25th Hour review

 Number 558 on the top 1000 films of all time is Spike Lee's crime-thriller '25th Hour.'

Monty Brogan (Edward Norton) is a crime lord twenty-five hours away from going to prison. In that time, he has to settle affairs with his girlfriend Naturelle (Rosario Dawson) friends - the obnoxious stockbroker Frank Slaughtery (Barry Pepper) and English teacher Jacob (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and father James (Brian Cox.)

This film had Spike Lee written all over it. It strongly reminded me of Lee's earlier film Do the Right Thing. Similarly, to arguably one of his most famous films, 25th Hour was very heavy-handed in its storytelling. Much of the dialogue had a hammy, over-the-top quality from Ukrainian crime-lord Uncle Nikolai to the obnoxious Frank speaking about closing deals to Ed Norton's famous tirade in the mirror.

This famous diatribe decrying basically any and every ethnic group in New York was ripped straight from David Benioff's source material, except for the addition of Al Qaeda - probably to reflect the changing post 9/11 climate. Maybe my indignation should really be with Ed Norton's delivery instead.

This was definitely one of his worst performances. He was unconvincing as the crime lord Monty because Monty himself was unbelievable. A hardened crime lord was caught by the police because they find his drug money stuffed down the sofa. It's less Pablo Escobar and more world's dumbest criminals. I had to remind myself this was a Tony Soprano type character and not your average hood. 

Similarly, how was Monty so naive about the realities of jail? He is terrified about the thought of going there, which I would understand if he were your average petty crook, but he is high-ranking enough to justify a sit-down with the Ukrainian mob. Surely a man in Monty's position would be able to look after himself in prison or at least be well-connected with those who could protect him.

Norton also lacked a lot of chemistry between co-stars Barry Pepper and Philip Seymour Hoffman. I couldn't believe the three were best friends least of all as Frank and Jacob spend more time together than with Monty. Jacob was also very creepy as he entertained a sexual attraction to his seventeen-year-old student Mary (Anna Paquin) This was an ultimately pointless subplot that went nowhere. All this culminated in a rather laughable climax where Monty goads Frank into beating him up to deter any prison rapists. Pepper was less than convincing than his emotional anguish here.

Finally, Norton also lacked romantic chemistry with Rosario Dawson. They weren't believable together. He was okay opposite Brian Cox, but not even the formidable shoulders of Brian Cox could carry the whole film on his back.

I want to like 25th Hour, but it was just a ham-fisted, eye-rolling affair,.

13 Assassins review

 Number 676 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2010 Japanese samurai film '13 Assassins.'

Set at the end of the Edo period, the tyrannical Lord Naritsugu (Goro Inagaki) is set to be appointed to the Tokugawa Shogunate council. Realising the dangers that entails, the Shogun justice minister Sir Doi Toshitisura (Mikijiro Hira) enlists the help of experienced samurai Shimada Shinzaemon (Koji Yashuko) to assassinate Lord Naritsugu. Shinzaemon recruits twelve other samurai to help him in his mission.

13 Assassins hearkened back to the days of Akira Kurosawa and his wide range of samurai films. you had all the elements you would expect including deep philosophising, harikari and the Bushido code of honour. It also had one of the most despicable villains that I have ever seen on screen.

Whereas most other villains have one redeemable quality, Lord Naritsugu is evil through and through. he is a sexual sadist who revels in torturing his victims. He is also an absolute despot, determined to crush any resistance around him. Goro Inagaki did well in turning this pure evil into a believable character.

Although the film is confusing at first with the introduction of each of the titular thirteen assassins - it takes a while for things to get going, but when it does the film is enjoyable. That is, until the ending, which let down a good film.

*spoilers ahead*

The film's final forty-five minutes are an extended battle scene where the thirteen assassins take on Naritsugu's two hundred men. Realising they are hopelessly outnumbered, they buy a local town and booby-trap it in clever ways. They rig parts of the town with dynamite while also creating spring-loaded walls to trap the soldiers. Then the assassins rein arrows down upon them.

This was a clever way to even the odds so that it baffled me when Shinzaemon declares that they'll stop their cheap tricks and they would fight the remaining 130 soldiers hand-to-hand. You've already killed seventy of their soldiers. Why not kill another seventy or another hundred before you take on the rest by sword-fighting. It seems like a silly way to get yourself killed.

And that's exactly what happened here. Although the characters initially have ridiculous amounts of plot-armour, this wears away as the 13 assassins die one by one. It all seemed like an unnecessary way to cause conflict. The 13 assassins had the high ground, they had the winning advantage, and then they threw it all away.

The end sequence was also intense, non-stop, relentless action while it was all brilliantly choregraphed, it became tiresome after a while. I would have much preferred to see this sequence broken into two. There is an initial skirmish where the 13 Assassins attack Naritsugu, but he escapes, killing some of them in the process. They then regroup and attack him again achieving their mission. We definitely needed some breathing space rather than the never-ending sword play.

And can we just mention the thirteenth assassin - the hunter - Kiga Koyata. He takes a sword to the neck, seemingly dies, but miraculously comes back to life in the film's conclusion. He declares he's had worse wounds from hunting wild boars. Some have said he's immortal, others think he was a trickster deity while others thought he really had died and what we see was a hallucination. Either way, it was weird.

I've seen a few samurai/Akira Kurosawa films in my time. They certainly have their fanbase, but I won't be joining them anytime soon.

American Gangster review

 Number 468 on the top 1000 films of all time is Ridley Scott's 2007 biographical crime film 'American Gangster.'

Based on the true story of Harlem crime kingpin and drug lord Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington) American Gangster explores how this once lowly crook rose to become of the biggest drug traffickers in US History, as well Newark Detective's Richie Roberts' (Russell Crowe) efforts to catch him.

Ridley Scott really likes his overlong films, doesn't he? Black Hawk Down was far longer than it needed to be, and the same could definitely be said for American Gangster which burgeoned on three hours. It was bloated and could have been excised. The obvious example would be Richie Roberts' storyline. He is supposed to be the only honest cop in a department of crooked cops like corrupt NYPD detective Nick Trupo (Josh Brolin) who regularly accepts bribes and robs criminals of their drugs only to go on and sell them himself. 

Richie is also locked in a bitter divorce battle with his ex-wife. Although he is straight in his work, he is not in his personal life. As we learn, he is a serial womaniser. This was a massive subplot which didn't deserve the amount of screentime we spent on it. I really couldn't have cared less. Richie's wife Laurie (Carla Gugino) was little more than a scorned woman. And due to Richie being so straight, he wasn't the most interesting character to watch. We like maverick detectives who aren't corrupt, but they play by their own set of rules. This is what sets them apart from every other police officer out there. And this subplot also did a disservice to Russell Crowe who is a good actor.

If we didn't spend so much time on this subplot, I would have enjoyed American Gangster much more than I did. Frank Lucas was the superior and more interesting character. It was fascinating seeing his journey from his former boss' driver and bodyguard to, effectively, the Harlem Pablo Escobar. Although the historicity of the film's events have been questioned, it's amazing to see how he cut out the middle-man and dealt directly with heroin producers in South-East Asia. He smuggled the drugs back into the country by putting them in the coffins of American soldiers returning home from Vietnam.

Ultimately, I would say this is a good film. It just didn't need to spend so much time on Richie Roberts. 

Lord of War review

 Number 661 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2005 crime drama 'Lord of War.'

Yuri Orlov (Nicolas Cage) is a Ukranian-born, American international arms dealer. He and his brother Vitaly (Jared Leto) deal weapons to warlords and governments worldwide. However, he is relentlessly pursued by INTERPOL agent Jack Valentine (Ethan Hawke.)

Although Nicolas Cage has had a prolific career, I know him more from internet memes rather than his films. In fact, I have seen very few of his films. In fact, I know him so much from clips where his acting is incredibly over-the-top, to the extent of being ridiculous, that I had forgotten that he was once a serious actor. And one that could seriously act. After all he did win the Oscar for Leaving Las Vegas, which I've also not seen. But I do think Cage was a big reason why this film was so successful.

Yuri Orlov narrates the film giving a blunt and cynical take on the subject. But his narration gives 'Lord of War,' a brilliant energy that moves everything along at a blistering pace. Cage's laconic delivery provides a lot of the film's black humour which does stop things from becoming too dark. And, as you can imagine, a film about arms dealing does get pretty dark at times. However, what was great about Cage's portrayal of Orlov was the authenticity of the character. He isn't a hypocrite. He knows exactly what he's doing and he doesn't care. For him, it's just business. And this unapologetic perspective made him such a compelling character to follow.

He was far more compelling than Jared Leto as Vitaly. I have mixed thoughts of Jared Leto. Sometimes he gives great performances like in Dallas Buyers Club or Requiem for a Dream, but he was very boring here. Some of that was down to the character. Vitaly lacked much of the nuance and depth that Yuri had. Instead he is ill-disciplined and petulant leading to him gaining a cocaine addiction. And his inclusion at the end seemed like a very contrived way to generate conflict. 

*Spoiler alert* After Yuri enters retirement, an old client - Andre Baptiste Sr (Eamonn Walker) the brutal dictator of Liberia - offers him his biggest payday yet in exchange for one last deal. Yuri accepts and brings Vitaly with him. When Vitaly realises that Andre Baptiste intends to use the weapons to massacre a refugee camp, he blows up half of them before being killed himself. I don't really understand why Yuri brought Vitaly with him. It's already established that he is an unpredictable, loose-cannon. He spends much of the film addicted to cocaine. What good could he do?

Also a quick shout-out to Eamonn Walker who was great as the villainous Andre Baptiste. It's difficult to believe this was the same actor who played Kareem Said on HBO's prison-drama Oz.

I thoroughly enjoyed Lord of War. It had a delightful energy, mainly due to Nicolas Cage's great performance. Jared Leto wasn't as good, but, nevertheless, Lord of War brilliantly exposed the horrific nature of arms trafficking. It is a difficult topic that more people should know about. And the ending was the icing on the cake. We are told that rather than independent traffickers, the biggest arms traffickers are the US, the UK, Russia, France and China - the five permanent members of the UN's security council.