Film Reviews by Timmy B

Joanna Scanlan has been a mainstay of predominantly comedy over the last 20-plus years.

Here, she finally gets a lead role worthy of her talents, with a meaty part dealing with extremely challenging and difficult subjects. And the sensitivity of how this is handled is absolutely to the film’s credit. The clashing in many ways of the different cultures is wonderfully and compassionately shown, all wrapped up in the unbearable grief of losing a loved one. Scanlan stars as Mary. She lives with her husband in what she feels is domestic bliss.

The opening of the film also perfectly builds to what is happening, the seeds of change set against the crashing waves. As Mary’s life is thrown into turmoil, she begins to suspect that her husband was unfaithful, before finding out about a whole other family which lives on the other side of the channel. I don’t want to say too much more, but the way the film moves at both a slow and also lightening pace, whilst still keeping you gripped, is masterful.

And at the centre of it all is Scanlan. She is amazing and richly deserved her BAFTA win. Please can she be given more of these roles in the future, so we can continue to witness this incredible actress break our hearts. 

I so clearly remember Sin City coming out. I was still at school doing media studies and this came out as a groundbreaking & totally revolutionary way of filmmaking. Not only did I love the look of the film, but also the total look and mise-en-scene of it.

Robert Rodriguez, with guest director Quentin Tarantino, created something amazing. Not one part isn't great or iconic. The performances of everyone, particularly Bruce Willis and Clive Owen, are great.

Now please can we have a 4K remaster?!?

I rented this film only because I had seen it topped the list on Empire of the 100 greatest film comedies of all time.

I started to watch it and very quickly realised this wasn't a film I was going to find funny. The humour totally missed for me. But, as with stand up comedians, I never think that they aren't funny. It's just not my sense of humour.

Gave up after about 40 minutes.

Unfortunately, this is one of Ridley Scott's less good films. All the right components are here, but this is a very long film with some interjections of spectacular action to move the plot along, stunning cinematography as always from Dariusz Wolski and competent direction. This is a film which strains for epic but unfortunately never gets above mediocre.

Something that I once heard Mark Kermode say about Ridley Scott is "Scott seems to be only as good as the script he's working from." This is one of those films. As much as there is potential there for a great film, like with Noah, it just didn't grab me.

Finally, apparently there was some blowback from people who were religious and disagreed with the way the story was told. I am an atheist, so don't care about the religious themes in this film. If a film is good, it's good. And sadly this one wasn't that great.

Daniel Day-Lewis is one of my two favourite actors. He is quite simply one of the greatest actors of all time. He is a chameleon, a total spark of genius. There is a reason why he is the only actor to hold 3 Best Actor Oscars. And whilst this film has some significant script & other issues, this for me is his greatest performance, despite My Left Foot being his best film. It was in many senses a miracle he was even in it. After semi-retiring from acting after The Boxer, Day-Lewis went off grid. It was only Scorsese's persistence & the character of Bill that made him come back.

I find it hard to describe just how phenomenal & electric Bill is. Even though I have seen this film multiple times, his performance has not lost one iota of the violence, fear & electricity I felt the first time I saw it. Bill is a coiled spring of anger & hate, ready to explode at any point. But it is just as moving when he is calm, such as the conversation whilst draped in the American flag.

But this towering performance also has an unintended consequence: he makes almost everyone else look like a cardboard cutout in comparison. And this is where the film has its problems. The main one is that the other two leads (DiCaprio & Diaz,) are totally miscast. Despite the excellent work that he has done with Marty since, here DiCaprio is totally out of his depth. The accent is terrible, he never convinces & I suspect that in many ways he has been cast due to his star power/to get the film funded. Diaz doesn't really fare any better, although I felt she was the stronger of the two. She did fairly well convey the trauma of her early life & how in a sick way Bill had saved her, despite her going from one sort of oppression to another.

There are some notable great performances, the main one being Jim Broadbent as the corrupt mayor. He gets some great lines & his face-offs with Bill are great. Stephen Graham & Gary Lewis also have memorable scenes as well.

But the other issue with this film is it's length & script. This film had an extremely tortured road to production, with multiple rewrites & arguments behind the scenes. The film was a longtime passion project for Scorsese & it is easy to see why he wanted to make it, especially it's setting in Little Italy & rival gangs fighting for control of the streets.

So why, despite all this criticism, do I give it 4 stars? Well, the main reason I have described above & let me make it clear, without Day-Lewis, this film would totally fail. I cannot even imagine De Niro, who was originally cast, being able to do as good a job. But also, this film is in every way an epic. And this feel is what carries the film through, despite it's issues. You are swept up in it, showing how the modern New York was created.

So absolutely a film to watch and love. But I bet you all the money in the world that once it finishes, the only thing on your mind will be Day-Lewis and this, his greatest ever performance.

In many ways, Jason Bourne saved James Bond. Conceived very deliberately by both Robert Ludlum & the filmmakers as the anti-Bond, this series was designed to show espionage in a very real light. There were precious few gadgets to get you out of trouble, no supercars & if you were caught, you were disowned. Released the same year as the atrocious Die Another Day, this really turned the spy film genre on its head, forcing the 007 producers as well as other filmmakers to up their game.

But despite this monumental achievement, this film is for me only fairly average in many ways. The script is a bit too spare in many ways, as much as we are in the same position as Bourne, trying to work out what is happening. I also really disliked how it looked: limp, miserable, dank and colourless. Even the outside scenes are dreary. Again, I appreciate the point the filmmakers are trying to show: the grim & dark world of espionage. But they have gone far too far the other way.

The chemistry between Damon & Franka Potente (Marie) is also fairly terrible as well. When they first meet, they are both in a sense lost. As they brave danger together, you expect & see them get closer together. But I never was convinced about this element of the film, in this film. In Supremacy, their screen time & interactions are far more believable, which again I put at the feet of Paul Greengrass. Marie, despite Potente's best efforts, is mainly very annoying & grating. And as the film progresses, as much as she has some good moments, for me it is never what it could have been.

But there are some big positives to this film, starting with Damon. Apart from some small supporting parts in action films, most people knew him from dramas such as Talented Mr Ripley & Good Will Hunting. But he absolutely owns & is believable as Jason Bourne. It is clear he worked extensively with the stunts & never looks anything less than the spy Ludlum so clearly envisaged. The only outstanding performance comes from Chris Cooper as Conklin, Bourne's handler. Cooper is always exceptional in whatever he is in, and he dominates the screen here, every inch the burnt-out, cynical & devious spy. You feel his horror as the programme he was the author of spins completely out of his control. Brian Cox is also great as Conklin's boss, channeling his considerable power into the two handers between them.

I do feel that most of the blame for this film's failings, as I said earlier, are down to the director, rather than the cast. I fully appreciate and Damon has gone on the record to say that without Doug Liman, this film and the franchise would not exist. But there are as many shortcomings as there are great moments. And it is strange, as some of his other films, particularly Edge of Tomorrow & American Made, are fantastic films. You sort of wonder how the same man made those two films when you compare it to this one.

There are definitely some good moments, but for me, this is and always will be the weakest of the franchise. Watch this and then immediately put on/rent Bourne Supremacy. That is a masterpiece.

How much you adore the Beatles will obviously influence how much you love this film. I don't particularly care for them, although there are of course some incredible songs they have done that I love. But because I'm not a mad fan, I look at this film principally for its filmmaking, with the music an added bonus.

The story itself is in many ways a fairly by-the-numbers and standard one, albeit with the supernatural mixed in. Jack is a struggling songwriter who, due to a fantastical event, is the only person who can remember all the Beatles songs. He starts to perform them and claim them as his, but the feelings of fraudulent credit & imposter syndrome start to weigh heavily on him.

The performances are good and Himish Patel is perfectly fine. But for me, the story never gripped me that much. I could see where it was going and there wasn't enough to keep me enthralled. Plus, as this is a Danny Boyle film, you expect greatness.

But this is also a feel-good film, which is absolutely what is needed today. My criticism of this movie is just that I really wanted more.

After Lock Stock and Snatch, everybody knows what they want out of a Guy Ritchie film: proper "Lan-dann" cockney gangsters, shoot-ups and violence all wrapped up in his unique brand of humour. Whilst this was done to perfection in the above-mentioned films, there have also been some terrible misses, mainly Revolver, which just sucked and was so bad, I couldn't even finish it. The wheel was pulled back significantly with RocknRolla, but even so, for many people, they are still waiting for a film as good as the first two.

Sadly for me, The Gentleman wasn't it. And it actually was slightly poorer than RocknRolla, despite the amazing cast. Matthew McConaughey stars as a big time drug dealer who is wanting to sell up & vanish with the cash. This intention spreads like wildfire across the London drug scene and his various competitors are drawn into an epic battle to try & secure it.

The film does have it's good points, especially the performances. Whilst McConaughey is perfectly fine, Hugh Grant steals every scene he is in. He is the chancer trying to get his claws into what he thinks should all rights be his, spinning his yarn mainly to Charlie Hunnam's cynical gangland enforcer.

There are some other good flourishes as well, especially the soundtrack which is great. But it never adds up to anything more than a fairly reasonable offering. I know some people who absolutely loved it, but for me it was a 3-star film to watch, enjoy parts of it, then send it back and get my next disk.

Whatever you could say about Fifty Shades of Gray, it was never dull. Despite a lot of terrible narrative choices, I enjoyed various parts of it. It had a strange humour to it & Dakota Johnson was actually the best part of it. And yet again in this film, she is also the best part. However, this film has lost pretty much all of the charm of the first film and not replaced it with anything.

According to multiple reports, this seems to be entirely the fault of E.L James. When she sold the rights, she also retained extensive & almost total creative control of the franchise, which I cannot blame her for in many ways. There have been so many thousands of films which have been adapted from books & totally bombed/destroyed so much of the source material, that you can understand why you would want to retain as much control as possible. But, the problem comes when you then go too far in the other direction. And this appears to have been what she has done.

In almost dictator style, after many heated arguments on the set of the 1st film, James fired most of the creative team & brought in her own scriptwriter who she could control, who also coincidentally happens to be her husband. The director has also been replaced and as much as James Foley has his own impressive filmography, you do get the impression that he is just a director for hire, who has agreed a massive payday in return for lending his credibility to this project. But the results of all this messing about are devastating for what was already a mediocre story.

The biggest issue with this series, as many others have pointed out, is that if you want to watch sleazy & transgressive sex, you can just stick on some porn. And Fifty Shades, despite all the build-up, is just not a sexy film. When the key selling point (the sex) is shot so badly & gives you absolutely no reaction or feeling, you know there are problems. And front & center of that, as with the first film, is the ATROCIOUS chemistry between the two leads.

There is literally nothing there. Jamie Dornan may act his heart out in terms of puppy-dog eyes & lowering his voice to a growl when trying to raise tension, but it's like watching a terrible school play. Dakota Johnson, who absolutely is the best thing about the series, doesn't fare much better. The two of them actively seem uncomfortable in each others presence, which is never a good thing, especially when the whole story is about how crazy you are for each other.

The bondage itself is also not at all transgressive, and more than that, is actually quite boring, almost laughable. Especially after the events at the end of the first film, you would expect the game to be upped, but it really isn't.

Ironically for me, my favourite bit of this film has nothing to do with the story or actions of the characters: about halfway through on the extended cut, there is a spectacular & stunningly shot scene with a yacht as it sails through the waters around an exotic location (I can't remember where.) This scene (around 4 minutes,) is absolutely stunningly shot. Beautiful camera angles, music, literally like the film takes a pitstop to give you a break from all the turgid rubbish. And that was for me the best bit.

When a sailing sequence with no debauchery is the best thing in a film about S&M sex, you know you're in problems. But there is also a strange fun to be had with it, which is in no way erotic. You may even laugh once or twice...

Paul Verhoeven making a film about lesbian nuns should be an instant winner. Not only is he fearless, but the film would be so much more than it's lurid premise, which was what I was most looking forward to. And after the phenomenal Elle, this was shaping up to be something incredible.

However, this film is really boring. There are lots of speeches about sin and miracle working. But it never is as scandalous as it likes to think it is. And when the much-hinted at and built upto sex scene arrives, it is fairly boring. Another example of this sort of film hype really not delivering.

Verhoeven may have been trying to make that point in a postmodern type of way, but it didn't work for me and fell flat. There are some plus points, the main one being that it's use of lighting, colour palette and cinematography is stunning: this really is a beautiful film to look at, hence the 2 stars. And Charlotte Rampling is suitably frosty & domineering as the head nun.

But these are small plus points in a film which in all honesty should have been so, so much more.

Simply wonderful.

The action film that other action films wish they were.

Bruce Willis's finest performance, as the street-smart, wise-cracking cop who ends up in the middle of a high-stakes robbery lead by a never-better Alan Rickman. He becomes the only hope for the hostages, slowly taking out the terrorists until the final showdown.

The stunts are amazing, the action flawless & the story wonderful.

And yes, Die Hard is a Christmas movie.

The plot for this film is in a funny way like the anti-Expendables, despite the fact that both feature Bruce Willis. Whereas the Expendables are still all absolutely ripped/stacked/muscular, this film is more about brains than brawn.

The chemistry between the actors is also great, particularly with the addition of Helen Mirren. Mirren is the last person you'd expect in this type of film, which is exactly why it works. Brian Cox is also good fun. He also has the best part in the movie, when he creates a diversion by pretending to smell gas and setting off the alarms. The completely over the top way he does this absolutely creased me with laughter.

As much as this is a 3 star film, you have a good time watching it and there are some good stunts/stunt work as well.

There were some annoyances, such as Mary-Louise Parker's character, who has the tricky task of being the woman caught up in it all who also spouts dialogue machine gun fashion, which very quickly becomes tiresome.

But it's still a good watch and fun if you don't think about it too much.

When I was at school, there was a music teacher who shall remain nameless. This man was ex-army and had been in the military band. He was also an absolute psychopath, his favourite thing being to throw his big bunch of keys at someone who wasn't playing well/annoying him. He also on more than one occasion so belittled his wife (another teacher) in front of students that he reduced her to floods of tears. This was who I thought of fairly frequently when watching this film, as well as wondering if Fletcher and this guy were related.

The performance of music professionally is something which is infamous in bringing out the worst in some people, especially the more elite level. And Whiplash absolutely taps into that.

We are introduced to Andrew Neiman in a very low-key way, messing around with a drum kit. In through the door walks Terence Fletcher, the renowned and revered music head. After making him feel suitably uncomfortable and watching him play, he invites him to join his jazz ensemble. From there, Andrew is exposed to Fletcher's teaching methods.

This includes extreme threat, belittling, insulting, screaming and physical violence. And this is where, as much as I appreciate the fact that this performance is just that, a performance where there is some dramatic licence taken, the simple truth is that anyone behaving in the way Fletcher is shown with his students would have been arrested within 10 minutes. He definitely wouldn't be teaching in a school in America/the Western world. And the fact that this extreme behaviour is shown like this so frequently, plus the facts that come to light later in the film, means that element to me was something that affected the whole film.

However, it is important to say that Whiplash is still a great film. Miles Teller was exceptional and actually to me was the better of the two. It would have been so easy to make Andrew a very unlikable character, but Teller really nails the everyman trait of him. This could easily be us and we root for him all the way. I also really liked Paul Reiser as Andrew's father, again really doing wonders with what is in many ways a small role.

Naturally a lot of the headlines, as well as every award going, went to JK Simmons and I am not going to reduce his role just because of my previous thoughts. He is an extremely enigmatic character and there is a lot of previous music greats who I know Simmons will have incorporated into his performance. The redemption arc that he goes through is just about pulled off and the end sequence is absolutely fantastic.

The other great thing about this film is how well directed it is, specifically the editing and length. There isn't an ounce of fat or bloat in this film, and much credit needs to go to Damien Chazelle. As a first time director, this was an amazing achievement.

Finally, the film does actually raise one extremely significant question which has no easy answer and something which people will argue about until the end of time: at what price genius? Or to put it another way, how much should or can we as a society/people tolerate contemptible & despicable behaviour, even when the person involved is the best in their field. Whiplash certainly adds an interesting contribution to that debate.

In a career stuffed full of memorable and iconic roles, for many people it is this role as Bex Bissell that is listed as his best. And he does give an incredible performance, especially in his psychotic rage towards both his rivals and his own gang members who step out of line.

But the film around him just didn't click that much for me. Lesley Manville was very good, but the script meanders and there are several scenes which just go on and on.

I can appreciate that today we have a huge number of football hooligan films and that back in the 80's, this was an extremely controversial & new type of film. But for me, as much as it is treasonous to say this, I still feel the best film I've seen about this is The Football Factory. This is mainly because the characters in that film are so relatable and the type of people I have repeatedly met when involved with football days.

Being born in 1988, I had no recollection or memory of any of the communist states/countries, so this film will mean more to others than it did to me.

But the ground is still very effectively laid early on. Otilia and Gabriela are 2 students living in Nicolae Ceaucescu's Romania. Their lives are strictly controlled, including access to money and needing to show identity cards wherever they go. Another element of Romanian life at the time was abortion being illegal, unless there were exceptional circumstances. Gabriela discovers to her horror that she is pregnant and asks Otilia to arrange an illegal abortion for her. The film then shows the desperation & fear that these two women individually go through in order to access this vital service. They make contact with a man known only as Mr Bebe, but from there they are exploited and due to the two friends not following the instructions given, the circumstances and things they are required to do drastically change.

For me, as I intimated earlier, the locations, setting and world-building are excellent. You really feel the oppression, which is almost suffocating, which these women and the Romanian population as a whole, had to tolerate for over 24 years just with Ceaucescu. I could not imagine the horror of it all.

But this film does have several massive issues, the biggest one being the characters, particularly Gabriela. She is absolutely vile; a petulant and extremely unlikeable woman. And this absolutely overrides any argument that is made about her being scared due to the oppressive regime that she is living in. Her behaviour not only potentially puts her in danger, but also her friend who is risking everything, literally everything, to help her. You may very well be scared, but the way you are behaving means that you risk taking not only yourself down, but your friend and both families as well.

And the flip side of that is that Otilia becomes an unrealistic character as well, the further the film goes on. There comes a point where any self-respecting person would just bail out, irrelevant of how close they are as a friend. When the woman you are risking everything for is acting like a combination of Veruca Salt & Angelica from Rugrats, it's time to get the hell out of there. The chemistry between the 2 is also unrealistic, in that they don't ever seem to be that close, and definitely not the level of friendship which would go even halfway towards the risks that Otilia faces.

The other big problem with the film is that it is far too long. There is also a scene involving a dinner party that goes on and on, stalling the narrative and killing the tension. When the film does finally jump back into life, it cannot recover, although to be fair I was starting to lose interest anyways. There is a further inexplicable piece of behaviour from Gabriela which is so extreme in its selfishness that any remaining sympathy I had was totally shattered.

I appreciate all this film does right, however for me there is such a bitter taste left after watching it that I cannot award it more than 3 stars, irrelevant of how much praise is heaped upon it.