My Favorite Movies

That has been one of the greatest movies I have seen in a long time .Very impressive cast and direction by Clint Eastwood. A gripping experience which made the audience in the cinema speechless and touched when the curtain fell. Based on a true story, the direction is very gentle and traditional (as to classic Hollywood pre 50s). An unmissable masterpiece in movie making and storytelling, that should not be missed.

By far my favourite of the four Rutherford Marple movies. Set on a ship, Marple investiages a series of mysterious murders on and off board the ship. The setting heightens the densitiy and sense of isolation for Miss Marple and make the movie the more enjoying. A very good supporting cast round up this cozy classic whodunnit. One of the best.

Brilliant Movie, the goofyspook, burtonesque theme is a wonderful thing to dwelve into, especially in cozy evenings at home. A good successor of the three short movies by Ardman. Although I found Ralph Fiennes' voicework was a bit heartless. Go see it !

Nowadays, a movie with such a strange structure would be hard to sell to audiences which are more unwilling to engage in active consumation than ever. The Warriors follows a gang of outcasts on their struggle to get back to their home turf. What sounds like a Greek play, is actually based on one. The cast is good, but expect strong, onedimensional characters, but lots of flavour. The movie was made in 1979 and you can smell the sleaze all over it, which is a good thing. Husky men, racy women, a pulsating soundtrack and more gangs dressed in wicked clothes than you can think of. The movie feels a bit like a survival movie as well, because the question of how makes it and who does not is strongly emphasized.

Cult classic
H.

A nice, sophisticated movie. The dialogues are witty and humourful alongside and exceptional cast, especially the supports (Kirby & Fishers) add a lot of wholeheartness to the movie. The soundtrack oozes into your ears, a genretypical mix of Armstrong-like crooner and holiday classics. Contains some classic scenes, like the fake orgasm by Ryan or the four-way telephone conference by the leads. That is four stars from me, I just found Billy Crystal's character written a bit too heavy in the beginning, made it hard for him to grow on him later on.

What an extraordinary imaginative and well directed movie that was. The story is about a gang of boys, led by the somewhat off-beatish boy Dick who form a gang called the "Dandies", a secret society obsessed with classic marksmanship and honor codes. The movie adressess many issues on a very subtle and beautifully mellow level. The question of gun possession, how modern weaponry and warfare went over the top, especially in the context of youth politics. The movie has the quirkyness and love for its characters like a Wes Anderson movie, but also sports the brooding Post-America atmosphere of Lars von Trier and David Lynch movies. The cast is brilliant, from Pullman to Jamie Bell, so is the 60ies OST. I strongly recommend this movie to my friends here at Flixster, you will be surprised and raising your eyebrows at times but cannot help to be immersed, forced to rethink often and of course entertained by this work of art.

H.

A brilliant movie ! A very unusual and thus interesting story. The movie follows the basic rom-com formula with a kinky (very kinky) twist of BDSM to it, which makes it the more enjoyable. The two leads are excellently played and cast, which is not as easy it may seem, considering the offbeat theme of the movie. The ending lost the movie a half a star there for me, which was unnecessary light and happy. I reckon, the director wanted to make a very strong statement regarding the fact that sadomasochism can be a wonderful thing as well, but he used a overweight brush to paint that picture.
H.

Schneider's 1001 Movies you have to see before you die, No. 1.

A visionary sci-fi spectacle depicting a "voyage" to the moon. Yet, the movie is far from being realistic (whatever these realistic ideas regarding lunar travel may have been), but feels like a Da Vinci, Steampunk and Fantasy mash up. The special effects are impressive and there are some I still cannot explain technically when watching it. The sets and costumes are great as well. The movie also features the famous scene / shot of the rocket being stuck in the moon's eye which is a motive prominently featured in pop cutlure and it was nice to finally see it within its original cinematic context. Melies was a pioneer of movie making both in terms of technique and artistic vision and I am impressed with his choice of going for something bold and daring as lunar travel, considering this were the infant days of movie making.

You can tell that prior to moviemaking (obviosuly) theatre and stage productions were still the go-to medium / form of entertainment and creativity (visually). Many shots in this movie are totals and have a stage-like feel to it and when it comes to the composition of the elements (the gathering of scholars, the men entering the spaceship etc.). One of my fellow reviewers noted how the rocket hitting the moon in the eye would be a de tour of the main storyline, but I kind of disagree. If you take many contemporary mainstream, especially "family" and "childrens" movies into account, they usually blend a serious storyline (LOTR, POTC, Disney movies) with some reliefing (catharsian) funny elements, such as Gollum and Sam quarreling with each other, or Jack Sparrow's charms or all the cute little critters supporting the heroes in Disney movies. For me, the whole movie was a bit of a satire of human endeveour in general, mocking the will to surpass our fate and nature by launching rockets to the moon (nearly a Faustian scenario). The rocket in the moon's may very well be a comment on "nature's" take on the whole undertaking. After all, the humans in this movie decide to destroy whoever it is they encounter on the other planet, which is another harsh comment.

The acting is of course very dramatic in the purest sense of stage acting. Elaborated gestures and a high priority on readability, which works fine with in a fantastic movie, as you do not really expect anything to be normal anyway. The movie is part of a tradition (which was still ongoing) of speculative fiction, think Jules Verne and think (ahead) H.G. Wells. These authors (and this film) had a very Da Vinci'esque take on science fiction, trying to resolve physical problems with a very tongue-in-cheek approach, which makes it so interesting for people to watch, because you do not need to be a computer of physics geek to appreciate the works.

Highly recommended,

Next on the list: 2. The great Train robbery

Henrik

A very interesting movie mirroring the ambivalence of human morale. It is hard to position yourself as the movie ends and that is a very good "illustration" of the peciularness we are facing when it comes to deciding what is good and what is evil.

A good cast, the mixture of experienced actors and newcomers as well as the different national backgrounds make this an interesting ensemble piece to watch.

A beautiful and perfect fairy talesque story about a young English boy who ditches his boxing class for ballet lessons only to face various obstacles such as his unappreciative working class familiy and the challeng of learning ballet itself. A wonderful film and a very believable cast. Inspiring, not to miss. The soundtrack is loaded with nice T.Rex tunes and the dancing scenes are not too flashy (think Musicals), but are very subtly realized and make you actually want to watch Billy dance.

An extraordinary eerie and strange movie. A policeman is send to a remote island to investigate the disapperance of a young girl, only the become entangled into the web of a paganistic cult.

The movie has the feel of a 70ies camp movie, using many excuses (Paganism) to show naked women strolling and dancing around, leaning against graves or dancing around a bonfire (reminded me of the 1922 movie Haxan). While I was a bit put off by that in the beginning, it made sense in terms of the narrative later on and fitted well into the setting. The cast is solid, and apart from Christopher Lee, recruited out of the B-Ranks. Actually, Christopher Lee agreed to take part in this movie for free.

While the movie does not have lots of twists (except in the end), yet the brooding eariness and especially the growing uncomfortability of the police officer and the challenges to his Christian beliefs are a very interesting thing to observe. Christoper Lee pulls off hsi classic Lord of Terror thing here, which I found a bit of a heartless and formal performance.

The movie is entertaining and gritty and I highly recommend it.

A note on the movie's underlying anthropological assumptions. While I can understand how the portrayal of the islanders as ruthless pagans works for this movie, I strongly object any notions of taking this circumstance for real. Paganistic beliefs are far more rational and sensible than Christianity and people should not forget that.

Henrik

Tranquility and isolation paired up with tenderness and the fascination of glimpsing into the lives of others make this my favourite arthouse movie ever. The story of a retired mineworker discovering the magic of American Blues which sends him on a personal, as well as actual journey into the heartland of America. Amazing and mezmerizing, this movie is most definetly not for everyone, as it is a far cry from Hollywood cinema, being far too subtle, slow and simple. Don't be fooled though, behind it's lighthearted touch breeds a heavy philosophy of self-discovery and love for all things beautiful and human.

Hard to digest, yet very warm and full of melancholic beauty at times. Robert De Niro's performance alone make this movie worthwhile. As does the solid acting by Robin Wlliiams and the hand-picked rest of the cast. The movie is very tragic and the ending is not much of a happy end (dont want to spoil it), but that makes it even more likeable. It respects his characters and is, after all, based on a true story (Actually, it is based on a non-fiction book by Oliver Sacks, M.D. which is a good read btw.) So, I do recommend this movie, especially if you are a fan of Williams and/or De Niro.
H.

Fascinating documentary depicitng lives of peope who have a 'special' and unusual way of creating their immediate home. Be at the man living on a boat in the everglades, the cat family or the kooky inventor who plans to be reborn in a humanoid robot he built.

An entertaining, yet enlighting view of how people are able to construct their lives according to their own beliefs and imaginations.

An gritty documentary portraying the creeping decay of an English suburbian 'working men's club'. While each and every men looks somehwere else for an explanation for what is happening, they all share the gloomy awareness of the advent which pronounces the extinction of a proper homogenous British working class. A very sad but pointagnt documentary you should not miss if you are interested in those kind of issues.

Ava Gardner: " He sent me down here. I think he did not know what to do with me."
Gregory Peck. "That is debatable"

A great post-apocalyptic scenarion set in Australia, depicting the various lifes of people involved with the disaster and how they cope with it and the time they have left. One thing that always struck me as weird, was how limited the number of nuclear craze movies Hollywood produced that were at least partially realistic and dialect. The cold war led to put out of hundreds of giant monster movies but only a handful of "serious" tackles of the topic.

This movie is a prime example, grim, gritty and throwing many questions at you. Gregory Peck is one of my favourite leading man in Hollywood (past era) and he agains proves me right in this picture. Ava Gardner clearly enjoys her first non-contract film work, while Anthony Perkins is as cringing to look at as ever.

The movie is very raunchy, with many drinking and sexual references, I would even go as far and not call them references at all. In one scene, Ava Gardner's characters ask Peck's character what he thinks about when he is at the dentist: "Do you think about the most beautiful thing ? Sex ?".

I give Stanley Kramer two thumbs up for this.Without spoiling the ending, it is refreshingly non-hollywood.

The only weak spot of the movie is, see above, Anthony Perkins and every scene containing him, which are unfortunately quite a few. He is a terrible actor and I had to fast forward his sequences, I could not take it.

All in all, an interestng movie which, despite its cast, direction and overall American feel, is a bit off-beat and quirky as well.

A fantastic premise and innovation make this a milstone of cinema history. A story about the perfect murder, two men trying to commit bult ultimately fail as it lies in human nature to fear, doubt and be arrogant. The movie is infanmous for its quirky realization, filmed in 10 takes, the movie feels like a very dense play, with the actors being more in focus than in many other movies. The set is amazing, you have to love Hitchcock to create an apartment including an artifical sunset (which looks beautiful). Despite the story not being the focus of the movie, the aforementioned formalities make the movie great. James Stewart, as always, is brillaint and mezmerizing. The movie has the typical mix of playful eeriness, black and maccabre humour and stone cold looks. Unfortunately, Granger and Dall are very weak actors and the costed my rating half a star.

The movie is also a tip of the hat to homosexuality, which I think is a very brave and courageous thing to do in Hollywood, and it earned the movie some bans and only a limited success, but to me, it is one of the arguments that works for the movie. Still, within the movie, it does not really matter whether the men are gay or not, and thus should not be of any signifcance anyway.

H.

A wonderful, tender and heartwarming movie about a boy who is send away to the countryside to stay with "Mr.Tom" The grumpy old man is reluctant to get close to the boy at first, as he is still in mourning over his wife. Yet, as he lears more about the fate of the boy he understands that they do have more in common than he first thought.

The movie is very sad and mellow, but directed without any melodramatic effects and although the plot is quite heavy and tragic, the movie does not feel overloaded but subtle and observant. Furthermore, the movie is set in the beautiful British countryside, which adds both to the theme of singular tragedies and isolation, as well as making the movie very enjoyable to watch. The cast is very good, especially the lead character (John Thaw).

Brilliant movie
Henrik

Stand Up Comdey, as good as it gets. Very musical, witty and enjoyable. Higly recommended and worth the money and time !

The Perfect Western. Howard Hawks, John Wayne, Robert Mitchum, Saloon Fights, Shootouts, Purple Mountain Majesties and so on, you get the picture.

A brilliant movie which basically works due to the great acting of its lead characters, especially John Wayne and Robert Mitchum, whose free-for-all acting style firs perfectly into the setting of some Wild West Outland.

The movie is pretty much a remake of Rio Bravo, a movie which features a bunch of rejects fight of the supposedly stronger enemy.

So to speak, both movies are what I would call "Survival Westerns" (as in Survival Horror) because the setting is very narrow, the main characters limited and the danger closing in.

An interesting genre which - I think - just made up.

Anway, highly recommonded if you like Westerns and if you don't. this is the perfect way to start liking them.

H.

Charming German "Heimat"-movie. The story of a butch crook who pretends to be a priest in order to remain undiscovered. Yet, through his involuntary change of place in the world he begins to question his own ways and views of moraiity. A very slow paced but beautiful little gem. I reckon it is nearly impossible to track this movie down outside of Germany, so I will refrain from recommending it to my friends.

This movie is a breathtakingly "round" package with every little detail of the film being masterfully executed, acting, soundtrack, set design, cinematography, story, sfx etc. It has been a long time since I could appreciate a movie in its full broadness like this.

Sam Rockwell plays his role(s) so virtous, yet it looks so easy, that he reminded me of such greats as De Niro and Pacino, with their seemingly effortless portrayal of the most outrageous situations. The set design, both interiour and exteriour are gorgeous and I love that the film feels like a 70ies Sci-Fi classic (2001, Silent Running etc.) instead of some CGI-fuelled braindead fest for eyes but not what lies behind it. The OST is great and I noticed at the beginning already that I am in for a treat for the ears as well. Kevin Spacey does well as the robot, but the brilliance of his "character" lies in the character design really.

The only setback I had were some unpolished story arcs and a kind of strange pace here and there, characters getting used to weird situations to fast to make the movie go on, which kind of put me off. Furthermore, the ending was terrible and a gem like this deserves a better one, because it kind of leaves you wtth your breath stuck in your mouth although you expected to gasp it out, but nothing really happens which prompts you to do so.

Still, amazing piece of work, not to be missed !

Of all mystery cliches, the mystery on a train is my favourite, that and a haunted house maybe, I was never the biggest fan of the Rathbone versions of Sherlock Holmes. They are very pulp, render Watson to a doofus and are usually extremely patriotic (Holmes was British !). Anyway, this is one of the better films Rathbone/Bruce made. The usual mix of sleuthing, screwball humour and film noir visuals. Highly recommended if you are a fan of Holmes or the classic whodunnit. The conclusion is a bit obvious though.

Wonderful, lyrican and tender bit melancholy. Pixars sense for beauty and magic reminds me of the pioneer spirit qualities Disney posessed when they kicked off.

Nolan takes the campy comic book hero of Burton's movies (let alone those botched attempts in between) and transports Batman into the present, which is dense, bleak and not funny at all. Christian Bale again lets his infinite pool of anger and hatred ooze of the silverscreen and turns a franchise (just like Terminator) into the story of one man turning one-man-gang and vigilante. The prequel to the Batman setting nicely rounds up the character, deepening his inner drive and motivation, casting the much needed shadow of broodyness on the Dark Knight. Thus, both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight introduce the core philosophy of a vengeance seeking crusader into franchise, moral ambiguity, the question of right and wrong and the ultimate goal of justice. While Batman begins does not take these issues as far as The Dark Knight, is does a good job of making Batman a far more interesting character than in Burton's movies, playing off the man that is Bruce Wayne and the idea that is Batman off against each other nicely. Michael Caine adds a touch of class to the movie and his screen presence decorates the movie even further, despite his "small" role, which is not small at of course. Liam Neeson does a good job although he looks way to nice and cuddly to be truly menacing, and Nolan would have done better to cast an actor more capable of filling the role of the villain and of Wayne's nemesis. Cillian Murphy shows off his unique face and his faerielike beauty takes a turn for the eerie in his portrayal of Scarecrow. Katie Holmes is decoration, like most women in American mainstream cinema. It is a shame Elfman's theme did not make it back to the movie (at least not audible).

God stuff.

A visually stunning and amazing epic tale of a Mayan warrior and his fate. While this movie works great as a story told at tis core, there is so much more to it, the stunning cinematography, the costumes, make-up, set design and so much more. First and foremost, the setting is a daring feat which Mel Gibson undertakes with bold efficiency. Say what you will about him, but he infuses fresh blood into an ondragging American movie world every time he directs a movie. A movie with no love interest but the courage in your heart and the memory fo your loved ones, vulnerable superheroes, likeable bad guys, no American cliches but deep experiences of humanity. The Mayan culture is a deeply fascinating one, and on its own would make an excellent subject for a documentary or feature film, but paired with this adrenaline ride, the result is a mesmerizing tale. Amazing !

When I rented this movie out I did not expect much, I almost did not watch it and send it right back. My friends here at flixster bashed it and the reviewers tore it apart. Yet, I think this one of the finest movies I have seen in a long time. The story is taken and heavily altered from the classic Beowulf poem. The story is altered in so far as it add a few more layers of emotional struggle and questions of morality to the movie, the margins between "monster" and "hero" are blurred and the question of good and evil thrown around a bit, which gives the movie slightly more depth, which was not necessary but certainly a plus. The voice acting is very good, especially by Gleeson and Hopkins whose experience and expertise in classical acting make the medieval dialogue more dynamic and lively, while Angelina Jolies feels a bit anachronical (especially in high heels, wtf ?)

The CGI is the best I have ever seen in a movie and uses the much-talked about Digital motion capture technique. Apart from being nicely rendered, the takes and scenes are beautifully and hauntingly composed and Zemeckis classically trained Hollywood-Hand shows.

One thing I really liked about this move is that it pushed Animation away from being a "childish" and of interest mainly for kids. The movie is gritty, raunchy, brutal, twisted and perverse and matures the animation genre, which impressed me very much as it was a bold and couragous thing to do. The way the movie treats history is more accurate (apart from altering the fictional source) than every other animation / Disney movie I have seen in my life, the Danes and Geates swear, fuck, curse, die, slaughter and ravage, a true depiction of history and not your american popcorn version of dancing fairies and singing maidens. Talking of singing maidens, the movie contains many nice medieval songs composed by Alan Silverstri, hear up.

Highly recommended if you are open minded and I guess it works better on a big screen, I give em that (Luckily, I own a cinema)

H.

A beautiful movie which makes up in art direction, cinematography and sound (music and editing) what it lacks in narrative. The movie feels like a great idea spun around. I know it is based on a book and I cannot really say to which extent the literate original dictate this style of narration, but the the focus lies on the frail relationship of Oskar and Eli, as well as their alienation with the world around them which ultimately leds to a degree of alienation from themselves. The cinematography is amazing, so is the editing and general direction, which supports the "feel" of the movie. Instead of forcing a chewed story on us, we are granted a glimpse into a few extraordinary events which could happen nowhere and everywhere. The cast is refreshing and believable which is a long throw, considering the fact that Eli is a vampire. There are a few very powerful scenes, which glue you to the screen and you are tempted to whisper the tender words "Masterpiece" in the gloom of the cinema. But I dare say, the movie is refreshing, innovative, beautiful, bold and quirky, but not a milestone in general. It may very well be for Swedish cinema and/or vampire movies, especially after the pain we had to suffer from the recent assgravy that is Twilight.

Highly recommended to every movie fan, if only for the ending, touche . . .

PS.: A remake is already on the way, god save our souls from the dumb and blind

A grim and highly biased film about the Irish resistance of British occupancy in the 1920s. Both the physical and the social violence in this movie are hard to endure and make your toenails roll up. Yet, as I already mentioned, the movie's depiction the British is very strict and anti-British, which I suppose is alright though considering the fact that they were the occupying force and carried out the war atrocities.

Yet, Ken Loach does not overlook the internal conflict of political interests among the Irish themselves as friend turns against friend, brother versus brother, traitors being executed and political interests clashing.

This slightly nihilistic view is taken over the top by the radical ending which was a bit too much for my taste, but you have to give it to the filmmakers, it is a courageous one.

The cast is very ensemblematic and good, with mostly genuine Irish men and women portraying their countrymen. Cillian Murphy is a good lead, as usual.

If you are interested in the Irish-British issue or Irish history in general, I would recommend this movie.

Lars von Trier is a master filmmaker, this can hardly be argued. Everything else aside, the way he uses the set and ligthning and directs his actors in Dogville and Manderlay is haunting and a feast for every film connoisseur.

Yet, the "stories" of his films vary so much you cannot talk about his oeuvre in total. Dogville and Manderlay differ from his Dogma movies and all of these again very much from his Swedish movies.

Manderlay explores another episode of American history/life, yet the focus dwindles between the fate of slaves in general and (which has always been Trier's prior interest), the question of good and bad, morals, decisions and fate.

While I very much enjoyed this movie, I think it is a questionable decision to make a movie that singular in likeliness and subjective in opinion, but yet make it all part of an triolgy called "America", which supposedly portraits aspect of American history. The movie is utterly anti-American or anti-West for that matter, anti-capitalism and anti-human in general, as there is not one "good" person in the movie.

Yet, one cannot deny that Trier's portrayal of humanity and humans is more realistic than many other. The division between good and bad, right and wrong cannot be made in reality and not a lot of moviemakers dare to speak out that truth in their movie and make each of their characters ambigious and ultimately human. The human nature is ambigious, paradox and neither good nor bad.

Of course, this makes the movie not easy to digest as it is both disturbing as well as shockingly truthful which might put people off that already surrendered to the simpleness of mainstream cinema.

A brilliant movie with an extraordinary cast except for a very disappointing Bryce Dallas Howard in the lead. The Anglo-African cast is very strong and intense, so is Danny Glover.

Highly Recommended !

Superb movie featuring an astounding performanc by John Hurt. I have always been interested in this particular case, that is the Elephant Man and the movie does justice to the enigma and the mythos. The movie is entertaining without being too hollywoodesque and not too melodramatic. The decision to make this movie in Black&White is an interesting one, yet I did not fully understand the particular intention behind it, other than fr aesthetic value that is. A few odd bits here and there (John Hurt's hand is not the hand of a 21 year old, Anne Bancroft's attire and make-up looks straight from the 80ies), but is suppose the movie was kinda low budget. Still, highly recommended with love for little details (the circus bizarre OST and a nice reference to Tod Browning's Freaks from 1932). Very enjoyable film that tackles the timeless topic of human cruelty and who are the true beasts (freaks) in our society.

Apocalypse Now is one of those movies for which I frequently had been confronted with mouths opened wide in astonishment, how come you have not seen it ? Never heard of the phrase: I love the smell of Napalm in the Morning ? Well, now I have, thanks very much.



In defense of my reputation I must say, I have read the book upon which the movie is based upon years ago (Joseph Conrad - Heart of Darkness). While the movie follows the book to a large extent, the story is a basic and working formula of a man's journey both into the world as well as into his heart (of darkness).



The movie is set in Vietnam, instead of the African continent, which works very well and the often cited 'Horrors' are many and illustrous in this movie, rangning from physical violence to mental degeneration.



A very good and solid cast (except Dennis Hopper, that moron almost ruined the movie with his horrible performance).



I have never seen a movie whose starpower (concerning Brando) was so evidently woven into the structure. The movie builds up to the climaxing moment when we finally meet the enigmatic man in the middle of darkness, and personally I wanted to meet the character in the story as much as looking forward to the stellar performance (so Ive been told) of the legendary Marlon Brando.



I was not dissapointed.



There is an interesting documentary around, called Hearts of Darkness which basically documents the movie's making. It took 16 months (instead of the scheduled 6 weeks) to make, Martin Sheen suffered from a heart attack, Coppolo treated suicide and Brando did not care about his lines.



An epic masterpiece, highly recommended

A stellar cast, yet the story is oddly spiltted in two episodes who feel a bit disconnected. A shame though because both had potential on their own. Anyway, a good and surprisingly realistic movie.

If you are into classic movies, submarines and cold war this one is for you.

What else is there to say that has no been said about Nolan's over-the-top cinematic masterpiece The Dark Knight. A fantastic entertainment package. Good storyline, great cast and crisp production. Ill refrain from praising all the elements that make this movie great, it is pretty much beyond any subjectivity of opinion. But I want to pen a few lines regarding the half a star that has been deduced from my almost 5-star rating. First of all, Aaron Eckhart was, in my opinion, miscast, both for this role which he does not fill at all. His character(s) stay lifeless and bland, and he made realize that I was watching a product instead of another world whenever he was on screen. Furthermore, I found that the screenwriters (Nolan & Nolan) tried a wee bit too hard to make the ambiguity of good & evil shine through the film, by introducing so many elements of blurred moralities and questions of right & wrong that I feeled smacked over the head with the message instead of subtly delivered. I know American people are said to be incapable of understanding movies without being spoonfed, and this movie shows how even Nolan thinks of that as being true, but we all know it is not and a bit more delicate and suave handing of the film's core philosphy would have done the film good.

Heath Ledger is, we all know it, what makes this movie something else, transforms it into something that is relevant instead of just an action movie. I am not one of those buzzbirds claiming that this role killed him, but it certainly did not make him saner than he was before, to put it that way.

Highly recommended
H.

God knows I love Wes Anderson, and again he surprises me with a "fantastic" movie. Roald Dahl's story is altered and twisted and filled to the brim with off-beat humour and geeky quirkyness typical for Wes' movies. The cast is, as always, a who is who of serious acting and George Clooney delivers a dry and subtle performance. Like many of Wes' movies, this one is very conceptual and feels more like a movie sculpture for all in it that is meticoulously composed and structured. Stop-motion is an amazing discipline and I am always happy if someone picks it up and saves it from oblivion. If you care Waterfalls made of clingfilm, this is for you. The whole movie kind of conjures a classic FX feeling with lots of make-shift special effects and incredible love for detail. The story is rarely knee-slap hilarious but casts a constant smirk on your face, as the insane story unfolds. Personally, I prefer Anderson's live-action movies, because he does not use his trademark moments of nothingness in Fantastic Mr. Fox, as it clearly would not fit into an animated movie. Thus, the movie feels a bit more playful than his other movies while lacking the former's melancholic air of universal thoughtfulness.

Highly recommended, this movie should appeal to everyone.

H.