Film Reviews by GI

Taika Waititi's follow up to 2017s Thor: Ragnarok and more of his tongue in cheek humour and Chris Hemsworth relaxed and having an absolute ball in the title role. The previous film lifted the Marvel film franchise out of the doldrums, along with the Guardians Of The Galaxy trilogy (they make a brief appearance here too) and gave it a much needed injection of good natured humour. This latest does the same but with less originality and what you have is a fairly standard MCU film, indeed superhero film, with plenty of huge effects, monsters, strange worlds and punch ups (don't they always end up with one?). Here Christian Bale has been lured back to the genre as the chief baddie, who has a grievance with the Gods and sets about annihilating them. Thor teams up with his old girlfriend (Natalie Portman) who much to his surprise now wields his hammer, to battle him. MCU fans will love this and will be able to link the various characters from other films and there's a great cameo from Russell Crowe, who does a bizarre but hilarious accent as the top god, Zeus. Entertaining as far as it goes, nothing much new, and just maybe the franchise has chased itself up a dead end as further films may well be very tiresome.

This is best described as the Australian Red Dawn (1984), which itself was remade in 2012, where a group off bored teenagers in a small Australian town go camping in the bush for a weekend and whilst they're away the country is invaded by a foreign power. The story follows their initial discovery of the invasion, their attempts to avoid capture and eventually becoming guerrilla fighters. It's a reasonably entertaining drama with a couple of decent set pieces including a big chase sequence although the whole thing is totally full of plot holes and at times daft. The inclusion of some romance that is more like a teenage high school drama slows the film down which lacks the action needed to make it really good. Apparently there were plans for sequels which were shelved when this failed to find an audience. Overall this is watchable but hinders possibly by budgetary restraints.

Ridley Scott's dark, adult fairy tale film sits a little strange in his oeuvre and for that reason it's an intriguing film even if you consider it an oddity. Set in a mythical fairy tale land the Lord of Darkness, a massively impressive performance by Tim Curry, plans to bring eternal darkness to the land and to do so he must kill the last two unicorns. To thwart him we have Jack, a young Tom Cruise and a Princess, played by Mia Sara. Into the mix there are elves, dwarves and sprites and so it's all influenced by Tolkien and Grimm fairy stories and Scott has incorporated some very dark images. It does seem however that he hasn't been able to make up his mind whether to make a very adult film, a family film or a childrens film and so what resulted is a hybrid that occasionally becomes annoying whilst watching it. As you'd expect with Scott its visually very impressive and his own Blade Runner (1982) is an influence on the set designs (this was the film he made directly after Blade Runner). There are in fact several versions of the film around and each has different scenes, script and soundtrack. The Director's Cut is the one I'd strongly recommend. It was considered lost for several years but rediscovered and is both Scott's and Cruise' preferred version. Compared to the European Theatrical cut it's a longer, more coherent and introduces themes of jealousy, lust, love and vanity much more directly. Definitely a film to seek out if you've never seen it, it will bemuse some and intrigue most.

An entertaining and atmospheric horror film that draws its influence from It Follows (2014) where an evil entity stalks a victim until it's passed onto the next victim. In this case it's by committing suicide! The film has the usual moody light and dark shadows and sudden cattle prod shocks mixed with some gore and grotesque deaths. Rose (Sosie Bacon) is a doctor in an emergency mental health ward who is disturbed by the suicide of a young woman during a therapy session with her. Just before killing herself she exhibited a malevolent smile. Rose is then haunted by strange visions and disturbances including seeing people with the same smile. It appears she has become the entities next victim unless she can find out how, why, what etc etc. There's a theme emerges around facing one's own guilt and past traumas (Rose has a horrible history) and the film has a solid pace and tension. It's a genre piece, well made and will certainly appeal to horror fans.

This is a nostalgic British heist film about a group of former and disaffected Army officers who plan and execute a bank robbery. There's a mild comedy feel to script and the great array of stalwart British actors, Jack Hawkins, Roger Livesey, Nigel Patrick, Richard Attenborough and Terence Alexander will be familiar to those of a certain age - keen viewers will also spot a very early appearance of Oliver Reed as a gay actor. Overall it's a wonderful story though, well scripted and with, for its time, a gritty robbery set piece at its heart. Hawkins is the leader who brings together a group of ex soldiers who all have financial problems and a history that makes them susceptible to committing the audacious crime. This is an enjoyable and interesting film, not only for it's nostalgic value, but also as a classic British crime film that is well worth seeking out.

It's been many years since I last watched this B movie sci-fi heavily influenced by Blade Runner (1982) and possibly The Terminator (1984) and certainly styled like the films of John Carpenter. It's become a bit of a cult favourite despite its obvious cheapness and shoddy acting, effects and plot. Tim Thomerson plays Jack Deth, a cop from a dystopian future who is sent back in time to the Los Angeles of 1984 to hunt down the bad guy who turns people into obedient zombie like followers called Trancers. Helen Hunt is the girl who helps him and in whom he falls in love. It's all complete nonsense and follows the mode set by Blade Runner of the classic hard boiled detective genre crossed over into science fiction. No one is taking any of it seriously and it did spawn a couple of sequels. But it hasn't aged well.

A fairly routine revenge western with the usual, at times gruesome, violence and a slightly anti-climactic ending. January Jones is a former prostitute now living with her Mexican husband on a small farm. Their nearest neighbour is a sadistic religious cult leader played with obvious relish by Jason Isaacs who casually murders anyone he finds distasteful including Jone's husband. Into the mix rides an eccentric lawman played by Ed Harris who is looking for the killer of two brothers. It all ends in a bloody trail of gunplay, predictably and as I said a little disappointingly but it's entertaining in it's way as a simple genre piece.

Originally to be directed by Guy Ritchie this still has the hallmarks of the style of British crime film he laid down in Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1999). But director Matthew Vaughn gave this his own particular vision and the end result is a smooth, humorous and grittily realistic London crime drama that really rocks. A plot full of twists and turns and some brilliantly conceived characters not least the unnamed main character played by Daniel Craig who not only secured the James Bond role on the back of his performance here but he does a small Bond homage in the film which even in hindsight is very funny. Aided by a cast including Colm Meaney, Sienna Miller, Ben Wishaw, Tom Hardy and others who have all gone onto bigger and better things. Craig is a sophisticated drug dealer operating at the top of the business where he works for an uncouth crime boss (Kenneth Cranham). He survives in the violent world by following some simple rules and has a plan to get out of the business. But when the boss asks him for two favours, to find the daughter of a friend and to find a buyer for a large consignment of ecstasy pills, his plans are thrown into disarray and he is forced to ignore his rules! This is a great film and deserves to be recognised as one of the best of the new style of modern, British crime films.

This is one of those magnificent movies that makes you realise why you fell in love with cinema. It's a masterpiece, epic, stunningly beautiful, brilliantly scripted and directed and keeps at it's heart an intimate character study of a diverse historical figure. Set during the First World war it tells the story of T.E. Lawrence, an eccentric young British army officer who is sent by his superiors to act as liaison to an Arab prince to encourage the Arabs to fight the Turks. The British, of course, have designs on Arabia but Lawrence against the odds and to the surprise of his British High Command unites the warring Arab tribes and secures unprecedented victories against the Turkish army at personal cost to his beliefs and perhaps his sanity. There are some very famous scenes to be enjoyed here and a story that is really interesting and brilliantly told. Peter O'Toole plays Lawrence to sheer perfection aided by a stellar cast including Alec Guinness, Omar Shariff, Jack Hawkins, Anthony Quayle, Claude Rains and Anthony Quinn. The film garnered seven Academy Awards and they are richly deserved. A magnificent, beautiful film and one every film fan must see and watch time and time again.

A deeply unsettling drama based on the true story of Martin Bryant, a mentally disturbed man who carried out Australia's bloodiest massacre in 1996. The film charts the life of Martin, nicknamed Nitram at his school, and his dysfunctional family life with a weak father and shrill, hard-nosed mother, who has long since despaired of getting any love from her son and is acutely aware of his mental instability. Caleb Landry Jones plays Nitram as a belligerent young man whose behaviour lacks normal boundaries. He is befriended by a reclusive and wealthy woman, Helen (Essie Davis) and moves into her somewhat ramshackle large house. When she is killed in a road crash Nitram inherits her wealth and has access to enough money to begin collecting an arsenal of guns. Director Justin Kurzel stays away from showing the actual massacre which takes place at the film's end and off camera. This is arguably a good decision and one that prevents the awful events from becoming glorified although other film's that have depicted mass killers have included the event with positive and deliberately shocking results such as 22 July (2018) and Polytechnique (2019). This is a descent into madness narrative with a disturbing central performance and three other great ones from Judy Davis and Anthony LaPaglia as the parents and Davis as Helen. The film leaves open questions as to the whether Bryant was evil or just behaviourally ill and it's interesting to discover at the film's end that he didn't commit suicide like many mass killers or killed by the police but remains in prison to this day. The key message delivered though is the issue of gun control and ownership. From the scene where he is allowed by a gun dealer to buy weapons without the necessary licence to the quick decision by the Australian Government to restrict gun types and ownership after the killings. A strong, compelling character study, worth checking out.

This is a deeply moving, slightly sad but compassionate drama set in Ireland in the early 1980s. It's a gentle and beautiful film with stunning cinematography and wonderful performances. Cáit (Catherine Clinch), is the ten year girl of the title, introverted and shy she is one of a large dysfunctional family who run a failing small holding. Her mother is yet again pregnant and her father is a lazy drunk. One day, without telling her, her father takes Cáit to spend the summer with her mother's cousin (Carrie Crowley), who along with her husband, Seán (Andrew Bennett), run a farm. Thrust into this strange environment Cáit is bewildered but receives attention and affection she has never before experienced and soon she begins to blossom. This is a sort of coming of age scenario in that Cáit begins to grasp the world of adults, something she has previously only observed in her immature and withdrawn way. The film beautifully captures the the child's eye view of the world and Clinch is simply wonderful in the role. The film has a constant atmosphere that something awful is going to happen and yet it's a very moving and tender film that I found quite charming. This has all the hallmarks of becoming a classic.

The latest instalment or a sequel to Scream (2022)? Whichever way you want to label it this is the goriest in the franchise to date apparently. I'm not a huge fan and so apart from the very first 1996 one and these two latest I'm only going on reports. But this is certainly a gory slasher and was all the more entertaining for it. Narratively it's a sequel with the surviving protagonists from the previous film now all relocated to a new town and living in a forever sense of danger. And danger doesn't take too long to arrive in the form of the iconic 'Ghostface' killer who is out for revenge. As there were two killers in the 2022 film both of whom got their comeuppance the stage is set for the mystery element of who is the killer this time around? You'll have fun trying to guess. There's the humorous references to slasher film tropes and other films and lots of red herrings to keep you hooked. I found myself enjoying it despite myself. Yes it's more of the same as last time and it's a bit formulaic but it delivers exactly what you want with plenty of blood and tension. There's a fantastic section set on the subway during halloween with most of the passengers dressed as movie horror characters including a few Ghostfaces, but which, if any, is the real killer? All good fun and if you like this sort of thing it will be well worth your time.

While watching this romcom it always seemed familiar as if I'd seen it before. It's because it's derivative of other films and is basically an imitation of When Harry Met Sally (1989). Having said that it's very watchable and for the most part entertaining mainly due to the two leads of Jason Sudeikis and Alison Brie who have a strong on screen chemistry. They play Jake and Lainey, who meet in college, have a one night stand and then lose touch. Years later they meet and find they both have the same problem with relationships and decide to stay platonic friends. This cues lots of sexual tension and the film's ending is signposted for you in big bold letters! It's no spoiler really to spell it out.....They get together!! Of course they do. In this sense the films ultimately a routine affair and does become a little tiresome. Brie is a gifted comedy actor and for her alone the film is worth a look.

Lawman is not a particularly celebrated western nor is it that clever. Full of genre clichés and with a rather clumsy script it nevertheless has a distinguished cast. Burt Lancaster is the titular lawman, Jared Maddox, an uncompromising character who sees the law as the ultimate tamer of the west, Robert Ryan, as a burned out fellow lawman, Lee J. Cobb as a cattle baron used to paying off the law when it suits him and Joseph Wiseman as a saloon owner with a chequered history. All these characters are clichéd too and in the hands of director Michael Winner the film resorts to blood spurting violence and incorporates everything you can think of from the western genre. And yet it's great fun and Lancaster is superb as the dark (note the ever present use of shadow in case you don't get that he's a dark character!!!) 'killer of men'. It's a classic fiction narrative of a powerful force arriving to disrupt the peace and put things right and leave with the resultant changes on the remaining characters. The western has often used this basic story structure and here the lawman represents the force of change. It's a 'professional' western in the sense that the skilled gunfighter is the main protagonist but in here too is the seeds of the cattle baron narrative (in the form of Cobb's bigshot) and modern viewers may see a contemporary resonance to something like the TV series, Yellowstone. In the hands of a more subtle director, who loves his zoom shots, and a better screenplay this would have been possibly better celebrated. Looking at Winner's films today especially his westerns they are focused on death which is the predominant theme and scenes of death and decay litter this movie. Overall this is a solid modern western made in the early years of the revisionist period for the western. It hangs onto too many genre tropes to be up there with the films of directors Sam Peckinpah or Clint Eastwood but it has its merits and is worth checking out.

A period crime drama set in Virginia during the Prohibition. In many ways this film whilst entertaining and with a great cast lacks the elements to make it something really great. All the ingredients are there they just never coalesce properly. This appears to be because of the strained direction by John Hillcoat who seems more intent on making a bloody western and striving for period authenticity over strong storylines. However what there is results in an interesting albeit flawed crime film that pits a 'hillbilly' family against the corrupt forces of law and order. Tom Hardy is the head of the Bondurant family of three brothers. They make illegal moonshine which they sell to the locals and organised crime in Chicago. When they refuse to play ball with a new corrupt District Attorney a war breaks out between them and a sadistic federal agent played by Guy Pearce. There's some gut wrenching violence, with one scene in particular and plenty of violent set piece action. A romance between Hardy's Forrest Bondurant and Jessica Chastain's, Maggie, is a distraction and her back story is not fully explored. Equally the romance between younger brother Jack, whose ambitions drive the narrative, and local girl Bertha (Mia Wasikowska) is also rather pointless in many ways because the film doesn't grip the issues it suggests of the poor 'mountain' community forced into crime by the depression and power hungry corruption and the mafia (represented here in a cameo by Gary Oldman). Even the Sam Peckinpah influences aren't fully realised in the build up to a climactic gun battle results in a fairly lame affair. Guy Pearce, clearly relishing the slimy and sadistic agent, Rakes, seems almost a cartoonish villain with shaved eyebrows, a penchant for hurting people and yet we never get to find out anything about him. He's just there to hate. I may be doing this film some injustice because it's well made and, based on a true story, and satisfies as a genre piece perfectly well. All the cast involved does a great job with what the script gives them but it's a film that leaves you somewhat unsatisfied.