role.
If Ridley Scott wanted an individual where the audience could concur 'Yes, he's a sexy, handsome man' then maybe someone ten years younger, more handsome, and closer to Cromer's own age would have been more apposite. Sadly, he comes across as a hypothetical progeny of Alan Rickman. That is not meant disparagingly, more a visual conceit.
The concept was good. The use of celluloid, frugal, the stories of each three were sadly inconsistent.
When Jean de Carrouges had the knife in Jacques Le Gris mouth and he protested to the end it was a consensual coupling, how many of you questioned all three versions ?
Coming Home in the Dark (2021)
Going Away to the Light... Continuity Gone Mad.
Was this intended to toy with my intelligence ?
Was it intended to be retrospective, topical and 'hip' ?
Was it intended to be used as a continuity advisor's training tool ?
So we start with a panoramic red sky that repeats itself, frame-by-frame at the end of the film. A Mercedes with its passenger door open - Ooh, tantalising. No explanation whatsoever. (The 'Mandrake' character - yes- the vegetable that 'screams' when it's pulled from the ground - or, as we witness later, a boy of the wrong age, {1988}; has it's swastika removed, not by a wire-brush, but by a nylon one {Now that would really take some doing}
A couple with their two adolescent boys, (who, incidentally, cannot be their biological siblings as inferred by the length of their relationship later in the script) scramble for ages over rugged terrain only to 'coincidently' bump into the vegetable that spends it's time muttering incoherently. Now what's the chance of that ? A country of 4.93 million, the size of the UK, and you just happen to stumble out of a stolen Merc and engage with somebody who you can easily identify 33 years later ?
But there's more - white picket fences in the rural outback that appear to be endlessly cloaked in night. I swear I saw the exact same driving footage on three separate occasions. Let's forget how many shots the weapon holds - anything from 10 to 15. Good job that they left the power on the outside lights of the abandoned former reform home. We glimpse 'Hoggie's' wife spluttering in the river - should we pursue her ? Nah, makes it complicated. And if I put a screw in a tyre of a vehicle, I doubt very much that it would suddenly cause a blow out tens of miles down the road. And what is with the countless images of boys' knees and feet with no contextual reference ?
Lucky that they were in driving distance to the Reform Home and knew exactly where they were going.
Just a couple of suggestions. If you use brute force on a man's head with a fire extinguisher, hitting the face many times, there's a good chance that you may break the nose and not leave the complexion damage free. Similarly, if you strike a man's head with a rock larger than your hand, again with all the strength that you can muster - I do this several times, it is doubtful that the person can sit up and take pot shots at you following such damage.
Flawed from start to finish - a real sad waste of celluloid.
Midnight Mass (2021)
Lars Von Trier in British Columbia
Complemented by a soundtrack of over 35 different pieces of music, each of which meticulously selected to add meaning and depth; enhancing the progress of the narrative; this 'third addition' subtly communicates Mr. Flanagan's approach to this series.
This is an intellectual piece of work that attempts to convey good and evil through the well-trod path of religion and quasi-horror. Surprisingly, 'good' rarely shows its face, other than with a naïve visage. But 'evil' abounds, not so much with neck-chewing monsters, but with verbatim passages extracted from The Bible. Now, I appreciate that this isn't for everyone - if you want a 'Living Dead' scenario you're going to call this boring and 'wordy', leaving most probably one to four stars at the most. That is your prerogative, and I completely respect your sense of betrayal from the accustomed 'norm.' But what Mr Flanagan has done here is to extrapolate his own views/feelings/emotions/concepts and ultimately 'unknown apprehension' of what happens when we shuffle loose this mortal coil 'from whose bourn no traveller returns' - what happens then, eh ?
So, those who comment upon the unnecessary length of the monologues are possibly missing the point. His, (Mr. Flanagan's), premise is to entertain, which he does favourably well. But the main essence of this series can be found in those monologues. Other trappings such as plot, special effects, character development and the like are merely sidelining the writer's desire to rise above blood and gore and to look closely, with existential eyes at the end of life. In my opinion he has managed to get this off his chest with a fairly well reasoned response that debunks the medieval myth of 'heaven'.
I confess that there were parts which I found elongated and others that appeared to be pandering to the 'Hill House' brigade. Having said that, the only sincere toe-curling moment for me was the shuffling together of the 'Abide with Me' crowd towards the end.
For myself, Lars von Trier's 'Melancholia' was far more resonant, producing a similar final acclaim without requiring Stephen King's shock tactics.
I also consider that the proliferation of blood-soaked walls and clothing an unnecessary detraction from the theme. However, 'The public gets what the public wants' is crucial for cinematic success. If, one day, a series such as this, dispenses with such overt obvious pictorial 'proof', and the imagination is permitted to examine and interpret independently, then maybe the bar will be lifted. What you do not see informs the level of your anxiety and fear.
Big shout out for Hamish Linklater's acting. His skills and expression were exceptional. Hopefully, he will get similar scripts in the future. His performance was intuitive and remarkable. A gifted actor worthy of the highest acclaim, despite some incoherence emotional deliverance towards the end, (which maybe due to my television's audio settings !!)
His phrasing, pausing, refreshed thought, and delivery were remarkable, like seeing De Niro or Pachino for the first time. He has it.
Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood (2019)
This is Fiction, just Fiction.
If De Nero and Pacino had collaborated to make a new film, (hang on, there's 'The Irishman', forgot that), would we expect a 'Godfather Pt 4', or, 'Casino'; 'Goodfella's'; 'Serpico'; 'Heat'; etc. With the same gun-toting violence that accompanied them ? What would we have ? Well, in a word, 'repeats'.
Repeats that cannot fulfill their immediate original excitement because time, and we, have moved on.
So what Scorsese and Tarantino have done is to move the 'swashbuckling' into a new phase and direction, where character, not CGI, (albeit sometimes necessarily present), dominates.
I agree, it's not for all - blood soaked walls and Sergio Leone's heavy overcoats falling onto wooden sidewalks still arouse. But more of the same ? Again and again ?
To repeat, this is fiction. Fiction imbibed with period references, that's all.
If the Tate-LaBianca murders of 1969 had not occurred would there be such a furore ? Tarantino has deliberately distanced himself from this by not being sucked into its factual history, creating a fiction.
Pitt and Dicaprio; De Nero and Pacino are wholesome, three-dimensional characters deserving praise. We should be thankful, not only for Scorsese and Tarantino's earlier, visceral works, but their maturity as they develop into hardened observers of the human condition.
Seven Worlds One Planet (2019)
Unequalled...period.
It does seem unfair when attempting to compare a masterpiece, (as this most definitely is), against 'popular', well-executed fiction 'blockbusters'. (A look at IMBD's most highly-rated films shows public discerning proof of this).
As indicated, four years in the making, editing many thousand of hours footage, would render a 90+ minute slice of popular entertainment rather inconsequential by comparison.
It is more a reflection of our world and its precious diversity that is magnificently portrayed here.
Yes,it is 'political' exhibiting how we, (as a supposedly superior race ), are systematically annihilating creatures that do not have our capacity to protect and preserve this beautiful planet that we are so privileged to inhabit. But we do have an obligation to tell future generations why their ancestors did what they did to reduce diversity.
Place yourself 100 years from now - would 'The Shawshank Redemption' resonate over how our present generation disregarded, exploited and left the planet they were left with ? The choice is yours.
I'm not an activist in any form - have never been on marches, signed petitions, called for changes, to my shame. I'm like the majority of the people who read this - benignly concerned, yet apathetic. I'm an old failure. And I'm truly, truly sorry for my lack of action. SHAME ON ME.
Fences (2016)
Denzel Washington - A Flawless performance
Oh, to have been a 'fly-in-the-brain' when Denzel Washington first imbibed August Wilson's character of Troy. It's straight out of the school of Arthur Miller's dysfunctional,dystopian 1950's, social family inertia, where dreams can never aspire or be allowed passage to a better place. Yet 'Fences' is even darker. At best Willy Loman could elicit, if not sympathy, then a degree of empathy with his audience, Troy, on the other hand, is manifestly without redeeming features. As an audience, we instinctively or intuitively understand that his motivation and actions were constructed, albeit with an unconscious misplaced belief, for personal gain and recognition. This is what sets him apart from Miller's protagonist. With Troy, 'self, self, self' overrides all of his actions. The only area in which he could glean a smidgen of morality, is his association with his brother, but even here he is left bereft, stealing from the traumatized war veteran. It has been said, in previous reviews, that Mr Washington completely and succinctly inhabits Troy's character. In the entire picture, not once are the audience given any facial expression, any physical gesture to feel that Troy questions his actions. His fervent belief that he is correct in all he does and says produces an actor of extraordinary performance skills. This performance by Mr Washington elevates him into the select pantheon of actors that can be mentioned in a single breath. What makes his performance unique in my mind, however, is that he sustains a character devoid of pity/sympathy, throughout, who the audience despise to their core, yet can acknowledge that this is one of the greatest presentations they have ever seen. This is the ability of a truly magnificent actor.
La La Land (2016)
Tinky Winky Land?
Lets set the parameters. An Oscar-winning film, or any above-average picture for that matter, needs to fulfil criteria that sets it apart from the 'average'. It requires a breath of innovation, story-line, integrity and impeccable acting that levitates the subject above the norm. It needs also to vault hype and financial remuneration. To create a musical, which, I believe 'La La Land' aspires in many parts to be, there has to be a synergy between book, score and choreography. Sadly, for this viewer, not one of these three elements can be considered by any stretch of the imagination,'exceptional'. It's triumph is evident in it's cinematography and lighting, which were largely outstanding. But the remainder? The story is typical Hollywood fare - predictable without significant twists or intellectual excertion. Essentially, nothing out of the ordinary happens and the blandness creeps to a predictable end. The acting is OK. You would expect as much from someone of Gosling's ability, but I hope that one day he'll be provided with a script that alienates him from the type-casting that befell Hugh Grant, with a diversity that De Nero was astute to select. Choreography? What choreography? That brief moment with the bench is all that taunts the memory. Singing - best not go there. Marni Nixon could have played both roles.
And I read today that it's up for 14 Academy nominations. Figures. Trump was successful so there's no reason this will not win.
Emperor's new clothes 'n all.
By Our Selves (2015)
Awful
Toby, it's OK, you probably had no idea what drivel that this would eventually become. Yes, distance yourself to the margins of the universe; hopefully, unless it's some cringing "and we have now something you really do regret" moment; you can be forgiven by not uttering a syllable in this pretentious twaddle, that looks like a GCSE p' poor performance Drama moment, unworthy of comment. To say it's 'crap' dignifies it into worthy of debate. We will not go there. Filming my fish tank is far more productive of dissertations into life's meaning, let alone one of this country's greatest poets. What annoys more than anything is that some individual duped well-meaning sponsors into parting with their readies for this tripe. Be ashamed, 'though you're probably drawing interest on what you pocketed. And we wonder why the US produces better films than we do for the same budget. Don't let this person anywhere near a camera if you wish to retain the dignity of British Film - wait until they're older and can cope with subtlety and intelligence.
Macbeth (2015)
Shakespeare, if you saw this, I'm so, so sorry
So, the Australian director's producing 'Assassin's Creed' later this year. That figures.
For my sins, I actually did nod off a couple of times during the screening of this drivel. Couldn't agree more with the comments regarding the belches of grumbled, mumbled dialogue that frothed like a soiled nappy from those poor unfortunates.
Did anyone else feel that this painful tripe was so transparent in it's futile attempt to be 'trendy' and deeply significant?
Artistically, (and I use that word loosely), it was a mismatch of sound and vision - from the silly pretend blood daubing virtually every male forehead, to the mistake of purchasing too much quilted material by the costume department.
On a plus side, it would make a great stomping ground for male grooming products. The ultra close-ups of a male beard actually growing were unsurpassed.
Throw a couple more shrimps into the cauldron, Bruce.
Voyna (2002)
Rambo Vacation in Russia ?
The general ambiance of the film is acceptable - it's a 'boy's own' romp through the outback to rescue a fair maiden. The most outstanding quality belongs with the topography - the rugged terrain is almost a character in itself, providing a worthy obstacle and adversary, handled very well by the cinematographer, creating great vistas. The predominant colour here is green...which brings me to the acting ability of Ian Kelly. Rarely have I been so embarrassed with a compatriot's lack of skill. I sincerely wanted to curl up with shame. Whoever told this buffoon that he could act, needs speaking to. When we first encountered him and he uttered the opening of Hamlet's 'Quintessence of dust' soliloquy, I nearly fell off my chair, mouth agape. Surely this was a joke...and a pretty poor one too, considering the gravity of the subject matter. But no, Kelly was for real, he really did think that he was acting. Unbelievable! By the time he was hamming it up, (like no other could, even on a bad-stage day), near the end; wielding a gun and screaming like a banshee, the tears rolled down my cheeks. Absolutely fantastic - priceless. Think Alan Partridge playing Sylvester Stallone and you'll get the picture. All that money spent on the production and Kelly, a vortex of ineptitude, brings it crashing down. Wonderful.
The Falling (2014)
Brawling with 'The Falling'
Regardless of how beautifully filmed; wonderfully acted; craftily directed, and sympathetically scored a film may be, without a half decent plot and script, it will 'fall' flat on it's face. I think that the majority of reviews here, question the credulity of those individuals and organisations who deemed it fit to invest good cash in this farrago of misplaced ideas and concepts. Sad, really, because, retaining the cast and film-crew, (not the film editors, or appalling film score), with a good, powerful, intelligent script, this could have been so much the better. Instead, what we get are anecdotal stereotypes of stock characters, uttering senseless, sixth-form 'man that's sooo deep', lines, with every metaphorical visual cliché that you could imagine. And the ending? someone could have had the decency to properly edit Maxine Peake's movements, even if that was the most predictable cliché of them all. I'll tell you what would have been better - final close-up of Lydia's sleeping, twitching face. Slowly, she opens her eyes and stares into camera. Ultra CU of one final, heroic twitch as she mouths the line..."And yeah, it was all a dream" CUT!
Spectre (2015)
Glamour, Glitz, Cliché and Grit!
The success of the franchise speaks for itself; and 53 years longevity is, by any account, a magnificent triumph in the fickle world of film. Seven 'Bonds', (and yes, we must include David Niven), have brought excitement, joy and awe in equal measures as each new generation finds delight in this form of personal escapism. What separates this particular patent, against other mammoths, such as 'Star Wars' and 'Indiana Jones' et al, is a more coherent association with the protagonist, regardless of your sex. Bond is an iconoclast, first and foremost, yet with a dispassionate approach to his work. Yes, there are traces of personal ambition, notably when the physical objects of his desire are compromised, but the sense of justice to 'King and Country' are constantly to the fore, and 'personal gain' has no place in his agenda. This 'remoteness' is what feeds the public's imagination, and consequently, the enigma. Comparisons with previous incarnations are, on the face of it, quite unfair. You can't tell a contemporary 20-year-old, prejudicially, that Connery was the better, just because when you were 20, to you,he was. Each new cohort, (God, I hate that word), finds solace in their own heroes. I've just returned from viewing 'Spectre', and, like the previous three Craig films, was entertained, wonderfully. My ancient frame has seen nearly all of the previous renditions in the cinema, and yes, I look upon the visual effects from the earlier outings, now, as being somewhat twee, however, at the time, they were cutting-edge and totally innovative. Two days ago I saw 'Crimson Peak', a tour- de-force in CGI artistic presentation, from a master of the genre with all the tell-tale signatures of the director. Something that audiences will eventually, I hope, come to ignore, in favour of 'realism' in movies. Time will tell. In 'Spectre', the only overt CGI that interfered with me was the...well, I'd better not say, because it's a spoiler - but if you are yet to see it, you'll know what I mean. Connery had just turned 31 in his first Bond film, and finished at 40; Craig was 37 in his inaugural, and 48, now. Both had ten good years at the job. Having said that, Moore was 58 when he made 'A View to a Kill', so there's hope for all of us!