The Bourne Supremacy

 Number 553 on the top 1000 films of all time is the action-thriller The Bourne Supremacy.

Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) is a former CIA agent with amnesia. After the events of the last film, he is trying to live a normal life in India with his girlfriend Maria (Franka Potente.) However, he is forced out of hiding when he is framed for a crime he didn't commit. Joan Allen, Julia styles, Brian Cox and Karl urban co star.

I've never been a fan of this film series and this film did little to move the needle. The main reason was that the characterisations and characters were paper-thin. Julia Styles's character of technician Nicky Parsons was little more than a snivelling wreck. Was she this much of a wet blanket in the first film? Or did director Paul Greengrass want to do Julie Styles dirty? Karl Urban wasn't particularly menacing as a Russian hit man either. He had more of a look of an overgrown emo rather than a ruthless murderer.

This brings me onto the film's plot focussing on Jason and Marie or rather Jason as Marie

*spoilers*

is killed by mistake early in the film. Emo Karl Urban was trying to kill Jason but he killed Marie instead. In the Bourne Identity I was highly critical of their relationship, declaring they had no romantic chemistry. The same applied here. 

As well as trying to clear his name, Bourne also wants to revenge on emo Karl Urban which I would have found believable if their relationship was more believable. It doesn't help that he doesn't seem that cut up about her death. He doesn't even shed one tear and only remembers her death when it's convenient. It was very much the fridging the wife cliche done very badly. 

Matt Damon was nothing special as Bourne. I guess he did the action sequences well enough but he was fairly wooden when it came to anything more emotional. Any redeeming factors? Brian Cox's inclusion as a corrupt CIA chief? Cox is usually very good in whatever he's in but not even he could save this generic action film.

The Bourne Supremacy? There was nothing supreme about this film at all.

Frost/Nixon review

 Number 552 on the top 1000 films of all time is Ron Howard's historical drama Frost/Nixon.

1970's America was rocked by the Watergate Scandal which saw Richard Nixon resign the presidency. To rehabilitate this his image, Nixon (played by Frank Langella) gives a series of tell-all interviews by English has-been talk-show host David Frost (Michael Sheen.) Kevin bacon, Rebecca Hall, Matthew McFayden and Sam Rockwell all co-star in this dramatisation of the true-life story.

Forst/Nixon reminded me of another Watergate-themed film: All the President's Men which focussed on the actual investigation into Watergate. Although I like that film on the first watch, subsequent rewatches proved it hard-going and confusing. I thought it would be a similar case here, but I'm glad to say I was wrong.

Frost-Nixon was a surprisingly gripping film especially so as it was a very talkey film, by its nature. Ron Howard employed a docu-drama esque style where he had talking heads speaking directly to the camera and providing helpful bits of exposition for dopey viewers like me.

However, what this film hinged on the most was the strength of its two leads. Sheen and Langella certainly delivered the goods. Initially, Frost seems like a deer in the headlights, woefully unprepared, as he allows Nixon to dominate the conversation. He is less Jeremy Paxman and more Graham Norton, but as the interview progresses we see his confidence build.

Frank Langella was also a worthy opponent. He was great as Richard Nixon. He rightly deserved a Best Actor nomintation, which paired well with the Tony Award he received for the original stage production of the film. Frost/Nixon began life as a theatre play written by Peter Morgan who also wrote the screenplay, receiving an Oscar nomination. True he took some creative license, but he still crafted an interesting script.

If I were to criticise anything, it would be Rebecca Hall's inclusion as Frost's girlfriend Caroline Cushing. Cushing was a rather boring and pointless character. Wait sorry. She did buy cheeseburgers for Frost.

That aside I did enjoy Frost/Nixon. it was a surprising watch but a welcome one to be sure.

The Sandlot review

 Number 551 on the top 1000 films of all time is the sports coming-of-age drama 'The Sandlot.'

Scotty Smalls (Tom Guiry) is the new kid on the block. Struggling to make friends, he reluctantly begins playing baseball with a group of eight neighbourhood kids led by the popular Benny Rodriguez (Mike Vitar.)

The Sandlot reminded me of the The Goonies. You had a group of little boys finding out the real treasure was the friendship they made along the way. There were plenty of shenanigans and misadventures which makes the audience pine for their youth.

Except the Goonies was better as instead of having four or five annoying pre-pubescent boys who couldn't stop laughing, you had eight of them. At times I wanted to watch this film on mute, they were so annoying. And they weren't particularly well-characterised. Except for Scotty and Benny, they all blended into one.

That's not true. I'm being unfair. You could distinguish the characters on how annoying they were. You had the two brothers Timmy Timmons (Victor Dimattia) and Tommy "Repeat" Timmons (Shane Obedzinski) with Tommy repeating everything his brother said. Then you had Michael "Squints" Palledorous (Chauncey Leopardi) who tricks the older lifeguard into kissing him. The two later go onto get married. In today's age, this would more likely result in a restraining order. #metoomovement. It was all so weird and unrealistic. God and then there was the super obnoxious Hamilton "Ham" Porter (Patrick Renna.)

Speaking of unrealistic, you had the unrealistically naive and innocent protagonist Scotty. I get that he is a completely inept sportsman. I get it. I'm no better. I write reviews nobody reads instead of batting in the MLB but unlike Scotty I can catch and throw a ball. It was so silly that he couldn't do this. Plus, how has he never heard of Babe Ruth? I'm a limey with no interest in baseball and even I've heard of him.

The second half of the film also functioned on a really bad plot hole. *spoilers*

During one game, the kids bat their baseball into a garden patrolled by a fearsome English Mastiff called the Beast. They are unable to retrieve it and their game stops. However, Scotty keeps the game going by stealing his stepdad's baseball signed by Babe Ruth.

This is great until this too goes into the mastiff's lair. And as it was signed by Babe Ruth, they have to get it back. But so nobody notices the difference at home, the boys raise ninety cents by selling bottles and they buy a temporary replacement ball.

Why didn't they just do that in the first place? It's not like it was difficult for them to raise the money? One scene Benny was telling them to find bottles. The next they're buying a new ball. There was no reason for Scotty to steal his dad's baseball.

Don't get me wrong, there are some great coming-of-age dramas out there...Stand By Me, Mud, City of God if you want to call it that. But the Sandlot was not one of them.

Show me Love (Fucking Åmål) review

 Number 547 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Swedish coming-of-age romantic-comedy.

Agnes Ahlberg (Rebecka Lilijeberg) is a sixteen-year-old recluse. She has no friends but is secretly in love with her classmate Elin (Alexandra Dahlstrom) a party girl who hates the boring town of Amal where both girls live.

Show Me Love was Lukas Moodysson's directiorial debut. He would go onto to direct the tragic Lilya-4-ever which also starred a lost, naive female protagonist, although in far more dire circumstances tha here. To be honest, Lilya-4-ever was a far better film.

Show Me Love had the look of a low-budget teen drama. Considering its budget was nine million Swediwsh Kroner, under £80,000 (no doubt less than this thirty years ago) I guess there's a reason it looks like a test version of Skins.

Of course a low budget doesn't dictate a film being bad. However, it helps if the film has likeable characters. Both Agnes and Elin were annoying. Agnes bemoans being lonely and friendless but is rude to the only other girl who turned up to her birthday party, which quite rightfully, comes back to bite her on the arse. Meanwhile, Elin comes across as incredibly shallow.

Yes, of course, they're teenagers and that's what teenagers are like, but it also didn't make their characters heroes I wanted to see succeed. I'll concede that they became more likeable as they were allowed to mature and develop. It's just a shame that they were so damn annoying at first.

The film also had a strange ending scene as if Moodysson didn't know how to end his debut.

*spoilers*

Cornered in the school bathroom with fears of bother their relationship and sexuality being outed, the two girls choose to out their relationship to the school and are all the better for it. This would have been a good ending except then there was another scene of them drinking chocolate milk in Agnes' room. Very weird and ultimately pointless. It would have been far more powerful to have ended it with the outing scene.

Maybe I should give Moodysson some grace. This was his debut after all. Without this film, he would never have gone onto direct the heartbreaking Lilya-4-ever.

Goodbye Lenin review

 Number 541 on the top 1000 films of all time is the German tragicomedy 'Goodbye Lenin.'

On the eve of the fall of the Berlin Wall, the emotionally fragile mother and staunch Socialist Unity Party supporter Christiane Kerner (Katrin Suss) falls into a coma. Upon waking up, the wall has fallen and Germany has been re-unified. However, her son Alex (Daniel Bruhl) resolves to hide the truth, in case, the shock kills her.

I think it's quite easy to compare this film to the later German film: the Lives of Others. Released three years later, this film is also set in the newly-reunited Germany although with a far more dour tone.

Not necessarily a bad thing, but Goodbye Lenin had a far more hopeful and optimistic tone. The Lives of Others was all about exposing subterfuge, but Goodbye Lenin hinged on subterfuge. Most of all from Alex who is desperately trying to keep the truth from his mother even as his web of lies spins out of control.

Alex was played by Daniel Bruhl in his breakout role. Since then he has gone onto appear in Hollywood films like Inglorious Basterds and Rush. But Goodbye Lenin was where everything started. Alex's dedication into keeping the truth from his mother soon grew into an unhealthy obsession that threatens to tear apart his relationship with hi sister Ariane (Maria Simon) and girlfriend Lara (Chulpun Kamatova.)

Although the charade starts with the best of intentions it soon unravels as Christiane starts getting glimpses of the real world. No amount of fake news reports that Alex films especially will do anything to stop Christiane from discovering the truth.

All this would be good and well expect this narrative work is undone in the film's final act. After Christiane recovers well enough to visit the family dacha and reveal a devastating family secret, she suddenly relapses and has to return to hospital. It all just seemed a rather cheap way to generate conflict.

That being said, I did enjoy Goodbye Lenin. I enjoyed its hopeful, optimistic tone and it did launch Daniel Bruhl's career. Although it wasn't Oscar-nominated it quite rightly won other awards like Cesars and Lolas.

Kramer Vs Kramer review

 Number 540 on the top 1000 films of all time is the legal drama Kramer vs Kramer.

Ted Kramer (Dustin Hoffman,) his wife Joanne (Meryl Streep) and their son Billy (Justin Henry) seem to be the perfect happy family. That is until wife Joanne abruptly says that she is leaving her family meaning Ted has to balance his advertising job and being a single father. Later on, Joanne returns and demands custody of Billy. A vicious battle ensues.

Kramer Vs Kramer explores a number of different themes like fathers' rights, single parenthood and gender roles. There are some who would argue that it portrays the difficulties that single fathers have in raising their family. Others would say that single fathers do exactly the same as single mothers do except they demand a lot more praise for it. The film does well in not taking any particular side but instead leaves the audience to make their own decisions.

At first Ted Kramer seems like a bad father - stressed out at doing well in his new advertising job, he struggles in balancing his new responsibilities as a single father. Meanwhile, Billy hates living with his father and wants nothing more than for his mum to come home. The tensions lead the two to fight a lot. Whether you sympathise with Ted or not depends on what side of the aforementioned debate you land on,  but I think Hoffman did well in making him an objectively understandable, if not sympathetic, character. You understand his irascibility even if you don't agree with it. Hoffman won his first of two acting Oscars for this role and it was well-earned.

Justin Henry was also very good in his debut acting role which went onto land him a Best Supporting Actor nomination. He had a natural chemistry with Hoffman which led to them being able to easily improvise many of the film's most famous scenes together like the ice cream for dinner scene. And just like Ted, while you might not find Billy sympathetic, you at least understand why he is acting the way he does.

Rounding out the cast is Meryl Streep. While she was great, earning the first of her three Acting Oscars, her character of Joanne was the weakest part of the film. Compared to her husband and son, she is quite shallow. The film doesn't take the same time to really delve into her motivations. We get a vague idea that she lost her self-confidence in her marriage. Having found herself again, she decides to take her son back. However, because she is largely absent for most of the film, I didn't find her very believable. Her decision to suddenly return sounded a little contrived like Robert Benton needed a new source of conflict after Ted and Billy reconcile their differences. But Benton went onto win the Best Directing Oscar while the film itself won Best Picture along with the acting wins, so what do I know?

What I do know is that this was a powerful film. It takes a neutral position and never talks down or preaches to its viewer. Instead it leaves them to make their own decision. Who do you think Billy should live with? His mum or his dad? Let me know in the comments below.

Adaptation review

 Number 538 on the top 1000 films of all time is the metafictional comedy-drama Adaptation.

Adaptation follows real-life screenwriter Charlie Kauffman (Nicholas Cage) as he struggles to adapt Susan Orleans' book 'The Orchid Thief' to the screen. Not even his identical twin brother Donald (also played by Cage) can help him. An interwoven subplot sees Susan Orleans' (Meryl Streep) process behind writing book including an attraction to John Laroche (Chris Cooper) a horticulturalist whose arrest for poaching orchids was the inspiration for Susan's book.

If there was a list for the top 1000 zaniest films of all time than Adaptation would surely be number one. The metafictional nature of the film ensures that you are in for an entertaining if somewhat convoluted ride. It is a film that centres on the topic of writing films itself. And its subject matter is Charlie Kauffman (who also wrote the screenplay.) Charlie Kauffman himself is portrayed as socially anxious and incredibly neurotic unlike his more confident twin brother Donald.  The film opens with a behind-the-scenes clip of Kauffman's famous film Being John Malkovich and only gets weirder from there as we see the intense writer's block that forms upon his struggles to adapt the Orchid Thief.

Nicholas Cage plays the Kauffman twins (although Donald is fictional.) Cage is a strange actor. At times he is capable of brilliance like when he won an Oscar for Leaving Las Vegas, but at other times he is so incredibly over-the-top. In this role, I think he managed to balance both traits well. At times, you can truly understand the pain that Kauffman is experiencing as well as his alienation from life. At other times, you can see the stranger side of Cage coming out especially in scenes where he is acting against himself. I guess his zany portrayal matched the zany nature of the film.

More enjoyable was Meryl Streep as the emotionally conflicted Susan Orleans. She develops a begrudging affection for Laroche and eventually becomes his secret lover. She brought a lot of emotional gravitas to the role. And her actions propelled us into the rather chaotic final act which was surprisingly gripping compared to the rest of the film.

*spoiler alert*

Donald Kauffman is also a screen-writer - far more successful than his twin brother. Charlie asks Donald to interview Susan while pretending to be his brother. Donald becomes suspicious of Susan and secretly follows her where he discovers she is having an affair with Laroche. Susan doesn't want to be exposed so she resolves to kill Donald. A big chase through a swamp ensues involving guns, alligators and a fatal car crash. It was an unexpected end to an unexpected movie.

Lastly, I will give a quick shoutout to Chris Cooper who won the Oscar for playing John Laroche. It was certainly a good performance as he provided some nuance to a strange character.

Strange is probably the best way I  could describe Adaptation. It was a thoroughly off-kilter and zany movie.