FIRES OF KUWAIT

1992

7/10

DIRECTOR: David Douglas

The Fires Of Kuwait burned for months after the First Gulf War. Imax, still a new format was on hand to capture the efforts made by some brave men and women, and some engineering innovations, to extinguish this devastating legacy of Saddam’s foiled invasion of Kuwait.

This epic sized Imax documentary provides an interesting insight into the methods and mentalities of those who braved oil fumes and intense heat as they battled to bring these oil fires under control. The 36 minute documentary is narrated by the distinctive tones of Rip Torn but most of it is visual and aided more by the roaring, monstrous Imax sound scheme, rather than the dialogue.

It is interesting, dramatic and somewhat insightful but at such a running time, there’s little space for detail and most of the narrative is taken up with simply demonstrating the fires extinction. I find it to be a worth while documentary, great for the big screen, though unfortunately I haven’t seen it on its native Imax, but it’s what a good theatrical doc should be and is a nice, succinct tale of human ingenuity.

PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: DEAD MAN’S CHEST

2006

7/10

DIRECTOR: Gore Verbinski

Captain Jack is back! was the claim. In truth, Jack’s ghost was all that would return for the 2006 sequel to the excellent POTC: The Curse Of the Black Pearl. The prospect of the orignal director continuing the franchise himself, with the same cast all sounds too good to be true and it ultimately was.

Gore Verbinski had struck gold with Pirates, but it all seemed to go to his head and instead of understanding what it was about the first film that had worked, he fell for his own work and created an epic contrivance which brought all the elements from the first film to bear but missed the point, sacrificing the fun and excitement in favour of overblown melodrama.

Johnny Depp has become a caricature of his earlier Sparrow performance, but looks uncomfortable and strained as he forces zinger after zinger, reciting his catchphrases as if the character has nothing else to offer. Then we have Orlando Bloom, quickly growing tiresome as Will Turner and his finance, played so averagely by Keira Knightly.

The set pieces had to be bigger and better for the sequel and they decidedly were not. Bigger yes, but far from better as the massive overblown Waterwheel sequence can attest too, as all the characters are chasing the eponymous chest around an island. Fun though it was, its enjoyment was tainted by its contrivance, filling time with endless reaction shots as the chara

cters who look upon Jack’s ludicrousness antics as a nod to the audience. Jack is cool, but not if everyone knows about it!

But the biggest flaw is also one its great successes, with the introduction of a new villain in the shape of Davie Jones. Jones, Bill Nighy, has transformed in to a half man, half squid as he ferries the dead to the infamous Locker, and his press-ganged crew are going the same way, becoming warped hybrids of both man and sea life. But the effects which are so very, very good are also quite distasteful, not so much fun gross, but gross and disturbing full stop.

Well, they are to me anyway. It works but it goes to far in my opinion. In spite of this, it is still very watchable but all in all, I wonder what we would have done if this had never been made and I feel that we would have lost nothing. Fun but pointless…

CASINO

1995

8/10

DIRECTOR: Martin Scorsese

The opening twenty minutes of a feature film are like the first three chapters of a book in the sense that they either win or lose you depending on its success. Whether it be the D-Day landings in Saving Private Ryan or the naval battle in Master & Commander: The Far Side Of The World,  or the twenty minute so-called Steady-cam shot from Brian DePalma’s, Snake Eyes; the opening 20 minutes set the tone, and Casino has such an opening.

Like most of Scorsese’s work, there’s a lot of narration and in this case, most of that is shared between Robert De Nero’s, “Ace” and Joe Pesci’s, Nicki. “Ace” is a man with mob connections who is employed to run the fictional Tangiers casino in Las Vegas in 1973, and Nicki is a made man and his boyhood friend who wants to take Vegas for his own.

The opening of Casino is a lesson in crooked accounting and you have to keep up with this as it does not patronise the audience in any way. Everything is explained, the characters, their roles and how they do things, but I must admit that  this had become a little tedious after a while and the old adige about showing the story rather than telling it comes to mind as you’re watching it.

But it gets there and the remainder of the 172 minute running time is taken up with the domestic and mod drama of running the Tangiers. Scorsese is an old school  film maker and his style is very apparent, as he crafts his film from the opening frame, with the interesting choice of  a Saul Bass opening credit sequence over something more contemporary.

The acting as good as you would expect from such a cast, which includes in addition, Sharon Stone and James Woods and all in all this is a very successful and gripping drama from Scorsese, but it is just that, and lacks any real twists and turns, offering few surprises. The violence though, is excessive and though shockingly brutal, realistic and frightening in nature, it may well be too much at times, going beyond the needs of the story. But Joe Pesci’s portrayal as the thoroughly evil Nicki is brilliant, though not too far removed from that of Tommy DeVito, his character from Goodfellas, but since both films share screenwriter and directorial credits, that’s not entirely a surprise…

INTOLERABLE CRUELTY

2003

7/10

DIRECTOR: Joel & (Ethan) Coen

George Clooney is the king of cool and as such it can be easy to forget that he is also a very talented comedic actor. This is a facet that the Coen Brothers haven’t missed as they cast him as a cynical divorce lawyer in this typically off-beat Coen comedy.

The Coen’s are an acquired taste with their brand of comedy often leaving the masses behind, but their tallents are clearly on display for all to see and this was no exception. I found the film funny, though not hilarious, but it was all in the performances and little to do with the story, which for all intents and purposes was threadbare at best.

It had something to do with Clooney’s lawyer falling for a gold-digging serial divorcee and his life and outlook changing as a result. This has the usual Coen comedic misadventures and misunderstandings that we’ve come expect, with previous Coen films such as Fargo, Miller’s Crossing and The Big Lebowski to serve as examples.

The story though, seemed to be underwritten with little to speak off and nothing to really spoil as nothing significant seems to happen. Worth a watch for the great performances, especially a first reel cameo from Geoffrey Rush and Clooney charm but don’t expect this to be a great work, because it deciding wasn’t.

PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: THE CURSE OF THE BLACK PEARL

2003

10/10

DIRECTOR: Gore Verbinski

It began life as a ride. It became one of the most iconic movie franchises of all time, propelling its stars into the mainstream, particularly Johnny Depp, who many may not remember, though a house hold name but was still only teetering on stardom. Since then, many have disparaged his Keith Richard’s inspired performance as being over top, old hat and just plain overrated, but for the most part, I’m not one of them.

The film’s first two sequels severely damaged the good work done here, but that shouldn’t take away from what Pirates Of The Caribbean has achieved. Pirate films have always been regarded as fun, but when you think about it, there aren’t many striking examples, without going as far back as the 1930′s/40′s with the likes of Errol Flynn and his Sea Hawks to fly the flag for this swashbuckling drama.

But here we are presented with a film which gives us an image of pirates as we would expect, with arrhs! and my heartys!, old ships and more rum than you could ever drink, or want to for that matter. Geoffrey Rush’s, Captain Barbossa is the epitome of the old school pirate, whilst Depp’s, Captain Jack Sparrow is something else all together. Funny and entertaining, he thinks of himself as the worlds best pirate, but in fact is just very, very lucky.

Then we’re presented with Keira Knightly’s, The Governor’s Daughter, and the local blacksmith Orlando Bloom to complete our cast, who spend the next two and half hours trotting through everything you could expect from such a film, only doing it so well that it feels original. And that’s because it actually was.

We have never had a pirate film like this before. Visually stunning, with everything you’d expect from a Bruckheimer blockbuster with perfect pacing, action, adventure and drama, though notably, not so much drama that it becomes bogged down by it, as its sequels did.

Its tongue was firmly in its cheek and it knew what it was, though the audience had yet to learn. This is a film that never tried to be anything but what you saw on the screen and that was fun, exiting family entertainment, universally acceptable for all ages without compromising anything. This is certainly one of the templates for how to make films of this sort and it’s a crying shame that its ill begotten sequels, with the exception of On Stranger Tides,  didn’t follow it.

I remember that Johnny Depp was nominated for an Oscar in 2004 for his portrayal of Sparrow and many people scoffed at the idea. I didn’t. Depp broke into the big leagues with this and it was well deserved after years of hard work and many great performances, though the character is a sight gag and will only work for so long. It may well have already passed…

PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN: ON STRANGER TIDES (3D)

2011

8/10

DIRECTOR: Rob Marshall

CINEMA REVIEW

Will we be adding this to our collection? Yes

Based, believe it or not, loosely, on the Tim Powers novel, On Stranger Tides, Pirates 4 seemed about as appealing as hole in the head after the diabolical sequels to the excellent first outing. Then it was to be in 3D, scrap several key characters and shed the direction of Gore Verbinski, in favour of Chicago’s, Rob Marshall. A recipe for disaster? It seemed that way.

Though saying that, Gore had certainly sealed his fate with me, turning what was a well conceived, action adventure romp with some very memorable characters into an unnecessary epic saga which seriously missed the point and derailed itself. One dubious decision taken in the production of Dead Man’s Chest, was to keep Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightly’s characters, let alone giving them so much prominence.

Knightly was fine, for the first film,. in fact, she was spot on, but she couldn’t carry the role any further and began to look ridiculous as the series progressed. This should have been the adventures of Jack Sparrow, so excellently portrayed by Johnny Depp, and Geoffrey Rush’s, Barbossa was the perfect pirate. So I was more than pleased to see the continuing adventures of these two characters, with Depp, returning to form after I felt that he had lost it in the sequels.

Penélope Cruz was another pleasant surprise, as never being a fan of her’s, I was dubious but this was casting done properly. She was more than convincing as a pirate and put Knightly’s efforts to shame. But what of Ian McShane’s Blackbeard? Well, another great showing from him, but the inexplicable magic displayed as he waves in his 3D sword around and points it at the camera to remind us that 3D is here, not so much.

But the 3D was pretty naff. You could watch most of the film without the glasses, with the effect being limited to several sequences. It looked good, it was inoffensive and unobtrusive but what was the point again? I don’t think that this film will do 3D any real harm but that’s because nobody really noticed it in the first place.

The sense of adventure from the The Curse Of The Black Pearl was evident here and long over due. I find it puzzling as to why so many reviews have been so harsh, branding it boring, overly complicated and not pulled together properly, but I would disagree. Granted, it is a bit scrappy, it’s not going to be used as case study in tight scripting, or deep character development and it is somewhat derivative, but it was fun, flashy and flamboyant.

Isn’t this what these films are all about? Depp created a classic character with Sparrow back in 2003, and tough I felt that he was a one trick pony, Sparrow that is, not Depp, this was a partial return to form, under new direction from Marshall. But I am left feeling that no matter how much I enjoyed this for what it was, the first Pirates Of The Caribbean was a film which successfully transferred a theme park ride into a career defining blockbuster, but I feel that it should have remained one film, a single triumph and not a franchise that has been saved in my eyes, by the fourth installment.

Open email to Mayo & Kermode’s Film Review (BBC Radio 5 Live)

On the 11th of May, we found ourselves in Screen 20 of our local Odeon, where I got a bee in my bonnet about the lack of black borders on-screen. I complained and was very politely responded to and was mostly happy with the way my complaint was dealt with.

But, the response to the complaint itself was less satisfying. I was informed that it wasn’t an error and that with the introduction of Digital Cinema, the black borders and the adjustment of the screen ratio has gone and will no longer take place. In the case of the film that we watched, Something Borrowed, it was presented in 1.85:1, but was projected onto a unrectified screen ratio of 2:35:1.

At this rate they will just end up projecting films onto a white wall, with zero interest in presenting a film properly.

Below is the email which I have sent to Radio 5:

“I would just like to bring this issue to your attention, though I must warn you that it is a bit geeky. But this is kind of issue that Mark may well appreciate as it involves the Digital revolution and the further erosion of traditional cinema values. First it was the removal of the velvet curtain, than actual film from the projectors, now, the screen masking.

As you know, the screen ratio is adjusted for each film by moving black curtains on the side of the screen, reducing the width from 2:35:1 (Cinemascope) to 1.85:1, etc… The black masking curtains were also used to conceal the blurring around the edge of the image as this was a problem with projecting film.

This is not a problem when projecting a digital image though and the masking qualities of the black border are now null and void. This would seem to be the basis for a major cinema chain’s decision to scrap the border all together and now they are projecting any sized image on to the full width screen which looks shoddy in my opinion.

It just seems to me that a television screen is more faithful in the recreation of the image that a cinema screen and when they’re charging just short of a tenner for the privilege of seeing a film on the big screen, this just seems to be taking the Michael! I would just like to see just a little effort given to the presentation of a film, but since it’s now just become a bums of seats exercise, I feel that it’s all down hill for the future of cinema. I can see many advantages to digital, but it seems that I can present a film to same standard if not better at home, so why spend at the cinema…? Shame…”

MEET JOE BLACK

1998

7/10

DIRECTOR: Martin Brest

Meet Joe Black is a very long film. 172 minutes for a story about Death taking human form to learn about life from the opulent Managing Director, Anthony Hopkins, who is literally at death’s door after suffering a heart attack. In exchange for more time, Hopkins takes Death, in the form of Bard Pitt, under his wing and they show each other how to live, blar, blar, blar.

It’s actually a very well presented film, with top acting, the exception being the ever annoying Claire Forlani, who plays Hopkins daughter and Death’s love interest. The pacing is delicate; The narrative is slow, but never really boring but is way too long for the subject. It seems to have been stretched out beyond all reason and does not need to be over 120 minutes, if even that.

The story has little peril and little in the way of incident. Just the overriding plotlines about Hopkins life’s work being usurped by his number one, his desire for his daughter to find love and the his own impending death. It is nice, gentle and unlikely to offend but it’s also ponderous at times.

But this is the Brad Pitt, complete with his early cheeky charm, before Ocean’s Eleven ruined him and made him into the self-assured, cocky icon. Joe Black, along with his role in David Fincher’s Se7en, stand as proof that he was a great actor before he became the Brad Pitt of the naughties.

 

RIGHTEOUS KILL

2008

7/10

DIRECTOR: Jon Avnet

About half way through this cop thriller, Brian Dennehy, 70, is stood in his office discussing the case with his two detectives, Al Pacin0, 68 and Robert De Nero, 66. He makes a crack about their combined experience being 110 years on the job, a jibe necessary to abate the audiences concerns, but when he makes a serious point about getting this case wrong and jeopardising their pensions, I found myself laughing as I wondered why these two men where already drawing them!

Seriously, with all due respect to these guys, they are in their late sixties and they look it too! Granted they can still move and are fit but I found it almost incomprehensible that no-one in that precinct seemed to care about their ages. How many detectives  are still working over the age of 60? Really? But, leaving that on one side for the minute, the long anticipated pairing of the Pacino and De Nero, the first since Michael Mann’s Heat, which had very little shared screen time, was nice to see.

Was it any good? Well, the pairing, no, not really but the film itself wasn’t bad. It follows the investigation of a serial killer hunting down villains, and it looks more and more like a cop as the film progresses. Is it obvious who it is? Are we going to be subjected an epic twist? Yes, and No, not really. It is obvious from outset as to who the shooter is but the heavyweight acting of our two leads help to keep is us distracted for few minutes here and there.

The film is much more entertaining than the plot is, mind, a narrative which believes more in itself that it should do. Paint by numbers suspense interspersed with hard-core S & M, zippy dialogue and fast passing makes this  film into nothing more than a decent 97 minute cop thriller, and not the movie event than many had expected. Shame.

 

MY BEST FRIEND’S GIRL

2008

6/10

DIRECTOR: Howard Deutch

This is a pretty straight forward rom-com about a man, Jason Biggs, who is madly in love a work mate, Kate Hudson, and his best mate, Dane Cook is a professional arse-hole who is paid to date women who have been wronged by their boyfriends to show them how bad a date can get in order to send them back to their boyfriends. Get it?

But when Cook is employed by Biggs to show Hudson a bad time, it back fires as the pair fall for each other, leaving Biggs out in the cold with epic porn collection. But as the film plays out, it’s not really till the end that I know who we’re supposed to be rooting for, Biggs or Cook? Neither really, but someones gotta win I suppose.

Apart from an over the top but otherwise funny performance from Alex Baldwin who used to be serious actor once, I think, this was nothing special. It was still funny though and if you like exuberant teen/twenty something comedies then this will hit the mark but is far from a classic.