Showing posts with label david. Show all posts
Showing posts with label david. Show all posts

Tuesday, 19 May 2026

Eastern Promises review

 Number 605 on the top 1000 films of all time is David Cronenberg's crime-drama 'Eastern Promises.'

Anna Khitrova (Naomi Watts) is an English-Russian midwife whose next patient is Russian sexual-trafficking victim Tatiana. Tatiana is pregnant and dies in childbirth but her daughter survives. When Anna tries to locate the newborn baby's family, she is drawn into the Russian criminal underworld spearheaded by Nikolai Luzhin - driver for the Russian mafia boss Sermyon (Armin Mueller-Stahl) and his loose cannon son Kiril (Vincent Cassel.)

There was a lot to like about this film and I was definitely all in up until the film's final act where it lost me. But before we get too negative let's talk about the positives of the film. I would be doing a major disservice if I didn't speak about Viggo Mortenson - one of the most chameleonic and versatile actors working in Hollywood today. And he was terrific as the morally grey Nikolai - driver to the Russian mafia. There is a reason he received a whole slieu of nominations (including an Oscar nod) and Best Actor awards like the Bafta for the role. 

I also very much enjoyed Armin Mueller-Stahl as the villainous Sermyon - he is a character living a double life. On the outside, he is a charming and amicable restauranter but on the inside he is a vicious criminal. Mueller-Stahl played both parts of the role very well. At first he didn't seem anymore dangerous than a lovable grandpa, but scratch beneath the surface and he was a chilling psychopath. Vincent Cassel also brought a great chaotic energy to the unpredictable Kiril - even if this did border on the unbelievable at times.

David Cronenberg is well-known for being a master of body-horror and Eastern Promise is certainly no exception. It had its share of violence and throat-slitting which, while being stomach-churning, also had a feeling of authenticity. Cronenberg rejected the gangsters using guns, as in real life they tend to use knives. The two Chechen assassins have linolem cutting knives which could easily be disguised as tools. It is more difficult to do that with guns. Speaking of the two Chechen assassins, their fight with Nikolai has to be the highlight of the film. It was a thrilling, exciting climax, but also one that arrived too early. Everything that came after was anticlimatic and disappointing. Spoiler territory to follow.

The two Chechens try to kill Nikolai after mistakenly believing that he is Kiril. Why do they think this? Nikolai was set up by a rival capo after both he and Kiril were involved in the killing of an associate. This was a brilliantly-choregraphed fight scene, but largely inconsequential. What happens to the capo who set up Nikolai? We don't know because the film jumps to the reveal that Nikolai is actually an undercover Russian agent on loan to the London police. He then provides them evidence to arrest Sermyon for the earlier statuory rape of Tatiana. The arrest itself is left off-screen.

Instead we see Kiril attempt to kidnap and murder Tatiana's baby on his father's orders before being talked around by Nikolai. Compared to the thrilling fight scene, it was a damp squib of an ending. It was building toward a big bang but instead finished with a whisper. Naomi Watts was also less than convincing in her role of Anna very much lacking the intensity of her co-stars.

Eastern Promises is definitely a good example of a film that started stronger than it finished. It had so much potential that was just wasted.

Saturday, 2 May 2026

Shine film

 Number 593 on the top 1000 films of all time is the musical biopic 'Shine.'

Shine ells the true-life story of famed Australian pianist David Helfgott from his childhood to the start of his career, where he was played by Noah Taylor, to his eventual mental breakdown where Geoffrey Rush took over the mantle.

Shine is perhaps best-known for its success at the 69th Academy awards where it generated seven nominations and one win. Armin Mueller-Stahl was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for playing David's tyrannical father Peter. For playing David, Geoffrey Rush took home the Best Actor gong.

Sure Rush was great, but did he shine enough to merit an Oscar? I'm not so sure. And I think that's more because he wasn't given a chance to shine. He shared the role of David with Noah Taylor and I'd argue that Taylor dominated the role. He had the more interesting parts. We see the fledgling beginnings of David's career, his tempestuous relationship with his father - more on that later - and the beginnings of David's breakdown. Rush takes over the latter half of the film, as we see David's life post-breakdown. It wasn't as interesting. Noah Taylor was more deserving of the Oscar nod, not because of the difference in acting quality, but in screen-time ratio.

However, Armin Mueller-Stahl was well-deserving of his Best Supporting Actor nomination. He cut a well-intentioned if misguided father figure trying to live out his failed dreams through his children. A toxic parent, but a great performance. Ultimately, Mueller-Stahl lost to Cuba Gooding Jr in Jerry Maguire, but this was still a memorable performance.

In some ways, Shine reminded me of Ron Howard's later film 'A Beautiful Mind,' which explored similar tortured genius mathematician John Nash. Although David was a more likable character and the plus side of having two actors portray him was that we got a well-rounded, three-dimensional character.

I'm not sure if Shine shone bright enough to be truly Oscar-worthy, but it was a good film nonetheless.


Friday, 16 August 2024

Blowup Review

 Number 629 on the top 1000 films of all time is Michelangelo Antonioni's 1966 psychological mystery drama 'Blowup.'

Thomas (David Hemmings) is a photographer during the London's Swinging sixties. He believes he has unwittingly photographed a murder that is somehow connected to the mysterious woman Jane (Vanessa Redgrave.) This was Italian Antonioni's first English-language film.

Blowup? More like blow-out. This film was boring and tedious. If you looked up dull in the dictionary, you would see a picture of Blowup. It revolves around Thomas discovering a murder, yet this doesn't occur until an hour into the film. You get some movies that take a while to get going and then you have this...maybe if this film was three hours long (thank God it wasn't) the slow start would have been justifiable, but Blowup was under two hours.

There was no reason to have an hour of Thomas photographing models or photographing Jane and her lover in the park. I get it, the film is about photography, Thomas is a photographer, but seeing photos being developed hardly makes for the most entertaining or dramatic of cinema.

Not to mention that Thomas is one of the most unlikeable protagonists that I have seen on film. In the creative world, you get the pretentious, artistic genius archetype. Thomas embodies this and more. He is arrogant, spoiled, creepy and incredibly predatory. When he is photographing the model Verushka, he is constantly licking her ear. He has a weird sexual dalliance with two aspiring models, this scene went on for far longer than it should have, and there is an unwelcome sexual tension between him and Jane.

Thomas also seems remarkably uncaring about whether he solves the mystery or not. For some reason, he goes to a dope house to bring his obviously intoxicated friend to see the dead body. But by the time he actually gets there, the body has disappeared and he's more concerned with watching a group of mimes miming playing tennis. What was up with that? Why were we watching that?

It was like they had wandered off the set of La Dolce Vita and onto the set of Blowup. In fact, this whole film was like if Fellini had taken his existentially lost, young, annoying, artistic characters and transplanted them into a Hitchcock thriller.

But Blowup had none of the tension or suspense of a Hitchcock thriller. The severe lack of non-diegetic music did not help. Instead, we got a strange and unnecessary scene of the Yardbirds playing out a gig, and Jeff Beck smashing his guitar.

*spoiler alert*

The mystery is never solved. We never find out who killed this man or why, which I think was supposed to be the point, but it also made the film pointless. It left a lot of annoying plot holes. When Jane spots Thomas taking photos of her, she complains vehemently and visits his studio multiple times to get a copy of them. Why is she so interested? Who knows? And who cares? Obviously Antonioni didn't.

And I know this was the sixties, but Thomas' photos are so grainy and blurred, I don't know how he spotted any dead body in them. it was a bit like the so-called photos that prove the existence of Bigfoot or aliens.

Blowup was a tedious film. Not enough drama, tension or likeable characters. And too many shots of characters standing around staring into the middle-distance and bloody mimes playing tennis.

Sunday, 2 July 2023

American Hustle review

 Number 614 on the top 1000 films of all time is David O'Russell's black comedy crime film 'American Hustle.'

Irving Rosenfeld (Christian Bale) and Sydney Prosser (Amy Adams) are two con-artists who are enlisted by FBI agent Richie Dimaso (Bradley Cooper) to entrap corrupt politicians like Mayor of Camden, New Jersey, Carmine Polito (Jeremy Renner.) Jennifer Lawrence also stars as Irving's emotionally unstable wife Rosalyn.

While this film has some great acting talent, especially from a cast involving Christian Bale, Bradley Cooper and Jeremy Renner, I think that the female co-stars majorly outshone their male counterparts. Amy Adams was very good as the con-woman Sydney Prosser. She effortlessly switches from her British persona, complete with accent, of Lady Edith Greensly, to her native American accent. But the love triangle between her, Irving and Rosalyn eventually comes to a head, leading to a very effective and powerful confrontation.

Jennifer Lawrence was also very good as Rosalyn. I think she brought a quiet power to a vulnerable role. She really helped to bring her character to life. All four principle actors received Oscar nods, but Lawrence and Adams also received Golden Globe and Bafta nods with Adams getting the Golden Globe and Lawrence the Golden Glove AND the Bafta. And Robert De Niro was very effective in his uncredited cameo role as a Florida mob boss. It was a small but sweet part.

Unlike some other directors, David O'Russell actively encouraged improvisation on set with much of the dialogue being ad-libbed. At times, this led to some strangely, long pauses as the actors weren't sure what they were going to say next, but at others it led to an authentic and realistic portrayal. After all, American Hustle is partially based on the true story of the FBI's abscam investigation.

This was definitely a good film. Although Bale, Cooper and Renner might be arguably bigger names, I think Amy Adams and Jennifer Lawrence were the true stars.

Sunday, 18 June 2023

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo review

 Number 423 on the top 1000 films of all time is David Fincher's 2011 remake of the Swedish 'The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.'

Mikhail Blomkvist (Daniel Craig) is a Swedish journalist who has lost everything in a libel case brought against him businessman Hans-Erik Wennerstrom. Businessman Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer) offers him a chance of redemption if Mikhail can solve the forty-year old disappearance of his grandniece Harriet. Mikhail enlists the help of emotionally damaged hacker Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara.)

TGWTDT was the latest offering in the Scandi-noir trend that was dominating the airwaves in the late 2000s and early 2010s. Based on Stieg Larsson's book of the same name, TGWTDT joins the tradition along with Jo Nesbo, Henning Mankell, the Bridge and the Killing. So much of Scandi-noir is rooted in its Scandinavian setting. The mighty mountains, imposing glaciers and remote settings lend themselves well to grisly murders. Frosty temperatures and frostier attitudes all add to the Gothic horror.

And that's why I found the accents so weird. I understand this is an American remake, so I wouldn't expect the actors to be speaking in Swedish, but the accents were inconsistent. Christopher Plummer did well, but Rooney Mara and Robin Wright, who played Mikhail's editor and occasional lover, less so. Daniel Craig didn't bother with one at all. He chose to do this, as the thought it would sound silly otherwise. And it did. Either have all the actors do accents or none of them.

Daniel Craig received star-billing for this well-crafted thriller, but Rooney Mara was the true star. She received a Best Actress nod and it was well-earned. Lisbeth Salander - an emotionally shut down, misanthrope would be a difficult character to play. How do you make her likable without making her annoying? But Rooney Mara brought an excellent amount of vulnerability to the role. And, of course, we have to talk about the horrific scenes where Salander was raped and sodomised. These were brutal, intense scenes and Mara was fantastic.

If I were to criticise the film for anything, it would be the ending. *Spoiler alert* After the main mystery is solved, Plummer rewards Blomkvist by providing him evidence that will help him take down Wennerstrom. However, the evidence proves fruitless. So, Salander helps by hacking him and discovering he is laundering money for organised crime. She then empties his accounts. It was all good, but it seemed like a strange addendum that didn't match the rest of the film. I guess they were bringing everything full circle, but it seemed like Fincher was setting up a second film, rather than finishing this one.

Nevertheless, TGWTDT was an expertly-crafted thriller with a career-high performance from Rooney Mara.

Sunday, 22 January 2023

Suspiria review

 Number 851 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Italian 1977 horror film Suspiria.

Suzy Bannion (Jessica Harper) is an American student who enrols in a prestigious ballet school in Germany. However, when staff and students alike start dying, she realises that the school is at the front of a supernatural conspiracy.

As was common for Italian films at the time, all sound was added in post-production. This meant that all the actors were dubbed. To say this was distracting would be a massive understatement. It very much broke the immersive nature of the film. And this also interfered with the sound mixing. At times, the dialogue was too quiet and, at others, the sound effects were too loud. The film opens in a massive storm, noisy enough to drown out the character's speech.

Perhaps I've been spoiled by modern-CGI, but the special effects looked dated. When the deaths do occur, the bodies look more like waxwork models. But technical aspects aside, this was a scary film. The setting of a ballet school was a refreshing change to the haunted houses which is usually par for the course. Suzy progressively gains more agency and becomes more likeable. Granted, while her friend Stephanie is being murdered, Suzy is drugged up and of little use. But she gains enough bravery/stupidity to go into the restricted area of the school and confront the head witch.

I also enjoyed the supernatural element. Slasher movies were popular in the seventies - Suspiria is sandwiched between the Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Halloween. Witches made a nice change to your deranged serial killer. And the film had some genuine scares. Instead of solely using jumpscares, David Argento created a tense and unsettling atmosphere from the word go. The original score performed by Italian progressive rock band Goblin sent the fear factor through the roof.

All in all, I did enjoy, if that's the right word, this 70's horror film. Weird dubbing aside, it had me on the edge of my seat. Will I be watching the 2018 remake? Maybe with my eyes closed.

Monday, 28 November 2022

BlacKkKlansman review

 Continuing my deviation from the top 1000 films of all time by reviewing Spike Lee's 2018 biographical crime comedy-drama 'BlacKkKlansman.'

Based on a true story and nominated for the Best film Oscar, BlackKklansman follows the story of Ron Stallworth (John David Washington.) Stallworth is the first black cop in the Colorado Springs police department. He starts to infiltrate the Ku Klux Klan led by David Duke (Topher Grace.) He is aided by his Jewish partner Philip "Flip" Zimmerman (Adam Driver) who attends Klan meetings while impersonating Ron.

Although BlacKkKlansman is set in 1970, it is as relevant now as it was back then. Race relations has always been a controversial topic in the USA especially in 2018. Spike Lee incorporated a lot of this cultural context into his film giving it a thematically powerful ending.  In 2017, in the wake of the Charleston Church Shooting, there were many movement to remove Confederate monuments from public spaces. One of these monuments was the Robert E. Lee statue in Lee Park, Charlottesville, Virginia. In response, a rally of alt-right and Neo-Nazis counter-protestors clashed with the protestors already there. This all culminated with one white supremacist driving his car into the crowd and killing activist Heather Heyer. I think that this context gives the film a special place in the cultural zeitgeist. This hatred is intrinsic within American culture. It always has been and maybe always will be.

However, I'm no cultural theorist or commentator so on with the review. I've watched quite a few films about race relations in the US from Green Book to the Help and Hidden Figures, which I am yet to review. And it's safe to say that BlacKkKlansman is far more in your face about its portrayal of racism. Rather than being subtle or understated, Lee goes straight for the throat. The KKK members are expectedly abhorrent especially the disgusting Felix Kendrickson, played brilliantly by Jasper Paakkonen. 

There is the showing of the racist film 'A Birth of a Nation,' liberal use of the N-word, numerous anti-semitic remarks, racist police accosting black activists and even the recounting of the horrific real-life lynching of Jesse Washington told by Harry Belafonte. All this made for uncomfortable but entirely necessary viewing. Lee brought the true nature of the 'black' experience to the forefront and forced us to absorb it whether we wanted to or not.

I have to also give full credit to lead actors John David Washington and Adam Driver, who was nominated for the Best Supporting Actor Oscar. They were brilliant in their roles. Ron Stallworth initially gains entry into the klan through telephone calls alone, but when it comes to going there in person, Flip assumes this role. Despite being Jewish himself and having to endure plenty of casual anti-semitism, he quickly ingratiates himself into the group. Driver definitely deserved the Best Supporting Actor nomination. 

I am reminded of Quentin Tarantino's Django Unchained. Leonardo Dicaprio was initially uncomfortable with playing such an overtly racist character, but Tarantino took him aside and said that if he doesn't 100% commit to the role audiences will hate him forever. He committed to the role and was brilliant. And so was Driver. I found him very meh in the Star Wars sequels, but he was great here. This was a far more mature and developed role and very much suited Driver's talents. Mahershala Ali might have won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for Green Book, but Driver was just as good.

John David Washington was also great as Stallworth. He had a difficult role to play - the first black policeman in Colorado dealing with his racist colleagues while also going undercover in the clan, but he played the role of a man caught between two worlds very well. He is a black man working for the police - an institution that many of his friends and even his activist girlfriend Patrice Dumas (Laura Harrier) declares as systemically racist. 

Topher Grace and Ryan Eggold who played Colorado KKK chapter leader Walter Breachway were also great. Their more restrained but no less abhorrent racism was a nice contrast to Felix's more overt racism.

If I were to criticise the film for anything, it would be that on occasion Spike Lee chose some odd shots and some editing techniques. It was like he was trying to be all gritty and artistic, but it just came across as silly. There was the split screen at the end, where Ron was revealing his true identity to David Duke over the phone, which looked like a comic book. But the penultimate shot made me laugh out loud over how silly it looked: Ron and Patrice are investigating a strange noise outside their apartment with their guns drawn. There is a dolly shot that makes it look like the actors are floating toward the camera. It's like they're on a travelator. 

But this was a great film. Spike Lee took a challenging and provocative subject matter and put it up front for all to see. This is a film that might leave you in shocked silence or maybe it will leave you thinking. But there is no way you will  be left unaffected by BlacKkKlansman. 

Tuesday, 1 November 2022

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button review

 Number 459 on the top 1000 films of all time is David Fincher's 2008 fantasy romantic drama 'The Curious Case of Benjamin Button.'

Benjamin Button (Brad Pitt) is a man who ages in reverse. Abandoned at birth due to his seemingly elderly appearance, he is adopted by the kindly Queenie (Taraji P.Henson) and Tizzy Weathers (Mahershala Ali.) As he ages chronologically, he appears to look younger and younger. Cate Blanchett stars as his love interest Daisy Fuller.

I would argue this film marked a maturation for both Brad Pitt and David Fincher. Fincher is primarily known for his thrillers like Fight Club, Se7en  and the Game. Yet this film marked a coming-of-age for him. A thriller is completely different game to a romantic drama - there's a whole new set of rules and Fincher played it well. I think you can argue that Fincher isn't a subtle director. His thrillers like Se7en take an unflinching look into the darker aspects of the human mind. However, here, he was far more nuanced and understated. None of the characters ever come across as two-dimensional or cliched. Thomas Button (Jason Fleyming) could have easily been the archetypal, neglectful father who abandoned his son, but you can see how guilty he feels about his actions and how he tries to make things right. 

Daisy Fuller could have been little more than a scorned woman. Her affections for Benjamin are initially rebuffed. Later on, he leaves her after they have a child together as he doesn't want to become a burden. However, Daisy later reconnects with Benjamin after he has regressed into a teenager and takes care of him as a baby. It is her diaries. detailing the nature of her and Benjamin's relationship, that fuel the narrative along. 

Fincher also balanced the drama and the comedy well. I certainly enjoyed the running joke of the man who was struck by lightning seven times.

And Brad Pitt is great in the leading role well-deserving of his Oscar nomination. Having starred in Fincher's Se7en and Fight Club and better known as an action movie star, he might not be your first choice for dramatic roles. But he plays Benjamin Button well. Benjamin could have been a caricature - a freak that everybody points and laughs at or he could have been a self-pitying victim. But he was neither of those things. Rather than being self-pitying, Benjamin Button takes pride in his appearance. He doesn't see it as a disability and refuses to let it get in his way of living his life. And he lives a great life from fighting in WW2 to travelling to India and Southeast Asia. He is an inspiring character to watch and a lot of that is down to Brad Pitt's great portrayal.

This film did surprise me. Based on their reputations, I certainly didn't expect David Fincher or Brad Pitt to be able to pull it off, but, boy, oh boy, did they prove me wrong.

Wednesday, 14 September 2022

The Game review

 Number 524 on the top 1000 films of all time is David Fincher's thriller 'the Game.'

Nicholas Van Orton (Michael Douglas) is a wealthy investment banker in San Francisco. He is also lonely with no family, except for his estranged younger brother Conrad (Sean Penn.) Conrad enrols Nicholas in a mysterious game as a birthday present. Upon accepting, Nicholas finds his life spiralling out of control.

What David Fincher achieved in this film is taking an inherently unlikeable character and making you root for him. Nicholas is set up as grumpy, old curmudgeon. Haunted by the memories of his father's suicide at the same age he is now, he has no friends or family, save for Conrad. Michael Douglas played the fish out of water well. Nicholas' progressively growing panic was palpable to see, as the game evolves from mild inconveniences in his life to life-threatening situations. it might be tempting to describe him as a Scrooge, although I'm not sure if he performs a 180. By the film's end, he isn't welcoming Bob Cratchitt to eat with Christmas dinner with him, but there is a definite softening to his character.

This is exhibited within the character of Christine (Deborah Kara Unger) who is a waitress at Nicholas' favourite restaurant. Upon spilling wine on him, Nicholas admonishes her and gets her fired from her job. However, the two are thrown together, as Christine is also caught up in the mystery. But, by the end, the two reconcile and go for coffee. Nicholas may not have fully transformed yet, but there is the potential to do so.

Having said all that, I don't think Sean Penn was anything special as the unhinged Conrad. Yes, he kick starts the action by sending his brother down this rabbit role, but this role could have gone to anyone. Except for a few key scenes, he doesn't really do much. I guess the only reason that Sean Penn was billed second was his star power, rather than the importance of his character.

Fincher did well in always keeping the mystery high. The audience is in as much in the dark about the true nature of the Game as Nicky. And this always keeps the tension high. We have morally duplicitous characters like Christine who becomes an unlikely ally until she isn't. And, as things get weirder, Nicholas is sure that he is embroiled in some big conspiracy against him. The truth behind it all, which I won't spoil here, is far more innocuous.

This was a thoroughly enjoyable film with some edge-on-the-seat action. Douglas was great, but I do think Penn could have brought more to the role.

Saturday, 3 September 2022

The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas review

 Number 474 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Holocaust film the Boy in the Striped Pyjamas (TBITSP.)

Bruno (Asa Butterfield) is an eight-year old boy from WW2 Berlin. When his father, SS officer Ralf (David Thewlis) is promoted, the family move to Poland where their new home borders a concentration camp. The adventurous Bruno discovers the camp and befriends another eight-year-old boy Schmuel (Jack Sanlon,) with neither boy aware of their true predicament.

Would it be fair to character this film as the Holocaust equivalent of Braveheart? Entertaining? Yes. Tragic? Most definitely. Historically accurate? Not so much. But I don't think that really mattered. This film isn't about being historically accurate; it's about retelling the horrors of the Holocaust from the perspective of childhood and the innocence that entails.

Since starting this challenge, I've seen my fair share of holocaust/WW2 films and they've all broken my heart. TBITSP didn't quite reach those levels, but it was still very powerful. And that could be down to how it was underplayed. Whereas films like The Pianist portray the unflinching brutality of the Holocaust, TBITSP is far more subtle. If you're going to tackle an issue as big as the Holocaust, I am adamant that you have to go hard or go home - anything else would be an insult. However, the understated nature of TBITSP made it very upsetting.

We see everything through the eyes of Bruno - at only eight he is too young to fully understand the complexities of the Holocaust. Even when Ralf hires a tutor, Bruno questions all of the propaganda he is being taught. Bruno's parents are keen to hide the truth from him, which I did find puzzling. I'm no expert, but I thought that children of Nazis would be brainwashed by anti-semitic propaganda from as soon as they could walk, but I guess this does make Bruno all the more innocent. The scenes where he is conversing with Schmuel, with neither boy fully understanding their situation, are laden with a subtext, and a dramatic irony that are impossible to ignore. Bruno thinks the prisoners are wearing pyjamas and having fun in a holiday camp while Schmuel thinks he'll be going home soon.

The illusion shatters in the worst possible way when Bruno burrows into the camp to help Schmuel find his father. Here Bruno's ideas are turned on their head. He discovers that there is no cafe and the inmates don't spend their time playing football. The film hurtles toward a shocking and distressing conclusion as all of the prisoners, including Schmuel and Bruno, are taken to the showers. The boys hold hands as the lights go out. For a film that is so understated, they nailed the ending. Hearing the prisoners screaming in the black was so much more terrifying than seeing their mangle corpses.

Lastly, I have to praise Rupert Friend who played the villainous Lieutenant Kurt Kotler. He was terrific as the sociopathic, boot-licking subordinate of Ralf. One minute he is all cute with Bruno and getting cosy with Bruno's older sister, the next, Kurt is beating a house slave for knocking over a glass of wine. Poor Pavel.

Although TBITSP isn't particularly realistic, it more than makes up for it with its subtle nature and ominous dramatic irony.

Tuesday, 23 November 2021

How to Train your Dragon review

 Number 168 on top 1000 films of all time is the animated film How to Train your Dragon.

  Hiccup (Jay Baruchel) is not your typical Viking. Scrawny and small, he is next to useless at defending his village from dragon attacks. His father Stoick the Vast (Gerard Butler) has all but given up hope. Determined to prove him and everybody else wrong, Hiccup erupts in dragon-slaying classes but when he meets a Night Fury dragon that he names Toothless, he soon discovers that everything he knew about dragons was wrong.

This film franchise has always passed me by and if it hadn't been for this challenge, I probably wouldn't have watched it. Having seen it, I can understand why. It was released in 2010, so perhaps if I had seen it when I was sixteen instead of twenty-six, I would have liked it more.

That's not to say the animation wasn't cute and the design of the dragons creative, but the film did leave a lot to be desired. For one, the storyline was very predictable. It was obvious that Hiccup would go from the scrawny runt to the unlikely hero who saves the day, which is exactly what happened. All because he has been the first character ever to have taken the time to understand the dragons.

It was also obvious that Stoick would go from the badass warrior dragon-slayer determined to wipe out every single dragon to the soft-hearted father who saves Toothless' life. Both were predictable character arcs.

Apart from Hiccup, the characters were all very vaguely drawn. Hiccup trains with a supporting cast who were all generic and blended into one another. Although voiced by famous comedy actors like Jonah Hill, T.J Miller, Christopher Mintz-Plasse and Kristen Wiig, this did not make the characters anymore distinctive.

Even Hiccup's supposed love interest Astrid (America Ferrera) was more of an archetype, dare I say, cliche of the strong, independent woman with a softer side, than an actual character. The humour was also very immature and juvenile with an over-reliance on fart jokes that did little to make me laugh. And I was very confused by the weird mixture of Scottish and American accents. All of the adults were Scottish and the teenagers American. Why not make them all Scottish or all American?

For kids, I can definitely see why this movie would appeal but to a grumpy old-fogey like me, it was nothing special.