Film Reviews by PV

This movie reminded me of Winter's Bone - the Americans do seem to like making movies about the poorest of the poor country hicks and hillbillies, esp in Apalachian or Cajun settings. Anyway, like Winter's Bone, criminality and murder get the plot going, and the acting and pace are good - Jamie Bell's decent American accent never falters either. The big problem for me with this film is that is simply could not believe the plot - and without wanting to give a spoiler here, I'll just say that I don't think people in poverty who have the opportunity to sell something to get out of poverty would pass at that chance. It's all about the symbolism, I suppose, and some codswallop about 'paying the ferryman'. I detect some nods to Silas Marner in this movie too. Having said that, it's more Watchable than Winter's Bone for sure - and the better film. Recommended.

This is an enjoyable movie to watch, with excellently realised apes, and a simple enough storyline. Nowhere near as good as the original Planet of the Apes, but better by far that the more recent version............ One thing that I thought a shame was the Hollywood need to make the baddie British - you hear a British accent in a movie like this and you know that's tnhe villain! If they used an ethnic group like this it'd be called racism! I also thought it a bad casting choice to cast a black British actor in the role. The original POA movie and script from the 60s was full of racial references to the civil rights movement of the time and segregation/discrimination of blacks in the US - that's why all the main human characters were white. Casting a black man in this role took away from that - perhaps deliberately.........The science in this movie is all hokum, of course, and I actually laughed out loud when a character started coughing a little - this always means DEATH in any costume drama, and this movie too!..........The end of this movie screams 'sequel'. I fear there will be one because of the success of this. It will be downhill from hereon in then.......This movie has made me want to see the wonderful original from 1969 (?) again though; I watched it on TV in the 70s as a boy and did not know the twist at the end when I saw it: that movie is one of the best of the 70s. I fear no-one watching it now will enjoy that innocence. This movie is packed full of references to and lines from that film though. Maybe watch them back to back?

This film is worth 2 stars only: it'll pass an evening, but no more. It's certainly not scary or in any way frightening. Unpleasant, yes - with lots of guns and shooting. As for the theme - well, it's motherhood. But the character issues feel tacked on. I simply did not believe in these characters, or the story and the way the characters behave in it. The 'ma' character is WAY too young too - an older actress would have been better. There are also a few plot holes and some storylines that are just dropped - (Queenie...) - which is annoying. I found this dragged terribly too - I felt myself yawning and looking at my watch: this should have been 20 minutes shorter. BUT all in all, not dreadful, but not good. It'll pass a couple of hours...

How much you like this TV series will depand on how much you are into therapy and the kind of self-obsessed navel-gazing and egocentricity of the me me me generation. Americans apparently loved this tV series - but then, they are all on medication and worship therapists. If you are like me and think counsellors are mainly rip-off merchants who love nosingin people's lives and don't actually do any good at all, tyhen you'll hate it.

Also, despite good acting from Gabriel Byrne, the acting of the 'patients' was over the top. It looked like I was watching an acting lesson at some US stage school.

So, not my thing; but if you are into wallowingin your own self-pity and are interested in therapy, then you'll love it!

Offensive, smug, boring, pseudo-religious, environmentalist, green-wash trash from a director seemingly enthralled by a bizarre snese of American environmental superiority - when in fact the USA is the least environmentally friendly country on earth.

Funny though: I never realised blue people on a distant planet could look like African Americans or have perfect teeth.

Stoopid and offensive - and proof, if any were needed, that money will buy you Oscar nominations.

This movie is the definition of dumb.

This film was SUCH a disappointment. It is essential a heavily adapted version of a novel which owes a great deal to Adrian Mole and other coming of age books and films (400 blows; 50 days last summer). However, the film was clearly not filmed in Swansea; the locations were picked to look small seaside town-ish, and are no way where the novel is set! No Gower either! Also, the film is trying way too hard to be quirky - in such a slef-conscious and 'cool' way that it fails utterly to be funny OR quirky. It's a rather dull piece of whimsy - and I was watching my watch several times. The biggest issue, however, is the lack of any sympathetic characters and the fact that neither I nor anyone watching the film with me laughed out loud - not even once! It simply IS NOT FUNNY! This movie is trying SO hard to be whimsically quirky and thinks it's so clever and funny - that makes it just look smug. And it's SO derivative of US indie movies too - an erzatz model of those types of US indie movies that are also irritating. Submarine is a real diappointment. I hope it sinks without trace. If this is where our taxes go, thank goodness the Film Council has been abolished! Two stars is being generous - I liked the music and could location-spot!

I HATED this film. Mike Leigh gets far too many plaudits from the cinephile crowd - his films are often dull leftwing rants. Also, he tends to hate working class people who try to better themselves (most of his films show this) but lately he has been trying to redress the balance: that is why here Jim Broadbent and his wife Gerri - the most irritatingly smug woman in the world - are shown as working class persons 'made good' - all caring sharing and wonderful. Only a middle class son of a wealthy doctor like Leigh could come up with such nonsense! The more I think about this film the more I hate it! It is outrageous that Leigh gets taxpayers' money to make this crap when far better filmmakers and writers can't get funding. This should have been a BBC2 drama - at best. I'd rather pay not to watch this drivel again.

This is a wonderful film - highly entertaining and unusual. It keeps up the pace and has a cracking twist ending - though the writer of the novel should get the credit for all that! The acting is top notch - the drunk assistant especially - the flashbacks work well, and the scenes are interesting. My only gripe would be the romantic subplot - this kind of thing works better in novels than films. When that plot strand came along it intruded a bit into the story - but not enough to spoil it. Why can't more films - from anywhere - be like this? Five stars!

Well, what can I say? This film is French, so obviously it's pretentious piffle, as is the tradition. I would have given this flight of fancy 1 star - but the animation sequences are good, as is some acting, and there are a few good one-liners. And Paris looks pretty. Otherwise, this is only for lovers of Gondry and cinematic Frenchiness. At least it's not as bad as 'Tokyo', another load of prententioua French faffing about and nonsense.

This is that rare beast: a French film that is actually entertaining. OK so it's all very soapy and family-orientated. But it is entertaining and there are some great lines in some funny dialogue. I think this is French trying to be cool American - but perhaps no worse for that. Not brilliant but it passes the time happily enough.

The film is a real comedy find! (as is 2012: The Rapture).

Terrible script, worst 'feen toon' I've heard for ages (written by the producer - never a good sign...), histrionic emo-acting, the usual American sloppy spiritual themes (Christian, Tibetan...), the usual anti-British tone from this German director, and the ticky boxy ethnic and national quotes - no doubt to try and sell the film in China, India etc.

Yes, the special effects are good. No big deal, these days. Seen it all before...

The funniest thing is when they show archive TV news clips to show riots happening around the world - the one from London is the famous, much-showed image of a woman being knocked down by a police horse in the poll tax riots os the 90s! I laughed out loud at this point!

Emmerich was the director, wasn't he, who made U571 which claimed the Americans captured a U-boat (actually, the British did)? And didn't he also make The Patriot which showed the British committing atrocities which were actually committed by the gestapo in WWII? The guy is probably upset that we won the war eh...

But what I really want to know is: will we ever have a white man playing the president of the USA ever again I wonder... Or perhaps even a bad, 'unsaintly' black man? Or are Americans to guilty about their undoubted racial crimes to do that?

Hollywood tripe. Watch it and scream with laughter!

This film works. Why? It's got a GREAT script - and the fact that the director, the actors and everyone else remembers that is why it works, even though it's a bit dated now. It was updated in the 70s or 80s - but this first version is better. It is genuinely creepy - far more than any horror movie - and keeps the audience guessing. The tension crackles right till the end. One of the best films ever made - in France or anywhere. Watch it and learn.

I enjoyed this film. It's so unlike so many US films, and I enjoyed it for just that, for a start. I liked the sinister tone - though the country hick scenarios are perhaps steroetyped a bit too much. I liked the way the film had much of the colour sucked out of it - like the nordic addict hillbilly characters' faces! It drags a little in the middle, but generally keeps the pace going OK: the plot points come dead on cue and power the plot along in a way movies like this usually fail to do. I liked the gruesome scenes too - believable, up to a point. The one thing that irritated me - and this is common in movies filmed by women - is the way all the male characters are portrayed as baddies and all the women as goodies - gentle little things who are such victims of men and suffer so much. Sexist is the word! Patronising too. The female equivalent of a male director only using women as eye candy. But anyhow, it's WAY better than the kind of silly romantic 'comedies' most female directors seem to make. Different and worth watching.

I really enjoyed this. It's a light, nostalgic, semi-autobiographical film by Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant - but it's nothing like The Office (thank goodness!). There are some lovely scenes - I liked Gervais as the father and the racist grandmother! And, despite being too young for the 70s, I loved the music! Sure, some was from the 80s in a 70s movie - but a little poestic licence is fine. All in all, this is way funnier than most Hollywood comedies. Not perfect or spectacularly funny, but well worth renting.

I thought this was a great comedy! Well written, good characterisation, good acting. I laughed several times - and that doesn't usually happen when I watch Hollywood 'comedies'.

It's also based on a book (good sign) and is actually farily intelligent - which is really unusual for Hollywood comedies these days.

I suppose it's for the US market and some people will consider it controversial and outrageous and offensive because it's about a gay couple; the Americans are puritans, so may have an issue. Personally, I find stupidity of the average dumb Hollywood 'comedy' infinitely more offensive!

The laughs mainly come from the fast pace, the bright script and the final twist.; but for me tha biggest laughs come from all the scams! It's a bit like a gay, 21st century Paper Moon.