Film reviews part 22 (in order of viewing)

Boyhood (2014). 14-16.8.24. An intriguing, somewhat captivating first hour, but the absence of plot started to irk after that, and the script and characterisation weren’t quite interesting enough to compensate, despite a sprinkling of nice touches such as when the two kids talk together to compete for Mason Sr’s attention. And the constant bonhomie, the superficially messed-up but (of course) absolutely ideal father, the ‘we have to be tolerant and appreciate the gun-loving religious people’ message etc all started to rankle. I can see the (worthy) reasons why it won the Oscar though. 7½/10

Doctor Zhivago (1965). 22 & 25.8.24. A slick, stylish production very much of its time. More focused on the big sweeping picture than having an eye for detail, but some of the dialogue and the love triangle storyline were advanced for its time and impressive. One can see why it would have been highly thought of when it was released. No comparison with, say, Lean’s Brief Encounter though. 7/10

Strangers on a train (1951). 29&30.8.24. The first two-thirds were so much better than the action-heavy and melodramatic final third; this is a regular criticism of mine regarding films, especially perhaps older films. The incidental music was a hindrance. A few nice touches here and there, such as the mother character, just about make this a 7. 7/10

Meantime (1983). 2&3.9.24. Another spot-on Mike Leigh film in terms of dialogue and characterisation, although a few of the characters’ motivations were annoyingly but doubtless deliberately unexplained. Very similar in style and structure to (at least) Life is Sweet. All the cast are excellent but the performances from Phil Daniels and Marion Bailey stand out especially. 8½/10

Get Carter (1971). 7.9.24. An absolutely cracking, tight, first-rate film, and perhaps one of the first really raw, authentic crime films – of which the 1970s are famous – to come out of Britain or America? It needs to be seen at least twice though to really ‘get it’ as there is a lot going on. The scene where he is having ‘telephone sex’, while his landlady is obliged to listen, is captivating, and possibly the most erotic thing I’ve seen on film. 9/10

Waves (2019). 26&27.9.24. The overall message is strong and beautiful; the direction and pacing are good; there is originality, three-dimensional characters (which is kind of the point of the film) and pathos galore; but the dialogue is unexceptional which means it cannot raise its head above the rest. 7/10

Custody (2017). 4&5.10.24. After thinking about this film some time after watching it I am minded to give it a better review than I would have if writing just afterwards. The first hour was excellent in ramping up the suspense, and nuances in dialogue and direction mean there is a more to think about regarding the family dynamics than seems obvious. That said, this is essentially a simple film that does not need to be seen more than once to appreciate it more fully. 7½/10

Deliverance (1972). 21.11.24. I was captured right from the start with its realistic dialogue reminiscent of the Deer Hunter (NOT a favourite of mine) and characterisation, especially of the hillbillies which I would guess is authentic for the time. There is a straightforward and entertaining plot, the cinematography is gorgeous, and the scenes in the water are thrilling. My only gripe is that the film rather tailed off towards the end; it could have been punchier. Still, good entertainment. 8/10

Minari (2020). 5.12.24. Warm and engaging but didn’t fulfil its early promise, and with a damp squib ending (although ‘insightful’ no doubt). 7/10

The blue caftan (2022). 27.12.24. I was wary of watching this film because from (a) the title, (b) subject matter and (c) being Moroccan, I expected pretentiousness. But this was better than expected and – for once with this type of film – I tend to agree with the good reviews, or at least I think there is a lot here for the casual intelligent (not necessarily intellectual) viewer. Well-paced, and well-acted by the actors playing the married couple. 7/10

Planes, trains and automobiles (1987). 30.12.24. This was the first time I’d seen this classic. I am a fan of the more modern film Due Date – which was clearly heavily based on this – and prefer that movie. This is a bit loose, I don’t really feel for Steve Martin’s character (is he miscast?) and the laughs are too intermittent. Good fun though / it never seriously slacks. 7/10

I also started watching the following films, but they didn't interest me enough to keep watching.

Decision to leave (2022). 8.10.24. Watched half.

Memoria (2021). 8.11.24. Watched 45 minutes.

Anais in love (2021). 3.12.24. Watched first half and bits of second half.

 

 

 

Film reviews part 21 (in order of viewing)

Richard III (1955). 27&29.5.24. Perhaps the best filmed production of a Shakespeare play I’ve seen to date, although the rather haphazard, amateurish battle scenes at the end – filmed inexplicably in the Spanish countryside (and it shows)  - spoilt a little what had gone before (and why would a horseless Richard be drawing attention to himself in the way that he did!). 8/10 

A cock and bull story (2005). 4.6.24. A novel idea, which basically works. 7½/10

The big country (1958). 10-13.6.24. Intelligent nuanced Western with three-dimensional characters and situations. Right up there with The Gunfighter, High Noon and The Good the Bad and the Ugly. 9/10

Shiva Baby (2020). 13.6.24. Claustrophobic – which was doubtless the intention (to reflect the claustrophobia felt by Danielle). Anyway, this is all good stuff for what it is (which isn’t much), and wisely kept to a very short duration (78 minutes). 7/10

Close (2022). 14.6.24. After a boring start where I thought it might turn out to be yet another pretentious French-language film, this steadily improved and ticked all the right boxes but without great flair / becoming exceptional. An extremely poignant story and excellent performances. 8/10

Man for all seasons (1968). 15.6.24. A very worthy Best Film Oscar-winner, this is unusual, striking and ultimately outstanding (both in the literal and contemporary senses of that word), with a mesmerising lead performance from Paul Scofield. 9/10

Hit man (2023). 18.6.24. This is being written a week after watching which isn’t good, but from memory I thought it was solid entertainment (no more than that, and forgettable). 7/10

The Duke (2020). 2.7.24. Another “good”, ticks-all-the-right-boxes British film: light, bright and soon forgettable. Despite good jobs by Broadbent and Mirren, talented Geordie actors would have made things more believable and therefore spiced it up a bit, the dialogue often lacked flair – and the two sons and their girlfriends were very sketchy and underused. 7/10

Ali & Ava (2021) (early July 2024). A winning vibe and winning performances  ̶  especially Claire Rushbrook’s remarkable Ava – more than make up for the thin material. 7½/10

Chopper (2000). 21.7.24. Up until the final set-piece this was tight and literate; just short of being excellent. But the final quarter of the film becomes unnecessarily confusing. Still, very memorable. 7½/10

Film reviews part 20 (in order of viewing)

Elle (2016). 17.2.24. The main plot development of the film didn’t work for me while I was watching it. However, after reading the Wikipedia article and reflecting, I can grudgingly accept what the writer and director were getting at, and that Michelle’s actions – despite being on the face of it implausible – might be just about plausible for this particular woman. This point aside, there was a lot going on to maintain interest, and Huppert’s performance (and/or the script or direction maybe?) somehow managed to be borderline comic while still being completely realistic. 7½/10

Petite Maman (2021). 27.2.24. Short, low-key, pretty pointless, supernatural film. Quite relaxing to look at. [The professional or mainstream critics love this film however; no doubt they can see a whole range of artistic sensibility. The part of Mark Kermode’s review which is quoted in Wikipedia astonishes me!] 5½/10

Parallel mothers (2021). 2&3.3.24. To me, this was writing by numbers: the (literally!) monotonous dialogue does it no favours in terms of creating an atmosphere of dramatic potency. When the reveal comes, it is dealt with extremely neatly and logically which is nice in the sense that it is very realistic / there is no silly melodrama, but also disappointing as a filmic experience. The turn in the two women’s relationship in the middle of the film I really hoped wouldn’t happen despite the subtle indications, and was greatly disappointed when it did (an unnecessary contemporary cliché and which devalues the power of genuine uncomplicated female friendship). 7/10

Nomadland (2020). 11&12.3.24. A meandering journey, visiting several characters and not telling much of a story. Always watchable, always completely realistic, but not enough here for a Best Film Oscar. 7½/10

The Old Oak (2023). 22&23.3.24. Another mesmerising film from the Laverty / Loach team (apparently Loach’s last). Slight dragging in the middle and occasionally a little saccharine, but Laverty’s dialogue is exceptional in its realism; and his (a) three-dimensional approach generally to character, and (b) honest, humanistic, broadly apolitical script, are strongly commendable. 8½/10

Here we are (2020). 23&24.3.24. A slim story, but a nice and easy way to spend an hour and a half. 7/10

True things (2021). 2.4.24. This has less meaning than it seems to think it has, but is still quite engrossing. 7/10

Never rarely sometimes often (2020). 4&5.4.24. Something of a curio, with a very affecting / mesmerising scene at one of the clinics. Some off-the-boil direction during the New York scenes makes things a touch confusing but the documentary style works overall. As the reviewers on Wikipedia state, there are no didactics, no polemic, no “hidden” messages to the viewer. The “truth” is revealed through the cinematography alone. 7/10

In this world (2002). 19.5.24. Essentially a fictionalised docudrama: no space to get involved with the principal characters. Still worth watching for the (perhaps now outdated) information. 6½/10

Quo Vadis, Ada (2020). 22.5.24. A straightforward, limited but powerful portrayal of one event in the 1990s Yugoslav wars; however, reading about the Srebrenica massacre on Wikipedia after watching the film, it seems that what was portrayed was only the tip of the iceberg. I quite liked the character of the translator, who acted like most people would act in such situations, rather than someone who constantly made ethical judgements. Overall, the film’s limited scope means its potential was never quite realised. 7½/10

I also started watching the following films, but they didn't entertain me enough to keep watching.

The train (1964). 30&31.3.24. Watched 35 mins.

Funny face (1957). 6.4.24. Watched half.

Film reviews part 19 (in order of viewing)

Anatomy of a fall (2023). CINEMA. 7.12.23. Exceptional did-she-do-it. All elements of this film are superlative. One small criticism is that the quality and entertainment value of the final few scenes didn’t quite match what had gone before. As everyone else says, particular kudos for Sandra Hüller in the lead role. 9/10

Boiling point (2021). 18.12.23. Brilliant ensemble piece. Gripping and claustrophobic (in a good way) from start to finish. 9/10

The father (2020). 30.12.23. A one-trick-pony where time as a concept disappears. It works. 8/10

Witchfinder General (1968). 3.1.24. Very silly, two-dimensional pulp – but good enough for one viewing, especially as these horrors had a historical basis. 7/10

Drive my car (2021). 5-7.1.24. Very Art House French in style, self-indulgent, and unoriginal in both concept / message and story-telling – but nevertheless very good performances from the two leads help make it watchable, despite its 2h50 running time. Overall, a poor Best International Film Oscar winner. 6/10

By the grace of God (2018). 10&11.1.24. Not much in the way of intensity, or even drama; the mood is consistent throughout and there is no space for the characters to be really fleshed out. Something of a docudrama feel about it. But certainly passable. [Postscript: I see on Wikipedia that Peter Bradshaw of the Guardian has also mentioned the word “docudrama” in relation to this film]. 6½/10

The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel (2011). 14&15.1.24. Clichéd mediocrity. 5½/10

Edward Scissorhands (1990). 18.1.24. A great story and made with lots of heart. 7½/10 (score applies to adult viewers).

Nine to five (1980). 21&22.1.24. Quaint (a dated style) and big-hearted, but after an ebullient start the film loses its way in the middle with silly plotlines involving a corpse and kidnap. However, it redeems itself somewhat near the end. 7/10

Sound of metal (2019). 4.2.24. For me, this worked more on an intellectual level than an emotional one. (The middle of the film dragged substantially, so muting the emotional response at the end.) Credit though for not being too mushy or predictable, and the final scenes were somewhat inspired. 7/10

I also started watching the following films, but they didn't entertain me enough to keep watching.

Hit the road (2021). 4.12.23. Watched half.

Planets of the Apes (1968). 8.12.23. Watched 35 minutes.

Pan’s Labyrinth (2006). 5.1.24. Watched the start.

C’mon c’mon (2021). 20.1.24. Watched half.