Film reviews part 16 (in order of viewing)

To Leslie (2022). 23.3.23. A thoroughly convincing slice of Americana with excellent performances all-round. A brilliant directorial debut. 8½/10

Pain and Glory (2019). 22 / 23.3.23. This is one for European-film-loving intellectuals, who are likely to see all sorts of allusions. For laymen like me, it was still very watchable apart from the final third – two dull contrivances which resolved the tension in Salvador’s character, but at the expense of entertainment. 6/10

Chariots of fire (1981). 26 / 27.3.23. Intelligent, mature, original, and possessing considerable flair, let down occasionally by some dialogue and situations seeming a touch two-dimensional. 8½/10

Clemency (2019). 28.3.23. Just ok. A touch worthy and ponderous. 7/10

Young offenders (2016). 30.3.23. Fresh, exciting and very funny. Not high art but a great film! 8½/10

Wildlife (2018). 1 / 2.4.23. Low-key, two-dimensional, claustrophobic drama. Good for one watch. 7/10

Airport (1970). 29.4.23. Radio Times apparently gives this three stars (as a rule, I only review films given 4* or 5* by the RT – see my “film reviews recommence” post of 4 November 2021) but this was a film I wanted to watch. The first half is low-key but superlative entertainment: intelligent, non-clichéd dialogue so different from most modern films, and so many plotlines (yet it never seems crammed). The sincerity of the action in the second half is spoilt for audiences who have seen the Airplane spoof films, things are perhaps just a little rushed towards the end, and Burt Lancaster doesn’t quite do it for me personally (he comes across a little stagey). But as far as I’m concerned – and many would disagree - this beautiful film is almost as good entertainment as you can get, and I would argue especially interesting for open-minded and unprejudiced modern audiences who might not have seen films with this sort of style and sophistication. Postscript: after reading the Wikipedia entry re “Critical response”, I seem to be very much in the minority about this film, but that’s ok and the reviews are contemporary; it deserves a reappraisal. 9/10

School for Scoundrels (1960). 29&30.4.23. I caught this film by accident. As with Airport, the RT gave it just three stars, and again as with Airport I think they got it very wrong! This is an absolute hoot from start to finish. 9/10

Disobedience (2017). 6.5.23. After the joy of Airport and School for Scoundrels this perfectly adequate, write-by-numbers film felt unimaginative and unoriginal, although I’m sure many critics have declared the opposite. The sex scene stood out for being gratuitous / unnecessary: we had already seen them passionately kiss! [I see it was directed by the same man as A Fantastic Woman, which I didn’t think much of either – see review above.] 7/10

The unlikely pilgrimage of Harold Fry (2023). CINEMA. 10.5.23. The “profound” and allegorical aspects were a turn-off and I didn’t like how the film skimmed over the practical aspects, e.g. where he ate and how he came by accommodation; and also all the people following him didn’t ring true. But the central performances were fantastic, as you’d expect, and there was more than enough to make it enjoyable. I somewhat agree with Peter Bradshaw’s Guardian review, as quoted in Wikipedia: "Whilst it was “impeccably acted, sincerely intended and often beautifully shot” there was something “unsatisfying” in the “solemn, self-conscious fantasy””. 7½/10

I also watched about half of the below films but did not get into them sufficiently to continue watching:

Children of men (2006). 10.4.23. 

Mean girls (2004). 8&9.5.23.