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) is a 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. There 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's 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. It 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.

Blue Velvet Review

Number 471 on the top 1000 films of all time is David Lynch's neo-noir mystery thriller 'Blue Velvet.'

Jeffrey Beaumont (Kyle MacLachlan) is a recent college graduate who is returning home. When he discovers a severed ear in his garden, he is thrown into a dark world involving the night-club singer Dorothy Vallens (Isabella Rosselini) and psychotic drug dealer Frank Booth (Dennis Hopper.)

When you think of David Lynch, you think of dark, abstract and surreal. When you think of noir films, you think of over-complicated, convoluted films. Thankfully Blue Velvet was relatively straightforward lacking any of the backwards-speaking and red rooms that made Twin Peaks such an enigmatic watch. If anything, David Lynch was just warming up here for his seminal TV show. Don't get me wrong, Blue Velvet was still weird, but it was nowhere near as weird as it could have been.

It helped that you had the excellent Dennis Hopper playing Frank Booth. Some might argue that he was so over-the-top, but this is what made him so scary. You never knew what he was going to do next. And this unpredictability made him such a terrifying villain. Yet Hopper kept the character incredibly grounded. He brought an electric energy to the role.

Praise should also be given to Isabella Rosselini. She was playing the tragic character of Dorothy Vallens helping her to revitalise her flagging career. But with good reason. She was great as the emotionally damaged cabaret singer who had fallen victim to Frank Booth's violent tendencies.

While Lynch was warming up for Twin Peaks, Kyle MacLachlan was doing the same for detective Dale Cooper in Twin Peaks. Kyle was good as well. But I think Lynch was the true star here, crafting a memorable, if weird thriller that was an intense and gripping watch, with a great performance by Dennis Hopper.  

The Killing review

 Number 244 on the top 1000 films of all time is Stanley Kubrick's 1956 film noir 'The Killing.'

Johnny Clay (Sterling Hayden) is a career criminal planning one last heist before settling down with his lover Fay (Coleen Gray.) He assembles a crack-crew of five other criminals to rob the local racetrack.

Sadly, the Killing was a film that suffered badly from unwanted studio interference. Studio execs demanded Kubrick include narration, which only functioned to give exposition. Or rather, to beat the audience around the head with exposition. It really slowed up what should have been a fast-paced crime-thriller. It was an unnecessary inclusion.

Otherwise, this would have been a very interesting film noir, even if it didn't bring anything new to the genre. It has the same morally-grey characters you would see in the Big Sleep, but without the overly-convoluted plot. Yes, the Killing employs a non-linear narrative, but I don't think this particularly complicated things.

The Killing also had the old familiar trope of the femme fatale: Sherry (Marie Windsor) wife of one of the gang who is plotting to double-cross him and run off with his share. And, of course, you had the low-key lighting and endless supply of men smoking cigarettes.

Yes, the fight scenes looked very silly, but the Killing was an interesting watch. It was one of Kubrick's earliest films, but also one one of his most influential, influencing the likes of Quentin Tarantino. It's just a shame that the studio couldn't keep their grubby hands away from Kubrick's work.

Memories of Murder review

 Number 213 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Bong Jong-Hoo's 2003 South Korean neo-noir crime thriller 'Memories of Murder.'

Park Doo-man (Song Kang-ho) and Kim Roi-ha (Cho Yong-koo) are police detectives in 1986 Hwaseong who are investigating a string of grisly rapes and murders. They are soon joined by the Seoul hotshot Seo Tae-yoon (Kim Sang-kyung.)

This was a convincing thriller. It was tense, gripping with plenty of plot-twists along the way. Granted it was complicated and convoluted at times, but as such is the nature with these films. Bong makes great use of the weather and music to really up the tension. There were great sequences like when the detectives chase a suspect through the backstreets of Hwaseong.

As is common for thrillers, many of the key scenes took place at night and in the pouring rain, which certainly built the suspense. And one of the biggest clues that cracks the case is a radio song that is always requested to play while the murders take place.

However, there was something stopping me from really engaging with it and that was the interpersonal dynamics between Park, Kim and Seo. Their constant unprofessionalism and squabbling really got on my nerves after a while. I get it. Park and Kim are resentful of having an outsider come help them. They neither want or need their help, but for the greater good they must work together. It is quickly implied that Park and Kim are out of their depths. Their small police department doesn't have the resources or funds to successfully complete this investigation.

But their constant in-fighting made them seem incredibly amateurish. I had no confidence that they would find the true killer especially when they resort to beating confessions out of their suspects. I get that they're from the school of flawed, psychologically-damaged, rough-around-the-edges, willing to break the rules to get the job done, police detectives, but it was all too much. They weren't very likeable and I wasn't too bothered if they would successfully apprehend the killer. Rather than catching the killer, they just get even more people killed like their initial suspect.

And *spoilers*

they don't. Despite having three key suspects, including the most likely candidate Park Hyeon-gu, the case remains frustratingly unsolved. Having the killer escape was refreshing to see. In many thrillers, it's expected that after some ordeals and struggles, the cops would eventually catch the murderer and everything would wrap up nicely. Maybe not with a pretty pink bow, but nicely enough. However, that isn't the case here. And I quite liked this ending. It felt painfully realistic. Sadly, in real life, many murders do go unsolved, because the killers are never caught. They do escape.

Despite the rather unlikeable main characters, I still think Memories of Murder is worth a watch. It's a gripping thriller with a refreshing ending.

The Night of the Hunter review

 Number 211 on the top 1000 films of all time is Charles Laughton's film-noir thriller 'the Night of the Hunter.'

Ben Harper (Robert Graves) is a bank-robber who killed two people before escaping with $10,000. He hides the money and makes his two small children John (Billy Chapin) and Pearl (Sally Jane Bruce) promise to never reveal the location. However, he is then caught and sent to death-row. Before his execution, he tells the preacher-disguised serial killer Harry Powell (Robert Mitchum) about the money, although he doesn't reveal the exact location. Powell then visits Harper's family in his hometown in the hopes of finding the money. Although he quickly wins over the town and Harper's wife, his children remain distrustful of him.

Upon its initial release, the Night of the Hunter was so negatively reviewed that Charles Laughton never directed another film again. Although its critical evaluation has immensely improved in modern times, I do think this is great shame. The Night of the Hunter reminded me of the best of the old German expressionist films of old particularly Fritz Lang's M. This wasn't an accident either as Laughton gave the film a deliberate expressionist style.

 He deliberately employed the harsh lighting and strong shadows you would often see in expressionism. Much of the set design was also incredibly simplistic and minimalist. One of my favourite shots was when you see Powell's silhouette on the Harper children's bedroom wall. You only see the shape of his hat, but it was still incredibly sinister.

Robert Mitchum was also well-known for starring in film noir roles before he achieved mainstream success. From Undercurrent to the Locket to Pursued and Where Danger Rules, he has played a variety of roles. And he was the perfect fit for the duplicitous Harry Powell. He was charismatic enough to win over not only Harper's entire home-town, but also Harper's widow. And not only does he win her over, but he manipulates her into becoming his greatest acolyte. When Powell refuses to consumate their marriage, she starts believing that her soul needs to be redeemed and starts joining him in his preaching missions. Yet all of Powell's charisma was not enough to win over Harper's children.

However, I do think that the film's ending severely let it down. Everything changed from a tense, scary horror noir to a borderline Christmas film. All the suspense dissolved into unnecessary sentimentality and sweetness. Spoilers to follow.

After exposing Powell, John and Pearl run away from their home town where they take refuge with a woman called Rachel Cooper (Lillian Gish) a tough-as-nails badass who looks after troubled children. When Powell follows them there, Cooper fires a shotgun full of birdshot into his face. She holds him off long enough for the police to arrive and arrest Powell. Afterwards, Christmas comes and John and Pearl join Cooper's brood of lost children. They all live happily ever after. Although Cooper was only a supporting role, I thought she was a great character. It was brilliant seeing a female character having that much agency especially in a 1950's film.

But at the end of the day, 'The Night of the Hunter' is a thriller. It should be suspenseful from start-to-finish and this ending killed the suspense. Okay, it's nice to know that the Harper children finally get to have a normal life after their traumatic ordeals, but this could have just been implied. We didn't need to get a whole Christmas special.

Nonetheless, I did enjoy this film. I do think it's such a shame that Laughton didn't make anymore films. Such a waste of potential.

Strangers on a Train review

 Number 210 on the top 1000 films of all time is Alfred Hitchcock's 1951 psychological thriller 'Strangers on a Train.'

Guy Haines (Farley Granger) is an amateur tennis star who wishes to divorce his wife Miriam to instead marry Anne Morton (Ruth Roman,) the daughter of a US senator. On a train, he meets Bruno Antony (Robert Walker,) a psychopath who hates his father. Bruno suggests that the two swap murders - Bruno will kill Guy's wife if Guy kills Bruno's father. 

Hitchcock was dubbed the 'Master of Suspense' for a reason. This was another great outing. Possibly one of his scariest films since The Birds. A lot of this was down to Robert Walker's portrayal of the antagonistic Bruno Antony. Not only is he a psychopath, but he is a silver-tongued psychopath, charismatic enough to integrate himself into any social situation without raising an alarm. And he is clever enough to manipulate all situations to his advantage. He tricks his way into fancy dinners that Haines is attending and even into his tennis club. And like many psychopaths, he is delusional; he kills Haines' wife believing that Haines has accepted his offer, but this was never the case. 

Walker is definitely no hulking giant of a man, but he still created a true aura of menace. In some ways, he was what I would imagine Ted Bundy being like. Although I did read online that Hitchcock deliberately queer-coded Bruno. By today's standards that could be considered problematic, although I didn't really notice much of that. Perhaps because Walker was so charismatic.

But it wasn't just Walker's performance that kept me on the edge of my seat; it was the lighting, shadows and the cinematography. Guy is a famous tennis star who wears his shiny tennis whites while Bruno is a nobody languishing in his dark, dingy mansion. All his wealth has failed to save his soul. Of course, there is also the famous shot of Bruno strangling Miriam reflected in her glasses that had tumbled to the floor. In fact, the whole sequence was tense, as Bruno silently pursues her through the tunnel of love in a fairground.

Speaking of the fairground, I was sceptical about the final confrontation between Bruno and Haines taking place on a carousel that is spinning wildly out of control. I understand that it is going very quickly, but it's not that high off the ground. There's no real danger there. Unfortunately, this did push my suspension of disbelief a little too far.

Anyway, this was still an enjoyable film. It was tense, gripping and had a great performance by Robert Walker.

Lucky Number Slevin review

 Number 504 on the top 1000 films of all time is Paul McGuigan's 2006 neo-noir thriller 'Lucky Number Slevin.'

Slevin Kelevra (Josh Hartnett) is a victim of mistaken identity. Believed to be his friend Nicky, he is thrust into a war between two mob bosses - the Boss (Morgan Freeman) and the Rabbi (Ben Kingsley.) This is all while Slevin tries to evade the ruthless hitman Goodkat (Bruce Willis.) Together with the love interest and coroner Lindsey (Lucy Liu.) Slevin has to survive however he can. But all is not what it seems.

The general problem with the noir and, by extension, neo-noir films is that they are so overly-convoluted. The Big Sleep is notorious for its incomprehensible plot. Lucky Number Slevin is no exception. Major spoilers lie ahead.

Things are all relatively straightforward until the film's conclusion where everything is explained in the most complicated way possible. Slevin has actually been playing both mob bosses against in each other. This is to take revenge for how they murdered his father when Slevin was a child. To top everything off, a corrupt cop Brikowski (Stanley Tucci) murdered Slevin's mother. And, of course, he is the cop investigating the Boss and the Rabbi. Naturally he comes under Slevin's radar too.

This was a contrivance too far. I don't see why they had any reason to connect Brikowski with the main pot. it was all so unnecessary. Plus Slevin was supposed to be killed at the same time at his parents. Carrying out the hit was none other than the ruthless Goodkat who spares Slevin as he is a hitman who has suddenly developed a conscience because of ... reasons. And then Goodkat becomes a mentor to Slevin helping him to take revenge.

And despite having some major acting talent, Kingsley and Freeman are both Oscar winners, none of the characters were particularly memorable. Maybe that's because the characters weren't particularly memorable.

Although the mistaken identity element did produce some funny parts earlier on, the overall convoluted plot and one-dimensional characters made this an unenjoyable watch.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo review

 Number 423 on the top 1000 films of all time is David Fincher's 2011 remake of the Swedish 'The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.'

Mikhail Blomkvist (Daniel Craig) is a Swedish journalist who has lost everything in a libel case brought against him businessman Hans-Erik Wennerstrom. Businessman Henrik Vanger (Christopher Plummer) offers him a chance of redemption if Mikhail can solve the forty-year old disappearance of his grandniece Harriet. Mikhail enlists the help of emotionally damaged hacker Lisbeth Salander (Rooney Mara.)

TGWTDT was the latest offering in the Scandi-noir trend that was dominating the airwaves in the late 2000s and early 2010s. Based on Stieg Larsson's book of the same name, TGWTDT joins the tradition along with Jo Nesbo, Henning Mankell, the Bridge and the Killing. So much of Scandi-noir is rooted in its Scandinavian setting. The mighty mountains, imposing glaciers and remote settings lend themselves well to grisly murders. Frosty temperatures and frostier attitudes all add to the Gothic horror.

And that's why I found the accents so weird. I understand this is an American remake, so I wouldn't expect the actors to be speaking in Swedish, but the accents were inconsistent. Christopher Plummer did well, but Rooney Mara and Robin Wright, who played Mikhail's editor and occasional lover, less so. Daniel Craig didn't bother with one at all. He chose to do this, as the thought it would sound silly otherwise. And it did. Either have all the actors do accents or none of them.

Daniel Craig received star-billing for this well-crafted thriller, but Rooney Mara was the true star. She received a Best Actress nod and it was well-earned. Lisbeth Salander - an emotionally shut down, misanthrope would be a difficult character to play. How do you make her likable without making her annoying? But Rooney Mara brought an excellent amount of vulnerability to the role. And, of course, we have to talk about the horrific scenes where Salander was raped and sodomised. These were brutal, intense scenes and Mara was fantastic.

If I were to criticise the film for anything, it would be the ending. *Spoiler alert* After the main mystery is solved, Plummer rewards Blomkvist by providing him evidence that will help him take down Wennerstrom. However, the evidence proves fruitless. So, Salander helps by hacking him and discovering he is laundering money for organised crime. She then empties his accounts. It was all good, but it seemed like a strange addendum that didn't match the rest of the film. I guess they were bringing everything full circle, but it seemed like Fincher was setting up a second film, rather than finishing this one.

Nevertheless, TGWTDT was an expertly-crafted thriller with a career-high performance from Rooney Mara.

The Big Sleep review

 Number 214 on the top 1000 films of all time is Howard Hawks' 1946 film noir 'The Big Sleep.'

Based on the 1939 Raymond Chandley book, the Big Sleep follows the exploits of Private Detective Philip Marlowe (Humphrey Bogart.) Marlowe is hired by General Sternwood (Charles Waldron) to investigate the person who is blackmailing his daughter Carmen (Martha Vickers.) But soon Marlowe becomes involved with Sternwood's other daughter Vivien (Lauren Bacall.) And, not before long, he stumbles upon a conspiracy involving murder, gambling and organised crime.

I have to admit that I had a lot of trouble following this film. That's probably because of my poor watching abilities rather than Howard Hawks' film-making. Yet I wonder if things are needlessly complicated. The Big Sleep has a convoluted plot as is often the case with many crime films, especially noir films, that throw in characters and subplots willy-nilly. 

I haven't read the book, so maybe Hawks was just being faithful to Raymond Chandler's source material, but I still think things were needlessly complicated. There are plenty of morally-grey characters who are constantly double-crossing each other. And I did have trouble distinguishing the characters from one another. Characters like Geiger are introduced to later be quickly killed off.

I understand that a lot of the writing, acting and direction was very much of the time, but it still bordered on very cheesy. It seems like Humphrey Bogart's only direction was to flirt with every single female cast member from his love triangle with Carmen and Vivien to the girls working at the book shops he visits. The fight and murder scenes were also hardly the most convincing either.

Perhaps I am being very unfair with my review. I'm sure the right audiences would find this a very entertaining and thrilling film. I guess there has to be a reason it made it into this list. Maybe I shouldn't be judging the Big Sleep by modern standards, but I just wasn't the right audience.

Running Scared review

 Number 849 on the top 1000 films of all time is the neo-noir crime thriller 'Running Scared.'

Joey Gazelle (Paul Walker) is a low-level mafioso present at a drug-deal gone wrong. A group of masked, dirty cops turn up and a shoot-out happens. Gazelle and his other mobsters shoot dead all the cops. Gazelle is then tasked with hiding the gun. He takes it home and hides it in the basement. It is later discovered by his son Nicky (Alex Neuberger) and his son's best friend Oleg Yugorsky (Cameron Bright.) Oleg steals the gun and uses it to shoot his abusive, Russian mobster stepfather Anzor Yugorsky (Karel Roden.) Gazelle is in a race against time to find Oleg and the gun before his mob, the Russian mob and the corrupt coppers.

Who decided this should be on the top 1000 films of all time? Was it a group of twelve-year-old boys? Because it looked like it had been written, filmed, edited and directed by a group of twelve-year-old boys. It was all so immature and juvenile. I'm talking gratuitous violence, cliched characters, absurd plot developments, ridiculous action scenes, terrible dialogue, objectified women - Joey's wife Teresa (Vera Farmiga) spent much of the film with her thong poking out of her jeans - and the effects, filters and grainy colour scheme that look like they're out of a 90's rap video.

Let's break these down in more detail. The film starts badly with the drug-deal going wrong. The corrupt coppers turn up and the violence ramps up. Gangsters and ex-coppers are flying across the screen in slow-motion. We see bloody mists and weird filters. It all just looked ridiculous. But this was nothing compared to the final sequence where Gazelle confronts the Russian and Italian mob at an ice-hockey stadium. The Russians hold him down on the rink and have one of their players shoot pucks at his face until he tells them what he wants to know. It was all just so laughable. And of course there was another of these stupid filters - this time, a blue-light filter. Eventually this breaks down into another chaotic shoot-out where you have no idea what's happening and don't know who is shooting who.

I did criticise Teresa's character, but that's not a criticism of Farmiga, but rather her writing. She is immediately portrayed as a sex object. Her introduction is her rubbing up against Gazelle on the washing machine with her senile father in the living room and son in her basement. And as previously stated, she then spends the rest of the film with her thong sticking out of jeans. It didn't seem like a very empowering role for Farmiga, but I think she did the best she could. 

In fairness, she did have some agency. It's just a shame it happened with such a crazy plot development. When Oleg is on the run after having shot by his stepfather, he is kidnapped by these two paedophiles Dez Hansel (Bruce Altman) and Edele Hansel (Elizabeth Burke.) They take him to their flat where they're going to film a snuff film. He is later rescued by Teresa who murders the two paedophiles.  But this was just absurd. It comes out of nowhere and the vivid colour scheme didn't fit into the grainy visuals of the rest of the film. Obviously, I'm sure this stuff does happen, but it just didn't fit into the film. I do wish they had given Farmiga much better material. She was very much a cliche.

But so were the rest of the characters. Gazelle is your standard hot-headed mobster, Chaz Palminteri is your corrupt cop and the Italian and Russian mobsters are complete run-of-the-mill. And there was also the weird side character of Lester-the-Pimp. Oleg stumbles upon the pimp abusing one of his workers. He was just another silly addition to an already bloated cast. The only character I really felt any sympathy for was Oleg's mother Mila (Ivana Milicevic.) Unlike most of the other characters she actually had some depth. She worked as a prostitute in Moscow before her pimp brought her to the United States. After getting pregnant, she is told to abort her child. She refuses and her pimp sends Anzor to kill her. Instead he marries her. Unlike everybody else, I actually felt sorry for her.

The ending was also super cheesy. There is a fake-out death with Joey Gazelle. He and Farmiga share lots of tears, but I didn't feel anything. Both characters were complete cliches and it didn't help that he and Farmiga lacked any real chemistry. Other than them having sex and yelling at each other, you never see any real relationship or any reason why you should root for them.

I've been working through this list for years now and I've seen a lot of films that I can acknowledge as being good films in their own right, but not for me. Running Scared is one of the first films I've watched that I can say was objectively bad.