Mississippi Burning review

 Number 470 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1988 crime-thriller 'Mississippi Burning.'

Mississippi Burning is based on the true story of three civil rights activists going missing in a small Mississippi town. When FBI agents Rupert Anderson (Gene Hackman) and Alan Ward (Wilhelm Dafoe) start investigating, they are met with hostility from the town's racist locals. Soon they suspect the three activists were killed by the KKK. Frances Mcdormand, Brad Dourif, Michael Rooker, R. Lee Erney and Stephen Tobolowsky co-star.

I recently wrote a listicle about films too traumatic to watch again. If I were to write another list, surely Mississippi Burning would be at the top of the list. This is a film that does not shy away from the United States' racist past. Rather, it tackles it head-on. And there's no other way you can depict such horrible subject matter.

Mississippi Burning is a harrowing and brutal portrayal of the ugly discrimination that the black community was forced to endure. Yes, it does show it through the perspective of white men, and it would be have been more interesting if the black men were put more front-and-centre, but it was still a powerful watch all the same.

The relationship between Anderson and Ward underpinned the film. Anderson, the older and more maverick of the two, has to follow the orders of the younger, but more senior in rank, Ward, who is a stickler for the rules. Despite their differences, they learn to work together.  Dafoe and Hackman had great chemistry, which shone through.

As Dafoe is a character actor, he usually plays larger-than-life oddballs, usually leading, to over-the-top, exaggerated performances *cough cough* the the Boondock Saints, but he was incredibly measured and controlled in this.

Hackman was also great. Anderson has a romantic subplot with the wife of one of the Mississippi police officers played by Frances Mcdormand. she showed why she is one of the few actors to have won three Best Acting Oscars. Their relationship was wonderfully understated. Originally, the pair were supposed to have a sex-scene, but this was dropped in favour of the two characters standing in the shadows. And that's all we needed to see. Props to the lighting department.

And all the supporting cast were good too: Brad Dourif, Michael Rooker, and, especially, Stephen Tobolowsky were chilling ass the abhorrent KKK members.

Sure there might be some who criticise Mississippi Burning for distorting history, but the key message is clear enough: the black community was subject to terrible, racist abuse. And that's a true we should never forget.

JFK review

 Number 306 on the top 1000 films of all time is Oliver Stone's epic political thriller: JFK.

Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner) is the former New Orleans district attorney. After President Kennedy is assassinated, the Warren report declares that Lee Harvey Oswald (Gary Oldman) was the lone perpetrator. Garrison has his doubts and reopens the investigation. He inadvertently unearths a massive conspiracy theory. The huge ensemble cast includes Tommy Lee Jones, Joe Pesci, Kevin Bacon, Jack Lemmon, Walter Matthau and John Candy.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: a film needs a very good reason to be over three hours long. And it needs an excellent reason to be three hours and twenty-five minutes long. JFK had no such reason. it was one of the longest films I've seen and far longer than it needed to be.

It's safe to say that Kennedy's assassination is one of the most controversial topics in history. Few people believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was acting as a lone wolf. The true perpetrators range from the mob to the CIAS to the Russians to the Cubans. Any one of these explored in isolation could have made a very interesting film, but where Stone went was how he tried to connect everything. Reportedly, he read two dozen books on Kennedy's assassination and his research team read 100-200 books. And it was like Stone tried to include every single scrap of information he could find. This made for a bloated, unfocussed film.

The supporting cast was huge and certainly could have been trimmed down. Garrison's many deputies were very similar to each other and I regularly mixed them up. Some of them were also ultimately pointless to the plot as they were involved in subplots that went nowhere. Bill Broussard (Michael Rooker) is one such deputy who becomes uncomfortable at how the conspiracy begins to implicate LBJ. He betrays his former boss by starting to work for the feds, but we never see any consequences for this.

Stone was heavily criticised for taking liberties with history. But my issue isn't so much was he included, but what he didn't, which was nothing. He included everything which was not necessary. I could have done without seeing how Garrison's investigation was affecting his family life. This would have cut the film down a lot.

And everything was slow that after a while it became very tedious. Much of the film were characters sitting in a room either quietly talking or loudly yelling at each other. As such, a lot of the supporting cast was wasted. Gary Oldman did very little as did Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau. With so many famous faces, it's inevitable that you can't give them all the attention they deserve and a lot of them did fall by the wayside. Although, John Candy and Joe Pesci gave memorable performances and Costner's ending monologue was particularly powerful.

The film did have the potential to live up to its ambitious premise, but if you have to watch a film in two halves then it is too damn long.