Film Reviews by GI

This remains a delight even after loads of viewings and perhaps surprisingly too as it's really a very English comedy of manners, that quintessential British sub-genre as it neatly taps into the social awkwardness that in this case includes the thorny topic of sex and even love. Writer Richard Curtis has that gift of capturing the very essence of these moments that give rise to hilarious situations even when tragedy is involved. This is exemplified in the death scene where the central character, Charles (Hugh Grant) starts by chuckling at the plight of his friend who he doesn't immediately realise is having a heart attack. The clever structure of the film mirrors the skill of a writer such as John Cleese who has made a career of highlighting English social reticence and in the hands of director Mike Newell the comedy is kept grounded rather than drifting into farce. The structure is of course around the titular four weddings, themselves shown as a ridiculous, mostly class divided ceremony, and the extremely moving funeral section. Class is a key theme here and it has to be remembered that the main characters hail from a strata of British society that can best be described as privileged, it's only the funeral that takes place in the industrial, and poorer, north east of England. Overall though this is a romantic comedy that is focused on what finding your one true love entails as Charles ponders how those who marry have managed to be so sure they've discovered 'the one'. This certainly made Grant a star and brought forward many now well established actors including Kristen Scott Thomas, James Fleet, John Hannah, Simon Callow and Andie MacDowell, who often gets a bad press over her role here but I think she captures the beauty and contrast that the story strives for. This is a modern romcom that has remained a firm favourite for many and it deserves repeated viewings as there are delights to discover on each viewing.

One of the greatest of American films and the first in what has since become known as director John Ford's 'Cavalry Trilogy', although the later two films are narratively unconnected although there are similar themes at play. Anyone unfamiliar with this film may be surprised that it's not a film that sits that comfortably in the western genre despite its setting and story. It reads as more of an American historical drama and is quite light on action considering it's concerned with the Indian wars of the 1870s. Ford was more interested in depicting the ordinary, often mundane life in a remote army outpost with its class divisions, role of women, dances and military procedures. Into this mix he adds character relationships particularly between the men and adds his trademark doses of roustabout comedy, drunkenness and Irish heritage along with traditional songs. The story also culminates in Ford's well known vision of legend built around more unsavoury truths and here the story is loosely influenced in particular by the myth of Custer and the Battle of The Little Big Horn. Henry Fonda, who takes second billing but is the main character, is Colonel Thursday, the embittered commander of the titular fort, a posting he deems beneath him. He's a martinet (although at one point he specifically denies this) and is soon in conflict with the more experienced of his officers in particular Captain York (John Wayne). The Apache's are causing trouble in the area but whilst this is the focus of the military men the narrative also spends much of its time with the wives and women relations of the soldiers epitomised by Thursday's daughter played by Shirley Temple. There's a delightful romance story developed between her character and a young officer (John Agar) who is also the son of the Fort's Sergeant-Major (Ward Bond) much to the consternation of the Colonel. Ultimately Thursday leads a foolhardy mission against the Apache resulting in the massacre of his men (interestingly Wayne's character is pushed out of the action in order to survive and promote the false heroism story that follows). The film can be read in a variety of ways not least in Thursday's motives for leading his command on a suicidal charge against advice. Could it be he sacrifices his men for posthumous glory or is he just incompetent? There are conversations earlier suggesting he had been, during the civil war, a highly regarded soldier albeit one who relished such glory. These aspects are what makes this and many of Ford's films such masterpieces. His storytelling abilities and the poetic use of camera (often static) and his taking an uncanny advantage of everything that happened on set especially weather marks him as the genius he is now rightly considered. Fort Apache is a landmark film and one that cinephiles should explore in depth, a masterpiece of the art form.

A routine shark stalking film that offers nothing new. It's really the same ol' narrative of stranded, beautiful people being hunted by aggressive great white sharks (there's a couple on the prowl here), you'll guess which characters (five in this case) will get eaten first and who will end up surviving. A young couple run a small, financially struggling, seaplane tourist company, are hired by a rich couple to go to a remote atoll for the day. The plane is attacked by a shark!!! It sinks and they are on a life raft as the sharks circle..... endlessly!!! Even the first sequel to Jaws was better than this, indeed there are some similarities to Jaws 2 (1978), but really not since the original and brilliant Jaws (1975) has this type of film excelled. You have to go in a different direction if shark attack stories are going to compete and compare well, Deep Blue Sea (1999) or even The Shallows (2016) for example. Don't get me wrong Great White has it's moments but they are nothing new and a little disappointing when they do come although the aerial shots are good. A mediocre film that isn't really worth the effort.

A classic science fiction film and ahead of its time, indeed it's one of the first major films in the genre made when such films were rarely given a budget big enough to produce the effects. In glorious colour and filmed in 'Cinemascope' this was a box office hit and viewed today it remains a tense, exciting and very entertaining film. You can see the clear influence this had on the TV series' Star Trek and Lost In Space. A spaceship commanded by Adams (Leslie Nielsen in his first major film role) arrives at the distant planet of Altair IV to check on the scientific expedition that arrived there many years before. They find only two remaining survivors, the mysterious Dr Morbius (Walter Pidgeon) and his beautiful daughter (Anne Francis). Morbius has managed to build an advanced robot he calls Robby which fascinates Adams and his crew. But when the crew are attacked by a strange force Adams suspects that Morbius is behind it especially as he has discovered an ancient extinct alien technology. The effects, some courtesy of the Walt Disney studio, are quite impressive especially the cavernous interior of the alien city. Whilst the film is firmly rooted in the style and sexual politics of the 1950s it does portray a potential future of space exploration which has been similarly visualised in may subsequent films. It's a great film and if you are a fan of science fiction its a must see film sit holds a key place in cinema history.

Greyhound is a traditionally styled war drama about one small US Navy destroyer as it takes up escort duties to a merchant convoy during the Battle of The Atlantic in 1942. Tom Hanks, who also wrote the screenplay, is the relatively inexperienced and religiously devout Captain who is tested throughout the cat and mouse drama as the Greyhound hunts for the attacking U Boats who in turn attempt to sink it. There are some genuinely tense moments and the film expertly conveys the claustrophobic world of the ships bridge where split second decisions are made to avoid torpedoes and to make the correct manoeuvres. Hanks plays the role as a flawed man trying his best and he's seen making mistakes as the battle rages. There are also some small intimate moments that are dealt with in a subtle way to show that such moments occur in the extremes of battle but the film is clever enough not to overly dwell on them spoiling the nature of the action. This is really a good old fashioned war yarn with Hanks in a role that he seems made for ably assisted by Stephen Graham as his second in command. Enjoyable film, well directed and very entertaining.

Here's another Nicolas Cage film that deserves to be forgotten immediately. It's not helped by a slack script that drifts all over the place with a story as daft as a brush. Here Cage is an ex marine and Vietnam War veteran who hires a young handyman, Buddy (Luke Benward) to mend his fence (we get to see how the fence became broken, a scene which shows Cage's character to be one of his usual manic/deranged ones). Buddy, all muscles, youth and wavy hair, is instantly the sexual target of the femme fatale, Fancy (KaDee Strickland), the sultry wife. Cage gets more crazy, then a hurricane begins forcing Buddy to spend the night. This leads to a bizarre chain of events that all makes little sense but Cage gets to do those famous high kicks he loves so much. Kelsey Grammar plays a local detective and nothing happens that isn't a total disappointment at every turn. A poor film, don't bother.

A gentle, unassuming and very British comedy, a sweet story about the relationship between a teenage heavy metal fan and his lonely and devoted mum. Basically a coming-of-age film that doesn't concern itself with sexual awakening as is normal in such stories but about that somewhat stressful relationship between parent and child when the latter is endlessly frustrated by life. Monica Dolan plays Sue, a divorced librarian living in suburbia with Daniel (Earl Cave), her moody son. He's crushingly disappointed when a planned summer holiday with his father in Florida is cancelled at the last minute and he realises he has to spend it with his mum at home. He roams the endlessly tidy streets of suburbia, bored and dreaming of being the singer in a metal band, whilst his mum, ever protective and caring, carries on. There's a period where she gets a chance at romance but that doesn't go well. There's the influence here of similar American films but here we get a delightful comedy that doesn't trap itself in romance or sex or friendship clichés but reveals a realistic view of the most enduring of relationships. By the end its obvious its a happy story and has a nice feel good vibe about it and the two leads are exceptional.

A B movie style action thriller set in a dystopian near future where rising crime has resulted in the walling up of the worst districts of Paris. In one a crime lord rules with ruthlessness but a young man, Leïto (David Belle) is trying to protect his apartment block from the criminals. As a result he gets framed, sent to prison and his sister is made the sex slave of the bad guy. When a nuclear bomb is stolen and set to detonate in the district the authorities send in a tough cop, Damien (Cyril Raffaelli) and Leïto to find and defuse it but its all a double cross. You can actually forget the plot because its irrelevant as this is all about gutsy fights and plenty of 'parkour' chase scenes through the derelict buildings. It's an entertaining slice of hokum all done with panache and neatly short enough to enjoy and move on.

Adapted from the novel by Robert Harris this is a routine war drama set at Bletchley Park the now famous centre of British code breaking. Unlike The Imitation Game (2014) this is not a story that attempts to tell a history, the story is a work of fiction with the odd very loose reference to real people. The story here is that the Germans have sneakily changed their codes and Tom (Dougray Scott), a maths genius who broke their codes before, is hastily summonsed back to Bletchley. He isn't well thought of by the top brass as he had an emotional meltdown over his obsessive love for Claire (Saffron Burrows), who has since disappeared. Along with her roommate, Hester (Kate Winslet) he sets out to find her as he believes she may have been spying. This leads to lots of emotional chases and daft plot twists in a mediocre espionage story that fails to really get going. Good support cast that includes Tom Hollander and Jeremy Northam amongst others but they don't make up for an average and silly story.

The surprising international success of Fistful Of Dollars (1964) gave director Sergio Leone the increased budget which here in his second western meant bigger sets, longer running time and a second star. Clint Eastwood returned after seeing how good the first film turned out and Lee Van Cleef was rescued from obscurity to take second billing (his career effectively being reignited). Although often considered a sequel to A Fistful... this is actually an entirely different film and only Eastwood's costume is the same (indeed there was a court case in Italy that stated this was not a sequel). Here he plays Monco, a ruthless bounty hunter who decides to hunt down the most wanted outlaw in the territory, El Indio (Gian Maria Volontè). But he discovers another bounty hunter is also after him. This is Colonel Mortimer (Van Cleef) who has a more moral reason for doing so than just money. They join forces to face down the outlaw and his gang of cutthroats. Leone dabbles here with the established western genre effectively subverting it with a style that incorporates opera, religious iconography, an element of 60s 'cool', and a vision of the west that denigrates it almost to an alien vista of sun drenched, lawless violence where only money is respected. He takes, for example the standard gunfight, the iconic genre duel, and injects it with a poetic symmetry and exploits the viewer's expectations (he went on to perfect this later in his next film). With the addition of Ennio Morricone's superb score with its jangling electric guitars, whips cracking, gunshots and operatic organs and vocals this is a film that cemented the genre onto a new path. Interestingly Eastwood is almost pushed aside here as the narrative centres around Mortimer and El Indio whose history is the focus of the story and Leone pushed boundaries with the inclusion of cannabis and rape. These were not to be found in anything made in the USA at this time and certainly not in the genre they considered was their mythical domain. Flawed as it is this remains a wonderful film today, beautifully shot and taking a tired style and genre into new exciting directions.

A good ol' action adventure survival film that benefits from Robert Aldrich's clever subversive and quirky traits. Considering when this was made and contrary to Hollywood standard there are no women or children here to sentimentalise the narrative (the only woman in the film is a mirage) and the cast are all great character actors who play against type, for example George Kennedy and Dan Duryea, normally screen heavies, are surprisingly lightweight and pleasant. Some are killed off early and main star, James Stewart, plays a deeply flawed character who struggles with his self esteem and displays a psychological instability that was often seen in his 1950s westerns. Here he's the pilot of a small oil company owned cargo plane travelling across the Sahara desert with an assortment of oil workers, a couple of soldiers and others. A sudden sand storm causes them to crash land in the desert with little chance of survival until one of them, Dorfmann (Hardy Kruger), claims he knows how they can make a serviceable aircraft from the wreckage. With a terrific narrative twist towards the end this is a watchable, entertaining and riveting film that focuses as much on the characters as they struggle with dealing with the dire situation (they as much build the ramshackle aeroplane to keep busy than hope it will fly them safety). Whilst it appears to be one of Aldrich's most mainstream of films it's actually a much more neurotic and suspenseful one that warrants a detailed textual analysis. It's certainly a great film and a definite one to seek out if you've never seen it.

Jeez this is hard work. Clunky and unsubtle romcom that needed a script with finesse and charm, more dialogue, more funny intrigue and a director that could have reined in George Clooney who seems to think that gurning is hilarious. Sorry George it isn't. From the opening scenes you'll work out what's going to happen here. Clooney is a businessman and Julia Roberts his ex (she's an art dealer), married young, had a daughter and now hate one another. So we get the bickering couple competing for their daughter Lily's (Kaitlyn Dever) affection. When she heads off to Bali for a holiday and falls for a young local seaweed farmer whom she wants to marry off go the parents to sabotage the whole thing. You can guess the rest. The beautiful island setting is the best thing about the film because the rest is mediocre cliché. For the most part this is painful and all the jokes have been in other films and so little is original. My advice is give this a miss.

Clint Eastwood's majestically directed war drama is a very moving and interesting film, more for it's detailed examination of the effects on three men caught up in political machinations that they cannot control while suffering, in varied degrees, with PTSD following combat. This is the story of the famous and iconic Second World War photograph of six US Marines raising the American flag at the height of the battle for the Japanese island of Iwo Jima. The film is about the circumstances leading to the photograph being taken and the after effects of the six men who were in the photograph and some who were not but believed to be (I understand that even quite recently the identities of those in the picture is disputed). Eastwood directs a visceral combat film set on the sparse, black volcanic island, juxtapositioned with three of the surviving men who were shipped back home to play a somewhat sordid marketing game and hailed as heroes in order to induce the public to buy war bonds. It's a quite emotional journey and the combat scenes are shocking and realistic and the influence of Steven Spielberg's (who is a producer here), Saving Private Ryan (1997) are evident. Both films feature extended scenes of beach landings under heavy fire. The enemy is a faceless one and we hardly see them as this drama is played out mostly in the USA where the three men chosen are forced to re-enact battle, host parties and make speeches. Ryan Phillipe is the naval medic who is damaged by the loss of his friend Iggy (Jamie Bell), for which he blames himself, Jesse Bradford is Rene, a soldier who sees a way out of the war and enjoys the attention he receives back home and hopes to prosper because of it and Adam Beach is Ira, an American Indian, who is routinely called 'Chief' and is daily faced with the subtle racist bigotry from his friends as well as politicians and his seniors. He is the emotional heart of the film, he feels the guilt of leaving his friends back in the fighting and turns to alcohol for a crutch to cope. His plight is the most moving. There are elements of 'flag waving' in the film's presentation (not meant as a pun by the way) but I think that's the very idea in order to highlight propaganda as the political weapon to justify war while young men die, horribly, fighting it. A war film that deserves to be ranked alongside the best of war films and viewed alongside Eastwood's companion piece, Letters From Iwo Jima (2006) it is a remarkable achievement.

Reboot or sequel to the 1992 film about the urban bogeyman who can be summonsed forth by saying his name five times in a mirror and from whence he will dish out some bloody mayhem. I can hardly remember the '92 film so whilst this one has it's moments it failed to bring me anywhere near the edge of my seat. Clive Barker's original creation was set in Liverpool and designed to expose the bitter divide between rich and poor. Here we have a continuation of the theme but set in Chicago in a once run down slum area and now turned into a prestigious and wealthy neighbourhood. The film investigates the symptoms of bad housing and inequality and taps into the Black Lives Matter debates that are raging throughout the USA in particular. The story is of a young, up and coming artist, Anthony (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II) who lives in a plush apartment in the very area where years before the Candyman murders occurred. When he hears about the legend it sparks a creative idea and he produces an artwork that challenges people to invoke the Candyman. Of course when they do gore and violence ensue. There's a strong element of satire at play here but somehow the film failed to convince me and as a horror story it felt a bit limp. I did wonder while watching it as to how long a pause you had to leave between saying his name four times before saying it the fifth before the Candyman decided it was a reset to number one!!

This semi-autobiographical film from Viggo Mortensen, who writes, directs, produces and stars is a clear and emotional drama that focuses on the effects of dementia. He gives a restrained performance as John, a gay man living with his husband and their young daughter in California. He has to bring his frail father, Willis (Lance Henriksen) to live with them as he seems incapable of looking after himself at his remote farm. Willis is a deeply unpleasant bigot and the early stages of dementia bring out the worst of his racism and homophobia, tolerated by John and his family. The film flashbacks into Willis' past as the condition evokes confused and disjointed memories and Mortensen cleverly shows how Willis' increasingly awful behaviour is tolerated rather than challenged other than by the young family members who are unafraid to react. There's also a generational conflict at play here and whilst Willis is so awful that you almost despair at the tolerance his family show him there are instances of kindness in his past that balance the character. Henriksen is excellent as is Laura Linney as his daughter who is deeply frightened by him but tries to hide it. This is an interesting and quite compelling drama that showcases Mortensen's creative talents. Well worth checking out.