Film Reviews by GI

A playful yet profound comedy drama about mid life crisis and a stunning central performance from Mads Mikkelsen. He plays Martin, one of four school teacher friends who have lost their mojo, have become bored by their job teaching in a high school and with their marriages and relationships all suffering. They embark on an experiment after reading of a theory that humans have a natural alcohol deficiency and need to top it up! They set rules for themselves and begin to benefit from the small amount of drink they have each morning soon feeling energetic and free from anxiety and rediscovering their zest for life. But when they decide to escalate their intake to see what happens the opposite soon manifests itself. Here is a film that takes a sharp look at society's relationship with alcohol from the mediocrity of everyday life to the delights and the buoyancy that social drinking provides and it especially has things to say about young people and drinking. It's a clever and entertaining, indeed at times very funny, film confronting serious issues with a wry and intelligent eye and with first rate performances. Highly recommended.

A routine post apocalypse sci-fi thriller set during a new ice age. Survivors are holed up in various underground installations where they struggle with the confinement and fears of illness. In Colony 5 leader Briggs (Laurence Fishburne) battles with Mason (Bill Paxton) over how they should control the colony. So it's a strange decision Briggs makes when communication with the neighbouring Colony is lost and he decides to head out with two others including Sam (Kevin Zegers) across the winter wasteland to check on the neighbours. They find something very horrific and have to hurry home with a horde of cannibals chasing them. This cues a load of gore and sudden death and a final confrontation with Mason. There's any number of films that take cannabilism as the new threat and which are far more interesting - The Road (2009) being the obvious example - and essentially this reads like 30 Days Of Night (2007), which is also better. This has some entertainment value and some nice Cgi shots of the snowy wastes but it's instantly forgettable.

If you like historical drama then you'll not get better than this one set at the height of the French Revolution and telling the story of the political rivalry between top revolutionary leaders, Georges Danton (Gérard Depardieu) and Robespierre (Wojciech Pszoniak). It's based on real events and superbly recreates 17th Century Paris at the height of the 'Reign Of Terror'. Both the main leads are exceptional and this is a good film to see the talents of Depardieu, then at the height of his fame. Danton, a popular leader of the revolution with the mob, is considered a threat by the radical and despotic faction led by Robespierre, who decides he must bring Danton down even though to do so risks the revolution itself. A show trial is held at which skilled orator Danton soon gets the upper hand. All the while the guillotine awaits to losers. If you are versed in this period of history or indeed know someone studying the French Revolution at school or college then this is a must see. Admittedly it may not be for everyone but it's definitely a film that draws you into the visual accuracy and the complexities of the times. An interesting study of these famous French historical figures.

A rich and very rewarding film, epic in length and structure but with a beautiful story that incorporates romance and action and has deep thematic ideas around man's place in the world and the environment. Set in the 1860s this is the tory of John Dunbar (Kevin Costner), a Lieutenant in the army who after a suicidal act of gallantry during the American Civil War, chooses a posting on the western frontier where white man have yet to colonise. Finding his ramshackle post to be deserted Dunbar tries to adapt to the wilderness which begins to affect him spiritually. He soon attracts the attention of the Sioux Indians who live nearby and, his initial suspicions of them as potential murderous savages soon gives way to the realisation they are a gentle, happy and generous people who adopt him and where he finds peace and love. Unfortunately his past will soon catch up with him. There's been several key films that look at the plight of Native Americans and this is arguably the most famous and possibly significant. Yes it's a western by genre definition but a western that western haters love. It looks at the destructive nature of capitalism for profit and importantly that humanity needs to be a part of nature and not pillage it for selfish gain. As a story it's fantastic, lovingly directed by Costner, and with a great support cast that includes Mary McDonnell as a white woman rescued and raised by the Sioux. A warm, exciting and at times very moving and tense film that everyone will love. If you haven't seen this then I can't recommend it highly enough. If you have but its been awhile then seek it out and be reminded just what a great film experience this is. (Check out the Director's Cut, it has additional and very interesting scenes)

A revenge thriller which is basically London gangsters take on cowboys in a pseudo western that makes little sense and promises lots of bloody violence and delivers little. The big tough guys here seem half asleep most of the time and the women characters are given very little to do other than have fighting factions moon over them. Vinnie Jones stars as Neelyn, an enforcer for top London gangster, Harris (Malcolm McDowell), who is in Virginia sorting out a money laundering deal with corrupt oilman Preston (Ron Perlman). When Preston's psycho son (Brandon Sklenar) takes a fancy to Neelyn's girlfriend and she goes missing Neelyn insists on finding out what's happened to her. This is all predictable, has been done before and better and the characters are all stereotypical. Jones hasn't the acting chops nor the screen charisma to carry a film, this needed the Jason Statham touch to liven things up a bit. For a super hard man he's pretty useless all round in this!! Give this a miss it's mediocre.

Based on a real story this British comedy is a classic underdog story. It tells the story of Maurice Flitcroft, who in 1976, having never played a round of golf before, entered the British Open tournament and played the worst round in the competitions history. What makes this film such a pleasant, heartwarming delight is that Maurice is an amiable, optimistic, kind man who exudes an almost childlike innocence, he has that scent of British eccentricity and has to overcome some traditional class snobbery. All of which makes him a character that British audiences especially love. This is also a family drama about Maurice, played so excellently by Mark Rylance, his wife, Jean (Sally Hawkins) and their three boys. Maurice is a humble crane operator in England's north west and he raises his family of a step son and twin boys to always try and follow their dreams. So when redundancy looms Maurice decides to apply to play in the British Open although he's never played golf before. How he does this I won't spoil suffice to say he soon finds he has to face the bureaucracy and stiff lipped snobs of the golfing world, mostly epitomised in the guise of the top golf official played by Rhys Ifans. But Maurice believes in following ones dreams and he won't be put off. Much laugh out loud moments follow as essentially Maurice, his family and some friends take on the establishment and find support in some surprising quarters. The film, at times, has a bit of the Carry On about it but still manages to combine good comedy with effective drama. A delight and well worth seeing.

A very famous and entertaining British war film about the well known bombing raid on the Ruhr Valley dams. The actual raid was a huge morale booster for the British at the time and the film captures the sense of achievement. But ultimately this is an uplifting film rather than an actual portrayal of the events where very little strategic significance was achieved. Richard Todd, a major British star at the time, plays Wing Commander Guy Gibson, affable and much loved by his men who is given the task of training for the raid which involved using a new and bizarre invention, a bouncing bomb. (The real Gibson was an unpopular martinet). The bomb has been invented by the eccentric Barnes Wallis (Michael Redgrave), a genius engineer, who becomes obsessed with the notion that destroying the dams will win the war. The film is roughly in three sections that all fit perfectly; Wallis' coming up with the idea and then persuading the higher ups to go along with it, Gibson and his men training for the mission and the climax of the mission itself. This is a classic British war film, well structured and highlights the plucky British airmen as well as the boffin who is slightly bonkers. A great British support cast and keen eyed viewers will spot early appearances of Robert Shaw and Patrick McGoohan. And of course there is the modern day issue with the name of Gibson's dog! Overall this is a great war film especially about bomber command. Interestingly the coda of the film gives a lot to reflecting on the aircrews who died in the raid but doesn't mention the large amount of German civilians who died as a consequence of it. Still a film that all good film lovers should make sure they see, it deserves rediscovery.

The advertising all points to a gritty disaster movie but what you actually get is a small community drama with loads of family tensions and every social issue going on including abortion rights, homophobia, illegal immigration, racism, disability, single parenting...it goes on and a big tornado then pops along and makes nearly everyone have a rethink about their prejudices. The tornado has a brief visit in the narrative after which the film refocuses itself onto the plight of extreme weather victims in the USA. Overall this crams so much and gives none of the issues any weight or significance leaving the film a rambling jaunt of about two hours. Dull.

Adapted by John Le Carré from his own novel this spy story is a dark comedy that is well written but ultimately an unsatisfying film. Pierce Brosnan plays disgraced MI6 agent Andy Osnard, a serial womaniser and sleazy spy who is sent to Panama where he needs to make an impression. Andy focuses his attention on Harry (Geoffrey Rush), a former Savile Row tailor who makes suits for all the local bigwigs. He's also a bit of a fraud and seriously in debt. Andy recruits him to pass on all the secrets his customers supposedly tell him and ~Harry sees a chance to sort his finances out. Both have their own agenda that quickly gets out of hand. In many ways this is Brosnan playing a spy the polar opposite of his 007 persona. He's not bad here and is clearly relishing the borderline corrupt character of Osnard. He and Rush are aided by a good support cast including Jamie Lee Curtis, Catherine McCormack and a miscast Brendan Gleeson. Daniel Radcliffe is also there in a very early role. The film has it's moments but it drifts along and is not quite funny enough or dramatic enough to make it memorable or entertaining.

One of the best of the cycle of revisionist westerns made in the 70s, influenced by Sam Peckinpah's westerns and with hints of Sergio Leone's spaghetti western style. From the opening credits of sepia photographs this film posits itself as an authentic retelling of the west. In this case it's focused on the cattle drive, a familiar subject in the genre, but here the myths of the honest, hard working frontier life of a cowboy are sharply deconstructed. This is told through the central character of Ben (Gary Grimes), a young boy who joins the cattle drive of Frank Culpepper (Billy Green Bush), a no nonsense cattleman taking his herd across the wilderness to Colorado. Ben has dreamt of being a cowboy but he quickly learns it's a lowly job, with no honour or camaraderie and a life spiced with sudden death and violence. His presence and inexperience as well as his innocence eventually cause a chain of events that gives the violent men around him some redemption when they face up to a domineering land baron. The film is violent without heroics. The men face a final showdown but do so for selfish reasons and in the final analysis Ben realises everyone is just out for themselves and others lives have no meaning. This is a western that is rather excellent and one that rarely gets mentioned today. Yet it deserves to be ranked with the great westerns of the late 60s and the 1970s for its attempt to show the American west as historical drama rather than myth and legend.

Whilst Kevin Costner gets the odd opportunity here to show his action chops this is a weak, clumsy and inept film that makes little sense and struggles to classify itself. It clearly wants to be an action spy film built around the likes of the Mission Impossible series but then drifts into family comedy drama and the two don't always make for good story here. Costner plays Ethan (not Hunt I may add), a tough CIA field agent who is forced to retire after a mission goes awry and it turns out he has terminal cancer. He decides to go to Paris to reconnect with his estranged daughter, Zooey (Hailee Steinfeld) and wife, Christine (Connie Nielsen). But on the promise of a revolutionary cure he succumbs to the invite of sultry agent Vivi (Amber Heard) to finish off his last job. This threatens his new relationship with his family which cues a mix of killing and domestic strife! The film has it's moments mostly in the gritty fight sequences with a coughing and spluttering Costner seeming to find enough oomph to take down some immensely built bad guys. Heard plays a femme fatale vixen who constantly changes her hair and dresses as a pornstar, hardly very covert. The baddies are all Bondesque villains ie bald, albino, mysterious etc etc and basically none of it makes any sense.

Often claimed to be one of the most accurate of war films this is one of the best British films ever made. Based on a celebrated novel it's a story of Royal Navy escorts during the Battle of The Atlantic and the Arctic convoys in the Second World War. It has a documentary realism and seamlessly weaves actual war footage into the film making it very tense. It's a story built around two naval officers, Captain Ericson (Jack Hawkins) and Lieutenant Lockhart (Donald Sinden) and their tours of duty on two ships that attempt to protect merchant convoys from U-Boat attacks. The film captures the monotony, fear, camaraderie and terror of the war at sea as the two enemies stalk one another and all the while the sea presents the most frightening danger. Controversially it shows the awful and difficult decisions that men have to make when faced with war. Hawkins and Sinden give first class performances and this film cemented Hawkins as a major British star. There's a host of British character actors in support too. This is a significant war film, certainly one of the few that didn't go in for the false heroics of Hollywood films in this genre but sought to capture the realities of war. It shows that a war film can be intense and gripping without the need for gratuitousness. A remarkable film that deserves a modern audience and it is most certainly a film I highly recommend if you've never seen it.

An award winning apocalyptic film from New Zealand. An interesting story about a scientist (Bruno Lawrence) who finds himself the only human left after a massive energy project goes wrong. Of course he's not the last man standing as he finds a couple of others along his journey that involves his struggles with isolation through to trying to put right what has happened. It's a little enigmatic and the scenes involving the loneliness are ideas seen in any number of similar films. The film has it's fans although viewed today it seems a little dated and at times clichéd. The tensions between the three survivors are never pursued quite as satisfactorily as the film promises but the strange ending leaves the film feeling like it's something different and a bit mysterious. Worth checking out.

A tough, uncompromising, realistic and very thought provoking war film set on the Russian Front during the Second World War. Twenty years before the celebrated realism of Saving Private Ryan (1998) came along director Sam Peckinpah made this film that Orson Welles described as one of the greatest war films ever made. He was right, this is a remarkable film with some of there most authentic combat scenes committed to film. It's a story of ordinary men thrust into the maelstrom of war and reliant on luck and experience to survive. Death by random shellfire litters the film and the constant fear in the characters is always evident and battle is experienced by the soldiers everyday. James Coburn plays highly decorated Sergeant Steiner, a German soldier who has become highly respected by his men and the officers above him for his combat skills and ability to survive. But he hates the establishment and ideology that forces ordinary young men into war. He therefore immediately distrusts his new commander, Captain Stravinsky (Maximilian Schell), a class obsessed man desperate to win the Iron Cross. When Stansky lies in order to win the medal Steiner stands against him so Stravinsky sets about ensuring Steiner and his men will not survive. This is Peckinpah's last great film, a genius director mired by alcoholism, but who turned ordinary stories into something very special. This film is a bloody, compelling indictment of war. The battle scenes are epic in construction and exciting while portraying the horrors of war. Thematically this delves into the philosophy of humanities obsession with war through politics and ideologies where the victims are those forced to fight. A masterpiece and a film I highly recommend.

A pyschological thriller that doesn't quite find itself. This is one of those narratives where the audience are constantly torn between did it happen or is it all in his mind. Aaron Eckhart plays Arthur, an ex cop now private eye but who is also a conspiracy theorist and mentally unstable. He's mired by grief due to a family trauma. He gets hired by a woman claiming her daughter was mysteriously killed in the small border town of Wander. The circumstances have a similarity to something in Arthur's past and so he sets off to investigate. Once there he uncovers a conspiracy that affects the entire population....or does he? Eckhart's detective is too far gone here to make the story interesting, he does more stumbling onto things than actually investigate and of course you're constantly being juggled between is it his delusion or actually happening with a fairly predictable denouement at the end. It's all a bit drab and uninteresting. Heather Graham lends support.