Film Reviews by TB

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.

I’ve never been a huge fan of Marion Cotillard in the films I’ve seen her in. For example, in Inception, she came off as rather annoying and her character not relatable. I found myself wishing that Kate Winslet had been cast instead. Although I haven’t seen La Vie En Rose, after her Oscar win, there were a huge number of plaudits for her, and I had waited for the film where I could see why there was a huge fuss about her.

From the Land of the Moon is absolutely her film. She is the best thing in it and I was absolutely convinced by her character and acting, even though at times how it was written didn’t make her particularly likeable. I especially appreciated the complete fearlessness which she approached Gabrielle’s more extreme traits, giving a very vulnerable and unvarnished performance. It’s just a shame that the film itself is not deserving of her talents.

The worst thing about this film is that it takes an unbelievably long time to say not very much. There are flashes of brilliance, some beautiful landscapes and a good performance by Louis Garrel. But for me, the slowness never turned into a slow burn. It is simply a long drawn-out film. I will absolutely admit I was happy to keep watching, but there wasn’t the compulsion to want to get to the end, it was more simply to see where the film went.

I do appreciate the chances it takes and there absolutely will be an audience for it, but sadly the best I can say about it is that it was the first film which actually had a Marion Cotillard performance I enjoyed. I only wish the rest of it had lived up to this.

A really nasty, verminous film with no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

When it first starts, the opening hints at a dark story, with no-holds barred. But it just nose-dives into souless, blank, empty characters, who you don't care about, in a relentlessly depressing and grim Soviet-era city.

Jim Carrey, who whilst I didn't expect the usual goofiness associated with him, I did want SOMETHING to like or root for, is just a blank heartless policeman.

Apparently further on in the film, he commits some shocking acts of violence, which may have in some way worked towards the story/character. Unfortunately I didn't get further than about 40 minutes in. The nihilism in this film makes Nil By Mouth look like Mamma Mia.

For dark and gripping police detective stories, watch Hyena, Insomnia or the first series of True Detective. Just avoid this.

Such is the continued draw of The Silence of the Lambs that this specially made behind the scenes documentary was released to DVD.

Whilst there are some great behind the scenes clips and also interviews with all the key cast and crew, I did have one very big frustration with it: despite being almost 90 minutes long, I felt that there was a huge amount of padding in terms of content that had been put in which wasn't interesting, at the expense of genuinely fascinating moments which were cut.

An example of this is that although the director Jonathan Demme appeared, to me it seemed there was so much that he said that didn't make the final cut. Having seen other interviews with him, talking about not only Silence of the Lambs but other projects he has done, he is an incredible raconteur and storyteller. And I wanted to see and hear this genius director be allowed to talk much more freely about this masterpiece, along with the other actors. But he along with others only gets small little snippets of screentime. Ted Levine welcomingly is allowed to speak at some length about the creation of Buffalo Bill, but it's a rarity sadly.

If you are a Silence fan, then there is absolutely things here you'll want to see. But you almost certainly will be left wanting more, and with the access that this documentary team clearly had, it's a travesty this wasn't fully explored.

Ambulance is Michael Bay's version of a "small/micro-budget film," which still manages to pack a lot into a tight running time.

In many ways, it is very much action-picture fare, with the standard moral situations, uneasy-buddy friendships and destruction aplenty. But this also has some strong things going for it to elevate it above its competitors. For one, as much as it is far-fetched, it is always engaging. The stunts are also absolutely incredible, the standout one being a chase between the titular ambulance and 2 helicopters which rivals Spectre's opening scene for nail-biting and edge-of-your-seat action. The action cameras employed, as well as the set-up of different action shots, is also breath-taking. Irrelevant of the many fully justified criticisms of Michael Bay, there are few directors who can rival in any way how he orchestrates and pulls off action scenes and car chases.

Another reason for the success of this film is down to the casting. Jake Gyllenhaal does his best with the material he is given, but unfortunately his performance is in many ways very one-note. Playing an out-and-out psycho is in many ways one of the most difficult roles to play, because as the stakes get higher, the only way to go is up in terms of temperament. And the crazier you go, the more the performance strays into hammy and pastiche. For every perfect performance, like Daniel Day-Lewis (Bill the Butcher) or Anthony Hopkins (Hannibal Lector,) you have 20 hammy or terrible ones (Brian Earl Thompson in Cobra springs to mind.)

This film does have an ace up its sleeve in the form of Yahya Abdul-Mateen II. He really really is good, his battle-scarred ex-soldier fighting to scrape together the money to pay massive medical bills for his family. His decency and morality, as well as his horror at the situation he is effectively forced into by his brother, makes you root for him the whole time. Abdul-Mateen II is also great at the action scenes, fully believable in the chaos surrounding him.

This is in many ways a film which, depending on your mindset at the time, will dictate your experience of it. It won't change your mind, make you look at the world a different way, or convince you that the world this film is set in is in any way comparable to the real one. But, as a mindless action thriller, it does the trick and also welcomingly, really gives credit to and elevates the role the emergency services play in helping people. Just don't look too far into the fact that the main plot line is a man having to go and commit a robbery in order to pay for treatment because of the obscene cost in the US...

This is perfect drama. As in, flat-out masterpiece. From the opening scenes, I was totally hooked and marathoned the whole series in one go. The writing was excellent and also really challenged some of the wrong narratives which were allowed to be said about the circumstances surrounding the Lawrence murder. Whilst it has been said to be a sequel to the Paul Greengrass film The Murder of Stephen Lawrence, you don't need to have seen that to get the full impact from this film. Even knowing the bare-bones details of the case is enough, plus there is a recap of the facts early on in the first episode.

Whilst Steve Coogan is the big-name draw to this series, for me he was absolutely eclipsed by Sharlene Whyte as Stephen's mother Doreen. Coogan does elevate his character above the standard police-series tropes, but Whyte is incredible. Dominating scenes with a burning sense of wanting justice for her son, who was repeatedly failed by the Met police, Whyte really makes you feel this agony.

As mentioned in the title, this series pulls no punches, and nowhere is this more so than in a scene within the first episode involving a reconstruction. I don't want to give any more details about this so as not to take away the impact, but it is really, really nasty. A skin-crawling and horrific look at the pure and abhorrent evil committed against an innocent and unarmed teenager on a night out with a friend.

Finally, the other element where no punches are pulled is in the devastating portrayal of the Met Police. This review was written in the week where the Casey review was published. It is disgusting that, in the 30th anniversary year of Stephen's murder and after the highly critical MacPherson report, there is still the deep-rooted issues within that police force. Hopefully there will now be deep and meaningful change.

The hype was stratospheric. The haul of Oscars enormous. The praise pretty much universal. And then I watched it...

Within the first 5 minutes, this film started to grate on me. It was like watching the most out of control art experiment gone wrong I've ever seen. But it had the effect of being so over the top, that I literally didn't care about anything within it. So much effort had been put into what for me was just a complete and utter mess. Whatever this film was trying to build in terms of worlds, for me it totally failed. And the harder it tried, the worse it became.

As someone who loves Michelle Yeoh and always wants to experience new films and try different things, I went into this fully open and wanting to be blown away. Instead, I sat and waited, and waited, and waited, whilst every possible random thing happened on the screen. None of it connected, none of it worked and I just sat waiting for something to happen to engage me in it and for it to make some kind of sense, or even to be able to enjoy it.

I have no doubt that for many many people, this movie is great. My best friend adored it. But for me, it was just an exercise in getting through it, so I could get to the end, say I'd seen it, then never watch it again. I fully appreciate I'm in a minority, but it was seriously how I felt. Afterwards I watched the 4K remastered film of Heat, and was able to enjoy a proper masterpiece. Amusingly, Heat is half an hour longer than EEAAO, but the time flew by.

I really enjoyed this film. It is in many ways everything I love about movies: a strong story/script, a simple but powerful journey, a micro budget/small film where every little thing has been thoughtfully considered; and finally great performances, especially from Anjorka Strechel.

The story itself is about a woman called Mel who is extremely masculine looking, who forms an extremely strong and close bond with a girl called Jenny, whom she rescues one night. Whilst the trajectory of the story is in many ways the classic LGBTQIA one, this film elevates this with simple dialogue and exceptional and moving acting, especially by Strechel.

Although there are some strange narrative choices, this make for an interesting watch and a memorable one. Although, if you really want an incredible film which deals with this type of subject matter, once you've watched this, rent Tomboy. That is a masterpiece and one of the best and most moving films I've seen in recent years