The Raid review

 Number 716 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2011 Indonesian martial art, action-thriller 'The Raid.'

Rama (Iko Uwais) is a member of an elite swat team sent into a high-rise building to take down notorious crime-lord Tama Riyadi (Ray Sahetapy) and his top lieutenants Mad Dog (Yayan Ruhian) and Andi (Donny Alamsyah.) Rama is assisted by his sergeant Jaka (Joe Taslin) and lieutenant Wahyu (Pierre Gruno.)

Upon making this film, Gareth Evans said that he wanted to make a pure action film. He certainly achieved that. The Raid is non-stop action with plenty of explosions, hand-to-hand combat, gratuitous violence and non-stop gunshots. Unfortunately, Evans forgot to include any semblance of a storyline. The narrative, as far as it goes, is paper-thin and often gives way to the fight sequences. Don't get me wrong, the martial art sequences are brilliantly choregraphed. The actors are depicting the Indonesian martial art of pencak silat and they never put a foot wrong. 

It's just after one or two fight sequences, it all became very repetitive and monotonous. The fight sequences, as spectacular as they were, very quickly took over the film. And they might have looked great, but they were hardly the most realistic. The characters seem to survive endless knocks to the head that would have killed somebody like me. And this lack of realism certainly stopped me from becoming too immersed. But I guess action films are never supposed to be the most realistic. They're not documentaries.

While Gareth Evans did attempt to have emotional beats or subplots, they always felt half-done. He didn't properly develop these into anything of substance. It's implied that Wahyu is corrupt, but this is never explored in any great detail. It is revealed that Rama and Andi are estranged brothers, but this plotline is never given any chance to breathe, before we're thrust back into the action. Rama also has an expectant wife at home, yet except for a brief scene in the beginning, we hear very little of her ever again.

And the film is ridden with all the cliches we could expect from an action film: guns that never run out of ammo, bad guys who scream before attacking somebody, losing the element of surprise and giving away their position, bad guys who just when it looks like the hero is down-and-out then hesitate or monologue allowing themselves to be overpowered. It's explained that Rama and the rest of the SWAT team are a bunch of rookies so that explains why so many of them are completely useless and die quickly. But why were the bad guys such noobs?

Usually I end reviews like these with a disclaimer of "this wasn't necessarily a bad film, but it just wasn't for me." I can't do that here. Action films and martial-art films can be enjoyable to watch as long as the action is balanced with a strong storyline and the storyline was virtually non-existent. Film critic Roger Ebert panned the film giving it one out of four stars. He received a lot of criticism for his review, but I'm with him all the way here. The Raid was not a good film.

The Impossible review

 Number 689 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2012 disaster film 'The Impossible.'

Based on the true story of Spanish doctor Maria Belon and her family, The Impossible details how she and her family survived the 2004 Boxing Day Tsunami that devastated South-East Asia. In the film, the family are British and their surname is Bennet. They consist of Maria (Naomi Watts,) husband Henry (Ewan Mcgregor,) oldest son Lucas (Tom Holland) in his debut role, and younger sons Thomas (Samuel Joslin) and Simon (Oaklee Pendergast.)

I was very conflicted by this film. It began brilliantly, but quickly descended into contrivances and melo-drama. The first fifteen-twenty minutes was edge-of-the-seat stuff. We are given a nice introduction to the Bennet family - they are a family like any other. Henry is worried about losing his job, Maria is wondering whether she should return to work and the three boys squabble with each other like brothers tend to do. But as they arrive at their Thai resort, they think they're in for the holiday of a lifetime.

And then the tsunami hits. And this looked spectacular. Spanish director J.A Bayona made the decision to use real waves instead of CGI. To maintain realism, he also had Naomi Watts and Tom Holland spend five gruelling weeks filming in a water tank. And it totally paid off. My heart was in my mouth the whole time. The action was immediate and the tension was high. And then it all goes downhill.

In the aftermath of the tsunami while being caught in the rushing water and battered with debris, Maria and Lucas find each other. Maria is badly injured. And they also find another little boy before they were rescued by Thai villagers and taken to hospital. Meanwhile, Henry finds his sons and sends them away to a refugee camp while he searches for Maria and Lucas in the different hospitals. And eventually the family reunite. Everything seemed too easy. I thought the characters would struggle to find one another. I thought they would be battling against the elements trying to survive. But the film skipped over all this. And that killed the narrative momentum.

I am not familiar with the real-life story, so I can only assume that this did happen in real life. But I do wonder if Bayona exaggerated or changed things for dramatic effect. Perhaps I'm just in disbelief that an entire family could survive such a devastating event. It killed over 200,000 people. But I guess that's why the film is called the Impossible.

The action was on-point. For a debut role, Tom Holland was brilliant. He was only fourteen, playing a twelve-year-old, but he acted with the maturity of somebody twice his age. After Maria is taken to hospital, Lucas gets to work helping to reunite other lost families. Maybe he acts unrealistically mature. I certainly was not as mature as him at his age. And I would not be as mature as that in his situation. But then again, I would have been dead within the first few minutes.

Naomi Watts rightfully earned a Best Actress Oscar nomination and Ewan Macgregor was great as well. A particularly touching moment sees him break down after he calls his father-in-law at home. He is lent a phone by a kindly German man Karl (Sonke Mohring) who is also trying to find his family. It was a lovely emotional beat.

Overall, I was left a little disappointed by the Impossible. It had brilliant acting and the production value, but the writing did let it down.

Lord of War review

 Number 661 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2005 crime drama 'Lord of War.'

Yuri Orlov (Nicolas Cage) is a Ukranian-born, American international arms dealer. He and his brother Vitaly (Jared Leto) deal weapons to warlords and governments worldwide. However, he is relentlessly pursued by INTERPOL agent Jack Valentine (Ethan Hawke.)

Although Nicolas Cage has had a prolific career, I know him more from internet memes rather than his films. In fact, I have seen very few of his films. In fact, I know him so much from clips where his acting is incredibly over-the-top, to the extent of being ridiculous, that I had forgotten that he was once a serious actor. And one that could seriously act. After all he did win the Oscar for Leaving Las Vegas, which I've also not seen. But I do think Cage was a big reason why this film was so successful.

Yuri Orlov narrates the film giving a blunt and cynical take on the subject. But his narration gives 'Lord of War,' a brilliant energy that moves everything along at a blistering pace. Cage's laconic delivery provides a lot of the film's black humour which does stop things from becoming too dark. And, as you can imagine, a film about arms dealing does get pretty dark at times. However, what was great about Cage's portrayal of Orlov was the authenticity of the character. He isn't a hypocrite. He knows exactly what he's doing and he doesn't care. For him, it's just business. And this unapologetic perspective made him such a compelling character to follow.

He was far more compelling than Jared Leto as Vitaly. I have mixed thoughts of Jared Leto. Sometimes he gives great performances like in Dallas Buyers Club or Requiem for a Dream, but he was very boring here. Some of that was down to the character. Vitaly lacked much of the nuance and depth that Yuri had. Instead he is ill-disciplined and petulant leading to him gaining a cocaine addiction. And his inclusion at the end seemed like a very contrived way to generate conflict. 

*Spoiler alert* After Yuri enters retirement, an old client - Andre Baptiste Sr (Eamonn Walker) the brutal dictator of Liberia - offers him his biggest payday yet in exchange for one last deal. Yuri accepts and brings Vitaly with him. When Vitaly realises that Andre Baptiste intends to use the weapons to massacre a refugee camp, he blows up half of them before being killed himself. I don't really understand why Yuri brought Vitaly with him. It's already established that he is an unpredictable, loose-cannon. He spends much of the film addicted to cocaine. What good could he do?

Also a quick shout-out to Eamonn Walker who was great as the villainous Andre Baptiste. It's difficult to believe this was the same actor who played Kareem Said on HBO's prison-drama Oz.

I thoroughly enjoyed Lord of War. It had a delightful energy, mainly due to Nicolas Cage's great performance. Jared Leto wasn't as good, but, nevertheless, Lord of War brilliantly exposed the horrific nature of arms trafficking. It is a difficult topic that more people should know about. And the ending was the icing on the cake. We are told that rather than independent traffickers, the biggest arms traffickers are the US, the UK, Russia, France and China - the five permanent members of the UN's security council.

Midnight Express review

 Number 644 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1978 prison-drama film 'Midnight Express.'

Based on the memoir of the same name, Midnight Express follows Billy Hayes (Brad Davis.) He is an American college student who is caught trying to smuggle drugs from Turkey back to the US. He is sent to the notorious Sagmalcilar prison where he and his fellow prisoners are routinely beaten and mistreated. Realising that he will die if he stays there, he and fellow prisoners hot-headed Jimmy Booth (Randy Quaid) and quieter Max (John Hurt) plot to try and escape a.k.a catching the Midnight Express.

My biggest problem with this film was with the protagonist of Billy Hayes. Initially, he didn't seem very likeable or sympathetic. He willingly tries to smuggle drugs; it isn't like he is forced or coerced into it. He breaks the law and he is punished for it. And we're supposed to empathise with him? It was a very strange character to have as a protagonist. It might have made more sense if he were forced into the role or if like the Shawshank Redemption, he was frame and imprisoned for a crime he didn't commit. This would have certainly made him more of a likeable character.

Putting this aside, this was still a thrilling and enjoyable film, despite the odd loose end and plot hole. It was a story of redemption. There is unflinching brutality but also moments of true tenderness. I guess Billy goes through a hero-arc of sorts, yet some of the other characters are tossed aside. For example, Jimmy Booth is quickly introduced as Billy's hot-headed cellmate. After an escape route goes wrong, Jimmy is taken away to never be seen again. Although I only realised this after the film had finished. It is never explicitly stated in the film. I found it odd how we never even had one line of exposition addressing that. He was an important character.

Initially, Billy is only sentenced to three years, but fifty-three days before his release, the prosecutor successfully has his sentence extended to life. Brad goes on an impassioned rant in the courtroom where he insults everybody in sight. Surely, no judge would stand for something like that. He would have been held in contempt for court and thrown out. 

What I enjoyed most about this film was the relationship between Billy Hayes and Max. John Hurt is always wonderful in everything he's in, but he was especially good as Max. I can totally understand why he was nominated for the Best Supporting Actor Oscar. He brought a quietness and a tenderness to the role. It made for a refreshing change to the ongoing violence. And he and Billy become very close friends. When Billy eventually escapes, he swears to come back for Max. We don't see it on-screen, but I hope he did.

This film wasn't for me. Yes, it was powerful and touching in its own way. But too many loose ends and an unlikeable protagonist made me wish I could catch the Midnight Express out of the cinema!

Traffic review

 Number 630 on the top 1000 films of all time is Steven Soderbergh's 2000 crime-drama 'Traffic.'

Traffic follows the drug-trafficking trade from four different perspectives in an inter-connected narrative. Ray Castro (Luis Guzman) and Montel Gordon (Don Cheadle) are two DEA agents aiming to take down drug kingpin Carlos Ayala (Stephen Bauer) through getting their witness Eduardo Ruiz (Miguel Ferrer.) Meanwhile, Bauer's wife Helena (Catherine Zeta Jones) tries to continue the business he left behind. In Ohio, Robert Wakefield (Michael Douglas) is appointed the new Drug Czar only to discover his own daughter is a cocaine addict. Finally, in Mexico, corrupt cop Javier Rodriguez (Benicio del Toro) has a change of heart when he witnesses the true horrors of the drug trade.

I'm going to start this review with my usual disclaimer of not wanting to compare films with each other, before immediately comparing Traffic with Crash. Crash is also a multi-narrative, interconnected film that engages with crime and race relations, but it woefully fails where Traffic succeeds. Whereas Crash felt rushed, contrived and half-arsed, Steven Soderbergh's took the time to really explore each character and narrative. The two and a half-hour runtime was an added bonus. It was an ambitious project and anything shorter wouldn't have done it justice.

Soderbergh also made the key decision of adopting distinctive looks for each narrative: Wakefield's story is shot with a blue tungsten filter, Helena's story has an over-exposed diffusion filter and Javier's story has is harsh and yellow. Although that seems to be the case whenever American films depict Mexico. Regardless, it was a good decision that helped to distinguish each narrative. It stopped things from becoming too confusing.

And the drug-trafficking world is one of confusion and chaos. There are a lot of moving parts yet through this multi-narrative, Soderbergh is able to bring all of these parts together in one cohesive narrative. By telling the story through different perspectives, he is able to add a lot of nuance to what could have been a straight, boring black-and-white story. There is a lot more morally grey than people would like to think.

Of course it helped that Soderbergh had a star-studded, ensemble cast. Nine of the cast members have either been nominated or won an Oscar - Benicio Del toro won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for this role and, deservingly so.

I thoroughly enjoyed Traffic. it is a marker of what all good multi-story narratives should be.

Arrietty Review

 Number 627 on the top 1000 films of all time is Studio Ghibli's animated fantasy film 'Arrietty.'

Based on the 1952 book of the same name, Arrietty (Mirai Shida) is one of a race of tiny people called the Borrowers. Her and her father Pod (Tomokazu Mirua) and her mother Homily (Shinobu Otake) live in the house of a sickly boy called Sho (Ryunosuke Kamiki.) They make their living through borrowing items that human beings won't miss. Terrified of humans, they live their lives in hiding. However, Sho discovers Arrietty and befriend her. Later when Sho's housekeeper Haru (Kirin Kiki) also finds the Borrowers and calls exterminators, Sho starts helping Arrietty and her parents to survive.

Mary Norton's book 'The Borrowers' has been adapted a number of times with Arrietty being the fourth adaptation. I am most familiar with the 1997 adaptation starring John Goodman, Jim Broadbent and Tom Felton among others. And I have always been a lover of Studio Ghibli films. Their animation and their music has always been second to none. Arrietty was no exception. The animation was beautiful as can be expected. It was the directorial debut of Hiromasa Yonebayashi who helped to animate Howl's Moving Castle, Ponyo and Spirited Away. Considering how gorgeous, the animation of Spirited Away is, it's no surprising that Arrietty was the same.

In Sho's home, there is a doll's house. This was installed by Sho's father who believed that there were little people living in the home. He put in the house just for them. And the detail was astounding especially within the ornate kitchen. Another scene sees a crow flying into Sho's bedroom window and getting stuck within the blind. Haru has to hit it away. It was a very funny bit of animation.

I also loved the music. French singer Cecile Corbel wrote the score and performed the theme tune and she did it justice. The music had a lovely element of mystique and wonder that can be expected within Studio Ghibli. We spoke about Spirited Away having wonderful animation. It also has a brilliant score.

However, where the film was so strong on animation and music, I do feel like it was quite light on story. Compared to other Studio Ghibli features, it felt far simpler and more basic. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it did make Arrietty far less punchier than some of its predecessors. While it was lovely seeing how the Borrowers live and function, I think too much time was spent on the set-up. By the time, we got to the main story, almost half the film had gone and the rest felt a little rushed. For example, the character of Spiller (Tatsuya Fujiwara) another Borrower who rescues Pod after he falls and twists his leg is left largely undeveloped. 

And Sho and Arrietty's relationship was rushed as well. The two trust each other far too quickly. Arrietty has been raised her whole life to believe that human beings are dangerous and she should never be seen by them, but all it takes is Sho giving her a sugar cube that convinces her to trust him. And as for Haru, she was a little too comical to be taken seriously as a villain.

While Arrietty has the stylistic flair and great music that we can expect from studio Ghibli, it wasn't anywhere near on the same level in terms of storytelling power.

Primal Fear review

 Number 615 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1996 legal thriller 'Primal Fear.'

Martin Vail (Richard Gere) is an arrogant Chicago lawyer who is well-known for taking high-profile cases, because of the publicity they generate. That's why he takes the case of Aaron Stampler (Edward Norton) - a simple-minded 19-year-old former altar boy accused of murdering the beloved Archbishop Rushman - head of Chicago's diocese. However, Vail slowly starts to prove that Aaron is innocent. And he has to prove that in court against the prosecution led by former flame Janet Venable (Laura Linney.)

Based on the 1993 book of the same name, Primal Fear was good enough. That is to say that it is as good as legal dramas go. Legal dramas have a tendency to be overlong with too much talking and exposition. By their very nature, not a lot happens outside of a courtroom, so they're not always the most interesting to watch. And if it wasn't for Ed Norton, I don't think I would have found this film very entertaining. This was his feature-film debut and he received widespread praise for it. I may argue that he was better than Gere and Linney.

I don't think either actor was particularly bad in isolation, but I don't think they were great together. I especially didn't like the plotpoint of them having a past relationship. Vail still has feelings for Venable and tries rekindling the relationship, but is constantly rejected. It all seemed very contrived and forced to me. Gere and Linney didn't have the best on-screen chemistry. And it wasn't believable that the two of them used to be romantically involved. True, it was an obvious source of conflict, but I don't think it worked. Their shared past was left too unexplained and enigmatic. 

To Vail, their relationship was something serious, but Venable thought it was a one-night stand that happened to last for six months. Perhaps if their relationship had been left more professional, I would have enjoyed it more. Instead of romantic feelings, one of them could have done something to have professionally screwed over the other. And that would have been a better explanation for Venable's resentment for her former colleague.

And I didn't particularly like Linney's character. This is no fault of the actress, but I think that Janet Venable was overly-cold, harsh and condescending. She's not supposed to be the devil, but the devil's advocate. There were moments where she could have been portrayed sympathetically, but any of these emotional beats fell flat on their face. 

Like I said, if it wasn't for Ed Norton, I think this entire film could have fallen flat on its face. *spoiler alert* It is initially revealed that he is schizophrenic - he has an alternate personality called Roy who surfaces whenever Aaron is felt threatened. Instead of Aaron who always denied killing Archbishop Rushman, it was actually Roy. Roy and Aaron are polar opposites to each other. Aaron is shy, simple-minded and speaks with a stutter. Whereas, Roy is arrogant, violent and a sociopath. They are completely different, but Ed Norton played the double-role with aplomb. He was convincing as both characters.

Ed Norton was very much the saving grace of this film. It fell short of its massive potential. It wasn't bad, but it also wasn't good. 

True Grit (2010) review

 Number 594 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Coen brothers' Western 'True Grit.'

Based on the book of the same name and a remake of the 1969 film, 'True Grit' follows the unlikely relationship between a teenage girl and a federal marshal in 19th century Arkansas. When the father of 14-year-old Mattie Ross (Hailee Steinfeld) is killed by hired hand Tom Chaney (Josh Brolin) she hires federal marshal Rooster Cogburn (Jeff Bridges) to track him down and bring him to justice. Also searching for Chaney is Texas ranger Laboeuf (Matt Damon.)

As you may have gathered from my High Noon review, I am not the biggest fan of Westerns. They're not a genre of film that has ever engaged me. However, I was pleasantly surprised by True Grit. A lot of that was down to Hailee Steinfeld as Mattie Ross. Unlike the female characters of the old spaghetti Westerns, she has a lot of agency. It is her pluckiness, determination and refusal to take no for an answer that kicks off the whole storyline. Granted, she is rash and impulsive which does lead her to make silly decisions for no other reasons than to advance the storyline, but it was refreshing to see a female character with ... well grit. Steinfeld played the part well. It was bizarre that she was only nominated for the Best Supporting Actress Oscar when she was the leading lady, but don't ask me how the Academy works.

Jeff Bridges was also great as the male lead Rooster Cogburn. He is initially dismissive of Mattie, but the two progressively become closer even forming a father-daughter relationship. It was quite touching and formed the backbone of the film. To some extent, it reminded me of Leon: the Professional with Cogburn training Mattie to help him catch Chaney. Throw in Matt Damon as Labeouf and you have the archetypal odd throuple. The three leads were very funny together and the humour helped to offset the dark tone.

Another reason that the film surprised me is that I'm generally not a fan of the Coen Brothers. As a whole, their films are too weird for me. Yet True Grit was very straightforward. There was none of their off-the-wall surrealist humour that dominates their other pictures. And unlike other Western directors *cough cough* Leone, there isn't endless tension-building that slows up the storyline. The pacing was fast and slow as was needed.

For a Western and a Coen Brother's film, I thoroughly enjoyed True Grit.

Sense and Sensibility review

 Number 580 on the top 1000 films of all time is Ang Lee's 1995 period drama 'Sense and Sensibility.'

Based on Jane Austen's book of the same name, Sense and Sensibility follows the Dashwood sisters: Elinor (Emma Thompson) and Marianne (Kate Winslet) after their father (Tom Wilkinson) dies leaving them penniless. To guarantee their financial security, they must marry. Colonel Brandon (Alan Rickman) and Edward Ferrars (Hugh Grant) are their respective suitors.

In completing this challenge, I naturally watch a lot of films and genres that I would have no interest in otherwise. But I aim to watch these with an open mind. Unfortunately, I have never been a fan of period dramas or Jane Austen. I know...I know, I'm a culturally ignorant philistine, but they're so boring. And Sense and Sensibility was no exception. The characters are so far removed from me that I would never relate to them. And the dialogue was as verbose and stuffy as I would expect any adaptation from an nineteenth century book. Emma Thompson wrote the screenplay and she went onto the win the Oscar. Good for her; in some ways she was a trailblazer for women, like Jane Austen before her. I'm just never going to care about a bunch of rich white people having rich white people problems.

The drama and the stakes were so unbelievably low that there was never any dramatic tension. Nothing exciting happens. Nothing happens. I couldn't have cared less about the Dashwood sisters, so I wasn't particularly bothered whether they went destitute or not. Elinor was slightly less annoying than Marianne who spends most of the film being carried around by the male leads. One point she falls and twists her ankle, but you would think that she's just witnessed a murder. At the end of the film, she runs off into the torrential rain and catches pneumonia causing a big trouble to the rest of the characters. But I guess that's what Marianne is supposed to be like whereas Elinor is more sensible and headstrong.

For me, the one saving grace of this film was Hugh Laurie who had a small but scene-stealing role of Mr Palmer. He and Imelda Staunton, who plays Mrs Palmer, provide a bit of light relief with funny, sarcastic jabs to one another. I say light relief, the film doesn't really need it. It's hardly a dramatic thriller, now, is it? 

I remember when my sisters dragged me to see the 2005 adaptation of Pride and Prejudice in the cinema. I was so disinterested that I actively slept through the whole film. I should have the done same with Sense and Sensibility. I wouldn't have missed anything.

Awakenings Review

 Number 575 on the top 1000 films of all time is Penny Marshall's 1990 drama 'Awakenings.'

Dr Malcolm Sayer (Robin Williams) is a researcher at a hospital in the Bronx. He has a whole contingent of catatonic patients including Leonard Lowe (Robert De Niro.) Dr Sayer begins treating Leonard and the others with an experimental drug. While the results are initially promising, things start to quickly go wrong.

I've seen Robert De Niro in a number of roles from taxi driver to gangster to boxer to cross-dressing pirate, but Leonard has to be his best role. Leonard is a character who has been catatonic for the last thirty years. Upon his awakening, he has to relearn how to walk, speak and function as everybody else does. He even becomes a Randle McMurphy character when he tries to gain more rights and freedoms for he and his fellow patients. In some sense, he almost acts as their Messiah.

Leonard is an empowering character and, despite his many disabilities, is never one to be pitied. And all of this is down to De Niro's excellent portrayal. He brought humanity and vulnerability to a role that could have been little more than a gross caricature. But he was also brave enough to show the severity of Leonard's Parkinson's. Rather than shy away, he embraced the role. And he forced the audience to realise how badly people like Leonard suffer. 

It took courage to play a character like Leonard. Penny Marshall was equally courageous to direct such a film. I work with the mentally ill and I know how terrifying they can seem for some people. They function as an uncomfortable reminder of our own mortality. It is all too tempting to lock these people away. Out of sight. Out of mind.

Speaking of courage, we have to talk about Robin Williams as the brave Dr Sayer who never gave up on his patients. For a comedic actor, he does drama damn well. He deserves just as much praise as De Niro. In fact, I was surprised that only De Niro received an Oscar nod. They surely both deserved Oscar nominations.

Nevertheless, this was a triumphant film that tells a very brave story. Just because somebody has a mental illness doesn't mean they should be treated as any less of a person.

Black Hawk Down review

 Number 571 on the top 1000 films of all time is Ridley Scott's 2001 war film 'Black Hawk Down.'

Based on true events, Black Hawk Down is set during the Somalian civil war. A group of American soldiers are sent to extract the top lieutenants of the Somalian dictator Mohamed Farrah Aidad from the capital Mogadishu. But the extraction goes wrong and the soldiers are left fighting for their lives. The massive ensemble cast includes Josh Hartnett, Ewan Macgregor, Ewen Bremner, Eric Bana, Ioan Gruffard, Orlando Bloom and Tom Hardy.

The problem with war films is that the characters always look the same. It is so difficult to tell them apart. Obviously, that comes with the territory, but other films and directors have done a much better job in distinguishing them than Ridley Scott does. True, he did choose to write the character's names on their helmets, but it was still difficult to tell who was who. Part of that was down to the sprawling cast, but also a lack of a clear protagonist.

Josh Hartnett received star billing, so I guess he was the main character, but there were so many other characters with so many storylines that they were all overshadowed by one another. They were all fighting to be noticed, but they all failed dreadfully. And that led to an overlong, bloated film which lost narrative direction. At times, it seemed like Ridley completely forgot about some of his characters and plot points.

Orlando Bloom plays raw recruit Todd Blackburn who is desperate to start fighting. He is due to drop into the city, but when his helicopter has to dodge an RPG, he tumbles to the ground below. A massive effort is made to rescue him, but what happens after isn't focussed on at all. Another soldier Michael Durant (Ron Eldard) is captured by the Somalians. Yet we only find out through a line of exposition at the film's end that he was released after ten days. Hell, the whole point of the mission was to capture Aidad's lieutenants and bring them out safely. But even this central plot point was left by the wayside. Ridley Scott set up so many storylines, but he forgot to finish them satisfactorily.

Instead any storyline takes a backseat to the action. Due to the army's mantra of leaving no man behind, the soldiers aim to rescue every single one of their fallen comrades (except for Durant who was mostly forgotten about) this includes the troopers inside the Black Hawk helicopters which are downed by RPGs. Yet the rescue effort goes awry as the soldiers quickly find themselves overnumbered. Cue endless gunfights and explosions. The action is fast, frenetic and chaotic. It doesn't let you catch your breath, so you're left blankly watching the screen asking 'what the hell is going on?' Ridley Scott was obsessed in creating a spectacle, he forgot to include any story.

Black Hawk Down was also criticised for its portrayal of the Somalian population. I would echo this criticism. The Somalians were generic, two-dimensional villains with no depth or clear motivations. I'm sure if Ridley wasn't so concerned with the gunfights he could have created a memorable villain, but he didn't.

*Spoilers* the film ends with a group of a soldiers running to safety from the crash site to a safe zone - something that has retrospectively been called the Mogadishu mile. They all make it safely. I know this was based on real life, but I found it hard to believe that the Somalians allowed them to do this in peace.

It's hard to believe this is the same man who created Alien - a masterpiece of horror and science-fiction. But Black Hawk Down was certainly no masterpiece. It was an overlong, monotonous affair with too many characters and paper-thin villains.

Gone Baby Gone review

 Number 561 on the top 1000 films of all time is the crime thriller 'Gone Baby Gone.' It was directed by Ben Affleck in his directorial debut.

Based on a Dennis Lehane novel, Gone Baby Gone follows two private investigators in Boston, Massachussetts Patrick Kenzie (Casey Affleck) and his girlfriend Angie Gennaro (Michelle Monaghan) are investigating the case of the missing four-year-old Amanda, but they soon uncover a much bigger mystery. Amy Ryan co-stars as Amanda's mother Helene Macready. Ed Harris and Morgan Freeman also star playing police officers DS Remy Bressant and Captain Jack Doyle respectively.

For a directorial debut, Ben Affleck did a very good job. Arguably better than some of his other films *cough cough* Argo. Gone baby Gone is a taut and tense thriller that keeps its audience on its toes. When Amanda goes missing, it's clear that she had a less than a happy homelife - her mother is a toxic, neglectful junkie. Enter Amy Ryan. The average viewer might not recognise that name, but she starred on NBC's sitcom 'the Office.' She does comedy well, but she did drama even better. I thought she was brilliant in this role. Well-deserving of her Oscar nomination. Helene is presented as an awful mother - only caring about her daughter once she goes missing, but she is a very sympathetic character.

Casey Affleck and Michelle Monaghan were very convincing as the two leads. Patrick Kenzie is dark, broody and doesn't play by the rules, yet he always has the calmer Gennaro to help him see straight. The two worked well together. And eight years later, Casey Affleck went onto win the Oscar for Manchester-by-the-Sea where he played another dark and broody character. And he does dark and broodiness very well. As a private investigator, he often finds himself torn between what is leally right and what is ethically right. And this is what leads to the conclusion that raises all types of interesting questions.

*Spoiler alert* Patrick and Angie discover that Amanda was actually at the heart of a massive conspiracy. Her uncle Lionel (Titus Welliver) and Ed Harris abducted her together to save her from her neglectful mother. They deliver her to Captain Doyle, who had previously lost a child, who will endeavour to give her the best possible life - a life far better than her mother who once forgot her for two hours in a boiling car.

Patrick wrestles over what is the right thing to do. Should he return her to her mother or leave her with Captain Doyle? Doyle would give her a loving home. Patrick picks the former leading to the disintegration of his personal and professional relationship with Angie. yet upon returning, Amanda home Patrick wonders whether he has made the right choice. Helene is nonchalantly going off on a date and leaves Patrick babysitting. She gives her daughter her favourite doll - Mirabelle. But Amanda later says the doll is actually called Annabelle. Her own mother didn't know the name of her daughter's favourite doll.

It's certainly no happily ever after, but it is an effective ending. it raises a number of different issues and questions. And this is what separates Gone Baby gone from other thrillers. Definitely worth a watch.

Donnie Brasco review

 Number 517 on the top 1000 films of all time is Mike Newell's 1997 crime-drama 'Donnie Brasco.'

Based on the true story, Donnie Brasco follows FBI agent Joseph Pistone (Johnny Depp) as he infiltrates the New York mob. He assumes the alias of Donnie Brasco and befriends Mafia hitman Benjamin "Lefty" Ruggerio (Al Pacino.) However, as Brasco grows closer with Lefty and the mob, he soon finds his professional and personal lives starting to blur.

Johnny Depp is now so well-known for playing whacky, off-the-wall characters, it's difficult to imagine him as anything else. Edward Scissorhands, Willy Wonka, the Mad Hatter, Captain Jack Sparrow...need I go on? But the eighties and nineties proved what a versatile actor he can be. Donnie Brasco is a character rule by conflict. Deeply unsatisfied with his home life, he throws himself into his undercover work, putting a strain on his already tenuous marriage. And to remain convincing to Lefty and the rest of the mobsters, Brasco has to participate in plenty of criminal activities. This creates its own array of personal dilemmas and Depp plays the conflict well.

Although, I would argue that his relationship with his wife Maggie (Anne Heche) was quite contrived. Their marriage becomes rocky as Brasco's work begins to take over. One second they are fighting and the next they were making up. This seemed forced and unnatural. It was almost like it was what writer Paul Attanasio wanted to happen instead of what should happen. But I did enjoy the little girls who played Brasco's daughters. They only had small parts, but they were played well. They become progressively more quiet, distant and withdrawn, emphasising the impact that Brasco's absent behaviour is having on them.

As for Al Pacino, I've seen him play so many grizzled, old gangsters that this was just another role for him. Don't get me wrong, he does them well, but the role of Lefty wasn't anything special. I was more impressed by Michael Madsen who played the fearsome mob boss Sonny Black. He had such an imposing presence that he was scary in every scene he was in.

Donnie Brasco was certainly an enjoyable film. And it proved that Johnny Depp can play more than the whacky, off-beat characters he's so well-known for.

High Noon review

 Number 195 on the top 1000 films of all time is Fred Zinnemann's 1952 Western 'High Noon.'

Marshall Will Cane (Gary Cooper) is ready to hang up his hat following his marriage to Amy Fowler (Grace Kelly.) However, he learns that Frank Miller (Ian Mcdonald,) an outlaw he put away, has been released and is coming for revenge. Will Cane must choose between running away with his new bride or standing and fighting.

I've never been keen on cowboy films. Westerns have never been something I've found engaging, so it's difficult for me to review this fairly, but I shall try. Honestly, I just found this film to be boring and generic. There was never any drama or tension. It was obvious that Marshall Will Cane would stay and defend his town. And that he would fight the outlaws alone after trying and failing to raise a posse.

This causes a problem with his Quaker and pacifist wife who threatens to leave without him, but jumps off the departing train at the last minute. All rather predictable. Grace Kelly did the best with what she had, but Amy Fowler was just a product of the female characters of her time - little more than inconvenience for the male protagonist rather than a character in her own right. Although I will admit that I did enjoy seeing her pick up a gun and shooting one of the outlaws. That was a nice touch of agency.

Gary Cooper won the Best Actor Oscar for this role. But I am at a loss to why. He has a reputation for being the strong, silent type, which I think is code for a big, block of wood. And that's exactly what he was, but, then again, I don't think the role of Will Cane afforded him a lot of opportunity to be anything else.

While some people might love Western and Cowboy films, they've never been for me. 

As Good as it Gets review

 Number 539 on the top 1000 films of all time is James L. Brook's comedy drama 'As Good as it Gets.'

Melvin Udell (Jack Nicholson) is a bigoted, grumpy, mean-spirited writer with OCD living in New York City. His neighbour Simon Bishop (Greg Kinnear) is a gay, depressed artist. And Melvin's favourite waitress at his local cafe is Carol Connelly (Helen Hunt) is an over-worked, over-protective single mother. The three form an unlikely friendship when life throws them all together.

Every so often, I see a film that reminds me of why I have enjoyed working through this list so much. As Good as it Gets surely deserves being higher than number 539. It has a great tone, equally hilarious and heartbreaking. Much of the humour comes from James L. Brook's witty script. Considering he also produced the Simpsons, it's no surprise that it was so funny.

You could certainly argue that the characters and plot were nothing original - a bitter old man finds a new lease of life upon meeting an attractive younger woman. Yet in the hands of Nicholson and Hunt, the characters felt fresh and dynamic. Both of them won best acting Oscars and understandably so. Udell having OCD was a refreshing touch and Nicholson played the ticks well. I think you could argue that it would take more than the love of a good woman to make him better, but I can suspend my disbelief.

And Greg Kinnear's character of Simon Bishop was a great addition. He was effectively a plot device to help orchestrate Melvin and Carol's relationship, yet he always felt like a real character. While he is sketching a portrait, he is brutally beaten and loses his muse. But through Carol's help, he rediscovers his love for painting. His tempestuous relationship with Melvin Udell even improves and and the two become friends at the end. This was a great film. It deserves all the praise I can give it.