Film Reviews by AW

Based on Guy Ritchie's popular film "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels", sought to capture the gritty, comedic essence of the original film. Despite the high expectations, the series had a short run, consisting of only seven episodes.

The show follows a similar premise to the film, revolving around a group of young, small-time criminals in London's East End. The main characters, while new, share the same archetypes as those in the movie: smart-talking, sharp-witted, and often finding themselves in over their heads. Each episode typically revolves around a new heist, con, or misadventure, blending humour with the criminal escapades. Like the movie, it maintains the dark humour that made the film popular. The witty banter and absurd situations provide plenty of laughs and comic relief throughout the episodes.

While it doesn’t quite match the original's brilliance, it offers enough laughs and thrills to entertain fans of British crime comedies. Its short run means it won’t demand much of your time, making it a quick watch for those interested in the genre.

The movie certainly had its strengths. Tom Cruise, who played the role of Jack Reacher, gave a solid performance as the tough, no-nonsense ex-military investigator. The action scenes were well-executed, and the pacing of the movie kept me engaged from start to finish. However, on the other hand, there were some elements of the movie that left me feeling underwhelmed. For one, the plot felt a bit too convoluted and contrived at times. It was difficult to keep track of all the different characters and their motivations, and the twists and turns of the story felt a bit forced.

Additionally, I couldn't help but feel that the movie missed the mark when it came to capturing the essence of the Jack Reacher character. In the novels, Reacher is a towering, imposing figure, a true force of nature. However, Tom Cruise's portrayal felt a bit too polished and Hollywood-ized, lacking the rough edges and raw intensity that make the character so compelling. All in all, I'd say that the 2012 movie adaptation of Jack Reacher is a decent action movie, but it falls short when it comes to capturing the gritty realism and complexity of the original novels. If you're a fan of the books, you might find the movie a bit disappointing, but if you're just looking for a fun, mindless action flick, it's worth checking out.

I must say that I was pleasantly surprised by this film. As someone who's a fan of the comic book genre, I was skeptical about how well the Joker could be portrayed in a standalone movie, without the likes of Batman to balance him out. However, I must say that director Todd Phillips and lead actor Joaquin Phoenix managed to pull it off.

One of the most striking aspects of this movie is how well it portrays the descent into madness of its titular character, Arthur Fleck, who would eventually become the Joker. Phoenix's performance is nothing short of mesmerizing - he captures the nuances of a man struggling with mental illness, and his transformation into a violent, anarchic force is both chilling and captivating.

Another thing that impressed me about this movie is how well it tackles certain societal issues. The movie doesn't shy away from exploring themes such as poverty, mental illness, and the class divide. It's not just a comic book movie - it's a commentary on the state of our society and how we treat those who are struggling the most.

Of course, this movie isn't without its flaws. Some have criticized it for glorifying violence, and I can see where they're coming from. The movie certainly doesn't shy away from showing gruesome acts of violence, and it's understandable that some people might be uncomfortable with that.

This film truly captures the brutality and horrors of the First World War. The cinematography is outstanding, with the camera work giving the viewer a real sense of the devastation and chaos of the battlefield.

The plot follows two young soldiers, Blake and Schofield, who are sent on a dangerous mission to deliver a message that could save the lives of 1,600 men. The journey is perilous and fraught with danger, as the two men must navigate enemy lines and treacherous terrain to reach their destination. One aspect of the film that truly impressed me was the way it portrayed the futility of war. The soldiers are depicted as pawns in a larger game, with their lives being sacrificed for the sake of political and strategic goals. This message is conveyed without being overly preachy or didactic, and it serves as a powerful reminder of the human cost of conflict.

The performances of the actors are also noteworthy. George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman deliver excellent performances as Blake and Schofield, respectively. The supporting cast, which includes Colin Firth, Benedict Cumberbatch, and Mark Strong, also give strong performances. Overall, I highly recommend 1917 to anyone who is interested in history, war movies, or just great filmmaking in general. It is a gripping and emotional journey that will leave you breathless and with a newfound appreciation for the sacrifices made by those who fought in the Great War.