Film Reviews by RP

This is the third 'Anne Of Green Gables' TV mini-series written and produced by Kevin Sullivan. While it has the same characters and players (Megan Follows as Anne yet again) it is not based on LM Montgomery's books but a story written by Sullivan that takes Anne and hubby Gilbert Blythe off to World War I.

The film follows Anne and Gilbert to New York where Gil works as a doctor at a prestigious hospital (but doesn't like the politics and emphasis on rich patients) and budding author Anne get a job with a publisher (and is cheated out of her first 'proper' book). Gil is pressured into joining up, and after her letters are returned and Gil goes missing in action, Anne follows him to the front as a Red Cross auxiliary nurse. After some silly and unrealistic adventures, all live happily ever after back on Prince Edward Island.

It isn't a patch on the first two Sullivan adaptations and is a big disappointment. The story is poor, the acting is wooden, and the location scenes (New York, London, France, Germany) all look very Canadian to me. I can only give it 2/5 stars.

I watched this saccharine-sweet, lengthy (it was originally a TV mini-series) film with three girls (two young teens + 7 year old) who gave their verdict: "It's *so* good." And it is, it really is.

It's a concatenation of several of the 'Anne Of Green Gables' books by Canadian author LM Montgomery. The film takes the story of Anne through further adventures in Avonlea, her studies to become a teacher, and teaching in a boarding school for posh young ladies, where she manages to win over her many opponents. And Megan Follows really does make an excellent 'Anne'.

Now I've promised my group of girls that I'd order up the next set of DVDs...

Excellent family viewing. 4/5 stars.

I had recently seen lead actress Katherine Isabelle (who plays Ginger) in the rather bizarre 'American Mary' so looked up her other films and found this one. And it's rather good.

Yes, I suppose it could be described as a 'teen horror' or even a poor girl's 'American Werewolf in London' but I really liked this low-budget Canadian shocker.

The story goes like this: the Fitzgerald sisters, Ginger and Brigitte (Emily Perkins) are school students who do a photo series of realistic fake death scenes for a school project. Meanwhile, local dogs are found half eaten and Brigitte is bullied. Then Ginger (of course) is bitten by a passing werewolf, starts to grow hair (of course) in strange places - and indeed a tail! - becomes attractive to boys, and (of course) begins to take revenge, while all the time her sister is searching for a 'cure'.

Despite the fairly standard storyline the film stands out from similar teen-scream films. The transformation sequence is well done, Ginger/werewolf is scary, there's plenty of blood and guts, and although there is much squealing of teenage girls and a bit too much f-ing and blinding for my taste the film is rather well done.

I liked it - 4/5 stars.

Hmmm... I enjoyed this film and can recommend it as a well written, well directed, well acted reasonably edge-of-the-seat affair. It won 3 Oscars and 3 BAFTAs - so why do I say 'Hmmm...' ?

The intro says 'Based on a true story'. Well, it is indeed 'based' on a true story but it's by no means true. It is of course, a Hollywood drama. It reminds me very much of those American films where America 'won the war' - yes, they played an extremely important role, but ignoring the role of the other Allies is unforgivable. And so it proves here.

I have to confess my ignorance - when the film was praised by critics and then went on to win many awards I really didn't know much about the historical events. A quick Google and a Wikipedia search (yes, I know Wikipedia isn't always accurate) gave me a much more realistic account of the historical events on which 'Argo' is based, and if you look up 'Canadian Caper' and read the 'Historical inaccuracies' section in the film's Wikipedia article you'll get some idea of reality. Suffice to say that the 6 Americans were indeed assisted by the Brits, they weren't all cooped up in the Canadian Ambassador's residence, the New Zealanders drove them to the airport, and they left without fuss and without any last minute dash for safety. So that's why I say 'Hmmm...'

Having said all that, I did enjoy the film. Ben Affleck both directs and (of course) takes the lead role as Antonio 'Tony' Mendez the CIA man, and John Goodman gets to play a straight role for once. I enjoyed it but I'm not convinced that it was really worth all those awards - it's too US-centric for me. 3/5 stars.

More than a mere costume drama, this is a part of our history that I was unaware of before watching this superb film. Search Wikipedia for 'Caroline Matilda' and read all about it...

At age 15 HRH Princess Caroline Matilda, daughter of the Prince of Wales was married off to her cousin, King Christian VII of Denmark. The film is a dramatisation of her relationship with Christian and her affair with the royal physician, Johann Friedrich Struensee.

Both Caroline's brother (George III) and her husband suffered from mental illness - and the film depicts Struensee taking advantage of Christian's illness to advance his ideas influenced by 'The Age of Enlightenment' then sweeping across Europe. Not unexpectedly this met with considerable opposition from both Court and Church, with unfortunate and deadly consequences.

The film is in Danish with subtitles, although there are a few words in English. The subtitles are hard to read, but bear with it...

The film is beautifully photographed, well acted and tells a moving tale. Superb stuff - 5/5 stars.

Painful to watch yet brilliant in its execution, 'Amour' is yet another over-honest film from Austrian director Michael Haneke.

Haneke seems to choose subjects which allow him to examine problems in society and 'Amour' is no exception, this time with a long hard look at what happens when love for one's partner is confronted with the day-to-day reality of caring for someone suffering cruelly from old age, and specifically from paralysis following a stroke.

Let down by family, let down by paid nursing staff, wanting to do what is right yet knowing that he will fail, this is an emotionally demanding film showing a man's love for his wife as it faces the greatest - and final - test.

See it and weep. 5/5 stars.

Low budget Canadian schlock horror film filled with over-the-top gratuitous violence. It's supposedly a homage to the 'grindhouse' films of the 1970s - 1980s, perhaps what in the UK we might call 'video nasties'.

'Hobo With A Shotgun' first appeared as a spoof trailer screened as part of the 'Grindhouse' double bill (comprising Robert Rodriguez' ' Planet Terror' and Quentin Tarantino's 'Death Proof') - the film 'Hobo With A Shotgun' is based on the premise outlined in this spoof trailer, which you can find on YouTube.

Suffice to say that it's seriously violent with much bloodshed and seems to set out to as offensive as possible, albeit in a sort of 'rude schoolboy' manner. Don't watch it if you're easily offended by (for example) assorted slaughtering, heads being removed by a barbed wire tow-rope, semi-naked women gyrating in fountains of blood, schoolgirl prostitutes, drug use, a flamethrower used on a school bus, partial decapitation by hand saw, assault by ice skate, disembowelling a strung up body with a baseball bat with embedded razor blades, motorbike riding demons, much f-ing and blinding - oh yes, and lots of shotgun wounds.

Rutger Hauer's lined and timeworn face is perfect for the unnamed hobo who rides into town and plans to buy a lawnmower for his future garden maintenance business - but ends up buying a shotgun instead.

If that sounds like the film for you, I can recommend it. Great, glorious, gory stuff with buckets of blood - 4/5 stars. But if you're easily offended, I suggest you steer clear.

I seem to have watched a few 'action' films set in tower blocks recently - and here's another. I don't know quite what the fascination with the particular building design is, but if you've seen 'Dredd' then I reckon you'll recognise the plot of this one: law enforcement team enter dodgy tower block to get big boss baddie. Err, that's it.

The difference is that this - despite starting off as a gun-laden SWAT team assignment - is a violent Indonesian martial arts movie with much kicking, punching, knives and machetes and spilling of blood. If you like the genre then you'll probably like this: the action is non-stop and the fight scenes lengthy and well choreographed.

But after a while I longed for some semblance of a plot (or at least an original plot), better dialogue, more character development. I know that may be asking a lot from a film like this, but after a while there's only so much chop sockey that a man can take.

I'll give it 3/5 stars. Despite the non-stop action I found it profoundly average.

Blind woman has stalker. Err, that's it.

Directed by Guillem Morales (forget references to Guillermo del Toro, his name is taken in vain) it's in Spanish with subtitles. Once you're over that minor hurdle and the fact that it owes a great deal to Hitchcock, you'll find it a well acted suspense movie, although somewhat predictable since the baddie is pretty easy to figure out. There are a few clichéd shocks here and there (hangings, throat slitting, eyeball puncturing) but it's not a horror film - it's most definitely a suspense film / psychological thriller.

Belén Rueda plays Julia (and indeed, her sister) superbly as she gradually loses her sight and sees the mysterious man on the periphery of her failing vision. Overall this is a tense and very well crafted film. Recommended - 4/5 stars.

When I was a boy I came across a box of books my mother had saved from her childhood. You know the kind of thing: horsey books, girl's boarding school adventures - and a copy of 'Anne Of Green Gables' by LM Montgomery. I read it and enjoyed it, although it's not a typical boy's book :)

Then I saw this made-for-TV version back in the 1980s, videotaped it and watched it many times with my children, and now I've watched it yet again on DVD.

It is of course saccharine sweet and yet told with a edge of childhood imagination and reality that captures much of the spirit of the books. Megan Follows is a good choice to play Anne Shirley and seems to encapsulate Anne's character as I imagined it.

Excellent family viewing. 4/5 stars.

This is a seriously disturbing study of John Bunting, an Australian serial killer who murdered a dozen people in South Australia in the 1990s. It's a hard film to watch and I wouldn't call it entertainment.

It isn't a 'story' - this is real life, and the film is shot in a semi-documentary 'fly on the wall' style. Because of this and unless you know the people and background to the events it is somewhat confusing - if you do decide to view it I suggest you look up 'Snowtown murders' on Wikipedia to get a feel of who the characters are.

This isn't a horror film, it's more a film about how a charismatic psychopath invades the life of a needy, deprived family and seduces young James Vlassakis into a series of horrendous acts.

This is a tough watch and can't say that I 'enjoyed' this film, but it really is a tour de force of cinema. 4/5 stars - highly recommended, but approach with caution.

Low budget US 'comedy horror' / slasher movie / whodunnit. Someone is bumping off old high school baseball team of recently released patient from a mental hospital. Err, that's it.

For the first 10 minutes or so I sat thinking: this is awful, I really can't watch any more of this USAnian so-called 'humor'. But it got better - and better. This really is a well acted, humorous film which touches upon bullying, family life and an assortment of unexpected subjects. And for the horror fans it has the required severed heads, slit throats, gushing blood etc.

There are some excellent actors here including Karen Black and Barry Bostwick. Despite the title and a few grisly bits it really isn't a horror film. There's a bit too much f-ing and blinding for my taste but try it - you might enjoy it. 3/5 stars.

I came late to 'Spiral' (aka 'Engrenages') and although this French TV cop/legal drama series has been shown on BBC4 I missed it there and watched Seasons 1-3 on DVD. I was eagerly awaiting Season 4 and deliberately did not watch it on TV but waited for the DVD version so that I could immerse myself in it.

And immerse myself I did - 3 discs, 12 x 50 minute episodes, 10 hours of viewing. I got discs 1 and 2 together and watched over 6 hours straight. Then - oh no! - I had to wait a couple of days for the final disc, then another 3+ hours of nail biting viewing.

I couldn't take my eyes off the screen - this really is excellent stuff. If you think this is gushing, over-the-top praise, then I suggest that you start at Season 1 and try it. And if you've seen the earlier seasons then I can confirm that Season 4 is of the same high quality.

The familiar characters are there: hard done-by Captain Laure Bertaud and her overworked police team, beautiful but sleazy lawyer Joséphine Karlsson, clean-cut lawyer Pierre Clément and Juge François Roban, as ever in pursuit of justice to the detriment of his own career.

This time the multi-threaded storyline is about a group of left-wing urban revolutionaries and includes intertwined stories about illegal immigrants from the French ex-colonies in Africa, Kurdish arms dealers, and a man unjustly imprisoned for rape.

Yes it's in French with subtitles, but don't let that put you off. This is TV cop drama of the very highest quality. Superb stuff - 5/5 stars.

Effective low budget Brit thriller about a group of people trapped in a tower block and coming under sniper attack. Err, that's it.

At only 86 minutes long the idea isn't stretched out too far, the plot and performances aren't stretched out too thin, and there's no time to examine the motivation of the (rather obvious, given the weapon) sniper. It's one of those films where it's over before you spot the cracks.

Having said that, it's not at all bad. The writing from James Moran - he scripted the rather (blackly) humorous 'Severance' and 'Cockneys vs Zombies' - is snappy, and the directing makes good use of the claustrophobic surroundings. The acting from Sheridan Smith and Jack O'Connell in the lead roles is good, and O'Connell gets to reprise his convincing yob roles from 'Harry Brown' and 'Eden Lake'.

A bit too much f-ing and blinding for my taste, but I enjoyed it. 3/5 stars - not quite good enough for 4.

I really didn't know what to expect from this film - horror? torture porn? What, exactly?

It's a low budget Canadian film which combines dead-pan humour with a rape/revenge story set in the world of body modification. Bizarre or what? There aren't any shocks - other than learning what some people will apparently do to their bodies and there's no horror, or not what I call horror anyway.

What there is - despite the low budget (it was apparently shot in just 15 days) - is a stylish, well acted, good looking film with a bizarre storyline, directed by the so-called 'Twisted Sisters', the Soska twins. There aren't many women film directors, let alone of films in the horror genre - so it's worth seeing just for that - and the twins even have a cameo role.

The story itself goes something like this: Mary Mason (well played by Katherine Isabelle) is a promising medical student. Short of cash, she goes for an audition at a strip club but is diverted into sewing up a wounded (tortured?) man. One of the dancers at the club is into body modification and has had surgery to make her look like Betty Boop and introduces her to her next 'job': surgery to make a woman look even more doll-like. After that comes a rape/revenge sequence, and separately Mary's reputation grows and she build up wealth and a lengthy client list. It turns out that Mary is keeping the rapist alive and continuing his torture, but her works come back to haunt her via the husband of her first client...

With a story like that you'd expect buckets of blood and gruesome scenes, but strangely it's all quite restrained and just about everything happens off camera. So it's not torture porn at all...

It is quite well done and has the look and feel of a possible minor cult classic, but for me it's not worth watching a second time.

I'll give it 3/5 stars - it's not bad, but I've seen a lot better. Just nothing quite like it :)