The Graduate review

Number 263 on the top 1000 films of all time is Mike Nichols' 1967 romantic comedy-drama 'the Graduate.'

Benjamin Braddock (Dustin Hoffman) is a 21-year-old college graduate with no plans in life. He is seduced into an affair with the older, married Mrs Robinson (Anne Bancroft,) but he soon falls in love with her daughter Elaine (Katherine Ross.)

If this film is best known for anything, it's the excellent soundtrack by Simon and Garfunkel. Taking the unusual move of explicitly including the duo's music, Nichols really helped to raise their image. And the music was used to good effect. The Sound of Silence brilliantly conveyed the alienation that Braddock feels for most of the film. But we also can't forget the inclusion of the wonderful Scarborough Fair.

But there is much more to this film than its soundtrack. If anything, it's a film of alienation and isolation. The lost Mrs Robinson, angry that she sold out her dreams of artistic freedom to have a stable marriage and rich husband, tries to regain control of her life by seducing the younger Benjamin Braddock - another lost character who only loses himself further in his affair with Mrs Robinson. That could one why he starts to fall for Elaine. He is also trying to take back control.

Dustin Hoffman and Anne Bancroft were great in the lead roles, we truly understood and empathised with the loneliness of both characters without ever becoming resentful of them. Anne Bancroft perfectly fit the role of Mrs Robinson, so much so, she was allowed to provide her own wardrobe.

I also enjoyed the ending, which stayed consistent with the theme of uncertainty and alienation. *Spoilers*

Having won Elain back, just as she was about to marry somebody else, we see Ben and Elaine hurry onto a bus and drive off into a sunset. Except it's actually an uncertain future. We see them staring awkwardly at each other, as the Sound of Silence plays.

I also thought the cinematography and camerawork gave the film an air of authenticity. Due to not being able to get permits to shoot on Berkeley Campus, Nichols had to use a range of medium and long shots, meaning that many of the extras we see, were real-life students who didn't know they were being filmed.

I thoroughly enjoyed the Graduate. It was good fun with a memorable soundtrack.

Sleepers review

 Number 792 on the top 1000 films of all time is the legal crime-drama Sleepers.

Lorenzo "Shakes" Carcaterra (Joe Perrino,) Tommy Marcano (Jonathan Tucker,) John Riley (Geoffrey Wigdor) and Michael Sullivan (Brad Renfro) are four boys growing up in the Hell's Kitchen neighbourhood of New York. Father Bobby Carillo (Robert De Niro) keeps a watchful eye over them. But when a childish prank goes horribly wrong, the four boys are sentenced to Wilkinson's Home for Boys where they experience horrific abuse by the guards led by Sean Noakes (Kevin Bacon.) Cut thirteen years into the future, the now adult John (Ron Eldard,) Tommy (Billy Crudup,) Shakes (Jason Patric) and Michael (Brad Pitt) swear to take revenge on everybody who did them harm.

Sleepers is very much a story of two halves. We have the lives of the boys before they attend Wilkinson's and their lives afterwards. If anything I preferred the first half. We're given a rich tapestry and a deep insight into life within Hell's Kitchen. There's no doubt that our four protagonists are little shits, but they are still interesting to watch.

And then things go south in the second half. The narrative tension just stops, as we enter a courtroom drama. The contrivance of all four boys all being sent to the same prison aside, the second half was not as neat or tightly focussed, as the first half. *spoilers to follow*

Upon release, John and Tommy become hitmen in the Irish mob. By chance they see Noakes in a bar and they publicly assassinate him. The case goes to court. Michael, now an assistant district attourny, seeing an opportunity to punish the rest of the guards who abused them, takes the prosecution with the intention of botching it. He enlists the alcoholic Dan Snyder ( Dustin Hoffman) to defend John and Tommy.

But the problem lies in how Noakes was killed early on. Noakes was the ringleader. He was the big, bad villain. The other guards were just his cronies. Without him, we're just seeing John and Tommy being persecuted for a revenge kill that the audiences knows they were justified in carrying out. It was dull.

It would have been more interesting seeing Sean Noakes, and the other guards, standing trial for the atrocities they committed. Instead, we were focussing on John and Tommy. And that killed any narrative suspense. The second half felt almost disconnected from the first. It didn't help that Noakes' cronies were little more than names on a page with little characterisation other than being a crony. The one exception was Ralph Ferguson (Terry Kinney) who was the only guard to express any remorse over what he did.

Even though there were some big names in the cast; Robert De Niro, Brad Pitt, Dustin Hoffman have five Oscars between them, I don't think anybody really shone. Brad Pitt and Dustin Hoffman only appear in the second half and De Niro was closer to a supporting character.

Overall, Sleepers was an entertaining if uneven film that went to sleep in its second half.

Capote review

 Number 891 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2005 biographical-drama Capote.

Truman Capote (Philip Seymour Hoffman) was an American novelist who gained fame after the release of his 1961 book 'Breakfast at Tiffany's.' After the Clutter family are murdered in their Kansas home, Capote becomes fascinated with the case, so much so, he decides to make it the subject of his next book. Together, with his friend and confidante Harper Lee (Catherine Keener,) he begins interviewing the killers Perry Smith (Clifton Collins Jr) and Dick Hicock (Mark Pellegrino.)

As many of you will know by now, I don't care for biopics. I find them overly-long, vague, lacking in tension and bloated e.g The Aviator or Catch me if you Can. But Capote succeeded because instead of telling his life from start to finish, it narrowed in on a very specific part, and, arguably, the most interesting part.

From the off, we are thrust into murky territory as we see our hero Capote coming to form strong relationships with Perry Smith and Dick Hicock, the longer he gets to know them. He begins empathising with them. Although he claims that he just wants to document the facts, the more he investigates, the more there is the chance that he will discover something that could exonerate the pair. Or worse, he may deliberately sabotage the case, so the pair will go free. This conflict kept things moving on nicely. It stopped things from becoming too slow.

Philip Seymour Hoffman won the 2005 Best Actor Oscar for his performance as Truman Capote. It was well-deserved, as unlike his other roles it was wonderfully balanced. We saw many different sides of Capote: the flamboyant party animal, the duplicitous liar keeping the truth from Smith and Hicock, and the quiet, vulnerable man looking for support from his friend Harper Lee.

I have yet to see Hoffman in a role that I haven't liked. Many of the characters he has played have been very sleazy. There is nothing wrong with this; he plays the sleaze well, but I was wondering if he was becoming a one-trick pony. Capote proved this was far from the case.

Catherine Keener was also good as Harper Lee, often acting as Capote's conscience, telling him what he needs to hear, rather than what he wants to hear. Clifton Collins Jr was also good, but I think Mark Pellegrino was thoroughly under-used.

Nonetheless, this film pleasantly surprised me. Who knows? I might become a die-hard biopic fan?

All the President's Men review

 Number 325 on the top 1000 films of all time is the biographical political-drama 'All the President's Men.'

In 1972 Washington DC, five burglars are caught breaking into the headquarters Democratic National Committee within the Watergate Office Building. Reporters Bob Woodward (Robert Redford) and Carl Bernstein (Dustin Hoffman,) from the Washington Post are assigned to investigate the case. But they soon unravelling a conspiracy theory that goes all the way to President Nixon himself.

The Watergate Scandal was no doubt one of the biggest political fiascos of the twentieth century. After all, it did bring down Richard Nixon. To this day, he is the only American president to resign.

It was also incredibly complicated. The film was equally complicated. I've watched it twice and I feel I need a massive cork board with red string to understand all the little intricacies and nuances. Not to mention the endless litany of names that are all connected to the conspiracy theory. From Sloane - the treasurer for the Committee to Re-elect, to Colson - Nixon's special counsel, to Hunt - one of Colson's employees, the list was veritably endless.

Despite this, 'All the President's Men,' is still quite watchable. Considering much of the film is Woodward and Bernstein either talking on the phone or furiously typing on typewriters you do question how much drama could this possibly generate. The answer is a lot. The tension always remained high.

In slow-burn dramas that are low on spectacle, it is vital that you have a strong cast. With Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford as the leads, that was certainly the case here. They were engaging as the two journalists thrown together to solve the case. Not believing Woodward to be experienced enough, he is paired with the time-tested Bernstein. The two journalists started as rivals, but ended as allies and friends.

I would also give a quick shout-out to Hal Holbrook who played Deepthroat - a mysterious man who became Woodward's key confidential source. We know nothing about this character except for his propensity to have conversations in shadowy car parks, but Holbrook still made him very interesting. I've only seen Holbrook in his older years, so it was nice to see him as a younger man.

All the President's Men is certainly a complicated and long film. Low on spectacle, it would be easy to dismiss it as dull. But there was enough tension bursting under the surface to make this slow-burner an interesting enough watch.

The Talented Mr Ripley review

Number 985 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1999 psychological thriller 'The Talented Mr Ripley.'

Tom Ripley (Matt Damon) is sent from New York to Italy to bring the spoiled playboy Dickie Greenleaf (Jude Law) back home. However, this seemingly simple task proves to be much more difficult than originally foretold, and soon takes a dark turn. Gwyneth Paltrow plays Greenleaf's girlfriend Marge Sherwood and Philip Seymour Hoffman plays Greenleaf's best friend Freddie Miles.

This was a very convincing thriller. It was tense, gripping and had high suspense throughout. But it was also marked by such a great subtext. Although it wasn't directly addressed, I wonder, in Ripley's attempts to convince Greenleaf to return home, he starts to fall in love with him. Greenleaf is your run-of-the-mill playboy - charismatic, playful, but incredibly spoiled. Jude Law brought a brilliant chaotic energy to the role. 

Matt Damon was equally good as Ripley. This film came out in '99, so this was before Damon had really made a name for himself. But you could see his potential. This subtext gave the film a completely different layer. Maybe I'm reading too much into it - I don't know whether this was intentional or not, but it really worked.

Damon played Ripley very well. I think it would be overly-simplistic to describe Ripley as a psychopathic serial killer. He is a far more nuanced character than that. And Damon brought this nuance to the fore. I don't think Ripley necessarily causes bad situations to happen, but, rather, he positions himself to best take advantage of these situations. And that's what made him such an interesting character.

I also very much enjoyed Philip Seymour Hoffman. He is good in everything he does, and this film was no exception. Freddie Miles absolutely despises Tom Ripley and Hoffman plays this contempt with aplomb. He is sleazy, arrogant and nasty. RIP Hoffman. He was an actor taken from us far too soon.

The Talented Mr Ripley was a great thriller with some convincing performances. Hoffman might have just been playing a supporting character, but he surely stole the show.

Papillon review

 Number 275 on the top 1000 films of all time is the historical drama epic prison film 'Papillon.'

Henri 'Papillon' Charierre (Steve Mcqueen) is a famed safecracker who is sent to prison after being wrongly convicted for the murder of a pimp. He is sentenced to life imprisonment in the penal system of French Guiana in a supposedly inescapable prison. Within the prison, he meets famed counterfeiter Louis Dega (Dustin Hoffman) and the two become fast friends as they scheme to escape the prison together.

This was the 350th film that I have watched since I've started slogging through this list. And I've come to the conclusion that two hours is my cut off point. If a film is over two hours there has to be a very good reason. The Godfather, the Green Mile and Braveheart are all notable exceptions, but then you get films like the Last of the Mohicans, Gone with the Wind or, indeed, Papillon that just go on and on and on. You think you've reached the ending, but then there's another ending and another and another. This isn't to say that they are necessarily bad films, but they're all much longer than they need to be. Papillon is no exception to this rule.

Similarly to the Last of the Mohicans, it was very bloated. There was a lot of slow-motion and grandiose music that made the film half an hour longer than it needed to be. And then we come to the various endings. We see Papillon, Degas and orderly Maturette (Robert Deman) escape the prison and wash up on Honduras. We could have ended the film there, but then we see Papillon being taken in by a native tribe, in probably one of the slowest portions of the film, before being recaptured and taken back to the prison. 

Again, it could have ended there, but Papillon is moved to the remote Devil's island where he re-unites with Degas who has since lost his marbles. Papillon then tries another escape attempt by diving into the sea. We could have ended things here, but we get a voiceover telling us that he survives and finally the film ends. These constants endings really killed the tension. It would have been nice if things were left up to the viewer, but any ambiguity was completely dispelled. 

Also the sound mixing wasn't very good either. There were multiple scenes especially when Papillon and Degas are being brought by boat to the prison, where it was difficult to hear the characters speaking over the sound of the waves. I'm sure I missed many important details there.

The film wasn't all bad though. Steve McQueen was great as the formidable Papillon. He is sent there after coming to Degas' aid by attacking a guard. Degas returns the favour by sneaking him food in solitary confinement and Papillon never gives up his friend. Papillon almost loses his mind in solitary as the guards starve him and leave him in darkness. It is difficult to believe that anybody could survive torture like that. And the scene where we see a prisoner being guillotined, as a warning, was disturbing to watch.

It is a shame about the bloating and the slow motion and the multiple endings, because it did have the potential to be a great film. 

Mary and Max review

 Number 167 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2009 Australian stop-motion drama - Mary and Max, directed by Adam Eliot.

Mary (Toni Colette) and Max (Philip Seymour Hoffman) tells the story of the blossoming relationship of the two titular characters. Both social outcasts, they soon find connection when they become pen pals.

I watched this film with my dad and he said he hadn't watched a film quite like that before. Neither have I. It was abstract and surreal. Dark and creepy at some points, hilarious and uplifting in others. It was a film that I had never heard off before and, apparently it never received a wider theatrical release, although it did premier at the Sundance Film Festival.

Although, I am puzzled as to why it didn't receive a wide theatrical release, as it was a brilliant film. Perhaps because it dealt with some problematic themes and it has some off-beat, dark humour. But the way, it engaged with its troubling themes was sensitive and evocative. Mary is a little girl in Australian with an alcoholic and kleptomaniac mother and a father who is more interested in taxidermy than his daughter. She has a prominent birthmark on her forehead which leads to her being bullied at school. Upon recounting this in a letter to Max, she breaks down in tears. Considering 'Mary' was only a claymation sculpture and not a real person, this was very upsetting to watch.  Bethany Whitmore who played the young Mary did well to bring real humanity to the character.

Conversely Max is a morbidly obese, autistic man living in New York. Because of his autism, he finds it difficult to befriend anybody and he too is a loner. Despite this, he was an uplifting character who far from feeling sorry for himself is proud of being a self-proclaimed "aspie." It is a fundamental part of his identity and, despite what his therapist might say, is not something that needs curing. He may not understand human behaviour or why people throw away food while children starve in India, which only makes his connection with mary all the sweeter. 

His lifelong goal of making a friend, a goal he realises with Mary is all too relatable and powerful. He was a pitiful character, but a likeable one. And that is down to Adam Eliot's good writing and Hoffman's good portrayal. With autistic characters, there is always the danger of making them into a cariacture of themselves, but that didn't happen here.

If I were to describe this film to anybody, it would be as a real arthouse film, mostly because of its claymation style allowed Adam Eliot to tackle themes he might not have been able to do with more traditional film. Mary and Max's environments contrast so drastically. In sunny Australia, the lighting is bright, the locations spacious, but in New York, everything is dark, gloomy and cramped. Max is alone in a crowd of people. Mary is isolated in a close-knit community.

Even the colour schemes are different. Australia is brighter with an off-colour, soft yellow. Whereas New York is a dark grey-scale, almost monochrome, representing Max's confused viewpoint of the world. But when he begins corresponding with Mary, spots of colour begin appearing, like the orange pom pom that she knits for him. He attaches this to this skullcap, which he wears, not because of how he is Jewish, but because it keeps his brain warm.

The growing relationship between the two central characters climaxes in the worse possible way. In a misguided attempt to help Max, Mary enrols in university, to study mental disorders like autism, in the hopes of curing him. Using Max as her case study, she writers a book detailing the findings of her research.  But Max, believing she has exploited him and his condition, rips out the "M" key of his typewriter and mails it to her. This raises interesting ideas around "disorders" like autism. Is it really a disorder? Is it an illness that needs to be cured? What if the person is happy the way they are?

Upon realising how badly she has hurt her friend, Mary sinks into a deep depression, becoming a mirror image of her alcoholic mother. In the process, she loses her childhood sweetheart, Damian Popodopulous (Eric Bana) who leaves her for a sheep farmer in New Zealand. Her depression culminates in a suicide attempt which is set to a slowed-down version of "Que Sera Sera." This combined with the background scenery fading to black was the darkest, most haunting, but most powerful moment of the film. Mary is only saved by her neighbour who delivers a package from Max who has finally forgiven her.

Over a year later with Damien's child, Mary finally travels to New York to meet Max. Sadly, he had died earlier that morning, staring up at all of Mary's letters which he has stuck on his ceiling. One of many heart-warming moments in what is a very twisted, Grim Brothers-esque fairy tale. Amid all the surrealism and horror, there are valuable lessons to be gained about human connection. 

Mary and Max was definitely a film that took me by surprise. I don't know what I was expecting, but I certainly wasn't expecting a poignant, surreal, arthouse film about the importance of friendship and loving yourself.