Monday, 17 February 2025

Cinderella Man review

 Number 334 on the top 1000 films of all time is Ron Howard's 2004 biographical sports-drama 'Cinderella Man.'

Cinderella Man tells the true story of the washed-up boxer James Braddock (Russell Crowe) who recaptured his former glory during the Great Depression. Renee Zellweger and Paul Giamatti co-star.

I've said it before and I will say it again. I've never been a fan of boxing films. Whether it's RockyRaging Bull or Million Dollar Baby, they're of little interest to me. Cinderella Man was no exception. I don't think it helped that I don't much like Russell Crowe as an actor. He always seems so serious and gruff - even in roles that might require some levity.

Braddock was a man seriously down on his luck. Like many men during the Great Depression, he was struggling to put food on the table, seeking out a meagre living as a dockworker, due to his failed boxing career.  Yet, I wasn't convinced by Crowe's performance. He didn't properly showcase the vulnerability of the character. Even in the scene where he has to go begging for money, I felt little sympathy. Maybe I'm just heartless.

I don't think he had much chemistry with Renee Zellwegger who played Braddock's wife. She was good, but not good with Crowe. For that reason, I didn't enjoy their scenes together. Weirdly enough, I actually preferred the boxing scenes.

These were all more entertaining to watch than I thought they would be - probably because they used real boxers, most of the time. Although this wasn't great for Crowe who sustained multiple injuries while filming.

The film's redeeming feature was Paul Giamatti who played Braddock's coach and manager Joe Gould. Giamatti bought a terrific energy to the role. There was probably a reason why he was nominated for an Oscar and Crowe wasn't - although, it should also be noted that Crowe actively campaigned for Giamatti rather than himself.

All in all, while Cinderella Man might be a heart-warming rags to riches story, I didn't care for it. Crowe's performance lacked heart and he also lacked chemistry with Renee Zellweger. Giamatti truly earned his Oscar nomination though.

Shadow of a Doubt review

 Number 323 on the top 1000 films of all time is Alfred Hitchcock's psychological thriller 'Shadow of a Doubt.'

Charlotte "Charlie" Newton (Teresa Wright) is a young woman who lives with her family in Santa Rosa, California. Bored with her life, she is overjoyed when her uncle Charles "Charlie" Oakley (Joseph Cotten) visits. Little does she realise is that Uncle Charlie is a serial killer on the run from the police. 

I've watched at least ten Hitchcock films in my time and I would count this as one of my least favourites. This is in stark contrast to Hitchcock who thought this was one of his best films. Sorry, Mr Hitchcock, but we shall have to agree to disagree.

I found Shadow of a Doubt to be overly-theatrical. It was stagey with an excess of dialogue. Some of this dialogue was attributed to side characters like a waitress in a diner. I was confused as to why she was speaking so much considering that she wasn't a major character.

Charlotte had two younger siblings, who were, quite possibly, two of the most annoying characters ever seen on screen. Christ, they were insufferable. They very much embodied the pompous, stuck-up little brats that you see too often on film.

And the sound-mixing was strange too. Maybe I was watching a bad bootleg, but I struggled in hearing some of the dialogue. It didn't help that the characters spoke over one another. At times, Charlotte's speech had a distinct echo.

Finally, the ending wasn't convincing at all. *Spoilers*

Upon hearing that Charlotte has discovered his secret, Uncle Charlie tries pushing her out of a moving train, only for her to get the upper hand and push him from the train instead. I just didn't find that believable at all.

Overall, this was not a film I cared for. 

Head-on Review

 Number 321 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 20024 German-Turkish drama 'Head-On.'

Cahit Tomruk (Birol Unel) is a Turkish-German alcoholic widower. Sibel Guner (Sibel Kekili) is a young Turkish-Germany lady who is desperately trying to escape her controlling, oppressive family. Both characters are severely psychologically damaged, but soon enter a marriage of convenience.

This was an entertaining if uneven film. It all followed a rather predictable plot hitting over-familiar beats. Cahit is your standard cinnamon roll - a suicidally depressed man who is angry at the world around him. While he is hot and fiery on the outside, Sibel soon starts peeling back the layers to find a soft centre. Soon Cahit starts falling in love with her for real. The same goes for Sibel. What initially starts as a sham marriage soon turns into something real.

As the name suggests, Head-On also wasn't afraid to tackle some heavy themes ... well... head-on. Sibel, just like Cahit is suicidally depressed -  the two of them met in a clinic after we see their failed suicide attempts. This is a theme that occurs throughout the film. It certainly makes for some uncomfortable viewing, but it never feels gratuitous.

I did enjoy the ending, as it took me by surprise. *Spoilers*

You might think that Cahit and Sibel would live happily ever after as they realise their true feelings for each other. However, they end up separated. Sibel promises to run away with Cahit, but then stands him up, leaving him all alone. It was a nice way to deviate from the predictable plot.

But there's nothing wrong with predictability if it is done well. And Head-On was done well. It's no surprise that it won the Golden Bear. 

Saturday, 1 February 2025

Pink Floyd: the Wall

 Number 320 on the top 1000 films of all time is the surrealist, musical part-animated drama 'Pink Floyd: The Wall.'

Pink (Bob Geldof) is a rock star who is becoming paranoid and alienated from society. To protect his increasingly fragile mental state, he builds a figurative wall.

Pink Floyd are one of, if not, my favourite band, so this film was perfect for me. However, if you've never listened to a Pink Floyd song then this film would be lost on you. I am surprised that this film had enough mainstream appeal to appear on this list. Its surrealist nature coupled with its lack of conventional narrative can make it inaccessible to all but the most ardent of Pink Floyd films.

You could argue that this film was an extended music video for Pink Floyd's double album: the Wall. In many ways, that was the intention behind the film - with many of the songs punctuating key moments of the film. All of this accompanied the Terry Jones-esque animation with the overall end result being a fever dream.

The storyline, for what it was, closely mirrored the themes of the album, which again would be lost on non Pink Floyd fans - you have the same themes of isolation, alienation and disconnect from society. There were some scary images too like Pink hallucinating himself as a Fascist dictator at a Neo-Nazi rally - that was populated with real Neo-Nazis singing along to Waiting for the Worms. Another scary scene is the school children marching into the meat grinder and wearing freaky masks. Appropriately, this scene is set to Another Brick in the Wall.

I wasn't entirely convinced by the acting either. Bob Geldof didn't have too much to do other than stare existentially into the middle-distance. Reportedly, he almost didn't take the role, as he didn't like Pink Floyd's music, so that might have contributed to his lacklustre performance.

The Wall also had a troubled production with director Alan Parker and writer and Pink Floyd front man, Roger Waters, often coming to blows. I wonder if that contributed to the disjointed film. But, then again, I think the disjointedness was supposed to be part of the point. The film is all about alienation and disconnection.

I certainly enjoyed the film, but that's more because of the great soundtrack, rather than the film itself. And if you aren't a Pink Floyd fan, you might not like this film at all. Upon its premiere, Steven Spielberg asked "what the fuck was that?" An accurate reaction for sure.

Rain Man review

 Number 319 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1988 road, comedy-drama Rain Man.

Charlie Babbit (Tom Cruise) is a spoiled and selfish wheeler and dealer in Los Angeles. When his wealthy father dies, he is disappointed to learn that he has been virtually cut out of his will in favour of an anonymous benefactor who will be inheriting his father's $3 million estate. Little does Charlie realises that this benefactor is his autistic savant brother Raymond (Dustin Hoffman) who Charlie didn't even know exist.

Rain Man is a highly-regarded film. It won Best Film, Best Original Screenplay, Best Director and Best Actor (for Hoffman) at the 61st Academy awards. While it was good, I don't think it was Oscar-worthy. It was competing against the likes of Mississippi Burning for Best Film and Actor (Gene Hackman) but I'd argue Mississippi Burning was better.

Let's talk about Tom Cruise first. Although he was good as Charlie, he wasn't incredible. Charlie was a jerk and it was obvious that he would go through a redemption arc as he spent more time with Raymond, but Cruise didn't sell me on this transformation. It was a shame as he is a fine dramatic actor. I just with he took these roles more often rather than the big action hero.

While Hoffman was very good as Raymond, I'm not sure he deserved the Oscar. It was a convincing representation of autism, all thanks to Hoffman spending a year preparing for the role by spending time with the autistic community, but it still felt quite surface-level. There wasn't the depth I was expecting. we see glimpses of Raymond's humanity beneath his neurodiversity, but not the whole picture. I can't think of a standout scene where Hoffman won his Oscar.

If anything I preferred Valeria Golino who played Charlie's girlfriend Susanna. She was fast to call out Charlie on how he is using Raymond for his money which is in sharp contrast to how she genuinely cares for him. She later leaves Charlie before reconciling with him, which was rather contrived.

All in all, Rain Man was a good film. But not a great film and certainly not Oscar-worthy.

Days of Heaven review

 Number 317 on the top 1000 films of all time is Terrence Malik's 1978 romantic period-drama film 'Days of Heaven.'

Richard Gere and Brooke Adams play Bill and Abby - two lovers in 1916 Chicago. After Bill kills his employer, he and Abby flee to find work at a Texan farm. There they concoct a plan for Abby to marry the dying farm-owner, played by Sam Shepard, with the idea of inheriting his money after he dies, but then she falls in love with him.

After the Thin Red Line, this is the second Terrence Malik film that I've seen. I am swiftly realising that I do not like Terrence Malik films. They are tedious, pretentious and over-long. Yes, Days of Heaven, was only ninety-five minutes, but that's still too long for what was ultimately a boring film.

There were too many weird close-ups of insects and animals and not enough of things actually happening. Much like, the Thin Red Line, and that was a war film. Yet all we got was endless philosophising rather than exciting war scenes.

I was bored of Days of Heaven within the first five minutes which naturally meant I missed all the film's set-up and introduction. But even if I hadn't I don't think I would have missed much. The performances were just as bland as the script which was a surprise as you have good actors like Richard Gere, Brooke Adams and Sam Shepard. Yet the weird love triangle felt unconvincing due to the lacklustre acting. Even writing this now, I am struggling to remember the character's names.

If I were to compliment the film on anything, it would be its cinematography particularly the climatic sequence with the farm being set on fire. There was a reason why it won the Best Cinematography Oscar.

Otherwise, this was a bland, boring and tedious film. Par for the course for Terrence Malik.

Tuesday, 28 January 2025

Ten scariest horror films on the top 1000 films of all time

 I will be the first to admit that I don't like horror films. Alas, I am too cowardly to brave all the jumpscares and torture porn. However, since I have started working through the top 1000 films of all time, I have naturally watched a number of different horror films. Here are my top ten. This list is only ranked chronologically. Spoilers to come.

Freaks (1932)

Freaks ranks 377th on our famous list. And we are going all the way back to the thirties with this pre-code horror film. Yes, it suffered terribly from studio interference, but it was still one of the earliest examples of how cinema has the power to scare us. True, it might be tame compared to modern standards, but the final scene of the eponymous "freaks" crawling through the morning rain to kill one of their own was terrifying to see.

The Wicker Man (1973)

The Wicker Man ranks 620th on the list. Without a doubt, it is the scariest horror film of all time. It also pioneered the folk-horror genre. If you loved the Witch or Midsommar then you owe the Wickerman a debt of thanks. Made on a miniscule budget, it was no less the scary for it. The final scene of the villagers gaily singing while Ed Woodwood burns to death was horrific.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

This film comes in at 813th. And it is a brilliant example of how less is more. It was another low-budget film that excelled in building atmosphere. Rather than overlying on jumpscares and gore, it chose when to scare us. Yes, Leatherface chasing after Sally was awful, but I'd argue the previous scene of her strapped to the chair with the cannibals all around her was scarier still.

Suspiria (1977)

This Italian horror film ranks as the 851st best film of all time. A dance student discovers a coven of witches at her academy. Cue one of the scariest films of the seventies. Yes, the special effects were a bit dated, but the soundtrack performed by Italian rock band Goblin sent the scares through the roof. The scene of one student falling into a pit of razor wire still lives rent-free in my head.

Alien (1979)

Ridley Scott's Alien is the 58th best film of all time. It will have you on the absolute edge of your seat. Alien is a terrifying film that never lets up for a moment. From start to finish, it is high on suspense. Ellen Ripley remains one of the best movie heroines of all time while much of horror and science-fiction owes a huge debt to Ridley Scott. From face-hugging to chest-bursting, this film has many iconic scenes. In fact, it scared me so much that I'm not brave enough to go back and rewatch it.

Misery (1990)

Misery is the 469th best film of all time. While I was tempted to include the 1976 adaptation of Carrie - also based on a Stephen King book - Misery edges it for Kathy Bathes Oscar-winning, standout performance of superfan Annie Wilkes. What was scary about her was how real she was. She isn't a vampire or an alien or a weird pagan cult, but she is a human being driven to madness by her fanatism toward author Paul Sheldon played by James Caan. And there are plenty of people just like Annie Wilkes in the real world. That's what makes her so scary.

The Silence of the Lambs (1991)

Number 29 on the top 1000 films of all time is only the third film to have won the Big Five Oscars. There are some who might not agree that it is a traditional horror film but everybody would agree that it is scary. It features Anthony Hopkins in a career-defining role where despite only having eight minutes of screentime still won the Best Actor Oscar. This shows just how he gave such a scary performance.

Speaking of scares, the final scene of Clarice Starling hunting Buffalo Bill in the dark cemented this film as having legendary status.

Requiem for a Dream (2000)

Requiem for a Dream is the 87th best film of all time. Similarly to the previous entry, not everybody would argue this is a traditional horror film, but I still think it is one of the scariest films ever. Not to mention one of the most intense watches since Alien. Telling the story of four drug addicts in New York City, it is one of those films too upsetting to watch more than once. I have, because I obviously hate myself. But if you want your children to never do drugs, show them this film. They'll be teetotal for life. And probably traumatised too.

The Ring (October 2002)

The Ring is the 971st best film of all time. I'm so glad that I watched it in the morning and not in the evening. I would never have fallen asleep otherwise. This remake of the Japanese Ringu has become an iconic film in its own right. After all, what could be scarier than turning off the TV and still having a possessed demon girl crawl through it to kill you.

28 Days Later (November 2002) 

28 Days Later comes in at 653 on the list. By 2002, the zombie horror genre was floundering. This was long after George A. Romero pioneered the genre and long before the Walking Dead TV series. 28 Days Later helped to revolutionise the genre by introducing zombies that could run, which are far scarier than anything you could might see in Night of the Living Dead. Of course, it also introduced us to future Oscar-winner Cillian Murphy.

This intimate, quiet yet horrifying zombie horror film was the perfect shot of adrenaline that the genre needed.