Help review

 Help is too modern to be on the top 1000 films of all time, but I'm reviewing it as it touched me so profoundly.

Sarah (Jodie Comer) is a directionless, young woman just starting work in the Bright Sky care home in Liverpool. There she quickly befriends Tony (Stephen Graham) who has early-onset dementia. But their world comes crashing down when the Covid-19 pandemic hits.

I've spent the last six years working in care homes. I worked in a care home all throughout the Covid era, so this film hit close to home for me. A little uncomfortably close. It was a raw, unflinching and visceral look at how the adult care sector was completely forgotten. No, not forgotten. Abandoned. Nobody cared about us. But Help honed in perfectly on what makes a care home a care home. There are the relationships between the staff and the residents, as well as the residents and their families. We see the residents enjoying poetry, meeting sheep and having a Christmas party. The authenticity was brilliant. But it also focussed on the stress that carers are under. It really is a thankless job.

Jodie Comer and Stephen Graham were terrific as the two leads. When Sarah begins, she is lost and directionless, but she quickly finds herself. She is a hard worker and a good carer. Comer was brilliant. She bought the role to life. I know many hard-working carers just like Sarah. Graham was also fantastic, as can only be expected from an actor of his calibre. Like Sarah he is lost. Some days he knows who he is and others he doesn't. But this touches upon a very important, but little-known aspect of dementia. People have a variable capacity. Some days they can be lucid and others not so much. If you'll permit me to be a little un-pc, they're not crazy loons all the time.

Graham played the role with a great subtlety. Tony is a quiet, but powerful character. Most importantly, he is human and never reduced to a gross caricature. Tony and Sarah's relationship was at the heart of this film. And this all culminates in a breath-taking 26-minute 1-take shot where Sarah is working a hellish night shift. With all her colleagues sick with Covid, she is forced to work a double and take care of all her residents by herself. One resident becomes particularly sick, and when it becomes clear, nobody is coming to help, Sarah enlists Tony to help her. It was heart-in-the-mouth action that was stunningly shot and acted. Comer and Graham's performances had literal tears running down my cheeks. That is saying something.

I may argue that the film peaked here. Perhaps this is where it should have ended, as the second half felt like a strange addendum that had been lazily tacked on. Tony is established as a flight risk, constantly trying to return home to his long-dead mother. When he tries escaping one too many times, the manager drugs him up to his eyeballs. Sarah protests this blatant abuse, but she is promptly fired. She goes rogue and breaks Tony free. They intend to self-quarantine at the seaside, before trying to send Tony to a different facility.

This is all well and good, but it felt incredibly disjointed. It didn't seem to match the first half at all, and it also lacked a lot of the same tension and immediacy. Writer Jack Thorne originally wanted to solely focus on the daily life of a care home, before he was convinced to write about Covid-19. I wonder if this was a latent idea that he tried and failed to shoe-horn into an otherwise faultless film.

Nonetheless, Help is a near perfect film. It was a damning indictment of how the adult social care sector was forsaken during the pandemic. Coming out in 2021, it is too new to make it onto the top 1000 list, but it has earned its place on any future lists.

Lust Caution review

 Number 699 on the top 1000 films of all time is Ang Lee's erotic, period-war drama 'Lust Caution.'

During the second Sino-Japanese war, Wong Chia Chi (Tang Wei) is a naive Shanghainese student going to study in Hong Kong which is currently being occupied by Japan in 1938. There she joins the patriotic drama club led by Kuang Yumin (Wang Leehorn,) but soon they decide to make a more meaningful contribution to the war by proposing to assassinate collaborator and puppet leader Mr Yee. Wang (Tony Leung Chiu-Wai) is drawn into a world of lies and conspiracies, as she is at the centre of a honey trap to catch and kill Mr Yee.

Lust, Caution begins in 1938 during the Second Sino-Japanese war before continuing to 1942 Shanghai where part of China were under Japanese occupation. It was very interesting seeing another side of the Second World War. Naturally, many WW2 films in the West focus on WW2 in the West. But there was a whole other war going on in the east. And that isn't something that is really talked about enough. It made a refreshing change to all the Nazi Germany/holocaust films I've watched.

In some ways, this film reminded me of the Dutch film Black Book. Lust, Caution also had morally grey characters conflicted by their own emotions. This created a great dramatic tension that progressed the film nicely. You are wondering when Kuang's plan is going to go wrong. But guessing where and how is what kept me hooked. The production was brilliant as well. From the costume to the set design, I really felt like I was in 1930's Hong Kong/1940's Shanghai.

But, of course, we have to talk about what the film is famous for and that's the sex scenes. It is an erotica after all. Unlike virtually all other sex scenes in films, these actually served the plot and weren't there for pure titillation. To get close enough to the ultra-careful Mr Yee to actually kill him, wang agrees to become his mistress. Initially, she is a virgin, but one of her comrades takes her virginity in an awkward encounter, very befitting of the context. It is the later scenes with Mr Yee that become passionate and steamy. So steamy that the actors themselves were asked if the sex was unsimulated.

The initial sex scene demonstrated Wang's nervousness, but she grows in confidence, as she becomes more committed to her cause. In may ways, it's a theme of female empowerment. In the initial scene, she has her power taken from her, as was China's when Japan invaded, but she slowly takes it back in the later scenes.

This was a very good film. It focussed on a lesser-known part of history with a great parody element. It's probably just best not to watch this with your parents.

Cat on a Hot Tin Roof review

 Number 235 on the top 1000 films of all time is Richard Brook's drama 'Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.'

Based on Tennessee Williams' play of the same name, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof focusses on the dynamics of the self-destructive Pollitt family in Eastern Mississippi. Brick (Paul Newman) is a drunk, former high-school athlete who hurts himself trying to recapture his glory days. His long-suffering wife is Maggie (Elizabeth Taylor) who is still deeply in love with him, but there is still plenty of tension between the pair. There is also Harvey "Big Daddy" who is the ageing patriarch of the family. In ill-health, his other son Cooper "Gooper" (Jack Carson) and his wife Mae "Sister Woman" (Madelaine Sherwood) are desperate to be written into his will.

I am not particularly familiar with Tennessee Williams' source material. but I am given to understand that Brooks did not make a faithful adaptation. Within the original play, there was a strong homosexual subtext including an implied romantic attraction between Brick and his unseen friend Skipper who committed suicide a few years before. Due to production codes, this was largely admitted. And by production codes, I, of course, mean institutionalised homophobia. And that's ironic as that subtext was supposed to be a critique of homophobia.

But I do think that the film suffered from the omission of this subtext. Without it, everything felt very superficial and bland. And it wasn't just this subtext, but it felt like there was little behind the curtain. Being based on a stage-play, it is a small and intimate film. There is a tiny cast, although with two massive names - Elizabeth Taylor and Paul Newman - and the film is largely limited to the one set of the Pollitt family mansion. Obviously, I wasn't expecting a major spectacle or massive explosions, but everything still felt very lacking.

Much of the play was everybody shouting at each other, which all became rather tedious after a while. Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, which also starred Elizabeth Taylor, was similar, yet it still had an apparent but subtle subtext. And so there was a point to all the yelling. But there was no discernible point here. It's a shame, because it sounds like Tennessee Williams was making a great point about the homophobia of the time, yet Richard Brooks wasn't able to convey the same ideas in his adaptation, whatever the reason might be. And this ultimately diluted the potency of the film.

I can only speculate that the fault of this film lies with the actual studio or film industry itself rather than with the film makers and actors - Paul Newman was brilliant as was Taylor - perhaps if they were given a chance, they could have made a very faithful adaptation of the American classic that is Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.

The Big Sleep review

 Number 214 on the top 1000 films of all time is Howard Hawks' 1946 film noir 'The Big Sleep.'

Based on the 1939 Raymond Chandley book, the Big Sleep follows the exploits of Private Detective Philip Marlowe (Humphrey Bogart.) Marlowe is hired by General Sternwood (Charles Waldron) to investigate the person who is blackmailing his daughter Carmen (Martha Vickers.) But soon Marlowe becomes involved with Sternwood's other daughter Vivien (Lauren Bacall.) And, not before long, he stumbles upon a conspiracy involving murder, gambling and organised crime.

I have to admit that I had a lot of trouble following this film. That's probably because of my poor watching abilities rather than Howard Hawks' film-making. Yet I wonder if things are needlessly complicated. The Big Sleep has a convoluted plot as is often the case with many crime films, especially noir films, that throw in characters and subplots willy-nilly. 

I haven't read the book, so maybe Hawks was just being faithful to Raymond Chandler's source material, but I still think things were needlessly complicated. There are plenty of morally-grey characters who are constantly double-crossing each other. And I did have trouble distinguishing the characters from one another. Characters like Geiger are introduced to later be quickly killed off.

I understand that a lot of the writing, acting and direction was very much of the time, but it still bordered on very cheesy. It seems like Humphrey Bogart's only direction was to flirt with every single female cast member from his love triangle with Carmen and Vivien to the girls working at the book shops he visits. The fight and murder scenes were also hardly the most convincing either.

Perhaps I am being very unfair with my review. I'm sure the right audiences would find this a very entertaining and thrilling film. I guess there has to be a reason it made it into this list. Maybe I shouldn't be judging the Big Sleep by modern standards, but I just wasn't the right audience.

Paris, Texas review

 Number 240 on the top 1000 films of all time is the 1984 road film 'Paris, Texas.'

After spending four years roaming the Mojave desert, aimless drifter Travis Henderson (Harry Dean Stanton) is found in Texas. His brother Walt (Dean Stockwell) takes him home to Los Angeles where he and his French wife Anne (Aurore Clement) have been raising Travis' son Hunter (Hunter Carson.) Travis and Hunter then set out on a road trip to find Jane (Nastassja Kinski,) Travis' wife and Hunter's mother.

I have to admit that this film surprised me. I initially thought it would be pretentious and overly-intellectual a la Ingmar Bergman. But despite its arthouse nature, it was very engaging. It was so bright and vibrant with some gorgeous cinematography. I loved all the sweeping shots of the great American landscape. All the colours popped off of the screen. Speaking of colour, red featured very prominently. Why? I'll leave that to the film majors to answer.

True, at two and a half hours, the film is probably longer than it needs to be. There are a lot of silences and forlorn gazing into the desert. Not all of this held my interest. Yet it was always steered back by Harry Dean Stanton's excellent performance. Travis, being initially mute, would not have been an easy character to play. He is a man rendered virtually catatonic by some unexplained trauma. But Stanton slowly transforms him from a vague, lifeless sketch into a living breathing person.

I also very much enjoyed the score. It was sparing and economical with every piece of music playing at the right moment. Perhaps if there had been more music instead of silences, especially with the pivotal conversations toward the end, I may have been more engaged throughout.

I talked about Stanton earlier, but I don't think there was a weak link among the cast. Dean Stockwell plays Travis' sympathetic, but increasingly frustrated brother. And Aurore Clement was equally good as his wife Anne. It's difficult not to feel sorry for the two as Travis and Hunter without telling them. And, finally, Nastassja Kinski was great as Jane. The final reunion between her and Travis was touching and poignant to watch.

Generally, I'm not a fan of arthouse films. They're the territory of cinophiles and film majors, but Paris, Texas surprised me. It's not a very loud film, but it made a hell of a lot of noise.

MegaMind review

 Number 990 on the top 1000 films of all time is the animated superhero comedy 'Megamind.'

Megamind (Will Ferrell) is a supervillain in Metro City. He has a fierce rivalry with super hero Metro Man (Brad Pitt.) However, after Megamind seemingly kills Metro Man, he feels lost and powerless. That is until he creates a new super hero. But this super hero quickly becomes a villain which Megamind must beat to save Metro City.

I totally see what this film was going for. It's trying to be a clever re-invention of the superhero genre. But a parody of a cliche is still a cliche. Megamind pointed out plenty of the cliches present within the superhero genre, but instead of subverting them like arguably better film, it tries to put a funny spin on them and fails miserably. Like many superhero films, Metro Man and Megamind have a big dialogue in the build-up to their final confrontation. Yet this dialogue gets progressively sillier and it adds nothing to the overall plot.

That's also a prime example of the film's poor attempts at humour. Many of the jokes fell completely flat and Will Ferrell's lacklustre performance did nothing to help things. He tried doing an imitation of Vito Corleone in the Godfather, and it was one of the worse imitations I've ever heard. Brad Pitt was was surprisingly uncharismatic as Metro Man.

Megamind and Metro Man are in themselves parodies of Superman - both are alien refugees sent to earth as their own planet is sucked into a black hole. Metro Man is handsome and popular at school, while Megamind is ugly and bullied. He goes onto begin resenting Metro Man before fully embracing his role as a supervillain. 

And that's largely all I can remember from this film, as I kept falling asleep. I wouldn't even say it was a kid's film, because I don't think it would be that entertaining for children to watch. Or for anybody to watch for that matter.

Law-abiding citizen review

 Number 937 on the top 1000 films of all time is the action-thriller 'Law Abiding Citizen.'

Clyde Shelton (Gerard Butler) is a family-man and former CIA operative. He witnesses his wife and daughter being murdered in a home-invasion by Clarence Derby (Christian Stolte.) When the justice system, including his lawyer Nick Rice (Jamie Foxx) lets him down by cutting a deal with Derby ensuring his premature release, Clyde Shelton begins to take the law into his own hands.

Vigilante justice always makes for a good film. People fall through the justice system all the time either through corruption or incompetence. Men like Shelton are always sympathetic protagonists, not to mention their poor wives and daughters. They've been victims of horrific crimes. Their entire families have been killed. Nobody's going to miss their murderers. However, what makes vigilante thrillers so interesting is their quiet, intimate nature. Generally it's one man acting out of passion or retaliation with one gun or one knife. Maybe he does have a plan, but the plan isn't as elaborate as Law-Abiding Citizen.

And that's where this film falls down. It all becomes so ridiculous. I get that Shelton is some super-soldier, CIA operative, but are we supposed to believe that he's spent ten years digging into every solitary confinement cell in prison? That he's turned mobile phones into bombs? Or created a remote-operated machine-gun mount? I get him tracking down Derby and brutally torturing and killing him, but everything else is so ridiculous.

It also gave the film an overly, dark tone which made for an uncomfortable watch. Gerard Butler and Jamie Foxx did the best with what they had, but neither character had any real depth to them. Rice is your typical man too busy to spend any time with his family while Shelton is a seemingly innocuous man with a psychopath bubbling beneath the surface.

This film is based on a good premise. Shame the execution was way too over-the-top.