The City of Lost Children review

 Number 566 on the top 1000 films of all time is the science-fantasy film 'The City of Lost Children.'

The City of Lost Children is set in a dystopic city where the monstrous being Krank (Daniel Emilfork) is kidnapping children to steal their dreams. One such child is Deree, the adopted little brother of carnival strongman, One (Ron Perlman.) He joins a group of orphans to stop Krank's terrible plans.

It's easy to compare The City of Lost Children to the earlier 1991 post-apocalyptic film Delicatessen. Both were French, both have a colourful set of characters and both are seriously weird.

You can make similar comparisons to Terry Gillam's films: Brazil, Twelve Monkeys and Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. All of these films take surrealism to a whole other level. They also take incomprehensible plots to a whole new level. I'm tempted to echo famed film critic Roger Ebert who said that while the visual design was great, the plot line was extremely confusing. I wouldn't be honest if I said I knew what happened during the film. While you can't fault the cinematography and production design, the plot is absolutely baffling. I'm not sure if I can really explain it or talk about it now.

And Ebert was right to praise the film's stylistic design. There is a host of memorable characters from the conjoined twins leading the group of orphans to the cyclops that act as Krank's enforcers to the other oddities that Krank's mad scientist creator also made. There is also a decaying steampunk aesthetic like something you would see in the Matrix. I just wish I understood the story that went along with it. I'm still not sure what Ron Perlman was doing in the film.

I wasn't sure about anything in this film. It was like a mad fever dream. And dreams never make the most sense.

Boy A film

 Number 569 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2007 British drama 'Boy A.'

Jack Burridge (Andrew Garfield) is a young man with a troubled past. Released from prison after a long sentence, he desperately tries to go straight with the help of his social worker Terry (Peter Mullan.)

Boy A was a gritty social drama based on the book of the same name by Jonathan Trigell. It has been compared to the horrific James Bulger murder and, indeed, Trigell was inspired by the resulting media frenzy. The comparisons were clear to see: there are two troubled pre-teens Jack Burridge and his deeply problematic friend Philip Craig (Taylor Doherty.) The two commit and awful crime (more on this in a  bit.) Ten years later, Jack is released into society.

Andrew Garfield played Jack in his debut film role and while he was rough around the edges, you could see the glimmers of the film star he would go onto become. Jack spent his adolescence in prison. Upon release, he is naturally shy and socially awkward. Garfield played the role with grace making Jack endearing despite his secret, dark past. Despite everything that happened, he wants to do better and atone for his crimes.

Equally good was Peter Mullen as social worker Terry. Everybody knows that social work is a thankless job and it's common for social workers to burn out and give up. Yet Terry never gives up on Jack. No matter how hard it gets. Peter Mullen stopped Terry from being just another beaten-down social worker.

Yet a lot of this was undone in the film's final act. Spoilers to follow. Flashbacks throughout the film hint to why Jack spent his adolescence in prison. The true reason is revealed to be he and Philip murdering and possibly assaulting a fellow school-girl  - although it isn't revealed who did what. I had grown to like Jack, but then it's released that he possibly killed a little girl. It feels a bit gross to have rooted for a character like that now.

We don't see Philip in Jack's adult life as it's revealed he died in jail - whether by his own hand or another is up for debate. However, what we know for certain is that Jack and Philip were best friends. I was expecting the troublemaker Philip to be attacked or killed and Jack to take revenge in a crime of passion. This would have been a somewhat justifiable motive. Not the murder of a little girl.

The weak ending aside, Boy A was a good film with a strong debut from Andrew Garfield.

Remember the Titans review

 Number 573 on the top 1000 films of all time is the biopic sports-drama 'Remember the Titans.'

Remember the Titans is based on a true story. It is set in 1970's Virginia. In an effort to successfully integrate the T.C Williams High School, the school board initially hires Herman Boone (Denzel Washington) to coach the black football team, before deciding he should integrate the black and white teams. He is aided by the school's former coach Bill Yoast (Will Patton.) Ryan Hurst and Ryan Gosling co-star.

Remember the Titans should have been like a shot of adrenaline, yet another painful reminder of the US's racial history where the audience are brought face to face with the country's terrible past. It should have been like a slap to the cheek. Instead it was like being tickled with a feather duster. There was no grit. No bite. Nothing beyond the lofty ideals. It reminded me of Crash and its over-simplified take on race relations.

I think much of this can be put down to how Remember the Titans was a Disney film. It suffered terribly because of the studio. As it was Disney, it needed to be a family-friendly story that stripped away all the nuance and hard-hitting social commentary especially on the topic of racism. Other than the odd racial slur, it felt like a coming-of-age drama with the odd song or too.

You can't really fault Denzel Washington for this. He did his best with a cheesy script, but he's been in much better similar films like Glory. Less good were some of his co-stars. I get that Ryan Hurst was young and this was long before his winning roles in Sons of Anarchy and The Walking Dead, but he was pretty wooden as the football captain Gerry Bertier. His romance with his girlfriend was pretty boring too even as we see her rejecting him because of how he embraces integration.

While Ryan Gosling was only a supporting character, I was expecting him to do more than just dance. It was difficult to believe that he would go on to become one of Hollywood's greatest leading men. But at least the Ryans looked like high-schoolers. Ethan Suplee who played Louie Lastik was the oldest sixteen year old I had ever seen. His receding hairline did little to help things.

As for the black footballers like Ronnie "Sunshine" Bass (Kip Pardue) and Jerry "Rev" Harris (Craig Kirkwood,) they were similarly under-developed and one-note. I think the script did a lot of their characters a big disservice especially when they should have been the main stars.

But we cannot blame the cheesy, over-simplified script for everything. Ultimately, this was a Walt Disney misfire - a misguided attempt to deliver what should have been a hard-hitting piece of social commentary in the cheesiest most sanitised way possible.

The Producers review

 Number 574 on the top 1000 films of all time is Mel Brook's black-comedy 'The Producers.'

Max Bilaystock (Zero Mostel) is a has-been Broadway producer desperately searching for his next hit. Leo Bloom (Gene Wilder) is a naive and neurotic accountant hired to audit Max's books. Together the two cook up a scam to make them rich. To this end, they produce a play called "Spring Time for Hitler," which celebrates the life of the notorious dictator.

The Producers was Mel Brooks' directorial debut. He won the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay. He later went onto win the EGOT, as well as directing very funny films like Blazing Saddles and Robin Hood: Men in Tights. I was expecting a lot, but I was disappointed.

Sure I could see the blackness - Mel Brooks has said the only way to get back at genocidal maniacs like Hitler is to laugh at them. Except I didn't laugh at all. Not because I was offended by the risque subject matter, but because it just wasn't funny. The jokes either didn't land or were drawn out longer than was funny.

I also didn't rate the lead actors either. Gene Wilder was a frequent collaborator of Mel Brooks, going onto star in Young Frankenstein and Blazing Saddles. He was a funny man, but here he was painfully over-the-top. I understand that Leo Bloom was a deeply neurotic character, but Wilder took the neuroticism to an obnoxious level.

I didn't think Zero Mostel was much better as the hapless Broadway producer. He was similarly over-the-top and annoying. After a while, I became annoyed whenever I saw him on screen. The same went with Wilder. Considering both of them were the main characters, this was not a good thing.

I really wanted to like the Producers; I love Robin Hood, Men in Tights, but the Producers was a complete directorial debut dud.

Mad Max review

 Mad Max does not feature on the top 1000 films of all time. However, its sequel does. It only made sense that at some point I would go back and watch the original.

Mad Max is set in a post-apocalyptic, near-future Australia where law and order has all but collapsed. Motorcycle gangs rule the road while the few remaining police try to keep control. One such officer is the maverick Max (Mel Gibson) who swears revenge on the bikers after they kill the policeman. 

Upon watching this I could see why it wasn't on the top 1000 films of all time. Granted some of my criticisms can be attributed to the film's meagre 350k budget, but a film doesn't need a large budget to be a good film.

Firstly, the genre of the film didn't match the content. For the post-apocalyptic film, the Australian roads and infrastructure was remarkably intact. Reportedly this was because the post-apocalyptic aspect was little more than an after-thought. Director George Miller couldn't afford lots of extras and half-destroyed set pieces, so he made the film post-apocalyptic. He also couldn't afford stunt performs, so the lead actors largely did this own stunts.

Speaking of lead actors, Miller also lacked the budget for high-profile stars hence why a twenty-one year old Mel Gibson was cast as Max. I think there's a reason why Mel Gibson has won Oscars for directing and producing. Like other directors/actors, he is much better as the former than the latter. He was rather hammy as Max.

Across the board, the acting wasn't great. The villains in the motorcycle gang soon blended into one. It didn't help they were also lumbered with clunky dialogue and strange acting choices like how the bikers would make weird animal noises. Joanne Samuel was also pretty bland as Max's wife Jessica, but in fairness, Jessica had all the charisma of a stale ham sandwich.

Ultimately, I was left disappointed by Max Max. Considering it launched a massive world-wide franchise I was expecting something more but I was left with very little.  

The Purple Rose of Cairo review

 Number 562 on the top 1000 films of all time is Woody Allen's fantasy romantic-drama 'The Purple Rose of Cairo.'

Set in Depression-era New-Jersey, 'the Purple Rose of Cairo' follows cinephile Cecilia (Mia Farrow) seeking escapism from her abusive marriage to brutal husband Monk (Danny Aiello) through frequent visits to the movies. While watching the Purple Rose of Cairo, she falls in love with archaeologist Tom Baxter (Jeff Daniels) who also falls in love with her and leaves the film world to see her.

My long-term reader(s) will know that I'm not a fan of Woody Allen films. They're not funny and Woody Allen always plays the same character. And we're not even going into his numerous controversies. Sufficed to ay, I was not expecting to enjoy the Purple Rose of Cairo. However, I was pleasantly surprised.

I wouldn't go so far to say I enjoyed the Purple Rose, but I also didn't outright despise it. It helped that Woody Allen didn't appear in his film like he usually does. And, when he does, he is always playing the same character - a middle-aged, neurotic, Jewish comedian/writer. Basically he's playing himself.

Instead you had Mia Farrow in the lead and she was fine. She was inoffensive and rather charming. She brought an enjoyable wide-eyed innocence to Cecilia. But despite starring a naive starlet, she soon found the courage to lead her abusive husband Monk.

Monk was played by Danny Aiello who I found disappointing. This was six years before he gave an Oscar-nominated performance in Spike Lee's 'Do the Right Thing.' He was much more convincing there than here. Sure he was menacing, but only in so far as romantic-comedy villains can be. At least he had more charisma than Jeff Daniels who was a bit of a wet blanket as Tom Baxter.

Although the film's concept was novel enough with plenty of meta-humour - not only does Tom Baxter become self-aware, but so do the rest of the characters in Purple Cairo. I don't think it was enough to sustain a whole film. Despite how the runtime was only a paltry eighty-two minutes, I was longing for it to finish by the end. Some of that was down to the clunky dialogue too.

Like I say, I actually liked the Purple Rose of Cairo. It was one of Woody Allen's least inoffensive films, but that isn't saying much really.

The King of Comedy review

 Number 556 on the top 1000 films of all time is Martin Scorsesee's black-comedy film 'The King of Comedy.'

Rupert Pupkin (Robert De Niro) is an up-and-coming stand-up comedian. He wants nothing more than to be a world-wide comedy star. After a chance encounter with successful comedian and talk-show host Jerry Langford (Jerry Lewis) which results in Pupkin being invited onto his show, Pupkin then develops a dangerous obsession with the comedy star.

In 2019, Todd Philipps made Joker with Joaquin Phoenix in the lead role. Upon release, it was instantly compared to the King of Comedy and with good reason. Both main characters are paranoid comedians. Both have Robert De Niro, although in Joker, he is playing the Jerry Lewis role. And both films were absolutely terrific.

Just like Arthur Fleck in Joker, Rupert Pupkin is a dangerously unreliable narrator. How much can you trust anything he says? He goes through the film in a paranoid delusion believing that he is Jerry Langford's' best friend when that is far from the case at all. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I wonder whether Rupert met Langford at all or whether it was just another paranoid delusion. Either way, it was a great comment on society's obsession with celebrity culture that has always existed.

And that leads me to Jerry Lewis' perfect casting as Jerry Langford. As one half of the iconic Martin and Lewis partnership, you can't imagine anyone else playing one of the US' greatest comedians. Or rather I should say a disaffected comedian who no longer has the patience for crazed fans.

Speaking of crazed fans, that brings us to Robert De Niro who, in some ways, played a similar role to his earlier Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver. Both men were dangerously unhinged, but Pupkin was all too believable. De Niro was convincing as the crazy superfan who would stop at nothing to achieve his goals. He was the literal embodiment of every toxic fandom ever.

I thoroughly enjoyed the King of Comedy. The lead actors were great and I loved the delicious dramatic irony. One of Scorsesee's best films for sure.