Film Reviews by AER

This film is the anti-Love Actually, in fact, to soppy old Richard Curtis, this film is the devil. I compare this to Love Actually because they are both about love in London amongst people in their 20s and 30s. They couldn't be more different, yet the same.

Mike Nichols' CLOSER came out in 2004 and I've probably seen it about 10 times now. Each time I watch it I am left utterly shaken by much of it. Watching it tonight, I spotted a few stylistic choices that have dated it already, but on the whole (and ignoring modern technology advances) this is a pertinent, relevant and wicked film about the birth and death of love.

For me, it contains career best performances from Clive Owen and Julia Roberts. It also stars Jude Law and Natalie Portman, who are both excellent. I think Clive Owen's thwarted alpha-male is the plum role and he is electric to watch in all of his scenes. Based on a West End play from the early 90s by Patrick Marber about two entwining couples, this is a foul-mouthed, brutal, sharply written dance to the death that skewers male and female sexual ambition, and reveals some very cold and arch thoughts on love dynamics. It's stark, and I've got to say, I love it, and I wish I could write a play like this one day. It's like a gift to actors.

At times, the film is stagey, and some of the dialogue would never get said in real life, but it's that slight disconnect with reality that makes this so watchable. It's a brave career choice for Julia Roberts, but it was very nice to see her play a 'real person' this once - somebody utterly relatable. I love the confrontation between Jude Law and Clive Owen, where the latter makes the former burst into tears. It's combat without a single blow (ok one blow) being landed... I couldn't take my eyes off it.

Two of my favourite lines...

"Have you ever seen a human heart? It's like a fist, wrapped in blood..."

And

"you women don't understand the territory. You are the territory."

"...It's not a war"

Its easy to see why this won the Palme D'Or in 2015, it's the kind of director's character piece that the Cannes Jury loves. I'm not belittling the film at all, it's a moving and engrossing film about a family of barley related misfits who bring up and abused six-year-old as their own only to have the world come crashing down when they are accused out evil kidnapping. It's a wonderful film, gently paced with an excellent cast, and no easy endings. Recommended, and one of Kore-eda Hirokaku's best.

You don't need me to tell you the plot. Black Widow is MOR MCU - and it comes too late to be of serious interest. I do enjoy these smaller MCU films, the scaling back of scope is important to focus on the characters, however this one doesn't feel different enough and ultimately it has the same ending with the main characters flying around trying to take down a (delete where applicable) a giant world eating/destroying machine/HQ/monster - it's a game of spin rinse repeat and I'm getting so bored of it all now. I think MCU should have finished at Phase 3, also Black Widow should have been made and released during Phase 3 for maximum effect. Black Widow feels like a thin footnote.

The acting was great and the pace was electric. PS: Ray Winstone shouldn't do accents - he sucks at ihem.

5 out of 10

This unwanted sequel is marginally better than the boring headache Birds of Prey. The Suicide Squad 2 is unimaginative, long, badly acted, nonsensical, unfunny and hell to sit through. The odd-one liner aside, this had zero going for it. It shows how much James Gunn's style gets smoothed out by Marvel, as this DC film is a director off the reins to the detriment of his honed-talents. This is the first James Gunn filmed that I have really, really disliked - Idris Elba looks lost, John Cena is never good in anything, and the rest of the cast get few opportunities to stand out from the ensuing hell of CGI mayhem. Pluses for me: The Rat was cool, and Sylvester Stallone's Sharks had limited appeal.

This is the last DC film I'm watching. All these superhero movies are the same - how many more films are going to end with the good guys flying around trying to take down a massive world eating/destroying machine/monster - I feel like I'm sitting through the same movie over and over again - didn't Black Widow do the same thing the other week? hahaha.

Low grade rubbish - 1 out of 10

This very cliched and corny Australian film holds no surprises, yet it has a lot of heart and at times it's very funny. Charlie & Boots is a very mild comedy made for people of a certain age and taste. It's a very simplistic road movie gushing with sentimentality about the importance of family and being there for your loved ones. Paul Hogan has only ever played one character and he's on good form here as the wily old widower with the twinkle in his eye, and Shane Jacobson matches him in the pretty basic cookie-cutter role of hopeless son. The plot sees the two men go on a fishing trip to the top of Australia and their adventures on the way. If this was made in England it would have probably featured actors like David Jason and Peter Kay. Production-wise it looks like it's been made for TV (it could have been), the incidental music never ceases, also at times, the film feels like one long feel-good montage. But the high points see off the low points, and I think that's down to the chemistry between the two leads. Funny, corny, predictable, heartwarming, and infuriating. It's middle-of-the-road stuff - one to watch with your parents. Undemanding stuff but you won't feel bad for watching it.

5 out of 10

Originally directed for TV, this is Steven Spielberg's feature film debut (it was released at the cinema in Europe with added scenes) from back in 1971.

Starring Dennis Weaver as a man who gets on the wrong side of truck driver from hell. Ever been on the receiving end of road rage? This is where your oppressor probably got it from. Duel is stripped back and menacing - the truck is iconic, we never actually see the driver, and the ending is awesome.

For me this is Spielberg's best film as he keeps his nerve - it's a pure thriller - no compromise. We know a tiny bit more about the highly strung lead who probably has a part in bringing this mess into his life. This was before Spielberg got soft and melodramatic like he did in the '80s (don't get me wrong, I love ET), and unadventurous in the 2000s+. Also I usually don't like Spielberg these days because he's not at all subtle and he has plot holes and leaves narrative messes everywhere (let's save this for another day).

Duel was perhaps the first 'scary' movie I ever remember seeing as a kid. I watched it with Mum & Dad and I'm amazed that I didn't get bored as it's quite slow at times (mind you I can tolerate moderate paces now), however when it turns up the pressure its a relentless thrill ride. I watched it again tonight and found it gripping for the most part. So, it retains top spot ahead of all the dross like The Terminal, Jurassic Park 2, and Ready Player One...

After seeing Color out of Space last year (which I really enjoyed) I began to forgive Nicolas Cage for his weird about-face over a decade ago into bad movies. Some films have also been very cool like The Trust (which he made with Elijah Wood) but then I got too enthusiastic and added Jiu Jitsu and Willy's Wonderland to my list. Sadly, Willy's Wonderland somehow fails to capitalise on its USP of seeing Nicolas Cage duff up a bunch of giant, furry, mechanical beasts. But it ends up being repetitive and ultimately boring and a bit naff. It's daft, and despite been well-shot, some aspects make it look low-budget. Beth Grant as the sheriff is good and dependable Cage is weird as the silent hero of the piece. Shame its got no ideas beyond the initial bizarreness of its concept.

Sorry, this was low energy - batteries not included. 1 out of 10.

Given the pedigree of those involved in this sequel / reboot to the Saw cycle of horror films, you'd expect a bit more care to have been taken. As it is, it's probably the world's most expensive fan-made movie. This is Saw without the narrative invention, the smarts, or good ideas - instead we have a 'masterplansplaining' baddy, no suspense, bad acting, plotholes, no surprises and less gore. It's a shame as this was the film to draw fans back in but all it will do is provide a disservice to the earlier films. Bring back John Kramer (Tobin Bell) - this copycat killer was doing Kermit The Frog impressions (I wonder if Frank OZ provided uncredited voice work). Game Over.

Cocoon is a great little film out of time. It shares much in common with F**cking Amal aka Show Me Love that came out about 20 years old, a crush between two high school develops and flourishes into what? It's well-acted, lovingly scripted and presented; quite simply it feels a need to celebrate the beautiful things in life, and whilst this may not have the gravitas of more serious films, it's a lovely watch and very truthful with it. However, Cocoon doesn't offer anything new for us, and sometimes that can be important. Recommended for those looking for an easy-going, uncomplex, feel-good drama we can all relate too.

This series was one of the more interesting ones. The early films aped John Carpenter's classics like Assault on Precinct 13 and Escape from NY, but as time as gone on the emphasis on horror has lessened into the moves into gory action films has progressed. The side order of anti-right politics is welcome, but is it Hollywood's way of reaching right-wing movie fans and trying to educate them through these films? High hopes? But anybody coming through the cinema doors to see Purge films aren't there from the political insight/satire, they want thrill kills and scares.... By the fifth film and a TV series, it's a case of rinse repeat with another angle to hang the template on. This entry revolves around a new set of 'characters' who mainly live on a ranch near El Paso, TX and how they survive when the Purge continues after the legal 12 hour period is over. From there it's just a series of run, hide, shoot scenes without any thought or invention. The Mexican variation could have been used a bit more imaginatively, but by now the films are too straight-jacketed and established to think all that far beyond its own garden.

Out of the existing film this ranks as the fourth out of five for quality. Only the First Purge was worse than this.

3 out of 10

Directed by France's Francois Ozon, the bi-lingual film is an exceptionally movie ode to pacifism and friendship. I won't detail the plot but I will say that I wasn't familiar with the source material, so I pretty much went to this film without knowing a thing about it's plot. Superficially, it reminded me of Michael Haneke's White Ribbon - that too is a B&W film that is set in rural Germany in that same war-wrecked decade of the early 20th century, however, a romantic mystery stands at the heart of this film. FRANTZ casts a peculiar spell over the view by weaving a lot of intrigue up until the halfway mark when the plot does an about turn and delves behind the reasons for all the pretence and mystery. It's a tantalising story and one enhanced by the cinematography, beautiful score, direction, and note-perfect performances.

This film was randomly selected from my 700+ pot of films, so this was a very welcome surprise. 10 out of 10.

First of all, I am grateful that there are risk takers like director M. Night Shyamalan at work (still) in Hollywood. He is a rare breed, a story-telling auteur that can tell pretty much do whatever he likes (for better or for worse). Unfortunately, his output is very patchy for my tastes, from the heights of Unbreakable, The Village, and Split, to the drivel of The Happening, Glass, and The Last Airbender, he's never boring. Sadly, Old, whilst not unwatchable, is a minor work - brimming with amazing ideas and a very intriguing concept, (people get trapped on a beach where time is sped up and they grow old rapidly) - it is so full of plot holes. Nothing hang together and after a promising opening, the actors flounder with a preposterous script and nonsensical plot developments. The denouement is interesting but turns to sand running through your fingers the minute you give it any real thought. It's a shame, as M NIGHT SHYAMALAN is one of those bewitching directors I really root for. But he's misfiring again.... sorry.

Authentic science-fiction movie about a mission to establish life on Europa (one of Jupiter's moons). The choice to tell the story via cameras aboard the mission shop and video diaries is interesting and serves the narrative well, as opposed to being another found-footage horror howler. The acting is convincing and the characters authentic. There is little room for melodrama and big actor moments - terrifying problems arise on the mission to jepordise the success and the crew respond within the parameters of their roles - there's no heroes and wise asses on board. Some may think this renders the film dramatically under-powered but I enjoyed it for the way it strived for authenticity over Hollywood-flavoured tom-foolery.

The main negative is the obvious impact the small budget has had on the SFX. Whilst much of the visuals are appropriate to the camera technology in the film, some of the death scenes on Europa are confusing and disorientating, which is a shame. This might disappoint viewers who like this kind of film purely to see who dies how and when. Most of the characters die off-screen.

For a low-budget sci-fi it is streets ahead of most sci-fis. It is worth a look for its seriousness and an attempt to give us something a little bit different.

This is a film about the death of humanity. One of the greatest war films of all-time, it's scary, horrifying, and upsetting in equal measure and a vital watch. I'd never seen it before but had been sent The Painted Bird by Cinemaparadiso a few months ago and read the comparisons (PB even features the lead actor from Come and See). Utter classic that makes Saving Private Ryan and others look like Sesame Street.

Director Scott Wiper last teamed up with Vinnie Jones for the Australian WWF movie The Condemned about a decade ago and that was another film that shouldn't have been as entertaining as it turned out to be based on its pedigree. This director and star have form, and The Big Ugly proves that they are a great match.

The Big Ugly may be a bit too ponderous for those that may usually pick a tough-guy movie like this to watch, but the characters, the acting, and some of the turns of the plot are a revelation. True, not everything fits together, whilst other parts feel slightly rushed, this is a thoughtful film with deeper layers hinted at along the way. Fine performances from the three famous faces, and from Brandon Skenlar as the baddie - doing good work with a one-dimensional part, elevate the well-worn material. This punches above its weight, is less predictable than you'd expect, and has some nice details at the fringes about life in West Virginia.

PS: I'm confused as to why Stephen Marcus got shot near the beginning though, anyone?

Recommended if you like slow burn, tough-guy movies. This is like a good version of Nowhere to Run, or Homefront.

5 out of 10