Film Reviews by GI

It's perhaps hard to understand today that on release this film was much derided by critics although it was hugely popular with audiences and in particular in the USA. Sergio Leone continued his general subversive take on the classic western genre honing his visuals with a perfect eye on pure cinema art rather than trying to emulate the myths and legends that the western genre uses to garner its decades of popularity. This is really a masterpiece of cinema, epic, stoic and surprisingly accurate in its depictions of the American Civil War. With the combination of the iconic Ennio Morricone soundtrack, Leone's shifts from extreme facial close ups (the face as landscape) to wide shot vistas is simply beautiful. The very way he takes the simple gunfight (basically a straight forward linear duel in westerns) and transformed it into a circus arena style, suspenseful piece of art is just magical. The story is essentially an odyssey about three men, all resorting to murder and crime to survive as the Civil War rages around them, who hear about a stash of stolen army gold now hidden. They each covet it but at various times each needs the others to get to its location and retrieve it with the inevitable journey to a final climactic confrontation. Clint Eastwood plays his character almost identically as he did in the two earlier westerns he made with Leone (I must reiterate though that he's NOT the same character, that was an invention of the American publicists, Leone always insisted they are three films with three different characters and in my view it's best to view the films like this), Eli Wallach is the stand out as Tuco, a Mexican bandit and Lee Van Cleef is magnificent as a cunning assassin. There are battles, gunfights and some very touching and emotional scenes too and interestingly there is no romance to divert the male protagonists from their mission. This is cinema as art in its purest sense, a visual masterpiece and a film to savour time and time again. It's just wonderful.

A very intriguing period thriller set in the mid 19th century in a small village where an experienced nurse played by Florence Pugh is hired by the village elders to 'watch' a young nine year old girl who has allegedly not eaten for four months. Hoping to prove a miracle the religious men are unprepared for the practical and fact driven nurse who sees that a young girl is dying and they are allowing it. There's obviously a mystery element to this story that has a slow burning suspense and a music score that hints at a horror narrative. It's Pugh that holds the attention here, she is utterly note perfect and proves what a highly talented actor she is. If for no other reason see this film for her performance. The narrative does question the issue of extreme religious views and the director Sebastiàn Lelio offers a prologue and epilogue that, in my view, was unnecessary but seems to be grounding the story in the modern world as a comparison. This is gimmicky and I'm unconvinced by it but that aside this is a really interesting film that is worthy of awards. The support cast are superb including Kila Lord Cassidy as the young girl, Tom Burke, Toby Jones and Ciarán Hinds.

For about two thirds this film is a funny romcom that utilises the Covid 19 UK Lockdown restrictions to look at a relationship that is exposed by the couple trapped together. Their already struggling bond fracturing more and more and Anne Hathaway and Chiwetel Ejiofor as Linda, a bored but successful executive, and Paxton, a delivery driver trapped in a lowly job due to a criminal conviction and now furloughed, bicker and snipe at one another. Whilst the script is occasionally clunky it is amusing and has a couple of funny cameos from Ben Stiller and Ben Kingsley who appear on 'zoom' meetings. Then the film veers off into a stupid heist comedy as the couple hatch a plan to steal a diamond from Harrods. This part of the film ruins it, it's not a dead loss but it smacks of a film made on the hoof without proper planning because without that this might've been an interesting romcom set in the lockdown. It's watchable but nothing here is as good as it could have been.

A mundane and tasteless action film with Sylvester Stallone finally nailing himself into self parody. Here he plays Joe, a loner and a garbage man who harbours a secret. That will soon get revealed mostly by the obsessive attentions of Sam (Jason Walton), a street kid who believes that a superhero, the Samaritan, believed killed years ago is still alive. And yes of course it's Joe. The Samaritan was a genetically mutated human with super strength who had to battle his evil twin brother to stop him killing lots of folks. Both allegedly died in the fight....there's few flashbacks to it. It's all a bit underwhelming and predictable although a final twist I didn't see coming! There's a stereotypical baddie played by Pilot Asbæk who just goes through the motions. The atmosphere is all reminiscent of the DC world, here we are in Granite City and there's general mayhem which is all a bit like Robocop (1987), dark, unfriendly and crime ridden. There's nothing new here and it seems it's all for Stallone to show he can still fight lots of younger baddies.

This comedy crime thriller is a sort of satirical hard boiled detective thriller that all seems to a bit silly and tries far to hard to impress. One of the main issues is that Charlie Hunnam, desperate to be a top leading man, just isn't the right lead here. He lacks the charisma and comedy chops to carry this off effectively and he's not aided by the presence of Mel Gibson. Gibson seems to think that playing a suspected wife murderer who is an eccentric doting father and can quote Shakespeare will help with his rehabilitation into the cinema going public's hearts. He's miscast here and far too ridiculous. The story is that Hunnam plays Waldo, a former über LAPD detective who has now shunned society and lives a pseudo monastic life in a caravan in the woods. He gets recruited by a Hollywood producer to look into the death of the wife of big shot TV actor, Alistair Pinch (Gibson). The police think Pinch did it and the studio would prefer that this wasn't the case! Reluctantly Waldo takes the case cycling back and forth and looking like some throwback rag 'n' bone man. Various characters pop up as the conspiracy unfolds. Clancy Brown and Lorena Baccarin support but are woefully underused and Rupert Friend is the cartoonish Hollywood big shot. The comedy is not funny enough and the action tame and the romance thrown in makes little sense. Not a film I would recommend.

Here is a contemporary crime thriller that has the rare qualities of integrity and intelligence and it's a stunning directorial debut from Ben Affleck. This is the sort of crime film that makes Michael Mann's films so brilliant and Affleck has here carved a twist and turn plot, based in a very realistic arena and given the audience a moral dilemma to debate. It's a first class work and worthy of repeated viewings. On the surface it's a genre piece, a detective mystery story with the most hateful of crimes at its heart, child abduction and murder. The emotion caused by the crime drives the characters towards the denouement and causes them such angst with the viewer being dragged along for the ride. Set in a crime ridden Boston suburb and a four year old girl goes missing. Her mother, Helene (Amy Ryan - a superb performance), regularly leaves the child unsupervised much to her sister in law, Bea's (Amy Madigan) anger. When the police make no headway in the investigation Bea hires local private detectives Patrick (Casey Affleck) and Angie (Michelle Monaghan) to assist. The police in the form of Captain Doyle (Morgan Freeman) and Detective Bessant (Ed Harris) resent this but Patrick and Angie have the advantage of being able to get information from the locals who hate the police. They soon discover there's a lot of people lying about what they know. If you've never seen this great gem of a film then you will be constantly on the edge of your seat as the plot goes in some very unexpected directions. There's some shocks on the way too although the film is restrained and depicts the violence carefully but with a realism that makes it all the more cold and frightening. This is one of the best crime thrillers of this century, it's a really well crafted and engrossing film and one to definitely put on your list if you've never seen it.

A key film of the 1960s and probably the moment that the James Bond series really hit the top spot. It's a more ambitious, big budget production than the previous two and is often cited as the best of the franchise. That is of course open to debate but I think it can be said that this is Sean Connery's pinnacle in the role as his subsequent three appearances as 007 are not as good films as this one. This has many of the hallmarks that are seen in Bond films ever since; a megalomaniac villain, an army of uniformed henchmen, a lair and there's a postscript scene where Bond must battle one final time. Goldfinger did push boundaries for a mid 60s film with its sexual references, the hints of lesbianism in the main female character and of course her risqué name of Pussy Galore, lifted of course from the source novel. There's plenty of action here too and the set piece sequences are great fun including the introduction of the now iconic Aston Martin DB5 and all its gadgets which are all given an outing here. There's the now famous death of Jill (Shirley Eaton) who gets covered in gold paint and the fight with the chief thug Oddjob (Harold Sakata) and his lethal hat! Connery oozes dangerous sex appeal and manages to seduce women often by force! Gert Frobe as the titular Goldfinger is one of the best of the Bond baddies and definitely one of the most memorable. Fantastically entertaining even after multiple viewings and massively influential on the Daniel Craig films, this is a Bond film to try and see on a big cinema screen if you can as it really is a visually spectacular film.

An effective enough horror/chiller if you can accept the gimmicky aspects. Director Rob Savage has taken advantage of the Covid 19 lockdown restrictions to make a jump scare horror film based on a 'Zoom' chat. The growth in the use of Zoom during the pandemic made its eventual use as a central idea in a film obvious I suppose and for the most part the film works. I suppose it sits within the sub-genre of found footage and Paranormal Activity type narratives and style and if you like those then this will appeal and it will certainly sit well with the You Tube generation. Much here is a little too predictable and there's a few too many 'what's that behind you' moments but Savage has correctly kept the runtime down to a neat 57 minutes (almost mirroring the 40 min Zoom free chat length). A group of girlfriends and one guy arrange a seance over Zoom run by a medium. Some take it partially seriously and others think it's all a joke and a bit of fun but things go awry when one of them inadvertently summons a vengeful demon. A film that gets you staring at the screen to spot what may or may not be happening in the dark backgrounds but it's a film, I suspect, destined to be forgotten once the reason for it has diminished in people's minds.

This is a whimsical romance set in the early 70s and is joyously nostalgic as well as offering some surprises. I hesitate to call it a 'coming-of-age' story although that is the first impression and it's more of a slow build love story that just happens to be about that all consuming first love. There's loads to admire here and the film is wonderfully humorous and littered with bizarre and interesting side characters. It centres on the relationship of Gary (Cooper Hoffman), a 15 year old child actor and Alana (Alana Haim), a cynical 25 year old Jewish girl, who is intrigued when Gary hits on her declaring to his brother that she is the girl he will one day marry. The film charts the heartaches of their relationship as Alana flirts around and Gary attempts to become an entrepreneur, firstly by selling waterbeds to the rich and famous and then running a pinball arcade. Director Paul Thomas Anderson keeps all this weirdness completely grounded with the result that it comes over as so believable and warm. Sean Penn cameos as an aging lothario actor, based on William Holden, and Bradley Cooper is hilarious as the slightly unhinged film producer Jon Peters. But it's the two leads who really nail this, they are natural and first class throughout and both look set for big futures. I enjoyed Licorice Pizza, its different, somewhat unusual but strangely affecting.  

Disappointed as he allegedly was not to return as James Bond in 2006 when Daniel Craig secured the part Pierce Brosnan's contribution has not become very memorable in the franchise. This is mostly because he was hampered by weak, often silly original stories (Goldeneye was the first Bond film not to have some link to an Ian Fleming book, story or title) and in this, his first, outing there is a vain attempt to continue the darker edges of the two Timothy Dalton films, return to the Sean Connery days with the screen persona of 007 as playboy and also retain the comedy elements of the Roger Moore years. As a combination it just doesn't work. The Bond films that introduce the character when a new actor takes on the role are interesting to see just how the filmmakers try and do this. The remarkable thing about the Bond franchise is the way they trust the audience to accept little links to previous films while essentially saying this is all a new start. The most successful changeover in this regard is Casino Royale (2006) and the weakest is Goldeneye. Brosnan is a little too cynical and the story has him as more a special forces soldier than a spy but the film benefits from the introduction of Judi Dench as M, which she successfully carried over into the Craig films. The real trouble here is that James Bond has not developed for the modern age, the film actually acknowledges this, no doubt intended as tongue-in-cheek, but sadly she is correct when M calls him a 'misogynistic, sexist dinosaur, a relic of the Cold War', and here in Goldeneye he is just that and it shows too. Bear in mind that just seven years after this film Jason Bourne exploded onto the action cinema scene. 007 missed the boat and then had to play catch up Here Bond, struggling with a change at the top of MI6, is sent to investigate the theft of a Russian weapon system that leads him to an old colleague, now turned bad guy. Sean Bean is not a convincing Bond villain and his plummy accent is really annoying. He does have a train (Bond villain's do so love their trains) and a lair where the climax to the film takes place. Bond replaces his fantastic Aston Martin for a crappy BMW and Minnie Driver has a small role. On the plus side there's a great chase sequence with a tank and lots of shooting, it's actually quite a violent film. But this is a weak addition to the franchise followed by weaker and dafter ones. I think Brosnan effectively missed the boat and was the right actor at the wrong time, so it's a pity he hadn't been able to step in a few years earlier or indeed Goldeneye may have been better with Timothy Dalton still there. We shall never know but this is one of the poorer Bond films.

Because of his long run as James Bond it's all too easy to forget Roger Moore's other films. This action drama from director Peter Hunt (who also directed a great 007 film) and adapted from the novel by Wilbur Smith is a fantastic movie. Set in South Africa during the apartheid years it was potentially controversial in its depiction of camaraderie between white bosses and black workers although the narrative does have a racist baddie. In the Sonderditch gold mine owned by a wealthy millionaire - superbly played by a curmudgeonly Ray Milland - and run by his sly son in law (Bradford Dillman) the handsome and unorthodox Rod Slater (Moore) is promoted to lead an exploration into a deep chamber believed to shield water but a new report suggests hides a rich gold seam. Moore is having an affair with Dillman's wife, the sexy Susannah York, and doesn't realise he is the foil in an international conspiracy to flood the mine and drive up gold prices. The film is action packed, exciting, tense involving mining disasters, heroics, sex and devious plots and it's all round great entertainment. A great little film which is well worth seeking out if you haven't seen it.

A science fiction action film that rolls along at a great pace and has a neat updated story. Director Gareth Edwards has effectively utilised an old, perhaps tired, movie creature feature and given it an injection of modern effects and a thrilling story making for one very entertaining movie. The cast are great and include Aaron Taylor-Johnson as the nominal lead, with Elizabeth Olsen (sadly underused), Ken Watanabe, Sally Hawkins, Bryan Cranston and Juliette Binoche although the real star are the monsters, which are brilliantly created. The story centres around the sudden destruction of a Japanese nuclear plant caused by something unknown but which produced strange seismic activity. After his wife dies in the accident engineer, Joe (Cranston) spends years trying to uncover the secrets behind the disaster much to the annoyance of his son, soldier Ford (Taylor-Johnson) but Joe is proved right when years later similar seismic activity unleashes strange, gigantic monsters that have lain hidden in the earth for millions of years. Plans to destroy them are commenced but scientist Ishiro (Watanabe) is convinced one of them has risen to reset a balance of nature and will work for mankind and destroy the others. There's some fantastic set pieces and the visuals are thrilling and really good. This is a neat action film, unpretentious and well written and I especially loved the opening credits where real footage of the atomic bomb tests of the 1950s is interwoven into the narrative of the film. Great fun, a pity the later sequel was so awful because this hits the spot.

A simply glorious piece of film making and one of those rare occasions where a sequel is as good, if not better, than the original. Director Francis Ford Coppola's striking recreation of the early 1900s and the 1950s and the somewhat unique structure of this film makes it a rewarding viewing experience. It's a modern cinematic art masterpiece and a film worthy of repeated viewings. It's so rich in detail that there are gems to be discovered each time you see it. The film is both prequel and sequel to the original with the two storylines intermixed creating a contrast between the rise of Vito Corleone, here played by Robert De Niro, and the continuing saga of Michael Corleone (Al Pacino) as he secures his empire through murder whilst claiming to be making the 'family' legitimate and having to deal with a senate hearing on organised crime. Coppola fills the screen with so much authenticity in the scenes that begin in Sicily with Vito, as a young boy, having to flee the local mafia boss who has murdered his family - a sequence that proves a key to the character's development later. The New York of 1901 and beyond where, as a young man, Vito realises that crime is the way to provide for his future sets his life on course to become the later head of the mafia family. There's some cold and precise violence displayed here although as with the first film it is restrained and whilst realistic it's not gratuitous. The intermixing of the family in Nevada where Michael rules without challenge is a story of corruption and Pacino's Michael has now transformed from reluctant crime boss to evil incarnate. His character is the epitome of the maxim 'absolute power corrupts absolutely' and we watch as he gradually turns on his own family members where he sees betrayal. Pacino is a tour de force here aided by Diane Keaton who has a more powerful role as his wife Kay who gradually comes to challenge and hate him. There's also a recreation of historical events that look and feel documentary in style especially the senate hearings and the Cuban revolution which has a key role in the narrative. A wonderful film, a family saga, epic and melodramatic and one of the finest films ever made.

There's little that can be said about this masterpiece that hasn't already been said many times over. It retains it's brilliance after many viewings and it's influence is so widespread, indeed it remains a surprise that director Francis Coppola was reluctant to direct it and the studio did not have high expectations expecting a small gangster film and yet what we got was a genre and era defining film, a saga about a close knit family who we see in all the normalities of their lives except they deal in murder and violence. This is so casually dealt with throughout the narrative that the film feels like melodrama rather than a crime film. When violence is shown it comes suddenly and shockingly although viewed today it's a remarkably restrained film. It's not gratuitous but depicts the violence as cold and businesslike. One of the most graphic killings in a small restaurant is described by the killer as 'business, not personal'. This is also the film that brought Al Pacino forward as a major league star. He's unrivalled here and the narrative is chiefly focused on his character arc from reluctant family member to ruthless crime boss, and he becomes very dark and foreboding in look and attitude. It really amplifies how good he is. Of course he's aided by a brilliantly scripted story, faultless direction and a cast that all perform superbly. Most remember of course Marlon Brando as the titular Godfather, Vito Corleone, the head of a family he dotes over and whose business he controls with cunning and insight. James Caan, too, as the heir apparent and hotheaded eldest son who is clearly doomed and has the bloodiest death. These are aided by Robert Duvall, John Cazale, Richard Conte and many others. But it's the women characters that often get overlooked, possibly with the exception of Diane Keaton', Kay, who is the one who begins to challenge the world she joins. The others are all complicit pretending to not hear or see the violence that provides for them. It's an ensemble piece in many ways and the script joins them together in this tale of organised crime brilliantly. Coppola mixes in the issues of culture, Catholicism and greed that makes them complicit in the vendetta way of family life. The Godfather remains one of the finest motion pictures ever made and it's worthy of rediscovery by modern audiences.

A romantic drama that could have been absolutely riveting but feels a bit short changed although it's a nice little film to curl up and watch on a rainy evening. The story switches between modern day as journalist, Ellie (Felicity Jones), comes across a series of love letters from the mid 1960s in her paper's archives and decides with the help of a nerdy colleague, Rory (Nabhaan Rizwan) to investigate their background; to the mid 1960's where Jennifer (Shailene Woodley), the wife of a rich businessman is recovering from a car accident in which she has lost her memory. Jennifer therefore has no recollection that she was having a passionate affair with Anthony (Callum Turner) and was on her way to run away with him when the accident occurred. The film delves into the misconceptions and quirks of fate that ruin the love affair whilst in the present day Ellie, herself a bit of a fuck up, begins to fall for Rory. This is all a bit Mills & Boon, but Jones is always watchable and Woodley plays the injured, physically and mentally, Jennifer with real earnestness. Unfortunately neither of the two love affairs covered by the narrative are told with any real depth and Turner especially is a bit one dimensional. The real tear jerk bit comes at the predictable ending. (Nice to see Ben Cross in one of his last roles before his sad death from cancer)