Of Mice and Men (1992) review

 Number 730 on the top 1000 films of all time us Gary Sinise's 1992 drama 'Of Mice and Men.;

Based on John Steinbeck's story of the same name, we watch George (Gary Sinise) and his intellectually disabled friend Lenny (John Malkovich) try to find work during America's great depression. They then find work on a Californian ranch.

The reputation of this film precedes it. Many English school children study it for their GCSEs. I've never read it, but I knew the story and the ending. However, this didn't make things any less tragic. Where Gary Sinise succeeded was by taking a well-known story and distilling it to its base elements. Naturally, things were changed, but the core story remained the same.

It can't be easy both directing and starting in the same film, but Gary Sinise succeeded there too. George had to play a fine balancing line between looking after the emotionally immature and fragile Lenny, but also appeasing his new employer, more, in particularly, his nasty son Curly (Ray Walston.) The film also looked great, as Sinise captured the remote Californian landscape.

But I think the true star was John Malkovich who played Lenny with a great vulnerability and a great humanity. In many ways, Lenny was a gentle giant who didn't know his own strength.

I already knew how his story ended, but that didn't make it any less sad to see on-screen. And that was down to Malkovich's performance and Sinise's direction.

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.

No Country for Old Men review

 Number 204 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Coen Brothers' No Country for Old Men.

Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) is a Vietnam war veteran and welder who stumbles upon a big bag of drug money in the desert. He takes the money in the hopes of giving him and his wife Carla Jean (Kelly Mcdonald) a better life. However, he is being hotly pursued by mysterious hitman Anton Chigurin (Javier Bardem) who leaves a trail of chaos in his wake. Investigating this is local sheriff Ed Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones). Woody Harrelson co-stars as a bounty hunter who is also tracking down Chirgurin.

Since I started this challenge, I've watched a fair few films by the Coen Brothers and they all contain the same offbeat, surreal humour. At times it did make things funny and at times it was tiresome. I was glad that No Country for Old Men was far more straightforward. It was more of a neo-western/thriller rather than an off-the-wall comedy. Everything was direct and easy to follow. Chigurin made a scary villain and I do think Bardem deserved his Best Supporting Actor Oscar. I loved the cinematography that was reminiscent of the old Spaghetti Westerns; the sweeping shots of the desert were great to see. You felt the isolation of all the characters. They were in this expanse all alone. Nobody was going to help them.

But despite all that, the film felt lacking. I was expecting so much more, but I was left short-changed. And I think that's because the film never really provided closure on anything. Our hero Llewelyn Moss dies off-screen. He isn't even killed by the bad guy, but by a Mexican drug cartel. There is no build-up and no payoff. He's our protagonist - the main character and he doesn't even have the dignity of an on-screen death. Sure, kill him off, but show it to us. He doesn't even have a confrontation with Chigurin. The sheer psychopathy behind Chigurin's character made him frightening to watch, but we don't even get to see him have a showdown with Llewelyn.

I was also sorely disappointed with Woody Harrelson's contribution. It looked like the film was setting up a confrontation between he and Chirgurin. And while the two meet, it's hardly the most thrilling of encounters. And shortly after, Chigurin kills him. Harrelson felt very underused.

But, perhaps this is supposed to be the point of the film. Times have changed. The days when films provide you closure and wrap everything up are long over. This is no country for old men, but also not a country for reviewers who like all their films neatly wrapped up with a pretty pink bow.