The Chorus review

 Number 415 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2004 German-French-Swiss musical drama 'The Chorus.'

Clement Mathieu (Gerard Jugnot) is a failed musician and teacher starting at the notorious Fond de l'etang French boarding school for delinquent boys. Once there, he is shocked by the headmaster Rachin's (Francois Berleand) tyrannical methods. To instil some discipline and morale, Mathieu decides to turn the delinquent boys into a choir.

If you look past the predictability and cliche, this was an enjoyable enough film.  It's a film that has been done many times before - arguably better too - especially in Dead Poet's Society. Jugnot was no Robin Williams, but he was certainly charming enough as the bumbling, but well-intentioned teacher turned choirmaster. And Rachin was no nurse Ratched but he made for a slimy and scary villain.

Yet it was difficult to look past the cliche. Mathieu is trying to desperately reach his students, so he turns them into a choir. Without too much arguing they quickly and fall into line. I found this all a bit too convenient. I understand the boys do need to agree to be part of the choir for the film to work, but it's difficult to believe they wouldn't have resisted this idea more at first.

The boys themselves were more underdeveloped in comparison to the adult characters. You had Pierre Morhange (Jean-Baptiste Maunier) who despite being one of the best singers is very badly behaved because of a vague troubled homelife, Pepinot (Maxence Perrin) forever waiting for parents who will never come and the hot-headed Mondian (Gregory Gatignol) whose side purpose is to create conflict rather than being a fully-formed character. Most of the boys felt like rough stretches than proper characters.

The film also felt directionless. I couldn't see the end goal for Mathieu's choir. This wasn't like the Blues Brothers when they were trying to stop their childhood orphanage from being closed down. I thought Mathieu would enter the boys in a singing competition or use them to secure more funding, but other than a showing for an investor, there was little else at stake.

The Chorus was certainly an entertaining film, but only entertaining. It was too predictable to be anything more.

Do the Right Thing review

 Number 409 on the top 1000 films of all time is Spike Lee's coming-of-age comedy-drama 'Do the Right Thing.'

Mookie (Spike Lee) is an African-American living in a rough Brooklyn neighbourhood. All he wants from life is to make enough money from his pizza delivery job at Sal's pizzeria so he can support his family. However, on an excruciatingly hot day, racial tensions between Sal (Danny Aiello,) and his sons Pino (John Turturro) and Vito (Richard Edson) and the other African-Americans in the neighbourhood including Radio Raheem (Bill Nunn) and Buggin' Out (Giancarlo Esposito) a man who fancies himself the next Malcom X. As a race riot threatens to break out, Mookie is forced to pick a side.

Do the Right Thing is just another film in a long list tackling one of the US' most pertinent issues: race relations. The US is known as the greatest melting pot playing home to people from all over the world. It's only natural that some of those people might not like each other as is the case here.

The deeply racist Vito resent working in an African-American neighbourhood and believes they should be with their own kind. Meanwhile, the African-American community doesn't like that white-owned businesses at the heart of their town. They believe there should be black businesses instead. It's a powder keg waiting to blow.

Another theme that Lee is explores is police brutality - another issue that has plagued the US for decades. Do the Right Thing was dedicated to Eleanor Bumpers, Arthur Miller Jr, Edmund Perry, Yvonne Smallwood, Michael Stewart and Michael Griffith - with the former five having been killed by police and the sixth by a white mob. Only a few years later, Rodney King was beaten and I do not have the necessary computer memory to write the name of every single black person who has been killed by the police in the last twenty-five years, except for one of the most notable: George Floyd.

Spike Lee tackles both of these subjects with his stylistic flair - think bold colours, razor-sharp dialogue and all the subtlety of a sledgehammer. Sure you can argue that he was exploring themes too important not to tackle head-on, but this exploration was incredibly on the nose. One scene has the different characters speaking directly to the camera, as they monologue racist insults about different groups of people. Sure this racism might be accurate, but its depiction was heavy-handed.

This isn't to denigrate the acting of those involved - least of all from Spike Lee as the lead Mookie. Giancarlo Esposito was also good as the political cognizant Buggin Out - it was amazing to think this was the same man who wowed audiences in Breaking Bad. But the standout star had to be Danny Aiello who received a well-earned Best Supporting Actor Oscar nomination. Initially, Sal is nothing more than hard-working Italian-American who often plays the mediator between his deeply racist son Pino and the black customers. However, not even the good-natured Sal can only keep his demons at bay for so long before he is driven too far on an excruciatingly hot day. Unlike Pino who overly hates blacks, I think Sal was a lot more level-headed, but, like the other characters, he fell victim to the simmering racial tension.

John Turturro was also very good as Vito. He gave a multi-layered performance, as one of the more openly racist characters of the film. It would have been all too easy to have written/portrayed him as a one-dimensional Italian-American "moolie" hating greaseball, but he was more three-dimensional than his.

But I would like to say one thing quickly. Why in these films do you always have the black characters being racist to the East Asian, or in this case, Korean characters? The local supermarket is ran by a Korean couple who are often the subject of racist taunting by the black characters. It was something similar to Menace II Society. Perhaps it was Lee's commitment to realism, but it didn't make his characters very endearing.

However, 'Do the Right Thing,' was a memorable and stylised, if heavy-handed, exploration of two issues that have plagued American society for decades. What was the right thing that Sal and Mookie should have done? Who knows?  

Dogville review

 Number 295 on the top 1000 films of all time is Lars Von Trier's 2003 experimental drama Dogville.

Grace (Nicole Kidman) is a fugitive trying to outrun both the mob and the law. She stumbles into the small mountain town of Dogville, Colorado. At the behest of the town's moral leader Tom Edison Jr (Paul Bettany,) the town's people reluctantly decide to take her in. However, Grace quickly learns that their kindness comes at a steep price. The huge ensemble cast includes Stellan Skarsgaard, Lauren Bacall, Philip Baker Hall, Patricia Clarkson, James Caan with John Hurt providing narration.

Dogville was highly experimental. Was it an experiment that worked? I'm not so sure. Reminiscent of black-box theatre, it was filmed on a minimalist stage-like set. Instead of buildings, there are chalk outlines. Instead of backdrops you have black or white walls. As the name would suggest it was like being in a black box. Although this tradition is common in the theatre, it is rare to see in film. I don't think it translated well.

The minimalism is designed to highlight the story and acting, but it just came across as pretentious. Too much was left to the viewer's imagination. it was like one of those restaurants that gets you took cook the food yourself. This is the chef's job, not the diner's.

Due to the natural limitations of the theatre, the Black Box style works well. But film is a different medium. You can have sets and film on location. There's no reason to have a minimalist style.

What really hurt the film was John Hurt's god-awful narration. It was overly-expository and one of the worse examples of telling, not showing. It was like I was reading a badly-written book with John Hurt telling me the characters were looking around or acting scared or being morally bad - which the characters then repeated. Not faulting John Hurt, of course, but this narration made me roll my eyes.

The film is also divided into nine chapters with title cards denoting when they started. It was like if I wanted to read a book I would have just read a book, not watch a film. When the ninth title said the film would be ending soon, I cheered loudly. This isn't the reaction you want your audience to have.

The dialogue was also eye-roll worthy. Honestly, I don't know how Bettany and Kidman delivered it with a straight faces. One cringe-worthy, innuendo-laden conversation saw Tom Edison Jr telling Grace that you can't plant seeds in the winter. Ew. Much of the dialogue steered toward the more-is-less mindset like I was watching a Shakespearean play.

As you might expect from a Von Trier film, it utilised elements from his own cinematic style of Dogme 54 including the hand-held camerawork. In a different film, this might have made things more intense, but alas it could not save Dogville.

Although the beginning and middle were slow and ponderous, it did build toward an unexpected and thrilling conclusion. The mob finally tracks Grace down to Dogville where we learn the mob boss (James Caan) is her father. Grace ran away from them after being sickened by their violent nature. Yet her father insists that she is hypocritical acting like she is morally better than everybody else when that could be furthest from the truth. 

Having spent much of the film's second act being bullied by the townspeople, she soon realises they're not much different from the mob. At the gentle encouragement of her father, she agrees for all of them, including the children and her would-be lover, Tom, to be shot dead. This was a dark, twist ending that I did not see coming. It also separated Grace from Von Trier's more naive female protagonists in Breaking the Waves or Dancer in the Dark.

Dogville was like a failed science experiment. Maybe it could have worked as a stageplay, but it didn't translate to film. Instead, it was boring, overly-long and just plain pretentious.

The Fall review

 Number 404 on the top 1000 films of all time is the adventure-fantasy film 'The Fall.'

In 1915 Los Angeles, stunt man Roy Walker (Lee Pace) is hospitalised after a stunt gone wrong. In hospital, he forms an unlikely friendship with fellow patient, eight-year-old Romanian girl Alexandria  (Catinca Untaru) who is recovering from a broken arm. He entertains her with a wild and fantasy tale about a rag-tag group of rebels to team up to kill a common enemy, but he has an agenda of his own. 

Although I understand respect director Tarsem's vision, The Fall didn't land for me. This was because of the story-within-a story format. Other films such as the Chinese Wuxia Hero also employ this format, but they only work if the framing story is as interesting as the secondary story.

This was not the case for the Fall, where the secondary story was infinitely more interesting than the framing story of Roy and Alexandria in the hospital. Yes, their relationship was cute and touching, but it didn't quite resonate for me.

*spoilers*

Roy has a dark secret. In exchange for entertaining Alexandria with these stories, he asks her to steal morphine for him. Ostensibly, this is to help him sleep, but he actually intends to commit suicide. His beloved has left him for the actor he was doubling for. Now he now longer wants to live. This was suitably tragic with Pace and Catinca giving good performances, but this framing story lacked the same forward momentum of the supporting story.

It also lacked the same, great visual style. Our B-story sees a range of quirky characters including a masked bandit, a silent Indian warrior, an ex-slave, an Italian explosives expert and Charles Darwin. They all team up to take revenge on a governor who has wronged them all. The fantasy land they inhabited was marked by bold colours and a distinct look - similar to the Chinese Hero film.

I do think this was just a case of a film not working for me, Obviously, The Fall is held in high regard, the IMDB fan base voted it as the 405th best film for a reason, but alas I was not one of those fans.

4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days

 Number 403 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Romanian drama '4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days.'

Set in Romania in the waning years of Communism, we are introduced to friends and college roommates Otilla (Anamaria Marinca) and Gabita (Laura Vasilu.) When Gabita has an unexpected pregnancy, she asks her friend to help her obtain an abortion. However, due to Romania's draconian Decree 770 that largely outlawed abortion, this is far easier said than done.

I have seen almost seven hundred films on IMDB's 2015 edition of the top 1000 films of all time. Yet this is the first film that I've seen so explicitly address the topic of abortion in such a frank and open way. I'm not even referring to the IMDB list, but films full stop. 

This is because abortion is the epitome of a hot-button issue - probably even more so now due to the US Supreme court overturning Roe Vs Wade in 2022. I suspect this was one major reason why this film was not nominated for the Best International Film Academy Award. I think this snubbing was down to the academy not being ready for this conversation.

Yet this is a conversation that director Christian Mungiu forces you to have whether you want to or not. much of the film consists of long takes where audiences have to watch and engage with the film. There's nowhere else to look.

Gabita makes a number of unwise decisions that imperils both her and Otila. The pair even have to sleep with the abortionist to ensure his cooperation. Naturally, this strains their relationship and we see its disintegration in uncomfortable detail. The long takes focus purely on Otila, as she chastises her friend.

Another long take sees Otila at the world's most awkward family dinner. She's supposed to be celebrating her boyfriend's mother's birthday, but instead they are all blissfully unaware of the inner turmoil she is facing.  With the uncomfortable long take, it's difficult not to feel what Otila must have been feeling at that time.

Arguably, the film's most shocking scene was the thirty-second long take of the aborted feotus, probably shocking due to its rarity on-screen.

4 months also brilliantly addressed the theme of womanhood and femininity. Too many conversations about abortion and women's bodies are made by men. However, there the script is correctly flipped. All of the important relationships take place between women while the male characters are relegated to supporting roles. Otila and Gabita's friendship is always at the centre of the film, as it should be. Both actresses excelled in the lead roles.

4 Months, 3 weeks and 2 days might have been an uncomfortable film to watch, but it was an necessary one too. And without doubt it was unfairly snubbed by the Academy.

Lilya-4-ever review

 Number 402 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Russian tragedy 'Lilya-4-ever.'

Lilya Michailova (Oksana Akinshina) is a sixteen-year-old young woman living in a Communist-era Russian town. When her mother unexpectedly abandons her for a new life and man in the USA, Lilya is lost. She befriends the equally lost and younger Volodya (Artyom Bogucharsky) but it looks like that Lilya's life will improve when she begins a relationship with the mysterious Andrei (Pavel Ponomaryov.) He encourages her to go to Sweden with him, in the promise of a new life together, but upon arrival, she is trafficked into sexual slavery.

Lilya-4-ever has been compared to Lars Von Trier's Dogme 43 movement. The comparisons are plain to see form the tight, claustrophobic camerawork, the lost, naive female characters and the brutally realistic tone. Just like Von Trier's Dancer in the Dark and Breaking the Waves, Lilya-4-ever is a powerful if deeply upsetting film. And its realism is what made it so powerful. Lilya's story is one that undoubtedly happens to so many women everywhere. And it does, as this was based on the tragic true story of Dangoule Rasalaite

Oksana was great as the innocent Lilya - somebody so desperate to escape her awful life that she ignores all the red flags about Andrei that even the far younger Voldymyr can recognise. Lilya is nothing more than a victim, but Oksana played her with a lot of will and determination. She's more than prepared to fight back than necessary.

The best part of the film was her relationship with the younger Voldymyr. Similar to Lilya, he comes from a broken home with an alcoholic father who constantly beats him. He and Lilya form a touching big sister/little brother relationship. She scrapes together whatever money she can get to buy him a basketball, which he carries everywhere with him. Even when his spiteful father punctures it, Volymyr still carries the half-inflated ball. This was just so sad and really highlighted Voldymyr's innocence. Like Lilya, he desperately clings to any escape from his awful life.

*Spoilers*

Voldymyr sees Lilya going to Sweden as a complete betrayal. She is going to a better life leaving him alone and friendless. Once she leaves, he commit suicide. This was all predictably tragic. Yet he continues to appear as an angel and hallucination in Lilya's mind. Complete with angel wings. Okay, I get him being an angel. The kid is so innocent that he wouldn't even hurt a fly. It also makes complete sense that Lilya would imagine her only friend at the more traumatic moments of her life. But actually giving Voldymyr angel wings felt like heavy-handed imagery.

Another criticism would be the film's pacing. In its efforts to dive into the storyline, it skipped over some important set-up. it wasn't made clear why Lilya's mother was so ready to abandon her daughter. Instead we're given hints and snippets. Although, I talked about realism earlier, and this is certainly a realistic thing to happen. Sometimes people, even parents, can walk out of your life with no exploration. it might not be satisfying to watch, but it's painfully true.

As is the horrific sexual treatment that Lilya experiences upon her sexual trafficking. Being forced into prostitution, we bear witness to Lilya's POV, as she has sex with a plethora of creepy scumbags. But these POV shots acted as a mirror to Lilya's awful situation. Just like her, the audience was trapped with no escape.

Finally, I didn't like the film's soundtrack. It was a weird mixture of Eurodance and German industrial rock. Rammstein's Mein Herz Brennt plays during the film's climatic sequence. It felt incredibly out of place. I know that Rammstein was popular in Russia at the time, but I think something softer might have been appropriate.

Nevertheless, Lilya-4-ever was a devastating film that perfectly encapsulated the phrase: all children deserve parents, but not all parents deserve children.

Nine Queens review

 Number 400 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Argentinean crime caper 'Nine Queens.'

Juan (Gaston Pauls) is a small-time con artist who comes to the attention of the older, more experienced Marcos (Ricardo Darin.) The two partner up to scam a wealthy collector into buying counterfeit stamps.

Nine Queens was released in 2000. Four years later, the BBC released the TV series Hustle. The comparisons were plain to see - a group of con artists take down an even more villainous bad guy. Hijinks and plot twists ensue.

Nine Queens can also be favourably compared to the 1973 film The Sting with Gaston Pauls and Ricardo Darin in the roles of Paul Newman and Robert Redford. The two of them were just as charismatic as Newman and Redford with the younger hotshot Juan more than capable of showing the old dog, Marcos, new tricks. Yet sometimes Marcos' experience proves more important especially upon their first meeting where he rescues Juan from a scam gone terribly wrong.

Juan's young arrogance sees him trying to pull the same scam twice in the same place. If it wasn't for Marcos, then Juan would have spent the rest of the film in jail. In films like these, there is usually a romantisation of the criminal main characters. Yes, the stamp collector Esteban Gandolfo (Ignasi Abadal) is a sleaze boy who is constantly harassing Marcos' sister Valeria (Leticia Bredice,) but neither he or Juan are angels. To raise capital, they perform small-time cons; sure it looks stylish and cool, but, for all we know, they're conning innocent people out of their hard-earned money.

Inevitably, problems start to arise in the duo's well-thought out scam and it was entertaining watching things go awry. Their counterfeit stamps are stolen by motorbike thieves who throw them in a river when they think they are worthless. This all culminates in a delightful twist ending, a la Hustle, where the con artists get their just desserts.

Nine Queens was certainly an entertaining film with charismatic performances from its lead actors, but we need to remember not to romanticise con-men. They're just as bad as the supposed criminals they're robbing. 

Breaking the Waves review

 Number 398 on the top 1000 films of all time is Lars Von Trier's 1996 psychological romantic melodrama 'Breaking the Waves.'

Bess Mcneil (Emily Watson) is a Scottish, simple-minded, deeply religious woman living in a small Scottish village. She marries Danish oil worker Jan Nyman (Stellan Skarsgard) - a marriage which is strongly disapproved of by her community and church. When Nyman becomes paralysed after an accident, he requests Bess to continue living her life including having sexual relationships with other men. Bess does so believing that her sexual infidelity is helping Nyman recover.

Would you believe me if I said that this was Emily Watson's debut film role? A film role that led her to receiving a Best Actress Oscar nod? It's the truth. She was impressive as Bess - the naive, innocent woman with undiagnosed mental issues. In her naivety, she continues to sexually debase herself as she erroneously thinks this helping her husband to feel better. 

At first glance you might argue the character isn't very realistic - and I'm sure there are some who would read the character with a feminist lens - but she is living in a backwater Scottish village deeply affected by the recent death of her brother with an oppressive mother who provides little emotional validation. Her church is similarly oppressive, not even allowing women to speak in their services. No doubt this would lead to some mental health problems. Perhaps if she was in the city she could get the hope she needs I think it makes sense that Bess would imprint herself onto her husband - the only person who's ever given her any validation.

Watson truly earned her Oscar nomination, as she conveyed the devastation of the character. Bess Mcneil is a character to be truly pitied and it is all too easy to feel sorry for her especially as her misguided sexual escapades lead to her excommunication and eventual exile of her community. She might have done, subjectively, bad things, but she isn't a bad person. She strongly reminded me of Bjork's similarly tragic character in Von Trier's later film Dancer in the Dark. Considering this was the third in Von Trier's Golden Heart trilogy that makes sense. 

Bess might be a morally good character, but can we say the same thing about Jan? Yes, he has been paralysed in a dreadful work accident, but other characters are quick to point out his own debasement - manipulating his wife into prostituting herself for his own voyeuristic pleasure. Skarsgard was great as the morally duplicitous Jan - does he really have his wife's best interests at hearts or is he just using her?

Something else to consider is that this film is a melodrama. It's not supposed to be 100% realistic - spectacle and emotional gravitas are prioritised over an airtight story or believable characters. This magic realism continued all the way to the film's conclusion, which, for me, pushed my suspension of disbelief a little too far. But I'll leave you to make up your own mind. 

But, for certain, it was an emotional film. It was deeply sad seeing the tragedies growing ever greater and greater. It was awful seeing the physical, mental and sexual violence continuously inflicted on Bess - a character who deserved a lot more than she ever received out of life.

This was Von Trier's first film after having founded the avant-garde Dogme - 95 cinema movement with fellow Danish film maker Thomas Vinterberg. Granted 'Breaking the Waves' doesn't adhere that closely to its principles, but the use of handheld camera and low lighting created a claustrophobic and uncomfortably intimate atmosphere. You learn more than you would like about these characters - not that you have any choice in the matter. There's no looking away, which was very much the point of the film.

Sure, you can argue that Breaking the Waves is over-the-top, unbelievable with unrealistic characters, but I think that was supposed to be the point of the film. It's melodrama - not always the most believable, but definitely entertaining if not downright tragic. And Emily Watson was terrific in her debut role.

Children of Men review

 Number 390 on the top 1000 films of all time is Alfonso Cuaron's 2006 dystopian thriller 'Children of Men.'

Based on P.D James' book of the same name, Children of Men is set in a slightly futuristic London where humanity has become infertile and can no longer have children. This plus an influx of refugees and asylum seekers to the UK has led the country to the brink of collapse. Enter former activist turned civil servant Theo Farron (Clive Farron) who is tasked in helping refugee Kee (Clare-Hope Ashitey) in escaping the chaos. Julianne Moore co-stars as Farron's estranged wife and activist leader Julian while Michael Caine plays former journalist Jasper Palmer. Chiwetel Eijofar, Pam Ferris and Charlie Hunnam all co-star.

Infertility has always been a theme that's interested audiences and readers. What happens if we can no longer reproduce? Margaret Atwood first tried answering that question in her 1985 book 'The Handmaid's tale,' which was recently adapted into a TV series that enraptured the world. Arguably, she was just laying the groundwork for P.D James and later Alfonso Cuaron.

In Children of Men, Cuaron portrayed a hellish future. This is far away from the techno-dystopia of Blade-Runner. If anything, Cuaron wanted to show an anti-Blade Runner. And he succeeds. The London he shows is dirty, despotic and completely hopeless. It doesn't look all that different from our own. Children of Men is set in 2027 - only 2 years on from when I'm writing this review - 21 years on from the making of the film and 35 from when the film was set. This is not a long-distant future, but it's in the here and now. Refugees are rounded up, caged, deported, some shot on sight. That's still happening in parts of the world as we speak. The similarities are scarily real.

Cuaron's use of cinematography and tracking-shots all contributed to this film's success. The film is well-known for its use of multiple one-take tracking shots that raised the tension to a fever pitch. I think we can all remember the film's most famous scene of Farron and the other Fishes desperately trying to outrun the bandits on the road. Another particularly famous scene comes during the film's climatic fight scene - another one-take scene, where the camera is splattered with blood. Cuaron wanted to reshoot it, but cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki insisted they leave it in. It was a great decision and one of many that contributed to Lubezki's well-earned Oscar nomination for Best Cinematography.

Speaking of Oscars, Children of Men was nominated for three: Cinematography as we mentioned, editing and adapted screenplay. There were no acting nominations. I question if this was a bit of an oversight. I've only seen Clive Owen in a few films, but they've generally been supporting or villainous roles. This is the first time I've seen as a leading man and he was good. He held the screen well, as he showed Farron's transformation from hapless bureaucrat to unlikely hero - am I the only one who cheered when he absolutely clobbered the corrupt prison guard Sid? Although I also found it annoying that Farron didn't pick up a stray gun when he had a chance - it would have been nice to have seen him personally kill the other villains of the film.

Speaking of villains, Chiwetel Eijofar filled this role well. As the de-facto leader of the activist group Fishes, he's desperate for the violence and killing to stop, but could you argue that his quest for justice has clouded his own moral compass. He will stop at nothing to achieve his goals even if that means he has to break the rules. I think Eijofar showed the conflict well, proving why he went onto be Oscar-nominated down the line. Similarly, you had Charlie Hunnam as a tertiary antagonist - his role was small, but still memorable. He played Patric - an activist whose cousin dies in an ill-thought out operation.

*Spoilers ahead* But let's give some love to the women as well. Granted Julianne Moore only has a small role due to her character's early shock death, but she was also good as was Pam Ferris. Ferris' turn as former midwife turned activist and martyr was a far cry from her villainous role as Trunchball in Matilda. A very versatile actress. And I even enjoyed Michael Caine as the ageing hippy and journalist Jasper Palmer.

If I were to criticise the film for anything, I think it could have been slightly longer. At 110 minutes, it's slightly shy of the two-hour mark and I think we could have used more time to explore more of the backstory of the world - especially with the 'Fishes' activist organisation. We quickly learn that they are behind Julian's death in a shady plot to use Kee's baby as a political symbol. Patric and his cousin spearhead this operation but his cousin is killed in the process. This sends Patric into a revenge arc which is never fully fleshed out.

Similarly, we never really find out how Kee became pregnant or what caused the infertility crisis in the first place. But I think much of this was down to Cuaron and his deliberate choice to eschew any explanations. He doesn't like exposition or backstory instead allowing audiences to come to their own conclusions.

My conclusion? This was a great film that left me wanting so much more. Time to read the book!

Miller's Crossing review

 Number 391 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Coen Brothers' 1990 neo-noir gangster film Miller's Crossing.

Set in prohibition-era America, Miller's Crossing follows Tom Reagan (Gabriel Byrne) right-hand man to Irish mobster Leo O'Bannon (Albert Finney) as O'Bannon wars with rival Italian gangster Johnny Casper (Jon Polito.) Reagan desperately tries to stay alive as he plays off the two sides against each other. Marcia Gay Harden and John Turturro co-star.

Miller's Crossing comes quite early in the Coen Brothers' career - being only the third film they made. As such, I would argue it was one of their more straightforward films. Unlike their later efforts of the Big Lebowski, Fargo and Oh Brother, where art thou, there was far less off-the-beat humour and far less surrealism. This made it an enjoyable and engaging gangster flick made at a time where they had some stiff competition from the likes of Goodfellas, Carlito's Way and Casino. The 90's was a hell of a time for gangster films for sure.

Yet what separated Miller's Crossing was not only the prohibition setting but its also strong cast. A highlight among them was Jon Polito who brought a brilliant, maverick energy to Caspar. It was the perfect balance to veteran English actor Albert Finney who gave a calm and measured performance as the far older Leo O'Bannon. John Turturro was also great as bookie Bernie Bernbaum. He soon makes an enemy of Caspar by continuously skimming off his match-fixing winnings. It looks like Bernbaum is nothing more than a greedy schnook, but he proves himself to be cleverer than meets the eye.

And nowhere is this more true than with our protagonist Tom Reagan. Although he begins as a close ally of O'Bannon, he soon realises that he has to play both sides if he has any chance of surviving this growing mob-war. In 2009, the Guardian labelled Gabriel Byrne one of the best actors to have never received an Oscar nomination (but bear in mind this article is years out of date) and he was good in this film. It's a fair comment as Byrne plays the man caught between two sides very well. And a quick shoutout to Marcia Gay Harden who would go onto prove why she later went onto win a Best Supporting Actress Oscar.

Although it might have lacked some of the surreal humour that the Coen Brothers are so well-known for, it still had the same stylistic flair they're so well-known for. The dialogue was sharp and snappy and its cinematography and style have been emulated well in future decades. Did the scenes in the titular Miller's Crossing remind anybody of a certain episode of the Sopranos?

Miller's Crossing might have been one of the Coen Brother's earliest films before we really knew what they had to say as film-makers, but it was certainly an enjoyable enough effort. And they showed why, like Marcia Gay Harden, they went onto win Oscars of their own.

The Outlaw Josey Wales review

 Number 395 on the top 1000 films of all time is Clint Eastwood's 1976 Revisionist Western 'The Outlaw Josey Wales.'

Josey Wales (Clint Eastwood) is a Missouri farmer whose family are murdered by the ruthless Union Captain Terrill (Bill Mckinney.) He joins a group of Confederate bushwackers to get revenge, but after the Civil War ends, they surrender to the union. All except for Wales who continues his quest for revenge. He is joined by ageing Cherokee Lone Watie (Chief Dan George) and pilgrim love interest Laura Lee (Sondra Locke.)

I've always been of the opinion that Eastwood is a better director than an actor. He won Oscars for directing both Unforgiven and Million Dollar Baby. He has also directed critically acclaimed films like Invictus, Letters from Iwo Jima, Gran Torino and Changeling. However, the Outlaw Josey Wales was one of his weaker efforts. While by no means terrible, it was strangely structured and badly-paced.

Initially, it seemed like this would be a straight-forward revenge story with Wales exacting vengeance on the killer of his family. Wales is aided by a rag-tag band of rebels. It was all building to an exciting climax, but then the tension dissipated.

In the film's third act, it seemed like Wales had completely forgotten about his quest for revenge and was more interested in setting up house with his new found family - Cherokee Lone Watie, Navajo Little Moonlight (Geraldine Keams) and pilgrim Laura Lee and her grandmother along with a couple of others. It was a sure fire way to stop the pace dead at a time you think it would be heating up. 

There were glimpses of a secondary villain with a Comanche tribe, but our roguish cowboy quickly makes peace in an anti-climatic, and ultimately, inconsequential fashion. The Comanche played little role in the rest of the film.

Just when it looked like Wales might get his happily ever after, he's tracked down by Terrill and his goonies. The battle begins. But this climatic moment felt more like an afterthought, as if Eastwood had just remembered about his villain.

As I said earlier, he is a better director than actor. In his later films, he plays a grumpy old man. In his earlier films, he plays the antihero lone cowboy. Josey Wales was pretty similar to Eastwood's other roles as the Man with No Name in the Dollars trilogy. Not the best range from Eastwood.

During film, Eastwood and Locke began an illicit relationship while both of them were still in nominal marriages. But this off-screen chemistry didn't translate to the screen, as Laura Lee as as much use as a wet as a wet blanket and had all the charisma as a stale ham sandwich. True, she joined the final fight, but she never felt like a suitable love interest for Eastwood. If anything, I think he would have been better suited to Little Moonlight whom he rescued from some unscrupulous men. She was more fun, interesting and gritty than Lee.

Despite these criticisms, The Outlaw Josey Wales was certainly an enjoyable enough film. It just isn't anywhere near as good as Eastwood's later films. That's a shame, as Eastwood is a great director. He's won two Oscars for a reason.

My Fair Lady review

 Number 393 on the top 1000 films of all time is George Cukor's 1964 musical comedy-drama 'My Fair Lady.'

Based on George Bernard Shaw's play Pygmalion, My Fair lady follows Cockney flower-seller Eliza Dolittle (Audrey Hepburn.) Wanting to improve her spoken-English and prospects in life, she employs noted phoneticist Henry Higgins (Rex Harrison) to help her speak more like a lady. An unlikely friendship occurs. Stanley Holloway co-stars as Eliza's father and Gladys Cooper plays Henry's mother.

My Fair Lady swept the awards season being nominated for almost forty awards and winning no less than twenty-four. This included eight Oscars with Rex Harrison winning the Best Actor, George Cukor winning Best Director and the film itself winning Best Picture. Stanley Holloway and Gladys Cooper were also nominated for Best Supporting Actor and Actress.

If you think Audrey Hepburn was conspicuous by her absence, you'd be right. She wasn't nominated at all. This snubbing was considered egregious at the time and even more so now. Some argued it was resentment of how she replaced Julie Andrews who famously played Dolittle in the stage play. Others said it was because of how Hepburn's singing which was largely dubbed by Marni Nixon, despite how Hepburn expected to do much of the singing herself.

I found it strange how you can nominate My Fair Lady for practically every Oscar going, but you don't nominate Hepburn. As a Londoner, I found her Cockney accent exaggerated, borderline cartoonish, but she was certainly charming enough as the flower-seller. True, Eliza was the same air-headed, scatter-brained character that proves there is more to her than meets the eye that Hepburn always plays, but she does play the role well.

Rex Harrison was also good as the male lead despite how he spoke rather than sung most of his songs. He also played Henry Higgins in the stage play winning the Tony award. Despite his initial reluctance of working with Audrey Hepburn, the two of them were good together. Their relationship was central to the film, but it was enjoyable watching them develop from begrudging allies into something closer to lovers.

Mr Fair Lady also won Oscars for Best Costume, Art Direction and Cinematography and these were well-earned. It is set in 1912 London and it looked great on-screen.

This final criticism will sound silly considering how it was a musical and it won an Oscar for Best Original score, but there was too much singing. This heavily slowed down the pace, bloating out the film to almost three hours long. True some songs have become absolute classics like "Wouldn't it Be Loverly" and "Get me to the Church on Time," but most of them seemed like vehicles to deliver ham-fisted exposition.

Yes, there was too much singing, it was too long and Audrey Hepburn was the recipient of one of the biggest Oscar snubs ever, but my Fair lady was an enjoyable enough film. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm getting married in the morning, ding dong, the bells are going to chime... 

Fight Club review

 Number 10 on the top 1000 films of all time is David Fincher's psychological thriller 'Fight Club.'

Edward Norton plays an unnamed white-collar worker and insomniac. Alienated from life and everybody around him, he forges a relationship with the mysterious and hedonistic soap salesman Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt.) The two of them form an underground fighting club which soon grows into something much bigger and more dangerous than either of them could ever expect. Helena Bonham Carter co-stars as the love interest of both male characters - Marla Singer.

Say the first two rules of Fight Club with me: You do not talk about Fight Club. Sorry, Mr Durden, but I will be breaking those rules straight away. As this film is probably David Fincher's most famous outing. based on Chuck Palahniuk's book of the same name, Fincher perfectly dialled into the alienation of Generation X. To paraphrase Tyler Durden, they are a generation without purpose. They had no war to fight, no great depression to suffer through, no collective identity - they are a group of men looking for meaning in a meaningless world. They are a dead people who find feeling in beating each other up.

Yet this film is so much more than just men fighting with each other. Regardless of what the ill-advised marketing campaign would have you believe. There is so much societal and political commentary from how we are constantly bombarded with advertising, which is more relevant now than it was in 1999, to the role of men in the modern world. Long gone are the days where men were the providers and builders of society.

I also hadn't realised how darkly comic the film was until I rewatched it. Much of this black humour comes in the film's initial act, when the narrator, in desperate efforts to find connection, attends a number of support groups including a testicular cancer support group. Here he meets Robert Paulsen - Meatloaf hidden under a massive fatsuit and prosthetic bitch tits. Due to Paulsen's cancer, he has quite literally become emasculated. He is just another lost man in an ocean of lost men.

Nobody is more lost than insomniac narrator played by Ed Norton in one of his most recognisable roles. Norton contributed greatly to the film's humour with his deadpan narration constantly conveying his cynicism about life. Even more recognisable was Brad Pitt who brought the enigmatic, anarchist Tyler Durden to life. By modern standards, you could argue Durden's nihilistic dialogue about the uselessness of the modern man is cheesy. In the hands of a lesser actor they would have been laughable, but Pitt was so convincing in the role that his words sounded almost philosophical. To some real audiences, they were a beacon inspiring real-life fight clubs all over the US.

Norton and Pitt also had a great chemistry. They balanced each other out in so many ways despite being complete opposites. This makes sense considering the film's twist ending, which I won't spoil here.

The setting was just as ambiguous as our narrator. Like how he is supposed to be an everyman, the setting could have been any run-down city full of disenfranchised men. The dull colour palate only added to the overall sense of alienation.

Lastly let's talk about Helena Bonham Carter who brought some fresh air to a sombre film. Marla Singer who, in retrospect was one of the first manic pixie dream girls, seems a hybrid of Durden and the narrator. She has all the narrator's cynicism, but also Durden's toxic hedonism. The three of them together were a toxic triangle.

If you don't know a lot about Fight Club, you might just write it off as a silly man film about sad men fighting each other because they can't properly process their emotions, but don't write it off too quickly. There is far more to this film than meets the eye. 

Badlands review

 Number 392 on the top 1000 films of all time is Terrence Malik's directorial debut: the 1973 neo-noir period crime drama Badlands.

Loosely based on the true-life story of spree killers Charles Starkweather and Caril Ann Fugate, Badlands tells the story of twenty-five year old Korean war veteran and greaser Kit Carruthers (Martin Sheen.) He is a deeply troubled individual who quickly forms a relationship with the naive, impressionable fifteen year old Holly Sargis (Sissy Spasek.) The two of them soon embark on a murder spree across America.

Badlands is the third Terrence Malik film I've seen after Days of Heaven and the Thin Red Line. I didn't like either of those films finding them slow, boring and overly-philosophical. I didn't enjoy them so much that I didn't think I would ever like a Terrence Malik film. But I will happily admit that I was wrong in that assessment. Badlands was a thrilling and engaging crime drama with some brilliant performances from its lead actors.

For his role as the psychotic Kit Carruthers, Martin Sheen deservedly won the Best Actor Award at the San Sebastian International Film Festival. Sissy Spacek was nominated for the Most Promising Newcomer at the BAFTA's. Both of them were great. Spacek remarked on the chemistry she had with Martin Sheen and this really showed through on-screen. It would be easy to compare them to Bonnie and Clyde, but their relationship was far different. Rather than being a willing accomplice like Bonnie, Holly seemed more like an innocent young woman caught up in Kit's charismatic charm.

And Kit had all the charm and charisma you would expect from a spree killer. No doubt carrying trauma from the PTSD, he is completely cut off from his emotions and any sense of human decency. Sheen shone in the lead role. He was engrossing as Kit Carruthers. Usually when you have "couple" killers, it is the man that initiates like with the Moors Murderers or Paul Bernado and Karla Homolka, with the woman usually claiming they were bewitched by their male counterparts. However true that actually is Sheen was spellbinding in his role.

Unlike the bloated The Thin Red Line, the Badlands is only ninety minutes long meaning the pacing was terrific. The tension rarely let up for a second as we see how Kit and Holly attempt to navigate this new life they've created for themselves. 

Granted Terrence Malik wasn't the easiest to work with as many members of the crew quit during production. Malik went through three different cinematographers and allegedly he was practically the only one left by the time the shoot had finished. Despite this, the film remained cohesive and unified. You might expect it to look like a disparate, disconnected mess but this was far from the case. Perhaps that's because how Malik also wrote, produced and edited the film ensuring that his vision remained intact. I loved the cinematography too, as it really emphasised the isolated American landscape.

If I were to criticise anything it would be Sissy Spasek's voiceover. Holly narrates the film throughout, but her narration is little more than exposition serving no purpose except for explaining things that the audience could have figured out for themselves. It was a strange choice by Malik as it suggests that he either didn't trust himself to explain his vision clearly enough or that he didn't trust his audience enough to understand it properly. Yet neither of these seem very likely from what I know about Terrence Malik.

That minor criticism aside, I thoroughly enjoyed Badlands. I wasn't expecting to like it at all but I'm very happy to say that it proved me wrong.

All about my Mother review

 Number 386 on the top 1000 films of all time is Pedro Almodavar's 1999 Spanish comedy-drama All About my Mother.

Manuela Echevarria (Cecillia Roth) is an Argentine nurse and single mother who after losing her son - the aspiring writer Esteban (Eloy Azorin) - in a car accident, travels to Barcelona to reconnect with her estranged husband - the transgender Lola (Toni Canto) - of whom she hid Esteban's birth from. Along the way she befriends actress Huma Rojo (Marisa Paredes) nun Rosa (Penelope Cruz) and transgender sex worker Agrado (Antonia San Juan.)

In 1999, the conversation around gender identity and transgenderism wasn't nearly as prevalent as it is now. Yet you still had directors like Pedro Almodavar who pioneered these so important dialogues. He did this by creating a humourous but touching story which won a whole host of International Best Film awards including the Oscar, Bafta and Golden Globe. The characters all felt real rather than cartoonish stereotypes or box-ticking tokens. At least that's from my perspective of a cis male. However, it has been praised by the trans community for its honest, authentic and level-headed portrayal of the trans experience.

All About my Mother explored themes like gender identity, motherhood and family through a fresh and unique lens. Although things start in tragedy with Esteban's death, Manuela soon has a new chance to become a mother when she begins taking care of the HIV positive nun Rosa. Rosa is later revealed to be pregnant by Manuela's husband. Cruz and Roth were great in the lead roles helping to provide humanity to their sad characters. They navigated the difficult subject matter well.

This applies to the rest of the cast too. From Azorin's brief role as Esteban to Canto playing his estranged father and especially the brilliant Antonia San Juan as sex worker Agrado, a lot of humanity was afforded to the film's large cast of characters. Out of all of them perhaps Agrado is the most tragic yet she was also the most human. 

Probably appropriate to Esteban, a theatrical version of a Streetcar named Desire plays throughout the film with Manuela and Huma in the lead roles. It served as a nice metaphor for how these old characters were trying to navigate a new unfamiliar time, much like Blanche in New Orleans.

Overall, this was an entertaining film about identity - much like the Adventures of Priscilla Queen of the Desert - it navigated contentious issues with ease, introducing humour and heartbreak to a very important conversation.

A Prophet review

 Number 389 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2009 French prison-drama 'A Prophet.'

Malik El Djebena (Tahir Rahim) is a French-Algerian petty criminal who is sentenced to six years in jail. Naive and alone, he soon falls under the sway of the ruling Corsican gang led by Cesar Luciani (Niels Arestrup.) At first Luciani and the others look at him as nothing less than an annoying bug, but Djebena soon rises to the top of the prison hierarchy.

A Prophet was a brutal and unflinching look into French prisons. I always say that you can't shy away from difficult subject matter like this - you either have to go hard or go home and A Prophet definitely goes hard. It's no surprise that it was nominated for the Best International Film Oscar. While it ultimately lost to the the Secret in their Eyes, it won the equivalent Bafta, the Best Film Cesar as well as further awards at Cannes. In many ways it reminded me of the equally brutal Midnight Express.

Sure, you can argue that petty criminal Malik El Djebena isn't the most likable of protagonists - he's in prison for a reason and once there he commits further crimes like murdering the other inmates, but Tahir Rahim moulded him into a very interesting character. In some ways, he is reminiscent of Michael Corleone from the Godfather films - he begins the film as an outsider to the criminal world, but finishes as its uncontested king. 

Tahir Rahim has the same acting talent as Al Pacino, as he won the Cesar award for Best Actor. Rahim took Djebena on a fascinating arc from a teenage boy haunted by his past crimes, including murder, to the kingpin of the prison.

Every bit his equal was Niels Arestrup as Cesar Luciani - the hitherto king of the criminal underworld. He strongly reminded me of actor Brian Cox bringing the same level of grounded intensity. Luciani was an unpredictable character - in a second he can go to sharing a joke with you to digging a spoon into your eye, as Djebena found out first hand - it was this unpredictability that made him so frightening. Arestrup helped to keep this villain scary without turning him into a cartoon.

If I were to criticise this film for anything it would be its title of "A prophet." Sure Djebena does demonstrate some prophetic tendencies like helping to avert the car he's in from crashing into a deer, this doesn't happen until midway through the film. This idea of him being a prophet didn't seem relevant enough to justify titling the film, but this is a minor criticism.

A Prophet was an uncomfortable but thrilling movie with great performances from its lead actors. Also, can we just talk about how interesting the Corsican language is? A language, similar to the Tuscan-dialect of Italian, being spoken on a French island? Amazing.

The Insider review

 Number 387 on the top 1000 films of all time is Michael Mann's 1999 biopic 'the Insider.'

The Insider tells the real-life story of Dr Jeffrey Wigland (Russell Crowe) - a whistleblower in the tobacco industry who alleged that his former employer - the Brown and Williamson tobacco company is chemically altering their product to make it more addictive. He takes the story to CBS producer Lowell Bergman (Al Pacino.) The two have to defend the story and themselves as Brown and Williamson aim to discredit Wigland.

To start this review, I need to address the Russell Crowe-shaped elephant in the room. While he was good as Wigland, earning a Best Actor Oscar nod, I also think he was miscast. The Insider was released in 1999 when Russell Crowe was 35. The real life Dr Wigland blew the whistle in 1996 when he was 54 - almost 20 years older than Russell Crowe. Crowe was too young for the part and not convincing as a fifty-year old no matter how much grey hair-dye they applied.

While he may have been miscast, he did well with Eric Roth's and Michael Mann's Oscar-nominated screenplay. This was a year before he featured in the film that forever defined his career - Gladiator. After his Oscar-winning role there, Crowe could never again shake off the shadow of Maximus Decimus Meridius. Thankfully, as the Insider was released a year earlier, I didn't need to worry about that here.

Al Pacino was a better choice to play Lowell Bergman. Rather than 19, there was only nine years separating him from his real-life counterpart. Of the two, he was more engaging bringing a quiet intensity and ferocity to the role. As the film portrays, Bergman struggled in defending Wigland's testimony and Pacino portrayed this righteous indignation well.

The Insider also marked a noted departure from the stylised dramas that have so defined Michael Mann's career. It is a very different film to Heat, Collateral and Public Enemies, but Mann still did it justice. He is already a director known for his meticulous attention to detail, but he and Roth took things one step further by sticking purely to the facts. If something could not have been independently verified by three separate sources, it wasn't to be included in their film. This paid off, as Mann directed a well-researched and engaging film.

Overall, the Insider was enjoyable enough. Pacino was great, but I do think Russell Crowe was miscast. An older actor should have been cast instead.

The Right Stuff review

 Number 384 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1983 historical drama film 'The Right Stuff.'

The Right Stuff portrays the true story of the Mercury Seven - a group of Navy, Marine and Test pilots who were picked for Project Mercury - the US first manned space mission. It also tells the story of Captain Chuck Yeager (Sam Shephard) - the first person to fly at supersonic speed. The astronauts consist of Air Force captains Virgil 'Gus' Grissom (Fred Ward) Gordon "Gordo" Cooper (Dennis Quaid,) Donald "Deke" Slayton (Scott Paulin,) Marine corps pilot John Glenn (Ed Harris) and Navy pilots Alan Shepard (Scott Glenn,) Walter Schirra (Lance Henriksen) and Scott Carpenter (Charles Frank.)

Coming in at 192 minutes, this is an epic film in every sense of the word. Yes, it was depicting a monumental moment in not just American history, but the history of mankind, but did the film need to be so long? It is a slow-paced film that dragged in a lot of places and was also somewhat lacking in conflict and tension. Of course, you can argue there was never going to be that much dramatic tension in the film - we know that Project Mercury was ultimately a success, but still the film was boring and bloated.

Originally, William Goldman was hired to write the script, but he completely ignored the contributions of Chuck Yeager. Director Philip Kaufman and producer Irvin Wrinkler disagreed with this and instead Kaufman used his own script. That's why we see Chuck Yeager at the beginning of the film making history. After many failures to break the sound barrier, he does what nobody else has done before.

From here we get a loose sketch of the different main characters who soon blended into each other. I can only really remember John Glenn, due to Ed Harris' stardom, and Gus Grissom, for reasons I'll explain later. 

I understand that Kaufman and Wrinkler had to stick to the historical record, which might explain why there wasn't too much drama, but more things could have gone. Perhaps they could have taken some more creative license to amp up the tension. True there were scenes of the pilot's wives worried about their safety, but these were little more than minor inconveniences. As a whole the female characters were overshadowed by the men. They could have contributed more to the film.

The most drama came from Grissom's space flight where he lands in the ocean and possibly panicking blows the hatch early leading to the spacecraft flooding and ending up on the seabed. As such he is denied the same prestige awarded to Alan Shepard. 

Although this storyline did face some criticism for unfairly portraying Grissom as a coward, instead of acknowledging a mechanical fault with the spacecraft, it certainly injected a shot of life into this film. It also made Grissom one of the more memorable and sympathetic characters.

No doubt, the Right Stuff was portraying one of the most important moments in not only the history of space travel, but also the history of the mankind, but it could have done so in a shorter, more engaging way. The Right Stuff for Project Mercury? Sure. The right stuff for an entertaining film? Not so much.

Bride of Frankenstein (1935) review

 Number 380 on the top 1000 films of all time is James Whale's Gothic horror film 'Bride of Frankenstein.'

Sequel to Frankenstein, Bride of Frankenstein portrays a previously un-filmed subplot of Mary Shelley's original novel. Scientist Henry Frankenstein (Colin Clive) and his mentor Doctor Pretorius (Ernest Thesiger) work to create a "Bride" for the monster (Boris Karloff )they created in the last film.

The original story was the birthchild of Mary Shelley when she, her husband Percy Shelley, Lord Byron are stuck inside on a rainy, miserable day. To stave off the boredom, they challenge themselves to tell the scariest ghost stories ever and, so Frankenstein, was borne. Bride of Frankenstein began by portraying this very incident in a way to establish some continuity (more on this later) between it and its successor, but I don't think this was necessary. I think any viewer could have filled in the gaps quite easily. 

A criticism I had for the original film was their unfair portrayal of Frankenstein's monster. In the original novel, he is portrayed as an intelligent and articulate, if hideous being. In Frankenstein, he is little more than a simple-minded beast. This edition helped to rectify that mistake. He's still far from being any type of Renaissance man, but we do see more depth to his character. 

He's not just an animal now, but somebody desperately looking for friendship like when he befriends a blind hermit who teaches him how to speak and how to enjoy life. Boris Karloff should also be credited for bringing some humanity to a monster that everybody misunderstands. Rather than being a mindless brute, he's more something to be pitied. 

This film also helps to develop Henry Frankenstein. Far from being a mad scientist, he still wants to continue his pursuit to the secret of life and immortality. Again, he has more depth than the first film.

At the start, I talked about continuity. I know this film was only made in the 1930's but there were a whole slieu of continuity errors. One I particularly remember was when the hermit was showing the monster how to smoke. He passes his cigar to him, but in the next cut, both characters have lit cigars. 

Bride of Frankenstein was enjoyable enough with well-developed characters, despite its dodgy editing.

Ed Wood review

 Number 378 on the top 1000 films of all time is Tim Burton's 1994 biographical comedy-drama 'Ed Wood.'

Ed Wood (Johnny Depp) tells the real-life story of the film-maker Ed Wood and his ascension through the Hollywood ranks to become affectionately known as the "Worst Director of All Time." The film portrays his personal and professional relationships including with Dracula actor Bela Lugosi (Martin Landau) and drag queen John "Bunny" Breckinridge (Bill Murray.) Sarah Jessica Parker plays Ed Wood's first girlfriend Dolores Fuller, but when their relationship deteriorates he starts anew with Kathy O'Hara (Patricia Arquette.)

Tim Burton is well-known for gothic horror and dark fantasy films being the director of such films like Sleepy Hollow, Corpse Bride, Edward Scissorhands and Beetlejuice. Yet Ed Wood was an interesting mixture of the real and the fantasy. Being a biopic, the story was founded in truth. It portrayed the life of famed B-movie director Ed Wood, but did so through a fantasy lens. The use of black-and-white gave the film a timeless element - although it was depicting the 50s it could have been set anywhere. Martin Landau and Johnny Depp's performances were suitably surreal too.

Johnny Depp has become well-known for playing off-the-wall eccentric characters. We've already talked about Edward Scissorhands, but there's also Sweeney Todd, Willy Wonka and of course, his most famous role, Captain Jack Sparrow. I would argue that Ed Wood was just as off-the-wall and as eccentric as any of these characters. He soon became known for his unconventional production techniques such as providing little direction for his actors, only shooting one take and filling any gaps with stock footage. Having said that, George Lucas was also notorious for only saying "faster" and "more intense" to his actors, so maybe that point isn't that unconventional, but I digress. 

And, most eccentrically of all, there was also Ed Wood's transvestism. Yet despite all this, Johnny Depp gave a three-dimensional and well-rounded portrayal of the ill-celebrated director. Granted both and he and Burton admitted to being overly-sympathetic side to Wood. Reportedly, the real-life director suffered from alcoholism so bad it was the true reason why Dolores left him. These scenes were not included in the film.

Finally, let's talk about Martin Landau who won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for playing Bela Lugosi. In the fifties, Bela Lugosi's best days were long behind him. Similar to Ed Wood he also had his own alcohol problems. Yet his collaborations with the ill-famed director saw a minor resurgence to his career. Just like Depp, Landau brought a vulnerability and tenderness to the damaged character.

Ed Wood was an enjoyable enough film. It had all the surrealism and eccentricity you would expect from a Tim Burton film and it also had Johnny Depp in one of his trademark off-the-wall roles. 

Dead Poet's Society review

 Number 375 on the top 1000 films of all time is the coming-of-age drama 'Dead Poet's Society.'

John Keating (Robin Williams) is the new English teacher at the prestigious prepatory Welton school - a school that prides itself on its devotion to tradition and discipline. He inspires a group of students led by Neil Perry (Robert Sean Leonard) and including the shy Todd Anderson (Ethan Hawke) to break free of the school's draconian measures by embracing the world of poetry.

While watching this, I couldn't help but be reminded of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. Keating is the Mcmurphy character rallying the students to rebel against the apparently tyrannical school regime. Except Dead Poet's Society, while certainly enjoyable, didn't quite hit the same heights.

The stakes never felt high enough nor did the school feel tyrannical enough. Headmaster Dr Gale Nolan (Norman Lloyd) wasn't as fearsome as Nurse Ratched. There were vague threats of the student's individuality and creativity being wiped out, but they were never really capitalised upon. True, one of the students does get paddled, but even that never felt particularly serious. And Dr Nolan wasn't as menacing as he could have been.

Robert Sean Leonard and Ethan Hawke were certainly enjoyable enough in the lead roles. It was nice to Anderson's transformation from a shy to a more confident student. It was difficult to believe this was the same Hawke who wowed audiences in Training Day or the Before trilogy. But the rest of the gang faded into one another. I also found it very unlikely that a group of teenage boys would rebel against the system by running into the woods and reciting poetry rather than drinking or smoking weed. Having said that, these are posh, private school kids. Anything's possible with them.

Robin Williams was the definite highlight of the film. He gave a restrained performance that was hilarious at moments, but heartfelt in others. I particularly enjoyed his impressions of the different celebrities of the time.

Dead Poet's Society wasn't a bad film by any means, but it also could have been a lot better.

Bonnie and Clyde review

 Number 374 on the top 1000 films of all time is Arthur Penn's 1967 biographical crime drama 'Bonnie and Clyde.'

Clyde Barrow (Warren Beatty) and Bonnie Parker (Faye Dunaway) were two bank robbers who terrorised the US during the Great Depression. This film dramatised their life, as well as the lives of their gang consisting of the dim-witted C.W Moss (Michael J. Pollard,) Clyde's brother Buck (Gene Hackman,) Buck's wife Blanche (Estelle Parsons) and briefly undertaker Eugene Grizzard (Gene Wilder) in his debut role.

Bonnie and Clyde changed the way films were seen forever. It was one of the first films to embrace the changing of the production code, which allowed a lot more violence, swearing and sex in cinema. And Bonnie and Clyde was a violent film with gunfire galore especially in the film's most climatic sequences.

It also had two great performances from leads Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway who played the titular robbers. Beatty had all the charisma you would expect from a gang leader. He was handsome, charming but also a complete maniac. Far form being the Robin Hood type, he would do anything to protect himself and his family.

That includes his brother played by the always welcome Gene Hackman. Hackman was every bit Beatty's equal matching his charisma and manic energy, as well as being deeply devoted to his Blanche. She was the weak point of the film. When she becomes an unwilling accomplice to the Barrow Gang, she spends much of the film screaming, whining and fighting with Bonnie who wants her gone.

I was surprised to learn that actress Estelle Parsons won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for her role, because the character was little more than a screaming mess. The real-life Blanche Barrow also criticised her portrayal saying it depicted her as a "screaming horse's ass." It's an accurate criticism. No disrespect to Parsons, but it was a bad characterisation.

Bonnie was a far better character played well by Faye Dunaway. Rather than a piece of plasticine to be moulded by Clyde, she was a willing accomplice in every sense of the word. Her unpredictable energy made her so interesting to watch.

And a quick shoutout to Gene Wilder whose small supporting role provided some much-needed levity to what was otherwise a violent, intense, but good film. 

Almost Famous review

 Number 369 on the top 1000 films of all time is Cameron Crowe's 2000 comedy-drama 'Almost Famous.'

William Miller (Patrick Fugit) is an aspiring journalist living under the thumb of his oppressive mother Elaine during the early 1970's. (Frances Mcdormand.) At the urging of his older sister, he starts rebelling by listening to rock music. But then music magazine editor Lester Bangs (Philip Seymour Hoffman) takes him under his wing. To further his career, William then joins rock band Stillwater as they tour the US.

This was an entertaining, if not amazing, coming-of-age drama ticking off all the boxes you would expect from the genre. You had William as the lost teenage protagonist looking for direction life his oppressive, over-protective parental figure - Elaine and the mentor character of Lester Bangs.

I think Frances Mcdormand showed why she went onto win three best Actress Oscars, as she was great as William's mother. It would be all too easy to play her as a cartoonish caricature, but Elaine's overprotective nature felt all too real. She was never being malicious or over-the-top, but she just wanted the best for her son.

Yet she wasn't the only future Oscar winner in the cast, as we also saw Philip Seymour Hoffman in a supporting role. He was one of the most versatile actors of his generation and he put that to good use playing William's mentor. It's a shame he didn't have more screentime - then again, he was suffering from the flu when filming, so perhaps that was for the best.

Cameron Crowe won the Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar for his semi-autobiographical script loosely based on his own experiences writing for Rolling Stone Magazine in the seventies. Almost Famous certainly had an air of realism to it.

Although the film lost something when William started following Stillwater around the US. The exploration of the band wasn't as deep as it could have been with much of the tension focussing on the conflict between the lead singer Jeff Bebe (Jason Lee) and lead guitarist Russell Hammond (Billy Crudup) with the rest of the band being largely forgotten about. Having said that, it's probably quite a common occurrence in most bands.

This film was enjoyable enough if overlong. Maybe I was just watching a dodgy bootleg, but it did feel longer than the advertised two-hour runtime.

The Conversation review

 Number 365 on the top 1000 films of all time is Francis Ford Coppola's 1974 neo-noir mystery thriller 'The Conversation.'

Harry R Caul (Gene Hackman) and Stan Ross (John Cazale) are surveillance experts investigating a couple in Union Square. Upon listening to their conversations, Caul becomes convinced they're going to be murdered. He soon descends into paranoia, as he tries to save their lives.

The Conversation came only two years after Coppola won the Best Writing Oscar for The Godfather, only a few months before he won the Best Directing Oscar for the Godfather Part 2 and three years after Gene Hackman won the Best Actor Oscar for the French Connection. These two creatives were at the top of their game when they met to make a tense and enthralling film.

Yet everything is so quiet and understated. Subtext is key in so many films, which was so especially true in the Conversation, where there was so much power in what was left unsaid. Coppola dialled into this with the subtext- more specifically Caul's misunderstanding of it helping to propel the film along. This all leads to a very satisfactory twist-ending, which I won't spoil here. As for the hidden bug? Maybe it's in the saxophone? Maybe there isn't one at all? Maybe it's only Caul's paranoia?

Hackman was terrific in the lead role portraying Caul's descent into obsession well. It felt real and authentic. Cazale was also good as the foil to Caul - the one character trying to keep him in check.

And as you might expect from a film like this, the sound mixing was very good. The titular conversation between the couple being spied upon is played throughout the film and is always audible even if the audience aren't aware of its importance.

Paranoia was a key theme of the film. It was something Coppola portrayed masterfully. A good film all around.

Hard Boiled review

 Number 368 on the top 1000 films of all time is John Woo's 1992 Hong Kong action-triller Hard-Boiled.

"Tequila" Yuen Ho-Yan (Chow Yun-Fat) is a cop who doesn't play by the book. His goal is to bring the triad boss Johnny Wong (Anthony Wong) to justice. He finds an unlikely ally in undercover cop Alan (Tony Leung) who is masquerading as Johnny Wong's closest advisor.

Similar to his previous effort of the Killer, Woo's Hard Boiled will be an acquired taste. If you're a fan of action films then you'll love it, but if not then I'd recommend you watch something else, as Hard-Boiled employs almost every action film cliche in the book including infinite ammo, plot armour, slow-motion, lots of blood and endless gunfights.

Thankfully, one refreshing change was how Hard Boiled's female protagonist - Tequila's girlfriend Theresa Chang (Teresa Mo) and fellow cop has some agency and does something else than incessantly scream like Sally Yeh did in the Killer. Teresa even shot one of the bad guys.

In making this film, John Woo wanted to romanticise the police rather than criminals, which he did do in fairness. True they weren't the most complicated of characters, but Tequila and Alan were undoubtedly the heroes of the films. Not the two-dimensional villainous Johnny Wong. 

I did enjoy seeing Yun-Fat and Leung together - they had good chemistry which is important in a film like this. I've seen Leung in both romantic and action roles and he's good at both. It's just a shame that I don't care for action films. The endless explosions and gunfights became rather repetitive. Rather than being exciting, it was very boring.

And I also found it strange how despite the film is mostly in Cantonese, the characters had a few odd lines in English. True Hong Kong was still a British colony, but it seemed like an odd, out-of-place choice.

Similar, to the Killer, I'd only recommend watching Hard Boiled if you're an action film fan. If you're not then you best find something else to watch as this is not the film for you.

Planet of the Apes review (1968)

 Number 363 on the top 1000 films of all time is Franklin J Schaffner's 1968 science-fiction Planet of the Apes.

Set two thousand years in the future, astronauts George Taylor (Charlton Heston,) Dodge (Jeff Burton) and Landon (Robert Gunner) crash-land on an alien planet. The planet is a desolate wasteland where the dominant form of life are sentient, intelligent apes. Meanwhile humans have been rendered mute savages including Nova (Linda Harrison.)

This is the film that has spawned one of Hollywood's biggest franchises including endless sequels, reboots and Tim Burton's god-awful 2001 remake. But this is where it all started.

And it was a great start to the franchise. Right from the start, we were given a mystery to solve and across the two-hour runtime, the layers of the mystery were peeled back leading to one of the best-executed twist-endings in science-fiction. Don't worry, I won't spoil it here. Although this film is almost sixty years old. If you have somehow avoided the twist ending then you've performed a miracle. All you need is to martyr yourself and you'll become a saint.

What I liked most about this film was its quiet, intimate nature. There is a minimal cast, few sets and a lack of explosions and gunfire. Taylor's fellow astronauts are quickly lobotomised/killed by the apes leaving him and the other humans to be taken prisoner by the apes.

I was half-expecting him to lead a rebellion and to topple the oppressive ape society - this was the predictable way the story could have gone, but instead Taylor breaks himself and Nova, for some reason, out of jail where they escape the apes and ride off into the sunset - with the help of a family of scientists who became unlikely allies.

Let's talk about Nova who seemed pretty superfluous to the pitch. The scientists originally wanted Taylor to mate with her, hence why the two were imprisoned together. Instead, when Taylor makes a break for it, he insists that Nova comes too, because of reasons. And she agrees because of reasons. And later on, she rides off into the sunset with him, because of reasons, instead of returning to her own people. The fact that she had no lines and did little but stand around and look pretty, it was difficult to see her a little more than eye-candy.

Charlton Heston made for a good leading man even if he was a bit theatrical for my tastes. Nonetheless, if you're going to watch the Planet of the Apes franchise, do yourself a favour and start here - not with Tim Burton's terrible remake.

The Blues Brothers review

 Number 360 on the top 1000 films of all time is John Landis' musical-comedy drama - 'The Blues Brothers.'

Elwood Blues (Dan Ackroyd) and Jake Blues (John Belushi) are brothers, petty crooks and blues musicians. After Jake Blues is released from jail, the brothers find out their Roman Catholic childhood orphanage will be demolished after failing to pay their property taxes. They reform their old blues band to raise money to save their old orphanage. The film features many musical cameos from massive soul singers like James Brown, Aretha Franklin and Ray Charles. Carrie Fisher also co-stars.

John Belushi and Dan Ackroyd were titans of the American comedy world. Both of them were prominent members of SNL - with this film and their characters growing out of an SNL skit  and Ackroyd going onto star in the legendary Ghostbuster's franchise. They brought their comedy flair to what was a funny if ridiculous film. But it was ridiculous in all the best ways.

The brother's misadventures include larger-than-life car chases, irritating a vengeful country music band and running neo-Nazi's off a bridge. It was completely bonkers, but that all added to the spectacle. And it all fitted the film's less-than-serious tone. It's a comedy. You're supposed to take things lightly. If you don't, you'll be in trouble.

About as much trouble as Jake and Elwood find themselves in when they return to their orphanage unable to stop cursing or taking the lord's name in vein, Sister Mary Stigmata beats them out of the building in one of the film's funniest if silliest scenes.

And the action scenes also looked great from the aforementioned car chase scenes to Carrie Fisher's increasingly outlandish attempts to kill the two brothers. Granted, this all led to the film going drastically over-budget - with much of that fuelling John Belushi's coke addiction, but it looked great on-screen.

True, the musical cameos were all pretty shoe-horned in, but they only added to the spectacle of the film. And when the cameos included singing legends like James Brown, Aretha Franklin and Ray Charles, who's complaining?

The Blues Brothers was a great film. Yes, it's silly and larger than life, but you need to remember not to take it too seriously.

The Killer review

Number 359 on the top 1000 films of all time John Woo's Hong Kong action film 'the Killer.'

Ah Jong (Chow Yun-Fat) is a hitman who accidentally blinds nightclub singer Jennie (Sally Yeh) in a mob hit gone wrong. Wanting to raise money for an operation that can cure her sight, he embarks on one last hit, but disgraced policeman Li Yang (Danny Lee) is determined to send him to prison.

If there was a list for the cheesiest 1980's, popcorn-munching action films then the Killer would surely top the list. If you love those types of films then you would love the Killer. But if you're looking for something more than pretty much every single cliche in the action genre, then you'll be disappointed. And I was left sorely disappointed by this film.

I know it was an action film, but it was so absurd that it bordered on the ridiculous. Like I say, it is absolutely bursting with cliches. Where do we even start? There's the infinite ammo cliche. In the numerous gun fights that litter the film, Ah Jong and Li Yang never seem to run out of bullets even when they're using handguns. And the characters get shot multiple times but rarely show any distress. Plus there's a silly amount of slow motion too.

The character of Jennie is little more than a damsel-in-distress having little identity beyond being a screaming woman to be saved. Hardly the most complicated of characters. Not knowing that he is the one who blinded her, she falls in love with Ah Jong and the two begin a relationship which also seemed pretty unlikely.

As for the villains, Triad boss Wong Hoi (Shing Fui-on) was one of the most two-dimensional villains I've seen in a while. Like the rest of the film, he was just so over the top that it really hurt his credibility as a scary enemy. However, I also think that the exaggerated reality was very much the point of the film. Everything was supposed to be over-the-top. 

Yet that didn't make it any more entertaining. The gunfights became tedious after a while. And they detracted from the rest of the film particularly from the central three characters of Ah Jong, Jennie and Li Hang. Beyond their roles in the film, there was little depth to any of them. The whole film is about Ah Jong raising money to help Jennie's sight yet she ends up completely blind by the end. It was rather a disappointing end to that storyline.

You should only watch the Killer if you love cheesy action films. If you don't, then I would sorely recommend you find something else to watch instead.

Breathless review

 Number 358 on the top 1000 films of all time is Jean-Luc Goddard's French crime-drama film 'Breathless.'

Michel (Jean-Paul Bermondo) is a petty-crook who after stealing a car and killing a policeman in Marseille hides out in Paris where he quickly starts up a relationship with American exchange-student Patricia (Jean Seberg.) In love with her, he tries convincing her to run away with him, but she has other ideas.

Breathless received much fanfare for its visual style which was pioneered by none other than by leader of the French New Wave movement - Jean-Luc Goddard. When it came to editing down the film rather than cutting whole scenes, Goddard instead cut out parts of the scenes themselves employing what has come to be known as jump cuts. Watch any Youtube video from the 2010's and you'll understand what I mean. Reportedly, Goddard improvised most of the film writing most of the dialogue in a journal that only he was allowed to see. As for the actors, he told them the dialogue while filming. It was all very experimental.

Was it an experiment that worked? In my opinion, no. Unless the experiment was to see whether Goddard could make the most boring film known to man. Mother-in-heaven I have seen 3 or 4 - hour long films that have more life than this 90-minute snooze fest. At least Ben-Hur had the exciting chariot race and things actually happen in Gone with the Wind. Granted, not the best things but things nonetheless.

Very little happens in Breathless. The film starts interestingly enough with Michel killing the police officer, but the narrative tension screeches to a halt when he reaches Paris. Goddard then mostly treats us to thrilling scenes of Michel and Patricia arguing in a smoky Parisian bedroom. Fascinating...not. Nothing was happening and there was a sense that nothing was going to happen. It was all so boring.

It didn't help that Michel wasn't a likeable character. Yes, he is a petty crook, thief and cop-killer, but he isn't even interesting to watch. Patrick Bateman in American Psycho is a freaking serial killer, but I was actually interested in reading about him. I had no interest at all about following Michel's journey.

And I had no interest in this film either. 358th on the 1000 best films of all time? More like 358th on the 1000 most boring films of all time.

King Kong (1933) review

 Number 356 on the top 1000 films of all time is the pre-code adventure, horror-monster film 'King Kong.'

New York film maker Carl Denham (Robert Armstrong) is making preparations to film his next project on a mysterious island. Casting Ann Darrow (Fay Wray) as his leading lady, they along with the crew of Captain Englehorn (Frank Reicher) and First Mate Jack Driscoll's (Bruce Cabot) ship, they sail to skull island where they find all kinds of impossible creatures such as dinosaurs and King Kong himself - a gigantic gorilla.

There's no doubt that this film was technically ground-breaking. It was a pioneering force in special effects blending together stop-motion, matte and live-action to create a stylistically brilliant experience. It's just a shame that it was all spent on a thoroughly boring film. Seriously, King Kong was tedious, repetitive and populated with unlikeable characters.

Film-maker Carl Denham only cares about making his film regardless of the cost to human life, Driscoll is your standard hothead with a heart of gold and Ann Darrow was little more than your proto-typical damsel-in-distress. I get this was the thirties but Darrow embodying the helpless female character became very old very quickly. Fay Wray gained a reputation for being the first scream queen and with good reason. Even when she isn't being attacked by any monsters she still spends most of her time screaming.

And there are a lot of monsters in this. From a T-Rex to a Brontosaurus to a Stegosaurus to a Pteranodon and even a massive snake-like thing, it all became too much after a while. It was monotonous seeing Kong having to save Ann from these monsters. I kept asking myself when was this going to end. It seemed to go on forever. By the time Denham captures Kong and takes him back to New York I had almost fallen asleep - not that I would have missed much. Due to how much time had been spent on the bloated beginning, the ending, which saw Kong become a freak show on Broadway, was rushed. The film was only 100 minutes but could have been shorter.

I'm sure King Kong was ground-breaking at the time, but I don't think it holds up well 92 years later.

The Untouchables review

Spoilers ahead 

Number 355 on the top 1000 films of all time is Brian De Palma's 1987 crime film 'The Untouchables.'

The Untouchables tells the true-life story of Elliot Ness (Kevin Costner) a prohibition agent who forms a team of untouchable, incorruptible men to bring down the era's biggest gangster and bootlegger Al Capone (Robert De Niro.) Ness' team consists of the veteran Irish-American cop James Malone (Sean Connery) young hot-shot George Stone (born Giuseppe Petri - Andy Garcia) and accountant Oscar Wallace (Charles Martin Smith.)

Firstly, let's address the Sean Connery in the room. Despite Malone being an Irish-American character, Connery's accent is neither Irish nor American. Like he does in every other role, he stubbornly played the role with his native Scottish accent. This was quite distracting to say the least, but what else can you expect from Sean Connery? He won the Best Supporting Oscar for his role and, despite the accent, I think it was a well-earned win. Malone acted as a mentor-cum-father figure for Ness helping to coach him on the best way to take down Al Capone. Connery played the role well bringing a great energy and life to the character.

The rest of the performances were fine, but none of them matched Sean Connery. Garcia was never really given the chance to exercise his acting chops - granted Stone IS a supporting character, but I don't think he was really fleshed out beyond being the best shot in his class. Charles Martin Smith was also good, but, alas, Oscar Wallace was the first of the Untouchables to prematurely die. It was a sad death as due to his accountant background he was the least suited for the way of life, but he still proved his worth for the team, being the one who suggests prosecuting Capone for tax evasion. 

Hell, I even liked Kevin Costner - Elliot Ness wasn't a character with a lot of depth, but he made for a good action hero and Costner played the role well. I was particularly surprised with Robert De Niro as Al Capone and I don't mean surprised in a good way. Considering I'm speaking about Robert FREAKING De Niro, I thought his portrayal of Capone was rather simplistic. There was none of the depth or complexity that I would expect from one of De Niro's roles. To paraphrase Capone himself, he was nothing but a receding hairline and a baseball bat.

Brian De Palma also played fast-and-loose with history often fictionalising or completely making up most of the film's key events. Ness's team had very little to do with Capone's tax evasion case and the train station shootout or the Canadian border raid never happened in real life. But that didn't matter as it all made for dramatic, entertaining viewing. The train station shootout was inspired by the Russian step scene in Battleship Potemkin with the parallels being obvious to see. Despite being pretty unbelievable/cheesy, it was still good fun to watch.

And that is a good summary of this film. It is an incredibly loose retelling of historical events but was still a thrilling watch. The acting wasn't fantastic except for Sean Connery, yet it still earned its place on the top 1000 films of all time.

Mulholland Drive review

*Spoilers ahead* 

Number 354 on the top 1000 films of all time is David Lynch's surrealist neo-noir mystery horror film Mulholland Drive.

Betty Elms (Naomi Watts) is an actress arriving in Hollywood to start her career. She befriends amnesiac Rita (Laura Harring) who is the only survivor of a terrible car crash. Betty resolves to help her new friend regain her lost memory to horrifying consequences. A separate storyline sees director Adam Kesher (Justin Theroux) struggle to maintain control of his latest film project, as both studio executives and mobsters try to interfere.

David Lynch regarded this film as his magnus opus. It takes surrealism to a whole new level - far more so than previous efforts like Blue Velvet and Twin Peaks. This isn't any understatement. Mulholland Drive is one of the weirdest films I have seen since Dark City or even Blue Velvet. I'm not sure it's worth trying to figure out the meaning behind Mulholland Drive - considering there is any meaning at all. Perhaps it's weird for purely the sake of being weird. Justin Theroux said that Lynch was happy for viewers to arrive at any interpretation they wished. As for Lynch, he has never elaborated on the deeper meanings behind the weirdness of Mulholland Drive. 

There is a lot of weirdness from the strange opening scene that looked to be from another film to Kesher meeting a mysterious cowboy to everything that happened at Club Silencio. And who can forget that awful decaying corpse believed to be Diane Selwyn. I was with the film until the final act where Rita unlocks a mysterious box leading to both her and Betty disappearing. Betty then reawakens as struggling actress Diane Selwyn. Rita is now Camilla who is playing the lead in Adam Kesher's new film. Oh and there's a weird old crone character uttering abstract prophecies. At this point it all became incomprehensible to me. I'm not even going to try and decipher the various oddities.

Instead, I will say this is one of the scariest, most unsettling films I have seen. The final scene where Diana, being terrorised by hallucinations, runs into her bedroom and shoots herself, was terrifying to watch. But it was also masterfully shot. The lighting and camerawork were brilliant. Watts and Harring were also great as the two leads. Mulholland Drive was very much Watts' breakout role and she really acted her socks off. Her terror in the above scene was palpable. Harring was also very good - playing her role as the amnesiac Rita with all the confusion, panic and fear that you would expect.

Yes, Mulholland Drive is a WEIRD film. It is surreal, abstract and confusing, but that's exactly what David Lynch intended. And he wouldn't want it any other way. It was also gripping, terrifying and thrilling. A good film all around.