I saw the Devil review

 Number 462 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Korean action-thriller 'I saw the Devil.'

Kim Soo-Hyun  (Lee Byung-Hun) is an NIS agent whose fiancee Joo-yun is brutally murdered. Soo-hyun swears revenge on her murderer - the sadistic Jang Kyung-Chul (Choi Min-Sik.)

I've seen quite a few Korean films since starting this list and I think it's fair to say that Korea is the America of the Asian film world. Nothing is done by half-measure. Everything is over-the-top and ridiculous. There is no subtlety. Just larger-than-life plots and daft plot developments.

This was certainly true for I saw the Devil which was a textbook example of horrible people being horrible to each other in particularly horrible ways. There was a lot of violence and most of it was completely gratuitous. I Saw the Devil was a film that could have left a lot more up to the imagination. It was a difficult watch.

Perhaps that's because we didn't really have a main character to root for. Soo-Hyun is supposed to be the antihero type, but his dogged determination to sadistically torture Kyung-Chul blurred the line between anti-hero and villain, but more in favour of the villain. Sure Kyung-Chul was a despicable killer, but Soo-Hyun was supposed to be better than him. He isn't though, least of all, because of his silly decisions to catch him, torture him, set him free and then repeat this process over and over again. This is all well and good, but it allows Kyung-Chul to kill more innocent people - he almost rapes and murders a schoolgirl.

I know revenge is a dish best served cold, but this seemed beyond stupid. Not to mention dangerous to Soo-Hyun and his family. Surely he would know by repeatedly catching and setting Kyung-Chul free, he is putting their lives at risk?

Spoilers

Speaking of loved ones, the film concludes with Soo-Hyun manufacturing a reunion between Kyung-Chul and his estranged parents and son, only to have him killed right in front of them. Yes, Kyung-Chul was a vicious killer, but what did his family do to deserve seeing something so traumatic? It was stupid and unnecessarily cruel.

Lee Byung-Hun is best known to international audiences as the Front Man in the hit series Squid Game. And Choi Min-Sik has also starred in the famous Vengeance trilogy. Both of them are great actors in their own ways, but here their characters were little more than soulless, emotionless monsters. They didn't get the chance to really show their acting chops.

I really didn't care for I saw the Devil. It was complete nonsense and unbelievably over-the-top. Not even the considerable acting talents of Choi Min-Sik and Lee Byung-Hun could save it.

Gattaca review

 Number 460 on the top 1000 films of all time is the science-fiction film 'Gattaca.'

Vincent Freeman (Ethan Hawke) wants nothing more than to be an astronaut and go to space with the Gattaca Aerospace corporation. The catch? He is an "in-valid" - a child that did not receive any gene-editing before birth. To achieve his goals, he impersonates quadriplegic Jerome Morrow (Jude Law.) However, when Gattaca's mission director is killed, Vincent is framed and his secret is in danger of being discovered.

Gattaca was a disappointing attempt to engage in some important ideas. Gene-editing is no doubt a sensitive topic. Sure if you have the chance to stop your child from developing cancer or dying from heart disease by the time they're thirty, why wouldn't you take that chance? But where do you stop? Do you remove any arbitrary characteristics you don't like like? What happens if you don't edit your child at all? Will they be discriminated against?

Gattaca attempts to answer these questions in a cold and sterile way. Despite having some talented actors like Ethan Hawke, Jude Law and Uma Thurman, who played Vincent's love interest Irene, I didn't care about any of the characters. All three actors are Oscar-nominated and I've enjoyed Ethan Hawke as a romantic and action lead, but I wasn't invested in Vincent. I don't think he was either, as it wasn't one of his most charismatic performances.

He also lacked on-screen chemistry with Jude Law. Jude Law plays Jerome who helps Vincent impersonate him by providing him with plenty of DNA samples. Despite some arguing, the two develop a begrudging respect for one another, but I still didn't find their relationship very believable.

I also saw attempts to create heart through a love story between Vincent and Irene. Although Hawke and Thurman began dating off-screen and later married, as a result of this film, this off-screen chemistry failed to translate to on-screen.

The same can be said through a subplot between Vincent and a reunion with an apparently long-lost brother who is investigating Vincent's involvement in the murder of the director of Gattaca's space programme. Yet this storyline fell emotionally flat too. The murder subplot never felt immediate enough to have any tangible effect on the plot. Plus there was never any on-screen rift or conflict to suggest that the two brothers had fallen out with each other after their childhood.

Sadly, like many science-fiction films, Gattaca became so obsessed with exploring its key ideas, it failed to create interesting characters.

The Triplets of Belleville review

 Number 455 on the top 1000 films of all time is the French animated adventure comedy-drama 'The Triplets of Belleville.'

Champion (Michel Robin) is a little boy who dreams of being a cyclist. Growing up he realises his dream by riding in the Tour De France. However, he and two other cyclists are kidnapped by the French mob. His grandmother Madame Souza (Monica Viegas) and her dog Bruno resolve to rescue them. They are helped by the eponymous Triplets of Belleville - former music hall singers.

I've been working through this list for longer than I care to remember. Every so often, I've come across an animated film that has really surprised me with its uniqueness. You had the incredible stop-motion Mary and Max, as well as the beautiful 2-D animated Persepolis. Now you have the wholly special Triplets of Belleville. I haven't seen anything like it. Considering I've watched over 700 of the film on this list, that is really saying something.

Similarly to Persepolis, the Triplets of Belleville utilises a simple 2-D style to tell an unchanging story. It's all complete nonsense obviously, yet I was more than willing to suspend my disbelief. I could totally see the plot happening in the weird steampunk-esque universe they created.

The animation style paid homage to the Jazz era initially, as well as the Post WW2 era. It evoked a grimy, industrial but also timeless feel. This film could be set in the thirties, the fifties or in its own little universe.

The animation also allowed for plenty of absurdity and therefore offbeat humour like Madame Souza and the Triplets of Belleville taking on a whole room of French gangsters with nothing but a frying pan. Yet it also had plenty of scares too like when we find out what happens tot he kidnapped cyclists if they displease the mob.

The most unique aspects of the Triplets of Belleville was how the story was told through minimal dialogue. Pantomime and music were used instead. This betrays the confidence of director Sylvain Chomet and his animation team. This confidence was not misplaced, as it allowed for some brilliant visual story-telling. There was no script full of cheesy one-liners and corny speeches, but striking imagery and memorable music. The Triplets of Belleville sung the film's most famous song Belleville Rendeyvous, which was Oscar-nominated.

I would definitely recommend watching The Triplets of Belleville. I can guarantee it won't be like anything you've seen before.

The French Connection review

 Number 453 on the top 1000 films of all time is William Friedkin's 1971 neo-noir crime thriller 'The French Connection.'

NYPD detectives Jimmy "Popeye" Doyle (Gene Hackman) and Buddy "Cloudy" Russo (Roy Scheider) are trying to bring the influential and wealthy French heroin smuggler Alain Charnier (Fernado Rey) to justice.

The French Connection was William Friedkin's fifth film, but also the one that arguably made his name. Considering that this film netted him Best Director awards from the Academy, the Golden Globes the Directors Guild of America, I think it's fair to say this was his breakout film. No doubt the success of this allowed him to go onto even, arguably, greater heights of directing The Exorcist a few years.

 Supposedly the scariest horror film of all time. I say supposedly as I really hated the Exorcist. Although evidently I'm in the minority with that opinion as The Exorcist went onto receive ten Oscar nominations including Best Director for Friedkin.

However, I think the French Connection was a much better film to warrant a Best Director win. True, The French Connection is a bit complicated and confusing like most neo-noir films are, but it was still very entertaining. After all, Friedkin directed what some label to be one of the greatest car chase scenes in movie history. Popeye drives hell-for-leather to catch a would-be assassin. This is complicated by how the assassin is on the train and Popeye is in a car, yet in a thrilling sequence, we see him stop at nothing to bring this killer to justice in one way or another.

Although I think Friedkin earned the Best Director Oscar, I'm less convinced by Gene Hackman winning the Best Actor Oscar for Popeye. True, he was good, but I don't think this was one of his best performances. 

He was better in Mississippi Burning, where he was also nominated for Best Actor Oscar losing out to Dustin Hoffman, or the Conversation where Hackman wasn't even nominated. The Conversation's biggest theme was paranoia and we saw that through and through in Hackman's performance. Here I think he was more your every-day hero. Nothing wrong with that, but not Oscar worthy.

Anyway, this is a minor criticism in what was a thoroughly entertaining film. Just a shame, Friedkin went onto direct the Exorcist. 

Amour review

 Number 450 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Michael Haneke's French psychological drama 'Amour.'

Georges (Jean-Louis Trintignant) and Anne (Emmanuelle Riva) Laurent are former music teachers and elderly couple in Paris. When Anne suffers a stroke that leaves her unable to take care of herself, Georges dutifully accepts the role of carer. However, the stress of the work becomes too much for the both of them.

Upon directing this film, Michael Haneke constantly reminded his cast to avoid over-sentimentality at all costs. This is what stopped the film from being a cheesy love story. Instead it was an utter devastating tragedy. Like Georges, I worked as a carer, so I saw first-hand how this stress can impact a couple's relationship.

I can attest there was nothing corny or overly-romanticised in Amour. We saw the authentic side of caring in all its brutal detail. We also saw the pour of amour - French for love - nowhere was this more present than in the relationship between Georges and Anne. Amour was the perfect title for the film - if you are taking care of a loved one, you need nothing less than love itself. And to allow somebody to take care of you, you need to trust and love somebody implicitly. It was obvious Georges and Anne loved each other unconditionally.

This was obvious from Trintigant's and Riva's excellent characterisations. Anne was obviously in an awful situation. Nobody ever wants to suffer like she does, but despite being in a pitiful situation, she wasn't a pitiable character. Riva played her with the utmost humanity. Despite being in a sorry situation, she never surrenders her humanity. Not once. It was this brilliant portrayal that saw her win the BAFTA and Caesar award as well as receiving an Oscar nod.

Trintignant was equally good as Georges. As Anne's carer, the stress quickly takes its toll - his position is almost as bad as his wife's. Yet similarly to Anne - although we feel sorry for Georges, Georges is not a sorry character. He remains faithful to his wife all the way up the shock ending that I didn't see coming. Just like Riva, Trintignant also won the Caesar award for his portrayal of Georges.

Amour was a powerful but tragic film which depicted one of the hardest parts of life with the utmost humanity. And if my praise wasn't enough, it also won the Best International Film Oscar. Well-deserved.

Tombstone review

 Number 444 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1993 Western 'Tombstone.'

Tombstone details the events that led up to the famous Gunfight at the Ok Corral in Tombstone, Arizona. Wyatt Earp (Kurt Russell) and his brothers Virgil (Sam Eliot) and Morgan (Bill Paxton) are three retired men who are looking for a quiet life in Tombstone. However, when the Cochise County Cowboys, led by Curly Bill Brocius (Powers Boothe) start pushing their way around town, the Earps are reluctantly drawn out of retirement to deal with the threat, helped by their close friend Doc Holliday (Val Kilmer.)

Anybody who knows me knows that I've never been a big fan of Westerns. The Gunfight at the Ok Corral as well as the Earps and Doc Holliday might be legendary parts of American folklore, but it's never been a topic that has really interested me. I'm not sure this film did too much to move the needle.

Of course this isn't to say that the film was explicitly terrible unlike some others I have seen, but it just wasn't for me. I can see what they were going. The charismatic Kurt Russell plays the sheriff who is reluctantly drawn back into his old life. He was good enough, as were his deputies Virgil and Morgan played by Sam Eliot and Bill Paxton. They played very different characters than in Frailty or the Big Lebowski. I think the good guys had a better characterisation than the Cochise County Cowboys. 

Perhaps that's because they were little more than a lawless rabble without more hierarchy or organisation. They were led by Curly Bill Brocious - Powers Boothe always gives recognisable performances, but the rest of the gang largely blended into one.

For me, the best part of the film was Val Kilmer. He played Doc Holliday - a cherished friend of the Earps who was suffering terribly from tuberculosis. Kilmer was definitely a dark horse considering his role was little more than just giving support to the Earps. Despite that, Holliday was a very tragic character who was also loyal to his friends. Kilmer's performance helped to demystify one of the most interesting characters of the Old West.

I'm sure there are many people who would love this film. These guys would also be big fans of the Wild West. I am not a fan of the Wild West, so I didn't much care for Tombstone, but that's just me.

In America review

 Number 448 on the top 1000 films of all time is Jim Sheridan's comedy-drama 'In America.'

Irish family, father Johnny (Paddy Considine,) mother Sarah (Samantha Morton) and daughters Christy (Sarah Bolger) and Ariel (Emma Bolger) have just moved to New York. As they settle into their new life, they are haunted by a dark secret which threatens to tear their family apart.

This was a good film, but also sentimental - dare I say overly-sentimental? Was it good enough to overcome its sentimentality? I'm not so sure about that. The principle cast were great. Samantha Morton rightly scored a Best Actress Oscar nod while Emma and Sarah Bolger showed a remarkable maturity for their young ages. They're real-life sisters which explained their great on-screen chemistry. 

Paddy Considine was also good, but his character of Jonny was rather annoying considering he was the main character. Johnny is a struggling actor who does whatever it takes to support his family. This includes really stupid things which he does for no reason but to add pointless conflict. He gambles the rent money on winning an ET toy in a carnival game. He walks through traffic to bring back an AC unit for his family. All of this undermined the emotional payoff his actions brought. Having said that, this film was partly based on Jim Sheridan's life, so maybe all this happened in one way or another.

As they say truth is stranger than fiction and the semi-autobiographical nature of the film did give it a generally authentic feel even if some parts were probably exaggerated for dramatic effect. No part felt more exaggerated than with the supporting character - the enigmatic Mateo (Djimon Hounsou.)

Initially, he's presented as an eccentric and dangerous man before it's revealed he has a heart of gold. I don't really know why Sheridan chose to depict him as such as an aggressive recluse who progressively softened up as he befriended the Sullivan family. This culminated in him leaving them an incredible amount of money. I don't think there had been enough groundwork to have justified such a decision. This isn't to discredit Hounsou - he quite rightly earned an Oscar nod, but Mateo's characterisation could have been improved.

And that summarises my opinion of this film. It was by no means bad, but it wasn't as good as it was trying to be.

The Motorcycle Diaries review

 Number 438 on the top 1000 films of all time is Walter Salles' biopic coming-of-age drama 'The Motorcycle Diaries.'

The Motorcycle Diaries tells the true-life story of Che Guevara's (Gael Garcia Bernal and Alberto Granada (Rodrigo De La Serna epic motorcycle road trip across South America. Che Guevara went onto become one of the biggest figures in the Cuban Revolution.

If you don't recognise Che Guevara's name, you will definitely recognise his face. He has become one of the biggest symbols of rebellion and counterculture featuring on everything from badges to necklaces and T-shirts, somewhat ironically considering his anti-capitalist leanings. Safe to say he has become a legendary figure regardless of your political bias.

The Motorcycle Diaries served to demystify this almost mythical figure beginning from his humble origins as a medical student to the blossoming of his revolutionary ideals. Although the film stops short of depicting the latter parts of his career. Exec producer Paul Webster described his depiction in this film as closer to Jack Kerouac than Vladimir Lenin.

Mexican actor Gael Garcia Bernal was given the difficult job of bringing this heroic figure to life. Bernal was good in the role as the portrayal Guevara as a three-dimensional figure with his own flaws and mistakes. There are some who criticised the for over-idealising Guevara, but his idealism was his greatest flaw. Che's commitment to his ideals fuels much of the film's conflict.

Rodrigo De La Serna also excelled as Che's best friend and travelling buddy Alberto Granada. The two actors had great chemistry together as their friendship and conflicting ideals contributed to the film's conflict. International audiences might know De La Serna better as the morally dubious bank robber Palermo in the hit Netflix series: La Casa De Papel, but De la Serna showed he is always an impressive actor regardless of the moral leanings of his characters.

It might be more accurate to describe this more as a coming-of-age drama rather than biopic, as it stops short of charting Che's life as a revolutionary, but it is an entertaining film nonetheless.

About Time review

 Number 439 on the top 1000 films of all time is Richard Curtis' romantic-comedy with a science-fiction twist 'About Time.'

Tim Lake (Domnhall Gleeson) has just turned twenty-one. His father James (Bill Nighy) informs him that all the men in their family upon turning twenty-one develop the ability to change their past. Rather than using it to find fame or fortune, Tim uses it to find love working as a lawyer in London. Cue the beautiful American Mary (Rachel Mcadams.)

Richard Curtis is well-known for his romantic comedies from Notting Hill to Four Weddings and a Funeral to Love Actually - all starring the who's who of British acting royalty, as well as the odd American or two. In many ways, About Time retreads the familiar beats we would expect from romantic comedies: a naive, bumbling but ultimately good-hearted young man navigates the difficulties of love and life before finding his special one.

However, Richard Curtis kept things fresh by adding a sci-fi twist. Tim discovers he has the ability to change the past and like many of us he uses it to fix all his mistakes until he discovers that it's the mistakes that make us human. It's not the most revolutionary of revelations and the time travel mechanics aren't the clearest, but that's not really important.

Perhaps that's because the film had plenty of laughs from Tim's foot-in-mouth syndrome to his father James' foul-mouthed playwright friend Harry Chapman (Tom Hollander) to brilliant cameos from Richard Griffiths and Richard E. Grant. There were plenty of laughs to balance out all the sentimentality of which there was a lot. What else would you expect from a romantic comedy?

Domnhall Gleeson made a for a charming leading man. He fit the role of Tim well with all the requisite charisma, but also plenty of space to grow. Rachel Mcadams was also good as she continued her string of rom-com successes. I do wonder if that's why she went onto to star in True Detective as the emotionally damaged Antigone Bezzerides. But the true star was Bill Nighy. He was the source of much of the film's comedy and pathos.

If I were to criticise anything, it would be Margot Robbie's brief inclusion. She played, I think, an early English love interest of Tim. I say "I think," as her accent varied between her native Australian and an upper-class English. But this was early on in her career.

I really enjoyed About Time. Yes, it was overly-sentimental but it had a great cast and brilliantly used a sci-fi twist to keep everything fresh. 

Predator review

 Number 443 on the top 1000 films of all time is the action-thriller Predator

Dutch (Arnold Schwarzenegger) leads a group of elite commandos as they attempt to rescue hostages from guerillas in the Central American rainforest. His group consists of mercenary Mac (Bill Duke,) explosives expert Poncho (Richard Chaves,) macho Blain (Jesse Ventura,) tracker Billy (Sonny Landham,) Dutch's commander Dillon (Carl Weathers) and wisecracking smart ass Hawkins (Shane Black.)

If you were to measure this film by an action-film standard, then it ticks every box in spades. You have the tough-as-nails soldiers, cheesy one-liners, undeveloped female characters, gunfire, explosions and Arnold Schwarzenegger. By that metric, Predator is a great film.

By any other metric, it is a load of rubbish. Of course it isn't pretending to be anything other than your average shoot-em-up, but shoot-em-ups can still make you care about their characters. Shoot-em-ups can still be entertaining.

I would say that the characterisations of Dutch and his men were paper-thin, but that's being generous. They were non-existent. They were nothing but your generic wise-cracking, vulgar soldiers. The only civillian and female character - the guerilla Anna (Elpidia Carillo) was similarly under-developed. At first it seems like she only speaks Spanish until she can suddenly speak fluent English. Why the change? Reasons.

The soldiers also didn't act like soldiers. They were so unrealistic from the whole group blindly following a million rounds into the jungle in an effort to kill the predator, to Dillon and Mac running off on their own to kill the predator, to Billy throwing down his gun to fight the predator with just a knife. Surprise surprise, he dies quickly. It just seemed like stupid characters doing stupid things for no reason but to advance the plot. If this were teenagers running away from Jason Vorhees, I'd get it, but fully-trained marines? Come on.

If you're going to watch Predator then manage your expectations. If you are expecting ground-breaking cinema, or at least entertaining cinema, you will be disappointed. But if you are after a popcorn-munching, octane-thriller, then Predator is the film for you. 

Ordinary People review

 Number 439 on the top 1000 films of all time is Robert Redford's 1976 directorial debut: Ordinary People.

The Jarretts are a wealthy upper-class family living in Chicago. However, mother Beth (Mary Tyler Moore) and father Calvin (Donald Sutherland) world is rocked after they lose one son in a boating accident and their other son Conrad (Timothy Hutton) tries and fails to take his own life. Despite help from therapist Tyrone Berger (Judd Hirsch) Conrad struggles to move on from the tragedy. The family slowly starts to disintegrate. 

This was always going to be a depressing film. That much was obvious from the film's summary. What made it so upsetting was its realness. The Jarretts can be substituted for any other family and the story would be the same. The tragedies that befall them could easily befall anyone. As the title would suggest, they are painfully ordinary people.

Ordinary People was Robert Redford's directorial debut. And it was a terrific debut, because he won the Best Directing Oscar. he did well in making the pain and the tragedy of the Jarrett family relatable for a general audience, regardless of how much wealth they hold.

Similar credit should be given to to the principle cast who were all Oscar-nominated except for Donald Sutherland. Moore and Hutton both won, with Hutton beating out his co-star Judd Hirsch. All this is while Donald Sutherland is generally regarded as one of the best actors to have never been Oscar-nominated, so his snubbing was no surprise. 

I do think if it was any other year Hirsch would have been beaten Hutton, but Hutton's considerable acting skills made him the youngest Best Supporting Actor Oscar in history - a record that stills stands to this day - at twenty. Of course, this isn't to disparage Hirsch. Therapists can tend to be played as cold and condescending, but this was not the case with Tyrone Berger. He was a warm and relatable man who soon becomes Conrad's most trusted confidante.

Yes, Ordinary People was a tragic film, but it was painfully relatable. Maybe that's why it was so sad.

Good Will Hunting review

 Number 159 on the top 1000 films of all time is the drama Good Will Hunting.

Will (Matt Damon) is an undiscovered genius with a troubled past. Instead of putting his genius to good use, he works as a janitor for MIT. That is until Professor Gerald Lambeau (Stellan Skarsgard) recognises his potential and arranges for Will to have counselling with therapist Dr Sean Maguire (Robin Williams.) Ben Affleck co stars as Will's best friend Chuckie and Minnie Driver plays Will's love interest Skylar.

In 1994, Matt Damon and Ben Affleck were struggling to break into the acting industry. They then decided to write and star in their own film. The rest as they say is history. Damon and Affleck went onto win Oscars for writing. Affleck has since gone onto win a Best Director Oscar for Argo. 

Yet the Oscars don't end there as you had the always terrific Robin Williams win Best Supporting Actor for his role as therapist Sean Maguire. Robin Williams is best known for his comedy roles but he is proven that he is equally adept at drama too. In this role, he played to both his comedic and dramatic strengths. One of the film's most famous scenes sees Maguire making Will dissolve into giggles by telling him a story about how his wife used to fart in her sleep. Matt Damon was laughing for real here as was the cameraman evidenced by how the camera shook. What made it so great was how it was unscripted.

Williams also had a great chemistry with Damon as we see Maguire become a mentor for the emotionally damaged Will. The two of them had many tender, heartfelt but also intense scenes together. Both of them were able to easily switch between comedy and drama.

Alas I cannot be so positive about Ben Affleck. I think it is very telling that he has won Oscars for writing and directing but NOT acting. I think this is because he is more wooden than your average tree. Chuckie was not an exception to this rule.

Although this is really just a minor blip in an otherwise very good film. It was funny yet dramatic with one of Robin Williams' finest performances 

Tangled review

Number 434 on the top 1000 films of all time is Disney’s animated fairy-tale film Tangled.

Based on the story of Rapunzel, we see the princess voiced by Mandy Moore kidnapped by the evil Mother Gothel (Donna Murphy) who raises her as her own daughter. Rapunzel knows nothing about her true identity. However, her hair has magical qualities that can heal all wounds and stop the aging process. She is locked away in a remote tower knowing nothing about the outside world. That is until the lovable rogue Flynn (Zachary Levi) stumbles upon her tower and soon changes her life.

Tangled is based on a fairytale, so like many of Disney’s films, it is formulaic. What I saw here was little different to the Disney princess films of old. You have your princess locked away by a parental figure with sinister intentions. She then meets a prince charming initially disguised as a selfish rogue, but who becomes a better person as a result of the princess. Throw in some magic, colourful animation and funny animals for good measure.

Yes, it is all stuff we’ve seen before but when you do it as well as Disney does then who’s complaining. Granted, I don’t think this is one of their best films, but it was certainly an entertaining watch. Rapunzel had a nice mixture of wonderlust, star-eyed naivety, agency and inner strength. This helped to give us a Disney princess for the modern age.

Although Flynn’s arc from selfish coward to unlikely hero was predictable, it was still enjoyable to watch. The villainous Mother Gothel wasn’t quite on the same levels as the likes of Scar, Jafar or the various evil stepmothers, but she had some great lines, especially when she was expressing her thinly-veiled contempt of her supposedly beloved daughter.

There were plenty of funny moments like when Rapunzel goes into the tavern supposedly full of thugs but they are actually full of gentle giants with a share of unrealised dreams.

Compared to some other Disney films, I don’t think the soundtrack was particularly memorable. This was a little disappointing as the music is often the best part of Disney’s films: I’m thinking of the Lion King, Mulan or Aladdin. Even the god-awful Frozen had an inescapable soundtrack. Yet I can’t remember any of the songs from Tangled.

True, I don’t think Tangled brought anything new to the genre. Disney were certainly treading familiar ground when they brought this fairy-tale to life, but when they do it as well as they do, who’s complaining really?

Evil Dead II review

 Number 436 on the top 1000 films of all time is Sam Raimi’s 1987 horror-comedy Evil Dead II.

Ash (Bruce Campbell) and his girlfriend Linda (Denise Bixler) have just arrived at a remote wood cabin for a passionate weekend away together. Instead, they find a mysterious book which turns Linda into a zombie, possesses anything in the vicinity with evil spirits and torments, harasses and terrifies Ash.

I know this was supposed to be a comedy and it was supposed to be silly, but silly comedies only work if they make audiences laugh. Instead they made me roll my eyes and decry the annoying, tedious nature of the film. The dialogue was cheesy, the characterisations were paper-thin and the special effects were pure B-movie.

I’m being generous when I say the characterisations were paper-thin, they were non-existent especially the female characters. It seemed like the actresses had little direction other than to stand around and scream in terror. This all became rather monotonous at a point. They had little to no agency. Even at times when they could have dealt lethal blows to the zombies, they just screeched and snarled.

This is in comparison to Ash who did little else than growl, shout or say cheesy one-liner after cheesy one-liner. He was very much the only character with any agency, but he still had as much depth as the shallow end of a swimming pool. Although other than fighting away arbitrarily possessed objects and people, he really didn’t have much to do.

Not that he had much to do. There was barely any storyline. The film had a basic siege plot as the small band of heroes led by Ash desperately try to defend themselves against the zombies. That’s it. But don’t forget the constant lapses in logic like Ash using a shotgun in one scene but forgetting about it in the next and using an axe. The rest of the film focussed on stupid characters making stupid decisions for no other reason than to fuel the plot. All very frustrating.

As were the special effects. They were so over-the-top, they just bordered on the ridiculous. It all became an endless gorefest at one point.

The less said about the ending the better too. It was like Raimi had taken a leaf out of 2001:Space Odyssey by sending Ash through some time-travelling wormhole into the past where we see a completely bonkers ending that I don’t think even Raimi properly understood. Talk about jumping the shark.

I know this was a comedy and I shouldn’t take it seriously. There was no way I could never take it seriously as a drama/horror film, but there was no way I could never take it seriously as a comedy either.

The Day the Earth Stood still review

Number 437 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1956 science-fiction film – The Day the Earth Stood Still.

One fateful day in 1951 Washington DC, a mysterious UFO sets down. Out comes an alien called Kantu (Michael Rennie) along with his robot protector Gort. The alien has an important message to tell the people of Earth, but will they listen? Patricia Neal co-starred.

It is safe to say that ‘The Day the Earth Stood Still’ was a sleeper hit. Neal herself thought the film would just be another of these generic flying saucer films that were so popular during the 1950’s. She could barely stop herself from laughing while reading the supposedly clunky dialogue. I’m glad that Neal was wrong, as the Day the Earth Stood Still was a terrific film.

Sure, you could argue that it isn’t the most original or novel especially by modern-day standards. However, in the 1950’s, paranoia and suspicion were rife, as was our wonder for life beyond the stars. We were in the midst of the cold war where there was distrust all around the world. Screenwriter Edmund H North capitalised on these ideas in this low-spectacle, but thoroughly interesting film.

It helped that you had the relatively-unknown Michael Rennie in the lead role. He was deliberately picked because of his low profile at the time. Director Robert Wise didn’t want a recognisable actor as Kantu, because it would have been too distracting. It was a good call, as Rennie gave a calm and measured performance as the alien.

The Day the Earth Stood still also succeeded where most science-fiction films, as it told an interesting story alongside exploring interesting ideas. Plus, at ninety minutes, it was well-paced with nothing feeling rushed or stretched. Kantu wishes to reveal his important message only to the whole world as once. Yet the logistical difficulties of this felt all too painfully real. How do you get the whole world to agree to something? I’m not sure this would be any easier now than it would have been in the 1950’s.

*spoilers*

Kantu finally reveals his message to a select group of scientists. He implores humanity to do what his race has done and employ a group of omnipotent robots to police them. Disobeying the robots would result in instant obliteration. This has led to an obliteration of all lawlessness on his world.

 Kantu finishes by saying that if humanity doesn’t choose this path, then we will lead ourselves into our own extinction. He leaves saying that he waits for humanity’s response. Judging by the state of our world now, I’m doubtful we will be renouncing our evil ways anytime soon.

Up review

 Number 134 on the top 1000 films of all time is Disney Pixar's family drama Up

Carl Frederickson (ken aster) has just lost his wife after decades of being together. Facing the prospect of losing his home too, he resolves to fulfill a lifelong dream of visiting the famous Paradise Falls. He is joined by wilderness explorer Russell (Jordan Nagari) who stows away unknown to Carl.

Up was released in 2009. It was the latest in the long line of successes from the prosperous animation studio. Like many Pixar films before it, Up had that rare ability to have you crying tears of laughter and sadness. 

The elderly Carl Frederickson is an unlikely hero, but that made him no less of an endearing character. His goals of wanting to fulfill an unrealised dream are relatable to all. He forms a touching father-son relationship with the wilderness explorer Russell - made all the more pertinent by Russell's rocky relationship with his own father and Carl's inability to have children with his wife.

Russell's good yet blundering personality provided a lot of the film's humour but also served as a great counterbalance to Carl's grumpy-old-man-ness. There is a lot of heart to back up the humour. We've already spoken about Carl and Russell's touching relationship, but there is also Carl's romance with his childhood sweetheart Ellie. The ten minute montage showing their relationship develop over the decades was more poignant than some whole two-hour films.

Up also has its share of interesting supporting characters from the bird Kevin to the "talking" dog Doug to the villainous Charles Muntz (Christopher Plummer.) All of these added something to this film.

And as you would expect from Disney Pixar, the animation was always on-point too. If you haven't seen Up yet, what are you waiting for? It was a brilliant feel-good film that will have you crying tears of laughter and sadness. 

Office Space review

 Number 430 on the top 1000 films of all time is the comedy 'Office Space.'

Peter Gibbons (Ron Livingston) is a lowly-paid software engineer who works in a cubicle. Hiss boss Bill Lumbergh (Gary Cole) is a micromanager, and Peter's wife is cheating on him. Aiming to retake control of his life, he hatches a scheme, along with his two colleagues Michael Bolton (David Herman) and Samir Nagheenanajar (Ajay Naidu,) to defraud the company, while also impressing waitress Joanna (Jennifer Aniston. A subplot sees the mousey, oddball employee Milton Waddams (Stephen Root) try and fail to win respect from those around him.

This was an entertaining if not excellent comedy which has since gained cult status. Sure it made me chuckle a few times, but it wasn't pant-wettingly funny. What it did do was use its small $10 million budget to great effect. Out of the cast, Jennifer Aniston was the only A-lister. The rest were either complete unknowns or up-and-comers.

Of course, Ron Livingston and Stephen Root have both gone onto star in the critically acclaimed series Boardwalk Empire. Livingston was good as our protagonist Peter. Through him, we vicariously fulfil a common fantasy of upturning our hum-drum office lives. Have any of us never wished to tell our manager to shut up? Thankfully, my time of working in a corporate office was only short, but I still still had my fair share of annoying micro-managing bosses. Gary Cole filled the role to a tee.

Although a box-office disappointment at the time, Office Space has gone onto garner a big reputation in no small part to the numerous memes of it that now circulate around the internet. Most of these either centre on micro-manager Bill or the timid doormat Milton. Despite only having a small role, Root was one of the best parts of the film.

I understand why Office Space is now a cult comedy. I also understand why it never had any mainstream success. It just wasn't funny enough for that.

Down By Law review

 Number 424 on the top 1000 films of all time is the independent noir comedy 'Down by Law.'

Zack (Tom Waits) a disc jockey and Jack (John Lurie) a pimp, are both set up and sent to jail. There they meet optimistic Italian Bob (Roberto Benigni.) The three of them stage a jailbreak together.

This was a strange film that dallied with the surreal even if it never quite crossed that bridge. The film subverted the odd couple trope by inserting a third member - the insufferably optimistic Bob - Roberto Benigni in his first American film.

Benigni really shone in this film helping to bring a lot of the off-beat comedy to what could have otherwise been quite a dour film. He also served as a foil between the warring Zack and Jack. Neither character liked each other very much, but Bob served as the glue which held the trio together. He has many endearing traits from his joie di vivre, but also his notebook full of English and Italian translations. The role wasn't unlike Benigni's Oscar-winning performance in Life is Beautiful.

Tom Waits is better known as a blues and rock singer, but he brought that same brooding mentality to the role of Zack. Waits also put his trademark deep, gravelly voice to good use. Zack is an angry, bitter man who is resentful toward the world, not unlike Jack in that regard.

As well as eschewing the odd couple trope, Down by Law also minimises the jail break itself in favour of focussing on the begrudging relationship that forms between the three men. As much as they don't want to admit it, they all need each other to survive. All this is captured in black and white, which stripped away any excess and helped to focus the off-beat humour of the film.

Down by Law was certainly an unconventional film that deliberately eschewed established norms, but it was enjoyable nonetheless.

The Ten Commandments review

 Number 422 on the top 1000 films of all time is Cecil B. Demille's 1956 biblical epic 'The Ten Commandments.'

The Ten Commandments dramatises the second book of the bible Exodus. We see Moses (Charlton Heston) change from an Egyptian price into the saviour of the Jewish people. Yul Brynner plays the Egyptian pharaoh Rameses II who clashes with Moses. Such events include the ten plagues, the exodus itself, the parting of the Red Sea and the receiving of the eponymous Ten Commandments.

There is no doubt that the Ten Commandments was a technical marvel upon its release. Although it's certainly outdated by modern standards, I was very impressed by the special effects from the burning bush to the parting of the Red Sea. At the time it was absolutely groundbreaking.

I have also read the bible including the book of Exodus. It is a dense text, but Cecil B Demille did well translating it to the screen. Sure, you can argue, that the almost four-hour runtime is excruciatingly long for today's Tiktok generation, but perhaps the length was necessary to truly convey the full extent of the book of Exodus. Granted it might have been overlong for me, but I think Rhodes managed to hit all the key plot points.

In the lead role, we have Charlton Heston who plays Moses with all the righteous indignation that we would expect from Heston. By righteous indignation, I mean lots of shouting - similarly to Planet of the Apes or Ben-Hur. Yul Brynner was also very good as the villainous Rameses II.

I'm not sure how well the Ten Commandments would appeal to a modern-day audience, but there's no doubt that it was a technically-proficient, Oscar-darling of its time.

Lone Survivor review

 Number 429 on the top 1000 films of all time is the biographical war film 'Lone Survivor.'

Lone Survivor tells the true story of Operation Redwings - an ultimately failed US Navy seal operation to track down the Taliban leader Ahmad Shah. The four-man team consists of Corpsman Marcus Lutrell (Mark Wahlbeg) Lieutenant Mike Murphy (Taylor Kitsch,) Gunner's Mate Danny Dietz (Emile Hirsch) and Sonar Technician Matthew "Axe" Axleson (Ben Foster.)

Like many US films about the Afghan War, it can be all too easy to dismiss them as stylised propaganda. Perhaps Lone Survivor is more nuanced than that, but it was ultimately still style over substance.

It received criticism for prioritising the action sequences over deep characterisations. Although the action sequences are impressive they are overlong and the character work suffered as a result. Upon being discovered i their outpost, the four Navy Seals have to defend themselves against a far bigger Taliban force. Most of the film consisted of an intense firefight and multiple falls from steep ravines - dangerous stunts that ultimately injured a lot of stunt performers.

It also begged belief that all four soldiers survived these falls with only superficial injuries. I know this was based on real life, but it seemed like the seals had some serious levels of plot armour. Maybe it was all the body armour they were wearing? They also did survive multiple bullet wounds - until they didn't. This isn't a spoiler by the way. It's called Lone Survivor for a reason.

Not that the title really means much. After his brothers-in-arms were killed, Marcus Lutrell becomes the eponymous lone survivor, but the characterisations are so paper-thin, this could have been any of the four navy seals. And when you have old, wooden Wahlberg in the lead role, things just became worse.

But Lutrell survives the Taliban militants by being sheltered by local Pashtun villager Muhammed Gulab who goes on to protect him from the Taliban militants. This was a nice way of adding some technicolour to the otherwise black-and-white storytelling of US good, Afghanistan bad. 

I initially thought Gulab was protecting Lutrell because of how the militants killed one of his fellow villagers earlier, but it was actually due to the Pashtun code of honour Pashtunwali where members swear to protect a man from his enemies at all costs.

Again this some nice characteristics - it's just a shame the Navy Seals didn't receive the same treatment. it was also a bit strange that the Pashtun local don't speak English until they're talking with Lutrell and then it's "f**k America" this and "f**k Taliban" that. All very unlikely.

My Left Foot review

 Number 428 on the top 1000 films of all time is Jim Sheridan's biopic: My Left Foot.

My Left Foot tells the true-life story of Christy Brown played by Daniel Day-Lewis. Christy Brown was a man living in 1930's Dublin who has been suffering from severe cerebral palsy since his birth. The only part of his body he can control is his left foot which he uses to become a successful writer and painter.

Upon watching this film, I thought it would be too traumatic to watch again. Akin to The Sea Inside or the Diving Bell and the Butterfly, it would explore the human condition in an inspirational but depressing way. It would raise up your spirits before brutally crushing them. 

However, the film surprised me intensely. Rather than being a soul-crushing, brutally-raw portrayal of Christy Brown's life, it was quite the opposite. This isn't to say that Christy Brown didn't suffer - he suffers immensely, especially during a time where cerebral palsy wasn't a widely recognised condition. Yet he is never a social outcast or pariah.

His family do their best to take care of him with his many siblings becoming his devoted caregivers. Brown also has many friends who are more than happy to include him in all his games. Even though his father played by Ray Macanally struggles with his son's condition, he is also the first to defend him from the teasing of his drinking buddies.

Daniel Day-Lewis won the first of his three acting Oscars for this role. It was a brilliant performance, as Christy Brown was over-flowing with humanity and vulnerability. Yet he was also inspirational. He never lets himself be downtrodden by his condition. True Day-Lewis may have gone a bit far in his method acting - actually having the crew push him around in a wheelchair - but it all paid off as Brown was a three-dimensional, well-rounded character. Just like anybody else, he has his own strengths and flaws.

Day-Lewis wasn't the only Oscar winner. Brenda Fricker also won the Best Supporting Actress Oscar for playing Brown's mother Bridget. She was every bit as good as Day-Lewis.

My Left Foot really surprised me as a film. I thought it would be one of the most depressing, hard-going films I would ever watch. I'm happy to admit that I couldn't have been more wrong.

Solaris (1972) review

 Number 250 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Russian science-fiction epic Solaris.

Kris Kelvin (Donatas Banionis) is a psychologist tasked with deciding whether a Soviet Union space station should continue its research. Upon arriving, he realises that something dreadful has happened to the skeleton crew assigned there.

Last year, I watched the 2002 American remake of Solaris starring George Clooney. To be honest, I think watching paint dry would have been more interesting. The remake was so boring that I fell asleep in the first half hour and missed the rest of the film. Things were never quite that bad here, but they weren't far off either.

In making Solaris, director Andrei Tarkovsky wanted to bring more emotional depth back to science fiction believing that films like 2001: A Space Odyssey focussed too much on technical innovation as opposed to interesting characters or a good story. I certainly admire his vision. Too often I find science fiction to be a vehicle for writers to show off how clever they are by exploring big themes, but forgetting to include any interesting characters. There are few science-fiction films I can think of which balance these two ideas well.

However, while I respect Tarkovsky's goal, I think he went too far in the opposite direction. In his aims to make a character-centric narrative, he forgot to include an interesting plot or any big ideas. Solaris reminded me of his 1979 effort Stalker, which was another film that was as dull as dishwater. Too much talking and not enough happening.

I am also doubtful whether Tarkobsky achieved his goal in creating emotional depth or memorable characters. Even as I write this review, I am struggling to remember any of the character's names at all. I had to look up Kelvin's name and I can't remember any other names at all.

I'm sure there are some of you out there who will say that I do not have the necessary brain power to understand science-fiction. Maybe you're right. But when they're as boring as Solaris, do I really want to understand them?

127 Hours review

 Number 619 on the top 1000 films of all time is Danny Boyle's 2010 biographical drama '127 Hours.'

127 Hours tells the true-life story of Aron Ralston (James Franco) - an American canyoneer and adventurer who becomes trapped in Bluejohn Canyon, Utah. If he can't escape, he will die.

This was a film I initially watched over ten years ago before I started writing film reviews. In those dark days rather than writing levelled and fair criticism, I used a silly and arbitrary system of adjectives. Instead of five stars, I described a film as either superlative, awesome, good, meh and shit. 127 Hours was one of the first films I saw that I labelled as superlative. Over ten years later, I think it holds up well to this high praise.

Much of this is down to Danny Boyle's excellent direction. Don't forget that 127 Hours was released in 2010 - just two years after Boyle won the Best Director Oscar for Slumdog Millionaire. 127 Hours contained the same slick and stylistic direction with some great cinematography. Perhaps this was due to the unusual decision of Boyle employing two separate cinematographers, Antony Dod Mantle and Enrique Chediak, who both outdid themselves. Sure, we get the stunning scenery of the Utah landscape, but you would expect to see these in any film. What you wouldn't expect were the excellent extreme close-ups. Once Aron is trapped in the canyon, the camerawork becomes more claustrophobic and intimate. The audience is trapped alongside with him.

Limited by their surroundings, Mantle and Chediak employ a whole host of clever shots from seeing water travel through the inside of Ralston's camelpak tube to a close-up of Ralston spinning the setting wheel on his digital camera. Considering much of the film is spent with Ralston trapped under the boulder, there was every chance the audience could have become bored. But this was far from the case. Despite the limited settings, the action and cinematography remained gripping and creative.

It helped that you had James Franco playing the main character. Primarily known for his comedy work, he turned his hand well to the more dramatic role of Aron Ralston. He did so well that he earned an Oscar nod. Considering that he is the only character on-screen for most of the film, Franco gave an entertaining and nuanced portrayal of Ralston, conveying simultaneously the bravado and arrogance that led to his predicament, as well as his inner fears and vulnerability when he realises the lethal nature of his situation.

Boyle also paced the film well. It is only a short ninety minutes, but it felt so much longer. I'm sure there could have been the temptation to have really drawn out the dramatic tension and Ralston's suffering, thus also drawing out the screentime, but Boyle did well by cutting it short. Anything longer could have been exhausting or gratuitous. If I were to be really nit-picky, I might say we could have used slightly more time expanding on Ralston's life before his incident. We get clips of his family life and his failed relationships like with past girlfriend Rana (Clemence Poesy) but these are nothing more than vignettes. Maybe that was all that was needed though.

I have now seen 127 Hours twice. Yes, it a thrilling, superlative watch, but it was also harrowing and intense. I shall not be watching it again. I'm not strong enough to watch the amputation scene (you know what I mean, this isn't a spoiler) for a third time. All credit to makeup designer Tony Gardner and the Alterian Inc company. They knocked it out of the park here.

But a word of warning for all you budding canyoneers and adventurers out there. One: always tell somebody where you're going and when you expect to be back. Two: do not cheap out on your survival equipment. Aron Ralston paid heavily for those mistakes.

The Sea Inside review

 Number 249 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2004 Spanish psychological drama 'The Sea Inside.'

The Sea Inside tells the true life story of Ramon Sampredo (Javier Bardem) a man who has been rendered a quadriplegic for the last 28 years. In that time, he has been fighting to be granted the right to euthanise himself.

Films are always a great way to explore taboo subjects and there are few subjects more taboo than euthanasia. The Sea Inside tackled this theme with gravitas and grace. There is a reason it won a whole host of awards both in its native Spain and internationally including the Best International Film Oscar.

Director Alejandro Amenabar, who co-wrote the script with Mateo Gil, tackled the many arguments for and against euthanasia. After 28 years of trying and failing to end his life, Ramon becomes a local celebrity. He has supporters like lawyer Julia (Belen Rueda) and his friend Gene (Clara Segara) who works for an organisation which supports the rights of those who wish to commit euthanasia.

However, he also has his opponents like local radio host Rosa (Lola Duenas) who urges him that life is worth living. This is in contrast to Gene and Julia who insist that the decision whether to live or die should always be Ramon's alone. Despite facing a moralistic minefield, Amenabar and Gil avoided being too preachy in their storytelling.

It helped that they had Javier Bardem in the lead role. He was nominated for a whole host of acting awards including Golden Globes and Critic Choice while also winning the Volpi Cup. Bardem really brought the character of Ramon Sampredo to life imbuing him with a charm and charisma that endeared him to audiences. Barden showed this charisma again only three years later when he won Best Supporting Actor for playing the psychotic hitman Anton Chigurin in No Country for Old Men. Arguably, this was his breakout Hollywood role.

The Sea Inside was a great film that was poignant without being preachy. It also featured a winning performance from Javier Bardem.

The Truman Show review

 Number 303 on the top 1000 films is Peter Weir's psychological comedy-drama 'The Truman Show.'

Truman Burbank (Jim Carrey) is your average, everyday American. Little does he realise that he is actually one of the most famous men in the world. He is unknowingly the star of his very own show, 'The Truman Show.' Secretly filmed since birth in a specially constructed set, Truman is loved worldwide. Yet everybody in his personal life from his wife Meryl (Laura Linney) and his best friend Marlon (Noah Emmerich) is trying to keep him from discovering the truth. Ed Harris co-stars as the show's creator Christof.

In 1998, director Peter Weir and screenwriter Andrew Niccol created one of the most relevant films about celebrity culture and reality TV ever. It's as pertinent today as it ever was in the 1990's. Just like most reality TV stars, Truman Burbank has no special talents or skills yet he is beloved by audiences worldwide. It is a great comment on the perverse nature of the parasocial relationships that audiences have with celebrities who don't even know they exist. Weir and Niccol brilliantly hit on the themes of celebrity worship in a way that saw them rightly nominated for a whole host of writing and directing awards including Baftas and Oscars.

However, a film like the Truman Show hinges on the success of its main star and Jim Carrey gave quite possibly one of his best performances. I'm always said that his comedy is over-the-top, but here he was reserved and understated. He was able to channel good physical comedy into the more dramatic role of Truman Burbank. Just like Truman endeared himself to fictional audiences, Jim Carrey endeared himself to real-life ones. But not the Academy though. He was snubbed by them when it came to the Oscars. This is made even more egregious by how Ed Harris was nominated for Christof, but Carrey would have been up against some stiff competition with Tom Hanks for Saving Private Ryan and Roberto Benigni in Life is Beautiful - but at least Carrey won the Golden Globe for the role.

The supporting cast were great too from Laura Linney as Truman's wife Meryl who eventually snaps after the pressure of keeping Truman from discovering the truth becomes too much to Noah Emmerich who played his best friend Marlon. Marlon was always on-hand to help defuse any situations and provide support to his best friend. Last, but not least, we have Ed Harris who excelled as the beret-wearing auteur Christof. Like too many creatives I know, he has a God complex, which Harris conveyed perfectly. After all he does have "Christ" in his name.

The Truman Show was a true triumph. It contained some brilliant social commentary and had a winning performance from Jim Carrey that perfectly blended drama and comedy.

Cabaret Review

 Number 410 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1972 musical period-drama 'Cabaret.'

Sally Bowles (Liza Minnelli) is a free-spirited cabaret singer in 1931 Berlin. She forms an unlikely friendship with the upright and repressed English teacher Brian Roberts (Michael York.) Meanwhile, the shadow of Nazi Germany looms large overhead.

It's safe to say that Cabaret swept the 1973 Oscars. it was nominated for ten awards and won no less than eight including Best Score, Best Actress for Liza Minnelli and Best Supporting Actor for Joel Grey - who played the compere of Sally's club. It lost the Best Picture award to the second Godfather film.

Strangely, despite his co-stars winning, Michael York wasn't even nominated. To me, this smells like a snub as egregious as Audrey Hepburn and My Fair Lady. You'll nominate Cabaret for virtually every other Oscar going, but NOT Michael York for Best Actor? It doesn't make sense. I'm not sure he would have won - would anybody beat Marlon Brando in the Godfather, but to not even be nominated...

York was very good as the stoically repressed Brian Roberts who was slowly undone by the carefree Sally. I wouldn't describe Brian as a brutish, emotionally shutdown cinnamon swirl, but rather an uptight, stick in the mud. He is also a deeply conflicted man holding a dark secret.

Minnelli was also very good as Sally Bowles embodying the best of Audrey Hepburn's airheaded characters. However, there was more to Sally Bowles than meets the eye. All of this was played against the backdrop of the rise of Nazi Germany. We receive subtle clues, but the early brutalities of the regime were cleverly alluded to rather than being shown outright.

Musicals like Cabaret might not be for everyone - they're not for me, but the Academy certainly loved it. Just not enough to nominate Michael York for an acting Oscar...

The Man from Nowhere review

 Number 417 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2010 Korean neo-noir action-thriller 'The Man from Nowhere.'

Cha Tae-Sik (Won Bin) is a pawn shop owner with a dark past. When his only friend - the ten year old So-Mi (Sae-Ron Kim) is kidnapped by gangsters, he will stop at nothing to get her back.

If there's one thing I've learned from my experience of watching Korean films is that they do not do anything by half-measures. They go in hard with their use of stylised violence and slick fight choreography. Sure, at times, it's over-the-top and even cheesy, but it's still entertaining enough to watch.

At the heart of our action story we have the psychologically-damaged, former black ops soldier Tae-Sik and his touching relationship with the young, innocent So-Mi. The old cinnamon swirl being undone by the cute kid certainly isn't a new idea, but if done, well, it's certainly entertaining to watch. And it was well done here.

Won Bin gave a measured performance taking Tae-Sik from the darkly mysterious loner to an all-out action here. Similarly, So Mi's relationship with her junkie mother is so damaged that it's understandable seeing her latch onto a father figure like Tae-Sik.

If anything I would say the villains weren't as well-developed as they could have been. Tae-Sik was fighting against a series of gangsters running a lethal organ-harvesting operation. There were quite a few of them and they all blended into one after a while.

Overall, the Man from Nowhere, was exactly what it said on-the-tin - an over-the-top, no holds barred K-Thriller.

Clerks review

 Number 421 on the top 1000 films of all time is Kevin Smith's slice-of-life comedy film 'Clerks.'

Clerks follows a day in the life of best friends supermarket cashier Dante Hicks (Brian O'Halloran) and video shop employee Randal Graves (Jeff Anderson,) as they navigate the challenges, customers and struggles of their own personal lives.

I've been fortunate enough to have never worked a retail job. There is no shortage of stories entailing the horrors of working with the general public. It is for that reason that I failed to properly connect with this film. Not to mention, it just wasn't funny.

I had my first chuckle at minute seventeen, my second at minute twenty-nine and I don't think there was a third. If a comedy film only makes you laugh twice in its ninety-minute run time then it has failed. It didn't help a lot of the humour was immature and juvenile.

It also didn't help that the main characters weren't characters I wanted to laugh with or at. Dante is constantly bemoaning how he wasn't supposed to be working that day, but was called in to cover a colleague's shift. At the film's conclusion, Randal correctly admonishes him on his self-pitying behaviour. Yet by this time I had grown weary of both characters. Randal's immaturity was equally annoying.

If I were to say anything positive, it would be about Kevin Smith's vision. He directed, produced and wrote a critical and commercially successful film for a miniscule budget of $27,000. To cut costs, he filmed in black and white, cast his friends and set the film in the video store where he worked during the day. His efforts worked as the film went onto gross almost $4,000,000. All credit to Kevin Smith.

Clerks was not a film that landed for me. It was funny with annoying, unlikeable characters.

The Chorus review

 Number 415 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2004 German-French-Swiss musical drama 'The Chorus.'

Clement Mathieu (Gerard Jugnot) is a failed musician and teacher starting at the notorious Fond de l'etang French boarding school for delinquent boys. Once there, he is shocked by the headmaster Rachin's (Francois Berleand) tyrannical methods. To instil some discipline and morale, Mathieu decides to turn the delinquent boys into a choir.

If you look past the predictability and cliche, this was an enjoyable enough film.  It's a film that has been done many times before - arguably better too - especially in Dead Poet's Society. Jugnot was no Robin Williams, but he was certainly charming enough as the bumbling, but well-intentioned teacher turned choirmaster. And Rachin was no nurse Ratched but he made for a slimy and scary villain.

Yet it was difficult to look past the cliche. Mathieu is trying to desperately reach his students, so he turns them into a choir. Without too much arguing they quickly and fall into line. I found this all a bit too convenient. I understand the boys do need to agree to be part of the choir for the film to work, but it's difficult to believe they wouldn't have resisted this idea more at first.

The boys themselves were more underdeveloped in comparison to the adult characters. You had Pierre Morhange (Jean-Baptiste Maunier) who despite being one of the best singers is very badly behaved because of a vague troubled homelife, Pepinot (Maxence Perrin) forever waiting for parents who will never come and the hot-headed Mondian (Gregory Gatignol) whose side purpose is to create conflict rather than being a fully-formed character. Most of the boys felt like rough stretches than proper characters.

The film also felt directionless. I couldn't see the end goal for Mathieu's choir. This wasn't like the Blues Brothers when they were trying to stop their childhood orphanage from being closed down. I thought Mathieu would enter the boys in a singing competition or use them to secure more funding, but other than a showing for an investor, there was little else at stake.

The Chorus was certainly an entertaining film, but only entertaining. It was too predictable to be anything more.

Do the Right Thing review

 Number 409 on the top 1000 films of all time is Spike Lee's coming-of-age comedy-drama 'Do the Right Thing.'

Mookie (Spike Lee) is an African-American living in a rough Brooklyn neighbourhood. All he wants from life is to make enough money from his pizza delivery job at Sal's pizzeria so he can support his family. However, on an excruciatingly hot day, racial tensions between Sal (Danny Aiello,) and his sons Pino (John Turturro) and Vito (Richard Edson) and the other African-Americans in the neighbourhood including Radio Raheem (Bill Nunn) and Buggin' Out (Giancarlo Esposito) a man who fancies himself the next Malcom X. As a race riot threatens to break out, Mookie is forced to pick a side.

Do the Right Thing is just another film in a long list tackling one of the US' most pertinent issues: race relations. The US is known as the greatest melting pot playing home to people from all over the world. It's only natural that some of those people might not like each other as is the case here.

The deeply racist Vito resent working in an African-American neighbourhood and believes they should be with their own kind. Meanwhile, the African-American community doesn't like that white-owned businesses at the heart of their town. They believe there should be black businesses instead. It's a powder keg waiting to blow.

Another theme that Lee is explores is police brutality - another issue that has plagued the US for decades. Do the Right Thing was dedicated to Eleanor Bumpers, Arthur Miller Jr, Edmund Perry, Yvonne Smallwood, Michael Stewart and Michael Griffith - with the former five having been killed by police and the sixth by a white mob. Only a few years later, Rodney King was beaten and I do not have the necessary computer memory to write the name of every single black person who has been killed by the police in the last twenty-five years, except for one of the most notable: George Floyd.

Spike Lee tackles both of these subjects with his stylistic flair - think bold colours, razor-sharp dialogue and all the subtlety of a sledgehammer. Sure you can argue that he was exploring themes too important not to tackle head-on, but this exploration was incredibly on the nose. One scene has the different characters speaking directly to the camera, as they monologue racist insults about different groups of people. Sure this racism might be accurate, but its depiction was heavy-handed.

This isn't to denigrate the acting of those involved - least of all from Spike Lee as the lead Mookie. Giancarlo Esposito was also good as the political cognizant Buggin Out - it was amazing to think this was the same man who wowed audiences in Breaking Bad. But the standout star had to be Danny Aiello who received a well-earned Best Supporting Actor Oscar nomination. Initially, Sal is nothing more than hard-working Italian-American who often plays the mediator between his deeply racist son Pino and the black customers. However, not even the good-natured Sal can only keep his demons at bay for so long before he is driven too far on an excruciatingly hot day. Unlike Pino who overly hates blacks, I think Sal was a lot more level-headed, but, like the other characters, he fell victim to the simmering racial tension.

John Turturro was also very good as Vito. He gave a multi-layered performance, as one of the more openly racist characters of the film. It would have been all too easy to have written/portrayed him as a one-dimensional Italian-American "moolie" hating greaseball, but he was more three-dimensional than his.

But I would like to say one thing quickly. Why in these films do you always have the black characters being racist to the East Asian, or in this case, Korean characters? The local supermarket is ran by a Korean couple who are often the subject of racist taunting by the black characters. It was something similar to Menace II Society. Perhaps it was Lee's commitment to realism, but it didn't make his characters very endearing.

However, 'Do the Right Thing,' was a memorable and stylised, if heavy-handed, exploration of two issues that have plagued American society for decades. What was the right thing that Sal and Mookie should have done? Who knows?  

Dogville review

 Number 295 on the top 1000 films of all time is Lars Von Trier's 2003 experimental drama Dogville.

Grace (Nicole Kidman) is a fugitive trying to outrun both the mob and the law. She stumbles into the small mountain town of Dogville, Colorado. At the behest of the town's moral leader Tom Edison Jr (Paul Bettany,) the town's people reluctantly decide to take her in. However, Grace quickly learns that their kindness comes at a steep price. The huge ensemble cast includes Stellan Skarsgaard, Lauren Bacall, Philip Baker Hall, Patricia Clarkson, James Caan with John Hurt providing narration.

Dogville was highly experimental. Was it an experiment that worked? I'm not so sure. Reminiscent of black-box theatre, it was filmed on a minimalist stage-like set. Instead of buildings, there are chalk outlines. Instead of backdrops you have black or white walls. As the name would suggest it was like being in a black box. Although this tradition is common in the theatre, it is rare to see in film. I don't think it translated well.

The minimalism is designed to highlight the story and acting, but it just came across as pretentious. Too much was left to the viewer's imagination. it was like one of those restaurants that gets you took cook the food yourself. This is the chef's job, not the diner's.

Due to the natural limitations of the theatre, the Black Box style works well. But film is a different medium. You can have sets and film on location. There's no reason to have a minimalist style.

What really hurt the film was John Hurt's god-awful narration. It was overly-expository and one of the worse examples of telling, not showing. It was like I was reading a badly-written book with John Hurt telling me the characters were looking around or acting scared or being morally bad - which the characters then repeated. Not faulting John Hurt, of course, but this narration made me roll my eyes.

The film is also divided into nine chapters with title cards denoting when they started. It was like if I wanted to read a book I would have just read a book, not watch a film. When the ninth title said the film would be ending soon, I cheered loudly. This isn't the reaction you want your audience to have.

The dialogue was also eye-roll worthy. Honestly, I don't know how Bettany and Kidman delivered it with a straight faces. One cringe-worthy, innuendo-laden conversation saw Tom Edison Jr telling Grace that you can't plant seeds in the winter. Ew. Much of the dialogue steered toward the more-is-less mindset like I was watching a Shakespearean play.

As you might expect from a Von Trier film, it utilised elements from his own cinematic style of Dogme 54 including the hand-held camerawork. In a different film, this might have made things more intense, but alas it could not save Dogville.

Although the beginning and middle were slow and ponderous, it did build toward an unexpected and thrilling conclusion. The mob finally tracks Grace down to Dogville where we learn the mob boss (James Caan) is her father. Grace ran away from them after being sickened by their violent nature. Yet her father insists that she is hypocritical acting like she is morally better than everybody else when that could be furthest from the truth. 

Having spent much of the film's second act being bullied by the townspeople, she soon realises they're not much different from the mob. At the gentle encouragement of her father, she agrees for all of them, including the children and her would-be lover, Tom, to be shot dead. This was a dark, twist ending that I did not see coming. It also separated Grace from Von Trier's more naive female protagonists in Breaking the Waves or Dancer in the Dark.

Dogville was like a failed science experiment. Maybe it could have worked as a stageplay, but it didn't translate to film. Instead, it was boring, overly-long and just plain pretentious.