Good Will Hunting review

 Number 159 on the top 1000 films of all time is the drama Good Will Hunting.

Will (Matt Damon) is an undiscovered genius with a troubled past. Instead of putting his genius to good use, he works as a janitor for MIT. That is until Professor Gerald Lambeau (Stellan Skarsgard) recognises his potential and arranges for Will to have counselling with therapist Dr Sean Maguire (Robin Williams.) Ben Affleck co stars as Will's best friend Chuckie and Minnie Driver plays Will's love interest Skylar.

In 1994, Matt Damon and Ben Affleck were struggling to break into the acting industry. They then decided to write and star in their own film. The rest as they say is history. Damon and Affleck went onto win Oscars for writing. Affleck has since gone onto win a Best Director Oscar for Argo. 

Yet the Oscars don't end there as you had the always terrific Robin Williams win Best Supporting Actor for his role as therapist Sean Maguire. Robin Williams is best known for his comedy roles but he is proven that he is equally adept at drama too. In this role, he played to both his comedic and dramatic strengths. One of the film's most famous scenes sees Maguire making Will dissolve into giggles by telling him a story about how his wife used to fart in her sleep. Matt Damon was laughing for real here as was the cameraman evidenced by how the camera shook. What made it so great was how it was unscripted.

Williams also had a great chemistry with Damon as we see Maguire become a mentor for the emotionally damaged Will. The two of them had many tender, heartfelt but also intense scenes together. Both of them were able to easily switch between comedy and drama.

Alas I cannot be so positive about Ben Affleck. I think it is very telling that he has won Oscars for writing and directing but NOT acting. I think this is because he is more wooden than your average tree. Chuckie was not an exception to this rule.

Although this is really just a minor blip in an otherwise very good film. It was funny yet dramatic with one of Robin Williams' finest performances 

Sling Blade review

 Number 288 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1996 drama 'Sling Blade.'

*Spoilers to follow*

Karl Childers (Billy Bob Thornton) is a developmentally-disabled man who has just been released from a psychiatric institution where he has been held since he was twelve years old. His crime? Murdering his mother and her lover with a sling blade. Thoroughly institutionalised, Karl struggles to adapt to his new life in Arkansas. That is until he befriends the twelve-year-old Frank (Lucas Black) and his mother Linda (Natalie Canerday) But her abusive boyfriend Doyle (Dwight Yokam) soon takes a disliking to Karl. As well as starring, Billy Bob Thornton also wrote, produced and directed Sling Blade.

Billy Bob Thornton won an Osar for writing Sling Blade. However, he was only nominate for acting and not even considered for direction. I think that's a good summary of the film: the acting and direction didn't match up to the Oscar-winning writing.

This isn't to say that Thornton did a bad job, but it certainly wasn't Oscar-worthy. Karl's journey was a predictable one. While predictability isn't a bad thing, Thornton did fail to bring anything new to the medium. Karl - having been institutionalised for most of his life struggles in adapting to life on the outside. He quickly comes to loggerheads with Doyle resulting in Karl murdering him. 

Yes, this was predictable, but a predictable ending can still be good if it was executed well. But this ending was disappointing and anti-climatic. There was too much build-up leading to a damp squib instead of a bang. We get a seemingly-endless montage of Karl preparing to kill Doyle with the latter meekly accepting his fate. It was a sequence devoid of tension.

I also think Thornton's portrayal of Karl was over-simplified. It didn't have the same depth as portrayals of similar characters of the era e.g Tom Hanks in Forrest Gump. whereas Gump was a living, breathing three-dimensional character, Karl was little more than a grunting cave man.

I can understand why Thornton won the Best Writing Oscar. Sling Blade certainly had a good story. It's just a shame that the direction and acting didn't match up to the writing.

The Man from Earth review

 Number 337 on the top 1000 films of all time is the science-fiction film 'The Man from Earth.'

John Oldman (David Lee Smith) is an academic moving on from his old life. At his farewell party, he reveals a big secret to his fellow academics: he claims to be a caveman who has survived 14,000 years into the modern day.

Before I watch these films, I generally take a cursory glance of their Wikipedia pages, so I know what I'm up against. When I read about this film, I thought it would be a tedious, surreal, philosophical arthouse film a la Ingmar Bergman.  And we've established that I'm not a fan of Bergman.

However, that assessment could not have been more wrong. Despite The Man from Earth being little more than a one-act play, it was very engaging. The academics discuss the philosophical nature of Oldman's being in a way that is accessible for audiences to understand. It isn't too scholarly neither is it oversimplified. I never felt like I was being talked down to or did the dialogue feel contrived.

And as the story advances things only become more interesting as Oldman's story is examined from different academic disciplines - from biology to archaeology and even theology. This culminates in the implication that even this outlandish claim didn't harm the suspension of disbelief. This claim and the others were all backed up by reasoned logic like any academic argument.

I also really enjoyed the ending. *Spoiler alert* Under duress, Oldman reveals this was all an elaborate prank. Some of his friends believe him and others. But without any conclusive evidence to either prove or disprove him, the audience is left to make up their own minds.

This film definitely surprised me. It was quiet, understated but very powerful.

The Hunger Games review

Although the Hunger Games is not on the top 1000 films of all time list, its sequel Catching fire is, so it was only logical that I went back and watched the original first.

The City of Panem holds annual Hunger Games contests where 2 members from each of the nation's 12 districts are selected to fight to the death. 24 enter but there can only be 1 winner. When Katniss Everdeen's (Jennifer Lawrence) sister is selected, Katniss volunteers to take her place. Competing along aside her is baker's boy, Peeta (Josh Hutchinson.) Woody Harrellson, Elizabeth Banks and Donald Sutherland all co star.

To preface this review, I have not read the Hunger Games books so my comments are based on the film alone. Although this film is 10 years old with the books being even older, I've never had any interest in the Hunger Games. Having finally watched it, I can understand why. It was like watching Young Adult fiction. During the whole film, I was asking "is this it?" By " it, " I mean a film with a half-baked romance, generic villains, an undeveloped cast and a plot holier than swiss cheese.

One thing that irked me through the whole film is that there are no guns. I didn't get it at all. This isn't a medieval fantasy; it's a futuristic dystopia where they have genetically engineered wasps, tracking implants and holographic interfaces. The tributes are fighting to the death in a televised tournament. Wouldn't it increase the entertainment factor if they had guns too? It would definitely raise the tension especially if some tributes guns and some didn't.  But would that make things too easy? I don't think so. Katniss would have some big obstacles to overcome if she has a bow and arrow and her opponents have guns. Even when Rue dies and her district riots, the riot police don't use guns. They use water cannon. It doesn't make any sense. 

Speaking of Rue, she was an example of the severely underdeveloped supporting cast. She had the potential to be a really interesting character if she wasn't on screen for fifteen minutes. She saves Katniss from the Careers and the two ally with each other. Ten minutes later, she dies in a trap set by the leader of the Careers, Marvel. Her death causes her district to riot. Do I care? I should do, but I don't. Later on, when Katniss is being attacked by another of the Careers, Clove, Thresh saves her life. Thresh is also from Rue's district and killed Clove to avenge Rue. He then dies off screen. Again, I don't care.

Then we come to the group of tributes called the Careers - AKA, cliched public school bullies. Marvel, Clove, Glimmer and Cato ally together because they're the biggest and the strongest. But they were all too meh to present any real threat. While they all die one by one, they were too indistinguishable  for me to tell them apart or to care about their deaths. Plus calling the strongest, fastest and most handsome tribute 'Marvel' is way too on the nose. To be honest, the only interesting, well developed character was Haymitch (Woody Harrelson), a previous winner and mentor to Katniss and Peeta. He begins as apathetic and jaded but soon starts to care about his trustees.

I would argue the premise of the film was flawed. Katniss only becomes tribute because she volunteers to take her sister's place, but what if she wasn't allowed? What if this was against the rules? What if Prim had to fight anyway? We wouldn't have a film then. Although the Gameskeeper Seneca obviously don't care about breaking rules. They throw in lots of curve balls to make things more interesting. And by interesting, I mean stupid. Katniss spends the first part of the tournament hiding at the edges of the arena. To drive her into action, Seneca starts a forest fire. Katniss is driven up a tree by the Careers who camp underneath, prepared to wait her out. she is only saved when Rue points out the nest of genetically engineered wasp nest hanging from a tree branch over them. Katniss breaks the branch and the wasps kill Glimmer.

 Thresh later dies when the organisers release some demonic big cat things. Sure this creates more drama and tension, but it's also stupid. Fire is fire, Wasps are wasps. Big cats are big cats. They don't know who they're killing. What if they kill all the tributes? Then there wouldn't be a champion. President Snow (Donald Sutherland) explains the reason they do the contest is so that the people will always have a spark of hope. But what hope can they have, when they know that the odds will never be in their favour? President Snow was obviously supposed to be the big bad villain but he was too underused to be any real threat.

And we come to the god-awful love story between Peeta and Katniss which had all the foundations of a lean-to shelter. In flashbacks, we see Peeta giving Katniss some bread. In a pre-tournament interview, Peeta confesses he is in love with Katniss. She angrily dismisses this as a shallow attempt to appeal to sponsors. When in the tournament, Peeta allies with the Careers and leads them straight to Katniss. But after the wasp attack, he joins Katniss after seemingly betraying her. I say seemingly as it's never explained why he joins the Careers and Katniss accepts this without question. It's not even just an acceptance...she falls in love with him. And they kiss! He could have got you killed, Katniss. And the less said about the Romeo and Juliet ending the better.

The Hunger Games was also criticised for its camerawork and it was pretty awful, especially the shaky-cam. In the film's final fight between Katniss, Peeta and Cato - one of these bland Careers, the camera moves around so much, I can barely tell who is who - not that I care much.

I am sure that this review will earn me the ire of Hunger Games' fans, but here's hoping Catching Fire will be better. May the odds ever be in my favour. Humph. Not bloody likely.

There Will Be Blood review

 Number 224 of on the top 1000 films of all time is Paul Thomas Anderson's epic period drama There Will be Blood.

Daniel Day-Lewis plays Daniel Plainview, a prospector turned ruthless oil tycoon in Southern California. Over the course of three decades, we see the rise and fall of his empire, as well as his tempestuous relationship with local preacher Eli Sunday (Paul Dano.)

I'll readily admit that I'm not a fan of period dramas. Generally, I find them slow and boring. I'm just not interested enough in their subject matter. And There Will be Blood  was no exception. This is no disrespect to Mr Day-Lewis. There is no doubt that Plainview is a despicable character. After his adopted son is deafened by an explosion, Plainview sends him to a special school to save him the trouble of raising him. He also cheats the Sundays out of their land and refuses to allow Eli to bless his new wells. 

Despite this he is still a very charismatic character to watch. I wouldn't necessarily say I wanted him to achieve his goals, but I was intrigued to see what would happen. And this was down to Day-Lewis' strong portrayal. He gave a character who could have easily been a stereotypical, moustache-twirling panto villain, a humanity and moral greyness.

I just wish Anderson had this in a shorter amount of time. At times, there is a lot of talking and the pacing was slow. I'm not sure we needed to spend as long as we did on Plainview's fake brother Henry (Kevin J O'Connor.) But maybe that ties in well into the central idea behind the film: it doesn't matter how rich you are if you're the only one enjoying the wealth. Plainview turns his son against him and kills the fraudster impersonating his brother. I wasn't entirely clear on the motivations of the fraudster, but presumably it was to steal Plainview's money.

The film climaxes with Plainview's rivalry with Eli bubbling over into a fall-on confrontation. Plainview beats Eli to death and the film ends with Plainview sitting alone in his massive mansion, a somewhat obvious metaphor for how the pursuit of wealth can leave you lonely.

I did want to enjoy this film more than I did. Day-Lewis truly earned his second Oscar win, but the pacing could have been faster with far less shots of the desert landscape. But hey, maybe that's just me. As I've said, I'm just not a fan of period dramas.