Film Reviews by TB

James Cameron is in many sense one of the few directors we have who is still genuinely breaking new ground & pushing the limits of what is achievable on film, to the extent that with both this & the first Avatar, the technology simply wasn't available/ready to be able to create what it was he wanted to create. But despite the jaw-dropping & visually sumptuous images, this film is basically an extremely expensive technical exercise in what you can do if money is no object & not having a great script is not seen as a barrier.

Avatar 2 reunites us back with Jake Sully & his family, which has now grown to 4 children & 1 adopted child. Everything is well after the events of the first film, until the soldiers/Sky People return, determined to complete the mission that they started, but this time to succeed. Forced to flee, the Sully's then team up with another species who primarily exist in and under the water. But they are tracked down & forced to fight and defend themselves.

Unfortunately, despite the way this film looks (and make no mistake the visual work is incredible, literally one of the best animated visuals I've ever seen,) the rest is almost a total failure, starting with the length. This film is 3 HOURS long. That is an obscenely bloated length for a film which in effect is a rerun of the first one in many ways, but now with the confidence of the fact that the first one made megabucks, so they can pretty much do whatever they want. This film falls exactly into the same trap as John Wick 4: mistaking length for profoundness & epic. There is so much world-building & character development & location setting that the whole thing feels at the same time bloated & also undercooked: vast amounts is tried to be communicated to you & you just start not to care.

There are far too many characters, as well as plot points. Multiple times you are set up for a cliffhanger, only for the day to be saved, then 5 minutes later we're back to everything is lost again. This scenario happened probably 5 times in 20 minutes.

As for casting, Sam Worthington hasn't improved since the first film; Zoë Saldana does everything in her power to be the fierce warrior but not succeeding half of the time; the child actors are good but also given too much to do so their impact is less. As with the 1st film, the best performance is Stephen Lang as Quarich. Brought back again (because in the future people can simply be cloned, again minimising the jeopardy element of the film,) he really turbo charges the movie, although after 3 hours of this constant ratcheting up to create tension, even Daniel Day-Lewis would struggle to keep things fresh.

Another 3 films have been announced to follow this one. They'll all have pretty much the same story, do exactly the same thing, have exactly the same impact, cost obscene amounts of money and break more records for cinema takings. Whilst I'm glad that Cameron is without question keeping film theatres open & thousands of people in highly skilled jobs, I cannot recommend this film for anything other than its visuals.

Before Inglorious Basterds (IG) was released, Tarantino had frequently alluded to & talked about the WW2 action film he was going to make. After the financial failure of Death Proof, Tarantino dug out the half-finished script of IG & finished it. The result is a brilliant, although sometimes too talky film which nevertheless still to me is his best film of the most recent ones he has done.

The story, as with most of Tarantino's films, is split into several narratives. It imagines an alternate setting of WW2 & involves a French orphan, a group of Jewish American soldiers (the Basterds of the title) & finally the British undercover mission to kill Hitler. Along the way, there are many of the staples of Tarantino which are brilliant, such as Mexican standoffs, meaty dialogue & strong characters.

The thing which I did like most of all about this film & is in no way a spoiler is the rug-pull element of it: as much as it is marketed as an action film & there are some combat-scenes, this movie is much more interested in character & story. The titular Basterds themselves barely appear for a good chunk of the film & you hear much of their exploits through the anecdotes of the traumatised Nazi's who managed to survive encountering them.

The opening scene in particular is an absolute powerhouse of tension building, proving again just how much of a master of his craft Tarantino is with script & setting. We are also introduced to Hans Landa, an incredible multi-lingual character played to perfection by Christoph Waltz. Nicknamed the Jew Hunter, he is remorseless in his pursuit of the terrified people trying to escape the Nazi machine slaughtering them without mercy. Despite his absolutely dispicible motives, Landa is a wonderful character, constantly subverting expectations. And most of all, his refusal to be pigeonholed by anyone or any ideology.

Opposite him, Brad Pitt is also great as Aldo Raine, the Tennessee soldier with an accent as thick as Molasses sugar & on a mission to kill as many Nazis as possible with his platoon. His interactions, particularly with Landa, are a highlight: these two men who couldn't be more different in their beliefs seeing & respecting their shared drive. Raine looks at what is going on around him with horror & disgust, further emboldening him to complete his mission.

And finally, Melanie Laurant as Shoshanna is a worthy & compelling character, the orphan who is determined to track down & kill as many of the people responsible for killing her family as she can. Her interactions with Landa are also, once she recognises him, filled with tension.

Unfortunately, amongst all this good stuff, there is also a lot of bloat, particularly in a scene set in a coffee shop. Tarantino cuts away from the story to obsessively watch a group of Germans eating cake & talking at great length, slamming the brakes onto the narrative. Although the film does manage to pull itself back, it was an unnecessary & quite frustrating interruption, making the film longer than it needed to be.

Then we get to the ending & in true Tarantino style, everything goes crazy, but enjoyably so. It is a bonkers but also deliriously silly finale, setting just the right tone & giving us the payoff we wanted.

As for performances, they are all great, including the cameo's from people such as Mike Myers. Everything else, from the uniforms down to the locations is also excellent.

A riot of a film and one which, despite some flaws, I loved & feel probably won't be bettered with whatever QT makes next.

Katherine Bigelow has had an incredible & chequered career, filled with interesting films as well incredible ones. Even when they don't work as a whole, they are still filled with ambition, such as Strange Days, which was so far ahead of its time, today it is scary to watch it.

After the disappointment & serious financial failure of K19 The Widowmaker, there was a 6 year gap before she resurfaced with, in comparison with the massive budgetary opulence of K19, a tiny film made fairly quietly in the Middle East about bomb disposal experts. And, having seen both films, I am actually pleased in a way that there was the failure of K19, because it forced her to go back to the small film world, where often the best films are created.

The Hurt Locker is incredible. Even though it has come into some criticism because of the various elements of it that are absolutely not in any way based in fact, that has to be overlooked when you factor in that this is a piece of entertainment using drama to effectively convey it's message. It opens with a tight-knit team lead by Guy Pearce, defusing a roadside bomb in Iraq. Starting as it means to go on, it starts relaxed & jokey then flips within a second to fear, panic & horror. Pearce's character is killed & then a new Sergeant is brought in to lead the team.

Sergeant First Class James is a totally different kettle of fish: rude, abrasive, refusing to follow orders, communicate with his team or just be a team player in general. He is also addicted to the rush of war & conflict, actively seeking it out, even though he puts everyone else in danger. Thankfully, in the hands of Jeremy Renner, he is also horrifyingly gripping to watch, even though in battle you wouldn't want him anywhere near you, despite his extensive skill in bomb defusal.

The other team members are also extremely diverse & complex characters. Sanborn is the brash, tough-talking sergeant who after losing his close friend in the opening credits, then has to balance that grief with trying to manage someone as unpredictable as the bombs they are defusing. The aggression & disagreements between them are electric. Finally, Eldridge is the young Specialist, wracked with PTSD & totally on edge after the horror of the opening. He is probably the character who could most be seen as us the audience, giving us that portal into an unforgiving & everlasting nightmare you never wake up from.

As the 3 men brave danger together, they start to work together better, although the joy of the story is the total unpredictability of what could happen. There are also some welcome cameo's, particularly from Ralph Fiennes as a highly strung & very English bounty hunter.

But what makes this film work more than anything else is how well it is directed & scripted. Bigelow's mastery of film is shown here as second to none. Whether directing small moments where there is silence but also emotion screaming out of the screen, through to full on action scenes, it is perfect. The look, colour palette & sound especially are also brilliant. The casting is perfect & this was the film that in many ways launched Renner & Mackie's careers.

A film that grabs you, doesn't let go & then leaves you breathless at the end, wanting more. Just like the greatest films should do.

The title pretty much says it all. This film is perfection. The most staggering thing about it in many ways is that it works at all. If you say the plot to someone, it sounds like the worst film ever: 2 down-on-their-luck/penniless actors escape their filthy flat in London for a weekend in the country after finding favour with the camp uncle of one of them. The holiday is a complete disaster, then things get worse when they receive an unexpected & uninvited guest. They then return back to the flat & nothing much has changed. But, as was said wryly by Ralph Brown, "it just goes to show that sometimes you don't need a good plot!"

The best thing about Withnail is it's script. Written by writer/director Bruce Robinson out of desperation & depression when he was living in conditions like in the film, this is one of the funniest stories ever created. Filled with line after line of endlessly quotable dialogue, it has become a cult favourite, particularly amongst students who relate to its alcoholic & poor protagonists.

The performances are note-perfect, especially Grant as Withnail. Based on one of Robinson's friends, Withnail should be an absolutely revolting, horrible character who you wouldn't want to have within 100 miles of you. But yet he is utterly charming, a totally deluded & vain man who is constantly getting himself into unmentionable & excruciatingly embarrassing situations, sometimes by his own making.

Paul McGann is also perfectly cast, playing the "I" character, although his proper name is Marwood. Effectively a composite of Robinson himself, Marwood is a ball of nerves, the man who usually ends up at the sharp end when things go wrong, constantly worrying about things, mainly what new issue Withnail will cause the pair of them. Marwood is also a gentle soul, the water to Withnail's fire. It must be said without him/McGann's performance, the film would be totally unbearable.

And rounding things off is the brilliant Ralph Brown as Danny the dealer. Speaking in a nasally voice & always carrying various hard drugs, Danny is a genius of a character. Spouting off ridiculous conspiracy theories such as hairdressers being in the employment of the government due to hair being your ariels and picking up signals from the cosmos, he perfectly rounds off the ensemble.

From a behind the scenes viewpoint, again it's a miracle this film exists at all. After the first day's shooting, an attempt was made to shut it down by one of the producers, which only failed as Robinson threatened to walk off the film and leave everyone in limbo. The film itself also looks like it was made very cheaply, which adds completely to the charm of it. Effectively, the DVD looks like a pirate copy, although I haven't seen if there is a remastered version (to be honest I wouldn't want there to be, as it'll ruin the charm.)

But complete credit must go to Bruce Robinson. His determination, talent & brilliance as a writer/director resulted in this total & utter gem. Whilst it's sad that he never again reached these heights (although The Rum Diary was a very good attempt to reclaim some lost ground,) salivate & enjoy watching one of the best small films ever made. Then find some other fans & see how long you can keep quoting it (it'll be years!)

Flawless perfection.

Robert Redford has had a glittering & unmatched career. Stunning in many of the films he has been in, he is without doubt a bonafide legend of the silver screen. In many ways it is very interesting that this is, if he keeps to his word, his last film. And I can certainly see why he would want to go out on this. 

It is a very gentle musing & true story, following a man called Forrest Tucker, who was first jailed when he was 15 and then spent the rest of his life in and out of prison, escaping multiple times successfully & many more times “unsuccessfully.” The film then shows his interactions with the various people in the town he finds himself in, as well as the knowledge that he cannot keep doing what he is doing, although this is now a deeply ingrained part of him & his life.

As much as this is a slow film, it is also nice to see an actor of Redford’s calibre in very basic & pure acting scenes, whether it is with Jewel, the woman who helps him escape from one robbery by covering for him, through to the local police chief trying to track down the suspect who he is convinced is the charming man he sees in front of him.

The film itself looks very lovely, although it is not in any way a masterpiece, hence the 3 star rating. It is also very slow, at times too slow & could have done with a bit of editing to tighten it up a bit. As much as some may hope for a massive showdown or shootout, this simply isn’t that kind of movie. This film is here to salivate & appreciate the remarkable talent of Redford, doing what he does best: acting & entertaining us for decades. 

Johnny Vegas’s aim when this TV series was announced was “to make a show so ridiculous there’s no way they’d recommission it.” Judging by the fact there has only been one series, he definitely achieved his goal. I do seem to remember when it was released in 2005 that certain media outlets, in particular the Daily Mail, absolutely lost their minds over it & used it as another example of proof that our society was in moral decline. 

But, if you find extremely transgressive & shocking humour done well funny, then this a riot of a watch. Rather than the whole series, this DVD contains the best bits of the shows edited together. There are some very funny moments, including skits done outside the studio, such as when Vegas dresses up/speaks like an 18th century rentboy, goes to a park and asks extremely surprised people if they want some debauchery. He also invites an audience member to come on stage & punch him and drinks beer from a shoe.

There are also special guests including Ray Winstone, Kathy Burke & Rhys Ifans (who appears absolutely slaughtered out of his mind,) who are all incredibly game for the various dodgy situations they are put in. At the end of each show there is also a “death-defying” with them, involving Vegas jumping over them in things like a kid’s bike or shopping trolley.

But this is absolutely not something to watch with your parents/children/anyone who gets easily offended. The 18 rating is completely justified. This is completely off the wall & uncensored comedy and very, very funny.

When Up In The Air (UITA) was released, it garnered across the board 5 star reviews. The easy charm of Clooney, alongside the minutiae of looking at how a man whose primary job was to travel around the world firing people was always going to be a winner if done well. Fortunately, the writer & director is Jason Reitman, who has made a career of a film with gentle musings and big impacts. Here, he has assembled an incredible cast as well as brilliant crew to bring this script to life.

Ryan Bingham is an “employee-termination” specialist who works for a company hired by organisations who wanted to get rid of their employees but didn’t have the guts to fire them using their own people. Hence, they pay Ryan extortionate amounts to travel all over the country and do it for them. Whilst he is travelling, he meets & starts a casual relationship with Alex, a fellow traveller, meeting up in different states when their schedules combine. Ryan’s life is also changing as well in terms of the goals he has set himself, combined with his advancing years. 

This film is unashamedly Clooney’s. There is almost no other actor on this planet who could play the role of someone who goes around sacking people & make you like them. There is a smoothness, alongside a genuine want to help these individuals find other employment, often better than the job that they are losing. Clooney is a professional at this type of role and his effortless charm & genuine warmth makes him a pleasure to be with. Similarly, Vera Farmiga is outstanding, her sharp businesswoman front giving way to a gentle & tender soul. Anna Kendrick finally rounds things off with her performance as a determined & deeply ambitious woman who then realises the job she has let herself in for. 

As the film progresses, you begin to really buy in to the world that Reitman has created, especially some of the scenes towards the end, including a powerful one where Ryan is forced to confront what he has been running away from most of his life. The music, cinematography & locations brilliantly used, subtle & powerful. Despite its 15 rating, there is only some casual uses of strong language. Overall this is an exceptionally gentle & profound film and one I loved spending the time being a part of.

Highly recommended  

Unless you were someone who lived in the UK & regularly went to the London theatre, there is almost no chance you’d have heard of Mark Rylance. But after some strong performances, including what I feel is & always will be his masterpiece Intimacy, he went back to the stage & ran the Globe Theatre. But one person who had always known & revered him was Steven Spielberg. And when this script was passed to him, there was only ever one person who could play the role of Rudolph Abel, the suspected Russian deep cover spy. 

Bridge of Spies is based on the true story of the prisoner swap between the US & The Soviet Union, at the height of the Cold War. Tom Hanks plays James B Donovan, a highly experienced insurance lawyer who is assigned the case of Rudolph Abel, a suspected Soviet spy who has been monitored & is suspected of passing highly classified material to the USSR. Despite the wish of pretty much everyone to have Abel executed, Donovan manages to successfully spare Abel from the death penalty & then when a U.S. pilot is shot down, he becomes a prisoner that the USSR is willing to trade their hostage with. 

I loved this film. The chemistry between Hanks & Rylance is absolutely outstanding, their respective humours & charm really working in harmony to drive the film forward. But Rylance is also head & shoulders above everyone else with his deeply soulful & sensitive performance. You really warm to Abel & his cheeky approachability, whether he is in a courtroom full of people wanting to kill him with their bare hands or a freezing cold night sharing small talk. It is no wonder that Rylance had a clean sweep at every awards ceremony for his work. 

The script is also very gentle & profound, creating an excellent world which it populates with amazing characters & story. Obviously, being a Spielberg film, everything behind the scenes wise is note perfect. The cinematography in his films never gets nearly enough credit. Janusz Kaminski, who has shot most of Spielberg’s films, is absolutely outstanding, with his colour palette & use of light almost unmatched. The soundtrack by Thomas Newman is also beautiful. 

This is a wonderful film, totally engrossing & perfectly made. Yes it is sometimes a demanding watch, but never for a second is it boring. And with Rylance & Hanks, you couldn’t want for more. 

Alan Turing was an incredible & vital part of the British war effort, cracking what was thought to be the un-crackable code, Enigma. Used by the Nazis to transmit all of their highly classified material including troop movements, ship positions & strategies, it was designed to be completely impossible to compromise. And as such, there was never any kind of censorship on it/all the details were completely accurate. The British, realising that to crack this would turn the tide of the war & enable them to defeat Germany, threw all the resources they had in terms of brainpower to solving it. One of the people who they brought on was a mathematician & genius called Alan Turing, often called the Godfather of the computer.

The Imitation Game follows the frantic attempts of the group assigned to crack this, plus the various challenges that come with this almost unbearable pressure. The film is split into 3 parts: the wartime period when Turing & the team are working on Turing’s creation, which he nicknames Christopher; the “present day” when Turing is being investigated over his sexuality & his arrest for gross indecency; then finally his school days, where he is first recognised as a child genius & develops a crush on a fellow schoolboy called Christopher. 

For me, the biggest issue I have with this film is this structure, specifically the “present day” element. I just felt that it had been added to try & shoehorn in as much exposition as possible and at times really dragged the film down. I didn’t care about the police investigation. For me, I actually wanted the section about his childhood & the young Turing element to be much more fleshed out. This is partly due to the outstanding performance by Alex Lawther, who is an incredible young actor. In just a few scenes, he communicates such happiness followed by heartbreak. His performance as Turing really sets the ground work for Cumberbatch. 

The cracking part of the film, set at Bletchley Park, is also amazing, really going into the detail of how they constructed the machine which would eventually not only help with the war but also become the basis for the technology which is now in everything from your phone to space rockets. Keira Knightly does excellent work as the woman who Turing becomes close to & proposers marriage to, despite her knowing of his sexuality. There is also the obligatory spy/espionage element, fantastically played by Mark Strong. 

Cumberbatch is excellent throughout, especially in the final scenes. The film is solidly & compassionately directed by Morten Tyldum, working from a good script. And finally & most importantly, this film rightfully shines a light on the disgusting treatment that Turing was subjected to because of his sexuality. It is a mark of profound shame on this country’s history that one of the saviours of it was treated the way he was. Thankfully he was pardoned, but the end scenes particularly are excruciating to watch. 

Thank you Alan Turing for everything you did. I and millions of others are indebted to you. 

I rented this for my parents as my dad has been a fanatical sailer his whole life & wanted to see this documentary, so this review is his feedback rather than my own personal experience.

They both loved it as a piece of cinema showing the struggles of getting sponsorship & a yacht in order to compete in the round the world race as the first female team.

The interviews were great and there was lots of new background information which hadn't been shown/spoken about before.

Came highly recommended

I knew nothing of the Jack Reacher series before seeing these films. I had read the good reviews, as well as the backlash from the fan base over the casting of Tom Cruise, but after witnessing the same thing with Daniel Craig over him being “too blonde” to play Bond, I never pay any attention to this these complaints. 

The film itself is really good. The opening in particular sets the tone horrifyingly well, watching a sniper pull up & just shoot into a crowd of people, with no music track, just the echoing of gunshots and screams. Reacher, having been keeping a profile so low not even law enforcement are able to track him down, resurfaces as he has his own reasons to become involved. Partnering up with Rosamund Pike’s lawyer, he discovers a set-up involving agencies across the legal system. 

The script, story, locations & performances are all great, none more so than Werner Herzog. Although normally a director, he had done some acting previously & wanted to do another film. As weird as it may sound, he is incredible, but is not much different from the Herzog we all know and love. But he is unbelievably creepy & the film benefitted massively from his in its cast. 

A great film & compelling watch. There is a sequel which is not as good as this movie, but still a good watch if you enjoyed this. 

After other attempts to bring a successful Dune adaptation to the big screen Denis Villeneuve, who had before spoken of Dune as being his dream project, was given the keys and the budget to be able to realise his vision, although until recently part 2 wasn't guaranteed to happen. This first part builds the worlds which the story takes place in, establishing the rival families and the power they seek.

My main reason for seeing this film was quite simply Denis Villeneuve. I love Prisoners and Sicario, although I hated Arrival. But all his films have incredible visuals, which in the end is the saving grace for me. The worlds Villeneuve builds along with his team are stunning and staggering beautiful to look at. The cinematography is great, as are the costumes.

However, for me this was never more than 3 stars and that's being generous. I struggled at times to stay interested in this film, and other times it would grab me but then just revert back to being boring.

Also, as much as it has one of the most stacked casts in recent blockbuster movie memory, there are some misfires. Josh Brolin is in many ways wasted, as is David Dastmalchian. But for me the biggest problem was Timothée Chalamet. Many actors before him have trod the same path: the son at the head of a dynasty who then takes over & proves himself to be the leader no-one thought he could be. But I simply couldn't take him seriously, especially in the combat scenes. In a duel between him & an enemy, it just doesn't work. The guy he's fighting looks like he's used bigger things to pick his teeth with. That's not to say Chalamet doesn't give it his all, he's just miscast.

But I do have to finish by saying this: I am not a big Sci-Fi/space opera fan. These massive stories set in space with the subsequent technology has never really interested me, with notable exceptions such as the Alien films. So despite me coming in with an open mind, this again just proves that this is not the type of film for me. But it is a very beautiful film to look at and for many people, this is great filmmaking. Sadly, not for me though.

After working with Derek Cianfrance on Blue Valentine, Ryan Gosling had wanted to make another film with him. Apparently the idea for The Place Beyond The Pines (TPBTP) came about from a conversation they had where Gosling had said that he always wanted to rob a bank, to experience the feeling & adrenaline of it. Cianfrance thought it was a brilliant idea & came up with this script. Whilst TPBTP does have some great ideas & scenes, it also has some quite big problems with it.

But with regards to the good stuff, the performances are excellent. Gosling & Mendes make a fantastic couple, which would have been quite awkward if they hadn't, seeing as they met on this film and have been together ever since. Cooper is also great as the cop who changes the course of their relationship forever. Even the small roles are well-played, my favourite being Ray Liotta, who in his usual style totally owns the screen for the short time he is on it. The film is shot in a very naturalistic way & the motorbike chases are also exhilarating.

But this film is frustrating because of its problems, the main one being that it tries to do far too much. And it also, in order to accommodate this, is stupidly long. There were at least 2 occasions where this film could have been wrapped up and it's 2 hour 15 minute run time felt nearly double that towards the end of the film. Also, there is a big twist that happens at one stage and whilst it was brilliantly done, the film then totally loses momentum & never regains it. And then, adding to the bloat, the film also tries to wrap up everything neatly, which not only doesn't work, but also would have benefited from some things being left upto the viewer's imagination.

For people who really like spending time with the characters & enjoy slower films, there is much to like here. But for others, this film just runs out of steam & then starts to outstay it's welcome.

After The Bourne Supremacy, Paul Greengrass exploded into the film world. From nowhere, this British director who had only made a couple of small-scale but extremely well-reviewed films then made one of the best espionage thrillers that I have seen to this day. I will never stop praising as one of the greatest; so much so it is in my list of top 10 films & has been ever since I watched it. Then he made United 93, again one of my favourite films & a masterpiece in every way.

However, in 2010 he then directed Green Zone, a film so terrible that I began to worry that he had completely lost his touch. For example, Greengrass's signature style is his use of handheld cameras to increase tension & intimacy of what you are watching. In Green Zone however, this is totally over the top, to the extent that the film is basically unwatchable, as well as having a terrible script. So when Captain Phillips was announced, I was fearing that this could be the final nail in the coffin of one of the best filmmakers I'd come across in recent years.

And then I saw it...

This film is a monumental achievement. I literally cannot find one single thing that doesn't work. It is a flawless, stunning masterpiece: incredibly acted, brilliantly shot & most importantly, showing both sides of the situation that Phillips & the pirates find themselves in.

Captain Phillips is about Richard Phillips, a long serving cargo ship captain who we first meet at home preparing to go off to sea. From the opening moments, the dread & fear is in the air, slowly creeping up on you. The reason for this, which is spelled out very clearly in the first few minutes, is the massive number of cargo ships which are attacked & the crews taken hostage by pirates who then demand extortionate ransoms. Despite this, Phillips insists that the ship continues to sail as normal, arguing that irrelevant of where they go, there is a big risk. The ship is then boarded by pirates who end up taking Phillips hostage, who then have a stand-off between them & the US navy.

The biggest triumph of this film, as I hinted earlier, is that both sides of the situation are shown. The vast majority of the pirates depicted were fisherman/other unstable & vulnerable careers, who then lost their incomes when other countries started to take all their fish/commodities. And for the pirates who managed to get their hands on these ransoms, the rewards were stratospheric for them & their families. This is fleshed out in great detail during intimate chats with the pirates & never does the film condone their actions, merely explains them/shows the extreme hardship & desperation they are in.

The performances are note-perfect, none more so that Barkhad Abdi as the lead pirate. As was noted by Greengrass on the special features, there are not many new, let alone experienced actors, who can go up against a 2-time academy award winner & for it to work. But Abdi is great, as are the other pirates, who are all Somalian & had their own extremely difficult experiences. Hanks is wonderful, playing the role of Phillips with tenacity as well as the genuine fear that he was not able to keep his crew safe.

The film then, once it gets into the lifeboat, switches up a gear again, becoming an almost unbearably claustrophobic pot-boiler: a shocking battle of wills between the pirates & military.

And then we get to the ending: it is one of the most emotional, shocking, tense & difficult scenes in my entire time of watching films. The tears starting streaming & didn't stop until the end credits. This film grabs you at the beginning, keeps you in a vice, then builds up to a incredible & visceral conclusion. I cannot say enough good things about it. You finish it & sit there, drained & exhilarated.

This is one of the greats, showing exactly how films can move you & deeply affect you. Flawless perfection in every way.

Despite my dislike of much of this film, the one thing I have to give it credit for is it’s completely unchained & no holds barred approach. In this film, nothing is held back. It is a totally crazy, shocking & highly sexualised biopic of the life & crimes of Jordan Belfort, a Wall Street trader who started up his own company with the sole purpose of ripping off every single person who wanted to invest with him. As Belfort gets richer & richer, he gets more greedy & immoral. Even his own father at one stage says to him “You’ve already got all the money in the world, why do you want everyone else’s?”

There is an enjoyment to a certain extent to be had with just how crazy everything is shown, plus there are a lot of visual flourishes & good colour schemes, which of course you would expect for a Scorsese film. In terms of performances, there are also some great ones amongst the bloat. For me, as much as for many she may be seen as eye candy, Margot Robbie was actually really good & more than held her own opposite Di Caprio. Matthew McConaughey was also, for many people, the most memorable part of the film, doing more in 10 minutes than many of the other actors managed in 3 hours!

But for me, the two biggest issues with this film are the length of it and Belfort himself. On the runtime, this film is obscenely bloated & overlong, by at least 40 minutes. There are so many scenes of parties & drug-taking which don’t really contribute anything to the story. And once we get 90 minutes in, we don’t need to be repeatedly shown the various sleazy behaviour by the traders to understand & appreciate that they are reprehensible thieves.

And with regards to Belfort, he is just a revolting & horrible person. And when you have to spend 3 hours with him, watching his totally disgusting behaviour, you just hate him more & more. Yes, there were some funny moments, hence the 3 stars, but as a person Belfort really is the pits.

Still a good watch, although you will need to have some patience towards the end.