Blow review

 Number 681 on the top 1000 films of all time is Ted Demme's 2001 biographical crime-drama 'Blow.'

Blow tells the story of George Jung (Johnny Depp), one of the biggest drug-traffickers in American History. We see his meteoric rise to infamy, including working with Pablo Escobar (Cliff Curtis) to his momentous downfall. Penelope Cruz, Rachel Griffiths and Ray Liotta co-star.

Is it far to say that film blows? Not quite, but there was definitely more bad than good. Things start interestingly enough, as we see George's rise - his relationship with his parents, his graduation from selling weed to trafficking cocaine, and his introduction to some of the biggest narco-traffickers ever. Despite the awful wigs he had to wear, Johnny Depp was charismatic as usual.

Then it all came crashing down in a second half that was founded on unlikelihoods. It stopped being an interesting look into criminality and became a hokey family-drama.

Firstly, let's start with Penelope Cruz who played George Jung's second wife Mirtha. Granted, the two had better chemistry than Depp and Framke Potente who played his first wife, but the relationship was difficult to believe. We are introduced to Mirtha, as the fiancee of a Colombian gangster who takes an instant disliking to Jung. Yet Jung is able to steal away his wife, no questions asked. In this criminal underworld, people get killed for lesser offences, yet George Jung faces no repercussions. 

But this is nothing compared to what's to come. After Jung is betrayed by his criminal associates, he decides to pack it all in and retire from crime and live a normal life. It sounds great except it's a load of rubbish. You don't just retire from a life like this; you're in it until you die. The mob doesn't let you retire; why should the cartel be any different? How do they know you won't be spilling your guts to the FBI? This is based on a real story, so I guess it must be true, but it was still difficult to stomach. 

The same goes for Penelope Cruz who was quite rightly nominated for a Golden Raspberry award. Her portrayal of Mirtha was just annoying and whiny. Also, Cliff Curtis wasn't physically imposing enough to pull off playing Pablo Escobar. He lacked the aura of menace that Wagner Mourra had on Narcos. Lastly, Rachel Griffths was badly miscast as George Jung's mother. She's five years younger than Johnny Depp and no amount of grey hair dye could convince me otherwise. Ray Liotta was more convincing as Jung's father.

It's a shame that this film's second half was so bad. It had all the potential of being another Goodfellas, but it was just a blow-out.

Enemy at the Gates review

 Number 734 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2001 war drama 'Enemy at the Gates.'

Set during the Battle of Stalingrad during WW2, 'Enemy at the Gates,' follows the sniper Vasily Zaitsev turned living legend. His colleague Commisar Danilov (Joseph Fiennes) uses Vasily as a piece of propaganda to embolden the Russian troops fighting against the Germans. One such German is Major Konig (Ed Harris) who is another sniper who embarks to kill Vasily at any costs. 

Based on a true story, although no doubt creative license was taken, Enemy at the gates received its fair share of criticism for its historical inaccuracy. I am not a historian so I cannot comment on this. However, 'Enemy at the Gates,' took a massive historical event and told it on the micro-level, delivering an entertaining and gripping narrative. Granted, it was probably overly-simplistic at times, but it was thrilling nonetheless.

Law and Harris embark on a cat-and-mouse game that always keeps the tension at a high. Both of them are such living legends that the death of either would surely tip the scales in the balance of power. there is excitement abound in the many battle sequences - this was 2001 so we can forgive the ropey CGI, but the special effects were great.

What was less great was the love triangle between Vassily, Danilov and interpreter Tania Chernova (Rachel Weisz.) I understand that love stories add heart and offset the darker themes, which is all well and good, if they actually work. But this one didn't and it distracted from an otherwise good film. Danilove grows so obsessed with Tania that he has her transferred to headquarters so he can work more closely with her. And Joseph Fiennes' portrayal of him was creepy and predatory. And as for Law and Weisz, I don't think there were any sparks in between them, let alone fireworks.

Also, can we talk about the accents? Ron Perlman stars in a supporting role, playing a former protege of Konig, but he does the weirdest accent. It isn't German or Russian, but a peculiar hybrid of English and Australian. Considering, Fiennes, Law and Weisz speak in their natural accents why doesn't Perlman? Also Ed Harris does a strange accent. I don't know what it was, but it certainly wasn't German.

This film might have faltered with its oversimplified plot and faltering love triangle, but it was an entertaining film.

The Notebook review

Number 346 on the top 1000 films of all time is the romantic drama: The Notebook.

Duke (James Garner) is a resident at a care home. He is friends with an elderly woman (Gena Rowlands) who is suffering from dementia. To comfort her, Duke reads her a story from a notebook. The story is about the romance between Noah (Ryan Gosling) and Allie (Rachel McAdams,) a young couple who fell in love in 1940's South Carolina.

As a rule, I am generally not a fan of romance films. I find them slow and saccharine. The Notebook was no exception. Part of that was down to the characters of Noah and Allie. This is, of course, no comment on Gosling and McAdams' acting abilities. I've seen Rachel McAdams in True Detective as the tough-as-nails police detective 'Antigone Bezzerides.' She was far more of an interesting character than Allie who was generic. There was no depth to her character other than being a Southern belle. It was a simple portrayal of a simple character and there wasn't a lot McAdams could do to change that.

Initially Allie spurns Noah's advances, but is eventually won over by his roguish charm. However, her snooty high-class family don't approve of Noah's working-class roots and forbid her from seeing him. When all seems lost, the power of love brings them back together. Noah was also generic. He's your run-of-the-mill cheeky chappy who holds a torch after his heart is broken. It's a storyline I've seen before and it wasn't any different here.

What I found much more interesting was the framing story. This actually had some conflict I was invested in. I was interesting in learning the answers to the questions they were raising. Who was Duke? Who was the woman he was reading to? What was wrong with her? Why was Duke reading to her? Why was he reading that particular story? These questions all culminate in a genuinely tragic way that did tug at my heartstrings. I'll leave you to find out the answers to these questions for yourself. But this framing narrative was far more intimate and stripped back compared to the grandiose 'Noah and Allie' love story, which is why I preferred it.

While the Notebook might be considered one of the best romances of all time, it was not for me.