Another movie who's reputation and even who's title, has become a part of modern cultural reference...

...But having finally watched it, I was somewhat disappointed.

Of course, there's the great central performance by Meryl Streep, and a strong, sympathetic supporting role by Peter MacNicol, but Kevin Kline over does it somewhat, albeit, playing a deeply disturbed individual (He's giving an almost Fish Called Wanda skit, at the very least, it's very... theatre).

But this aside, it's two things that underwhelm, and detract from this tale of an immigrant with a dark and horrific secret from her past:

Firstly, it feels like a made for TV movie (Was it?), which may be forgivable, if it was, but it feels cheaper in the production than the subject and it's aspirations require.

...And secondly, it's feels oddly structured, like two separate movies tacked sequentially onto each other: The first section being like The Great Gatsby, a very jazz age tale of American urban life shared between three friends and their difficulties, then it goes back to world war two Europe, and is a Holocaust movie... The contrast in styles, and tones is jarring.

I wonder if perhaps, this was made today, an editor or director might intersperse some of the latter element in the first American section, and vice versa, in order to foreshadow, suggest, or intimate the real underlying story, and even the tone, and indeed, even out the movie itself.

Maybe it would be possible to re-edit, and restructure the existing film in that way?

Doing this, might even elevate the whole experience to something more worthy of the film's reputation.

1 person found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

A tough watch, but ultimately rewarding.

What begins as a very civilized lifestyle for a gifted pianist turns, by degrees into Schindler's list, and finally something akin to the Tom Hanks movie: Castaway, as the Nazis invade, take over, then the entire city is bombed flat, to resemble a post-apocalyptic moonscape, the ruins among which, Brody's character: Władysław Szpilman, must scrape and hide to survive, all the while, avoiding being blown to bits, or captured by the Nazis.

It's essentially the story of one man's adapting to survive, and in so doing, having the layers of civilization stripped systematically from him.

A remarkable true story too.

1 person found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

It's strange, watching this at a distance of some years now, in that we are as far from the date of release, as the date of release was from the events depicted in this movie...

...And yet the background mood of reactionary conservative repression created by the "squares" of the time, flinching in moral panic at the licentiousness of the sixties and seventies, and seeking to squash it out at all costs, and who's puritanical, narrow lines of social acceptability seemed positively absurd to me back then... as if the world could be so ridiculously straight, and judgemental, certainly not in the comparatively liberal and enlightened nineties...

...Thank God we're over that, I thought (!)


Indeed, it seemed such repressive society almost demanded a semi-psychotic anti-hero (and his attorney :) brandishing his wildly crazed, relentlessly drug fuelled Gonzo journalism like a wrecking ball, to smash, head-long through the social mores of the times, and break almost every taboo they could find as they went. In order that the human spirit should not entirely succumb to such impositions.

(Well, it's a fine excuse, anyway!)

Be that as it may, it seems further away from the nutty, hilariously cartoonish picture of wild exaggerated, mythologised excess, or a depraved "psyche" movie that seemed to be the culmination of the nineties style of off the wall movie that I used to watch it as entertainment, but now, rather a bench mark of just how far we seem to have fallen into the seventh circle of moral hell since that time... so much so, this new millennium at times seems to make the fifties seem like a very liberal, open minded time by comparison!

Watch this then, for all the social commentary and pjilosphophy an old fart like me might ramble on about, or watch to see a movie that you would simply sit and think: "Well, they couldn't get away with making this kind of thing anymore!", or sit and watch the brilliantly funny characterisations Johnny Depp and Benicio Del Toro give of two of the most improbable human beings ever to walk the earth, or just put aside the trendy wokery for a spell, and bean-bag that old brain of yours Google boy, and just have fun watching an excessive, degenerate thrill ride that will have you laughing all the way through...

...Because it's fun.

1 person found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

WhyNow review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

WhyNow review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

WhyNow review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Essentially, a western set in space, with Sean Connery's Sherriff type, thrust into the middle of a conspiracy / intrigue to do with the criminal activities of a shady corporation.

He's basically Wyatt Earp, come to bring a little law to this outpost, but unusually (and refreshingly) for Connery, while he is the standard tough guy, he is not without a sense of vulnerability here.

...And it's a film essentially brought to you by the majority of the production team that made Alien, and it carries much of that look, feel, vibe of deep space horror created there.

Very underrated in my book.

1 person found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

City AM review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

City AM review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Iconic nineties movie.

It's groundhog day... all over again!

But here, the now well established (and somewhat overused) device of reliving a single time frame over and over again until you get it right is contracted to the space of about an hour, where Lola must run as fast as she can, to reach her boyfriend before he robs a supermarket to get a stack of cash to replace one he lost on a train, and which was intended to be paid to the local mob.

...If she doesn't get there, and find a way to get the cash along the way, boyfriend Manni has a run in with the cops, and gets shot.

She must keep doing this until she finds the right route through this time span to get there in time with cash in hand, and so prevent Manni's doom.

A very bright, very kinetic movie (as you'd expect) that doesn't slow down much to catch it's breath, and has a really inventive, yet simple storytelling device woven in, whereby, if she does something different in her interactions with the people she encounters along the way, a series of Polaroid snaps outlining that person's new alternate future clicks rapidly through, following the legend: "And then..."

(Saves filming entire sequences, and packs the new future story into a matter of seconds).

Everyone I knew saw this in the nineties - was a bit of "A thing" back then... and more than a few people I knew had this poster on their wall too.

Great fun.

1 person found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

A masterpiece trapped inside an abomination.

This is another one of those movies that less, certainly would have amounted to so much more.

In this case... less sex.

I know, how very prudish or puritanical of me! Certainly, I've never been one to consider myself as such, but find myself having more and more reason for complaint as I get older.

...And it's not, as I say, for reasons of moral indignation, but rather, for actual storytelling, and movie making reasons that I find myself infuriated by these kinds of films:

All the extra time you spend dwelling, or fixating on the sex, is, for me, time you are not telling an actual story, and cutting into the natural storytelling rhythms, that can make a movie more sublime, poetic, and well rounded, as well as more dramatic, poignant, meaningful, and impactful.

For this could have been beautiful.

...A subtly, and deftly told coming of age story of a young teen girl struggling to get to grips with her sexual awakening, as well as her sexuality. Set among the classroom peer pressures of highschool life, where she feels compelled to contain all these feelings, until she ventures out one night, and meets an slightly older, artistic, pseudo-intellectual type young gay woman, who she is instantly smitten with, if not slightly overawed by, and with whom she strikes up a freindship. leading to the inevitable relationship, and even "love".

So it is in essence, a coming of age lesbian love story.

... so far, so good.

.....But then..... damn!

Basically, they spend extensive sessions of awkward porn style pretzel sex bouts, which go on way too long...

(So as you find yourself checking your watch, as well as forgetting there was a story going on somewhere there, that for some - ahem - reason completely went out of my mind)

... as well as being disturbingly graphic... to the extent that if this is not actual sex, but merely simulated, then I struggle to see the point in having bothered to simulate it.

And of course, I see after a couple of attempts to watch this film, and get past the idea that it's just some creepy voyeuristic heterosexual male director / filmmaker using "making a movie" merely as an excuse to exploit young actresses for his own personal pleasure.

It feels dishonest.

...And makes you feel grubby, and like you are participating in this exploitation just by watching it take place - like you tacitly agree with this - which I do not.

The worst thing is, on more than one occasion, a momentary, involuntary glance at camera from one of these actresses which seems to speak of confusion and uncertainty about what they have been asked to do, only hammers this horrible feeling home to you the viewer.

It feels like witnessing a crime to watch it.

Now, the overall plot, and point of the movie is actually a really good one - in that two people who "fall in love" despite some very apparent differences between them, may well be confusing sex with love, or even infatuation with love... to the extent that I begin to suspect this is not about love, or even a gay relationship, or even a healthy sexual relationship, but more a tale of addiction. Sexual addiction, and a shared, and mutual sexual addiction at that.

This is then essentially a tale of two sex junkies, addicted to each other, and don't know how to control this need in themselves, or square it to their lives. Actually quite a tragic tale.

And told on it's own, could have been a classic, indeed, a masterpiece.

Unfortunately, it's trapped inside an unnecessarily absurd, over-long, overly- graphic, grubby series of porn flick episodes that totally detract from a, kill the wonderful tragic tale beneath.

Again... not a prude, I just feel that if a director feels he wants to make porn, then do so, you only need ten minutes of that everyone consenting, everybody happy, and you need not then try to pretend it's "drama", and porn doesn't need a Shakespearean plot under it.

Get in, get out, go home - wham, bam.... etc (so to speak)

But at least this would then be honest about, and with itself.

And at a three hour runtime, I do not exaggerate to say you could, by means of editorial excavation, lose at least half hour to forty five minutes of unnecessary movie flab, and porn, still make your points about the nature of their relationship, and have brilliant movie as the end result.

But as it is, it is too uncomfortable a watch.

3 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

WhyNow review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Excellent film, if somewhat...er... controversial.

(To say the least!!!)

Basically, it's the story of a young guy on the threshold of adult life, with lots of pressures bearing on him, and in his attempts to find a moment or two to himself... for... er... a little relief (ahem) discovers that that inner tension builds to an unbearable degree.

Something has to give.

...And does, in a way, that... er ... is.... um... yikes!

(far be it for me to offer spoilers, but I think it advisable to let you know what you're getting into in this case, as Oedipal incest ensues. Crumbs!)

When a movie has such a big talking point, especially one of such a controversial magnitude around a very particular taboo, it tends to push all other considerations aside, and how good the movie is, the performances, and indeed the story being told, and how well it is told tend to get lost in the mix, overwhelmed by the degree to which the one nugget of outrage that public discourse latches onto becomes.

For on all other of these counts, this is brilliant... a lightly, wryly handled comic / tragic portrait of a very confused young man's struggle to realize himself in the approaching adult world.

This has become a bit of a back-burner, low key cult classic indie movie, which, even the most broad minded tend to not mention in polite society.

It likely won't appear any time soon in your TV for these reasons, and it might be difficult to find on any media too... but stands as a good example of how to go about tackling the toughest of subjects.

1 person found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

WhyNow review - 3/5 :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Not half as clever as it likes to think it is, or wants you to think it is.

Another noisy neighbour!

...As I've come to think of those movies that seem to hum away in the background of your consciousness, occasionally bubbling up to the surface of conversation as some kind of cult classic contender, or unappreciated prospective masterpiece, to quote Peter Griffin: "It insists upon itself", until you finally relent, and watch the thing.

And for the most part such movies have not yet disappointed: Crazy Stupid Love, The Before Trilogy (such as I have seen so far!), have knocked it out of the park, and proven themselves worthy of more general appreciation, even, to a degree: Punch Drunk Love was in this zone...

...But this has proven itself not to be such a film - a lot of talk about it's quirky strangeness worthy of being mentioned alongside the works of Wes Anderson, Paul Thomas Anderson, Charlie Kauffman, Gondry, Jonze and the rest, is flattery beyond what is reasonable, because basically, this feels like an attempt to bottle and commercialise, or otherwise cash in on the vibes and themes that those other master film-makers do - to tap into their wild, surreal, yet insightful genius, and claim it for their own.

This wants to be a Wes Anderson movie, or a Paul Thomas Anderson movie, better yet. Wes Anderson directing a Paul Thomas Anderson Kauffman story, and reeks of pretentions to this... indeed it is, therefore:

Pretentious.

And while, on the surface of things, it should be an interesting confounding story of a man who feels nudged out of an enterprise by usurping, shallow former friend hiring a couple of, um, existential investigators to follow himself around, and get the bottom of his existence, and discover if life rests upon the intricate relationship of a causal interconnectedness of things, with meaning or purpose in it's design, or if it's all just one great coincidental mess, with no point or purpose to the circumstances of life...

(Phew! - I told you it was pretentious!!!)

...It actually dissolves into an uninteresting, incomprehensible mess of parts.

.......And you become increasingly aware as the movie goes on, that it was only a half baked idea to begin with, that on paper, may have made the actors involved look with relish at such an interesting concept, and script, probably with those other movie makers works in mind, like they would get the chance to be involve in something like that, with the same results. But sadly, no.

This feels very much like nobody involved even understood what it is those other guys actually do, but thought, let's just be strange, wordy, and make it look and feel like one of those we've achieved it... if it's purposely obscure, it must mean something, and people will be believe it too, and nod reverently at us for having made something so profound, and brilliant.

(For some reason, that Turner prize winner of the painting made with poo springs to mind, that everyone got very frowny, obsequious, and celebratory about :)

For this is a piece of shit.

First, look at the cast: Mark Wahlberg, Naomi Watts, ad Jude Law... yeah, enough said.

And then, I think the cardinal sin, is trying to all of those other film makers at once, and therefore loses the definition, and distinctiveness, both in substance and style which is each their own, and makes their movies work. It therefore feels messy, flat, bland, and uncompelling.

Granted, there are one or two moments of inspiration, such as the blanket analogy of reality, which I enjoyed, but then went beyond ridiculous to plain embarrassing in the "surreal" moments of seeing Schwartzman as a baby being breast fed by a grown man with hairy tits - an image I never want in my head again! - or the slow motion "passionate sexual abandon" in the woodland, covering each other with mud, and being really depressingly sad to look at.

Many other things just feel like amateur theatre ideas and playground gimmicks dressed up as something important, but it just made me wince.

And, although promising to begin with, the telling line: "That September thing" seeming to allude to what this was all about really, given it's historical proximity to 911: A shattered faith, and psychology of a people after that catastrophic event, seeking to make sense of an equally shattered reality trying to find meaning, and purpose in life where everything is apparently called into question...

...But this never lives up to it, and just meanders along until the end, and doesn't get good at any point.

So, I can now file this in my brain as watched, and can advise anyone else curious about it because of what they may have heard about it, that on this occasion, you can give this a miss, it won't ever (I hope) become regarded as a beloved classic, or culturally important in any way.

✔︎ Helpful Review?

WhyNow review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

City AM review (see image) :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

I have vague recollections of being made to read the Ted Hughes story at school of this; Originally titled: The Iron Man.

...I am somewhat sketchy about it now, but the lasting impression of it being a very haunting, sad feeling tale of the giant robot from outer space arriving on earth to be befriended by a boy, with the same depth of warmth and feeling as one of those early Oscar Wilde short stories...

(Better than the plays and witticisms he is generally known for! - saw an animated version of The Happy Prince at school, which has scarred me for life, and lodged it firmly in my soul ever since! - devastated!!!)

..And it has always jarred with me... seemed odd to me, that Mister Serious McFrowny pants intellectual poet Ted Hughes could be responsible for this, but Brad Bird does a bang up job of capturing the feeling of the book that stayed with me all this time.

Due to the setting of 1950s America, against a backdrop of Sputnik, the Cold War, and imminent Nuclear destruction, the general underlying themes of advancing and advanced technology posing a threat to humanity, and the boy who sees otherwise in this robot visitor (And all that this implies :) probably makes this a bit too much for very small children, but maybe early teens and up would be a better audience - so if on TV, more early evening than morning.

And there's lots for older (ahem) viewers to like, in the subtle light wit, and humour that's here throughout.

A wonderful animated movie!

✔︎ Helpful Review?

How disappointing!

Another one of those I'd sought to cross off my list, that comes with a huge, and legendary reputation...

...And while of course, it essentially patents the formula for the twisty turny private investigator noir movie, I found it unnecessarily convoluted, and the plot complicated, and a little difficult to follow.

What was amusing was the old stereotype of the characters talking in very quick, clipped sentences of this era: "You know what I mean see...?", "I do, see...?", "Oh you do see..?", "Oh yes I do, see...see...!".... "I see!" etc.

But that was mostly I think, because it felt they trying to cram too much dialogue and plot into too short a runtime, so it feels hurried.

It did gradually, mildly engross me towards the end, but I was getting quite non-plussed and even slightly bored with it until then.

(Oh, and while I Appreciate Humphrey Bogart is, of course, Humphrey Bogart, swimming in his Bogart-ness, I can't fathom why every single girl and woman in this thinks he's "Cute" and can barely keep themselves from falling over in swoons every time they encounter him... what the hell is that about?)

Overall... meh.

✔︎ Helpful Review?

WhyNow review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

The Guardian's five-star review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Short City AM review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

City AM review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

WhyNow review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?