Open Range review

 Number 817 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 2003 Revisionist Western 'Open Range,' directed, produced and starring Kevin Costner.

Boss Spearman (Robert Duvall) and Charley Waite (Kevin Costner) are two cattlemen hired to drive a herd across the state of Montana. But they quickly get on the wrong side of the local town mayor Denton Baxter (Michael Gambon.)

This Western strongly reminded me of the great Spaghetti Westerns of the 1960's. Of course, I'm talking about Sergio Leone who dominated the genre with his "Dollars Trilogy." Costner employed the same fantastic cinematography that made those old Westerns so visually stunning to watch. I loved the sweeping visuals of the great American landscape. It really emphasises the immensity and isolation of living in such an expanse.

Unfortunately, Costner traded off great cinematography with a plodding narrative. The pacing was slower than it had any right to have been. Except for the ending, which we'll get to, much of the pivotal violence happens off-screen. For example, Baxter's men attack Spearman and Waite's two ranch-hands killing one and badly injuring the other. We knew this was coming, so there was no surprise reveal. But because we didn't see this violence, we don't get to see Baxter's true villainy - or, in this case, his hired gun Butler (Kim Coates) who led the attack. Either way, Gambon's presence as a villain was severely hurt.

In the build-up to the climatic sequence, we get lots of banter between the two leads delivered in Duvall's most gravelly and Costner's all-American tones. And this wasn't the most interesting to watch. Waite also purses a relationship with the doctor's sister Sue Barlow (Annette Benning) which I found a little unbelievable. An attractive older woman like Benning has managed to stay single for just long enough for the cowboy Costner to sweep her off her feet?

We plod along to the final gunfight between Spearmen, Waites, and Baxter, and his posse. By all accounts, this should have been the most exciting part of the film, but we spent so long getting here that I had almost lost interest, The super-powered guns and questionable physics did little to help things either.

To be honest, I've never been keen on Westerns. Sure, they look great on-screen, but cowboys has never been something that's interested me. Open Range did little to change that opinion.

The Town review

 Number 729 on the top 1000 films of all time is Ben Affleck's crime-drama 'The Town.'

As well as directing, Ben Affleck stars as Douglas "Doug" Macray, a bank-robber who is looking to go straight. After his latest heist goes wrong, where his crew Jeremy "Jem" Coughlin (Jeremy Renner,) Albert "Gloansy" Macgloan (Slaine) and Desmond "Dez" Elden (Owen Burke) take bank manager Clare Keesey (Rebecca Hall) hostage before releasing her later, Doug begins keeping track of her. The two eventually fall in love. But for Doug to escape the life completely, he has to do one last job as ordered by local crime boss Fergus "Fergie" Colm (Pete Poselthwaite.)

What followed was a largely generic and banal action-thriller spearheaded by a largely wooden performance by Ben Affleck. Since starting this list, I've seen him in a few films, like Argo, which he also directed. And I would argue he is better as a director than an actor. It doesn't matter whether the role is a rough-round-the-edges hero or a bad boy turning good, he isn't very expressive. He just always seems to have a permanent scowl on his face. And there isn't a whole lot of emotion there. There are plenty of emotional scenes, or scenes that should be emotional, but Affleck couldn't really carry them off.  And since I wasn't invested in him as a character, I wasn't really invested in the storyline. Although he was nominated for Best Actor Bafta for his role in Argo, so what do I know? 

Affleck's lack of chemistry with Rebecca Hall didn't do much to help things either. Also a brief note on Rebecca Hall's accent. What was up with that? She's English, but at times it sounded like she was switching back and forth between English and Bostonian.

Much more convincing was Jeremy Renner. He plays Doug's childhood best friend and fellow bank-robber Jem Coughlin. Unlike his friend, he has no desires of leaving the life behind which sets up some nice conflict between the two. Renner was far more charismatic to watch and his storyline was more compelling. And it's a shame Poselthwaite was so under-used. He's a great actor so he should have had a far greater screen-presence. 

This wasn't a film I enjoyed very much if you didn't already guess. Sure it was watchable enough, but Affleck's wooden performance stopped it from achieving any true greatness in my eyes. 

A Single man review

 Number 725 on the top 1000 films of all time is the period romantic drama 'A Single Man.'

Colin Firth stars as George Falconer, a gay, English academic in 1960's Los Angeles. He is left suicidally depressed after his lover Jim (Matthew Goode) is killed in a car accident. But through his interactions with his best friend - fellow English expat Charley (Julianne Moore) and student Kenny Potter (Nicholas Hoult) he begins to re-evaluate his attitude to life.

A Single Man was directed by fashion designer and perfume-maker Tom Ford in his directorial debut. And it definitely felt like it was directed by a fashion designer. At times it seemed like an extended perfume advert. You do get some perfume adverts that look stunning like K by Dolce & Gabbana or Chanel no. 5. Other perfume adverts are ridiculous and over-the-top. But whatever camp they fall into, perfume adverts are generally style-over-substance. I would argue the same here.

The art direction consisted of sepia and monochrome filters, gratuitous slow-motion, multiple sequences set to grandiose classical scores and strange shots of men swimming in water tanks. At times it worked - I loved the shot of George crying in Charley's arms after learning of Jim's death - the sequence was set to music, so you heard none of Firth's crying. But mostly, the art direction was self-indulgent, pretentious and it bloated up the film. A Single Man is a relatively short film clocking in at roughly 100 minutes, but it seemed like much longer.

As well as a perfume advert, A Single man reminded me of one of the old, dusty books that I studied in university. Some type of academic, overly-intellectualised text where nothing happens except for in the character's heads. This did lead to a dull and boring film. Obviously you don't need gun fights and explosions, but you need some type of drama or tension.

Charley and George do have one fight which did provide an edge that the film was dearly missing. Otherwise, everything was so monotone. The mood never changed. Throughout it was downbeat, slow and introspective.

I also hated the ending. The whole film is about George overcoming his suicidal thoughts and coming to terms with his grief. Just when it looks like he has done so he *spoiler alert* suffers a heart attack and dies. At best this is a copout and at worst this is lazy writing. I guess it's easier to kill a character rather than have them trying to process and live with this guilt and sorrow.

This was all a shame as the narrative itself wasn't inherently bad. Sure it's simplistic, but it had the potential to be a really interesting character study. Instead, this was all lost in overly-flashy visuals.

House of Sand and Fog review

 Number 656 on the top 1000 films of all time is Vadim Perelman's psychological thriller 'House of Sand and Fog.'

Kathy Nicolo (Jennifer Connelly) is a recovering addict who is evicted from her San Fransisco house by the country office. She maintains the county has made a mistake, but her home is repossessed nonetheless. Moving are the Iranian Behrani family led by patriarch former Colonel Massoud Amir Behrani (Ben Kingsley.) Kathy is determined to get her home back by any means necessary.

This was an intense, psychological thriller that doesn't let up for a minute. It is taut and gripping with a whole host of morally dubious characters. I enjoyed the deep characterisations. No character was simply black or white - they are all complicated with their own troubled pasts. But these complexities are what made them so fascinating to watch.

Kathy is adamant to regain her house and deliberately disobeys her lawyer to directly confront the Behranis. She is a deeply troubled woman whose drug-addled past has estranged her from her family and husband. Her house is the only thing she has left. Conversely, rather than sticking to the past, Massoud Behrani is determined to make a fresh start for his family in the US. He is a proud man who refuses to show any weakness in front of his wife and son.

Ben Kingsley is brilliant in the role taking us through the journey of a broken man trying to start again. having once commanded considerable respect, he is forced to work menial jobs to make ends meet. Kingsley's star was so bright that he even blotted out Jennifer Connelly. This is no disrespect to Connelly, but I don't think her writing was anywhere as compelling as Kingsley's.

She lacked the same agency as Massoud had - much of her battles are fought by her self-styled knight in shining armour - sheriff's deputy Lestor Burden (Ron Eldard.) As the narrative momentum built, Kingsley's story took over. This culminated with Connelly being all but absent in the final act. A failed suicide attempt sees her lose consciousness and, instead, the final confrontation takes place between Massoud and Lester. Jennifer Connelly receives star billing and Kathy is the protagonist, but she is somewhat relegated to a side character.

Also a quick shoutout to Eldard. He was great as the sheriff's deputy Lestor Burnham. You could argue his over-protective nature of Kathy was a little over-the-top - he even leaves his family to start an affair with her. But when everything goes wrong at the end, he is more than happy to pay the price for his crimes. This did help him go through a redemption arc of sorts.

This is a tragic, but a thrilling film. It was a great watch with a masterful performance of Ben Kingsley. it's just a shame that Connelly wasn't afforded the same chance to shine.

Zodiac review

 Number 640 on the top 1000 films of all time is David Fincher's mystery thriller Zodiac.

Telling the true story of the investigation into the infamous Zodiac killer, 'Zodiac' stars Jake Gyllenhaal, Robert Downey Jr and Mark Ruffalo. Jake Gyllenhaal stars as San Fransisco Chronicle cartoonist Robert Graysmith and Downey Jr plays crime reporter Paul Avery. Both journalists become so obsessed with investigating the Zodiac killer that their lives quickly fall apart. Rounding out the trio is police inspector Dave Toschi (Mark Ruffalo.)

There's no denying the Zodiac killer has its place in the cultural zeitgeist. This film was released in 2007, a good thirty-three years after he supposedly stopped killing. Buzzfeed's video concerning Zodiac has over 15 million views. A few years ago there was even a running joke that Ted Cruz was the Zodiac killer. The Zodiac Killer is a cultural phenomenon and David Fincher capitalised on this brilliantly. Drawing inspiration from Robert Graysmith's true-crime books 'Zodiac' and 'Zodiac unmasked.' Fincher is a great thriller director, but he has a tendency to be gratuitous in his depiction of violence. Se7en is a top example of this. However, he shot Zodiac with a nice level of restraint. I thought we would be seeing Zodiac brutally torturing and killing his victims, but Fincher was far more subtle than this. 

Although what he had in subtlety, he lacked in pacing. I would argue that the film was unevenly paced. It is set between 1969 and 1991. And things move along very quickly. Too quickly, I think. Fincher would show one scene in a particular year and then move on before you have time to get your breath. You would see a scene from 1970 and then the next scene is in 1971. You don't have time to adjust to one scene before it has moved onto the next. This fast-paced nature did make things hard to follow at times. 

However, Fincher did well to always keep the suspense up. I'm not an expert on the Zodiac killer, but I know that he was never identified or caught. I was wondering how this might affect the ending. Would Fincher stay true to life or take creative license? He stayed true to life and left the identity of the Zodiac as ambiguous - although heavily implied to be the suspicious Arthur Leigh Allen (John Carroll Lynch,) but this could never be proved. I think if Fincher had offered a definitive solution would have been disrespectful to the real victims of the Zodiac killer. 

If anything, this film was about obsession. Both Graysmith and Avery become obsessed over finding the true identity of the killer and it costs them everything. Graysmith loses his family and Avery turns to drugs and alcohol before eventually losing his job. Gyllenhaal and Downey Jr were great in their parts. Downey Jr played Avery with the usual aloofness that he affects to all his roles, but Gyllenhaal was more understated as the quieter, socially awkward Graysmith. Although that isn't really unlike much of his other roles. But I particularly liked John Carroll Lynch who was heavily suspected of being the Zodiac killer. He played the role with an arrogance and a menace like he knew that he was untouchable. And he was. He died before he could be officially charged.

True, Fincher's pacing is uneven in places, but Zodiac is still a great thriller with genuine scares that don't lean into gory, as well as a tense plot that will keep you guessing. Will we ever find out the true identity of the Zodiac killer? I wouldn't hold my breath.

Training Day review

 Number 613 on the top 1000 films of all time is 2001 crime thriller Training Day.

Set over twenty-four hours in a rough LA neighbourhood, Training Day explores the relationship between two police officers: the maverick, borderline corrupt, Narcotics detective Alonzo Harris (Denzel Washington) and his new rookie partner Jake Hoyt (Ethan Hawke.)

Training Day pits two moralities against each other: Harris' the ends always justifies the means and Hoyt's justice over vengeance. Whereas the naive and innocent Hoyt wants to play by the rulebook, Harris rips it up and throws it out the window. He is adamant that his own brand of justice is what produces results from faking search warrants to unlawfully shooting suspects and covering up their murders. Hoyt has to battle hard to tow the line. The last thing he wants is to be sucked into Harris' corrupt ways.  But which form of justice is best?

Training Day makes a compelling argument for both. There is a time for following the rules and a time for breaking them. Breaking the rules, all the time, like Harris does, makes them redundant. But you can't be rigid, like Hoyt, and follow them to the letter. Which morality is better? That's for the audience to decide.

Denzel Washington won the Best Actor Oscar and while he brought a realism to the character, I don't think his performance was oscar-worthy. We've seen the corrupt cop who breaks the rules to get the job done time and time again. While Washington brought a charisma to the role, he was over-the-top. His adlibbed line "King Kong aint got shit on me" just sounded stupid.

Ethan Hawke was more convincing as the still wet-behind-the-ears Hoyt. It is his actions that drive the plot forward. Despite Harris' warnings, he stops two junkies trying to rape a teenage girl - an intervention that later saves his life when Hoyt is about to be killed by Mexican gangbangers. And it is Hoyt's refusal to go along with Harris' cover-up of a murder that brings them to odds. Perhaps you could argue Hoyt symbolises every wide-eyed, newbie cop determined to save the world while Harris is the cynical, jaded, washed-up copper beaten down by the world he has been trying to save. And rather than playing the victim, Harris spins the opportunity to his advantage.

Training Day had a nice authentic current running through it. Director Antoine Fuqua gained permission to film in neighbourhoods belonging to the 'Bloods' gang in exchange for Blood gangbangers appearing in the film. However, the ending seemed odd. Harris and Hoyt get into one final confrontation in a barrio where Harris holds control over the residents. The whole neighbourhood comes to watch. While they were initially Harris' acolytes they betray and even threaten to shoot him. I guess they were sick of his bossing them around and I suppose they had lost respect for him, but this is pure supposition in lieu of any real explanation. And it was all pointless anyway as they don't kill Harris. Instead he is later shot by the Russian mob who he has had an off-screen run-in.

Training Day was a good film if a tad overrated. Hawke was great, but the ending was strange. And Washington was more cartoon than actual character.

Little Miss Sunshine review

 Number 414 on the top 1000 films of all time is the tragicomedy road film 'Little Miss Sunshine.'

Olive (Abigail Breslin) is the youngest of the Hoover family - possibly the most dysfunctional family in the US. Her father Richard (Greg Kinnear) is failing motivational speaker, her older brother Dwayne (Paul Dano) is an angsty teenager who has taken a vow of silence. Her uncle Dr Frank Ginsburg (Steve Carell) has recently been released from a mental hospital after trying to commit suicide and Olive's grandfather Edwin (Alan Arkin) snorts heroin and swears every other minute. Rounding them out is Olive's mother Sheryl (Toni Collette) who is on the verge of a breakdown trying to get her crazy family from New Mexico to California so Olive can participate in a child beauty pageant.

Little Miss Sunshine is a brilliant feel-good film. It is hilarious, but heart-breaking. Tragic and touching. It engages with many difficult themes in a sensitive way. Least of all is the idea of body image and self-confidence. Olive is not your typical child beauty queen if there is such a thing. She is worried that she isn't pretty or skinny enough, but her grandfather is the first person to convince her otherwise. Olive and Edwin's relationship is at the heart of the film. Breslin and Arkin had a great chemistry and played well off each other. Arkin won Best Supporting Actor and deservingly so. True, you could argue that he is your stereotypical, grumpy un-PC baby boomer grandpa, but he played the part damn well. And it is his grumpy un-PC ways that provide a lot of the film's humour.

The rest of the supporting cast is just as good. As a comedy actor, I sometimes find that Carell can be quite over-the-top, but he played the role with a lot of restraint, while still being funny. Paul Dano is often cast as a moody outsider sic Prisoners or There Will be Blood. But he gave Dwayne some vulnerability and stopped him from being just another stroppy teenager. Perhaps you could argue the script short-changed Toni Collette as her character doesn't have the same eccentricities as the others, but she still acted as the glue that held the family together.

And I loved how directors Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris lampooned the grossly exploitative nature of child beauty pageants. This was intentional as writer Michael Ardnt wanted to portray the horribly competitive nature of these contests. They divide little girls into winners and losers often shattering their self-esteem in the process. Except for Abigail Breslin, all of the other contestants were real-life child beauty pageant winners. Or should I say little girls being exploited so their power-hungry parents can gain status.  

But when Olive performs an intentionally risque dance she is almost shut down, but her whole family quickly joins in. The whole notion of beauty pageants boils down to sexualising and disempowering little girls, but when Olive reclaims her power, she is punished. I loved how this hypocrisy was tackled head-on.

I did enjoy this film. There were great gags, but it also had a lot of heart. And Breslin and Arkin were fantastic together.