Film Reviews by JD

This combined a really good period drama based in the 70's with a warm, British gentle humour. The 70's were accurately portrayed and the humour neither hammed up nor too gentle, some laugh out loud but mainly subtle. For example an old man given a cut glass bowl for 24 years of crushingly dull service sits glumly by it, midway between regret, and anger at underachieving when a yob flicks his cigarette ash into it. The faintest of reactions midway between anger and resignation. The sort of comedy that wouldn't sell in Hollywood.

For a geeky natural history nerd like me this is manner from heaven. It is quite full on botany illustrated brilliantly and extravagantly. David must have notched up a few air-miles. Because of its relatively non-popular presentation (lots of interesting facts) not to be watched as background or if your tired. Recommended for anyone with a strong biology interest only.

This has got to be the most minority interest film I have ever watched. The history of a particular font designed in Switzerland in 1952. As it was pre-word-processing it is referred to as typeface.

No doubt there are graphic artists with an interest in 50's font but I'm guessing not many.

However after dozing off, I woke to watch, almost daring myself to continue with something so mind bogglingly minority and unimportant. It took on a surreal quality then it became strangely important and relevant. I think you really have to be in the mood.

The plot is compelling and moving even though I have no experience close to submarine warfare in the second world war. The acting is reasonable but not brilliant. I enjoyed the general atmosphere but I think it would appeal to war babies more.

This is a documentary about the slaughter of 23,000 dolphins in a small cove every year, in a very defensive and secretive town in Japan. It is not for the faint hearted. I found it haunting and disturbing. If it doesn't make you angry and sad you have no soul.

A pretty simple plot with a very guessable ending. Lots of smiles and backslapping. There are a few moderately amusing moments and Danzel is as usual interesting but the special effects are really the only good bit about the film.

At the end of each episode there is a short documentary on the difficulty or special technique used to film some of the scenes. In a sense it is interesting to see behind the camera but also slightly unnecessary. Seeing a pack of hunting dogs spreading and ambushing their prey at great speed through rough scrub, clearly requires immense patience, alot of high tech cameras and a helicopter. I didn't think you could do it any other way. Waiting for a snow leopard takes a while, I didn't really need to hear a grumpy camera man telling me that. The rest is absolutely fantastic natural history. Not that Attenborough has ever been associated with anything less. There is fair amount of death in these episodes but it makes one appreciate how easy our lives are, protected from predation in any significant way.

The other reviews, in my opinion have been a bit too gushing. I have not seen the Holly wood remake which may have affected my judgement, but I would not regard this as "one of the best suspense thrillers ever made".

Having said that I enjoyed it immensely. Although a little dated and lower budget by modern standards the plot was good, there is an intense need to know what happened to the abducted girl created mainly by good acting but with fine direction, and the characters are all very believable but quite extreme. Definitely creepy and very memorable.

The plot does not stand out as Fleming's most original nor is the film outstanding from other of the Bonds. Dalton plays well, some of the minor characters play poorly but the stunts are trademark of James Bond, well ahead of their time.

The bar brawl stunts are poor but the water stunts incredible. A more emotional plot than usual but also more brutal. Some parallels with Crocodile Dundee which was better acted but lacked the high budget stunts. Dalton is a good Bond but, as is so often the case, surrounded by some stunning poor performances. So glad Judi Dench took over as Q.

There were only 2 things about this film I would change. Demi Moore's make up to age her to her 70s was disastrous, I suspect a pot of wallpaper paste was involved. The other was the suggestion that sticking diamonds to the underside of long finger nails is a good way of smuggling. Otherwise it is brilliant (the adjectives are a bit too easy for a diamond film review) Demi Moore puts in an unusually good performance Michael Caine is multifaceted and captivating. The period is very well portrayed. The sexism possibly underplayed to appeal to a modern audience. The plot a real twister I won't spoil it except to say well worth watching.

This film has been reviewed very positively for its perceptive reflection of the banal superficiality of consumerist office-based existence. For this it is a memorable and interesting and very unusual cinematographically. For example the depiction of isolation and emptiness is a scene shot from inside a coach luggage holder of a door banging in the wind, not well described but particularly haunting. It is not however very compelling or exciting and should not be watched late in the evening.

Goldfinger stands out in my memory as the best of its era. I remember vividly the scandal of death by spray painting, and of odd-job crushing a golf ball. It is worth revisiting just to relive these moments of nostalgia. I was shocked however at the dreadful acting ability of some of the Bond girls. Tania(the one he picks up in the Aston Martin)stands out for me as the worst actress I have ever seen in a professional role. I don't know if you would get away today with calling a leading lady Pussy Galore. The main characters are excellent and the plot terrific. A spy thriller from the early 60's is bound to be dated but this stands the test of time better than most.

Sean is outstanding, possibly a little too outstanding. He is surrounded by pretty mediocre acting. Rowan Atkinson is funny but his part has been wedged in and doesn't fit. Kim Bassenger gives a reasonable performance but the baddy Max von Sydow and the MI5 Edward Fox play the worst performances of their lives. The stunts are a little dated though I quite liked the shark attack. Watch it if, like me, you think Sean is the second best (DC obviously the best) but not otherwise.

This is probably the best horror film I have ever seen because there is much more than just horror. I was not drawn in at first because it seemed dated and unnecessarily upper class, but for the big house, creaky floored, evil servant atmosphere it has to be like this. The direction would have been outstanding in any era but startlingly good for 1961. The acting is also strangely untheatrical. My slightest criticism would be that the balance of "is she mad or are they evil" was too close and I was unsure in the final scene which to believe. The other thing is that I am not a great horror fan. If you are this is easily a 5 star.