Film Reviews by TB

Paul Andrew Williams, in 2006, made one of the best British films ever with London to Brighton. If you haven't seen it, immediately put it on your rental list. What he managed to create with a miniscule budget & 10 days shooting time (the budget was so small this was all they could afford) was the sort of masterpiece $100 million films can't even come close to. When I first saw it, the rawness and tension hit me like a sledgehammer and still stays with me. Whenever I watch a small budget British film, I rate it against London to Brighton & Trainspotting, such was the impact.

Sadly, unlike Danny Boyle, Andrew Williams's career never managed to get the same amount of traction. There were a couple of misfires, Cherry Tree Lane being one of them. Although he had a larger budget, unfortunately for me it was just too horrible to really be enjoyable or watchable. He also directed a lot of TV shows, but now finally he is back where he excels, with a small film, great cast, amazing script and shocking violence.

Bull was conceived and shot during the pandemic and as much as it will have been extremely challenging to arrange and film, I think the tension in the real world had an indelible effect on the drama on-screen. The plot is fairly basic, in that a gandland enforcer comes back to settle scores and get revenge after being horrifically double-crossed and left for dead. So far, so clichéd, you might think. But oh no. This film is so much more than that.

The real ace up it's sleeve is the incredible cast that Andrew Williams has put together, and front & center of this is Neil Maskell. Maskell is genuinely terrifying. Although I know he has played these type of characters before to great effect (Kill List is a particular highlight,) here he is absolutely unhinged and psychopathic. This makes the acts of violence he commits even more shocking.

David Hayman is also excellent as Bull's boss and father-in-law, matching him toe to toe in both intimidation and the levels of violence he is prepared to use.

The other cast members are also outstanding, particularly the little boy cast as Bull's son. The casting director deserves special praise for the fact that she managed to get a boy who literally is the total spitting image of Maskell.

Everything else, in terms of cinematography, music and sound is spot on. The only real complaint I have and what stops this reaching 5 stars is that, even though it's only 90 minutes, like Muscle (another outstanding micro budget film I have also reviewed,) it does run out of steam a bit towards the end. And given how tight as a film this is, the extra flab is really noticeable.

But still absolutely rent this and be blown away by the talent of everyone involved.

One of the classics.

Packed full of one liners, dated and schlocky but excellently shot action scenes, plus what at the time was a really groundbreaking premise and special effects.

A band of rag-tag mercenaries are parachuted into the jungle to track down a missing team. What they discover and the subsequent escape is the driving force of the story.

This film, along with Commando, cemented Arnold Schwarzenegger's cult status, and with good reason. He is the best thing about it and fully embraced the ridiculous but also serious tone as well.

As much as there have been sequels and reboots, nothing comes close to this. Stick it on the TV, grab some popcorn, invite round some friends, leave all notions of seriousness at the door and enjoy one of the best and most influential action films ever made.

I so clearly remember the first time I saw The Raid. I was in a small cinema in Brighton with a friend. I had seen the 5 star Empire review basically calling it the best action film for years. I watched it and was blown away. Flawless, superb, incredible and a masterpiece. Even now, after multiple viewings, it still has not in any way been diminished. You are left with your adrenaline pumping and a massive grin on your face.

The critic reviews for the second film were broadly positive, so I rented it and the same friend and me sat down to watch it. An hour later, we were still waiting for it to "start."

The whole film is a mess. Whilst there was "a strong script" in a sense with the first film, it was strong because it gave bare bones details (which was all that was needed,) and then let the action develop the story. But the director Gareth Evans has for some inexplicable reason decided that what was missing from the first film was enormous amounts of exposition and characters spending huge amounts of time talking to each other.

I can appreciate that the expanding of the Raid universe might have been something that some people may have wanted and with other series's that have done this with the sequel, it has paid dividends. The most obvious one for me is Alien/Aliens. In Alien, not much is really known about the world it exists in. Aliens fleshes this out perfectly, but only to a point and only what benefits the story.

The Raid 2 totally overblows this. I am not interested in the minutiae of the gangster world. I don't care about the small details of the characters that in no way propel the story forward. And when you go from a film which literally is adrenaline on speed to this one & watching 2 head gangsters talking exposition to each other, it just totally fails.

When the action does finally and mercifully start properly (there is a very good car chase in the middle which is very ingeniously shot,) it is of course incredible. But it's too little too late. My friend I was watching with, when the action did start, turned to me and said "This is where the film should have started."

And by the time it finished, yes there had been some great moments, but the whole legacy of the Raid was somewhat tarnished. You almost couldn't compare the two films, they are so different. And it's sad and gives me no pleasure in writing that. I wanted to love it, I was so pumped for it, but it was a complete let down. I'd almost go as far to say that it's not worth watching it in the sense of continuing on the Raid universe. Watch the action scenes on their own, enjoy them and leave it at that.

There was talk of a third film, randomly taking place in the middle of the events of this one, but that now doesn't look to be the case and to be honest, I wouldn't want made, if it is anything like this one.

When writing this review, the one thing I am not going to talk about in detail is the politics within this film. The other review makes some extremely valid points about the hypocrisies of particularly the twins and their situation. But the reason I'm not going to talk about it because honestly, I don't care. I did not look at this film particularly in that respect, because I was so in love and enamoured with the world Bertolucci has created.

The Paris shown on screen is completely authentic, believable and lived in. I felt I could almost smell and feel the atmosphere. The cinematography, with its soft colour palette and perfect Mise-en-scène, was flawless. As much as there was the threat from the riots outside, when inside the 3 characters world, it was a distant worry.

The other reason this film works is due to the actors. As much as they were all good, I felt Louis Garrel was the slight weak link. As much as there was the frisson and tenseness between him and his sister, the moody element of it did not work for me. But that is also because of how electric the other two were.

In many ways, I can't choose between Eva Green and Michael Pitt in terms of who I liked more. Green is absolutely intoxicating, not only with her beauty but more than that her attitude and strength. She is many things: crazy, preachy, immature, needy, bossy, scared, innocent.

Pitt has in many ways the far more challenging of the roles. He has to be many things, but not completely overplay the innocence and naïvity of an American in Paris, experiencing all these new events from an outsider's perspective. And Pitt absolutely mastered this. As the protagonist, we saw all of his fears and hopes, plus his slow falling in love with Green's character.

But what makes this film truly fly is the absolute and total fearlessness of all 3 actors. Vast amounts has been written about the sexual content and sex scenes within The Dreamers, by a cynical and controversy obsessed media. And as with films like Intimacy, for me not only is it childish, but also much worse than that, it degenerates and debases the film.

Pitt has said in interviews about his worry about how this film could be seen as pornography and not as a film, but that he wanted to try and be a part of something to change that perspective. And he and the other cast members absolutely succeed in this. Green also mentioned that Bertolucci would repeatedly tell them to not hold back, to take risks and be free & fearless. This has paid dividends.

Without the actor's commitment and fearlessness, The Dreamers would totally fail. It is not a film of half measures, it is an adult and grown-up film which pushes boundaries, challenges you and yes makes you want to be there with them in their little piece of fantasy heaven.

It is pure, over the top extravagance, escapism and fun. Yes, it was a little too long for my liking and some of the script choices were not logical, but I didn't care. I loved this world and I loved this film. And if you want fearless, no holds barred acting, you'll love it too.

Whilst scrolling through Juno Temple's filmography, I saw this little indie film and thought I'd give it a shot.

I lasted about 40 minutes. It just didn't work. Juno was OK but completely wasted and worth so much more than this dreck. Nothing to keep me watching and in no way cared.

If you want a decent film, watch Killer Joe. Incredible performances all round and far more transgressive and fearless.

A very grim and not particularly accessible drama. In many ways, it shares many themes as My Left Foot, except in this case the disability is replaced with alcoholism. John Healy's story is one of a difficult childhood and slip into drink, then finding his saviour in chess.

Whilst there are many interesting elements shown, such as mental health and xenophobia, many of these are not explored and simply thrown onto the screen, hoping some of them will stick. The script itself is also extremely poorly written, jumping about all over the place and at times very incoherent.

Whilst Mark Rylance does try his best and there are some interesting flourishs he brings to the role, ultimately he is failed by a poor script and direction. The only huge positive from this role is that it got him the part of Jay in Intimacy, which is a far superior piece of drama.

A really good documentary.

Timothy Dalton's portrayal of James Bond allowed him the opportunity to be involved in various passion projects of his. And this is clearly one that he feels very strongly about. In the opening comments he talks about his fascination with and reverence of wolves but also his frustration over their misrepresentation and demonisation in the modern world.

He is very fortunate to also be paired with an extremely interesting researcher, who is a great guide for him and us.

The result is an extremely concise, enlightening and informative programme. Dalton is not only a great actor but also a terrific presenter whose passionate interest in this animal and it's history made for compelling viewing.

Highly recommended

I adore this film. Love it. Love everything about it. It is straight faced silliness, craziness and completely perfect satire all in one.

The direction, script, performances, cinematography and soundtrack flawless. It also has a roll call of now-famous actors who are brilliant.

Mary Harron, who directs and co-wrote the script, is perfection. Not one thing doesn't work, not one element not perfect.

And at the centre of it all is Christian Bale. His commitment to the role is legendary, including his months long, 6 day-a-week hours long gym sessions. But this is so much more than just what he looks like. The whole character of Bateman and his complete vanity are fascinating and horrifying.

Rent this film, book a reservation at Dorsia and stick Huey Lewis and the News on your stereo, then sit back and revel in this masterpiece of film and acting.

The first Kingsman film was an absolute riot. Colin Firth completely shattered the mould of Mr Darcy in both Pride and Prejudice & Bridget Jones's Diary. We were introduced to the wonderful Taron Egerton. The action was fantastic and a brilliant soundtrack as well.

Then the second film came along and whilst there were some good points, it actually in retrospect wasn't a great film. Even Julianne Moore couldn't elevate it past mediocre.

This is a prequal and in many ways, there have been some improvements. There is a good story, some crazy characters and a real curve ball twist which totally threw things in the opposite direction and was something I never saw coming.

By far the best part about it is Ralph Fiennes. He owns every scene he is in and is never anything less than totally believable. Harris Dickinson also is good. Rhys Ifans overplays it a bit as Rasputin, but I also appreciate that this is the tone of the film so as much as it jarred with me, I can see the value to a certain extent.

The biggest problem here is the story. Whilst there were some good elements, plus that twist, at the end I just felt a bit meh. It wasn't lack of effort from the film makers or actors, it looks great and again has a great soundtrack. But the first film set the bar so high that anything else pales into comparison.

But it is worth finishing on saying that I love the Kingsman world, I am excited to see the third film which bring back Taron and Colin, and will look forward to seeing what they do. I would also be interested if there were more adventures with the characters in this film as well. And this was set up quite nicely in the end credits...

It’s worth remembering that, in 2006, Borat was a genre and humour defining phenomenon. Nothing had ever been seen like it, and certainly not released on the scale that it was in cinemas. It pushed the boundaries in the most extreme ways possible at that time, but the sharpness & wince-inducing humour of the writing coupled with Sacha Baron Cohen’s comedic perfection meant it was in many ways the flawless undercover/prank comedy.

The members of the public featured, who let their guards completely down and in the process made absolute fools of themselves, showed a fascinating and at times cruel world not often featured in mainstream entertainment. But even the scripted moments, like the naked wrestling, were fresh and hysterically funny.

However, there is a flipside to this herculean success and it’s sadly something which shows definitively why you cannot, metaphorically speaking, put the genie back in the bottle: the vast majority of the world now know not only Baron Cohen but also his methods as well. And those people are now on their guard and also much more suspicious of everyone and everything. So when all that is put together, the result is a severely limited landscape in which to try and pull those sort of stunts.

There’s no getting away from it: Bruno is a sloppy, uneven and turgid mess. It is so obvious, despite the best efforts of the editor, that the sketches/set-ups are either rumbled immediately (so are not shown really at all) or people go along with it for a little while, whilst still keeping their guard up, then will walk away or blow Sacha’s cover, meaning the vignette abruptly finishes before this is seen.

For me though, the biggest reason why the film didn’t work well as a whole, and also destroyed in many ways the central theme of Cohen’s comedy, is the Bruno character itself. The genius element of Borat was that although he was himself rampantly sexist and racist and this used as a cover to trick people into lowering their guard, as a character, he was a sweet, amiable and good-natured person. So there was a warming to him and someone you could root for underneath the toxicity, but importantly people didn’t treat him differently.

But Bruno is as far away from that as it’s possible to be. He is a disgusting, shrill, vain and extremely unpleasant character. His behaviour, tantrums and general demeanour are so repellent that the whole set up of and critique of people treating him differently because of his sexuality is completely voided. The main reason people shun and look at him in disgust, whilst there may absolutely be elements of homophobia in the mix, is because he is a disgusting person. So the premise collapses.

But this isn’t to say that there aren’t some unbelievably funny moments. My favourites were the TV pilot group, the psychic and the final MMA fight at the end. There are also some killer one lines from people who didn’t realise what was happening. My own favourite was when Bruno attempted to get married. The reverend was then confronted with the situation, asks a question, then stops himself just says wearily “I don’t even know why I’m asking that question...”

If you are a fan of Cohen’s comedy, there is absolutely stuff to love here, but many will be disappointed. And as much as it was huge progress forward for an openly gay character/protagonist to be in a top grossing film, unfortunately the result leaves much to be desired.

After the disappointment of his performance in The Last Duel, Matt Damon has more than made up for it in this powerful and extremely watchable drama. His performance and transformation into a “roughneck” father who is desperately trying to help his daughter and get her out of prison is totally believable. I really enjoyed the performance, as well as the very profound curve that his character goes through. There is also no sanitization of the more challenging parts of his role, no hiding of the profound issues that he had trying to raise his daughter and the way that he before kept constantly letting her down and straining every sinew now to try and make it right, whatever the cost.

The chemistry with Camille Cottin is also excellent, as well as with her daughter. Abigail Breslin has the more challenging of the supporting actor’s roles, in that it is in many ways clichéd, but there is some fresh perspectives in its representation.

Tom McCarthy, who made the incredible Spotlight, again shows the level of talent he has not only as a screenwriter, but also director. Scenes are brilliantly staged, and the locations great too. It is definitely not a side of France which is picture-perfect but shows the reality of the difficulty so many people have to live in.

Finally, without giving anything away, I most loved that there was not a “neat, perfect” ending. The whole film had been showing so clearly that, in reality these situations don’t resolve themselves how we would want them to. And it leaves you with questions, as well as looking at, if you'd been in that situation, how you'd have handled it, which is what any good film should do.

I was 13 years old when Intimacy was released. Even though it was long ago, I do vaguely remember the complete & absolute hysteria in the press following its release in the UK. The allegations of pornography now being mainstream, the moral panic by right-leaning reviewers & the complete ignoring of the quality of the acting. Fast forward to 2023 & the reactions are so out of all proportion, it is almost satirical. When you compare this film to Young Adam, Blue is the Warmest Colour, Love and The Dreamers, its controversy barely registers. The only difference now is that if it was released today, the hysteria would probably propel it to No. 1 at the box office.

Predictably, the main focus point was the unsimulated fellatio scene. This scene was 4 seconds out of a nearly 2 hour film... 4 seconds. And this film is so much more than a single 4 second scene which has been completely taken out of context by a cynical & disingenuous media.

Intimacy is not an easy film to watch, but that is because it is also so raw. It is a story about 2 people who are lost in different ways & looking for meaning. And the ways they look for meaning, outside of the trysts they have each Wednesday, are the heart of the story. But it is also not an easy film to watch because it is not a standard, picture-perfect romance drama. For one, as much as it is deliberately shot handheld & with a muted colour palette, it looks very grimy, with dark shadows and cloudy skies.

Also, somewhat deliberately I feel, the sex itself is not in any way erotic. It is there to purely tell the story & evolution of the relationship between the characters. There are no waxed, tanned, muscular torsos on display. Instead, we see real people, grafting through life & getting pleasure in any way they can, even if that pleasure also feels empty once they part. Many people, particularly men, would look at a situation like this & probably think “That sounds perfect.” But when the reality of that is shown, it is a very different existence.

And that is the other reason why Intimacy is so challenging to watch. I read a quote from Mark Rylance saying that for him, the most difficult thing was “I could so easily have been that guy.” Not only did this ring true for me, but the emptiness of that existence haunted me long after the film finished.

Sadly, Intimacy does have its problems, the main one being the supporting characters within the narrative. Marianne Faithfull brings power to her role and Timothy Spall is good as Claire’s jovial husband, but in a strange way, none of them really fit within the story, especially because of the power of the two leads. When it is Fox and Rylance on screen, whether they are arguing, breaking down or banging each other, the film flies. When anyone else is on screen, it just doesn’t work for me. The film works beautifully at making you care and be interested with these 2 characters, so anything interrupting it just takes you out of the small moments.

So why 4 stars? Because of these incredible performances & the honesty within them. Intimacy haunted me when I first saw it years ago and still does to this day. This film shows what happens when you become a slave to your own ego. When you feel you have everything you want, but in the end have almost nothing, apart from the whims of your own sex drive. Intimacy shows you clearer than almost any other film the personal hell this will bring.

Brendan Fraser was for me, like many people my age, a part of my childhood. Whilst I never saw George of the Jungle, I loved the first two Mummy films. And whilst I did notice that he was not appearing in movies the last few years, it was only recently I found out about his personal and health difficulties which led him to take time away from acting. The only reason I mention this is because his performance as Charlie is so incredible, so heartfelt and so filled with pain that it really opens a window into the agony he has been through. This film would have totally failed without Fraser in the lead role and I struggle to think of anyone else who could even come close to what he achieves.

But as much as Fraser dominates this film, Hong Chau equally holds her own and her performance is another of power, beauty and desperation. Her character feels that she is the only one who can “save” him, whilst at the same time knowing that the point of no return was passed so long ago she probably has forgotten what it looked like when she passed it. You feel the deep sense of pain and hurt, whilst also trying to contain the anger which she feels at Charlie for destroying himself, despite her super-human attempts to help him.

Another incredible part of this film is Rob Simonsen’s soundtrack. Stunning strings and brass, when matched up with the images on screen, push the atmosphere into the next level. The prosthesis is also incredible. Unfortunately, that’s where the positives end, and the flaws of the film are so great that it actually exacerbates the faults.

The main issue is that this is so clearly adapted from a stage play and despite the technical wizardry, it never gets above that. The whole film feels constricted and also, even though it has a moderate running time, bloated. And there is a sub-plot regarding a missionary and Charlie’s daughter Ellie which for the most part seems to have been shoe-horned in to extend the running time and try to build character. And speaking of Ellie, whilst she is played as best as can be with the material by Sadie Sink, she is so horrible a person that by the time you get to the end and witness her so-called “redemption,” you are not left in any way convinced. Whilst there is clearly a little child hurting within her, it is in many ways nails-down-a-chalkboard character.

Finally, the hysteria from some in the media/social media regarding the subject of this film (a morbidly obese man) being exploited and the use of this as the main source of trauma, is to me completely disingenuous. Charlie’s size is never mocked and it is so clearly shown how he is a prisoner of his mind & body. One review criticized the film for not showing the stigma attached to his size, somehow totally missing the fact that Charlie can’t bear to see anyone who doesn’t know him well/is his carer. Charlie also knows that what he is doing will lead to his death and cannot face up to this reality, showing the complexity within him.

I absolutely recommend people watch this film, for Fraser and Chau’s work if nothing else. But don’t be surprised if when it finishes, you wanted more.

Pixar seem to be going through a very mediocre and somewhat rocky patch at the moment and I take no pleasure in writing that sentence. It is very frustrating to see the studio that released the first 2 Toy Story’s, and my own personal favourite WALL-E, now coming up with films like Luca. There is so much potential which just feels squandered by the end.

But in no way should this detract from the 2 main enormous positives. Firstly, the world that has been created by the animators, sound designers and artists is a thing of beauty. The colour palette is almost pornographic in its impact and wonder. The underwater scenes are lovely to behold. And on land is even better. As with Call Me By Your Name, the importance of food is front and center, meals loving imagined and cooking scenes plentiful.

And secondly, Jacob Tremblay’s voice acting is superb. It is said by some that voice acting within animation is some of the most difficult acting that can be done, as you only have one thing to be able to convey every emotion. I really felt the pain and frustration of Luca throughout the film.

But the rest of the film is in every way a clichéd coming of age film 101. It is almost like the director and screenwriter sat with a checklist of every trope in existence and went down it, ticking them all off. And having all of these clichés makes the film boring and monotonous. How many times does it need to be said in the same way by the same types of films about how to deal with the difficulties of growing up and spreading your wings.

And I so wanted it to be more. Whenever I criticise a film like Luca, which is clearly made with so much love and passion, as well as countless hours of meticulous work by thousands of staggeringly talented people, there is no pleasure in it. But Pixar have set the bar so high, when they fall short, it is much more noticeable. Whilst I wasn’t ever bored, it’s full potential sadly wasn’t realised.

A flat-out masterpiece.

As with my review for Silence of the Lambs, there is so much I could say, but quite simply, this is one of the best films ever made. Even today its effects are still being felt and influencing film.

The cast are uniformly perfect, the atmosphere nerve-shredding, the music outstanding.

And on 4K, which I rented to see the remaster, this is elevated in every way.

See it on the largest, highest-quality TV you can, in the darkest room you can.