Lolita review

Number 600 on the top 1000 films of all time is Stanley Kubrick’s black-comedy, psychological thriller ‘Lolita.’ 

English academic Humbert Humbert (James Mason) arrives in Ramsdale, New Hampshire, to spend the summer there before staring work. He soon marries his landlady Charlotte Haze (Shelley Winters) but then becomes infatuated with her fourteen-year-old daughter Dolores “Lolita” Haze (Sue Lyons.)

This is a film that needs no introduction. It, and Vladamir Nabokov’s book it was based upon, are highly controversial due to their themes of paedophilia. The film was even considered ‘unfilmable,’ so I was surprised by its underwhelming nature. Admittedly, I haven’t read the book nor am I fully familiar with the story, but I was expecting something more lurid.

Compared to modern-day films, Lolita was incredibly tame. Granted, Kubrick was up against the strict production code and studio restrictions meaning he had to tone down the erotic aspects of Humbert and Lolita’s relationship, but I was still expecting something more. I understand that Kubrick couldn’t be explicit, but I thought there would be more subtle references to the film’s darker themes.

Perhaps I’ve been misled by the film’s sensational reputation. If I had been more familiar with the original story, I would know differently, but I can only judge the film based on what I’ve seen.

The characterisation of Humbert and Lolita also surprised me. Mason played Humbert as a retiring and reserved academic, which he was, but he seemed an unlikely candidate to be attracted to his step-daughter. I understand that depicting him as an unshaven, over-weight slob in a singlet would be a cliché, but I did not find Mason to be a believable nonce.

To get round the censors, Kubrick upped Lolita’s age from twelve, as she originally was in the book (I know that much at least) to fourteen. Sue Lyon was fourteen, but was cast, because she looked older. The producers wanted audiences to believe that Lolita could be a sex object. I can understand why they would change her age, but I don’t agree with deliberately casting an actress who looks older than her years.

It changed the dynamic of her character and the dynamic of her relationship with Humbert. Compared from fourteen to twelve, you’re slightly more mature and aware of your surroundings and of your own sexual desires. This added sentience transformed Lolita from an innocent victim to even an unrealising participant of Humbert’s predatory behaviour.

But as I’ve said ad nauseum, I am not familiar with the original text, so I could very well be mis-reading the film. I do think that my opinion might be different if I had read the book first, but based on what I’ve seen, I wasn’t a fan of Lolita.

The Abyss review

 Number 709 on the top 1000 films of all time is James Cameron's science-fiction drama 'The Abyss.'

Virgil "Bud" Brigman (Ed Harris) is the foreman of the Deepcore oil rig. Joined by his estranged wife Dr. Lindsay Brigman (Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio,) they and their crew are tasked with the task of salvaging a US navy submarine that inexplicably lost power and sank to the bottom of the ocean. There they find a group of alien creatures.

Intense, claustrophobic and unrelenting, the Abyss was as difficult to watch as it was to make. Shot on a gruelling schedule in awful conditions with an authoritarian dictator in James Cameron, it is no surprise that Ed Harris almost drowned and later had a nervous breakdown. On another occasion, having been pushed too far by Cameron, Mastrantonio) stormed off set. Both actors have since distanced themselves from the film. And few, if any, of the cast and crew have worked with Cameron again.

It is a shame that they were pushed so hard, because they both gave excellent performances. Their chemistry helped give this film some much-needed heart, as we watched the pair re-discover their love for each other. I just don't think they needed Cameron's tyranny to bring out the best in them.

I couldn't help but compare this film to Das Boot. It had that same claustrophobic feel from the tight camera-angles to the cramped set and dim lighting. I couldn't help but feel a little trapped myself. And, as for the scene where the divers are exploring the lost submarine, that is a hard no from me. Sure, it was intense and well-shot, but not something I would ever want to do.

The other comparison would be Cameron's Aliens. Again that is a science-fiction drama taking place in a suffocating setting. But the obvious difference is the actual aliens. In the Abyss, they are friendly, plus they looked visually gorgeous. The visuals were stunning throughout.

I have read so many horror stories about the making of the Abyss, least of all about Cameron's dictatorial direction, that I'm surprised it was made at all. He pushed his actors to their absolute limit, but was that a really necessary thing to do?

Zero Dark Thirty review

 Number 865 on the top 1000 films of all time is Kathryn Bigelow's 2012 historical-drama-thriller film Zero Dark Thirty.

On the ninth of September 2001, America bore witness to its worst terrorist attack in history. And so started the war on terror as well as the man-hunt for the leader of Al-Qaeda Osama Bin Laden. Jessica Chastain stars as Maya, a CIA intelligence analyst who is in charge of the operation to bring OBL to justice. The huge ensemble cast includes Joel Edgerton, Jason Clarke, Mark Strong, James Gandolfini, Chris Pratt, Harold Perrineau and John Barrowman.

In creating this film, Bigelow and writer Marc Boal wanted to highlight the efforts that women played in the catching of OBL. Maya was reportedly a composite of several female CIA analysts who spear-headed the operation. Of course the CIA have never formally acknowledged the existence of these analysts out of fears for their safety. But, either way, Bigelow and Boal did these women justice. It was a great way to showcase female representation on the screen especially because of all the obstacles Maya faces. I'm not even talking about Al Qaeda, but her male superiors constantly undermining her ideas.

Jessica Chastain received an Oscar nod for her performance. It was well-earned. She played the role of Maya with a quiet confidence. And she was very convincing. I think it was a powerful portrayal of a character who despite being constantly set back never loses faith in herself, her abilities or her mission. As for the rest of the cast, I may argue it was bloated. There were a lot of characters that blended into each other. I don't think there was need for all of them. And, unfortunately, that led to some brilliant actors being absolutely squandered e.g Mark Strong, John Barrowman or James Gandolfini. The cast could have definitely be trimmed.

Zero Dark Thirty did receive some criticism for glorifying the use of torture as an interrogation method. This refers to the opening sequence where CIA officer Dan Fuller (Jason Clarke) waterboards and otherwise brutally tortures a terrorist. Torture not being an effective method to gain information aside, I would not agree that this sequence was glorified at all. Granted, it makes for unpleasant viewing, but you can see that Dan is not a sadist. He doesn't enjoy doing what he's doing, but he has a job to do. Later on, he laments on his actions.

But I think Bigelow's direction excelled in the final half-hour of the film where we see a Navy Seal team infiltrate OBL's compound. This was a brilliantly-directed sequence that always kept the tension high. It was gripping to watch. A lesser director may have added on a cheesy and grandiose score, but Bigelow made the excellent decision to not have an incidental music at all. And that was a great way to keep me on the edge of my seat.

Yes, Zero Dark Thirty has a bloated cast - Maya was a composite of many characters, why couldn't they have done that for the other characters - but Chastain gave an Oscar-worthy performance and the final sequence was fantastic film-making.

The Philadelphia Story review

 Number 231 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1940 romantic-drama 'the Philadelphia Story.'

Wealthy socialite Tracy Lord (Katherine Hepburn) has recently divorced from her ex-husband Dexter Haven (Cary Grant.) She is now intending to marry the wealthy George Kittredge (John Howard.) New York's Spy magazine sends journalists Mike Connor (James Stewart) and Liz Imbrie (Ruth Hussey) to cover the glitzy affair.

I'm probably just a culturally ignorant millennial who's been spoiled by the rich, complicated storytelling of directors like Christopher Nolan, and the like, but the older films are so much more simplistic.

And, by simplistic, I mean dull and predictable. It was obvious from the get-go that this film would centre around a love triangle between Hepburn, Grant and Stewart: Grant still has feelings for his old ex, but he faces new competition not only by Kittredge but also Connor played by Stewart. Meanwhile Hepburn is initially only interested in improving her social status. This is the only reason she is marrying Kittredge. However, she becomes romantically involved with Stewart. And I saw this coming from a mile away.

Of course, this is isn't to slate the acting talent in this film - Grant and Stewart were charismatic as usual - although I'm not sure whether Stewart was quite deserving of his Best Actor Oscar win. I think he was better in other roles like in Mr Smith Goes to Washington or Anatomy of a Murder. I did particularly like Hepburn. She was well-known as an outspoken feminist, constantly speaking out against the misogyny of the era. And she brought some of her fiery demeanour into her role. It was nice seeing a female lead as acting assertive and confident, rather than just a wet blanket, which was all too common for the films of the time.

While I was charmed by the three leads, I was less charmed by the film itself. All very cheesy and predictable.

The Last King of Scotland review

 Number 557 on the top 1000 films of all time is the historical drama 'The Last King of Scotland.'

Nicholas Garrigan (James Mcavoy) is a young Scottish doctor. Looking to make a difference, he travels to Uganda to work in a missionary clinic ran by David Merrit (Adam Katz) and his wife Sarah (Gillian Anderson.) But after a chance encounter, he becomes the personal physician of the Ugandan despot Idi Amin (Forrest Whitaker.)

In terms of dictators, Idi Amin is up there among the rest. He expelled all South Asians from his country, wiped out all political opposition and was responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths. Despite all this, Forrest Whitaker showed a remarkably human side of the tyrant. Without never romanticising his actions, Whitaker made Idi Amin into a watchable character. He had a fascinating arc as we saw him spiral into paranoia and meglomania while remaining incredibly charismatic.

James Mcavoy was equally good as the naive, starry-eyed doctor initially a disciple of Amin, until his tyrannical actions become too much for Garrigan to ignore. The character of Nicholas Garrigan was a nice dismantling of the white saviour archetype. Rather than your average white colonist aiming to pacify, sedate and civilise the savage negro, Garrigan is a destructive force, albert unintentionally. Instead of saving the black characters, he gets many of them killed. *Spoilers*

One of these characters is Amin's third wife Kay (Kerry Washington) whom Nicholas impregnates while the pair are having a secret tryst. He is criticised for being a white man who couldn't resist the mystical trophy of a black woman.

The Last King of Scotland was penned by Peter Morgan who wrote other biopics like the Queen and the Crown. He wrote well knowing the most important sections to focus on. There isn't any spare fat anywhere in this film. I also want to give dues to Gillian Anderson. She was great in the supporting role of Sarah Merrit. Having seen countless dictators come and go, she fails to share Nicholas' wide-eyed optimism for Idi Amin's regime.

I thoroughly enjoyed the Last King of the Scotland. It was a great look into the life of Uganda's ruthless dictator. 

Kung Fu Panda review

 Number 672 on the top 1000 films of all time is the computer-animated wuxia film Kung Fu Panda.

Kung Fu Panda is set in ancient China. It follows the bumbling, but well-intentioned Po (Jack Black) - a giant panda bear who loves kung fu. When he is inadvertently named the Dragon-Warrior, it becomes his destiny to stop the evil snow leopard Tai Lung (Ian Mcshane.)

I enjoyed Kung Fu Panda a lot more than I thought I would. Generally I find wuxia films more style than substance. Sure the martial arts sequences look brilliant, but the films are always so overly-serious. This wasn't the case for Kung Fu panda. The best thing about the film was that it didn't take itself too seriously. And a lot of that was down to John Stevenson's strong direction.

Rather than making a parody like Dreamworks wanted, he instead created an action-comedy that took all the best elements of Wuxia, but also incorporating a lighter tone. Having Jack Black as Po also helped a lot. His comedy is always so expressive and physical which translated well to an animated role. Yet he also made Po a very sympathetic character.

Po is a kung fu enthusiast. He loves the martial arts. But he is also resigned to spending his life in his father 'Goose's' (James Hong) noodle restaurant. As a side note, James Hong was a delight as the over-protective and overly-affectionate father. Po very much becomes an unlikely hero as nobody, least of all, Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) - the Red Panda who has to train Po, has any faith in him succeeding.

Jack Black, Ian McShane, Dustin Hoffman, James Hong - there are some acting heavyweights in his film. But that's not all. Angeline Jolie, Jackie Chan, Seth Rogen, Lucy Liu and Michael Clark Duncan also all lend their voices. But with such a large cast and so many characters a lot of the acting talent was largely underutilised. Jackie Chan - star of so many kung fu films gave a disappointing contribution, while Lucy Liu and Seth Rogen largely blended into the background. Ian Mcshane's voice performance was nothing noteworthy either.

Having said that, I did enjoy Kung Fu Panda. It had gorgeous animation, and real heart. Unlike so many of its predecessors, it embraced portraying Kung-Fu under a more light-hearted lens.

As Good as it Gets review

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

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

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

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

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

Everything Everywhere all at Once review

 I'm taking a little break from the top 1000 films of all time to review the winner of the 2023 Best Film: Everything Everywhere All At Once (EEAAO)

Evelyn Wang (Michelle Yeoh) is a Chinese-American immigrant running a laundromat that is being audited by IRS agent Ms Deirdre (Jamie Lee Curtis.) Evelyn runs the laundry with hr meek husband Waymond (Ke Huy Quan) rebellious, gay daughter Joy (Stephanie Hsu) and ageing father 'Gong Gong' (James Hong.) But Evelyn's life is turned upside down when she is introduced to the multiverse and told that she is the only hope in defeating the evil being Jobu Tupaki.

If I could describe EEAAO in one word, it would be surreal. It is weird, absurdist but endlessly creative. Although that is very much the point of the film. And, despite this, it never lost sight of its heartfelt message of the importance of family. Things start innocently enough with the establishment of Evelyn as our overworked, stressed out laundry over en route to an audit. But things take a turn for the insane when Waymond says that he is actually a Waymond from another universe. And he is Evelyn's guide to the multiverse. cue craziness as we're introduced to universe after universe with each one more random than the next.

EEAAO not only swept up at the Oscars, but many of the other award ceremonies too. Directors Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert won Best Director, Best Original Screenplay and Best Film Editing, and it is easy to see why. This film has its share of fantastical fight scenes which are choregraphed brilliantly. We see the Alphaverse Waymond beating up a group of security guards with his bumbag. Ridiculous, yes, but great to watch. Maybe you could argue that EEAAO indulges a little too much in its absurdism, but it was no less entertaining for it.

But it is also very heartfelt with powerful performances. Michelle Yeoh, Ke Huy Quan and Jamie Lee Curtis all picked up Acting Oscars. Curtis won for Best Supporting Actress, beating out Stephanie Hsu, who I was equally deserving of the win. But I think Ke Huy Quan was the best. He effortlessly went to meek, brow-beaten husband to badass action star. It's difficult to believe that this is the same actor who starred opposite Harrison Ford in Indiana Jones before taking an extended break from acting.

Despite the wackiness of the narrative, EEAAO still had a lot of heart. It is the story of a divided family coming together. At the beginning, Waymond wants to divorce Evelyn, while Evelyn is cracking under the pressure of running her laundry. Meanwhile, she is finding it difficult to accept Joy's lesbianism, creating a deep divide between her and her daughter. Lastly, Gong Gong has always disapproved of Waymond, even vowing to disown Evelyn if she marries him. Yet by the film's end, the family learns to love each other again; Evelyn and Joy have a tearful reunion where both actresses show off their acting talent.

EEAAO is certainly not for everyone. Its absurdism and surrealism might put off a lot of viewer, but if you look past the seemingly random weirdness, you'll be treated to one of the most creative and heartfelt films of the year. 

The Queen review

 Number 890 on the top 1000 films of all time is the biographical drama 'the Queen.'

Based on the true life story, 'The Queen' dramatises the events that occurred after the death of Princess Diana. Helen Mirren plays Queen Elizabeth II and James Cromwell plays Prince Philip. Together with Prince Charles (Alex Jennings) they must figure out how to deal with the Diana's death. Elizabeth and Philip want nothing to do with it, but the press, general public and prime minister Tony Blair (Michael Sheen) desperately want to convince them otherwise.

I have never understood this whole celebrity worship/hatred. As is evidenced from the copious amount of stock footage, the general public were devastated by Princess Diana's death. They descended upon Buckingham Palace in their thousands, left countless bouquets of flowers and queued for hours to sign a book of condolences. Thousands of people were upset over the death of somebody they never knew. Conversely, there were plenty of people who never liked Diana and were happy to see her dead. I was only two at the time, but if I was older enough to have know what was going on, I wouldn't have cared. Diana is a celebrity who wouldn't have even known that I existed. Why would I love or hate her?

Seeing as the Queen is indirectly about Diana and the love that seemingly everybody, except for the monarchy, had for her, it was difficult for me to truly resonate with this film. On a content level, I found everything quite meh, but on a technical level this film succeeded. Writer Peter Morgan could have easily fallen into a trap of painting a black-and-white picture. But he ensured that every character was nuanced and developed. 

Nowhere is this more apparent than with Helen Mirren's portrayal of the Queen. It was so good that not only did she win the Best Actress Oscar but Queen Elizabeth II herself invited her to dine at Buckingham Palace. Considering her obstinateness towards even publicly acknowledging Diana's death, she could have quite easily come across as a cliched baddie, but Mirren played the role with a great moral greyness. 

We can clearly see her moral conflict. She knows how badly Diana has torn apart her family and tarnished the royal image. She doesn't want to acknowledge her, even in death, but she also knows what her public expect of her. Eventually she bows to public opinion. I also particularly enjoyed Mark Bazeley as Tony Blair's odious director of communications: Alistair Campbell. Bazely was delightfully slimy and belligerent. But I can't fault the cast at all. From Michael Sheen to James Cromwell to Helen McCrory, they were all great.

I also liked the use of the aforementioned archival footage. It gave everything a brilliant sense of realism and it reminded us that these aren't just characters of the screen. At the film's conclusion, Michael Sheen makes an impassioned speech defending the queen against the constant barrage of criticism she has received for her reaction to Diana's death. Later on, the Queen reminds him that just as quickly as public opinion turned against her, it could just as easily do the same for him.

Although the film's content might not have resonated with me, I can recognise that it was a truly compelling narrative with strong performances across the board.

True Romance review

 Number 344 on the top 1000 films of all time is Tony Scott's romantic crime drama True Romance.

I am watching this film out of order as I recently saw it in the roof-top cinema in Peckham, South London.

Penned by Quentin Tarantino, True Romance tells the romance of Clarence and Alabama. Clarence (Christian Slater,) a comic book store worker is unknowingly set up with call girl Alabama (Patricia Arquette.) A whirlwind romance and shotgun marriage later. Clarence confronts Alabama's pimp, Drexel (Gary Oldman) and unwittingly steals 500k of Drexel's coke. However, the coke actually belong to the mob. And they want it back. Val Kilmer, Christopher Walken, Brad Pitt, Samuel L. Jackson and James Gandolfini round out the supporting cast.

    Released in 1993, this was one of Tarantino's earliest ventures and, arguably, one of his most original. I've been critical of Tarantino's latest film - Once Upon a Time in Hollywood for being more of a homage than an actual movie - a similar criticism I also reserved for Kill Bill Volume 1. Yet that wasn't the case here. A quick pace and plenty of plot twists keep this film hurtling toward its thrilling conclusion.

    One such plot twist is Samuel L' Jackson's quick demise. Upon meeting Drexel, he mocks him relentlessly before Drexel blows him away. Plus a pre-Soprano James Gandolfini was utterly menacing as mobster Virgil. Sure you could argue that the fight scene with Alabama burdened on the ridiculous, but it was also great to see such a brilliant performance from Gandolfini.

Tarantino and Tony Scott also paced this film well. There aren't any too many dialogue scenes and there are plenty of comedic scenes the keep the content light. most of these were due to Brad Pitt's character of stoner Floyd. Reportedly, he improvised most of his dialogue which worked to great effect. Especially when he is interrogated by the ominous Gandolfini.

   This film climaxes in classic Tarantino fashion. Clarence meets a hot-shot movie exec to offload the coke in the hopes of fleeing the country with Alabama. However, the dead broker has flipped and is wearing a wire. On top of that, the mobsters have tracked down Clarence. Cue a massive shootout between the cops, the mobsters and the exec's security guards. Cue blood, bullets and everybody dying except for our heroes Clarence and Alabama. Although Clarence does dance with death for a second.

Reportedly Tarantino originally wanted to kill Clarence but Tony Scott convinced him otherwise. I think that's the better decision. The film is called True Romance and in a very twisted way it is a romance - the two loves Clarence and Alabama will do anything for each other - even kill. Seeing them walk into the sunset was more effective than seeing Alabama cry over Clarence's gravestone.

Again you can argue that the violent conclusion is gratuitous which is is. But by the same admission, it's also classic Tarantino. if you're not into that then you shouldn't be watching a Tarantino film. Especially this one. But if you want to watch Tarantino at his best, True Romance is the film for you.