Film Reviews by Philip in Paradiso

Novelist Maurice Bendrix (Ralph Fiennes) narrates the film, which is about the affair he has had with a beautiful woman, Sarah Miles (Julianne Moore), who is married to a senior civil servant, Henry Miles (Stephen Rea). Sarah has never been particularly happy with Henry, who is intelligent but dull, and tends to focus exclusively on his work for the government.

The movie is very well crafted, re-creating the sepia and foggy atmosphere of London in the 1930s and 1940s very well, including the war years, with the toll that the Blitz takes on the city and its inhabitants. In this respect, it is very much a period film. Essentially, this is a sentimental drama focused on Maurice and Sarah, who engage in a passionate affair as they fall madly in love. But the conventional triangle - lover, mistress and husband - is not all there is to the story: the 4th party to the story is God, as Sarah's Catholic faith very much is part of the equation. Representing God, so to speak, is a Catholic priest, Father Richard Smythe (Jason Isaacs).

One recognises themes that recur in the novels of Graham Greene (the film is based on the novel of the same title), for whom faith and Catholicism were central concerns: coming to terms with one's sins (if one is prepared to recognise them as such), seeking redemption for them (or not), and so on. In the last analysis, the even deeper question is asked: does any of that matter if God does not exist, and how do we know that He does exist, and that He cares?

So, what could have been a mere sentimental drama set in the past becomes, in the process, something more complex and more profound - an unusual storyline in some respects, with a dark, metaphysical side. The film is intelligent, captivating and interesting in many respects, but it is also rather gloomy, in a way that you cannot shake off, as if it stuck to the skin.

The film takes place in Japan during the Edo period (1603-1868). Tattooing - an ancient practice known as 'irezumi' in Japanese, hence the title of the film - is central to the story. Otsuya (Ayako Wakao) is the beautiful and seductive daughter of a wealthy merchant. She falls in love with Shinsuke (Akio Hasegawa), her father’s apprentice, who is of a much lower social status. The couple decide to elope in order to escape the anger of Otsuya's father. The two lovers, however, are in a vulnerable position and various individuals try to take advantage of them - more particularly of the beautiful Otsuya.

The merchant's daughter finds herself destined to become a geisha - presented as a form of prostitution in the movie - and her body is violated when the image of a bloodthirsty spider is tattooed on her back without her consent. That spider, known as 'jorogumo', is a supernatural entity in the Japanese tradition, which can shape-shift between the form of a golden orb-weaver spider and a beautiful woman. Somehow, in the film, the spider and Otsuya become one, and the spider is a curse on all those involved. Otsuya is strong-willed and bold, and she decides she will take revenge on all those who have tormented her, more particularly the men who have taken advantage of her.

The film develops from that point onwards into a dark and gory tale of lust, love, blood, violence and murder. The movie is fascinating in a morbid kind of way, as the curse of the spider tattoo comes to dominate the entire narrative. It is an interesting and captivating film, which also represents a reflection on various broad themes, such as the nature of love and power. It is very good at showing the amount of power that lust and beauty can give to a seemingly helpless woman like Otsuya, at the expense of the men who would do anything to possess her.

Set in the distant future, the story takes place in a remote location, in the middle of the mountains, in Japan, where George Almore (Theo James) is working on his own in a secretive R&D centre for his company. George is on his own inside the spacecraft-like building, in the company of 2 robots he has developed without telling his employer: J1, which is quite simple, and J2, which is already more advanced.

George is now working on J3, a very advanced humanoid robot in the shape of a woman who looks uncannily like Jules, i.e. George's late wife (Stacy Martin). George wants to download all of Jules' consciousness, and all the data relating to her, onto J3, to somehow create a robotic copy of his deceased partner. George has little time left because a company called Archive is holding all of Jules's data on their systems, and the storage contract, which allows George to interact with – a virtual – Jules for a total of 200 hours, will soon come to an end. The story develops from here.

This is a peculiar film that will charm you, unsettle you, intrigue you, and make you think - some kind of philosophical tale as to what it means to be alive (and to be dead), and what it means to be a human being (as opposed to a machine). The movie works very well on many levels. Although there are no spectacular fireworks – it certainly isn't an action movie – the plot holds the viewer's attention and there is a huge amount of tension at times as the story unfolds. The film is slick and feels oddly plausible. It was shot mainly in Hungary and in Norway (the waterfall featured in the film is called Månafossen). I have not managed to establish where the research centre (where George lives and works) is located, on the assumption that it is a real location: it looks absolutely amazing.

Overall, it is a very good film, and the ending is unexpected. I do not want to say any more so as not to spoil anything.

In 1918, Pearl (Mia Goth, absolutely sensational) is a young woman who lives with her parents (of German extraction) on the family farm, in Texas. Pearl is married but her husband, Howard, is away in Europe, fighting in the First World War, which is nearing its end. Pearl's father is paralyzed and an infirm. Pearl's mother, Ruth, is very strict with her daughter, treating her as if she were still a young teenager. The family are isolating themselves to protect against the devastating Spanish flu pandemic. Pearl feels trapped on this isolated farm, constantly being watched by her mother, and having to look after her sick father. She dreams of becoming a film star or a chorus girl - a life and career she imagines glamorous and exciting, based on what she has seen in movies. (There is a cinema in the nearby town, where she manages to see feature films from time to time, against her mother's advice.) The film develops from there.

The film is about Pearl: a young woman who is caught between repression (life on the farm and her tyrannical mother) and temptation (the world outside, the nearby town, the movies and her fantasies). That tension informs every twist and turn in the plot. This is a remarkable film, if only because of the spectacularly good acting on the part of Mia Goth, who is fascinating, frightening and amazing all at once. But all the actors in the movie are excellent, and the atmosphere that is created is simply overwhelming. This is done in a very sophisticated way, with a riveting plot that is carefully and intelligently constructed. In a nutshell, within the parameters of the genre, it is a masterpiece, but it is not for the faint-hearted.

'The Promised Land' (1975) is a historical drama directed by Andrzej Wajda, the famous Polish director. The film focuses on the Polish city of Lodz, which was industrializing very fast in the late 19th century, on the back of a boom in the manufacturing of textiles: Lodz had become, to Poland, what Manchester was to England. The movie focuses on 3 young men who are friends and want to get rich: they want to set up a factory of their own. One is an ethnic Pole, an aristocrat; the 2nd one is an ethnic German; and the 3rd one is a Jew. In that way, the film re-creates the multi-ethnic and multi-cultural nature of Polish society at the time when, alongside ethnic Poles, there were large German and Jewish minorities. Lodz is in central Poland and was under Russian (Tsarist) rule at the time, which explains the fact the Ruble is the currency in use.

Karol Borowiecki is a young Polish nobleman; he is an engineer. He is ambitious and ruthless in his career pursuits, and is also uninterested in the aristocratic traditions vested in his financially struggling family. His dream is to set up his own factory with the help of his 2 friends - Max Baum, an ethnic German whose father still runs an old-style textile factory operating with handlooms , and Moritz Welt, a Jewish businessman. The film narrates the 3 friends' progress towards achieving their goal, and the obstacles they have to overcome along the way.

The film, which is nearly 2 hrs 45 mins long, is a kind of historical epic drama, and it follows a linear path, in a manner that is primarily descriptive, with striking set pieces along the way. The movie is good at re-creating the atmosphere in Lodz at the time - a boom town in the grip of unbridled capitalist development, where lavish wealth co-exists with dire poverty. There is an undertone of moral disapproval right through the movie, in this respect: the rich, in the main, are greedy, selfish and predatory characters, exploiting the wretched working masses, who live in filth and squalor. This moralistic stance - justified as it may be in view of the context at the time - appears to be rooted in Roman Catholicism (the Christian notion of sin) as well as Socialism (the class struggle). The film was made when Poland was a Communist country and this angle, no doubt, would have appealed to the authorities, as the movie, in essence, denounces capitalism as an evil system.

Where the film is more problematical is in the way that it depicts the various characters, always relating their reactions and attitudes to their ethnic background. Karol is the epitome of the dashing Polish nobleman, supremely self-confident, also with women. Max is quieter as well as hard-working, with an interest in engineering and machines - your typical German, in other words! As for Moritz, he is the caricature of the Jewish wheeler-dealer who only cares about making money quickly. In fairness, a lot of the industrialists, bankers and financiers in Lodz at the time were ethnic Germans and Jews, not ethnic Poles, and the story touches upon this aspect, in fact: Karol may not be welcome, as an ethnic Pole who represents a threat to the established textile companies. Still, the film is built around stereotypes - and, in view of the history of Poland from the 1920s until the 1950s more particularly, this may be deemed rather troubling.

In terms of the film, the problem with those simplistic stereotypes (and there are many others in the movie, such as the dim-witted Polish peasant!) is that it makes it difficult for the viewer to fully engage with the characters, somehow. So, it is a very good film, but not a nuanced masterpiece in my opinion.

In 1975, in New York, Carlito Brigante (Al Pacino) is released on a technicality after serving 5 years in jail, out of a 35-year prison sentence. His lawyer, Dave Kleinfeld (Sean Penn), who is also a close friend, has been instrumental in getting Carlito out of jail. When he comes out of prison, Carlito vows never to go back to his earlier life of crime, despite the incredulity of his former contacts in the Puerto Rican community and the drug-trafficking world. Carlito also attempts to get back in touch with Gail (Penelope Ann Miller), a ballet dancer who also performs in strip clubs to make ends meet. The story develops from there.

The film is about redemption or, rather, what happens when a hardened criminal (Carlito) tries to redeem himself and move away from crime, despite all those individuals from his past around him who, directly or not, are still involved in a range of criminal activities. The film is also about lost love and what happens when a man tries to resume a relationship he had with a woman (here, Gail), before he was thrown into jail. These themes are not that original in themselves: they are found in the film 'Heat', for instance.

All the same, this is an excellent thriller and, in many ways, a great classic of the genre. I do not agree that the story is implausible. Overall, it is quite convincing, and the chemistry between Al Pacino and Penelope Ann Miller feels quite real: each one, in his (or her) own way, is lost and drifting, between his (or her) dreams and the harsh reality around them, and each one seeks in the other the help that he (or she) needs in order to escape from their surroundings. The movie is also very good at creating an atmosphere - that of New York, its nightclubs, its gangsters, and so on. Finally, there are some memorable scenes that will stay with you, and I do not want to say any more in order not to spoil the story.

In my view, an excellent thriller.

Carmen is in her fifties. She is a housewife from a well-to-do middle-class family from the capital of Chile, Santiago. Her husband enjoys a successful career; he is a doctor.

In the winter of 1976, 3 years after the military coup led by Augusto Pinochet, which has established a sinister and ruthless military dictatorship in the country, Carmen travels to her summer house: she intends to oversee some renovation work and enjoy a break by the seaside. That is when, inadvertently, she gets involved in the politics of the period. The film develops from there.

Carmen (Aline Kuppenheim) is the central character of the story: the film follows her, in her family circle and among her friends and acquaintances, also in her dealings with her staff and with suppliers and contractors. She is not interested in politics. Her bourgeois lifestyle has insulated her from the events of the past 3 years in Chile. Where the film is very good, it is in somehow creating an oppressive atmosphere through the depiction of seemingly minor incidents and little details. Beneath the veneer of complete normality, we realise, little by little, together with Carmen, that a tragedy is unfolding - a sinister tragedy combining extreme violence and ruthless repression with relentless propaganda and constant surveillance. Nowhere is safe. No one can be trusted. The henchmen of the military regime seem to be everywhere, watching you, listening to your telephone calls, following you...

It is a good movie because of its ability to transport us back to the Chile of the dictatorship, in the 1970s and 1980s. However, relatively little happens and the story feels claustrophobic in the extreme - intentionally, of course. So, an interesting piece of tense but low-key cinema: do not expect any fireworks as such.

This is a faithful adaptation of the novel, 'Pride and Prejudice', by Jane Austen. It takes place in England in the late 18th century. The story is centred on the Bennet family: Mr and Mrs Bennet and their 5 daughters – Jane, Elizabeth, Mary, Kitty, and Lydia. They live on a relatively modest estate in rural England. Jane and Elizabeth are the eldest of the 5 girls. For their parents, the obsession is to find them suitable husbands, as they need to be provided for. (Women of that social status, at the time, are not expected or trained to work, essentially.)

The story focuses primarily on the interaction between Jane Bennet (Rosamund Pike) and Charles Bingley (Simon Woods), a wealthy bachelor, on the one hand, and that between Elizabeth (Lizzy) Bennet (Keira Knightley) and Bingley's friend, Mr Darcy (Matthew Macfadyen), on the other. As the plot unfolds, the key characters are Lizzy Bennet and Mr Darcy, and how their dealings with each other evolve over time. Mr Darcy is a somewhat snobbish and awkward character, who can be aloof and exceedingly reserved: this aspect of his character is at the heart of the novel, and is prominent in the movie too.

Overall, this is a beautifully made period film. Matthew Macfadyen looks rather miserable and almost dull at times but, after all, Mr Darcy, in the novel, is hardly the life and soul of the party. The movie, in the last analysis, works thanks to the excellent performance by Keira Knightley: in the way that the film unfolds, it really is Lizzy Bennet's story and we see the chain of events through her eyes. In practice, she is the central, dominant character and, in fact, the narrator.

The film is never dreary or boring (it could easily have been, at 2 hours, and being the adaptation of such a novel...): on the contrary, it fizzes with energy and humour, making the most of the twists and turns of the story. The movie is well worth watching, more particularly if you like period films of this kind and are a fan of Jane Austen's.

Carter "Doc" McCoy (Steve McQueen) is eventually granted parole from a Texas prison where he was serving a 10-year sentence for armed robbery. His wife Carol (Ali MacGraw) has stood by him all along, and has helped secure his early release. McCoy has had to make a deal with Jack Beynon, an influential member of the parole board and a powerful businessman in San Antonio. Beynon has facilitated Doc's parole on the condition that McCoy should plan and participate in a bank robbery with two gangsters chosen by Beynon. The story develops from there.

The film is a tense and violent action thriller of the kind you would expect from director Sam Peckinpah; the film's music is very effective in enhancing the suspense. The 2 lead actors - Steve McQueen and Ali MacGraw - are convincing and the chemistry between them seems strong. There are unexpected twists and turns in the story that focus the attention of the viewer. The movie, however, is not particularly profound in any way: it remains, from start to finish, somehow, a spectacle - the archetypal get-away, underpinned by an implicit and romantic fascination with guns and violence. Still, overall, although not quite as good as what I expected, it is an excellent film.

Harry Caul (Gene Hackman) is a highly regarded surveillance expert based in San Francisco; he specializes in wiretapping services. We are in the analogue world but, as the movie shows in great detail, electronic surveillance was already highly advanced, very effective and scarily intrusive in the 1970s (and one dreads to think the extent of it, today, in the internet age, as denounced by, among others, Edward Snowden). Harry Caul and his team work for a range of clients, usually in the private sector. They are given an assignment and carry it out, without asking too many questions. Caul prides himself on his professionalism and focuses on the technical aspects of the job; he appears to have no scruples or, rather, no interest in the actual nature of the cases he is asked to put together, or in the reasons his clients have for seeking the information that Caul gives them.

Caul and his team are hired by a mysterious corporate client to eavesdrop on a couple, seen walking around Union Square, in San Francisco. Despite the ambient noise, Caul works on the various tapes to the point where he has a clear recording of the couple's conversation. The meaning is ambiguous but Caul soon feels that his work may be used in a way that could have tragic consequences. The story develops from there.

Harry Caul is, really, a dull character and a loner (played very well by Gene Hackman). There is a strong technical angle to the movie, as the practical and technological conditions of the surveillance work are described in some detail. In spite of all this, the film is a gripping thriller. And, unlike many such movies, the story gets more interesting, more intriguing and more powerful as it develops, to reach its climax in the last 30 minutes of the film. Highly recommended.

This French film deals with the nature of police work, focusing on a team of detectives working for the Judicial Police department (the equivalent of CID in Britain) of the city of Grenoble, in south-eastern France. A young woman has been murdered in terrible circumstances, and the police officers try to establish who the murderer may be. In the process, they dig deep into the past of Clara, the victim, and her complicated sentimental life.

As we are told right at the beginning of the movie, about 80% of homicides in France are solved by the police, i.e. the culprit is identified and arrested, but, in 20% of cases, no one is ever charged. The film describes such a case. In other words, the detectives will not manage to pin the murder on any of the suspects known to them. From this premise, the film develops its narrative.

This is not a conventional thriller. There are no fireworks. It is more in the tradition of social realism, but focused on police work, here. The police officers, in their various ways, are quite ordinary. And yet the film is fascinating in what it shows and examines. The investigation draws us into the story as if we were the detectives conducting the police work: each time they question a suspect, we cannot help but think that he is the one, and they will be able to corner him, to expose him. In this sense, the film is supremely well and very skilfully crafted.

The underlying, burning questions are never far from the surface of the events, tragic or not: how do you cope with pure evil when you are confronted with it? How does it affect those who have had to deal with it as part of their job? The lead officer, Yohan (Bastien Bouillon), is remarkably uncharismatic, to the point of being almost dull, but this is probably deliberate on the part of the director: he does not say much, and yet he sees and understands everything, taking it all on the chin, unable or unwilling to turn the impact of reality on him into words.

Overall, a very good film.

At the start of the film, we are in the city of Munich, in 1864. Ludwig II (Helmut Berger) is only 18 when he is crowned King of Bavaria. The young monarch is more interested in the arts and in culture than in anything else. He provides composer Richard Wagner with lavish support, encouraging the musician to settle down in Munich. The movie develops from there, covering the entire reign of Ludwig II, who soon develops a keen and costly interest in architecture, having extravagant castles built all over Bavaria.

Overall, the movie is structured in a predictable way, as the narrative follows the chronology of the king's reign and his life. Ludwig II, who was born in 1846, reigned from 1864 until his death in 1886. This was also a period of transition in German history, with Prussia asserting growing control over the fate of the German states, at the expense of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. The film is historically accurate in most respects, it would appear, in terms of how it presents the chain of events, the king's character, etc. ; everyone speaks Italian, however, which is odd in a way, as the story takes place in Bavaria, mainly.

It is a good film (in Italian with English subtitles), a kind of romantic, epic biography, given the fact its central character is a tormented young man fascinated with Wagnerian myths and Wagner's musical genius. The film is also fairly slow, albeit never boring, and probably overlong (at nearly 4 hours). There is something a bit ponderous and predictable about the portrayal of Ludwig, the mad king, even though Luchino Visconti is never simplistic in the way he approaches his complex and tragic subject. One thing that surprised me is the fact that L Visconti, overall, does not really make the most of the aesthetic and spectacular potential of the backdrop to the king's story, namely those castles and palaces he had built all over his kingdom. Given how extravagant and Disney-like some of them are, we get a glimpse of them, but I feel that much more could have been made of those settings.

Overall, a good movie and a well-made classic, where Romy Schneider as Empress Elisabeth of Austria (or Sissi) shines through with her radiant beauty (but her part is a fairly minor one in the film, unfortunately).

In 1893, in Tierra del Fuego, in the very south of Chile, Alexander MacLennan, a Scotsman who served in the British Army, oversees the fencing-off of the land for his employer, José Menéndez, a wealthy landowner who owns thousands of sheep. MacLennan is a very rough and violent man, and he plays the part of enforcer for his employer.

Menéndez asks the Scotsman to lead an expedition across the whole of his estate, all the way to the Atlantic Ocean, on the Argentinian side of Tierra del Fuego. The aim will be to demarcate and reclaim the land. Menéndez makes it clear that, if MacLennan encounters any groups of Amerindians native to the region, they should be eliminated, as he considers that they are a threat to his sheep-raising business (he claims they kill and eat the sheep belonging to European settlers). The Scotsman sets off in the company of Bill, an American cowboy from Texas working for José Menéndez, and Segundo, who is mixed-blood (mestizo) and has been selected by MacLennan because he is a good shot.

The movie develops from there. In many respects, it is an odd, unconventional and unique film you are unlikely to ever forget, once you have seen it. There is something haunting and dark about it. That is, no doubt, linked to the eerie, bleak, mournful and wild landscapes of Tierra del Fuego (I assume it was filmed on location): endless moorland interspersed with forests, snow-capped mountains in the distance and, in places, moon-like scenery of utter desolation. You feel the vastness of this empty, or near-empty, wilderness, its power and its mystery. The music, also, is captivating and hard-hitting. All of this makes the narrative mesmerizing.

In other ways, the film is perhaps a bit frustrating, as not that much actually happens most of the time: there is something slow and deliberative about the pace of the story. And yet, there are several high points along the way, and the end of the movie, which I do not want to spoil for readers of this review, is as unexpected as it is masterful.

The film depicts, more than anything else, an atmosphere - an atmosphere of fear, menace and violence in the midst of this primeval natural world. The underlying theme, of course, is that of the white man purporting to bring Western civilisation, religion and values to the aboriginal population of Tierra del Fuego, deemed to be 'savages'. However, as the film shows, things are not that simple, and the 'savages' may not be those the settlers despise and slaughter so readily.

Overall, a weird and haunting film that I would recommend, but which may not be everyone's cup of tea.

In County Cork, in Ireland under British rule, in 1920, Damien O'Donovan (Cillian Murphy) has decided to leave his native village in order to practise medicine in a hospital in London. For his part, his brother Teddy is involved in Ireland's struggle for independence from Britain: he is the commander of the local flying column of the Irish Republican Army (IRA). Events decide Damien to join his brother, Teddy, and the film shows their involvement in armed operations against the British security forces. The film shows what happened when, after the Anglo-Irish Treaty (1921), which established the Irish Free State as a British Dominion and led to the partition of Ireland, some of the anti-British fighters accepted it, while others rejected it: the Irish war of independence turned into a civil war (1922-1923) in Ireland itself.

The movie is very much a historical drama following a linear narrative. Ken Loach being who he is, the film intends to show that the British occupation of Ireland was a savage and ruthless colonial enterprise - and no doubt, in many ways, it was: the ultra-violent paramilitary forces, such as the Black and Tans, are shown in action in the film. The story is told from the standpoint of the IRA fighters. This is fine, but the movie does feel a bit demonstrative, didactic and predictable at times: somehow, it lacks originality. However, it is a convincing and well-made film. It seems to capture the atmosphere in Ireland in the 1920s very well. I enjoyed watching the movie, even though it may not be the masterpiece that some people claim it is. Somehow, the film is interesting and feels necessary.

In the Battle of Myeongnyang, in October 1597, the navy of the Korean Kingdom of Joseon (named after a dynasty that reigned over the country from 1392 to 1897), under the command of Admiral Yi Sun-sin, fought an utterly desperate and truly heroic battle against the numerically superior invading Japanese naval force in the Myeongnyang Strait, off the southwest corner of the Korean Peninsula. Admiral Yi Sun-sin (1545-1598) is considered a national hero in South Korea: there is a large statue of him along one of the avenues crossing central Seoul. He is to the Koreans what Joan of Arc is to the French or Admiral H Nelson is to the British: the country's saviour.

The background to the naval battle is Japan's invasion of Korea in the late 16th century, known as the Imjin War (1592-1598), in the course of which Japanese forces went on the rampage up and down the Korean Peninsula, slaughtering the locals and pillaging along the way. The Koreans enlisted the support of the Ming Chinese (named after the Ming dynasty, in power in China at the time) to manage to repulse the Japanese army and navy - a fact that gets a brief mention in the film and is not central to the story.

The movie is, overall, an accurate depiction of what happened during the Battle of Myeongnyang, and it feels very raw and very authentic. The music draws you into the story. The reconstitution of the fleets of warships is impressive and the battle scenes are beyond spectacular. The outfits of the senior officers - more particularly the Japanese - are sumptuous, but there is no attempt to gloss over the horrors of naval warfare. I found it easy to follow the story (then again, I do know South Korea, which I travelled around in late 2023), and the uniforms and outfits of the soldiers in the Japanese and in the Korean armed forces are different, which helps to differentiate the 2 sides. Overall, it is an excellent film, full of suspense and drama - one of the best of its kind that I have ever seen.