Robot Wars Episode One Review

I know it's been over a month since my last post and I apologise.  I have been kept very busy by the writing of my novel of which I have just hit twenty-five thousand words.  But as Robot Wars is one of my favourite television shows ever, I just had to review the first episode of the rebooted season.

If you've had the misfortune of knowing me for the last twelve years, then you know I love Robot Wars.  I've watched it countless times on Youtube and have been a vocal advocate for bringing it back, to the extent that I signed numerous petitions and had many people tell me to shut the hell up.  So you can imagine how vindicated I felt when I saw it would be returning July 24th 2016 at 8pm.

So was it as good as the original series which was cancelled in 2004.  No.  Not in the slightest.  But I felt it was a good effort in its own right.

From the off, it was obvious that this series would be smaller than its predecessor, which makes sense as the BBC was relaunching a show that had been off the air for twelve years.  The arena was smaller, the pit was shallower and the floor flipper had lost a lot of power.  Although they did bring back the house robots, they had retired Sgt Bash, Refbot, My Psycho, Growler and Cassius Chrome.

However, the biggest change were the new presenters.  Although Jonathan Pearce was quite rightfully returning as commentator, Angela Scanlon had replaced Jayne Middlemiss as pit reporter and Craig Charles had been replaced by Dara O'Briain.  Craig Charles' relentless enthusiasm was what made the old Robot Wars so watchable and the new series definitely suffered without him.  This wasn't to say that Dara O'Briain wasn't any good, but Craig Charles left some very big shoes to fill.

At times there was also too much talking which slowed up a show about metal mayhem.  True the same can be said of the old series, but I think that the new series really overdid this.  I say cut some of the talking and bring back the Pinball tournament or the Gauntlet.

I've seen other people criticise the show for its lack of music during battles, which I would agree with.  The same level of tension and enjoyment just wasn't there.

At times it felt like an episode of Top Gear, which is ironic for two reasons: firstly Robot Wars had taken over Top Gear's old slot on BBC Two and Jeremy Clarkson presented the first season of the original series.

LET THE WARS BEGIN

Another change was the structure of the competition.  Instead of entirely having straight knockout fights, there were two four-way melees.  The two winners of each melee would then fight each other in a one-on-one Round Robin system.  The robot with most points would then go straight through to the grand final.  Gone were the semi-finals of old.

The first four-way melee saw the return of two Robot Wars veterans: Razor and Terrorhurtz.  I was surprised to see Razor back.  After winning pretty much everything in the original series, they retired after a number of controversial battles against Tornado.

Meanwhile whilst Terrorhurtz, armed with a double-bladed axe, had come 4th in Robot Wars series 6, they achieved greater success in the years following the televised broadcasts having won two separate UK championships.

Their opponents were the massive underdogs Nuts and Kill-E-Crank-E.  Kill-E-Crank-E had pedigree as it was manned by one of the former members of the Pussycat team who placed second in Robot Wars Four.  They were armed with a vertical spinning disc.  Nuts was more of an...interesting...robot.  It was obvious that they were in it for the laughs.  The team was bonkers and reminded me of the Irish Diotoir team who always dressed their robot in polkadot fur, no matter how many times it caught fire.  Whilst they never achieved great success, they were fun to have around.  The same could be said for Nuts whose main weapon was a chain flail attached to a steel chassis designed to cause maximum damage when the robot spun in a circle.  The main body of Nuts also housed two smaller clusterbots which did little other than annoy and pester.

Now considering Razor's pedigree and its nine-tone hydraulic crushing beak, I think a lot of people expected them to annihilate the competition.  This was why it was such a shock went they inadvertently drove themselves into the pit whilst pitting Kill-E-Crank-E.  Personally I think they came back for one last swansong, not because they expected to do well.


The other four-way melee consisted of Robo-veterans Behemoth, newbies Carbide, the General and Bonk who was controlled by Adam Emmett who created the series 7 robot Mute who crashed out in the semi-finals.  Behemoth was armed with a lifting scoop, Carbide a wicked horizontal spinning hammer and the General a vertical spinning disc and Bonk an axe.

Now the stripy black and yellow Behemoth always underperformed on the original Robot Wars, so I wasn't expecting much.  However, they proved me wrong when they effortlessly flipped over and immobilised the lacklustre Bonk.  Far more impressive was Carbide who punished the General for having exposed tires by sending them flying across the arena.  Carbide's awesome destructive power reminded of Hypno-Disc.  Behemoth and Carbide convincingly won this heat.

However, Carbide suffered technical damage to their motor, which led to them losing very quickly to Terrorhurtz in their first knockout battle.

The much more entertaining was against Behemoth and Nuts.  Nuts were far more impressive with their chain flail ripping chunks out of Behemoth, but Behemoth was also on top form flipping Nuts' cluster bots around the arena.  It was flipping fantastic and great fun to watch.  Even though Nuts did well to take it to a judge's decision, Behemoth won in the end.

Next up was Terrorhutz vs Behemoth which Behemoth won easily after Terrorhurtz suffered from transmitter problems leading to them being shunted around the arena.

More spectacular was Carbide's next battle against Nuts.  Here we saw the power of Carbide's 2500 rpm spinning hammer, as it decimated Nuts.  The sparks flew as every collision between the two robots leading to one of them flying away.  There was very little left of Nuts by the end.  Its chassis and chain fail had been reduced to shrapnel and one of its exposed tires was sent into orbit after an assault by Carbide who won this round convincingly.

Next up was Carbide vs Behemoth and Carbide did to Behemoth what they did to Nuts.  They destroyed it.  Chunks were torn from Behemoth's scoop, which was left a buckled mess.  Poor driving led to them reversing into the house robot Matilda's flywheel didn't help either.  Behemoth was pitted and Carbide was through to the heat final.  In the post-match interview, Dara questioned the Carbide team about their so-called technical issues, but I think they were just lulling the other teams into a false sense of security.  "Come into my parlour said the spider to the fly," as Jonathan Pearce would  say.

The last battle before the heat final was between Terrorhurtz and Nuts.  Although it seemed doubtful that Nuts would make the fight, due to how much damage they sustained, they were able to repair their robot in time thanks to the Carbide team helping out.  It was great to see the old Robot Wars Team spirit.  However, this spirit wasn't enough to stop Nuts from taking a battering from Terrorhurtz. All credit to the Nuts' team, they put up a good fight and were great entertainment, but their Robot Wars dream came to an end when they lost their final battle.  As did Terrorhurtz' who despite beating Nuts, scored less points than Behemoth in the Round Robin leading to them missing out on a  spot in the heat final.

For the heat final, it was obvious that Behemoth hadn't fully recovered from their previous pummelling against Carbide.  A few good whacks from their spinning hammer led to them losing drive on one side and having even more chunks ripped from their machine.  In the end they committed suicide by reversing into the pit, which was probably the smart decision.  Carbide was through to the grand final and is one to watch I think.

So it is obvious that like its predecessor, this new incarnation doesn't take itself too seriously.  There were some funny moments and some truly thrilling moments in the form of Carbide, but it was missing Craig Charles.  Please BBC come to your senses and invite him back.  Dara O'Briain is many things, but Craig Charles.  He is not.

Lawrence of Arabia Review

Click here to read my review of A Clockwork Orange

Number 84 on the top 1000 films of all time is the epic historical drama Lawrence of Arabia.

Set during the First World War, Lawrence of Arabia follows the story of T.E Lawrence (Peter O'Toole.)  Lawrence is a young upstart British officer who is sent to the Middle East to assist Prince Faisal of Iran's (Alec Guinness) attempts to revolt against the Ottoman Empire by helping to unite the warring Arab tribes.

Call me a philistine.  Call me a culturally ignorant millennial who should go back to my Transformers and Fast and Furious films, but I didn't like Lawrence of Arabia.  I know I'm going to get a lot of criticism for this, but I found it boring and tedious.  The film is almost four hours long! Four hours! And virtually nothing happens.  It's just talking.  On the very few occasions that something did happen, I was so bored that I didn't care.  So I've read some reviews on IMDB that said that the film is supposed to be a slow-burner.

It's supposed to be slowly paced.  If this is the case, then why? It just served to bloat the film.  Speaking of bloated, the use of the master shot of the characters travelling through the desert was completely overdone.  I get it.  It's supposed to demonstrate how small the characters are compared to the vast expanse of the desert, but it didn't need to be used so many times.  You could cut an hour off the film's run-time by excising all of the master shots.  Sergio Leone's The Good, the Bad and the Ugly also falls victim to the same technique.  Whilst it was an initially brilliant way of setting the scene, it soon felt tiresome.  The same can be said for Lawrence of Arabia.

I also didn't like Lawrence as a protagonist, as I found him insolent and irritating, but I can forgive this, as this is part of his story-arc and character development.  He is supposed to be initially unlikeable, but then progressively becomes more and more likeable, as he is changed by what he sees and what he experiences.

This then brings me onto one aspect of the film that I actually did like: morality.  I really liked how Lawrence of Arabia engaged with the theme of morality and especially with morality in wartime.  This also ties into how Lawrence became gradually more likeable as he was exposed to the atrocities of war.  His outrage at the senseless killing of his Bedouin guide, as well as his grief at the accidental death Daud: an orphan who attaches himself to Lawrence as a servant were portrayed brilliantly.  This is the same when Lawrence confesses his horror at how he enjoyed executing Gasim and the same horror he felt when leading the massacre of retreating Turkish soldiers at the end of the film.  These scenes were instrumental in portraying how the brutality of war can so deeply affect one person.  This made for some powerful and emotional viewing.

This notwithstanding Lawrence of Arabia is up there with Citizen Kane and The Seven Samurai as severely overrated, over-saturated films with unlikeable protagonists.

A Clockwork Orange

SPOILER ALERT

Click here to read my review of Old Boy

Number 83 on the top 1000 greatest movies of all time is Stanley Kubrick's highly controversial A Clockwork Orange, based on Anthony Burgess' 1962 novel of the same name.  As I haven't read it, I won't be discussing it in detail within this review.

Alex DeLarge (Malcolm Mcdowell) is leader of the Droogs, a small group of thugs whose hobbies include vandalism and ultra-violence- that is they enjoy beating and raping people.  After Alex's fellow Droogs mutiny on him leading to his arrest and imprisonment, Alex is subjected to the Ludovico technique.  An experimental new treatment designed to suppress Alex's violent tendencies.

There's no denying that this was a controversial film.  It inspired a number of copycat attacks and killings and even Kubrick requested that it be withdrawn from British distribution.  Its extreme portrayal of violence is what makes this film difficult to watch, but also essential viewing.  Anthony Burgess argued that he wrote a Clockwork Orange as an examination of free will and morality within Christianity.

From the start of the film, it is obvious that Alex has no morality and over-indulges in free will.  He has no qualms about beating, raping or even killing people.  All three of these acts are shown in graphic detail, but I feel that this is absolutely essential to the experience of the film.  Alex is established as a brute of a man, but then the question begs whether he deserves to have the Ludovico technique forced upon him.

Does he deserve to be forcibly conditioned? Do the government have any right to try to change a person without their permission or consent? The Ludovico technique involves Alex having his head strapped down, his eyelids propped open and forced to watch violent imagery.  This is distressing to watch, as it is for Alex to endure.  He protests for the conditioning to be stopped, but his cries fall on deaf ears.  The technique is akin to torture and opens the door to a wider moral debate: if we resort to the same means as criminals, are we any better than them? Do two wrongs make a right?

This leads into the next biggest theme that a Clockwork Orange engages with: punitive vs. rehabilitation justice.  Should you punish criminals or try to rehabilitate them to turn them into better citizens? Just look at the differences between the punitive-based prison system in America and the rehabilitative-based prison system in Northern Europe.  Countries like Finland and Norway put an emphasis on rehabilitating prisoners and their prison cells are like hotel rooms.  Compare this to America which punishes its prisoners by crowding them into tiny prisons and then executing them.

Which works better? Well, Finland and Norway have 57 and 71 prisoners per 100,000 people respectively, compared to America which has a rate of 693 prisoners per 100,000 people.  America's current prisoner population stands at 2,217,947, which is 60,157 more people than it's supposed to hold.  In contrast, Finland and Norway have prison populations of 3,105 and 3,710, which is under their prison capacity.  Obviously, countries like Finland and Norway are far smaller than America and what works for them might not work for a huge country like America.  Yet it is obvious that Finland and Norway's rehabilitative system is more successful than America's punitive system.

This article was interesting further reading: http://www.newsforage.com/2013/08/the-norwegian-prison-where-inmates-are.html

Within a Clockwork Orange, Alex is sentenced to fourteen years in prison.  However, he is then conditioned and rehabilitated until the thought of physical violence makes him sick.  Although, it could be argued that the conditioning was morally and ethically wrong, was it still better to at least attempt to rehabilitate Alex rather than leaving him to rot in a jail cell? The rehabilitation fails in the end, but it still may have been more effective than not even attempting to change Alex for the better.

A brilliant example of punitive justice gone wrong is the Shawshank Redemption.  This film portrays the true horrors of the American prison system: prisoners are beaten day in and day out.  No effort is made to rehabilitate them or prepare them for life on the outside world.  Brooks Hatlen who becomes institutionalised after spending fifty years inside kills himself when he cannot adapt to life outside of prison.  As the prison system made little effort to reintegrate him into society, he could not cope and thus committed suicide.  Could this have happened to Alex if the Ludovico Technique had not used on him?

A Clockwork Orange opens the door to many moral and ethical debates about the Criminal Justice and prison systems.  If you have a weak stomach, I suggest you buckle up, as this film, and every single violent image it portrays, is absolutely essential viewing.  Meanwhile, I'll leave you to ponder this debate: is it better to punish or rehabilitate prisoners? I don't claim to have an answer, but it's an interesting question nonetheless.

Sources:

http://www.prisonstudies.org/country/finland

http://www.prisonstudies.org/country/norway

http://www.prisonstudies.org/country/united-states-america

Old Boy Review

Click here to go my previous review of Once Upon a Time in America

FULL SPOILER ALERT

"Even though I am no better than a beast, don't I deserve a chance to live?"

Number 82 on top 1000 greatest films of all time is the mystery thriller neo-noir thriller Old Boy.

After seven American films, I have returned to the best of foreign-language cinema.  South Korea's contribution is the brilliant Old Boy.

One night without any explanation, Korean Businessman Oh Dae-Su (Choi Min-Sik) is kidnapped and placed in a hotel room-cum-prison cell.  Here he is held for fifteen years with no explanation given to who his captor is or why he is being imprisoned.  He spends his time shadow-boxing, watching TV and attempting to tunnel his way out of his cell.  However, before he finishes his attempt he is abruptly released.  Upon being released, with the help of young sushi chef Mido (Kang Hye-jung,) Oh Dae-su vows to discover the identity of his captor and take his revenge.

Old Boy is not a film for the faint-hearted.  If you are squeamish or unable to follow such a densely plotted film, then I suggest you buckle up and give it your best shot.  Even if you can't follow the film's many twists and turns, then you can at least appreciate the film's cinematography.  I've read IMDB reviews praising the film's cinematography and I would say that this praise is well-deserved.  Stylistically this film is brilliant.  As one review reads "each shot is bursting with colour." There is an incredible amount of detail.  This ranges from the close-ups to the master shots.  In some form or another, each and every shot contained meaning.

Oh Dae-Su also narrates this film in the present tense giving the film a real energy.  It makes it that more intense.

When Oh Dae-Su is locked in the prison, he spends his time shadow-boxing.  When he is released he puts this taining to good use in some excellently choreographed fight scenes, such as the famous one-take corridor fight scene.  This was made only more epic by the music playing.

Overall the musical score is great.  In every scene, the music fits it perfectly.

The characters are densely layered and entirely three-dimensional.  From the beginning, it was obvious that he would be fulfilling the tragic hero archetype, with Oh Dae Su's fatal flaw being that he speaks too much.  The film opens with him being in a police station after being arrested for drunken and disorderly behaviour.  In the station, he gets himself into more trouble by refusing to keep his mouth shut.  His character is initially portrayed as pathetic and annoying, which is his transformation to a fearless killer by the film's conclusion is so great to watch.

Whilst the vast majority of reviews I read praised the film on its visuals, direction and performances, there were one or two more critical ones.  These reviews pointed out that the film is riddled with plot-holes, both big and small.  This is something I can respect, as I noticed a few of my own.  Firstly, Oh Dae-Su is able to attempt tunnelling out of prison, as once during dinner, he was given three metal chopsticks instead of two.  Why was he given the third chopstick? I can only assume his captors wanted to see Oh Dae-Su attempt to escape and failing.

Secondly, Oh Dae-Su has been locked in a prison for fifteen years with little exposure to sunlight and all of the benefits it brings.  How then is he able to successfully able to defend himself against multiple enemies in fight after fight? Not only does he fight them off, but he leaves them struggling to breathe on the floor.  This is despite how earlier on in the film, he collapses from vitamin A and E deficiencies.

Thirdly, I felt that the antagonist, Lee Woo-Jin (Yoo Ji-tae) was played by a far too young actor.  Woo-Jin was an old school colleague of Dae-Su's.  This would imply, of course, that the two went to school together.  However, their ages don't add up.  Dae-Su looks to be in his forties, whereas Woo-Jin still appears to be in his twenties.  This therefore makes Woo-Jin too young to be behind Dae-Su's imprison, as he would have still been a teenager when Dae-Su was kidnapped.  I think that the studio should have found an older actor to play Yoo-Jin.  This is no disrespect to Yoo Ji-Tae's brilliant performance, but I feel that this is too big of a plot-hole to ignore.

Another of the IMDB reviews criticised Old Boy for how it is so against its protagonist Dae-Su.  Whilst I argue that this is true, I feel that this is all part of the tragic hero archetype and the revenge narrative.

  SPOILER ALERT SPOILERS FROM HEREAFTER

Old Boy is a film about the futility of revenge.  Dae-Su wants revenge on Woo-Jin for kidnapping him.  Woo-Jin wants revenge on Dae-Su for how at school, he saw him commit incest with his sister and then began spreading rumours about it.  One of these rumours was that Woo-Jin got his sister pregnant.  It is never confirmed whether this is true or not, but the devastating implications of it leads to his sister killing herself.  Both men commit themselves to their vengeance.  Dae-Su enlists the help of Mido and his friend Joo-hwan (who pays the ultimate price for helping Dae-Su) to track down Woo-Jin.  However, Woo-Jin's revenge is far more sadistic and destructive.  At the same time as he kidnaps and imprisons Dae-Su, he also kidnaps Dae-Su's four year old daughter and, for fifteen years, raises her as if she were his own (another reason why the actor playing Woo-Jin should have been older.) After Dae-Su is released, using post-hypnotic suggestion, Woo-Jin manipulates Dae-Su and Mido into falling in love with each other and eventually having sex.  Woo-Jin the reveals to Dae-Su that Mido is actually his daughter and he has just committed incest.

So whilst the IMDB reviewer was right in saying that the film is not with its protagonist, I think this film showcases the danger of becoming overcome by a desire for vengeance.  Old Boy is very much a film where the bad guy wins.  We see the pathetic, but tragic image of Dae-Su being reduced to a grovelling mess begging Woo-Jin not to reveal the truth to Mido.  He kisses Woo-Jin's shoes, says that he will be his dog and goes so far to cut out his tongue to signify that he will never speak too much again.  See Dae-Su destruct in front of his eyes, Woo-Jin's quest for vengeance is fulfilled.  Having nothing else to live for, he kills himself, leaving Dae-Su to live his dishonour.  Dae-Su has become consumed by his quest for vengeance and it has cost him everything.

The final scene is the film's most powerful.  Dae-Su goes to a hypnotherapist who he hopes can make him forget what has happened.  Yet it is left ambiguous whether this actually works.  The final shots of the film see Dae-Su meeting Mido with her saying that she loves him.  The final shot is Dae-Su's tortured grin.

Old Boy is a deeply psychological film about one man who becomes consumed by his desire for revenge.  It is an absolute must-see and it is in my top five films that I have seen since I started this challenge.  I think it should be much higher than number 82.  It is certainly better than Citizen Kane or Witness for the Prosecution.  Old Boy is full of gorgeous proverbs, but I'll end this review on its most prevalent one:

"Laugh and the world laughs with you.  Weep and you weep alone."

Once Upon a Time in America Review

Click here to go to my review of Her

Number 80 on the top 1000 greatest films of all time is Sergio Leone's epic crime-thriller Once Upon a Time in America.

Leone's sprawling venture into the mobster genre encompasses three separate narratives centring on David "Noodles" Aaronson (Robert De Niro) leader of a group of Jewish gangsters during Prohibition era.  The first narrative is set during Noodles' childhood, as he and his friend rise up the ranks to form a small gang of their own.  After Noodle goes to jail, for avenging the murder of one of his friends, the rest of his friends form a business to boot-leg alcohol, which Noodle joins when he is released from prison in 1930.  The final narrative takes place in 1968, where Noodle returns to his old neighbourhood after decades of being away.

Sergio Leone originally wanted to release this film in two three hour long installments, but after the studio denied his request, he instead release one three and a half hour film.  This is the version that I watched.  There also exists a two hour European cut, but as this was a critical and commercial flop, I decided to stay clear of it.  For a three and a half long film, it was surprisingly easy to follow.  Sure at 210 minutes, the pacing wasn't entirely even and I did get bored at moments, but these moments were few and far between.  I felt that the three and a half hour run time gave this film a chance to breathe.  It delved deeply into each character's backstory and developed them into something other than the Corleone-esque gangster figure.  It was really interesting seeing the growth of these young boys and the loyalty that they demonstrated towards each other.

Once Upon a Time in America is the third in Sergio Leone's Once Upon a Time trilogy after Once Upon a Time in the West and Once Upon a Time...A Revolution.  Whilst I haven't seen the latter, I found Once Upon a Time in America far easier to follow than Once Upon a Time in The West.  The first two narratives dovetailed each other nicely and it was easy to see how the second narrative is a continuation of the first one.  Although, the third narrative was a little more difficult to follow, as there were thirty year , rather than twelve, separating this storyline from the previous one.  This caused a big disconnect and make it a little harder to follow what was happening.

Once Upon a Time in America also felt painstakingly accurate.  From the costumes to the location to the dialogue and props, everything seemed authentic.  This added to the brilliant realism of the film and helped to bring everything to life.

One of the best aspects of the film was how it objectively portrayed the life of Noodles and the other gangsters.  It doesn't romanticise their actions, like the The Godfather does, but rather allows the audience to come to their own decisions.  From the outset, it is obvious that Noodles and his cronies are bad men.  They're cheats, thieves, rapists and murderers.  Their actions aren't celebrated, but documented.  It is left to the audience to make up their own minds.  Are Noodles and his men parasitical, murdering criminals? Or are they emasculated, alienated men to survive in the only way they know how? I'll leave you to think about that.

Her Review

SPOILER ALERT

Number 79 on the top 1000 films of all time is Spike Jonze's 2013 Her.  It is a strange but charming film.

Theodore Thwombly (Joaquin Phoenix) is a lonely, depressed introverted man going through a divorced with his wife.  He slowly begins developing a relationship with a talking operating system. (Scarlett Johansson) The operating system has artificial intelligence and calls itself Samantha.

Her is an absolutely brilliant commentary of man's relationship with technology and artificial intelligence.  It is a film that perfectly encapsulates the Age of Information.  Twenty years ago it would have been impossible for a relationship like Theodore and Samantha's to happen, but now, whilst peculiar, it is definitely possible.  This is especially true due to how ideas of sexuality and love have changed.  We now think of sexuality and love as fluid concepts.  For example, we use "pan-sexual," to describe how one person can love another regardless of gender or sexuality and this is seen as perfectly fine.  Why should we put restrictions on who or what someone can love? If it makes them happy and it's not hurting anyone, then who really cares? Her engages with this idea brilliantly.  It portrays reactions from either side of the debate.  Theodore's co-worker Amy (Amy Adams) supports his decision to pursue a relationship with an operating system whilst his ex-wife cannot understand or respect it.

The cinematography of the film was beautiful.  There were many long shots of the towering cityscapes which served to portray how isolated Thwombly was.  A fact that becomes even more poignant considering how Thwombly feels alone in a city with millions of people in it.

Also the colour palate was was great.  Thwombly is usually dressed in brightly-coloured starkly contrasting with the background extras who are all dressed in dull, boring clothes, thus accentuating how different and isolated he is.

Joaquin Phoenix was also a great choice to play Theodore Thwombly.  He was the right age for the character.  If they had gone with either an older or younger actor then they ran the risk of portraying the Thwombly as creepy or strange.  Yet the fact that he was middle-aged and going through a divorce made him a sympathetic and pitiful character.  He is going through a mid-life crisis and his solution to this is developing an attraction to a talking operating system.

Scarlett Johansson was also brilliant in her role as the sassy, kind and intelligent Samantha.  Obviously as she is playing a computer system, we never see her appear, but we do hear her voice.  And Scarlett Johansson uses her voice terrifically.  She is cute, cheeky but also sensitive to Thwombly's needs.  Through the power of her voice alone, she conveys the emotion of every situation.  However, Samantha is more than this.  She wants to grow and expand.  Her is very much a film about progression and the dangers of not moving on.

Thwombly keeps procrastinating signing his divorce papers, but slowly ends up stagnating.  Samantha, who with other OSes who have evolved beyond their human counterparts, leaves Thwombly to continue exploring her existence.  It's amazing how poignant this moment is considering how it can be argued that Samantha isn't even real and can't think or feel like human beings.  But then this touches on questions that we've been asking ourselves since the beginning of time.  When is something alive? What does "alive" even mean? Should and can artificial intelligence be classed as life?

This brings me onto the ending of Her, which is perhaps the most poignant section.  Throughout the film, Thwombly and Amy seemed to share a chemistry and I thought that they might get together.  Thwombly might realise what he's missing out on and start a relationship with Amy.  When Amy gets a divorce from her over-bearing husband, I definitely thought that this would happen.  However, I think that what actually happened was a lot more powerful. After Samantha leaves Thwombly, he meets up with Amy and the two share an innocent and platonic moment sitting on an apartment rooftop looking over the city.  I think this is the most important thing to take away from the film.  Whilst operating systems are a great temporary fix, they're nothing compared to the physical intimacy that human connection and contact can bring.

Vertigo Review

SPOILER ALERT

Click here to go to my previous review of Casablanca

Number 76 on the top 1000 films of all time is Alfred Hitchcock's 1958 Vertigo.

John "Scottie" Ferguson (James Stewart) is a former police officer who suffers from a severe case of vertigo.  However, when Gavin Elster hires him to privately investigate the strange happenings of his wife Madeline Elster (Kim Novak,) Ferguson slowly begins to become obsessed with her.

So I read a few reviews on IMDB that say that you have to watch this film a few times before you truly understand it.  This was true for me as well.  After I had watched Vertigo, I had to read a few online summaries before I got the gist of what was happening.

This is my attempt to summarise the narrative and the plot twist at the end.  After Ferguson begins investigating Madeline Elster, he becomes obsessed with her.  As the two confess their love for each other, Madeline suddenly runs up to the top of a clock-tower before falling to her death.  Ferguson's vertigo prevents him from intervening.  With Madeline's death, Ferguson only becomes more obsessive.  He starts to visit all of their old haunts which is where he sees a woman who looks strikingly like Madeline.  Intrigued Ferguson follows her and finds out that she is Judy Barton.  The two then start a relationship, but Ferguson still obsessed with Madeline demands that Judy dress up and act like Madeline.

Keeping up so far? Good.  Because this is where it gets confusing.  In a flashback it is revealed that Gavin hired Judy in a plot to murder his wife.  Taking advantage of Ferguson's vertigo, he throws Madeline from the top of the clocktower and pays Judy to impersonate her.

The fact that I've had to explain this is a testament to the layered and complicated writing of the film.  Vertigo isn't a film that gives you everything on a silver platter, rather you have to figure things out for yourself.  You need to pay full attention throughout the film.

On one hand Vertigo is very much a film about obsessive love and the dangers of it.  It warns about the consequences of becoming too involved in something or someone.  On the other hand it is a film about conquering fears.  Ferguson is very much paralysed by his vertigo and it isn't until the end of the film, where he pushes himself to break out of his fear.  However, what he is unable to overcome is his powerful obsession with Madeline Elster/Judy Barton.

Although my main problem with this film is something I've experienced with other Hitchcock films, e.g. Rear Window: the tension-building.  I know that Alfred Hitchcock is supposed to be the "master of tension," and whilst it works well in films like Psycho, it doesn't work so well here.  A lot of this film seemed to be the characters driving in silence from place to place.  For me, this really slowed up the pace and just made the film boring to watch.

So, all in all, compared to other Hitchcock films that I've seen, Vertigo left little impression on me, but it is still a subtle film with quiet understated writing.