michaelarmer Reviews

Body of Lies (2008)

Body of Close-Ups

[7/10 · 30 April 2024]

This is a tight political spy thriller, and a good one, with Leonardo di Caprio as the agent on the ground, caught between his CIA boss and Jordanian intelligence, whilst trying to capture a muslim extremist, they get the guy in the end, but only after a bit of using and double-dealing, with Leonardo getting a bit of punishment and falling for a local girl.

The film is well made, well to a point, the direction is good, the action is ok, dialogue is spot on, the locations are believable, etc. But there is a slight problem, and it is one I may have mentioned before, the close-up shots, Ridley Scott is a fine director, several of his other films are excellent, but his close-ups (or ultra close-ups) are a bit annoying, it would make a better film if wider angles were used, its hard for the audience to see what's going on around, and this is important. Mostly because its annoying, and you want people to pay money to see this film, so making it annoying is not a good way of doing it.

Other than that it was very good, Leonardo was excellent, Crowe was good, and Mark Strong was his usual cool and prim persona.

The close -ups camera shots are a modern trait in film-making, and I don't think they are good, a few perhaps, but not loads, throughout the entire film, which gradually erodes everything else that is good about it. This is why this style will not make films as good as they used to be, like in the 1960's, when they did not have this style, well not much anyway. I wish they would stop it and then we can have better films.

I would have given this fil 8 stars, but I have to knock one off for all the close-ups.

The Magus (1968)

The Mug-Us

[3/10 · 29 April 2024]

Yeah, they mugged a lot of people into paying good money to see this. The scenery was great, but the plot, screenplay, scenes, direction, editing, continuity was rubbish. I get the impression that Michael Caine was wondering "what the hell am I doing here", Anthony Quinn seemed to be trying with a boring role, Candice Bergen looked nice but her acting was not up to much. I know Michael Caine did many roles, just to be kept in employment, which is a sensible attitude, but not good for movie goers, particularly in this case. The plot was just annoying and seemed to have missed certain items, Michael Caine's character discovered the Villa, and straight-away there was something amiss, and after meeting Quinn assumed "there was a game to be played" without much indication of such, maybe he was telepathic, but it was confusing, daft and preposterous, all in one go. I was bored out of my mind watching it. The book might have been good, but it did not work as a film, the screenplay needed to be more dynamic, the direction needed to be tighter, and more suspenseful. I gave this 3 stars for the scenery, and the actors, but mainly the scenery.

Jack Reacher (2012)

Investigator/Vigilante old school

[6/10 · 27 April 2024]

This is like an older type film, like one made in the late 70's/early 80's, a bit like Dirty Harry, one where an investigator, whether official or private, takes the law into his own hands and delivers justice, also a bi like Rambo, where he disappears/off grid. So that made it a little dated. Also, like those older movies, there were holes in the plot overlooked or missed, maybe they did it like that on purpose to look like an older movie. But it does not work for me, well not that well.

Tom Cruise does well in the lead role, and so I suppose did Rosamund Pike, although she seemed a little dazed throughout, like as if the scenes had taken her by surprise. There was no chemistry between her and Jack Reacher, although it was hinted at, but I'm glad they didn't come together, it would have spoilt it.

Direction was OK, action was good, the roles did not make supermen out of them, and the fight scenes were not ling, so maybe more realistic. But a film like this needs a little style, and it did not have much, it just seemed to be ticking off the boxes, of how to do one of these films, but why in the 2000's ??.

It was not crap though, it sort of meandered along at a good pace, with a good bit of action and a little intrigue, with a small twist. So I gave it a 6, as it was above average, but not great. Tom Cruise can do so much better though, and has proved it on several occasions.

Tae Guk Gi: The Brotherhood of War (2004)

Real War

[9/10 · 26 April 2024]

This is the best war film I have seen, but its not made in Hollywood or Shepperton, it was made in South Korea, about the Korean War and two brothers in it. The acting is superb, the action is fantastic, and probably too real, because there's plenty of blood, guts and other body parts blown off.

On a political angle, because it shows a war realistically, it should be given awards just for that, but also there is the two brothers story and the drama involving them, which is also great. The direction is excellent, photography excellent, its probably a bit short and could have been longer and still great, so editing is the only slightly poor angle, but its hard to fault it just for that.

Watch it when you get the chance, its up there with Schindlers List and Spartacus.

The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1965)

The Spy Who was Shot on the Wall

[8/10 · 25 April 2024]

He might have come in from cold, but he went straight out into it again, and it turned tragic. The storyline was to incriminate the opposition leader, so that they would assassinate him, however there was a bit of a twist, since Leamas (Burton) was led down the garden path, instead it was the second in command who was to be incriminated, because his boss was really a double agent working for Britain, and his understudy suspected him, so Leamas was used as a decoy, so that could happen, still with me?

Leamas only came aware of this deception at the last, but was given a way out, and took it, but his woman friend (Bloom) was shot escaping to the west, why when they were being allowed to escape I am unsure, but this angle was not touched upon, as it was the end of the film, maybe it was in the book. Leamas, who was in love with said woman, gave himself up to be shot rather than escape to his double dealing bosses, who had put him in the firing line. So it was a tragedy, but as I said I am unsure why. It was well acted, the storyline was great, it was bleak, but that was natural for the film. The main reason for its success was that it was from the book by Le Carre.

The Third Man (1949)

The Fourth Man

[8/10 · 24 April 2024]

That's what Holly Martins (Joseph Cotten) became, and his was the lead role in the film.

I am unsure why they called it "The Third Man", I know why , its because the porter noticed a 'third man' helping to carry Harry Lime's (Orson Welles) body across the street, who became a point of interest for Holly Martins, to discover who he was, which he never did. But since that was only a small part of the film, I don't understand why they called it that, Maybe 'Funeral in Vienna' or something like that.

There are a few misconceptions about this film, firstly it is not a Spy film, although its set in Vienna just after WW2 (lots of spies) and with the tensions between east and west, and that the original story is written by Graham Greene who mostly wrote Spy novels, also Harry Lime is not a Spy (nor is the third man), and its not the best film of all time, as per what many people say. Its actually a crime thriller, based in Vienna, in that time period, but it is a good film, very good, but surely not the 'best of all time'. Another thing is that Orson Welles got a lot of credit for this film, but he's hardly in it, even in the sewer scenes, where they used a double, as Welles refused to go down there (They are the real sewers of Vienna). Joseph Cotten is the real star, in the lead role, and he does an excellent job, Using real Viennese scenes, European actors and Viennese extras was also crucial to the realism, also the story line, based on an original story, by Graham Greene, but which was fiction.

The main story being that Harry Lime faked his death before being caught by the police for supplying faulty drugs, which ruined the health or killed many children, the mystery was surrounding his death. Alida Valli was excellent has the the 'beauty', showing what a good actress she was, Trevor Howard, who is usually good, did not disappoint. And it was aided by several good British character actors, playing brits.

I did like it a lot, but not as much as others, and although Orson did act well in his few minutes on screen, it was only as good as a support role would be. He did not have enough screen time to do more.

Very good, but not the best.

Saints and Soldiers (2003)

Soldiers & 1 Christian

[5/10 · 18 April 2024]

I was already very doubtful about this film with its title, which seems to me someone made it up without thinking too much, and just because of the religious soldier in the lead. However it was not as bad as I feared, but still not great. It's definitely a "B" movie, with a film quality and poor production to match, but the acting was reasonably OK, except for the the British character. Corbin Allred played the lead well, a deeply christian soldier who was also an excellent shot, however that in itself was a bit of a "B" movie cliche. It helped that the story was based on an original WW2 scenario, the american soldiers were all played well, by american actors, but the British Soldier was played poorly by Kirby Heyborne, his English accent was a bit off, and the way he played his part was not how an English soldier would have been. I have said this many times before, its always better if you get an actor of the same nationality as the character to play the role correctly, so why did they not choose a British actor? After all, its not as if they are in short supply. Don't get me wrong, some Americans play English parts exceptionally well, but Kirby didn't.

Other faults with the film included continuity, also some scenes were a bit daft, particularly the ending, the photography was a bit dark and it would have benefitted wider angles to see more of the scenery in the winter time it was set, but the main problem was direction, which severely lacked any level of skill or sensitivity. The only thing that saved it was the acting from the American soldiers and the storyline.

There is a sequel to this which was Saints and Soldiers: Airborne Creed (an even more dubious title) which I had downloaded, but I only watched the start and turned it off because it was crap at the start, so I wanted to save myself the agony of watching it all the way through. I am glad I watched this one though, if not just for the experience, but am not putting it in any list of top films, since it would be more likely in a lower range.

The Aviator (2004)

The Eccentric

[8/10 · 11 April 2024]

This is a good film, not the best, but still very good. Leonardo Di Caprio plays Howard Hughes very well, but the best performance was by Kate Blanchett as Katherine Hepburn, the good thing was that she had lots of material to draw on to create that performance. The film quality is excellent and the period costumes, scenery and make-up were spot on, the secret of making a good "real story" movie is to make it as real and as close to how it was when the events took place, and it was very realistic. The direction was superb, it was a long film at 2 hours 50 mins, but it could have been longer, apparently scenes were cut, including one with "Amelia Earhart", and I think it would have benefitted from being longer, because the main character had such an interesting life. Because it was edited so much the continuity suffered, but that did not affect the quality. A cameo by Jude Law as "Errol Flynn" was also good, and realistic, actor characters such as Errol and Spencer Tracy could have featured more. But the best angle to the movie was Howards role as an Aviation Designer and Pilot, hence the title, and being the main subject of this part of Howard Hughes life.

Please make more films like this.

Clash of the Titans (2010)

Clash of the lame heads

[4/10 · 6 April 2024]

That's what this film is lame, mostly coming from the direction, also editing seems to be a problem, as well as continuity, the acting was a bit flat, but the special effects are great though. And there lies the problem, they focussed on the action and special effects, and forgot to direct the acting well, and forgot how to make a good film. If the actors were used better, it would have improved it no end, but there scenes were cut short or washed over by all the attention to the costumes and effects. They had an excellent cast, and all the best actors were underused, Sam Worthington was a bit like a "rabbit caught in the headlights" Liam Neeson was reduced to just looking thoughtful most of the time, and the British actors, all who were good actors, looked like British actors, not like the Ancient Greeks they were supposed to be. The point of acting a role, is to be that character, but they were just being themselves in ancient greek clothes. Or at least they were not being allowed to be or given the time.

Other reviewer's describe it as being hollow, which is what I agree with, I know it was a remake of the 1981 film, but that storyline was not the best, and this storyline was also poor . With modern film making techniques and allowing longer and better scenes for the actors it could have been so much better, but mostly the fault lies with direction and editing. A bit poor.

Pathfinder (2007)

Lost its Path

[3/10 · 21 March 2024]

In reference to another review, "It is as bad as its painted to be".

They made a good film, crap! Its a remake of a Norwegian film, but a poor one. Apart from all the factual errors, there are two other major problems with this film, its too dark, and the camera work is too close, when we need to see wider shots. I know its set in winter, but the darkness is too much, its like a Tim Burton horror/fantasy, maybe they wanted to copy that style, but for me its not good in this film, and the close ups are too close, we need to see more, not just the gory faces. Karl Urban was ok, and its good that they got real indigenous actors to play those parts, but most of everything else was off, the mountain shots were not real, or from archive footage. The action was ok, but a bit too gory, but it seems they intended that, but that goes against the subject material, Vikings discovering a new land, yes there would have been some killing, but nothing like this. The only saving grace was that it was not overlong. They could make a much better film at about 2 1/2 hours by turning it into more of an adventure with more colour and better camera work, but that does not save this film.

Do yourself a favour, if there nothing else available, listen to the radio, and save yourself from this dross.

Glorious 39 (2009)

Not-glorious 1939

[7/10 · 19 February 2024]

A mystery and odd goings on in the period just befor WW2 in England with a upper class family.

It was suspenseful, but meandered around a bit, but in a dramatic way. The ending was quite god though. It was a bit similar in style to "The Wicker Man", but with a more positive ending.

Romola Garai was excellent, someone whom I have not seen before, the rest were supporting ably, nice to see Christopher Lee in one of his last films. It was a shame that Charlie Cox was killed off, he was doing well in his few scenes. Some of the other re-viewer's seem to think nothing was clarified, for me it was completely clarified, the heroine survived and outlived the nasty people, who were in league with Hitler.

Not the best mystery, but quite good, and a who's who of British acting talent.

Basic (2003)

Complicated

[7/10 · 19 February 2024]

A very complicated whodunnit, with a twist at the end, it is a very interesting film, and acted well, but the storyline was too complicated, especially set against lots of noise which made it hard to understand the dialogue. Even after the film ended, and there was not really a whodunnit, because there was no murder, it all left me a bit confused, an extremely complicated ruse in order to uncover a drug operation, surely they would have done something far simpler, and the complicated plot was not convincing.

John Travolta was as good as he gets, Connie Neilson was also very good, the others supported ably. The action was good, the scenery was excellent, the fast speed of the changing stories/storyline was a bit fast but not too fast, although if it was a longer film and the storyline spread out a bit, it could have benefitted, also the ending could have been a bit more longer and dramatic, but overall it was good, despite the unconvincing, over-complicated plot.

Beyond Paradise (2023– )

Beyond Expectations

[5/10 · 9 June 2023]

This was made by the same team that made Death in Paradise, and they proudly state that in the opening credits, but seeing as that series started off ok but then dived into an abysmal bore, Its not good that they should tell us that.

It also has copied another TV series - Doc Martin, whereas that is set in a pretty Cornwall seaside village, this one is set in a pretty Devon seaside village, both with local odd characters, one of the actors from the Doc Martin series is also in this!

They run the story that the lead character - Humphrey, has returned to England from his stint in the Caribbean (Death in Paradise), and has moved with his wife to this Devon village, with similar crime plots to the Death in Paradise series, despite the change of scenery, it has not really improved much, the first few episodes benefitted from it being a bit fresher (new place/new characters), but it soon descended into the dross that Death in Paradise did, the last episode did not feature a murder, which was, a little different, but it ended with Humphrey (and his partly estranged wife) going back to the Death in Paradise Island. Indicating the experiment with the Devon setting was over. However there is a Xmas Special and a new series in the pipeline, so I am assuming they are returning to Devon?

I hope his wife (character) does not reappear, the crime plots and acting/storylines about them were ok, although descending into boring repetition, but the plot involving his on/off relationship with his wife was mind numbingly annoying, and her character was bringing the series down, she was like the iceberg sticking into the Titanic!

The other actors did ok, their roles were better than the ones in Death in Paradise, and the Sergeant role was better than the one in Death in Paradise, getting more involved. But the side storyline of Humphrey's relationship, his wife and her ex, was bringing it all down.

If they are doing more episode/series, they really need to ditch that storyline, and his wife character, otherwise it will be terminal for the series.

As far as this series goes, I give it 5 stars, for the acting of (except the wife and her ex), and the slightly different criminal storylines, if it didn't have the storyline about his wife, I would have rated it much higher.

The Outlaw (1943)

The Outsider

[7/10 · 26 March 2023]

This was a pretty good western for its time, Its not historically accurate, and not too serious, and I suppose a bit daft in parts, but its still a pretty good film.

Jack Buetel was excellent in the lead role, but Walter Huston was the class act as Doc Hollday, Thomas Mitchell was ok as Pat Garrett, if not a bit wooden, despite his rating as an actor he was a long way off Buetel and Huston. But the lame duck was Jane Russell, she was a combination of a "rabbit caught in the headlights" and "without a clue" , she was supposed to be one of Hollywood's top beauties and female stars, but she did not look that great to me (although she had a lovely pair of knockers) and her acting was well off, so I am unsure what all the fuss was about, however this was her first film and she was only 20 years old when making it, so a bit of a learning curve.

The film was made by Howard Hughes and Howard Hawks, a legendary combination, and despite its lack of accuracy and odd style, they still manage to pull of a good film, the combination of Buetel and Huston with the direction seemed to do the trick.

I see the average rating on here is 5.4 stars at the time I wrote this, I don't know why, maybe other raters did not get that the film was not made to be accurate, nor taken too seriously, I reckon it was about 7 stars, and despite my criticism it was interesting to see Jane Russell, although she failed to live up to expectation. And it was a pity that Jack Buetel was prevented from making more films by Howard Hughes, he could have been a Hollywood great. When he eventually got out of Howard Hughes grip, his rising star had fallen. Shame

All in all it was a good movie for a Sunday afternoon.

No Time to Die (2021)

Time To Die

[6/10 · 2 January 2023]

Well Well, Bond is Dead, However there was a screen message saying "Bond Will Be Back", but if so in what guise, we'll see.

And onto this film, this is the fifth (and last) one with Daniel Craig playing Bond, but it is his worst, the action is there but little in the way of tension, the drama is mostly focussed around his relationship with Madeleine Swann, and his newly found daughter, so Bond is now a Dad (was a Dad), that's a new one on the storyline, but like his marriage in 'On Her Majesty's Secret Service' is short-lived, and its apt. I quote that film, since some of the music and scenes were taken from or similar to the ones in that film, which was a good thing, since it was one of the best, but in this film he didn't get married, acknowledging the modern standards of un-married couples with kids, in the OHMSS days, they would have to get married, to keep up the moral standards in those days. To make the most of the retro feel to that film they could have got George Lazonby, if possible (he was about 80/81 years old when they made this film), to play a cameo role, they could not get any other main actors from that film, since they have all passed away, including Diana Rigg who did so when this was being made (some of the girls from the clinic are still with us, including Catherine Schell and Joanna Lumley - who are now in their 70's).

The main plot of the storyline was the biological device which could be programmed to wipe out however they wanted by selecting their DNA, this is contemporary, however it did not seem plausible, in the film when they wiped out all of Spectre's agents, with almost everyone of them having different DNA, not being related to each other (maybe a few were family), so impossible, that was a major "goof" in the storyline. There are several lesser mistakes, but that was the main plot, so for me, I kinda lost the thread, not only that, but they claimed that the biological strains would all be destroyed when they blew up the Island facility at the end, uh uh, in reality the nanobots would survive and possibly spread from there, the area would have been a no go site for hundreds of years.

The bad guy Lyutsifer Safin, played well by Remi Malek, was good, as was Paloma, played by Ana de Armas, playing the dumb/useless CIA agent, who turned out to be fantastic, the Madeleine character played by Léa Seydoux was also good, better than in Spectre, in this she had a lot more screen time, and used it well, Craig was ok as Bond, but not as good as in the previous four films, and his make up was rubbish, his face almost looked like that of a mannequin at times, even Roger Moore, who played the role when he was 58 did not have that problem. The MI6 team were all as per standard, I felt that Moneypenny (Naomi Harris) did not get enough screen time though, the new '007' was a bit of a let down though, Nomi, played by Lashana Lynch, the action she was doing was great, but she did not have the physique or figure of a 00 agent, more like a 30 ish mum of three, and her dialogue and non action scenes were a bit flat, her acting was a bit average.

The CIA characters were Ok, one turning out to be a bad guy is a bit of a theme, ala 'Never Say Never Again', with Jeffrey Wright recreating Felix Leiter well enough, for the last time. David Dencik playing the mad scientist was a good one, again he could have done with more screen time, also the same with the henchman - Primo, played by Dali Benssalah.

The storyline was a bit poor, but the scenes, scenery and action were all good, along with the links to earlier Bond films, the colouring was a bit grey though, I suppose this is the modern style, but in a bond film, it should be a bit more colourful, the music was good, the opening song was a bit of a damp squib, but the repeating of the end song 'We Have All The Time in The World' by Louis Armstrong, which was also originally in the OHMSS film as well was very good, since it is a classic song and it fit well at the end.

Another theme running through this film was the killing off of characters, obviously the main one was Bond, but they also did for Blofeld (Christophe Waltz, a fine actor who also did not get enough screen time), Spectre as an organisation, and Felix Leiter. The MI6 team was not killed off though, suggesting they will be in whatever new variant the franchise will be in the future. Another thing they killed of was the five episodes series this film ended, starting with 'Casino Royale', basically they had a storyline running through all five Craig films, with this one as the last, maybe they should have given them all the same main title, but added a subtitle, as in the 'Lord of The Rings' The Hobbit' and the 'Harry Potter films, it should have been ended on the fourth.

If there is a new Bond or at least a new 007, if its Nomi, she will need to step up a gear or three, I haven't got a problem with the main character being different, but for me it needs to be a fit bloke, starting out in his late 20's and retiring in his early forties, like an ex SAS soldier type. Its not reality, as the storyline proved, its fantasy and entertainment, they should not be trying to be pander to political correctness, gender or race issues, the character being black is not a bad idea, if Idris Elba had taken the role instead of Daniel Craig, back in the early 2000's I'm fairly sure he would have made a great bond, but 007 looking like a middle-aged mum of three is not one that will be successful. So if they do return with new films, please let Bond be a good, muscular, intelligent bloke in the prime of his life.

I have given this film 6 stars, mostly because of the action and style, the storyline, some acting, roles being short and lack of tension, prevents me from making it more, the (current) 7.3 rating on here seems a bit high for me.

I have created a Bond Girls list on this website, these are all ladies who Bond has had a sexual relationship with in the films, unfortunately I cannot add to that list with this film, since he was monogamous, only having it with Madeleine, who was in the last film, so is already in that list, the only possible addition would have been Paloma, but unlike Bond in earlier films, he does not go there, another modern trait I suppose.

First Knight (1995)

First Turkey

[3/10 · 18 March 2022]

I don't know what others on here see when they watch films, but its sure not what I see! I have just read a few reviews, who claim this is great or magnificent, it can't be the same film I watched.

The main problem is the acting,Sean Connery is the best, but by his standards, he was going through the motions, Richard Gere looked and acted like a donkey with a smacked arse, Julia Ormond was trying, but seemed immature (She was young) and acted immaturely, the supporting actors just seemed to be there for the money, direction was poor, as was photography and continuity, the sets looked borrowed from a B movie, the castle looked like a model, the battle scenes looked staged, they cannot have spent much on it, I gave it a 3, for the horses, at least they made an effort, and were real.

Actually the best thing about this film was the beer I had whilst watching it. RIP Sean.

The Forbidden Kingdom (2008)

The Monkey King

[9/10 · 8 January 2022]

One of the East/West movies that Hollywood is now churning out to capture the Chinese market, an early one but not the first, but one of the best.

The casting of Jackie Chan and Jet Li was long overdue and welcome, and the rest of casting was excellent as well,

This film has got it all, action, comedy, romance, historical, fantasy, gong fu, it pushes all the buttons, well almost all, it should have been called the Kingdom of the Monkey King though, but that is of little importance, what is important is that Jet Li played the Monkey King and the Monk, and as the Monk was as cool as can be, the Chinese Steve McQueen, Jet is my favourite Martial Arts actor, probably because he really is a.true martial arts champion, and was for several years, so acting the moves comes easy. He plays the straight man to Jackie Chan's comedy action role, playing on his drunken master persona, and like Jet, it comes easy to him.

The story is a good one, a little cliche'd but still good, and of course the action is excellent, the special effects are also good, particularly at the start with the fantasy segment. Its worth watching just for that, but when you have Jet Li and Jackie Chan doing a Gong Fu fight, its a masterclass performance, this should have been given awards for that.

This film is better than its star rating on here, I gave it 9 stars, but it should be 9 1/2.

Cold Zone (2017)

Cold Turkey.....

[3/10 · 16 November 2021]

.... and that it is what it's like going through when watching this.

I know we are currently suffering extremes of weather, which the producers of this film are exploiting, but this is a bit over the top, the "special effects" are not so special, they keep repeating a satellite image of a white cloud with a hole in it, exactly the same - no movement, repeating it several times throughout the film, one scene involves the main hero burying himself in a snow hole to survive being frozen, with a candle which burns the oxygen in the hole uo, so either he should have frozen to death or died of lack of oxygen, but he was not even that cold when he came out.

The acting is poor, the dialogue terrible, the emotional scenes look put on, which of course they are (real actors make the emotional scenes look real), continuity is not good, scenes where there are frozen people show the area frost free, it would take a while to defrost! And despite recently been frozen, the roads have wet puddles, not ice!

The music is poor, and sound effects are annoying.

I am looking for the good points, maybe the story is good, but the screenplay has ruined it.

Poor, interesting, but poor. Like a disaster movie from the 70's but without star actors.

Hanna (2011)

Unlikely

[6/10 · 18 October 2021]

Soairse Ronan was ok, but did not like right for the role, she had good moves, and acted ok, but her physical appearance did not look like someone who had spent years of physical training. Eric Bana and Cate Blanchett were ok, but not great.

The movie had good pace but not good continuity, the music was ok, the action was so so, I am not a big fan of martial arts style fighting, but I do like some, Jet Li is my favourite performer of such, but this was nowhere near that quality and not as good as Jackie Chan's stunts, it looked like people who don't know anything about martial arts, were performing such, which is the case here. It also touches on lesbianism, not the right film for that I think.

However it was entertaining and interesting, the ending was as expected but they did it reasonably well.

Paradise Lagoon (1957)

An Admirable Film

[8/10 · 18 October 2021]

An interesting social reversing drama, I have not seen the original nor the play or the later films, but this is good, More does his usual amiable character, and Sally Ann Howes and Diane Cilento supply the beauty, with good support from Cecil Parker and others, it works well and the end is very clever. Almost a fifties british comedy but more of a drama.

Shanghai Knights (2003)

China vs England

[5/10 · 16 October 2021]

Sequel to Shanghai Noon, not quite as good as that, but the same formula, the first one brought nothing new to the screen, so this is like a inbred mutation, almost identical, but with minor faults, still funny (just) and still plenty of Gong Fu action (lots), so like the first we know what to expect, but that's ok, we would not expect anything less.

Shanghai Noon (2000)

China vs America round 1

[6/10 · 16 October 2021]

Not such a big surprise having a Chinese man in the Wild West, the Chinese did build the railways there, provided laundry services and cooks, so having a Gong Fu artiste roaming the west is not so far fetched.

This is a fun movie, Chen Long gets up to his fantastic tricks with his Gong Fu stunt team, there is nothing new with this action, Jackie has done it lots of times before, but it's not boring, and very clever.

Owen Wilson does his usual dodgy but nice/ well intended poor mans entrepreneur/playboy, again not new.

The chemistry between the two works well, with Lucy Liu providing the pretty girl, to brighten up proceedings, we all know they are going to win the day, but that is not a problem, it's the action and fun along the way that makes the film, they are not pretending to make a classic, and they don't need to be Shakespearean quality in the acting stakes, just do what they usually do, and what everyone expects, and they do that well.

Allied (2016)

Marriage in the service never works

[8/10 · 9 October 2021]

A very good war time romance/drama/intrigue

With Brad Pitt and Marion Coutillard, Brad plays a Canadian officer who goes to Casablanca undercover as a frenchman to meet his pretend french wife (Coutillard), whence they kill a few germans and fall in love, after he asks her to go to London with him and to get married. All going smoothly, however it turns sour when she is not what she seems, and is in fact a German pretending to be a French woman who was killed earlier, and is now spying for the Germans in London, Brad is faced with a dilemma and an ultimatum, it does not turn out good.

Its a well made film with Marion and Brad hitting it well, good quality camera work and scenes, and very realistic props, the Canary Islands stands in for Casablanca, so not completely accurate, but mostly it looks perfect.

Green Zone (2010)

Sand Zone

[1/10 · 9 October 2021]

I don't know what to say about this film, since I could not get throiugh 20 mins of it.

The problem was the constant annoying erratic movement of the cameras, like as per a war zone film crew at work in real life, however it was too erratic, it was erratic when we were looking at generals in a briefing room, which it would not have been like.

This is another annoying trait from modern film makers, such as the ultra close ups and the like.

So I cannot rate this film correctly because I gave up trying to watch it less than 20 minutes in, because it was so annoying. I saw Matt Damon and Greg Kinnear, and they looked the part, Damon was acting well in what I saw.

So because the camera action was annoying me so much, I can only give it 1 star rating as if it did that to me, it might to others watching it, which cannot be good.

Jaws (1975)

Hens Teeth

[9/10 · 6 October 2021]

Rare - A kind of disaster movie that is actually good.

The sharks were crap, but the acting was top drawer.

This is a well made film, despite the dodgy sharks, Spielberg made a good fist of it and concentrated on the performances, which went well, and it has aged well, despite knowing what happens, I have never got bored watching repeats of it,