Once review

 Number 349 on the top 1000 films of all time is the Irish musical romantic comedy Once.

A busker in Dublin only known as Guy (Glen Hansard) meets a Czech lady (Marketa Irglova) who is a musician as well. Through their shared love of music, they start a budding relationship.

I know that in my  'the Notebook' review that as a rule I don't like romance films. Once is the exception to that rule. The main reason is its simplicity. Cillian Murphy was originally set to play Guy, but after he pulled out, so did most of the film's investors. Director John Carney had little choice but to produce this film on a shoestring budget. He gave his salary to Hansard and Irglova, filmed at friends' houses, used natural lighting and filmed in Dublin's busy streets without a permit.

Seeing this simplicity was refreshing compared to the standard American high-budget production. And it gave the film a lovely sense of authenticity. These are struggling musicians and it makes perfect sense that they would do everything on a budget. Further, everything felt more natural. As Hansard was filming in Central Dublin without a permit, he had to use a long lens. This often led to Hansard and Irglova forgetting that they were being filmed, allowing them to adlib and feel more natural with each other.

A great example of ad-libbing comes when Guy and Girl are on a bus. Guy sings a joke song explaining why he and his ex girlfriend broke up. Hansard improvised the expletive-filled ditty and you can see the other passenger's genuinely amused reactions.

Hansard and Irglova were great as the two leads. They had great on-screen chemistry, probably due to how they dated while filming, and that made Guy and Girl's relationship all the more believable. They were adorable together especially when Girl tells Guy "Miluji Tebe," but coyly refuses to translate what she means. Although I think it's pretty obvious. This was another ad-lib, this time completed by Irglova.

Both Guy and Girl were estranged from their previous partners and it seemed like the two of them would end up as a couple. There were multiple moments where I thought a kiss was on the cards, but it wasn't to be. Once ends with Guy flying too London to win his girlfriend back and Girl reuniting with her husband. Both of them have happy endings, just not with each other. And I liked this. Having the two end up together would be too obvious and predictable and I'm glad they went their separate ways.

Having said that, the film was far from perfect. I know Once is about music with most of the storytelling done through singing, but the musical numbers dragged on for a bit. I would also argue that at times Hansard's singing bordered on screechy, but, then again, I'm tone deaf. It also made no sense that they were still using cassette tapes. This isn't the eighties, it's 2007 where CDs were in full swing with digital streaming and downloads not far behind. On a similar note, why were the characters using payphones and not mobiles? This was strange too.

But, ultimately, I did enjoy Once. The simplified, stripped-back story made for a refreshing and sweet watch.

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.

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire review

Number 324 on the top 1000 films of all time is Francis Lawrence's science fiction, dystopia: The Hunger Games: Catching Fire.

After Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta (Josh Hutchinson) win the previous Hunger Games, they become unlikely celebrities. However, they also become symbols for a rebellion as the 12 districts of Panem begin rising up against the capitol.

Just like its predecessor, I have not read the Hunger Game books so this review is based entirely on the film itself. I really wanted to like this film. It had so much potential. It could have been better than the first, and while it was, that's not really saying much. However, unlike the original, I actually have some positive things to say so let's start with those. 

On the surface, it seemed that director Francis Lawrence had learned from his predecessor's mistakes. There was far less shaky-cam and the villains were more than men in black hiding behind curtains. Donald Sutherland was menacing as President Snow. I particularly liked the scene with him and Katniss. He warns her that she needs to toe the line on her victory tour otherwise everybody in her district will die. I felt the malice from here. It was nice to have an actually threatening villain unlike the first film. Shoutout also goes to the always great Philip Seymour Hoffman as the morally duplicitous gameskeeper: Plutarch Heavensbee. He was much better than the campy Seneca Crane and he worked well together with Sutherland. There was even guns in this film! Although why they were present here and not in the original is beyond me.

Sounds good right? That's what I thought. The first hour of the film felt markedly different from the original. I was actually invested. I was excited to see a rebellion or even a civil war play out and for Katniss and Peeta to undergo reluctant hero arcs but then the film took a complete nosedive.

Worried that Katniss' defiance could lead to full-blown revolution, President Snow organises another Hunger Games where the contestants are former tributes - a plan that is beyond ridiculous. If you want to kill Katniss, why would you submit her into a competition where she could die as a martyr for the revolution? Oh no, says Plutarch: when the audience see how she betrays and kills her friends and allies, they'll turn against her. Great plan, but why even risk the chance? 

Also, what are the chances that there would actually be 2 victors from each district? It would make sense if there was a severe imbalance in the number of tributes that each district could provide. Districts 1 and 2 always produce the Careers - i.e the strongest, fastest and cleverest tributes. It would be logical if they won most of the previous tournaments and thus provided the most tributes. What if some districts had never won the tournament and thus couldn't produce any victors?

 And then we come back to this volunteering nonsense. Katniss is the only female victor from district 12 and so she is picked (again, what if District 12 had never produced a female champion or any championbefore) but Haymitch (Woody Harrelson) is picked as the male victor. However, Peeta volunteers to take his place. I do not believe that a despotic, totalitarian regime would be okay with tributes volunteering in the place of others. They just wouldn't. The whole point of this tournament is to punish Katniss and Peeta for their defiance. But yet they're fine with other people breaking the rules! It makes no sense that they would allow Peeta to volunteer. 

Granted at least the other tributes were a little more interesting as the film actually took time to develop them. Katniss and Peeta quickly ally themselves with playboy Finnick (Sam Claflin) and older contestant Mags (Lynn Cohen) - also it was stupid that she was allowed to volunteer for another contestant. This is a televised tournament and Mags is way too old to take part. How would it be entertaining to see her compete? Anyway, we also have Joanna (Jena Malone,) who is not the happiest about being forced to take part again, and computer nerds Beetie (Jeffrey Wright) and Wiress (Amanda Plummer.) These supporting characters were much better defined than in the last film. I was actually sad when they started inevitably dying. Case-in-point, when a killer fog arrives, Mags sacrifices herself as she is slowing down the others.

What was interesting was that the curve balls that the Gameskeeper threw in were made into canon and not randomly thrown in. This film had killer fog and killer monkeys and killer waves which was just as stupid as in the first film. Fog or monkeys or waves don't discriminate. They'll kill everybody in their path. What happens if they kill all the tributes? Katniss and Peeta were prepared to both kill themselves at the end of the first film and the tournament was stopped with both being crowned as champions. 

Finally, we've come to the stupid Katniss and Peeta love story which continues to make no sense. Although the two of them seemed very cosy at the end of the first film, Katniss has lost all interest in Peeta, by the time Catching Fire starts,  with no explanation why. In fact she's with her boyfriend from District 12: Gale (Liam Hemsworth) but she promptly forgets about him. In fairness, he's pretty forgettable. I forgot that he had appeared in the first film. 

 To prevent rebellion, President Snow orders Katniss and Peeta to make the people believe that their romance was real. On their victory tour, they embark on a sham relationship ending with a sham marriage. And all of this is in spite of Peeta still having feelings toward Katniss and Katniss still being apathetic toward him. But for unexplained reasons, upon entering the arena, they hook up properly. And it doesn't make sense. Outside of the arena, Katniss has shown very little interest in Peeta. But in it, she's suddenly in love with him. Ur Katniss? This is the guy who betrayed you to the Careers. He almost got you killed. Yet she doesn't care about that. And despite all of her initial apathy, she is suddenly concerned about keeping him safe. As Haymitch remarks, Peeta really doesn't deserve her.

And I didn't deserve to watch this. Granted it's better than the first film, but it was a really low bar. Thank God, I don't have to watch Mockingjay.

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.

Dallas Buyers Club review

Number 312 on the top 1000 films of all time is Jean-Marc Valle's biopic drama Dallas Buyers Club.

Based on the true story, Ron Woodroof (Matthew McConaughey) is a Texan electrician who is diagnosed with AIDS in 1980's America when AIDS was poorly understood. He initially takes the standard treatment of AZT but after this makes him worse, he begins smuggling in alternative treatments and selling them to other aids sufferers under the guise of the Dallas Buyers Club with the help of transgender prostitute Rayon (Jared Leto.)

After the last two years of Covid and lockdown, it's weird to think of AIDS as a pandemic but it was and very much still is. As of 2020, over 36 million people have died, marking it the 4th worst pandemic in history. This pandemic began in the 80s when the disease was stigmatised and under-researched - due to the homophobic attitudes of the time, not to mention, the bureaucratic red tape surrounding the development of new treatments. Woodroof quickly loses his friends who suspect that he is secretly gay. I often wondered whether he was a closeted homosexual and his own self-loathing is the reason for his own intense homophobia.

AZT - the only viable treatment for AIDs is highly experimental and hasn't been approved by the FDA yet. Woodroof bribes a hospital worker for the treatment, but after it makes him worse, he goes to Mexico where a doctor prescribes him with a cocktail of Ddc and peptide T. Knowing there are others suffering, Woodroof exploits this new miracle cure by setting up a club where members can get free medication. However, they have to pay membership fees at a monthly rate of $400. 

To be honest, this is the perfect microcosm of the American healthcare system. You're dying from a lethal disease? You can't afford to pay for your treatment? Guess you better start making funeral plans. It also showcases Woodroof as being less than a great man - exploiting dying people for the last of their money. He isn't the nicest of men to begin with - a homophobic, loudmouthed drunk, but that's what makes his character arc so interesting to watch. He goes from calling Rayon homophobic slurs to defending her against his homophobic friends who don't want to shake her hand to even hugging her when she sells her life insurance policy to keep the club going. When Rayon is taken to hospital and dies after being given AZT, Woodroof is furious. 

And while he begins the club for solely exploitative reasons, he truly begins to care about the people he is helping. The FDA threatens to arrest Woodroof and makes his imported drugs illegal. He promises to fight this, not because he cares about the money, but because he wants to genuinely keep helping people. Matthew McConaughey won the Best Acting Oscar for his role as Woodroof and it was well deserved. He took an unlikable, annoying jackass and turned him into a sympathetic, interesting hero. McConaughey reportedly lost 22 kilos to play the role and this dedication to the role showed through.

But McConaughey cannot take all the credit. Some of that has to be reserved for Jared Leto's standout performance as Rayon. Leto won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar for this role and it was clear why. He utterly disappeared into the role of the transgender prostitute. It would have been so easy to turn Rayon into nothing more than a hurtful stereotype/caricature but she was so sympathetic. Leto played her as an inspiring, but tragic character. Despite how much shit she must have taken throughout her life, she doesn't devolve into pity and self-loathing like Woodroof does, but always keeps her spirits high. One of the film's most heart-breaking scenes is when Rayon confronts her abusive, transphobic father. Her dad says "God, help me," Rayon replies, "he is helping you; I have aids." Similarly, to McConaughey, Leto also dedicated himself to the role, shaving his eyebrows, waxing his whole body and losing 13kg. Reportedly, he refused to break character and went to the supermarket dressed as Rayon, earning him many stares.

Granted, Jean-Marc Vallee reportedly played a little fast and loose with history. In real life, Woodroof was bisexual and wasn't anywhere near as homophobic as he was portrayed here. The negative effects of AZT were largely overstated as were Woodroof's alternative treatments. But that doesn't change the fact that Vallee still produced a great film with a great performance from McConaughey but an even greater performance from Jared Leto.

The Thing Review

 Number 186 on the top 1000 films of all time is John Carpenter's 1982 sci-fi horror 'The Thing.'

Macready (Kurt Russell) is a helicopter pilot on an Antarctic research base. When a shape-shifting, parasitic alien attacks the research team, paranoia sets in as the men realise that any one of them could be the alien.

After my world-tour of cinema, from Serbia to Italy to Russia back to Italy to Korea and finally Japan, we are back in the States for this 80's horror classic. Although it is only a classic by modern standards. Upon its initial release, it was panned by critics with some deriding it as an Alien knock-off. While it is easy to draw comparisons between the two, the Thing is a good film in its own right.

But it isn't perfect. The cast is large and sometimes confusing. As is typical in horror films, the cast is killed off one-by-one, but I did have trouble keeping track of who was who. Every time somebody died, I had to double-check who they were and what role they played. The cast was so large that I think even Carpenter lost track of who was who. Right at the end of the film, cook Nauls (T.K Carter) goes missing. It's implied that he's been killed by the monster, it isn't specifically stated which is a dangling plot thread. It's made even more peculiar by how mechanic Childs (Keith David) also goes missing to reappear at the end - although we're not sure whether he is really Childs or not. It was a little strange that we had this certainty with one character but not with another. 

Secondly, and perhaps, I've been spoiled by modern CGI, but I'm not sure how well the special effects hold up forty years later. The various incarnations of the alien looked a little too silly to be threatening. When Dr Copper is trying to resuscitate, geologist Norris, Norris turns into the alien and bites off Cooper's arms. The fake blood was less than convincing. Later you have a decapitated head grow spider legs and some weird slug antennae before being set on fire.

However, the Thing worked brilliantly as a horror film. Rather than overly-relying on jumpscares, like many modern horror films do, John Carpenter builds tension by exploring the strained relationship of the different characters. We slowly see this group of friends turn into enemies as their paranoia consumes them. Dog handler Clark (Richard Masur) lunges at Macready with a knife and is shot dead as a consequence. Chief Biologist Blair (A.Wilford Brimley) is locked away in a cabin after he destroys the communication equipment and helicopter in a paranoid rage. 

Carpenter also balanced Ennio Morricone's original score with the use of silence. Silence is employed well in the scene where the Macready threatens to use dynamite to blow the whole base to kingdom come, after the men turn on him. This amped the tension up to no degree and a lesser director might have used tacky sound effects. But the opening scene has the film's famous space-age score which is just quiet and subtle enough to make you uncomfortable. 

I bet that the critics who initially maligned this film are now eating their words. The Thing is a definite classic of horror cinema.

Akira review

 Number 265 on the top 1000 films of all time is Katsuhiro Otomo's cyberpunk anime 'Akira.'

Set in a dystopic 2019, the landscape of Japan has changed immensely. Tokyo has been destroyed in a nuclear blast. The new capital Neo-Tokyo is ran by a corrupt government and biker gangs control the streets. Violence and crime are rife. At the centre of everything are the ESPers - people with psychokinetic powers. One such ESPer is Tetsuo - member of a biker gang.

Other than Studio Ghibli or Pokemon, I've never been big on anime. So I was completely ignorant of Akira's reputation. This film helped introduce anime to a Western audience. In terms of the animation, it was easy to see why. It was gorgeous and really reminded me of early Studio Ghibli especially Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind. And, of course, the Akira slide has become a staple of popular culture.

Perhaps it's my lack of exposure to anime, but I did not enjoy this film at all. I found the actual story convoluted and overcomplicated. The "good guys" are a biker gang - too annoying and mischievous to be likable characters. Tetsuo crashes his bike into the young ESPer Takashi which is where Tetsuo's powers manifest. What happens to Takashi? Who knows? He's taken to a government facility to never be heard from again. Meanwhile Tetsuo is taken away to be experimented on by Colonel Shikishima - leader of Japan's self-defense forces. It's revealed that Tetsuo has powers similar to the legendary 'Akira,' who supposedly destroyed the original Tokyo.

Meanwhile Tetsuo's best friend Keneda busts him from the jail and they join an ESP resistance cells. But then the friends turn on each other and Colonel Shikishima is hunting them down. Tetsuo transforms into a Godzilla type monster, goes into space and destroys an orbital weapon, and then Tetsuo and Keneda are transported to another dimension. Keneda is saved by the other ESPers, but Tetsuo is stuck in this other plane of existence. Got all that?

It was a bit like the end of 2001: Space Odyssey where Dave goes through the space tunnel and he sees the future versions of himself. Too surreal and abstract for me. It was like I had fallen asleep and woken up halfway through, but I was awake the whole time.

While this might be a favourite of anime afficionadoes, I am not one of those, so I did not care for this film at all.