Film Reviews by PV

The first thing to say about this film is that it's too long at over 2 hours, like so many Hollywood movies.

This has got rave reviews but I found it tiresome the longer it went on. It's al a dream fantasy really and desperately tries to squeeze in too much incl racial politics (yawn!), cult leaders like Waco, the FBI, an armed robbery backstory, feminism, child abuse, Motown, Viet Nam, religion, and even a hinted-at JFK element. Too much really. This could and maybe should have been 2 movies - the cult scenes later on could be a different film, frankly.

It's watchable and does have surprises and plot twists aplenty. But what it reminds me of really is an Agatha Christie whodunnit. And the end is pure Hamlet. Reminds me too of that Tarantino movie set in a hotel with vampires.

So-so. So 3 stars.

This is a necessary film about a serious subject - the deliberate Ukrainian famine of 1932-33 in which Stalin and the Soviets deliberately starved to death 7-10 million people. And people still wonder why Ukraine wanted so badly to be independent (and why some sided with Nazis against Soviets in WWII). Watch this and learn.

Yes, it's low budget - but I disagree with the 1 and 2 star reviews here which are too harsh. The film is well-plotted and hangs together well - yes, the romance part is silly BUT I'd say ALL Hollywood movies think they have to have this to appeal to the female audience. Expect more of this as more women's movies get made (which I won't watch).

Anyone who thinks Socialism leads to Utopia should watch this movie which shows what happens when the state has all control. Disaster! Oppression! Dictatorship!

It made me laugh when one Soviet butcher accuses a Ukrainian of being 'reactionary' - well, that is a favourite term of abuse used by leftwing academics, aimed at anyone who states opinions they disagree with. That speaks volumes.

A flawed but excellent film. 4 stars.

There are SO many movies like this these days. They start with a concept: WHAT IF...etc. Then follow an absurd fantasy plot, with loads of CGI car/train crashes, shootings, fights ALL to directly appeal to the Chinese market which demands such set pieces (look how that has RUINED Bond movies).

The BEST thing about this movie if the end credits which are brilliantly designed.

Otherwise it's utter hokum and nonsense - some fantasy of movie executives. AND all that CGI gets utterly tedious in the end. The plot was probably written on the back of a beer mat too (or maybe a vegan menu).

I enjoyed this film. Yes,, it's slight and yes, we know the ending because it happens as the news story was famous (in the UK anyway).

But it's a nice enough watch, with some old con characters played by loads of white men (which I enjoyed in this age which activetly discriminates against them and parachutes in women and ethnic minorities in absurd roles).

Michael Caine must be 85. Tom Courtney 80. Others here like Paul Whitehouse and Ray Winstone only 60.

They use footage from their old movies a bit near the end, which is fun.

However, the film SEXY BEAST is way superior - it also features and heist and also features Ray Winstone, and Ian McShane who wouldn't have fitted in here too.

SO my advice is to watch the 2 movies back to back. This first, then the 5 star SEXY BEAST.

This is 3.5 stars rounded up.

Chekhov always gets massive praise as a playwright and a short story writer - I have tried reading the latter such as 'The Lady with the Little Dog' but must admit I don't really get him as a writer. It's all about subtle shifts in relationships with Chekhov, I think.

This is a slight film which is pretty local to the play EXCEPT the Americanisms in the text (eg 'smart' for intelligent or bright) which I disliked. I can just about put up with the US accents.

Some interesting characters but all spoilt rich people navel-gazing really, something I hate about so much modern cinema and drama.

No wonder there was a revolution in Russia with all these spoilt rich people obsessed with their own happiness! Maybe they should have tried being serfs and peasants eh.

3 stars. Just.

I watched 20 minutes of this THEN thankfully the DVD got stuck. I decided not to get a replacement.

Those 20 minutes showed me that 1) Ian McEwan may well write pretty prose and deal with big themes in his novels BUT he does not an exciting tale write; 2) Novelists should NOT write screenplays from their own novels - that was disaster lies.

This is just awful - typical state-funded British film-making. Our taxes and lottery funding paid for this, folks.

I heard the same novel serialised on the radio. Not a great novel - all about a newly married couple so shy they don't know what to do in bed on their wedding night (and that, folks. is the plot). Mildly interesting and with McEwan's trademark pretty prose. But thassit! This is NOT a great story or even a story at all - more a character piece, For radio or theatre, fine, NOT for film.

I do not care if they 'did their best' - imagine anyone else messing up getting that let-off! Oh the bus driver drove off a cliff - but never mind, he did his best, The teacher lost 3 kids on the outing who then drowned - but never mind, she did her best.

This film is AWFUL - tedious, pretentious rubbish. Only watch if you are tired of life.

I had low expectations of this film, based on the blurb and description - however, I found it an utter revelation.

THIS IS A BRILLIANT FILM. The writing, characters, direction, acting, the lot. Should have won an Oscar.

The way a man (talented, intelligent, educated, youngish, not poor) reevaluates his life and realises he just cannot go back to square one and start again is heart-breakingly captivating. You'll rarely see a character as complex or true in any Hollywood movie.

If I had my way, this film - not some OTT Hollywood drug morality tale movie, should be shown to every teenager in the world.

Just brilliant. Best movie I have watched this year. 5 stars - with bells on.

One thing I HATE about modern movies especially since the #metoo mob started its pity party riot, is how young women especially of ALL ages behave as though they were 'strong. independent' (YAWN!) woman of NOW - demanding their right to do whatever they like and be themselves, because they're all strong and independent, you see (RE-YAWN!). Often these women - be they living in the Ancient world, the 17th century, the early 20th century, are full of attitude and do things men would usually do (making the point they are 'strong and independent' - do you see?) - such as piloting aircraft or spaceships, or fighting men and winning (yeah right) or as in this case setting out alone as a young woman in 1913 to drive to Turkey. Yeah right... It would have been MORE believable if she'd actually chosen to ride a unicorn there/

And so the romance starts and the predictable love triangle, because as in real life, the presence of females ALWAYS causes conflict between men. And of course, the woman is the true hero and shown to have been right all along.

The ONLY reason this is not 1 star is the interesting war dynamics and pretty scenery. The genocide of 1.5 million Armenian Christians by Muslim Turks at the time certainly needs highlighting, esp as that country denies it even happened.

This is probably a movie for women as it's basically emotional porn for them. Men, expect to yawn - a lot!

2 stars. JUST.

If you like the Beatles then you'll love this. The band were at their height in the touring years, and it shows.

This is a fascinating true story, and to ram home that point, occasionally the real-life characters (the 4 young men who did the heist and their parents, and the librarian) give interviews to camera.

I'd never heard of this story so found it interesting, especially the psychology involved.

But those who like shoot-up-up movies won't like this - it's all about the theft of rare books from a library. No shots fired.

I don't always like Stephen King adaptations, but loved this. The interplay between the characters was utterly believable and full of twists and turns, not all 100% believable, but then this is fiction!

Of course, there have been many cases of former Nazis being extradited from the USA or Latin America to face trial, so King had a mountain of real information to base this on.

Ian McKellen is superb as the main character, with a spot-on accent. I suspect that comes from his decades working in theatre.

OK, the ending my stretch coincidence too far (no spoilers!) but then this is fiction!

4.5 stars rounded up.

I cannot believe one review here claims THE MEG is superior to Jaws because the latter takes too long to get to the action whereas this hokum monster movie gets to it quicker. If that is how you judge the quality of a movie, I'd suggest your opinion's not worth taking on board really.

JAWS was and is a classic movie - unlike the dross Spielberg makes now. This is like a Poundland Jaws - a forgettable, silly, CGI-created mash-up of ideas nicked from Jaws and many other movies too. ALL pandering and kowtowing to the great Chinese empire with Chinese characters and settings - all with an eye on many more dollar, quick quick!

ALL very ironic as demand from China for shark fins to put in soup (the fins have no flavour so it is flavoured with chicken stock - all a status symbol of that backwards superstitious dictatorship society) have resulted in 90% of large sharks in OUR oceans being killed in the last 20 years. Similar levels of devastation of large mammals thanks to Chinese demand for fake medicine cures and trinkets - in Africa, 50 years ago, there were 500,000 lions; now there are estimated to be 40,000 or even 20,000. Ditto for elephants. Rhino and tigers almost extinct in the wild. Thanks, China.

And as per usual, we have a pc diverse tick-boxy cast with ethnic characters aplenty and, predictably, women in charge of piloting a submarine (HOW many female sub captains are there in the world? Even one? I doubt it), and the person who designed the entire IT system of the marine base is a tattooed metoo smug arrogant 'girl power' woman too. Yawn. So unrealistic and silly, MOST IT systems designed are fat balding men, usually white but some Asian, and very few women!

BUT there were some funny bits and some tense action - with the gore as predictable as the plot.

Both JAWS and THE MEG were based on popular novels, apparently. JAWS is a classic movie; this is B-movie popcorn trash and as long as you don't expect more, it's fun enough for a Friday night watch.

I actually own a fossilised megadon shark tooth and it is pretty big though they get MUCH bigger than the one I own. Massive monsters.

Makes me giggle too that THE MEG is apparently the nickname palace staff give to bossy pushy Meghan Markle lol.

3 stars for the fun and action.

Well like the previous film by this director which won the Oscar, I believe, my reaction to this film is 'MEH'.

It's moderately interesting - about the awful time when the Soviets and Communism were in charge of Poland and Eastern Europe, and oppressed and bullied people just as badly as the Nazis.

Funded by lottery grants, Film4 and other state funding - it's all watchable though hardly exciting.

Basically a thwarted love story - and I hated the ending (no spoilers).

Well-filmed and that's why it gets 3 stars.

I really enjoyed this film - way more than most modern Christmas movies.

It's basically a forerunner of IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE and based on a novel - so an angel comes to earth, this time in the form of Brit Archie Leach AKA Cary Grant, who proceeds to transforms people's lives. Real star quality. David Niven plays the depressed bishop. Some wonderful old trouts on display too!

Some fun special effects on display - from 1947 - esp the sherry bottle gag.

OK so it's a bit dated BUT no worse for that - it's a relief to escape from pc diversity worship and aggressive mouthy women, to see feminine women who like hats and traditional men who aren't all branded perverts by the #MeToo mob.

Some fan skating scenes with doubles, and Cary Grant pretending to pay a harp - in a nice little twist. Very nicely done.

I didn't like the preachy bit re the old atheists professor at the end BUT I am prepared to forgive it that (imho Christmas is an inclusive festival not just a Christian one and can be whatever you want it to be - which makes it all the more wonderful).

4 stars.

I liked some parts of this film.

If you can get past the nonsense - such as Stone Age people wearing clothes that look fit for a catwalk, all fur parkas and even a skimpy swimming costume (what's he hiding his modesty from - a dog? lol); and their perfect teeth (not a one missing) and clear moisturised skin.

This is basically mostly an animation with CGI effects so all-consuming this is more CGI than live action.

An utterly unbelievable plot, to be honest - the cavemen seem to find perfectly round stones in abundance wherever they go, in a barren landscape.

There are better Stone Age films - even oldies like the Carry On film or The Land/People that Time Forgot. A short novel called THE GIFT OF STONES by Jim Crace is a great read too - way better than this.

No spoilers but the ending if so pc tick-boxy sentimental - even for Disney. And bizarrely, I note on the credits that dog playing ALPHA is called CHUCK - hardly a girl dog name. But maybe he's transgender eh?

A dreadful icky silly Morgan Freeman voiceover for the prologue and epilogue is, for me, unnecessary - and is packed with purple prose and clichés - all puppies and flowers and rainbows, the usual cod-religious cant about being friends and believing in yourself etc. Really vomit-inducing, as is the use of the pc word 'humankind' - fyi 'man' refers to people NOT just non-women! So MANKIND is fine.