bpstraycat Reviews

Transformers (2007)

brilliant comic-book fantasy

[9/10 · 9 December 2007]

Went into this film with negative expectations, and left with the satisfying feeling of having watched something worthwhile and refreshing in the current political and social climate. For me the clinch point of the movie was its reliance on the comic-book genre, with specific set-piece 'storyboard' - style images accompanied with very few words - just like a comic.

Because the story and the whole experience is centred on alien creatures, the performances of the human actors had to be subordinate to the supreme beings from outer space, and the director delivered this big-time.

A greatly satisfying part of this movie was that it wasn't an all-American 'flag waving' exercise. Sure the robots were engaged in a battle obviously taking place in some US city, and the human heroes were clearly American, but it carefully avoided the normal cop-out involving multiple shots of the Stars and Stripes going into battle to vanquish yet another evil empire. In fact, in this film, it is the invaders themselves who, with the help of the humans, manage to provide the viewer with a very real sense of wonderment and appreciation of the movie for what it is - first-rate, engaging and surreal fantasy.

I Heart Huckabees (2004)

Oh no not again......

[2/10 · 20 November 2007]

Soul-searching, meaningless and time-wasting pseudism from a soul-searching, meaningless and pseudy director. If the message of this film is to brand all those who offer alternatives to organised religion as posers and nutcases, then it should do it with more honesty. It is hard for me to convey to you, dear reader, the extent of the sheer pointless waste of money this film represents. The plot does not exist, the characters are so unbelievable that they simply never materialise as individuals. Whatever the message of the distracted director may be, the result is a cowardly and intellectually bankrupt justification for this trite and tiresome exposure of his own vanity and inability to present, discuss and expand potentially interesting issues. I would have given it a 1/10 rating had it not been for Dustin Hoffman's presence, but even that was so limp I cannot manage more than 2/10. Watch it if your head is empty - or alternatively, pour water in your ears - you will end up more enlightened.

A Pure Formality (1994)

More here than many may think, or want to think

[9/10 · 10 May 2007]

Marvellous work. Demanding of actors, director and audience. The dialogue fills the screenspace, the performances of the two main characters are masterpieces of consistency. I enjoyed it from start to finish and I hope you do as well.

The director keeps ratcheting up the tension and letting it fall back using very few devices. It has the feel of a stage play, and would perhaps transfer very well to the theatre.

Although some accuse the director of over-complicating things, I find the whole to be satisfying and simple. The lack of clarity of the storyline reflects the confusion in Depardieu's head.

If you want non-intellectual action, this film is not for you.

The Constant Gardener (2005)

more non-artistic art........yawn yawn yawn

[3/10 · 10 May 2007]

I suppose it's interesting for people who don't watch non-Hollowood films to see hand-held camera, machine-gun edited 'cinema modern'. To anyone who saw all this stuff 15 years ago it looks very out of date. The problem is that the film makes assumptions about the audience, and tries to satisfy by delivering dummed-down Le Carre, spiced up with a few trendy camera and 'fast-forward' effects.

The opening 'protest speech' of the heroine, Tessa, is a masterpiece of cinematic buffoonery. It's sadly downhill from there, as we trudge through a ploughed field of stereotypes - the perfidious FCO man (who looks a bit like Gordon Brown - that was funny), Sandy, the naughty British businessmen who cant seem to say anything with more than 4 letters, the condescending portrayal of the Kenyans and the little infra-dig digs at 'racism'.....

Instead of this rather weedy excuse for spending a lot of money, try watching 'Noi Albinoi'

Shaun of the Dead (2004)

if you don't like this then be careful of the man with the cricket bat

[10/10 · 7 October 2006]

Tom ex-Crusiating and Brad Pitts-of-the-earth and all the rest of those over-paid, undertalented nut-cases in Hollywood should be strapped to chairs, have their eyes and ears superglued open and be forced to watch this. It was made on a budget about the same as a Jolie nice dress and it contains more fun in one minute than in the whole filmography of 99% of Hollywouldnt stars. None of the people in this film tried to influence governments of third world countries to close their borders just because some chick was having a baby. None of these people are trying to convert the world to follow their own scientific system of taking your money. Its a real film,people. Watch it and don't support the sinister manipulators of science! Sometimes only a cricket bat will do!

Down in the Valley (2005)

there is still life in the corpse of the US movie industry

[7/10 · 3 October 2006]

This is a cowboy film simply and cleverly re-worked to bring the make-believe violence of Hollywood's westerns into a modern setting. In this world the bullets hurt, the victims are real, convincingly boring people, leading convincingly boring lives in a convincingly boring town. The director even invokes a cowboy-like 'horse rustling' scene, but filmed it as though it really might happen. The invention and creativity of this film is in its dead-pan portrayal and its desire to convince rather than to fantasise. The slow pace of the development of the story is important to help convey the realism - things like this do not happen overnight. The sense of emptiness in all of the characters' lives hits you like a headshot. A fine film, with nods to taxi driver (existentialism) and Badlands (dissfunctional society). The character of the cowboy is comparable (in a rather naive way) to Meursault in Albret Camus' 'The Stranger'.

In general - worth it! Why does Hollywood turn out nonsensical cinematic soap-operas when the US film industry can produce meaningful works of cinema?

Of Mice and Men (1992)

A successful film that gives rise to many of questions

[8/10 · 17 June 2006]

If you feel like sitting down and watching something thought-provoking without becoming too 'Peter Greenaway', then have a look here - a sound and 'safe' story of a man with a mental disability and his friend.

The film deals with some very deep subjects. Social attitudes are displayed but not analysed. The only black character in the film is discriminated against more than the mentally-deficient white man. At the time of the writing of Stenibeck's novel (1938) this was a far more relevant message than it is today. Malkovich is excellent in the role of the main character: his portrayal elicits both sympathy and understanding from the audience in the face of homicidal brutality.

In isolation, this is a worthy piece of work and should have had a lot more recognition than it received. As an adaptation of a novel written when the world was a very different place, it is a true and fine reflection of attitudes of the time.

Here ends to review of the film. Now begins a wider topic:

I am sure the 1938 novel was ground-breaking in its treatment of a handicapped person as a real human being. At that time, for whatever reason, Steinbeck decided that his main character should in fact turn out to be a murderer. Civilisation has moved on since then, however, and just as the prejudice shown towards to black character is unthinkable today, then so should be the tendency in the cinema to portray mentally handicapped people as dangerous psycopaths.

In the context of many other movies that deal with mental disorder, this is yet another story of a 'very gentle' maniac who wins our sympathy but ultimately never our trust. Look at 'Slingblade','Cuckoos Nest' and a lot of other 'understandable lunatic' films and you will see that although the audience is invited to identify and condemn the injustice that society delivers to the mentally ill, the carpet is pulled from under them because the handicapped person they are just getting to know and to understand and sympathise with turns out to be a darkly negative character, thus reinforcing the prejudices the audience had when they entered the movie theatre. This is an insidious and even dangerous trend. Why bother to lead people up a blind alley?

When is Hollywood going to grow up and realise that most people suffering from mental disorders are not homicidal and are on the contrary highly valuable human beings. When will there be a truly credible and positive mentally-retarded lead character on the screen who does not end with his hands in a bath of blood? I am not talking about 'comic-book retards' like Forest Gump or the proto-lunatics (no pun intended) living on K-Pax.

Mentally deficient people are not all murderers. 'Of Mice and Men' is a film showing attitudes from 80 years or so ago. As such it an engaging and positive work. Film makers who deal with modern scripts set in the present should not resort to the prejudices of 80 years ago.

Crash (1996)

Watch this movie

[3/10 · 8 June 2006]

This film concerns horrific subjects: Mutilation, death, and just about the silliest set of sexual perversions one can imagine. The worst thing about is that despite its total commitment to portraying filth in a very boring way, it is a lot better than many of the pathetic moralistic stories with which the US film industry continues to carpet-bomb the world. Watch this film, then wonder why this nonsense is more engaging than 80% of films made in Hollywood in the last ten years.

When you have trudged through the lack of story, the superfluous sex, the very unattractive characters and all the rest of this megadeath of monstrosity, maybe you can consider that the author, JG Ballard, (one of the finest writers of contemporary psychodelic nightmares), is trying to make fun of the car-caressing, fender-feeling, specification - sucking class of humans who live and breathe auto-masturbation. This movie has cars, engines, naked girls, the whole lot. The only factor that defines it as imagination is that they are all torn and disfugered. However they retain their intrinsic functions.

Watch it - I really recommend it. Then watch 'Priscilla, Queen of the Desert' as an antidote to our own crashing stupidity.

The Remains of the Day (1993)

First class cinema

[8/10 · 19 May 2006]

This delightful film deals with questions of duty and circumstance. On one hand, the character played with considerable finesse by Edward Fox is a well-meaning but horribly miss-informed man who, by an accident of birth, has found himself in a position to play a role in far-reaching international events, leading to the suffering of the second world war. On the other hand, we are given Anthony Hopkins, a well-meaning but horribly under-informed man, who, by an accident of birth, makes mistakes in his personal life that eventually lead him to regret.

The juxtaposition of the two characters allow the viewer to consider the nature of both official and personal decisions - that good nature and a desire to serve a perception of 'what is right' can lead honorable people to despair.

This complex and demanding subject was handled superbly by James Ivory, (the director) and his actors. I recommend this film to anyone who wants more than visual excitement. Schmoo says Emma Thompson is very pretty.

The Road to Wellville (1994)

This film is not a film

[1/10 · 17 May 2006]

I have rarely seen such a feast of bad-taste tosh in my life. One or two 'jokes' about bowel movements could be funny....two could be amusing.....but this film, dedicated to that end of the alimentary canal is about as much fun to watch as it is to receive the endless enemas it delights in bringing to our close attention. Parker's characters are shallow and boring. Hopkins plays a one-dimensional puritanical sadist. He abused his adopted son, likes to humiliate his patients, is impotent and does things to his own backside with devices. Fantastic. This character could have been generated by computer. What happened to Parker's creativity? The story simply does not exist. There is no relation at all between the various threads and they have no influence on the main storyline because it is either totally lacking or so weak as to be invisible. However I fear the most important criticism I have of this sorry waste of money is that it is simply NOT AT ALL FUNNY. During the entire, dragging, boring debacle, there were perhaps two occasions when it was worth a slight smile. Does Parker really think it is necessary to show a man in a shower with filthy underpants and then give us a close-up of the brown-black waste water emanating from them? Is it funny for a man to have an erection because of electrical charges applied to his feet? (Incidently this joke was played for several minutes and several scenes in the film.) Parker directed with a total lack of taste and finesse. I would like to take a copy of this lame disaster, and just as Mr. Parker wasted a couple of precious hours of my life showing me his sad anal fixation fantasies, procure a jar of Vaseline and then introduce him to new ways of 'enjoying film'.

This film should have stayed where it belonged - on the cutting room floor. Parker - hang your head in shame, Sir!

All Quiet on the Western Front (1979 TV Movie)

Extraordinary failure

[2/10 · 28 April 2006]

Amazing - how can anyone place actors like Borgnine and Thomas in German uniforms?......it is the most miss-cast film I have seen for years. Thomas is very wooden and Borgnine is just plain funny...he can hardly speak English, let alone portray a convincing German!

Due to the appalling blunders of the casting team, the film lacks atmosphere. If we consider faithfulness to the original book and 'hollywood goofing-off', I am afraid this film aspires to the former but ends up as the latter. The battle scenes are cheap and unrealistic.

Imagine a cowboy film with a German cast all speaking English in horrific accents - but just imagine it, please, and don't waste your time watching this movie.

What a shame - could have been great with German actors........(why did they have to use Americans?)

The Night Porter (1974)

Requires brainpower.........Hollywood film lovers beware!

[9/10 · 27 April 2006]

A deeply disturbing and beautiful film, The Night Porter still manages to arouse emotion so many years after it first appeared. The performances are superb, with Bogarde and Rampling in fine form. I particularly liked the scenes involving the ex - SS men and their 'alcoholics anonymous' - style meetings. There is a slight problem with the synchronisation of speech and film on my copy - and the quality makes it sound like it was very hastily re-dubbed (with the original actors). I wonder if anyone else has this feeling? In any case, the film works on many levels. The atmosphere established by the director is oppressive and dingy....you can feel it yourself.....its like a cold day in autumn when it is steely-grey and rainy outside...

SO...watch this movie! (Unless you enjoy films like 'Rock Star'!)

Rock Star (2001)

This film is a soap opera.....do not bother with it!

[1/10 · 27 April 2006]

Well........how and where do I start to describe this utter nonsense? Imagine the morals of a cheesy Hollywood Western, throw in a lavish helping of the most trite soap opera storyline, and try to dupe the kids into thinking its cool by dressing it up to be about something 'contemporary'. This film is all package and absolutely no substance.

It starts with promise......young men dreaming of becoming rockstars and engaging in the kind of excessive hero-worship everyone can laugh at. After that, it all goes downhill.....quicker than a bobsleigh with no brakes. The scene involving the first gig with Steel Dragon is one of the most pathetic pieces of 'cine kitsch' I have seen in a long time. The singer appears on stage for his debut and falls down some stairs.....will he get up and sing???......or will he stay there on the floor and not sing......who cares by now?? It gets worse, but I don't want to bore myself by having to remember it in all its excruciating detail. If you watch it after this review, its your own fault!