Apocalypse Now Review

SPOILER ALERT

Click here to go to my previous review of the Pianist.

"I love the smell of Napalm in the morning."

Number 49 on the top 1000 films of all time is Francis Ford Coppola's 1979 epic adventure war film Apocalypse Now.

How it all goes down:

Set in the height of the Vietnam War, Martin Sheen plays Captain Benjamin L. Willard who is tasked with assassinating Colonel Walter E. Kurtz (Marlon Brando) who has gone insane and commands his own Montagnard troops in Cambodia.  Accompanying Captain Willard are a Navy Boat Patrol commanded by "Chief" (Albert Hall) and crewed by Lance (Sam Bottoms,) "Chef" (Frederic Forrest) and "Mr Clean" (Laurence Fishburne in his first major film role.)

What worked:

Taking Saving Private Ryan as a prime example, I think that any good war film should do two things.  It should portray an evocative, powerful and gut-wrenching picture of war and it should demonstrate the loyalty and camaraderie that soldiers share with each other.  Apocalypse Now ticks both of these boxes.  As well as this, the location and set pieces are great too.  Filmed in the Philippines, the surrounding landscape and scenery are gorgeous.

The Vietnam War cost the lives of almost 4 million Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, American and many more soldiers and civilians, so there is no doubt that the war was bloody and destructive.  The film is just as horrifying.  Apocalypse Now contains a number of great action sequences that convey the terror the war caused.  The standout example of this is the scene involving Robert Duvall as Lieutenant Colonel Bill Kilgore who encounters Captain Willard's group and agrees to escort them through the Viet-Cong held coastal mouth of the Nung River.  Even though, Duvall has less than 15 minutes screen-time, his scene is without doubt one of the best in the film.  Duvall's character is tyrannical, insane and terrifying.  Duvall spends much of his time screaming obscenities and he is great with it.  He also gives us some of the film's most quotable lines, such as "I love the smell of Napalm in the morning." This scene also contains one of the film's most notable sequences: a helicopter raid of the local area set to Ride of The Valkyries.  This sequence demonstrates the grotesque grandeur of war and does it well.  For example, when a local Vietnamese girl throws a grenade into the American ground troops, Kilgore responds by having her and the rest of her group shot down from the helicopter.  One can't help but sympathise with the Vietnamese girl who is very much the victim in the situation considering the Americans are the aggressors in her home and country.  Another brutal scene comes when the Willard and his crew inspect a civilian sampan for weapons.  Panicking, Mr Clean shoots all on board.  To prevent any further delay, Willard coldly shoots the last remaining survivor.

As the film progresses, we see Captain Willard and his men grow closer and closer together.  Whilst, Chief constantly comes to blows with Willard, he acts as a father figure for the seventeen year old Mr Clean and is greatly affected by his death.  Captain Willard is initially sworn to secrecy but after after the death of Chief, he comes clean with Lance and Chef.  I really enjoyed watching all of the soldier's interactions with each other.  Seeing how they're affected by each other's pain and suffering was visceral and felt realistic of how real soldiers would react.

What didn't work:

This notwithstanding, the film isn't perfect.  My main issue with it was its length.  At two and a half hours long, it does drag quite a bit and the pacing is uneven.  Whilst Coppola did well in building the suspense in certain scenes, this is completely undone in others.  For example, after Mr Clean's death scene, the survivors find an outpost held by French troops and decide to stop there to catch their breaths.  However, this led to all of the previously built up tension dissipating and turned the film into a bit of a snooze-fest.  I almost fell asleep!

Truth be told, I was also a bit disappointed with Marlon Brando's contribution.  As the only other thing I've seen him in is the Godfather, I was expecting great things from him and these expectations never materialised.  Even though he is the villain in the film, he never has much presence until the very end where when he does actually appear, he is mainly kept in shadow.  Whilst Coppola agreed to have Brando filmed in shadows, due to how he was overweight and drunk for most of the filming, this hurt Colonel Kurtz' characterisation.  Whilst it can be effective to keep some villains hidden in darkness, as it were, I argue that the same does not apply for Colonel Kurtz.

What was ugly:

This is a nitpick which is why I'm saving it for this segment.  I'm sure I'm not the only one who got confused between the three characters whose names all begin with C: Chef, Chief and Mr Clean.  Surely John Milus and Francis Ford Coppola could have been a little more creative.

This film is good.  It's good in its portrayl of war and the horrific violence that encompasses it.  It does well in its characterisation and demonstration of relationships.  It's just a shame that the pacing isn't consistent and the character names are a little confusing.  Anyway, in its portrayl of the death and destruction of the Vietnam War, without doubt, in America's struggle to rid Vietnam of communism, they left miles and miles of broken bodies and burnt crops.  With the death and destruction caused, the Vietnam War is the Godfather of war post WW2.


Click here to go to my previous review of the Godfather Part II

The Returned Episode 1: Camille

SPOILER ALERT

The Returned is a recent French supernatural series based on the 2004 film They Came Back.

Never since Lost has a show left me feeling so confused or with so many questions, although thankfully, the Returned has yet to include a smoke monster, an island that travels through time or hostile natives. Set in the Alpine town of Annecy in South-Eastern France, Les Revenants or the Returned, focuses on a group of people who return from the dead. Unaware of their recent demises, the show concentrates on their attempts to reintegrate themselves into their old lives. Far from your traditional zombie show, the Returned is a poignant, challenging and enjoyable journey exploring the inner-most workings of human loss. I have just finished watching the second season and to help my understanding of it, I have decided to rewatch the show from the beginning and review it.

Featuring a large cast and plenty of narratives, the Returned is complicated from the beginning. Each episode is driven by a particular character with other character-driven narratives converging around the main storyline. The eponymous character in this episode is Camille (Yana Pillartz) who is a fifteen year old school girl whose school coach mysteriously drives off a mountain road killing all on board. Camille wakes up with no memory of the event and returns home to find that her parents Claire and Jerome have separated and Claire is now seeing the morally ambiguous religious man Pierre who runs a homeless shelter called the Helping Hand. Camille has also left behind her identical twin sister Lena (Jenna Thiam) who has grown four years older without her. Lena spends all her time drinking in the Lake Pub where she meets Simon Delaitre (Pierre Perrier)

 Like Camille, Simon has no memory of his death and spends the episode trying to return home to his fiancee Adele and his daughter Chloe. Simon first starts looking for them at Adele's old residence where a hospice nurse called Julie now lives. Julie is a fairly young nurse who leads a dull and unexciting life. This all changes when a boy named Victor comes to visit her. Next to nothing is revealed about Victor who quite literally appears from out of the darkness and attaches himself to Julie with little explanation. Julie cares for an elderly man called Mr De Costa who is visited by his wife who has been dead for thirty five years. The last narrative revolves around the characters of Toni and Lucy. Toni is the landlord of the Lake Pub and Lucy is one of his barmaids. Other than performing sexual favours for men like Jerome, Lucy is also brutally attacked in an underpass on her way home from work. Annecy is also heavily reliant on the Lake Annecy and dam that surrounds their little town and worry is caused when it is discovered that the level of the water is dropping.

Whilst this sheer amount of storylines and characters makes the Returned challenging and difficult to follow at times, this is also one of its strongest points. It doesn't claim to make things easy for the viewer and expects them to work to piece together everything that's going on. It doesn't just tell the audience what they want to know, but instead drops little hints and clues. To trust their audiences to do this shows the faith that the showmakers have in their viewers and I think it's a great way to engage the audience.

Camille's narrative frames the episode. We see her return home and continue life as if she had never have died. She showers and eats as usual, completely unaware of her recent demise. By showing Camille's school coach drive off the mountainside, the episode starts explosively. This was a shocking image, but a gripping one. The great writing of Camille's storyline pushes the episode forward. We are shown powerful and evocative reactions to death and loss. Claire and Jerome are stunned into silence to see their daughter return, whilst Lena breaks down in a fit of terror upon seeing her sister seemingly alive again. This was harrowing to watch, but I did find it a little strange that Camille seeing her sister break down in front of her then broke down as well, but hell, what do I know about coming back from the dead?

However, whilst Camille's narrative is strong and forceful, it is the other characters and storylines that make this episode a great start to the series. One narrative that has since become my favourite is the Julie/Victor one, despite how they are only minor characters in this episode. Victor is without doubt the creepiest character of the show, but also one of the most endearing ones. Without explanation, he follows Julie home one night from checking up on Mr De Costa and then invites himself into her apartment all without saying a word. It is here that we see the beginnings of their relationship that I have grown to love so much. Julie is initially wary and quizzical of Victor, but she springs to his defence, when her nosy neighbour begins poking her beak in, going so far as to saying his name is Victor, which he unquestionably accepts, and saying that he is a relative of hers. Whilst Julie is confronting her neighbour, Victor silently takes her hand. After the neighbour is fended off, Julie repeatedly threatens to calls the police, but eventually decides against this. It is these two subtle moments that depict what this show does best: character relationships.

It is interesting that none of the Returnees are welcomed with open arms. Lena breaks down upon seeing Camille again and Adele is more terrified than happy at Simon's return. Mr De Costa is so unable to cope with his wife's return that he ties her up, burns down the house and then commits suicide by jumping from the Dam, thus begging the question that once you've returned, can you die again, but it is how the Returned engages with this type of emotion that makes it so great to watch. It is perfectly logical that once you've made peace with someone's death, it would be unsettling and upsetting to see them again, as if they had never died. This is what separates the Returned from shows like the Walking Dead. Camille, Victor, Simon and Mrs De Costa are not zombies with an appetite for human flesh, but regular people who want nothing more than to return to the lives, they were never aware that they had left. As much as I love the Walking Dead, the Returned is just a breath of fresh air amongst this onslaught of zombies that is currently dominating popular culture.

As can be expected, this episode is mainly set-up of the rest of the series. It introduces the major characters and narratives. Kudos is also owed to the music and location. As it is set in a mountain-town, the background scenery is unsurprisingly gorgeous and speaks volumes for the small town of Annecy. It is highly isolated yet close-kn it community, where everyone knows each other. Lena is able to help Simon find Adele, as Adele once tutored her. Julie is Mr De Costa's care nurse. What affects one member of the community affects it all. It is this sense of togetherness and family that makes the Returned great to watch.

The music and sound is also great. Scottish band Mogwai perform the theme tune, which is eerie, atmospheric and sets a strong precedent for the rest of the music. Whilst the Returned isn't explicitly a horror show, it is rooted in the supernatural and is certainly unnerving at times, especially in almost every scene involving Victor. In every possible way, the music serves to enhance the tense and fearful atmosphere.

The most frustrating thing about the Returned is how ti leaves everything so damn mysterious. Whilst we know that Camille, Victor, Simon and Mrs De Costa have returned, we don't know how and we don't know why. We don't know whether they have returned for good and we don't know how Simon, Mrs De Costa and Victor have died. In fact, we know next to nothing about Victor, especially why or how he's so inexplicably drawn to Julie. Whilst sitting up all of these unanswered questions is a great way of keeping the audience hooked, it is also incredibly exasperating for the audience. I want to know why Adele is so terrified at Simon's return. I want to know how Mrs De Costa died and most of all, I want to know why Victor appears in the middle of the exact road that Camille's school bus is driving on, causing it to veer off the mountainside killing all on board.

All in all, this was great start to the series. It was paced well with moments of action that punctuates more character-based scenes. The music and location is great and the characters are well-realised. I found the Returned to e fresh, intriguing and original and I am keen to watch more. If only it wasn't so damn mysterious, but hey, maybe some of these questions will be answered in the next episode. Ha! Fat chance! 

The Pianist Review

Number 48 on the top 1000 films of all time is the powerful but heart-breaking film: Roman Polanski's 'the Pianist.'

How it all goes down:

Based on the memoir of the real-life Holocaust survivor Wladyslaw Szpilman, the Pianist follows his struggles of living as a Jewish man, as he and his family are subjected to increasing anti-semitic discrimination with Nazi-occupied Poland.  Beginning in 1939 and continuing to 1945, the film documents the horrific conditions that Jewish people lived under and what some, like Wladyslaw Spzilman, had to do to survive.

What worked:

As you would expect any film about the Holocaust to, the Pianist is brutal, horrific, unrelenting and extremely powerful.  Quite rightly, it doesn't shy away from the horrors that happened during the Holocaust.  Instead, it explicitly and graphically portrays these horrors for the viewer.  This is where the film rises to new heights.  As a viewer myself, I have heard about the Holocaust and the awful conditions that Jewish people and others were subjected to, but to see it in front of me was something completely different.  One of the most brutal moments of violence is when Nazis storm into a Jewish household where a family is eating dinner.  They demand that all of the family stand up to salute Hitler, but one of the men is confined to a wheel-chair and thus unable to stand up.  Without hesitation, the Nazis take the man to the window and throw him out of it.  This was a powerful and visceral reminder of the merciless and sadistic nature of the Nazis.  However, this act of violence was just one in a long line of many that all served well to keep me thoroughly engaged with the film.

Even though this film did well in depicting the brutal conditions that the Jewish people lived under, it did even better at depicting the panic and desperation that they felt.  In one of the film's most powerful scenes, a starving man tries to steal, essentially a bowl of slop, out of the hands of a starving woman.  In their struggle, the slop falls to the floor and the man immediately gets down on his hands and knees and gobbles up the slop directly from the cold, hard ground.  This scene was uncomfortable to watch, but a brilliant depiction of the terrible conditions within the Warsaw Ghetto.

The Pianist also engages excellently with the theme of family.  Wladyslaw comes from a large family all of which are vastly loyal and protective of each other.  Another powerful scene comes when the Szpilmans are waiting to be transported to Treblinka, they spend the last of their money on a tiny bar of caramel that they share as a last meal.  Fortunately, Wladyslaw is rescued at the last minute by a friend in the Jewish Ghetto Police, but his family are sent to Treblinka to never be seen again.  This was a touching scene and one that demonstrates the importance of family.

Polanski's direction is magnificent.  His depiction of the Holocaust is immediate, raw and doesn't let up for a minute.  He kept me engaged throughout the whole film and it is to be strongly applauded that rather than holding the viewer's hand, he throws them straight into the deep end.  Quite rightly, the Holocaust is depicted in all of its horror.

The acting and music were also superb.  Adrien Brody who played Wladyslaw Szpilman quite deservedly won the Academy Award for Best Actor.  Unsurprisingly, the soundtrack is largely comprised of piano pieces all of which fit the film beautifully.  In places they are understated, in others they are powerful.

Originally, I was going to criticise this film for how it has a happy ending.  After Szpilman escapes from the Warsaw Ghetto, he is hidden by the Polish resistance movement.  However, during the 1944 Warsaw Uprising, Nazis discover Wladlyslaw's hideout and he is forced back into the ghetto where he hides from the Nazis in the attic of a ruined building.  There he is discovered by a German soldier called Hosenfeld who rather than reports him keeps him hidden and brings him food.  Initially, I would have preferred it if Szpilman had died at the end of the film, as I think it is only appropriate that a film concerning the tragic nature of the Holocaust should have a tragic ending.  However, in hindsight, I realise that if the film had had a sad ending, this would have been catastrophic for two reasons.

Firstly, it would have been gravely insulting to the memory of the real Szpilman who survived the Holocaust thanks to Hosenfeld, but, secondly, this would have undermined one of the greatest strengths of the film: how it demonstrates the complexity of human characters.  In the Pianist, it is not always clear which character is on which side and at times morality becomes blurred. For example, the Polish resistance worker Szales who is supposed to be looking after Szpilman pockets all of the money that he is collecting to supposedly buy food for Szpilman.  Through how Hosenfeld chooses to save Szpilman instead of shooting him on the spot portrays how it can be difficult to clearly distinguish between good and evil.  Just like how Hitler scapegoated the entire Jewish population for Germany's suffering after World War 1, we scapegoat every single German soldier who fought under his command as a murderous, brutal thugs who killed without conscience.  As this film quite rightly shows us, this was not always the case.  Things are never that black and white.

What didn't work:

Whilst I can't criticise the film for its ending, one thing I didn't like about the film was how it constantly jumped from scene to scene.  The film begins with Szpilman and his family in their home before they're moved to the Warsaw Ghetto, where Szpilman escapes and moves from home to home before finally being driven back to the ghetto.  I didn't like how the location changed so often, as it really took me out of the film as a viewer.  Just as I getting used to a new location and scene, it would change again.  I found these constant scene changes distracting and detrimental to the film as a whole.

Another thing I didn't like was how the film barely touched on the Warsaw Uprisings. Even though, they were an important backdrop to the Pianist, we were shown the build-up and aftermath of the uprisings and not the uprisings themselves.  I was vastly disappointed by this, as I felt that the Warsaw Uprising is too important of an event to be made light of.    

What was ugly:

In its portrayal of the atrocities of the Holocaust, the Pianist includes numerous scenes of brutality. The Pianist demonstrated how the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto were subject to routine violence including executions that happened every morning.  This has to be one of the ugliest scenes in the film.

Rating: 

Awesome.

This film is powerfully done.  It does not shy away from showing audiences the horrors of the Holocaust, rather forcing them to confront what happened.  It has great music, acting and does well to portray the complexities of human characters.  If only the Pianist had focused more on the Warsaw Uprising and hadn't jumped around so much, then it would have been superlative.  A great film, but perhaps one too traumatic to watch again.  Whatever way you look at it, Roman Polanski does brilliantly to really convey how for some victims of the Holocaust, it seemed like apocalypse now to them.

The Prestige Review

SPOILER ALERT

Click here to read my previous review of Cinema Paradiso

Whilst the Prestige is number 59 on the top 1000 films of all time, the reason I'm watching and reviewing it now is because I recently watched it with my friends Lucy and Callum.  Lucy recommended the film to us and I'm glad she did.  It was a great film.

How it all goes down:

Set at the end of the 19th century, the Prestige follows the story of two rival magicians: Robert Angier (Hugh Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Christian Bale.) The two magicians were originally friends and performed regularly together as shills for "Milton the Magician." Michael Caine also features John Cutter, as Milton's Ingenuier (stage engineer) and Piper Perabo plays Angier's wife Julia who is Milton's assistant.  When Julia dies in a stage illusion as the result of Borden's actions, Angier instantly begins to hate him and starts to bear a grudge.  The two quickly become rivals.  The rest of the film focuses on them constantly trying to outcompete the other by coming up with more and more original and new tricks.

The Good:

The Prestige was directed by Christopher Nolan.  He also directed Memento and Inception, so there was no doubt that this film would be a mind-boggler and a mind-boggler it certainly is.  The film begins with Alfred Borden going on trial for Robert Angier's murder and then there is an extended flashback explaining what has led to this event.  Nolan constantly cuts back and forth from the two different timelines, which does make the film slightly confusing and also difficult to follow.  However, I also argue that this is a strength of the film too.  I think that the cross-cutting makes the film more engaging for the viewer as it demands more of the viewer's attention.

Another reason why I liked the film was its subject matter.  I haven't seen too many films about magic so this was new and different for me.  That notwithstanding, the film isn't necessarily about magic.  It more focuses on the showmanship and misdirection that is present within magic.  It made me think of "magicians" like David Blaine and Derren Brown who aim to entertain an audience as much as they amaze them.  Also, I don't think showmanship and misdirection is something that I've ever really thought about that much, but I can see why it is vital to a magician's act.  

Like any Christopher Nolan film, the Prestige is multi-layered and works on a number of different levels.  I really liked how this film included Nikola Tesla, played by David Bowie, and Thomas Edison and commented on the rivalry that the two shared.  I thought that this was a good subplot, which reflected well the nature of the main plot.  

I also really liked how the film commented on themes of obsession and devotion.  It demonstrated how it is all too easy to become too focused on your work and as a result lose sight of all other aspects of your life.  For example, both Alfred Borden and Robert Angier lose wives and lovers, as a result of their fierce rivalry.  This rivalry culminates within the film's climax, where Alfred Borden determined to create the best trick ever, creates "the Transported Man trick," which sees him enter a cabinet on one side of the stage and then exit another cabinet on the other side.  Robert Angier becomes obsessed with trying to figure out this trick and showcasing his own version.  He initially uses a double, but then approaches Tesla to create a teleportation machine for him.  The film built to this moment well and it was extremely dramatic.

I thought the film ended well.  The twist was good, unexpected and very logical.  SPOILER ALERT! It is revealed that Alfred Borden performed the Transported Man trick through the help of his secret identical twin brother who has been masquerading as his assistant.  Afterwards, it is then revealed that the teleportation machine that Tesla created also creates exact duplicates of the matter it teleports.  Angier was using this method to do his own version of the Transported Man trick.  I thought that this was a sensible and clever way to end the film.

What didn't work:

Whilst this film is to be praised on its acting, direction, story-telling and characters, I feel that at times it skirted over some important issues which should have been focused on more.  For example, due to Alfred Borden's rivalry with Robert Angier, he drives a wedge in between he and his wife Sarah who becomes so distressed at his husband's actions that she is driven to depression, alcoholism and suicide.  Sarah's fate is only ever mentioned on screen and never explicitly shown in film.  This is definitely a significant event and I think it should have received more screentime than just one or two lines.

Another example sees Robert Angier falling in love with his new assistant Olivia Wenscombe (Scarlett Johansson) but he drives her into Borden's arms after he sends her to spy on Borden for him.  Again, Olivia and Borden's relationship is only really talked about the film and it isn't given a great deal of screentime.  I would have been very interested to watch the beginning of Olivia and Borden's relationship, rather than just see it be talked about.

What was ugly:

The ugly side of obsession and devotion is portrayed in this film when Alfred's twin voluntarily agrees to have two of his fingers chopped off to make the Transported Man trick seem realistic.  In an earlier part of the film, Borden performs the Bullet Catch trick, but loses two fingers, as the result of sabotage by Robert Angier.

Rating:

Awesome.

This was film was engaging, different and very original.  It was interesting and had great acting and characters.  I really liked the film's narrative style, but I felt that it the film left just a little too much out.  This notwithstanding it is still clear to see why magicians were held in such high regard in the 19th century, as much as pianists in the 21st century.

Cinema Paradiso Review

SPOILER ALERT

Click here to read my review of the Godfather

Number 47 on the top 1000 greatest films of all time is the 1999 Italian film: Cinema Paradiso (Cinema of Paradise)

How it all goes down:

The film opens on the main character Salvatore receiving the news that a person called Alfredo has died, which distresses him greatly.  The film the flashbacks to his childhood in the small Sicilian village Giancaldo a few years after World War 2.  Salvatore is depicted as a mischievous but kind-hearted child.  Whilst he underperforms in school, his greatest love is for the Cinema Paradiso, which is the heart of his small town.  The projectionist, Alfredo, mentors Salvatore in the ways of the cinema under the strict condition that once Salvatore is old enough, he will leave Giancaldo and the cinema to live the rest of his life.

What worked:

I really liked this film, as it was deeply touching on a personal level,  Set only a few years after World War 2, fears of Fascism and Communism are still high and the destruction that the war caused is still evident.  However, the cinema is the fixture of the small town and a source of great pride.  This is why I enjoyed the film,.  It was heart-warming to see this community that had been damaged by the war be able to untie around the Cinema Paradiso.  This was a really nice idea and one that worked on screen.  It was so effective due to all of the different characters.  For example, one of the audience members is a man who falls asleep during every single screening.  The other audience members then try to throw things into his open mouth and he wakes up cursing and screaming.  This is a running joke throughout the film and one that works well.

As well as uniting a community, this film works so well, as it highlights the cinema's effect on specific individuals.  For example, the cinema is deeply important to Salvatore as it gives him so much joy.  He fails academically, yet is able to succeed through working in the cinema.  The Cinema Paradiso is also a point of great pride for the projectionist Alfredo, as it gives him a sense of purpose.  The relationship between these two characters is one of the best parts of the film.  After Salvatore's father dies in the war, Alfredo reluctantly acts as a surrogate father.  Alfredo is hesitant to teach Salvatore about being a projectionist, as he wants the child to do bigger and better things than sitting in a dusty projection room.

 However, despite Alfredo's warnings, Salvatore cannot stay away.  The pair display a strong loyalty and friendship which is endearing to watch.  When a fire breaks out in the projection room trapping Alfredo inside, Salvatore selfless runs in and drags his friend out.  This moment was surprisingly dramatic and I was shocked to find myself so embroiled in the action.  Even though, Alfredo is blinded by the fire and the cinema is destroyed, the townspeople rally together to rebuild the cinema, employing Salvatore, who has been taught everything about projectionism from Alfredo, as the cinema's projectionist.  These moments earmark the best parts of the film: how the love for cinema can bring out the best in people. 

What didn't work:

Salvatore was given a love story which did not work.  Salvatore runs the projection room for ten years, from a small child to a young man.  And as a young man he falls in love with a girl called Elena.  Whilst it is only natural that this would happen, the love story felt contrived and forced.  Elena is initally dismissive of Salvatores affections and in response, he waits outside her window every night for her to change her mind.  Whilst he might think this is sweet and romantic, it is actually creepy and stalkerish.  What's more surprising is that it actually works.  I can't quite remember how this narrative ends or whether it is given a proper ending, but the fact that I can't remember it signifies how weak a narrative it is.

What was ugly:

Salvatore selflessly running into the fire to save Alfredo is a great example of courage and heroism in such an ugly situation.

Rating:

Good.

This film is definitely one to watch.  Its different and intriguing narrative makes it entertaining to watch and it also mixes together well comedy and drama.  Just don't expect too much from the weak love story.  Either way I think this film is well-deserving of the high prestige it received.

The Godfather Review

SPOILER ALERT

Click here to read my review of Spectre

Whilst this film is number 2 on the top 1000 films of all time that's not why I'm reviewing it.  I am reviewing it, because I am writing my dissertation on Mario Puzo's the Godfather and the Godfather trilogy of films.  As I have read the Godfather, I will be comparing the two throughout this review.  And also it's just a great film, isn't it?

How it all goes down:

Meet the Corleone family, your average Italian-American family consisting of family patriarch Vito Corleone (Marlon Brandon,) his wife Carmela, their eldest son, the hot-headed Santino 'Sonny,' (James Caan) their middle son, the weak and uncharismatic Frederico or 'Fredo,' their youngest son, the quiet and reserved Michael (Al Pacino) and their youngest child Constanzia 'Connie,' who is constantly beaten by her husband Carlo Rizzi.  However, the Corleones are a family with a twist.  Vito Corleone is the head of one of the biggest Mafia families in New York and Sonny is his underboss.  Whilst Michael Corleone begins the film as distant outsider who despite having no wish to become involved in the family business, progressively becomes more embroiled until he eventually succeeds his father as boss of the Corleone family.  In Michael's succession, he is assisted by family consigliere Tom Hagen (Robert Duvall,) the three caporegimes Peter Clemenza, Salvatore Tessio and Paulie Gatto and the family's violent enforcer Luca Brasi.

What worked:

Oh boy, what didn't work would be a better question.  This film is number 2 on the top 1000 films of all time only beaten by the Shawshank Redemption (click here to read my review) and I'm just going to come right out and say it.  The Godfather is a better film and is more deserving of the number one spot.  No disrespect to Shawshank which is a great film in its own right, but the Godfather engages with so many different issues and themes that it works on a much deeper and more detailed level than the Shawshank Redemption. 

The Godfather's presentation of its central theme, family, is one of the best parts of the film.  It simultaneously sanctifies the family, where members are not only loyal and protective to each other, but also to outsiders, especially the German-Irish Tom Hagen.  These members then use this loyalty to justify their violent and destructive behaviour.  Vito Corleone has the power to grant favours for his close friends and family, regardless of their immorality.  Sonny Corleone beats his sister's husband after he finds out that she is being abused by him.  After Michael is punched by the corrupt police captain McCluskey who is being supported by the Tattaglia family, the Corleones respond by killing the son of the Tattaglia boss.

After the Tattaglia family in conjunction with the Turkish drug baron Virgil Sollozzo perform a failed assassination attempt on Vito Corleone, Michael who hitherto has been unwilling to get involved, willingly volunteers to shoot Sollozzo along with his bodyguard the corrupt police captain McCluskey.  All of these men justify their actions through the pretence of protecting their families.  This then raises a great moral dilemma for the viewer.  How far would a man go to protect his family? Is it wrong to steal a loaf of bread if it's to feed a starving family? The Godfather completely subverts the notion of the family being a place of sanctuary and I think that's one reason why it works so well.  It takes the viewer's expectations and completely turns them on their head.

Another great thing about the Godfather is its authenticity.  Everything just felt real from the setting to the props to the dialogue to the costume.  I really felt like the film-makers had put a lot of effort into making everything realistic as possible, even if the level of violence is somewhat dramatised. 

The characters and characterisation also really helped to add to the authenticity.  Great long passages in the book are devoted to explaining about characters like Sonny, Vito and Michael, yet within the film, the same level of detail is conveyed within about half the time.  This is partly due to great script-writing, but also to great acting.  Marlon Brando is brilliant as Vito Corleone.  Even if you have to turn your volume to maximum to even hear him, he conveys perfectly the cool, calculating manner of Don Corleone.  In actuality, I think that Marlon Brando's quietly-spoken dialogue really added to the character.  Don Corleone is man of persuasive logic who rarely makes threats or raises his voice or loses his temper.  Through how Marlon Brando whispers, Don Corleone's calm temper and disposition is conveyed brilliantly.

In the book, a detailed passage is dedicated to explaining Sonny's short temper, yet this is conveyed succinctly in the film, when Sonny smashes the camera of a photo-journalist who gets a little nosy at his sister's wedding.  This moment was reportedly improvised by James Caan.  The second son Fredo features even less in the film than he does in the book, but this fits in well with how he is described as uncharismatic and weak. 

Al Pacino is also great in this film, as it documents how his character Michael Corleone is transformed from quiet outsider to a ruthless Mafia Don.  Pacino portrays this transformation so well that it really is remarkable to behold.  Another great example of transformation is how Vito Corleone is transformed from the calm yet unrelenting Mafia Don to nothing more than a frail old man.  All credit to Marlon Brando for portraying this transformation so brilliantly.

The film was also interesting and engaging throughout.  Each idea and theme was explored in turn and never did they become muddled or confused.  Surprisingly for a film as long as three hours, the pacing was really good and it never felt like it was running on for too long or that the narrative was becoming stretched. 

And lastly, there is no way I can write a review of the Godfather without talking of the music.  The theme tune for this film, scored by Nino Rota, is just magical.  It captures everything the Godfather is about.  It's dark, eerie, ambiguous, melancholic, subtle yet refined.  As I've been writing my dissertation, I've been listening to it on repeat and it has proven to be great study music. 

What didn't work:

Nothing! Next!

No, seriously, there were a couple of things that bugged me.  Firstly, during a war meeting, two fish wrapped in Luca Brasi's bulletproof vest are delivered to the Corleones.  Sonny Corleone screams "what the hell is this," before Clemenza responds "it's a Sicilian message: Luca Brasi sleeps with the fishes." I just don't find it realistic that Sonny would say this considering that he has been in the Mafia since he was a young man.  I think it would have been much better if Michael, who is more unfamiliar with Sicilian symbolism, asked this.

I also think that Paulie Gatto is too young to be a caporegime, especially with how, in the book, a big fuss is kicked up about Tom Hagen being consiligieri, due to his German-Irish ancestry and also how he's only thirty-five.  However, I am just nit-picking here and neither of these points really warrant severe criticism.

I could be a massive book elitist here and talk about how the film differs from the book.  However, for the most part they are quite faithful to Mario Puzo's original text and the changes they do make are mostly for the better. 

The book begins with a lengthy description of the undertaker Amerigo Bonasera standing in court waiting for the two young men who have beaten his daughter to be sentenced.  To his disgust they are set free and he resolves to see Vito Corleone who he hopes can deal out some rough justice.  The film instead opens with Amerigo Bonasera saying "I believe in America," before explaining how he and his family moved to America as they genuinely believed they could make a better life for themselves.  I loved how the film opened on this point, as it engages with the theme of the American Dream.  During the early 20th century, there was an influx of Italians immigrating to America under the promise of the American Dream, before being disillusioned with the harsh reality.  Amerigo Bonasera immigrated to America to provide the best possible life for his daughter and was rewarded by his daughter being brutally beaten and almost raped by two young men. 

The beginning of the book is further changed when, during his sister's wedding, Michael Corleone, acting as an exposition device, explains Mafioso terminology, such as Consigliere to his girlfriend Kay Adams.  Whilst this gets a little lengthy within the book, the film punctuates the exposition well with scenes from the wedding.

Another major change is the almost complete omission of the character Johnny Fontane, as well as the complete omission of his singing partner Nino Valenti, who other than the famous horse's head in the bed scene, plays little purpose within the film.  Whilst the book focuses on Fontane's backstory and his failed marriage, the film completely omits this.  I argue this is for the better, as Fontane is mainly tangential to the main narrative.  The film also omits the backstory of Vito Corleone, although from what I remember, this is touched on within the second film, which I will of course be reviewing.

When Vito Corleone is attempting to broker a peace with the mob families, the book gives the backstory of every single one of the families, which the film omits.  I think that if the film had talked about every character in detail then this would have slowed up the narrative and added unnecessary information.

Whilst I could go on and on about how the film differs from the book, the only change that annoyed me was how the film hardly mentioned Sonny Corleone's mistress Lucy Mancini.  After Sonny is killed, the Corleones take care of Lucy by sending her to Las Vegas where she begins a new relationship with Doctor Jules Segal, who is also omitted.  I don't like how this section was cut, because I feel that it's a perfect example of the loyalty that the Corleones pay to each other.  Whilst, Lucy is nothing more than Sonny's mistress, the family still goes to great lengths to make sure that she is taken care off.

What was Ugly:

I've heard rumours about Marlon Brando's mumbling diction, but I've never seen it before until now.

Rating:

Superlative.  Be serious now.  Was this film ever going to get any other rating? This film is intense, engaging, informative and interesting.  It interacts with so many themes and ideas, but never once does it become lost or confused.  The cast are all brilliant as is the characterisation and characters.  Again, no disrespect to the Shawshank Redemption, but never has a film been more deserving of the number 1 spot on the top 1000 films of all time than this one.  Watching this when it originally came out in the cinema would have been nothing short of paradise.

Click here to read my review of Cinema Paradiso