Eastern Promises review

 Number 605 on the top 1000 films of all time is David Cronenberg's crime-drama 'Eastern Promises.'

Anna Khitrova (Naomi Watts) is an English-Russian midwife whose next patient is Russian sexual-trafficking victim Tatiana. Tatiana is pregnant and dies in childbirth but her daughter survives. When Anna tries to locate the newborn baby's family, she is drawn into the Russian criminal underworld spearheaded by Nikolai Luzhin - driver for the Russian mafia boss Sermyon (Armin Mueller-Stahl) and his loose cannon son Kiril (Vincent Cassel.)

There was a lot to like about this film and I was definitely all in up until the film's final act where it lost me. But before we get too negative let's talk about the positives of the film. I would be doing a major disservice if I didn't speak about Viggo Mortenson - one of the most chameleonic and versatile actors working in Hollywood today. And he was terrific as the morally grey Nikolai - driver to the Russian mafia. There is a reason he received a whole slieu of nominations (including an Oscar nod) and Best Actor awards like the Bafta for the role. 

I also very much enjoyed Armin Mueller-Stahl as the villainous Sermyon - he is a character living a double life. On the outside, he is a charming and amicable restauranter but on the inside he is a vicious criminal. Mueller-Stahl played both parts of the role very well. At first he didn't seem anymore dangerous than a lovable grandpa, but scratch beneath the surface and he was a chilling psychopath. Vincent Cassel also brought a great chaotic energy to the unpredictable Kiril - even if this did border on the unbelievable at times.

David Cronenberg is well-known for being a master of body-horror and Eastern Promise is certainly no exception. It had its share of violence and throat-slitting which, while being stomach-churning, also had a feeling of authenticity. Cronenberg rejected the gangsters using guns, as in real life they tend to use knives. The two Chechen assassins have linolem cutting knives which could easily be disguised as tools. It is more difficult to do that with guns. Speaking of the two Chechen assassins, their fight with Nikolai has to be the highlight of the film. It was a thrilling, exciting climax, but also one that arrived too early. Everything that came after was anticlimatic and disappointing. Spoiler territory to follow.

The two Chechens try to kill Nikolai after mistakenly believing that he is Kiril. Why do they think this? Nikolai was set up by a rival capo after both he and Kiril were involved in the killing of an associate. This was a brilliantly-choregraphed fight scene, but largely inconsequential. What happens to the capo who set up Nikolai? We don't know because the film jumps to the reveal that Nikolai is actually an undercover Russian agent on loan to the London police. He then provides them evidence to arrest Sermyon for the earlier statuory rape of Tatiana. The arrest itself is left off-screen.

Instead we see Kiril attempt to kidnap and murder Tatiana's baby on his father's orders before being talked around by Nikolai. Compared to the thrilling fight scene, it was a damp squib of an ending. It was building toward a big bang but instead finished with a whisper. Naomi Watts was also less than convincing in her role of Anna very much lacking the intensity of her co-stars.

Eastern Promises is definitely a good example of a film that started stronger than it finished. It had so much potential that was just wasted.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang review

 Number 602 on the top 1000 films of all time is Shane Black's 2005 crime-caper Kiss Kiss Bang Bang.

Harry Lockhart (Robert Downey Jr) isa  burglar and petty crook who after on the run from the police worms his way into a high-profile acting role and fancy Hollywood party. Thetre he meets private detective 'Gay' Perry Van Shrike (Val Kilmer._ Lockhart becomes mixed up in Van Shrike's murder investigation. Michelle Monaghan co-stars.

In the 1990's, Roberty Downey Jr was one of the hottest properties in Hollywood earning Oscar nods for playing Charlie Chaplin. This all came crashing down at the end of the decade following a string of high-profile drug arrests and imprisonments. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang marked a clear resurgence in his career.

In many ways, the lovable rogue of Harry Lockhart served as a bleuprint for Downey most famous role of Tony Stark aka Iron Man. Lockhart is a charismatic if annoying jerk whose mile-an-hour mouth gets him into a lot of trouble. Mix that in with the straight-laced Van Shrike (Val Kilmer) and you have a very funny film.

Much of the film's humour comes from its meta-fictional, tongue-in-cheek tone with Lockhart providing amusing narration that pokes fun at the noir films of old. More specifically, he pokes fun at the convoluted plots that you might see in noir films starring Old Bogey. Personally, I've always found these films too smart for their own good, so it was nice seeing this be referenced. Although i would argue this film's storyline was similarly convoluted almost needed a cork bord and multiple reels of twine to figure out.

Yes, the film was convoluted but I would also argue that Michelle Monaghan was under-utilised. She seemed to spend much of the film in a sexy santa costume and could have had more to do. She is a good actress with a proven career from TV's True Detective to the silver screen with Gone Baby Gone. It would have been nice to have seen her do more.

Nevertheless, I did enjoy Kiss Kiss Bang Bang. And I very much enjoyed its parodying of the noir films of old.

Shine film

 Number 593 on the top 1000 films of all time is the musical biopic 'Shine.'

Shine ells the true-life story of famed Australian pianist David Helfgott from his childhood to the start of his career, where he was played by Noah Taylor, to his eventual mental breakdown where Geoffrey Rush took over the mantle.

Shine is perhaps best-known for its success at the 69th Academy awards where it generated seven nominations and one win. Armin Mueller-Stahl was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for playing David's tyrannical father Peter. For playing David, Geoffrey Rush took home the Best Actor gong.

Sure Rush was great, but did he shine enough to merit an Oscar? I'm not so sure. And I think that's more because he wasn't given a chance to shine. He shared the role of David with Noah Taylor and I'd argue that Taylor dominated the role. He had the more interesting parts. We see the fledgling beginnings of David's career, his tempestuous relationship with his father - more on that later - and the beginnings of David's breakdown. Rush takes over the latter half of the film, as we see David's life post-breakdown. It wasn't as interesting. Noah Taylor was more deserving of the Oscar nod, not because of the difference in acting quality, but in screen-time ratio.

However, Armin Mueller-Stahl was well-deserving of his Best Supporting Actor nomination. He cut a well-intentioned if misguided father figure trying to live out his failed dreams through his children. A toxic parent, but a great performance. Ultimately, Mueller-Stahl lost to Cuba Gooding Jr in Jerry Maguire, but this was still a memorable performance.

In some ways, Shine reminded me of Ron Howard's later film 'A Beautiful Mind,' which explored similar tortured genius mathematician John Nash. Although David was a more likable character and the plus side of having two actors portray him was that we got a well-rounded, three-dimensional character.

I'm not sure if Shine shone bright enough to be truly Oscar-worthy, but it was a good film nonetheless.

Malcolm X review

 Number 595 on the top 1000 films of all time is Spike Lee's epic biopic 'Malcolm X.'

Malcolm X (Denzel Washington) follows the life of the famed civil rights leader from his beginnings as a petty crook to his initial conversion to Islam in prison to becoming one of the highest ranking members of the Nation of Islam - perhaps evening becoming more powerful than leader Elijah Muhammed (Al Freeman Junior.)

I've seen a few Spike Lee films and if could describe them in a word, it would be heavy-handed. They're never as subtle as they could be. He's well-known for his focus on institutionalised racism and the African-American experience, so an adaptation of Malcolm X's life by an African-American director seemed like the perfect idea. Especially when the initially-attached white Norman Jewison was rejected because it was deemed a black director would be more appropriate. However, Malcolm X was a bloated, heavy-handed affair. Sure it was entertaining enough, but over-long and on the nose.

When I say over-long, I'm not kidding as it clocked in at just over two hundred minutes. And that was largely down to Spike Lee having financial control over the project thanks to many donors helping to fund the film. Like many biopics, it started too early into the main character's life and repeats too many key events - like Malcolm's father being brutalised by the KKK. Much of the film's third act focussed on Malcolm's many speeches, as he gained power within the Nation of Islam. Spike Lee insisted that you can't have a Malcolm X film without his speeches, but did we need every single speech? One or two would have sufficed.

This isn't to discredit Denzel Washington of course. He is a fine actor well-worthy of his two acting Oscars. Many people argue he should have won instead of Al Pacino in Scent of a Woman. Sure Pacino was great here, but I might argue that Malcolm X went on a far more interesting journey which was strongly portrayed by Washington. It was fascinating watching Malcolm Little go from a streetwise, cocky street hustler to a dedicated student of Islam where he sheds his "slave name" of Little to charismatic leader.

No, I'm saving my criticism for Spike Lee and his heavy-handed storytelling. Unlike 25th Hour and Do the Right Thing, there were no racially charged monologues, but there was a weird tracking shot like at the end of Blackkklansman.

Ultimately Malcolm X wasn't an inherently bad film, but it was bloated and not particularly subtle.

Three Colours: White review

 Number 588 on the top 1000 films of all time is the French comedy-drama 'Three Colours White - the middle sibling in Kryzsztof Kieslowski's 'Three Colours' trilogy.

Karol Karol (Zbigniew Zamachowski) is a Polish immigrant living in France whose wife Dominique (Julie Delphy) is divorcing him. He resolves to improve his life and exact revenge on his ex-wife.

Of the Three Colours trilogy, I would say this is my favourite. All three films have their own emotional nadirs, but this one seemed to resonate the most. Three Colours: White is named because like in some films, it follows the tricolour of the French flag and that qualities each colour represents. These different qualities link the film thematically - in this case equality - although you can argue freedom/liberation are present too.

Karol Karol begins as a most pathetic man - a man being divorced by his wife due to his own impotence. The fact he seems sympathetic makes him even more pathetic. After Dominique invokes divorce proceedings and frames him for an arson attack on their shared-owned salon, he becomes a beggar in Paris. Although he goes through self-pity at first, he soon meets fellow Polish immigrant Mikolai (Janusz Gajos) who galvanises him into taking action.

Although there's nothing wrong with going through hard times, it's never being round somebody who's always feeling sorry for themselves so I enjoyed seeing turn from an omega male into - maybe not alpha, but perhaps delta? Metaphors aside, it was enjoyable seeing him regain his confidence and his standing in society, which becomes much easier once he returns to Poland.

Zbigniew was very good in the role and displayed all of the different aspects of the character well. I also enjoyed Julie Delphy as his estranged wife Dominique. She is perhaps best known to international audience for her work in the excellent Before Trilogy, but she was equally good in this antagonistic role.

If I were to criticise anything, it would be the ending. I won't spoil anything, but suffice to say, it seems that Karol and Dominique are on the brink of reconciliation. Considering Karol spends much of the film getting back at his wife, it's strange that by the film's conclusion he is trying to get back with his wife.

That notwithstanding I've finally completed the Three Colours trilogy. White is definitely my favourite.

Planet Terror review

 Number 591 on the top 1000 films of all time is Robert Rodriguez' action-comedy zombie film: Planet Terror. Planet Terror shares this position with its sister film Death Proof. I will review both films separately.

Planet Terror follows the remnants of society as they struggle to repel a zombie outbreak. The survivors include the town's sheriff Hague (Michael Biehn,) his barbecue chef brother JT (Jeff Fahey,) career criminal El Wrey (Freddy Rodriguez) his stripper girlfriend Cherry (Rose Mcgowan) and Dr Dakota Block (Marley Skelton.) Josh Brolin, Bruce Willis and Naveen Andrews all co-star.

Planet Terror was directed by Robert Rodriguez with support from producer Quentin Tarantino. The film was intended as a homage to the exploitation B movies to the 1970's, so it was over-the-top, brash and, well, just silly. I know it was a homage, not meant to be taken seriously, but it was daft. Even as a parody of sorts, I found it difficult to take it seriously.

Perhaps that's because of my dislike of the action movies it was parodying. Character development and emotional weight took second stage to gunfire and explosions. Sure the characters weren't meant to be too complex, but neither were they supposed to be paper-thin. El Wray was little more than your lovable rogue gone good.

It didn't help you had Freddy Rodriguez playing him. Don't get me wrong, he great as the mild-mannered undertake in the TV series Six Feet Under, but I had difficulty believing him to be some tough-as-nails gangster. I could say the same for many of the other characters and actors.

Although Planet Terror was more critically regarded than its sister film Death Proof, it didn't score well commercially. Reportedly, the disgraced Harvey Weinstein killed in distribution due to his displeasure of Rose Mcgowan being cast. That being said, I much preferred Death Proof.

Yes, I know, Planet Terror is a popcorn film not meant to be taken seriously, but I also didn't think it was supposed to be so damn silly either.

Death Proof review

 Number 591 on the top 1000 films of all time is Quentin Tarantino's psychological thriller Death Proof. Death Proof shares this position with its sister film Planet Terror which were released together under the moniker Grindhouse. I will review both films separately.

Stuntman Mike (Kurt Russell) is a serial killer stuntman who kills women using his specially-modified car. Rose Mcgowan, Sydney Poitier, Rosario Dawson, Sam Bell among others co-star as the women he targets.

Tarantino generally regards Death Proof as his worse. Having now finally seen them all, I don't agree. I think that honour would go to the bloated and dialogue-heavy 'The Hateful Eight.' Neither is Death Proof one of his best - the simple but effective Reservoir Dogs takes the throne.

True, Death Proof is a relatively simple and straightforward film, but it lacked the same emotional pathos that Reservoir Dogs reached. Although maybe Death Proof didn't need it. It was a simple story of a psychopathic stuntman getting his just-desserts. Yes, it is rather self-validating with many callbacks to his previous films like Kill Bill - which would go over the head of casual viewers, but it was nowhere near as bad as Once Upon a Time in Hollywood.

Kurt Russell was very good as the terrifying killer stuman and it was particularly fun seeing him go from predator to prey. His reaction to getting shot was probably one of the most realistic I've seen in many films. Speaking of realism, Tarantino does dialogue well. Its realistic yet snappy - the Hateful Eight not included of course.

While Stuntman Mike goes from predator to prey, his would-be victims played by Zoe Bell, Rosario Dawson and Tracie Thoms become his hunter. This was a great and unexpected twist that I didn't see coming. It was something that made you sit up and realise this wasn't your average slasher film. It was a Tarantino slasher film complete with great performances from his women cast - performances matched Kurt Russell. Albeit, it all led to a rather abrupt and random ending.

That being said, I enjoyed Death Proof for what it was - a fun and thrilling slasher. It wasn't one of Tarantino's best, but definitely not his worse either.

Shortcuts review

Number 563 on the top 1000 films of all time is Robert Altman’s comedy drama: Short Cuts. 

Short Cuts tells a slice of life story of a group of strangers in LA whose lives occasionally intersect. There is the Finnegan family consisting of TV personality Howard (Bruce Davison,) his wife Anne (Andie Mcdowell) and their son Casey. There is also the Wymans: Ralph (Matthew Modine) and Marian (Julianne Moore,) and not forgetting Marian’s sister, Sherri (Madeline Stowe) whose husband, cop Gene (Tim Robbins) is cheating on her. Chris Penn, Robert Downey Junior, Frances Mcdormand, Tom Waits and a whole host of others all co-star.

Shortcuts reminded me of other slice-of-life films like Paul Thomas Anderson’s Magnolia or the repulsive Happiness – insert links. Just like Short Cuts which clocked in at a monstrous 188 minutes, Magnolia and Happiness are similarly epic in length. This is also matched by their huge ensemble casts including the likes of Tom Cruise, Philip Seymour Hoffman and others I need to check. Through the very nature of slice-of-life films, you need interesting characters. They are absolutely essential for the plot to succeed. In this regard, Short Cuts wasn’t comparable to Magnolia at all, but at least it wasn’t disgusting like Happiness.

Unfortunately, Short Cuts did just lack the same interesting and memorable characters that films like Magnolia had. Tom Cruise was rightly nominated for an Oscar for his work in Magnolia. He was terrific, but I can’t really think of any equivalent performances in Short Cuts. Robert Altman landed a Best Director nod, but that was it for the Oscars. Although evidently the critics don’t agree with me as Short Cuts won Best Ensemble at the Golden Globes, Julianne Moore and Andi McDowell were nominated and Madeline Stowe received a Best Supporting Actress Oscar from the National Society of Film Critics.

That’s their prerogative. I still can’t think back to a certain character and definitively say this film was all the better with them in it.  Many of the characters blended into one with few exceptions. I don’t think Tim Robbins was particularly convincing as the alcoholic, antagonistic, adultering cop Gene…but maybe it’s because he was so damn good in films like the Shawshank Redemption or Mystic River where he played tragic heroes.

Alas I think Short Cuts was a film undone by its very premise. If you have a slice-of-life drama where the audience has no interest in the lives being portrayed, then you won’t have a very interesting film. That was the case here.

Boy A film

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Barton Fink review

 Number 548 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Coen Brothers' black-comedy Barton Fink.

Barton Fink (John Turturro) is an aspiring screen-writer who finally gets his big break in Hollywood. However, the true reality of Hollywood screen-writing is far removed from the dream. Jon Polito and John Goodman co-star.

In the pantheon of Coen Brothers' films, I would rank this as one of their lower-tiered efforts. The brothers are well-known for their surreal films like Oh brother, wherefore art thou or The Big Lebowski, as well as more straightforward films like Miller's Crossing and No Country for Old Men. Barton Fink seemed to straddle both worlds without really landing in either.

Barton soon becomes mixed-up in a murder which sees him strike up an unusual friendship with the gregarious Charlie Meadows (John Goodman) which, in fairness, does finish in a fiery and dreamscape climax. Yet the earlier parts of the film deal with more grounded ideas like Barton trying to write a script to appease the big-shot Hollywood producer Jack Lipnick (Michael Lerner.) If the film could have been surreal or straightforward, I would have been okay with it, but not both.

John Turturro and Jon Polito also starred in Miller's Crossing - a prohibition-era gangster film. Both of them were terrific bringing frenetic energy to the role. They were memorable. Here I can't say the same. Granted Jon Polito was only a supporting character - a lackey to Michael Lerner, but he didn't bring the same energy to the role. Neither did Turturro. They played the roles with restraint when excess would have been better.

That summarises my criticism of this film really: it tried to be too many things and ended up being hardly anything.

The Bourne Supremacy

 Number 553 on the top 1000 films of all time is the action-thriller The Bourne Supremacy.

Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) is a former CIA agent with amnesia. After the events of the last film, he is trying to live a normal life in India with his girlfriend Maria (Franka Potente.) However, he is forced out of hiding when he is framed for a crime he didn't commit. Joan Allen, Julia styles, Brian Cox and Karl urban co star.

I've never been a fan of this film series and this film did little to move the needle. The main reason was that the characterisations and characters were paper-thin. Julia Styles's character of technician Nicky Parsons was little more than a snivelling wreck. Was she this much of a wet blanket in the first film? Or did director Paul Greengrass want to do Julie Styles dirty? Karl Urban wasn't particularly menacing as a Russian hit man either. He had more of a look of an overgrown emo rather than a ruthless murderer.

This brings me onto the film's plot focussing on Jason and Marie or rather Jason as Marie

*spoilers*

is killed by mistake early in the film. Emo Karl Urban was trying to kill Jason but he killed Marie instead. In the Bourne Identity I was highly critical of their relationship, declaring they had no romantic chemistry. The same applied here. 

As well as trying to clear his name, Bourne also wants to revenge on emo Karl Urban which I would have found believable if their relationship was more believable. It doesn't help that he doesn't seem that cut up about her death. He doesn't even shed one tear and only remembers her death when it's convenient. It was very much the fridging the wife cliche done very badly. 

Matt Damon was nothing special as Bourne. I guess he did the action sequences well enough but he was fairly wooden when it came to anything more emotional. Any redeeming factors? Brian Cox's inclusion as a corrupt CIA chief? Cox is usually very good in whatever he's in but not even he could save this generic action film.

The Bourne Supremacy? There was nothing supreme about this film at all.

Show me Love (Fucking Åmål) review

 Number 547 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Swedish coming-of-age romantic-comedy.

Agnes Ahlberg (Rebecka Lilijeberg) is a sixteen-year-old recluse. She has no friends but is secretly in love with her classmate Elin (Alexandra Dahlstrom) a party girl who hates the boring town of Amal where both girls live.

Show Me Love was Lukas Moodysson's directiorial debut. He would go onto to direct the tragic Lilya-4-ever which also starred a lost, naive female protagonist, although in far more dire circumstances tha here. To be honest, Lilya-4-ever was a far better film.

Show Me Love had the look of a low-budget teen drama. Considering its budget was nine million Swediwsh Kroner, under £80,000 (no doubt less than this thirty years ago) I guess there's a reason it looks like a test version of Skins.

Of course a low budget doesn't dictate a film being bad. However, it helps if the film has likeable characters. Both Agnes and Elin were annoying. Agnes bemoans being lonely and friendless but is rude to the only other girl who turned up to her birthday party, which quite rightfully, comes back to bite her on the arse. Meanwhile, Elin comes across as incredibly shallow.

Yes, of course, they're teenagers and that's what teenagers are like, but it also didn't make their characters heroes I wanted to see succeed. I'll concede that they became more likeable as they were allowed to mature and develop. It's just a shame that they were so damn annoying at first.

The film also had a strange ending scene as if Moodysson didn't know how to end his debut.

*spoilers*

Cornered in the school bathroom with fears of bother their relationship and sexuality being outed, the two girls choose to out their relationship to the school and are all the better for it. This would have been a good ending except then there was another scene of them drinking chocolate milk in Agnes' room. Very weird and ultimately pointless. It would have been far more powerful to have ended it with the outing scene.

Maybe I should give Moodysson some grace. This was his debut after all. Without this film, he would never have gone onto direct the heartbreaking Lilya-4-ever.

Adaptation review

 Number 538 on the top 1000 films of all time is the metafictional comedy-drama Adaptation.

Adaptation follows real-life screenwriter Charlie Kauffman (Nicholas Cage) as he struggles to adapt Susan Orleans' book 'The Orchid Thief' to the screen. Not even his identical twin brother Donald (also played by Cage) can help him. An interwoven subplot sees Susan Orleans' (Meryl Streep) process behind writing book including an attraction to John Laroche (Chris Cooper) a horticulturalist whose arrest for poaching orchids was the inspiration for Susan's book.

If there was a list for the top 1000 zaniest films of all time than Adaptation would surely be number one. The metafictional nature of the film ensures that you are in for an entertaining if somewhat convoluted ride. It is a film that centres on the topic of writing films itself. And its subject matter is Charlie Kauffman (who also wrote the screenplay.) Charlie Kauffman himself is portrayed as socially anxious and incredibly neurotic unlike his more confident twin brother Donald.  The film opens with a behind-the-scenes clip of Kauffman's famous film Being John Malkovich and only gets weirder from there as we see the intense writer's block that forms upon his struggles to adapt the Orchid Thief.

Nicholas Cage plays the Kauffman twins (although Donald is fictional.) Cage is a strange actor. At times he is capable of brilliance like when he won an Oscar for Leaving Las Vegas, but at other times he is so incredibly over-the-top. In this role, I think he managed to balance both traits well. At times, you can truly understand the pain that Kauffman is experiencing as well as his alienation from life. At other times, you can see the stranger side of Cage coming out especially in scenes where he is acting against himself. I guess his zany portrayal matched the zany nature of the film.

More enjoyable was Meryl Streep as the emotionally conflicted Susan Orleans. She develops a begrudging affection for Laroche and eventually becomes his secret lover. She brought a lot of emotional gravitas to the role. And her actions propelled us into the rather chaotic final act which was surprisingly gripping compared to the rest of the film.

*spoiler alert*

Donald Kauffman is also a screen-writer - far more successful than his twin brother. Charlie asks Donald to interview Susan while pretending to be his brother. Donald becomes suspicious of Susan and secretly follows her where he discovers she is having an affair with Laroche. Susan doesn't want to be exposed so she resolves to kill Donald. A big chase through a swamp ensues involving guns, alligators and a fatal car crash. It was an unexpected end to an unexpected movie.

Lastly, I will give a quick shoutout to Chris Cooper who won the Oscar for playing John Laroche. It was certainly a good performance as he provided some nuance to a strange character.

Strange is probably the best way I  could describe Adaptation. It was a thoroughly off-kilter and zany movie.

Waking Life review

 Number 530 on the top 1000 films of all time is Richard Linklater's animated surrealist drama 'Waking Life.'

Wiley Wiggins plays an unnamed protagonist who undergoes an existential crisis. He has a series of philosophical conversations before he realises that he is in a lucid dream that he must wake up from.

I don't think I've seen such pretentious Oscar-bait since Megalopolis. Don't get me wrong, Waking Life was beautiful to look at. It had a unique rotoscoping animation technique, but beyond that, the film was about as interesting as any of the films mentioned on my list of films that will put you to sleep. It was an arthouse film that was all style and no substance.

It's a shame as this was the same Richard Linklater who directed the brilliant Before Trilogy and the hilarious School of Rock. Yet Waking Life lacked the same humour and heart as Linklater's other efforts. This is despite how the Before Trilogy similarly had a lot of talking and little action.

The difference was that this talking occured between interesting characters who I actually gave a damn about. I couldn't say the same about Waking Life. Whereas the Before Trilogy had sparkling dialogue, Waking Life had the most boring philosophical discussions ever. Interestingly, the two leads from the Before Trilogy: Jesse (Ethan Hawke) and Celine (Julie Delphy) also cameo here in one of the many scenes that are tangential to the main plot.

Rather than one continuous film or dream in this case, Waking Life was a collection of unrelated dreams that you forget as soon as you wake up. Although I can't ever remember dreaming about pseudo intellectual discussions a la Woody Allen. Also what was with the Alex Jones cameo? Apparently Richard Linklater just dismissed him as funny quack. Little did he realise how consequential Alex Jones would be in later life.

Maybe I just wasn't clever enough to understand the true genius of this film, but I also didn't care. Never mind Waking Life, this was a bad dream that I couldn't wait to wake up from.

The Station Agent review

 Number 528 on the top 1000 films of all time is the comedy-drama 'The Station Agent.'

Finbar Mcbride (Peter Dinklage) is a reclusive locophile dwarf who works in a train model shop. His only friend is his manager Henry Styles (Paul Benjamin.) However, after Henry dies, Finn is bequeathed a closed-down train depot he owns. Fin lives here with every idea of having a quiet life. Cue the arrival of chatty hot dog seller Joe Oramos (Bobby Canavale) and grieving mother Olivia Harris (Patricia Clarkson.) The three form an unlikely friendship.

The Station Agent was the directorial debut of Tom McCarthy who went onto direct the superb the Visitor. That was a brilliant film which told a real story about real characters. It was a funny and heartwarming tale. I would definitely recommend it.

I would recommend the Station Agent too. It contained the same style and story. You had the terrific Peter Dinklage who wanted nothing more to be left alone. Then you had Bobby Canavale and Patricia Clarkson who wanted nothing more than to be with other people. Despite all three having literally nothing in common, except for being incredibly lonely, they find a spiritual kinship with each other.

Yet the actors all had great chemistry. Canavale was likable as the chatty Joe who gradually wears down Finn with his eternal optimism while the latter starts a budding romance with Olivia. Sure Joe's optimism became a bit irritating, but he was still an enjoyable character to watch. It's amazing to think this was the same actor who later terrified audiences as the fearsome Gyp Rosetti in Boardwalk Empire. 

Patricia Clarkson, who has also had a long and varied career, was great as the emotionally troubled Olivia. She brought the damaged character to life without making her maudlin. The same can be said for McCarthy. He crafted an emotional, funny and relatable story without becoming overly-sentimental.

However, the film was far from perfect. It is short at a paltry ninety minutes. It could have used an extra thirty minutes to explore its themes and relationships in more depth. Without going into spoilers, a good example would be Joe and Fin. Despite a rocky start, the two become good friends. That is until they have a big argument and go their separate ways. That is until they have an off-screen reconciliation which didn't feel very earned.

A subplot saw Fin having a separate romance with the town librarian Emily (Michelle Williams) creating a weird love triangle between Fin, Emily and Olivia. I much preferred the Fin and Olivia storyline, as Dinklage and Clarkson had much better on-screen chemistry. It was also more consequential to the plot. I wonder if McCarthy was trying and failing to add a final spanner into the works especially when Emily's dickhead boyfriend enters the scene.

All in all, I thoroughly enjoyed the Station Agent. It was a quiet, but powerful film about human connection and friendship with great performances from the three leads.

Delicatessen review

 Number 527 on the top 1000 films of all time is the French, post-apocalyptic, black-comedy Delicatessen.

Delicatessen is set in a ruined apartment building over a butcher shop. A mysterious apocalypse has occurred and food is in short supply. Don't ask what type of meat the butcher/landlord Clapet (Jean-Claude Dreyfuss) is selling. Hopefully, it won't be new tenant and circus clown Laison (Dominique Pinon) or his beau Jane - Clapet's daughter (Marie-Laure Dougnac.)

In the US, this film was released as being presented by Terry Gillam. Although I'm not sure why as I couldn't see any evidence of him having anything to do with the making of this film. Perhaps it was because this film was purely Terry Gillam.

Once being part of the legendary Monty Python comedy troupe, he has gone onto direct the famously surreal and incomprehensible Brazil and Twelve Monkeys. Delicatessen was similarly surreal and incomprehensible. It was all far too weird and zany for me.

Perhaps I'm just not clever enough to truly understand the true genius behind the film, but it seemed weird for the sake of being weird. From the firey colour palate to the strange cast of characters, it was all so strange. I could follow the main story well enough - the clown and his girlfriend are trying not to become dinner. As for everything else? Not a clue.

If you want to say this is a bad review, I wouldn't blame you. But can you critique a film that is so difficult to understand? It was all too weird for me.

Deliverance review

 Number 515 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1972 thriller film 'Deliverance.'

Lewis (Burt Reynolds) Ed (Jon Voight) Bobby (Ned Beatty) and Drew (Ronny Cox) are four business men who want to canoe down the Cahulawassee river in Georgia before it's dammed up. Lewis and Ed are experienced outdoorsmen while Bobby and Drew are not. Although it first seems this will be a boy's day out, it soon turns into a nightmare journey of survival.

This is a film that started slowly; we see these four townies try and fail to ingratiate themselves with the locals. There is a banjo duel. Nothing too interesting. I was beginning to question my life choices, but then this film proved why it features on this coveted list.

Shit hits the fan when Ed and Bobby are held hostage and tortured by two sadistic mountain men. The rest of the film becomes a deadly game of cat and mouse. Lewis - Burt Reynolds in a star-making role, with his tough-man, survivalist persona is the hero of the first half of the film. However, after he becomes incapacitated Ed emerges as the unlikely hero. Jon Voight proved why he went onto win an Oscar only six years later.

The pace slows down again as our heroes return to civilisation despite director John Boorman's insistence that these scenes were vital to the film. Our heroes swear to keep the traumatic events of the last few days secret. And the film ends on one final image that has been paid homage to in many countless films. The film was also notable for its distinct lack of incidental music other than the iconic duelling banjos tune. Instead we are treated to silence and incidental sound effects which ramped the tension up to 100.

Ultimately, I enjoyed Deliverance. Yes, the beginning and the ending are slow-paced, but the bit-inbetween was terrific.

The Fugitive review

 Number 505 on the top 1000 films of all time is the action-thriller 'The Fugitive.'

The Fugitive is based on the famous TV show of the same name. It tells the story of respected Chicago surgeon Dr Richard Kimble (Harrison Ford) who is sentenced to death for the murder of his wife, despite protesting his innocence. He escapes from custody and aims to prove his innocence while evading recapture by US Marshal Sam Gerard (Tommy Lee Jones.) Joe Pantoliano and Julianne Moore co-star.

At the 1993 Academy Awards, Tommy Lee Jones controversially won Best Supporting Actor Oscar. He beat out the likes of Leonardo Dicaprio for What's Eating Gilbert Grape, Pete Poselthwaite for in the Name of the Father, Ralph Fiennes for Schindler's List and John Malkovich for In the Line of Fire - with Fiennes being a shoe-in for the award. Having seen all but Malkovich's performance, I agree that the controversy was justified. Any one of the other actors would have been justified in winning the award.

Tommy Lee Jones was certainly a charismatic and entertaining presence as Sam Gerard. Was he Oscar-worthy? Absolutely not.

If anybody did deserve an Oscar nod, it would have been Harrison Ford who was great as the leading man Dr Richard Kimble. Yet despite the emotional pathos he brought to the role, he wasn't even nominated. It was a great shame, as I'm tempted to call it some of his best work. Unlike Star Wars, Indiana Jones or Blade Runner, where he played a roguish hero, Dr Ricard Kimble was an everyman.

Speaking of a shame, Julianne Moore was largely wasted in a supporting role. She plays a doctor in the hospital where Kimble hides as a fugitive. He pretends to be a janitor there. Despite scenes being shot giving her a much larger role including being Kimble's new love interest, these were eventually cut.

While we're talking about supporting actors, I've yet to see Joe Pantoliano in a leading man role. He plays supporting characters like the police detective here with so much gusto and energy. It's a shame he's always relegated to the supporting cast.

Questionable editing choices aside, I did enjoy the Fugitive. Granted, it was pure nonsense especially with Kimble surviving his jump from the dam, I was willing to suspend my disbelief. It helped that you could see it was so obviously a dummy. Maybe there were some Tommy Lee Jones' fans adamant that he was fully deserving of his Oscar, to quote Sam Gerard: "I don't care."

The Longest Day review

 Number 494 on the top 1000 films of all time is the epic historical war-drama 'The Longest Day.'

The Longest Day tells the dramatic story of the invasion of Dunkirk told from the perspective both the Allies and the Germans. It has a large ensemble cast with a whole host of famous stars like John Wayne, Henry Fonda, Sean Connery, Richard Burton, Robert Mitchum, Rod Steiger, Robert Wagner and Paul Anka.

There is no denying the the technical prowess behind The Longest Day. Shot as a docudrama, director Daryl F Zanuck deliberately chose a black-and-white colour scheme so he could really zero into the human element of the war. 

His cinematographers Jean Bourgoin and Walter Wottiz went onto the Best Cinematography Oscar for black and white. Znuck's special effects team led by Robert Macdonald and Jacques Maumont also won for Best Special effects. Neither of these were a surprise as the film was gripping from the outset, making a two and a half World War Two epic, a fast-paced thrilling watch. No doubt 'The Longest Day' influenced subsequent WW dramatisations like Saving Private Ryan, Dunkirk or Band of Brothers.

However, while the film looked great on-screen and was technically proficient, it fell down on its character work. Like I said, it had a massive supporting cast with many of its actors like Mitchum, Connery, Fonda and Burton being rendered to mere cameos. It was less immersing yourself in a different world and more spot the famous face. There wasn't a single protagonist or protagonists that you could follow throughout the film.

Nonetheless, the Longest Day was an entertaining dramatisation of one of the most important moments of not just World War Two, but world history.

The Last Emperor review

 Number 482 on the top 1000 films of all time is the epic biographical period-drama 'The Last Emperor.'

The Last Emperor tells the life story of its titular character - Pu Yi, the Last Emperor of China from his childhood where he was played by Richard Vu and then Tiger Tsau to his adolescence where he was played by Wu Tao and all the way to his adulthood, where, played by John Lone, he becomes a political prisoner of the Chinese Communist Party.

Bernado Bertolucci's story about Puyi felt very much like a Chinese version of Laurence of Arabia. The Last Emperor was almost four hours long and it also starred Peter O'Toole who played Pu Yi's Scottish tutor Reginald Johnson. Granted, I had unknowingly watched the extended cut, but I think even the one hundred and sixty-five minute theatrical cut would have still had me struggling to stay awake.

Obviously the academy didn't agree with me as they awarded The Last Emperor nine Oscars including Best Film, Director, production and Costume. The latter two were well-earned. Bertolucci was granted unprecedented access to film in China's Forbidden City and he made brilliant use of this opportunity. The production in this film was absolutely breathtaking especially in the early scenes within the city itself. It's just a shame the story itself wasn't very interesting.

The story is told from the adult Piyu's perspective - now a prisoner of the CCP, as he looks back on his life as China's last emperor. Although this part was interesting, his earlier life was less so. Considering how he was very much just a figurehead with no real power, it's no surprise that he was little more than a spoiled and lazy character, but he also became a tedious one too.

This is a film for true cinophiles. Although it looked great on-screen, the actual story left me cold and in desperate want of my bed.