Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956) Review

 Number 454 on the top 1000 films of all time is the science-fiction horror film 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers.'

Miles Bennell (Kevin McCarthy) is a doctor in LA who soon starts to be convinced that everybody around him has been replaced by copies. This includes everybody except for his girlfriend Becky (Dana Wynter.) However, as things start to become more serious, Miles struggles in getting anybody else to believe him. He endeavours to prove the truth no matter the cost.

I think it can be all too easy to dismiss films like these as just another science-fiction flick capitalising on the Red-Scare panic of the 1950's. And while Don Siegel certainly captured the paranoia of McCarthy's America, this film is certainly more than your average B-movie sci-fi film.

Although it was initially forgotten by critics, it has since grown into one of the pre-eminent science fiction/horror films and for good reason. Despite having a minimal $400,000 budget and a paltry 80 minute runtime, it grossed over seven times that. Probably due to the small budget, it was simple, but incredibly effective. Siegel did well to really convey a fearful atmosphere. 

Perhaps that's because he deliberately under-played things. Despite hearing throughout about the pod people who have replaced the town, we only see glimpses of the pods themselves and never anything of the actual aliens. Instead, they these people look like the average person on the street, again showing the paranoia that was rampant at the time. It was the simplicity that, I think, made this film stand out against some of its contemporaries like Forbidden Planet.

Kevin McCarthy - no relation to Joseph McCarthy who gave his name to the anti-communist policies that dominated the 60's - was very good as the lead Miles Bennell. He brought an everyman quality as we see Bennell trying desperately to expose the truth while not falling to hysteria. And, best of all, unlike most science fiction, Bennell was actually an interesting character that you want to root for.

I enjoyed Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Although it was low-budget, this by no far impacted it quality. And it was certainly more than your average 1950's sci-film which exploited the McCarthyismesque paranoia of the time.

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.