My Favorite Movies

"The battle of Helm's Deep is over; the battle for Middle Earth is about to begin..."

Through my eyes, Peter Jackson's much-anticipated and much-glorified The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is the paradigmatic example of a perfect movie. The cinematic journey that initiated on Boxing Day 2001 and quickly received worldwide acclaim ultimately came to a conclusion with this final instalment. Personally, my passion for the Lord of the Rings trilogy never ceased and to this day I continue to view them frequently.

Just like its two precursors, The Return of the King was met with a congregation of positive reviews and of course recognition from the Oscar committee. I was ecstatic during the Oscar season at the beginning of 2004 when I discovered that the film was recognised with 11 Oscar nominations. Needless to say, I was even more ecstatic when Peter Jackson and his crew walked away with all 11 in their possession. The Return of the King won literally hundreds of awards worldwide and above all it accomplished a Box Office landmark: breaking the $1 billion milestone and becoming just the second film in history to do so. With this film walking away after sweeping the Oscars and sitting at a convincing second on the worldwide box office (as of mid-2008), this is indeed a rare event when it comes to a film offering of the fantasy genre. The technical proficiency is purely the finest that money can buy. Jackson's team at WETA workshop single-handedly created and rendered all special effects shots using software they had designed themselves.

This is by far the longest instalment in the Lord of the Rings trilogy; however it never feels too long. While many will complain (endlessly complain) about the length, I see the film in a completely different light. The way I see it the length is necessary to maintain a sense of fidelity to the novel and to successfully wrap everything up. If anything, I hate it when filmmakers rush things and end up with a missed opportunity on their hands. Peter Jackson had a modest budget and some astronomically amazing special effects on his side, so the work in every other department had to be top notch. Jackson's supreme gift is that of total immersion; the breathtaking lands of Middle Earth remain vibrantly alive. The film's pace may be reasonably slow for some, but the beauty soars with opulent layers of architecture, geography and complex storytelling.

Just like both entries thus far in the trilogy, The Return of the King reinvents the word "epic" completely. Many of the battles throughout the film display rich texture, and awe-inspiring showcases of visual effects. The action is emphatically extravagant and brought to life on an exorbitantly impressive scale! But what separates this from most fantasy epics is the heart at its core. Whenever there's a battle, you'll always find a satisfying serving of emotionally-charged moments featuring intimate scenes with the central protagonists. This coupling of visceral special effects and moving moments that display deep camaraderie is absolutely spellbinding!

This third and final instalment in the Lord of the Rings trilogy starts off almost exactly where The Two Towers ended. One must remember that all three of Tolkien's novels were written to plainly be one enormous piece of literature, and it was his publisher that insisted the novel should be split up the three shorter, more convenient components. In essence, all three additions to the cinematic Lord of the Rings trilogy can be edited together and the transitions would be seamless. The films are identical to the situation with Tolkien's novels: one big chunk of storytelling that's separated into three parts. You can never watch The Return of the King without first watching the initial two parts as this was never meant to be a standalone movie.

The first section of the plot here is concerned with Frodo (Wood), Sam (Astin) and the creature Gollum (a digital character played by Andy Serkis). As they move closer to the dark lands of Mordor, towards the fire of Mount Doom where the One Ring must be destroyed, the ring is becoming a heavier burden for the troubled young Frodo. As the quest perseveres, Frodo is becoming severely tested. Faith has been placed in Gollum to lead the Hobbits to Mount Doom despite the constant mistrust that Sam holds for the former Hobbit. On the outside this seems like a simple physically straining journey, but it's also an emotionally tiring journey on the inside for the three companions. While this story unfolds, the focus also alters to the remainder of the original fellowship. Sauron's eye has shifted to the city of Minas Tirith, the capital of Gondor, as the next target for his rampaging army. The fall of Gondor will mean the end of Men and the completion of his objective to clean Middle Earth of the species. A portion of the original fellowship, along with a horde of newer characters, move to the city of Minas Tirith to help build up defence for the impending attack and possible destruction of the White City. We find Aragorn (Mortensen), Legolas (Bloom) and Gimli (Rhys-Davis) through their more diverse journey into the cursed mountains to summon the legendary Army of the Dead.

This brief synopsis barely breaks the surface of this grandiose, all-round extremely satisfying epic film.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is an unprecedented milestone of contemporary moviemaking. If The Two Towers raised the bar with its epic battles, then The Return of the King knocks the bar cleanly out of the ground! This is so much more than just a simple fantasy epic, in fact this is multi-faceted tale about the strength of character, friendship, loyalty and love. Each shot is sizzling with visual elegance...the special effects are nothing short of breathtaking! Every battle is truly monumental in its sheer scale, as well as exciting and intense. Previously, I briefly touched on the emotionally-straining moments that this film has to offer. The cast pull off these moments beautifully and I was extremely close to tears more than once during the movie. There are several truly moving moments that still give me goose bumps at the simple thought of them. These moments are fuelled by not only the motivating performances, but the score courtesy of composer Howard Shore. The composer was recognised with an Oscar and I plainly cannot quibble with this decision. The music retains the elegance of the visuals, and even makes the epic battles look even grander.

There are only a few new additions to the cast that are introduced here, the most notable being Australian actor John Noble as Denethor who rules Minas Tirith with an iron fist. The Oscar committee barely gave any recognition to the actors (only awarding Ian McKellen with a nomination for Fellowship). I guess with so many people in the cast it'd be impossible to choose one or two for a nomination. Andy Serkis is one member of the cast that deserves particular credit. He's hidden behind digital make-up, but each line he delivers is potent and really hits home. The acting from Elijah Wood is truly a triumph to behold. His performance required a great degree of emotion to portray the ring's power to corrupt. His performance was critical in order to display the ring's influence, which needless to say is absolute. Each character has their own personal demon to confront, and each undergoes their own inner journey. Every cast member does their job stunningly.

The Return of the King has of course been filmed in Peter Jackson's homeland of New Zealand. The Kiwi landscape is vast and beautiful. Whenever one views the film we're taking a step inside the gorgeous land of Middle Earth. Peter Jackson is a visionary, and like all the preceding films the attention and care to every conceivable detail is incredible.

The Fellowship of the Ring is a build up with an even share of action and exposition. The Two Towers is more exposition and build up followed by some action. With The Return of the King, the build up is definitely worth it...every second. The exposition has already been established in the other films, so this film is short on exposition and instead stocks a great supply of action scenes that are truly a cinematic marvel. The battles are lengthy but never suffer from over-length...each second is as intense as the one preceding it. Then the conclusion to the film is wholly satisfying. Some people complain about "too many endings". Okay, so there were many instances when the film could have ended but instead moved onto something else. Fair enough, but I mean this trilogy has already gone for like 9 hours...they can't wrap everything up in a hurry and leave plot holes or stories that haven't been concluded. Instead of rushing everything, each second is lovingly created in all aspects: filming, editing, colour scheme, special effects, acting, scripting, etc. The best part is that this end remains faithful to Tolkien's original novel. Thus the fans needn't worry...for the novel has been properly transferred to the medium of film.

There are far too many pointless and vain arguments between the haters and the lovers of the trilogy. The bottom line is that we're all entitled to our own opinion, and we can't all agree. Thus labelling Peter Jackson's masterpiece as "overrated" only proves that you are too narrow-minded to accept the fact that you are just a component of the minority that disagrees with the majority.

Overall, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is the crowning achievement of the fantasy genre. In terms of a conventional fantasy with wizards, magic and mythical creatures, this is as good as a fantasy film can get! Since 2003 this film has been my favourite of all time. In the number of years since the first time I saw it, I have never seen a film that can top the quality and escapism of this masterpiece. All three Lord of the Rings films score top marks from me, which is a rarity when it comes to a trilogy or series. All three films are truly an unfathomably excellent work of art. J.R.R. Tolkien's legacy that was preserved on pages is now preserved on film for the audiences of the contemporary age. The Return of the King is one of the most finely tuned and cinematically perfect films ever made. Winner of 11 Oscars including Best Picture 2003, Best Director, Best Visual Effects, Best Makeup, Best Score among others. Also available in an extended edition that adds 50 minutes to the experience.

In the common tongue it reads "One Ring to Rule Them All. One Ring to Find Them. One Ring to Bring Them All and In The Darkness Bind Them."

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring marks the first ambitious film adaptation of J.R.R. Tolkien's highly praised and acclaimed series of fantasy novels. Naturally, transferring one of the world's greatest fantasy novels to the screen would subsist as a daunting undertaking. For the die-hard fans of Tolkien's legendary novels, uncertainty was always an issue when small-time New Zealand born director Peter Jackson took the reigns. Although Jackson is an accomplished director who had previously helmed such films as Heavenly Creatures and Bad Taste, no-one knew for sure if the Kiwi was up to the task. The results are absolutely outstanding: a ripping yarn of a fantasy film rich in extraordinary production values, astounding special effects and never a dull moment.

The hordes of Tolkien fans must have breathed a collective sigh of relief when Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring thundered across cinemas worldwide and became an instant hit. The film grossed millions of dollars globally and was being met with cavalcades of acclaim including mountains of positive reviews. What's more - the film also scored 13 Oscar nominations and subsequently walked away with 4 wins. Although previous stabs at adapting Tolkien's novels to the big screen yielded embarrassing results, Jackson's prior experience and familiarity with the fantasy genre translated into a respectful, lavish, gorgeously-mounted production that breathed fresh cinematic life into Middle Earth.

This first instalment in the Lord of the Rings trilogy introduces the characters and establishes the story. An ancient ring of power was forged several centuries ago by the Dark Lord Sauron (Baker). Sauron's master ring, known as the One Ring, was filled with Sauron's sinister power and contains the capability to rule all peoples of Middle Earth. After an impressive opening montage that recaps the integral events of Middle Earth that have occurred thousands of years ago, the story then picks up at Hobbiton: a village that is largely inhabited by the Hobbit race.

After being lost for centuries, Sauron's One Ring is picked up by a Hobbit named Bilbo Baggins (Holm). Fast forward a few decades and it's Bilbo's eleventy-first birthday. As the celebrations rage on, Bilbo should be happy but feels empty as his life is seemingly winding down and there are still a lot of things he wants to do before shuffling off. Bilbo departs Hobbiton, leaving the One Ring to be inherited by his nephew Frodo Baggins (Wood). Frodo soon learns that this ring is Sauron's master ring, and it must be immediately destroyed. Now Frodo must embark on a journey to the fires of Mount Doom. Only in the flames of that mountain can the ring be destroyed. If he fails and a resurrected Sauron reclaims the ring, he will bind the other 9 subservient rings to his will and cast a pall over the lands of Middle Earth.

The film's subtitle, The Fellowship of the Ring, is drawn from the milestone in Frodo's journey to Mount Doom that occurs: Frodo collects a band of companions who swear to aid in the quest and protect Frodo at all costs.

The film's easy-going first hour quickly transforms into a heart-stopping, exciting, powerful and violent saga that is truly difficult to find boring. Although audience reactions were mixed and many complained about the film's length, I frankly cannot imagine myself being bored.

To say that I loved this film is a gross understatement. Not only is Tolkien's novel one of the greatest books ever published, but Jackson's film adaptation now confidently places itself amongst the greatest movies of all time. This first instalment in Jackson's trilogy is a labour of love - he and his team were determined and worked endlessly to accomplish the best possible product. Jackson's first LOTR film is visually astounding, as well being outstanding in terms of audio and atmosphere.

While so many battles were created using computer technology, this is the blueprint of "epic". Over the years we've seen "big" films like Titanic and Braveheart, but this film simply dwarfs most movies in terms of sheer production size. Every facet of the movie has been done to perfection - every chair, every sword, every location. Why has it taken so many decades to finally get this ambitious project off the ground? Simply because the sheer scope and size of the production would cost far too much. Even in the age of advanced digital technology and big-budget epics, it took countless years to finish. It's refreshing to see so much determination to reach perfection. The descriptions of everything in Tolkien's novel are brilliantly matched by the ideal creative team.

Pale imitations like Harry Potter are a regularity. In the years succeeding this film's release the world was exposed to failed fantasy epics like Eragon, just to name one. The brilliance of Jackson's The Lord of the Rings trilogy will always remain unmatched. To quote a music reviewer, this film is the "blueprint for a trillion inferior facsimiles." With the aid of contemporary filmmaking technology and the diverse New Zealand landscape, the visual result is simply impossible to match.

Special recognition must go to Howard Shore for composing the music that won an Oscar! I own the soundtrack CD and can't get enough of the music. It's exciting, intense, grand, passionate and even heart-breaking at times. This is the cherry on top.

The film is astronomically elevated by the marvellous cast. Elijah Wood makes an exceptional Frodo Baggins. This is an emotionally challenging role for the youthful actor, and nevertheless he nails it perfectly. Sean Astin plays the exigent role of Samwise Gamgee. The role called for an endless assortment of diverse emotions that Astin strikes faultlessly. Ian McKellen is utterly flawless as Gandalf the Grey. McKellen was acknowledged with an Oscar nomination for playing Gandalf with equal parts of underhanded humour and shrewdness. McKellen IS Gandalf and there is no doubt about that. Viggo Mortenson convincingly pulls off the dashing Aragorn: a ranger who becomes determined to help Frodo. Credit must also go to Sean Bean. I am a great admirer of Bean, and must mention his outstanding performance. His versatility is tested with this challenging role: like many other additions to the cast, a collection of emotions are pivotal. Bean passionately pulls off the role of Boromir.

I'm not even halfway through mentioning the cast! Orlando Bloom got his big break playing the loyal elf Legolas. This is the single role that Bloom was meant to play. The character is flat and emotionless...and this describes the nature of every single Orlando Bloom performance. John Rhys-Davis is sublime as the dwarf Gimli. This is one of the veteran actors included in the cast. I couldn't imagine anyone better suited. Finally there are great portrayals from Billy Boyd and Dominic Monaghan as two Hobbit companions, in addition to sublime elf portrayals from such actors as Hugo Weaving and Liv Tyler. The cast is truly a wonder to behold!

Overall, The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring will forever be one of my absolute favourite movies! I still recall the first time I saw this movie: it was Boxing Day 2001 and my favourite uncle dragged me along to the cinema with my brother and cousin. We had booked tickets in advance and it's a good thing we did as there was a sign outside that strictly read "LOTR sold out!" Ever since that first screening I viewed, I subsequently saw it many more times at the cinema (about 5 more times, actually) as well as watching it at marathons and in the comfort of my own bedroom where I can watch the DVD.

Peter Jackson and his creative team have achieved a cinematic marvel! Even with characters and segments of the book being removed, this will remain the definitive cinematic vision of Tolkien's novel for many decades to come. One of the most anticipated cinematic events in history has finally transpired and in my opinion it is completely worth the wait! Some will love it, some will hate it: I will always be part of the former. Critics and audiences alike will always praise this film, and who's to quibble? It's a fine movie! Winner of 4 Oscars. Later released in an extended version.

It's Hebrew, it's from the Talmud. It says, "Whoever saves one life, saves the world entire."

Steven Spielberg's Schindler's List is a challenging film to review. The incentive behind this is not because it's a bad movie...but that it's such a powerful experience to exhibit and it's virtually unfeasible to illustrate its power by employing words. In a sense, Spielberg's Schindler's List is something much more than a movie: this is a phenomenon!

When it was announced that director Spielberg was taking the reigns, this declaration encountered nothing but abject incredulity. Beforehand the director had only helmed mainstream blockbusters and films exhibiting bright exuberance like Jaws, Always, The Sugarland Express, Raiders of the Lost Ark and several others. Questions and uncertainties began to surface concerning the director's aptitude and capability to tackle a project of such enormity. There comes an occasion in the career of a director when they step away from the genre in which they take an interest, instead attempting something new. Certain directors have failed, some have prevailed. When Schindler's List was set for release, audiences sharpened their knives due to their qualms regarding the director. But make the film Spielberg did, and the world came to watch.

Spielberg achieved his goal beyond all initial comprehension...this was a step upwards for the director and a significant milestone in contemporary cinema. For the film's three hours duration audiences sat under an overwhelming collective spell - horrified, beleaguered, fascinated, inspired. As movie-goers stumbled, erratically blinking, from the theatres of the world, moist-eyed and moved, it became clear that a new era of filmmaking had commenced. Spielberg traded in his stereotyped career in the year 1993 with an astonishing double-whammy - he envisioned an unparalleled Holocaust template with Schindler's List, as well as resurrecting the dinosaurs with his astounding vision in Jurassic Park. By 1994 Spielberg was presiding over the most lucrative motion pictures of all time, and finally he received his cherished Oscar.

The subject matter is correctly a delicate topic. After all, it was only a number of decades ago that Adolf Hitler instigated a policy that necessitated the annihilation of Jews. Personally, I have studied the Holocaust in detail and am knowledgeable in the intricate, heart-wrenching niceties regarding the events leading up to mass murder. On a daily basis throughout the Holocaust, thousands of Jews were executed in sadistic ways - people were cooked alive, some shot, even some were exposed to poison gas. The disturbing factor is that the Nazis never felt an iota of sympathy due to the attitudes they were so severely lead to believe.

The focus of Schindler's List is not to portray the horrors that unfolded in extermination camps at all. Spielberg keeps the focus purely on the more minor events, and above all the viewpoint from a select few characters. The heavy nature in its depiction of executions challenges out notion of tolerance. We are challenged not only by the staggering acts of cruelty we see, but by the equally confounding acts of kindness. As we observe these ghastly proceedings unfold, we are strained to identify those virtues within ourselves that are equally light and dark. Schindler's List is not a film that we can impassively scrutinize. We are propelled into the dismay and the panic...the indignity, the brutality. As the title would suggest, this film is mainly the story of one man: Oskar Schindler (Neeson). Schindler is a Czech of German ethnicity who travels to Poland with the intention of becoming a war profiteer. He employs assistance from Jewish investors in order to buy his own pots-and-pans factory. At the outset, Schindler uses forced Jewish labour because it was inexpensive compared to hiring Polish workers. However, Schindler witnesses as World War II and the Holocaust develops with devastating results. These events are too overwhelming to fathom, and Schindler begins experiencing a slow, subtle moral awakening. His poignant story of bravery and generosity launches when Schindler cons the Nazis as he places more than a thousand Jews under his protection. By the conclusion of World War II, Schindler had exhausted his whole war-generated wealth to guarantee that his Jews would never again be touched by the Nazis.

On a more subtle, thematic level the screenwriter portrays a battle for Schindler's soul between camp commandant Amon Goeth (Fiennes) and Jewish accountant Itzhak Stern (Kingsley). Schindler's story is a staggering one. In a cacophony of death clouding his existence, one man managed to save roughly 1,100 Jewish lives using charisma, bluster, and trickery. The Holocaust has been previously described as a mechanical insanity because of the enormity of people who followed the philosophies: they are like cogs in a machine. It took a single person...a single machine cog with alternative ideas and an ethically problematic lifestyle (Schindler treasured alcohol and womanising) to mislead the Nazis (who regarded him as their frivolous comrade).

At the centre of the film we have a simply sublime group of actors. Liam Neeson nails the character of Oskar Schindler in a satisfyingly brilliant performance. Neeson perfectly displays Schindler's quiet method of expressing his morals. His outward show suggests he is a close buddy of the Nazis, but on the inside he's resentful and anguished towards the brutal, arbitrary termination of Jewish lives. Neeson was nominated for an Oscar. Ralph Fiennes was also nominated for an Oscar. His performance is utterly terrifying: he's intimidating and unnerving whenever he steps into the frame. His sheer established cruelty and viciousness will be enough to leave you in complete shock. This actor is focused as he portrays a character that appears to be soft-spoken when in fact his intentions are cruel and inhuman.

The meticulous screenplay was penned by Steven Zallian, and was based on the source material by Australian writer Thomas Keneally. Interestingly, Keneally was an accomplished author when he strolled into a luggage shop and immediately struck up a conversation with the shop owner. Said shop owner was one Leopald Page, formerly Poldek Pfefferberg: a Schindlerjuden. During their friendly conversation, Pfefferberg conveyed to Keneally the story of Oskar Schindler: the German industrialist who had saved him and 1,100 others from certain death in occupied Poland during the 1940s. Schindler was a Nazi who had not stood back. Keneally was so inspired and moved that he transformed this story into the Booker Prize winning novel Schindler's Ark. The rights were soon purchased by Universal boss Sid Sheinberg, and the transformation from book to movie was soon initiated. When Spielberg was involved in the project he originally offered the film to director Roman Polanski, but his own experiences in Polish ghettos were too tender for him to accept the director's chair. Thus Spielberg, who was at the time ensconced in post-production work for Jurassic Park, decided to tackle the directing duties himself. The director flew to Poland and began his masterwork for which he accepted no salary, saying that it would be akin to taking "blood money."

Spielberg worked intimately with cinematographer Janusz Kaminski, and the project was lensed using stylish grainy black and white photography techniques. The film was undertaken without any storyboarding: Spielberg planned each shot instinctively as the cameras were about to roll, where all of his God-given skills as an accomplished director were distilled into something intuitional and turbulently expressive. The cinematography techniques created a realistic atmosphere of almost documentary footage: he utilised jarring hand-held filmmaking to portray the intense confusion for the Jews during times of complete chaos. Spielberg evokes these creative techniques to create the illusion of complete immersion: for the 190 minutes that make up this film's duration, you will feel transported to an entirely different world...you will feel engrossed in the occurrences. The music by none other than John Williams (Spielberg's trademark composer), is a poignant composition that adds to the atmosphere. But it's not the music that ultimately helps the audience get involved: it's the visuals. One scene was played to very little music; however it always makes me cry. The scene in question is when we watch as corpses are transported past Oskar Schindler to be dumped into the ground without an iota of sentimentality towards any of the victims. No matter how manly you consider yourself, your eyes will be moist.

Spielberg does not want his audience to endure a fun romp that you'll want to immediately watch again...he instead tells his story straight and with the utmost sincerity. World War II films cannot come more personal than the masterpiece that is Schindler's List. The reviews were exultant and the Oscar committee rewarded the film with twelve nominations. Although Spielberg did receive some criticism in relation to several aspects of the film, such judgements are hard to swallow after watching this film. While some slam the director for not including the prejudice towards the handicapped and the homosexuals that were also prosecuted, or that the focus was shifted away from the concentration camps...quite simply it does not matter at all. This is the story that Poldek Pfefferberg wanted told: a story that intimately examines one man and his struggle to come to terms with his morals during an internationally horrific event. This was never meant to be the definitive Holocaust film and hence doesn't need to concentrate on all aspects...this is a personal movie based on a personal experience.

After trying with such dedication since the commencement of his career, Steven Spielberg has finally achieved a mature production with Schindler's List. An extraordinary work by any standard: this intense historical and biographical drama, about an amazing Nazi industrialist, evinces an artistic intransigence and unsentimental intellect disparate from anything the world's most successful filmmaker had previously demonstrated. Infused with a brilliant screenplay, outstandingly sinuous cinematic techniques, three astonishing lead performances and an approach toward the traumatic subject matter that is both passionately felt and impressively restrained, this is the film to win over the Spielberg skeptics.

Even now, all these years after its cinematic release, Schindler's List remains an expressive, heartbreaking and remarkable slice of filmmaking that transcends all obstacles of theatrical disbelief. The film successfully draws us personally into the dark hearts of a dark age, and then liberates us with the few beams of light produced by the actions of the righteous few. The harrowing detail and poignancy of this production will enthral audiences for generations of movie-goers to follow. After you finish watching this movie you will have the words of Schindlerjuden profoundly present in your heart - "That it may never happen again." Winner of 7 Oscars including Best Picture 1993, Best Director (for Steven Spielberg), Best Cinematography (for Janusz Kaminski), Best Music (for John Williams), Best Film Editing (for Michael Kahn), Best Writing based on other material (for Steven Zallian) and Best Art Direction/Set Direction (for Allan Starski and Ewa Braun).

"We've become a race of Peeping Toms. What people ought to do is get outside their own house and look in for a change. Yes sir. How's that for a bit of homespun philosophy?"

Rear Window is an undemanding lesson in accomplishing perfection from simplicity. This classic film was the creation of Alfred Hitchcock during one of his last grand creative spells. In the years to follow, the all-time master of suspense produced such classics as Vertigo and Psycho.

Rear Window is Hitchcock's supreme cinematic creation, his crowning triumph and the feather in his cap. With this particular production, the director influenced thrillers and their formulas still decades following its release. Rear Window is a film that invents the clichés. Preceding Hitchcock's masterpiece, said clichés didn't exist. The certain formula didn't exist either. Ergo, a modern audience labelling the film as "clichéd" or "predictable" is both unjust and unfair. Taking the film's age into account, this is a faultless production that unfortunately gave birth to millions of subsequent reproductions. The film is a multi-faceted production enriched and permeated with screenplay integrity, realism, credibility and originality. On top of this, Hitchcock's competently entrancing direction is capable of keeping an audience enthralled from start to finish.

Alfred Hitchcock's masterpiece, Rear Window, is a riveting thriller pervaded with tension and a spellbinding atmosphere. It's truly a gem and a half! Everyone has at least heard of this production. If one hasn't seen it, they're probably sick of the hype, praise and acclaim. Be that as it may, there is a reason why Rear Window is held in high regard over 50 years since its initial release. The crux of its perfection is within its straightforwardness. It's probable to argue that the film is supported by an exceedingly boring concept, as the film's events concern one person in one room. Mind you, that one person is actor James Stewart...and that one room is an intricate creation augmented with authenticity and absorbing panorama. Moreover, this is Alfred Hitchcock we're discussing. That director has forever been regarded as the master of suspense. Although countless have endeavoured, no other directors can competently tackle the genre like Mr. Hitchcock. His filmmaking allure lies in his ability to keep an audience captivated and interested. This is achieved by employing attention-grabbing camera movements and a succession of proceedings grounded in gripping realism.

This simple story is set in the apartment of successful, professional globe-trotting photographer L.B. "Jeff" Jefferies (James Stewart). After an unfortunate incident during an assignment, Jeff becomes confined to a wheelchair in his boring apartment. Jeff is faced with sheer boredom and, with nothing else to do, he begins spying on his neighbours. With the occasional visit of his nurse (Ritter) and beautiful girlfriend Carol (Kelly), there's plenty of time for Jeff to become consumed in the private dramas of his neighbours. One night his voyeuristic activities pay off when Jeff believes that he witnesses a murder. Salesman Lars Thorwald (Burr), living in the neighbouring apartment building, begins acting suspiciously after the unexplained disappearance of his nagging wife. Gradually, Jeff builds his investigation and he becomes increasingly convinced that the salesman is guilty of murder. While he steadily gathers evidence, Jeff draws others to his intrigue.

Witty, enthralling, poignant, comical and prudent - Rear Window challenges an audience with its connivance in the stories witnessed. Hitchcock also works up the film to one of cinema's greatest hero-and-killer confrontations. This confrontation is particularly memorable for Thorwald's acquiescent perplexity that a stranger would be interested in his certain life, let alone keen to expose his secrets. Flawless...essential.

Hitchcock's camera remains in one apartment, with very few exceptions. Despite sounding quite boring as we remain in one location for the film's entirety, Rear Window is an absorbing film crammed with limitless suspense. Hitchcock is of course the master of suspense, so you'll find many moments here when it's difficult to draw a breath. The director keeps his audience enthralled and engrossed until the unforgettable climax. The classic touches from a classic director are truly hard to beat. He can raise a clever grin occasionally while keeping an audience riveted and on the edge of their seat.

The single location is also an extremely fascinating one. Cleverly, the focus isn't directly on the murder plot. The characters are occasionally entangled in the dramas unfolding in other apartments. We are introduced to a cavalcade of people, and the short character development is effective despite being brief. The script is always taut and there is never a wasted frame. Hitchcock always uses his visuals to tell his story with further intrigue and suspense without relying solely on music. Silence, in fact, provides some of the film's most terrifying moments. Even better, the focus is on the protagonist and his story. The ending may seem rushed as the explanation is revealed very quickly, but this is one of the best decisions on Hitchcock's part in my opinion. It reminds the audience that we're following Jeff, and only a few moments of pure exposition were necessary. It also shows the build up of tension in Thorwald that eventually bursts open forcefully...he becomes ready to confess. This is a rare film that flaunts excellence and perfection in just about every aspect.

James Stewart's performance was absolutely essential. As we're spending the duration of the film in a single location with a chief protagonist, it was a necessity for Stewart to exude charm and charisma to keep the audience enthralled. Stewart has always been one of the screen's greatest performers. Partner him with Alfred Hitchcock and you simply cannot go wrong. For every shot...every frame...Stewart never strikes a false note. He's also fascinating and he possesses a particularly engaging voice. The eminence of his performance is demonstrated in the nuances, and none are superior to the expression of reprieve as he relieves the itches caused by the plaster cast. Stewart is simply so darned excellent in any role he tackles! Alongside Stewart, the beautiful Grace Kelly appears as the love interest that becomes entangled and obsessed with uncovering evidence to prove a man guilty of murder. At the time of release, Grace Kelly was one of the screen's greatest beauties and she abundantly reminds us of this. Thelma Ritter brings a delightful comedic sense to her role as Jeff's nurse. Across the entire film, there is an evident ring of excellence around the entire cast (no, not the cast on Jeff's leg).

Not only is Hitchcock a master of the thriller genre, he's also one of the greatest directors of all time. In his career he directed several memorable masterpieces such as North by Northwest, Psycho, Rebecca, Vertigo and several others. No-one then or now could match Hitchcock's large quantity of quality masterpieces. They say it's impossible for a director to helm more than 2 or 3 masterpieces in his career. Hitchcock transcends this expectation. Rear Window is his best film in my opinion. Everything about the film is pure perfection. If there was a rating higher than 5/5 or 10/10, then Rear Window would undoubtedly wear that rating with aplomb.

Several film buffs and cinema enthusiasts would concur that there's no such thing as a perfect movie. In my opinion, that statement is highly incorrect. This is a masterpiece of the highest order: a faultless marriage of tension, romance, drama and mystery with undertones of intrigue. Cunningly manipulative in optimum Hitchcock elegance, as well as managing to offer us with a complete gamut of human emotions and intrinsic idiosyncrasies all from the vantage point of just the one room: there is good reason why Rear Window is regarded as a classic masterpiece. With an impeccably selected cast, a virtuoso script courtesy of John Michael Hayes and a man who was probably the most creative director to ever draw breath...it simply lacks nothing. The best aspect is in its ability to build effectively until you abruptly realise that you're completely engrossed in this cinematic universe and you don't want the film to end. You cannot afford to miss this one.

"There was a barber and his wife...and she was beautiful..."

Tim Burton is unquestionably one of my favourite directors, if not my absolute favourite director. It's a fact that no matter what the film or the subject matter, I will view a film helmed by Tim Burton (at the time of writing this review, I have seen all of Burton's work and own all his films). The partnership of Tim Burton and Johnny Depp will forever be a movie occasion to treasure, be it Ed Wood or Edward Scissorhands among an enormous number of others. It was the end of 2006 when Dreamworks fast-tracked Burton's latest collaboration with Johnny Depp...and I initially discovered Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. The plan was to transform the lucrative Broadway musical into the world of live action cinema. The best part is that Burton promised a full-on musical to maintain a sense of fidelity to Steven Sondheim's brilliant Broadway production. Before the announcement of Burton's cinematic version of the musical, I hadn't possessed any prior knowledge of the source material. I had no idea what the film was about until my interest suddenly flared and research followed.

If you're familiar with the Broadway musical, you'll be aware of the dark humour and gothic style that is such a prominent feature. Sweeney Todd is a story intended for Tim Burton. The director possesses a distinctive superiority when it comes to the macabre and gothic tones. With the completion of creepy period films such as the wondrous Sleepy Hollow, director Burton demonstrated a special ability to deliver dark humour and elegant visuals. Burton is a director who can bring flawed and unusual characters to life. He is the master of darkness and has adapted a penchant for tossing a little blood around his sets in an exaggerated, albeit entertaining manner. Since the beginning of his career, stunning gothic visuals and extravagant production design has been his forte. Sweeney Todd is a film regarding a central character who is a sorrowful, vengeful and formerly caring individual. This character finds redemption for crimes against him and his family by slashing the throats of the innocents of London while hoping to one day slash the throat of the man who stole his wife and daughter from him. What better plot and central character could possibly be better suited for Tim Burton to bring to life?

2007 was a year that beared the release of several great films, but the year also saw its fair share of bad films (in my opinion, there were more bad films than good films throughout the year). Tim Burton's cinematic vision of Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street is a masterpiece of epic proportions, and ultimately ended up being the best film of 2007 without question or debate. After mentioning so much about Burton's brilliant work, I must admit I was a little worried because Burton's last movie, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, was disappointing to say the least. With this film, however, Burton patches up the scars. Like I previously mentioned, I didn't know much about the source material before walking into the cinema and had no idea that this film was going to be so good. Within the first few seconds of the titles commencing, I was completely enthralled in Burton's universe.

The film is so poetic, stylish, beautiful and so incredibly emotional at times as well. Every shot has been conceived beautifully, and every line delivered remarkably. This is a musical of course, so naturally the songs being interesting is a vitality. All the songs are utterly stunning and are crafted beautifully. Combine the witty lyrics of Steven Sondheim with the musical stylings of a successful Hollywood composer...suddenly things are looking interesting. The songs are both memorable and remarkable. I purchased the soundtrack CD immediately and now it's my default channel.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street is the story of a man named Benjamin Barker (Depp) who once had everything; a wife, a child and a successful career as a barber. For Barker, life could not be better. But a false conviction of a crime he did not commit destroys his happiness and his life, causing him to suffer through a massive, heart-breaking emotional trauma. Upon Barker's London homecoming by boat 15 years later to right the wrongs against him, he comes home to nothing. His family has been ripped apart. He forms an unlikely partnership with Mrs. Lovett (Carter), a creepy old woman who owns a pie shop. Benjamin Barker, who now goes by the name of Sweeney Todd, wants revenge on crooked Judge Turpin (Rickman) who convicted him out of sheer jealously. Sweeney re-opens a barber shop on Fleet Street, with the intention of getting sweet revenge on Turpin if he comes in for a shave. Sweeney uses his sharp silver blades to slash the throats of the innocent London public that come in for a shave, before destroying the evidence of his crimes by allowing the troubled Mrs. Lovett to cook the human corpses into her pies.

From start to finish, I was completely hooked. I literally couldn't tear my eyes away from the screen. Its combination of a superb cast, excellent music, exquisite production design and gorgeous cinematography creates a flawless movie. I remember goose-bumps literally covering my body as soon as the music commenced at the start of the opening credits...the outstanding organ music that successfully creates the desired atmosphere and tone for what is about to come.

Burton's unique colour scheme depicts the grimy streets of London with extremely drained colour that predominantly makes use of grey a black among other dark colours. The sky is always dark, with never a ray of bright sunshine poking through. This is the depressing, gothic mood that the director aimed to achieve. During the flashbacks that depict the events of the past, the colour scheme has been changed to show an array of bright colours as the sun lights the cheery streets. This symbolises Barker's emotions, so to speak. When Barker is happy with his life the colours are bright and joyous. Then when he returns to London and the life he once lived has been destroyed...his depression is reflected in the gloomy visuals.

Johnny Depp, playing the demon barber, is absolutely remarkable. Before this film Depp had never displayed his singing abilities on film. Before he was an actor he played guitar in a band with never an attempt to handle any vocals. If it weren't for his close friend Tim Burton asking him to consider a singing role, he would have gone through his whole career without singing a note. Thankfully, Depp's former career in the music industry allowed him to sing a brilliant tune. Before the film's release, Depp singing was a big question mark. As the film was not marketed as a musical from the previews, we were therefore never given the opportunity to witness the actor handling a song. When I first viewed the film in the cinema (on opening day) I sat in complete awe at the beauty of Johnny Depp's breathtaking singing. The actor was recognised with a Golden Globe win and an Oscar nomination for Best Actor (I still believe he wholly deserved to win). Helena Bonham Carter was the only member of the cast I was reluctant about, but my fears were soon alleviated by her stunning acting skills. She is able to carry on a brilliant duet with co-star Depp. Her singing is amazing. Alan Rickman is brilliant here, as are the rest of the supporting cast. This includes Timothy Spall, Sacha Baron Cohen (whose singing is quite incredible), Jamie Campbell Bower, Laura Michelle Kelly, Jayne Wisener and Ed Sanders. Every member of the cast can sing to perfection.

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street is a brilliant mix of dark humour, horror, romance, drama and tragedy. The ending is very sad, but very poetic at the same time. As the credits start to roll (with every screening I watch) I am a complete mess. Usually tears are escaping my eyes...I'm left speechless and stunned. The film is very violent, and when the exaggerated bloodshed begins it is very relentless and there is no stopping it. With Burton's direction the violence is very stylish and extraordinarily beautiful. Of course Burton's direction is the icing on the cake here. The man is a visionary and a wizard of filmmaking. His films are simply close to unbeatable. I am not a fan of the musical genre (interestingly enough, neither is Burton); however a musical of this superiority is a rare event. With each new screening I am always captivated.

Tim Burton's Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street is a modern masterpiece. It's an acquired taste and will not be liked by all of course, so you're welcome to disagree. Every aspect of the filmmaking is absolutely stunning. Without argument or question, this is the best movie of 2007. Since first watching this film, I cannot prevent myself from indulging in repeated screenings. To date, this is Burton's finest hour. Winner of 2 Golden Globes including Best Picture (Comedy or Musical) and Best Actor (for Johnny Depp).

"All our hopes now lie with two little hobbits, somewhere in the wilderness."

I still remember leaving the cinema subsequent to the first session I saw of The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring. Little did I know that the screening I attended would cause a never-ending obsession with the epic trilogy. Instantly I was completely hooked, and the cliff-hanger at the end of the first film made my anticipation even higher for the second. Alas, 12 months later Peter Jackson and his talented creative team reeled out the second instalment for which I waited with baited breath. Just like the first film, I remember booking tickets in advance and heading to a screening on Boxing Day of 2002: exactly one year since I initially saw the first film. Just like its predecessor, I absolutely loved The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.

The reception from critics and audiences was a mixed bag. Be that as it may, I will always adore all three additions in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Like its predecessor the film flaunts visceral filmmaking: astounding special effects, mind-blowing cinematography, amazing locations and incredible production values! Where the first LOTR film was essentially a road story of epic proportions, The Two Towers is a rich, heroic epic containing powerful and moving themes of friendship and courage in times of peril. With so many powerful underlying messages, the film also moves at a brisk pace with testosterone and intensity during the action scenes.

Like the first film, The Two Towers was acknowledged worldwide with critical acclaim and recognition from the Oscar committee. This film scored a mere 6 Oscar nominations (including Best Picture), ultimately walking away with two wins. In addition to this, award ceremonies globally recognised the film with several awards. There can be no disagreeances on this front: The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers is an exceptional movie that even dwarfs the original film with its increasingly expanded definition of the word "epic".

This second instalment in Peter Jackson's epic trilogy continues the story where it concluded at the end of The Fellowship of the Ring: basically, the fellowship is broken with groups of characters being separated from each other. The film does not open with any flashbacks or lines of narration: there is no help to assist first-time viewers to find their footing. Instead we're thrown straight into the action. If someone was to edit the first two films together (erasing the opening titles, of course) the transition would be fundamentally seamless.

Anyway, the original nine members of the fellowship have been broken apart. Frodo Baggins (Wood) is now travelling to Mordor with companion Samwise Gamgee (Astin). The camaraderie of the two is what keeps the flame of their spirit and determination burning. However they strike a hindrance when they discover that they are hopelessly lost. A ray of hope begins to shine as the tragic creature Gollum (a digital character played by Andy Serkis) is visibly following them. Gollum was once a Hobbit named Sméagol...who became a deformed creature because of the effect of the ring he now refers to as his "precious". Gollum is the ultimate expression of the One Ring's corrupting and draining influence, and serves as a reminder of the urgency of Frodo's mission while guiding him towards the boundaries of Mordor. Upon capturing Gollum, Frodo and Sam convince the troubled creature to act as a guide to help them navigate the difficult lands through which they are crossing. In an alternative storyline (that is vitally linked and occurring simultaneously) we find Aragorn (Mortensen), Legolas (Bloom) and Gimli (Rhys-Davis) who are tracking the Uruk-Hai warriors that kidnapped Merry (Monaghan) and Pippin (Boyd). Their pursuit of the Uruk-Hai brings them to the land of Rohan that is under threat. King Théoden (Hill) has too long been under the treacherous influence of his advisor Grima Wormtongue (Dourif). With the land of Rohan under threat of imminent attack, the inhabitants are advised to leave immediately and flee to the stronghold of Helm's Deep. Meanwhile, Saruman (Lee) is raising an army of several thousand Uruk-Hai warriors to advance on Helm's Deep. In the neighbouring forest of Fangorn, Merry and Pippin are under the very safe guard of the Ents. These Ents are creatures that are essentially walking trees. On the eve of the fight for Middle Earth, the Ents are reluctant to get involved. Most of their story is concerned with their decision-making process and subsequent battle.

The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers is a truly spectacular second part of an excellent trilogy. This film is darker, more focused, more deeply emotional and overall more exciting than its predecessor! Identical to the first film, The Two Towers is filmed against the magnificent scenery of New Zealand that is marvellously showcased as Middle Earth. This film is simply a visual enchantment. Even after repeated screenings you will still be trying to grasp the attention to detail in every single shot.

The special effects work is nothing short of mind-blowing! There's a spectacular assortment of technical wizardry on exhibition here, highlighted by the amazing CGI creation of Gollum. The character was created in a computer, using actor Serkis as a model for which to animate his mannerisms. Every piece of Gollum has been inserted by computer, and yet it's almost impossible to point out any flaws in the CGI. Shadow detail, skin texture...everything has been brilliantly detailed by the ideal creative team! Even though Gollum is a computer creation we can experience his emotions with a great deal of potency. His story is tragic and enough to make you cry. His mannerisms and voice by Andy Serkis is just the icing on the cake. There are certainly multiple facets to explore with this character, especially with dual personalities buzzing around in the mind of Gollum. This is all shown extremely well. I can't compliment the filmmakers enough!

Of course, The Two Towers features an outstanding cast. In my review of the first film I mention most of the cast in-depth. I will prominently mention the new members of the cast this time. Bernard Hill is an exceptional character portrayal of King Théoden. At first the king is weak and dying...then he becomes rejuvenated and younger. Hill plays both of these character personalities to perfection. I simply cannot imagine anyone but Hill pulling off this role. Miranda Otto is stunning and idyllic as Éowyn: a confident and feisty woman (also very beautiful) who spends most of the movie proving her worth in combat. Many of these bonding scenes with co-star Viggo Mortensen are very compelling, and their chemistry sizzles. Karl Urban's best role is on display here as he portrays the soldier Éomer. His lines are never contrived and he looks the part. David Wenham is yet another commendable addition to the cast as Gondorian ranger Faramir. During combat his lines are delivered with great intensity. Wenham never strikes a false note. There's also a powerhouse performance by Christopher Lee as the powerful white wizard, and a sadistic-looking Brad Dourif as the deformed Wormtongue. John Rhys-Davis also voiced Treebeard the Ent who is fittingly introduced in this second instalment.

Overall, The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers is every bit as stunning as its forerunner. With a gorgeous, motivating score from Howard Shore (that establishes a number of trademark themes for characters, locations, etc), exquisitely dazzling visuals, a solid script and plenty of testosterone this is indeed a film for the history books. The Fellowship of the Ring was a hard act to follow, but Jackson and his superlative creative team pull off a film that suitably matches its predecessor in terms of visuals, heart and intensity. This film created further reason for my never-ending obsession with the trilogy. I have so far attended 2 marathons, and I viewed The Two Towers singularly in the cinema on multiple occasions. It's a grand achievement of contemporary filmmaking...a cinematic rush of blood to the head that exhilarates, astounds and enchants; leaving you hungry for more.

The Two Towers continues Tolkein's trilogy in grandiose style, casting a spell that is impossible to resist. The Battle of Helm's Deep is possibly the greatest battle scene in cinematic history. Winner of 2 Oscars. Later released in an extended edition.

"Welcome to the party, pal."

Die Hard is considered to be the seminal action movie of the 1980s. Produced in 1988, this is the archetypal blueprint for the contemporary action thriller. It has been decades since this crackling action flick first hit cinemas in summer 1988, yet in the 21st century its influence on the action genre is still overwhelming. Die Hard is the smart-mouthed, high-rise thriller which launched Bruce Willis as an action icon. To this day, the world's greatest action hero (in my opinion) is Willis' John McClane. Willis portraying the New York Cop was a career-defining turn: he mixed comical repartee, action heroics and a grubby white vest to astonishing effect. Die Hard also vastly reinvented the action film formula. It introduced a hero that bleeds when shot, panics when people he's trying to protect are endangered, and conveys uncertainties about his ability to survive. McClane is a vulnerable Everyman as opposed to an unstoppable machine. Instead of dispersing bullets non-stop and regularly raising the body count, this hero prefers to employ his brain more frequently as an alternative. McClane was the lone Western hero transposed to a setting subjugated by skyscrapers rather than rock formations.

On top of this, Die Hard proved that action films could be genuinely original and break new boundaries whilst still awarding a mainstream audience the entertaining action they desired. By contemporary standards, the action in the film superficially emerges as fairly tame. Most films of late, such as The Matrix, depict over-the-top martial arts in irritating slow motion. The fight scenes in Die Hard are far more cramped and sweaty; saturated with a higher level of realism and brutality. These fights depict the way real men would do battle: with hard-hitting punches, struggles and a constant inkling of vulnerability.

The plot is as simple as it is involving. As the film opens, it's Christmas Eve and we are introduced to Officer John McClane (Willis): he's a New York City cop disembarking from a plane to Los Angeles. McClane's business in LA is to visit his estranged wife Holly (Bedelia) who had moved there several months beforehand with their children. Holly is in attendance at a Christmas function hosted in a high-rise LA skyscraper owned by the successful Nakatomi Corporation. Unfortunately for John McClane, the Christmas party is abruptly interrupted when a group of terrorists led by Hans Gruber (Rickman) seize control of the building and hold the guests hostage. McClane is, however, fortunate enough to be in a separate room when the terrorists make their presence known, therefore able to slip away. This consequently inaugurates an excruciating few hours as McClane works to evade the terrorists while also working to conquer them from the inside.

The film embodies all the customary action movie stereotypes: the hero, the nefarious bad guys, the trademark black guy (VelJohnson), the self-absorbed yet incredibly stupid police chief (Gleason), the despondently brainless federal agents (Bush and Davi) and the ex-wife who's still in love with the hero. However, all is fine as Die Hard spawned the majority of these clichés.

For an action movie made in 1988, the special effects (which secured an Oscar nomination) are still utterly mind-blowing. These special effects are still as effective today as their digital equivalent. The high level of practicality in these special effects is extraordinary, and they supply a valuable reminder about the dying art that's being rapidly replaced by CGI technology.
Prior to John McTiernan helming this 1988 masterpiece, he was only recognised for Predator and Nomads. I immensely adore Predator, however McTiernan's supreme cinematic creation will forever be the classic action romp known as Die Hard. The sense of claustrophobia is overwhelming, and we feel more riveted as the tension steadily increases with each passing second. His demolition-heavy vision - astoundingly captured with cinematographer Jan de Bont's lens - guarantees that the film is pure awesome mayhem...ensuring that it's fun no matter how many times one has watched it.

Die Hard also never conforms to the mediocre quality of a pure action fest. That said, there's still a decent dosage of gun battles, explosions and violent shootings. Decades on, and the gunshot wounds are still hard-hitting. Kneecaps being shredded by bullets, glass jammed into bare feet, bloody executions and fierce close combat are among the highlights. Like I said before, the violence probably appears quite tame when compared to contemporary action films, but it's stylish and used realistically. Despite all this action and violence, much of the 130-minute running time is dedicated to establishing the story and developing the fantastic characters. The script is impeccable. There's a great assortment of enjoyable scenarios punctuated with smart and fascinating dialogue. Die Hard also has the advantage of being largely unpredictable. We expect the hero to prevail, but there's a lack of sentimentality towards the characters, hence lending a hint of uncertainty.

The sound effects (which also earned an Oscar nomination) are ear-shattering and realistic. There are booming gunshots, brutal punches and deafening explosions. It'd be difficult to top even by today's standards. The film editing cannot be faulted either. The work of editors John F. Link and Frank J. Urioste holds up under close scrutiny. The directing/editing collaboration is terrific, resulting in minimal continuity issues. The remarkable definitive touch was eventually applied during the post-production period: Michael Kamen's score. There is no distinct Die Hard theme, yet there are countless segments of exciting, pulse-pounding music exclusive to the series. Kamen's musical composition for the film is perfect by action film standards. The intensity gradually elevates thanks to the amazing music. The film's key action sequences are even better with the inclusion of Kamen's efforts. The work behind the scenes is simply terrific!

Director McTiernan also ensured that no faulty performances would slip under the radar. As a result, the entire cast is amazing. Bruce Willis as John McClane cannot be faulted. The smart screenwriting provides Willis with a host of wisecracks and one-liners that are legendary, memorable and quotable. Willis also displays great versatility as an emotional side is expressed towards the climax. As he doubts he will survive the situation, McClane breaks down and lends a hint of vulnerability. The same cannot be said for Stallone, Van Damme, Chuck Norris or any other 80s action genre luminary. Prior to Die Hard, Bruce Willis was primarily known only for starring in the television show Moonlighting and the Blake Edwards comedy Blind Date. For the initial theatrical Die Hard posters, Bruce Willis' unfamiliar likeness wasn't featured because it was feared that this could be a major turn-off for cinemagoers. In hindsight, naturally, there is no doubt that the perennially smirking Willis contributed mightily to the film's enormous success as he traded blows and quips with equal assurance.
John McClane is essentially a Western hero like John Wayne or Roy Rogers. This similarity is referenced on several occasions. When McClane provides an alias, he asks to be called Roy. Alan Rickman's Hans Gruber even talks to McClane at one stage, and asks: "Who are you? Just another American who saw too many movies as a child? Another orphan of a bankrupt culture who thinks he's John Wayne? Rambo? Marshal Dillon?" To which McClane retorts with "I was always kinda partial to Roy Rogers actually". At the climax Gruber then says "Still the cowboy, Mr. McClane? Americans, all alike. Well this time John Wayne does not walk off into the sunset with Grace Kelly". "That's Gary Cooper, asshole" is McClane's response.

Alan Rickman surpasses perfection as the terrorist leader Hans Gruber. Die Hard already had the pleasure of featuring the greatest action hero of all time, but the film also boasts Rickman as the greatest action villain in cinematic history. Rickman's Hans Gruber is polite, witty and sinister. His character is well-written, and Rickman was the perfect man for the job.
But the screenwriter also develops a surplus of other characters as warm as toast. Reginald VelJohnson is highly likeable as the policeman inadvertently pulled into the situation. VelJohnson magnificently bounces off Willis' terrific dialogue. Although VelJohnson and Willis predominantly exchange dialogue via radio, their chemistry is solid.
Then there's Bonnie Bedelia as McClane's estranged wife. Bedelia develops a feisty character not afraid to make snappy remarks - even if a gun is pointed at her.
De'voreaux White contributes yet another terrific character. He provides comic relief and an easily likeable screen persona. I could keep going, but needless to say the supporting cast are devoid of flaws.

At the time of writing this review, Die Hard is two decades old. Even after those 20 years the film is a phenomenal action thrill ride of extraordinary proportions. It offers believable characters, staggering special effects, satisfyingly brutal action, as well as non-stop adventure and tension. Its success at the box office prompted studios to begin green-lighting a slew of knock-offs featuring other 80s action heroes: Die Hard on a ship (Under Siege with Steven Seagal), Die Hard in a sports stadium (Sudden Death with Jean-Claude Van Damme), Die Hard on a train (Under Siege II: Dark Territory with Seagal) and even Die Hard on a bloody big snowy mountain (Cliffhanger with Sylvester Stallone). All these younger siblings of this classic action film follow the same formula of the protagonist finding themself inadvertently entangled in a dangerous situation, and their daring-do is required. This is a testament to how brilliant, engrossing and influential this action masterpiece truly is. Furthermore, I've seen the film at least 60 times in the last few years (including a customary viewing on every Christmas Eve)...and I already want to watch it again. Films like these are simply too few and far between these days.

If you're a self-respecting action fan, Die Hard cannot be missed. If you enjoy watching smart, competent thrillers then this is an essential purchase. Or if you just like being entertained...Die Hard cannot be passed up. I'll be perfectly frank: Die Hard is damn close to being the zenith of filmic perfection. Even a five-star rating isn't sufficient. If this isn't the greatest action film of all time, then it's too close for words. This masterpiece ushered in a new era of action movies, bringing a human quality to the plethora of unbelievable situations in preceding incarnations whereby one man would take on an army himself.

"Yippee-ki-yay Motherfucker!"


Followed by three sequels, beginning with Die Hard 2: Die Harder.


"I wanted this to be professional, efficient, adult, cooperative. Not a lot to ask. Alas, your Mr. Takagi did not see it that way... so he won't be joining us for the rest of his life. We can go any way you want it. You can walk out of here or be carried out. But have no illusions. We are in charge. So, decide now, each of you. And please remember: we have left nothing to chance."

"Oh, we have 12 vacancies. 12 cabins, 12 vacancies."

Produced during the period when Alfred Hitchcock created his most gripping work, Psycho is the original archetypal horror movie and an essential piece of filmic history. It's the ultimate spine-tingler, the definitive slasher, and the perfect chiller. In the decades prior to helming Psycho, Hitchcock had delighted in astonishing and scaring audiences. However, never had Hitchcock engaged in full-on, straight-up horror until this macabre riposte to the schlock frighteners of the late 1950s.

Psycho has been imitated often, but never surpassed. This is suitably evidenced by almost 50 years of slasher flicks (like John Carpenter's brilliant original Halloween and the crappy Friday the 13th series) including the film's own sequels (that varied in quality), a TV movie spin-off and, in particular, Gus Van Sant's utterly woeful 1998 remake. Furthermore, this Hitchcock masterpiece is a reason why people these days lock the bathroom door while having a shower.

Psycho is more than the great granddaddy of all slashers; it is also an excellent thriller, a quality black comedy, and a valuable lesson in filmmaking. It's a landmark movie for its application of realistic violence, shock, subtle humour and surprise. Virtually every modern horror film and thriller owes its allegiance to Psycho.

Back in 1959, no-one could believe that the Master of Suspense was going to direct a movie with a mere $800,000 budget in a measly thirty-day period (seven of these days were spent shooting the shower scene, which is packed with 87 cross-cuts in its frenzied 45 seconds) using the crew from his TV series, Alfred Hitchcock Presents. People also couldn't understand why Hitchcock was helming a filmic adaptation of a pulp novel by Robert Bloch which was influenced by the gruesome career of the Wisconsin serial killer Ed Gein. The audience reaction at the time must have been quite similar to the mutual bewilderment when news broke out that Gus Van Sant intended to direct a shot-for-shot remake of this very masterpiece.

Upon release, Psycho was panned by quite a number of critics across the country. Nevertheless people lined up for the movie for blocks (there are stories of queues as long as three miles at drive-in cinemas), it became popular among audiences, and within a few months most critics had changed their opinion. Before long Hitchcock was nominated for an Academy Award, and Psycho was considered one of the best films of the year. In the subsequent decades it was being featured on lists of the best shockers, best suspense thrillers, and, eventually, best films of all time.

All and sundry should be familiar with the straightforward plot of Psycho. If you're unaware of the storyline, surely you've witnessed at least one of the thousands of lampoons and parodies of the acclaimed shower scene. It's hard to imagine anyone not knowing the plot of this masterpiece. For the sake of this reviewer's writing traditions, I'll provide a reasonably brief synopsis.
Marion Crane (Leigh) works as an assistant at a real estate agency in Phoenix, Arizona. She's a struggling working girl, and she's fed up with the way life is treating her. The only way she can see her lover Sam Loomis (Gavin) is if she sneaks out during her extended lunch breaks. Marion wants to marry Sam, but they have insufficient funds to commence a new life together. On a seemingly regular Friday afternoon, Marion's employer entrusts her with an enormous cash sum of $40,000. She's instructed to deposit the money at the bank. However, Marion's instinct tells her that this money could be her last chance at a new life. She steals the money and leaves town. On a fiercely stormy night, Marion stops at the Bates Motel. At this enigmatic location Marion encounters Norman Bates (Perkins): the shy-but-kind manager who's happy to offer her a room for the night and a sympathetic ear. But too long has the Bates Motel been under the authority of Norman's mother, and this night concludes with the immortal shower scene. In the weeks following Marion's murder, her family and friends grow worried and suspicious. Unfortunately for Norman Bates, things escalate when the investigation begins.

Plot-wise, Psycho isn't anything extraordinary. The film's true ingeniousness lies in its edifice. Director Hitchcock and screenwriter Joseph Stafano developed this masterpiece in such a way that it constantly defies expectations and eliminates any sense of predictability. There are two key surprises: the shower scene murder and the final shocking revelation (this ending still shocks me even after watching the film countless times). A viewer who watches Psycho for the first time without any knowledge about either surprise will experience the full impact of Hitchcock's intentions. In fact, the impact is weaker these days because the shower scene is so frequently discussed and so well-known. The greatest shock for a first-time audience member is the early exit of Marion Crane. This is doubly unanticipated because up to this point the script has tricked us into accepting Marion as the main character. When events dispel that illusion, and the point-of-view shifts to Norman Bates, viewers are justifiably baffled. In order to keep this aspect of the film secret when Psycho opened in theatres in 1960, no advance screenings were held, no-one was admitted to a showing after the feature had started, and Hitchcock purchased every copy of Robert Bloch's novel he could find.

To this day, audiences never forget how scary and disturbing Psycho truly is. People still have trouble taking a shower because of it (Janet Leigh reportedly never took a shower ever again after filming concluded). If you're looking for blood and gore, look elsewhere. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre or a Friday the 13th entry will be more to your liking. Psycho has a grand total of about two minutes (if that!) of actual violence in it. Yet these are the most unforgettable two minutes of violence in film history. Alfred Hitchcock was a magician and a director. The violence was done with mirrors, trick shots, and general illusions. The viewer comes away swearing they've witnessed more than they've actually seen. For example, at no point in Psycho do we ever see a knife penetrate the skin. The murders are done with quick flashes, expert editing, and realistic sounds (the stabbing noises were actually a recording of Hitchcock stabbing melons with a kitchen knife).
Let's not forget about the music. The film is offered an absolutely riveting score courtesy of Hitchcock regular Bernard Herrmann. Without the chilling sound of Herrman's music the film would lose about half its intensity. Psycho is probably the best instance in cinematic history of music effectively strengthening action and intensity.

Hitchcock purposely made the film in black & white because he thought it'd be too gory in colour! Hitchcock dabbled in cinematic taboos and pushed the censorship envelope with Psycho. In fact this was the first American motion picture to feature a toilet being flushed (up until then movies didn't even acknowledge the existence of toilets). Janet Leigh is also shown in her underwear on more than one occasion, and it's possible to see hints of flesh (mainly belonging to a body double) during the shower scene. The script also features a character speaking the word "transvestite" - a line that survived the censor only after a Herculean struggle on Stafano's part.

Anthony Perkins' perfect performance as Norman Bates is a brilliant mix of sincerity, charisma and impenetrable insanity. In the Robert Bloch novel the character of Norman Bates was a fat and balding middle-aged voyeur. To make the character more sympathetic, screenwriter Stafano reworked Bates in order for Perkins to suit the role.
Janet Leigh was nominated for an Oscar. Her performance is also quite extraordinary.
According to various actors who worked with the Master of Suspense, Hitchcock was a director never particularly concerned with the acting in his movies. Apparently he was more of a technician. Hitchcock (known more affectionately as "Hitch" to his collaborators) knew precisely what he wanted actors to do, and he expected them to do it. Most of the acting in Psycho is in fact quite perfunctory. Janet Leigh was the one who got an Oscar nomination, but it's Anthony Perkins' indelible performance that everyone remembers. Perkins delivers one of the cinema's most frightening and extraordinary performances. Perkins became so identified with Norman Bates that it changed the trajectory of his career. For years following Psycho, Perkins shunned talking about the part until he finally made peace with Norman in the 70s, and at long last returned to play the role in sequels.

Alfred Hitchcock's name has become synonymous with Psycho. If Hitch's name pops up in conversation, people will usually associate him with Psycho or Rear Window or Vertigo or The Birds. Hitchcock's Psycho is so incredibly influential and unspeakably brilliant. Many believe that John Carpenter's Halloween was the mother of the slasher genre. It became responsible for the Scream films and many other modern slashers. Yet, as important as Halloween was to the horror genre during the 80s and 90s, John Carpenter's thriller didn't invent this brand of terror...it re-invented it by paying tribute to one of the most frightening films of all time: Psycho. Not only did Halloween star Jamie Lee Curtis (Janet Leigh's daughter) but the character name of "Sam Loomis" was re-used.

Visually rich, unbearably intense and absolutely terrifying, no-one has ever done it better than Hitchcock and no-one ever will. As the film's shocking revelation is revealed, I always get goosebumps. These are the consequence of a combination of several elements: the shocking imagery, the sound, and the haunting music. Several argue that Psycho is Hitchcock's best movie. In my opinion that honour goes to Rear Window, although it's incredibly close.
Today, Psycho still holds up amazingly well. With the possible exception of Halloween and perhaps Scream, no latter-day horror/thriller has been capable of generating as many goosebumps as Psycho. The black and white photography is perfect for the film's tone and mood - colour would have blurred the nightmarish quality. The painstaking way in which Hitchcock composed every scene is evident in the quality of the final product. This is the most notorious title in the Hitchcock canon. It moves from one memorable scene to the next. It rattles along at a brisk pace, and before you know it the film is over. This was my introduction to Hitchcock and I've been viewing more of the director's work ever since.

"A boy's best friend is his mother."

"For nearly three thousand years man has been searching for the lost ark. It's not something to be taken lightly. No one knows its secrets. It's like nothing you've ever gone after before."

The Indiana Jones films became the most influential adventure films in cinematic history. The films made their mark on the genre and still influence the way adventure films are made to this day. What's the allure of the series? Put rather simply, all the Indiana Jones films impeccably merge action, exhilarating adventure, dazzling locations, marvellous humour and a mixture of great characters. Raiders of the Lost Ark is the first instalment in the highly acclaimed Indiana Jones series, and still the superior film. The elegance and class of this movie is so far unrivalled and unsurpassed even after several decades.


Set in 1936 on the eve of World War II, Dr. Indiana Jones (Ford) is a renowned archaeologist and a famed adventurer. Jones grows tired of lecturing students at a university; instead he adores trekking through the jungle touting a whip and a gun while searching for ancient artefacts. After an incredibly memorable opening sequence set in Africa, Indy is hired by the United States government to investigate the possible existence of the 'Ark of the Covenant'; an ancient relic that appears to be the cause of strange doings by the Nazis. Indy is pitted against rival archaeologist René Belloq (Freeman) who is also searching for this illustrious ark that has been nothing but myth and legend for centuries.


This fascinating story is merely the beginning as the film rapidly moves to numerous different locations around the globe from Nepal to Cairo.


Harrison Ford is unreservedly perfect for the principal role of Indiana Jones. Ford possesses that certain look about him that suits the role of both an adventurer and a professor. His dialogue is delivered extraordinarily, and his on screen magnetism is one of the film's highest points. Ford has all the wit and appeal: the character of Indiana Jones is the essential embodiment of an adventure hero that encompasses all the qualities and the charisma that makes him one of the best action heroes of all time (as voted on several occasions). Ford is partnered with the equally charismatic Karen Allen. Playing Indy's love interest, this isn't the usual clichéd damsel in distress who can't fend for herself. On top of this there's a remarkable performance by John Rhys-Davis, and unforgettable performances from both Paul Freeman and Ronald Lacey.


Steven Spielberg's direction is magnificent. This focused directing and the lavish cinematography are qualities rarely seen in contemporary adventure movies. I particularly loved the old school effects and the elaborate sets. With such gorgeous images on the screen for every second of the film's duration, it effectively moves from one memorable scene to the next.


The opening artefact hunt is still my favourite film opening of all time. Not to mention all the other memorable scenes - the bar fight, the plane scene, the snake pit, the truck chase, the ship battle, the final showdown...it's impossible to spot a dull second amongst the action and adventure. The outlandish stunts are a requirement for an adventure film of this calibre. The filmmakers deliver a never-ending supply.


The film is only made better by the accompanying exciting music by John Williams. The classic Indiana Jones theme is still my favourite movie theme of all time! The exhilarating action is only made better by the triumphant, invigorating music.


The special effects delightfully hold up even after all these years. With filmmaking technology forever advancing I am pleased and happy to see such terrific old school effects that still look mighty impressive.


When I was a youngster I remember watching Raiders of the Lost Ark on various occasions. The first three Indiana Jones films were an essential part of my childhood. Now that I've aged and matured I still love these original three films tremendously. This is unquestionably one of the best movies of all time! Followed by several sequels beginning with Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (this is actually a prequel).

"Here's looking at you, kid."

It has been over 6 decades since Casablanca was first released. That totals over 60 years of movie lovers and film enthusiasts alike admiring this masterpiece with the utmost praise.

Casablanca is a magical tale of loyalty, love and radiant romance that deserves every bit of praise it still receives, and then some. Casablanca is one of the only old movies that I could watch daily for the rest of my life and never get sick of. The film is a true original Hollywood classic that will always be thought by some to be the greatest movie of all time. It will always be in my Top 10.

Casablanca has not dated one iota; it's appealing, charming, magical and a downright masterpiece. Set during World War II, the main action of this exotic tale is located in the non-occupied French Morocco city of Casablanca, logically enough. The central character is a cynical café owner named Rick Blaine (Bogart), a discontented soul who "sticks his neck out for nobody". Rick finds himself coming into possession of two letters of transit; these can guarantee safe passage out of the country to whosoever carries the letters. Rick is informed that the leader of the underground in Europe, Victor Laszlo (Henreid), has arrived in Casablanca with hopes of escaping to America. But he needs these letters of transit that Rick is presently in possession of. The twist is that Victor arrives with his wife Ilsa (Bergman). Ilsa and Rick were lovers in Paris many years ago and departed under tragic circumstances. And now a classic love triangle emerges; two letters and three people that want the letters. Rick must now decide between being selfless or selfish.

Casablanca is an unforgettable film that is still mighty appealing in this contemporary age of cinema. It is classic and timeless in every sense of the word. Many people still regard the screenplay to be the best script in existence. Do I agree? Absolutely! The script is definitely the best script ever written for the screen. It contains some gorgeous lines that we often hear parodied and quoted. ("Round up the usual suspects", "We'll always have Paris", the list goes on) If you ever do a course on writing screenplays, Casablanca will be brought up as an example. The lines cannot be faulted at all. There is never anything cheesy and never anything too corny. The film is never boring and is also the perfect length.

Both the screenplay and the directing assist in making this perfect film into a reality. It almost goes without saying that the performances are fantastic. Humphrey Bogart was in his prime when this film was released. After The Maltese Falcon he was finally given his big break. And since this film in particular, Bogart has gone on to become one of the world's most memorable actors. Bogart's performance is masterful. Every line is delivered with such precision; keeping the audience interested and enthralled in everything that is going to happen next. The final line uttered in this movie is the greatest last line in cinematic history without question or debate. And Bogart's delivery is essentially flawless.

Ingrid Bergman was an extremely talented actress when this film was made. Her performance is sublime. The romance is never cheesy, and each line delivered by either her or Bogart glistens with perfection. The song As Time Goes By is the greatest movie song of all time. It will give one goose-bumps because of its poignancy and power.

I've seen this film broken down during filmmakering classes. Everything in this movie is to perfection. People will always suggest Casablanca as an example of a perfect movie. There is little wonder or debate surrounding that statement. I've said it many times before and I'll say it again, Casablanca could be the greatest movie ever made. If you want an example of a perfect movie then watch this one. If you want a good movie to watch with your partner, watch this one. Rush out and buy the movie with hesitation. I cannot put it clearer than that.

"The boy's alive and we're going to send someone to save him... and we are going to get him the hell out of there."

The directorial career of Steven Spielberg commenced in the early years of the 1970s. Spielberg originally directed Duel before progressing onto further projects such as The Sugarland Express, Jaws, and the excellent Indiana Jones adventures (beginning with Raiders of the Lost Ark). These few years established Spielberg as an accomplished purveyor of light-hearted blockbusters and good fun action movies. It was in 1993 that Spielberg demonstrated his ability to direct powerful and mature films. Schindler's List denoted a crucial addition to Spielberg's extensive résumé: a modern masterpiece that personified good (Schindler) and evil (Amon Goeth), playing out the struggle against the tragic backdrop of the Holocaust.

1997 marked the release of two further additions to the Spielberg canon - Amistad and The Lost World: Jurassic Park. These films are fine examples of Spielberg as a thinker and as an entertainer. For 1998's Saving Private Ryan, these two characteristics are deftly merged. Not only is Saving Private Ryan an extremely powerful and deeply philosophical affair, but it's also very entertaining and utterly riveting for its entire duration.

D-Day: Tuesday, June 6th, 1944. At 6:30am that ill-fated morning, an initial assault wave disembarked at Omaha Beach. This first assault wave comprised of 96 tanks, almost 1500 assault infantry, and a task force of engineers to clear the landing area of obstructions. In the hours preceding the landing, the German shore defences were heavily pulverised by Allied artillery, naval guns, and aerial barrages. However as the first landing craft came within a quarter-mile of shore...it became apparent that the German fortifications hadn't been neutralised. Rough seas and poor visibility had hampered the artillery bombardments, with overcast conditions amplifying the margin of error for the bombing runs. Consequently, a majority of the bombs hit too far inland. Establishing the beachhead would prove to be far more gruelling than originally envisaged. As the landing crafts hit the sand, the infantry immediately found themselves under concentrated small-arms, mortar and artillery fire from enemy fortifications that covered Omaha Beach. Burdened by heavy equipment, weakened by seasickness, exhausted, and disoriented by the mayhem surrounding them, the disembarking infantry had to travel through knee-deep to waist-high water, making them easy targets for the German soldiers. Upon reaching shore, they then had to move up 200 yards of open beach before reaching any form of cover. All this while avoiding enemy fire, which fell thick and fast all around them. This event was a violent massacre.

The story conveyed in Saving Private Ryan is prefaced with the D-Day landing at Omaha Beach. This beginning is commonly regarded as the best battle sequence ever committed to celluloid. It's also frequently regarded as the best war scene in cinematic history. This sequence depicts the Omaha Beach landing from the perspective of the soldiers who fought it. This is a brilliant scene, not only in terms of technique but in its unparalleled ability to have a viewer completely immersed as the anarchic mayhem transpires. This is certainly the most violent, gory, visceral cinematic depiction of war I have ever witnessed. Spielberg spares the viewer nothing of the horrors of war as he uses every tactic at his disposal to convey the utter turmoil and futile waste that lies at the core of any engagement. The audience is presented with unforgettable, haunting images of bodies being cut to pieces by bullets, limbs being blown off, entrails spilling out, as well as a range of additional assorted examples of carnage. When the tide comes in at the battle's conclusion, with the waves breaking on the body-strewn beach, the water is crimson. It's jaw-droppingly compelling material, and all the more sobering when you realise that this isn't fiction - this actually occurred to the mostly young, inexperienced soldiers. Spielberg and his cast & crew have produced an astonishingly faithful recreation of the war experience. Shell-shocked D-Day veterans reportedly staggered out of theatres mumbling "someone finally showed what it was really like". Steven Spielberg won a Best Director Oscar for his efforts of course.

"This Ryan had better be worth it - he better go home and cure some disease or invent a longer-lasting light bulb."

The story following this phenomenal opening sequence is a simple one. A group of eight soldiers, led by D-Day survivor and hero Captain Miller (Hanks), are dispatched to find a soldier who is currently believed to be stuck behind enemy lines. This soldier they're searching for is Private James Ryan (Damon) whose three other brothers were killed in action. To avoid the devastation of Ryan's mother suffering the loss of her last son, General George C. Marshall (Presnell) orders these aforementioned eight soldiers to find Private Ryan and bring him back home. Screenwriter Robert Rodat adapted the story from a real-life situation.
This is an incisive, philosophical story. The underlying theme that runs the length of the movie is in regards to the value of a single human soul. As the eight-man platoon suffers casualties, is it really worth it just to save one man? Are there lives in this world more important than others? As the soldiers strive to complete their objective, their loyalties begin to blur and they begin to question the necessity of the mission. Spielberg vividly contrasts the faceless carnage of the Omaha Beach landing with the extremely personal and shocking deaths of some of the soldiers during their mission. Thousands died on Omaha beach, including many close friends of the surviving men. Yet the nature of this mission - which a majority of the men see as "Fubar" - causes them to question the value they place on their own lives as well as the lives of their friends. As events unfold, these soldiers commit acts of vengeance and rage that they themselves would most likely never have thought themselves capable of mere days beforehand.

"To me sir, this mission is a serious misallocation of valuable military resources."

The three-act structure of Saving Private Ryan is moderately straightforward. The movie is book-ended by two major battle sequences. In between these two major battles there are smaller skirmishes and relatively subdued character-building moments. Consequently the entire film is absorbing, engrossing, mesmerising and totally enthralling. Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan is an emotionally intense journey through the battlegrounds of occupied France during World War II. Director Spielberg delivers one of the greatest war movies of all time, if not the greatest war movie in history. But, despite being set against the background of WWII, this isn't just a war movie; this is a human drama first and a war adventure second. It commemorates the preservation of hope, courage, and sacrifice in the cauldron of fear and devastation that was WWII, or any war for that matter. These virtues shine brightest throughout humanity's gloomiest hours. Spielberg understands that in art one must show the horrors of a certain situation in order to suitably illustrate the full potential of the human spirit. All of the verisimilitude merely exists to transport us into the hearts and minds of those who tolerated such taxing circumstances so that we may perhaps identify with them, and maybe become acquainted with ourselves a bit better along the way.

As escapist entertainment (something that Spielberg also relishes) Saving Private Ryan is a masterpiece that offers a rollercoaster ride yet to be equalled or surpassed.

"We're not here to do the decent thing - we're here to follow fucking orders."

The authenticity of its period depiction is truly astounding. Spielberg opted for the film to be shot in bleached colour, with lenses similar to those available during the 1940s to give the impression of actual documentary footage. The director employs other methods to encapsulate the essence of combat - gritty hand-held cameras, a slight speeding up of the images, muted colours, and an assortment of different kinds of film stock. Altogether this adds up to a dizzying, exhausting assault on the senses. Needless to say, the film confidently won the Oscar for Best Cinematography and Best Film Editing.
The searing and uncompromising images of violence and gore almost earned an NC-17 rating from the MPAA. However the gore is by no means exploitative or exaggerated. Instead of dwelling on geysers of blood being spilled, the film continues to rapidly move along at lightning pace.

If you're avoiding the movie due to the three-hour running time, then you're avoiding it for all the wrong reasons. 160 minutes has never flown by so fast. You'll be so captivated by the brilliant filmmaking that you won't ever be reduced to boredom. The film is also remarkably visceral. Spielberg very sparingly employs CGI. Things are generally kept practical, and the rare instances of CGI are so subtle that you won't notice. Even about 20 amputee stuntmen were employed and fitted with prosthetic limbs.
Words cannot accurately describe how remarkable the sound design truly is. Loud accurate gun noises, deafening explosions and explicit stabbings are among the moments perfectly topped off by the terrific sound mix. Needless to say, the film earned an Academy Award for both Best Sound and Best Sound Effects Editing.

There's an absolutely astonishing cast at the centre of the film. Tom Hanks once again delivers an impeccable performance. He was nominated for an Oscar, naturally. The excellent ensemble cast also includes Tom Sizemore, Matt Damon, Edward Burns, Jeremy Davies, Vin Diesel, Adam Goldberg, Barry Pepper, Ted Danson, Paul Giamatti and Giovanni Ribisi. They all look the part and convey the emotional necessities of their respective characters.
In the film there is no specific human villain. Even the harsh ideology and inhumane beliefs of Nazi Germany aren't presented as the evil to be overcome. Instead war and the blistering impact it has on soldiers is the real enemy.

"The more men I kill, the further away from home I feel."

John Williams was nominated for an Oscar for his terrific music. In my opinion this must be considered as one of Williams' finest scores. The music is touching and poignant, heroic and emotive. Music is never employed during the action sequences simply because (as Spielberg once explained) it reminds the audience that they're watching a movie. Instead of music, the ambient sound effects permeate the battles. This works perfectly. Other Oscar nominations included Best Writing and Best Make-Up. It deserved both of these awards in my books.

After the masterpiece of Schindler's List, nobody could imagine Spielberg crafting another masterpiece of such brilliance. But Saving Private Ryan is proof the director is capable of making another film of such a high standard. In my opinion, Saving Private Ryan earns the honour of being the greatest war film in history. It's gripping, engrossing, and uncompromising. Spielberg strikes the perfect balance of confronting horror and poignant human drama. The director's dexterous touch is readily apparent throughout this film, particularly in his inspired use of camera framing and movement as well as the soundtrack that plays a crucial role.

Saving Private Ryan is the most powerful and accurate cinematic rendering of World War II. Nothing you've ever read in history books can prepare you for the uncompromising way Spielberg brings the war to life...he does so with great attention to detail and a genuine passion for honesty toward his subject matter. Some bitterly complain about this film being potent American propaganda. The same can be said about any war film. This particular war film is based on a real mission that was carried out by American soldiers. If you think this is propaganda then you're unbelievably narrow-minded.

"Where's the sense of risking eight lives for one guy?"

In one of the biggest Oscar blunders in history, the Academy overlooked this masterpiece and awarded Best Picture to Shakespeare in Love. How this happened is simply beyond me...

"He knew the risks, he didn't have to be there. It rains... you get wet."

Heat is an absolutely stunning film; this epic, brilliant crime drama is unmissable and unforgettable.

Many will lose interest due to the film's length, but I found the film essentially perfect despite the running time.

First of all, Robert De Niro and Al Pacino in the same movie. These are two of the best actors on the planet, and both are in top form. The script (written by director Mann) is nothing short of remarkable. The dialogue is always witty, realistic, and is never contrived. The actors further cement this realism in an amazing way.

Mann's direction for every second of the movie was stunning. The way Mann approached this movie was destined to equal excellence. First of all, he penned the damn fine screenplay himself and thus knew what he wanted on screen. Second, he employed incredible cinematographic techniques to achieve his vision. And finally, he knew what actors he wanted and was not going to stop until the result is exactly the way he wants it. Even a dialogue scene between De Niro and Pacino can sustain interest in the viewer without showing any action.

Neil McCauley (De Niro) is a thief who indulges in precision jobs along with his team of professionals. After the robbery of an armoured car, the police are now investigating. Vincent Hanna (Pacino) leads the investigation. Hanna is a master at his profession, and McCauley is at the peak of his.

This epic crime film then becomes a game of cat-and-mouse as Hanna works to bring McCauley to justice. In amidst this, we have plenty of time for a character study as Mann digs in-depth into the private lives of the protagonists.

And of course, the occasional action scene is both spectacular and incredibly violent at times. The action scenes are crafted to perfection, with cinematography that blew me away.

De Niro and Pacino share very little screen time together, but when those two are in a scene together the results are unbeatable. The memorable scene at the diner between De Niro and Pacino is something we rarely ever see in a movie - great script, great direction, great performances. And the final showdown isn't your usual "good guy/bad guy" showdown but something a lot deeper.

The highlights of the movie include magnificent cinematic techniques during the few action scenes, and the wonderful performances from everyone in the cast.

Michael Mann's Heat is absolutely unmissable. This epic crime story is most definitely one of the best movies ever made. If you have not yet seen it, I urge you to get a copy of this film in your hands immediately.

""Treason doth never prosper," wrote an English poet, "What's the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason."

JFK is an astonishing, riveting achievement in filmmaking and marks Oliver Stone's best movie to date. Stone has crafted a masterpiece, and although the film is controversial and always will be due to the subject matter (not to mention those who believe something different will hate the film in favour of their beliefs) the film has been approached exceptionally!

There have been many conspiracy theories in relation to the John F. Kennedy assassination, and all aspects and theories are approached by Oliver Stone in great detail and using all available evidence at his disposal.

The film is the story of New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison (Costner) who is the only man to date to take someone to court in relation to the JFK assassination. He takes it upon himself to open up a detailed investigation and finally crack open the conspiracy in relation to one of the worst tragedies during the 20th Century.

In creating such a masterpiece, Stone has also put together an unbeatable cast lead by Kevin Costner who delivers a flawless performance.

Stone's films are always going to be controversial, and many people believe that he tried to shove a viewpoint down out throats and make us believe what he wants us to. But this is only narrow-minded people, as Stone was only outlining the inconsistencies that question the official line of Lee Harvey Oswald being the lone gunman. Until the government finally release the truth, we will never know how accurate the theories outlined here actually are.

Yes, the film is three hours long and many people lose interest, but the film is so well told and above all engaging that I was never bored. When the drama makes it to the courtroom for the final 40 minutes, I had my eyes glued to the screen as we are presented the facts in ways that we cannot dispute, and Costner's final monologue was Oscar-worthy.

On top of this, there are so many other qualities, like providing us with archive footage integrated into the dramatisations that are occurring. That Oscar for film editing was much deserved.

Love it or hate it, I leave it up to you. But if you dislike the movie due to its viewpoints that may question your beliefs; your narrow-mindedness shames our race. It's that simple. And if you don't wish to watch the film due to its three hour running time (God knows I didn't), I suggest that you cut out your stupidity and spend a few hours acquainting yourself with one of the most riveting, astonishing films ever made.

I never had much of an interest in investigating the truth behind the assassination of such a fine man that was JFK, but when I viewed this movie I now feel advantaged to have been presented with such facts, but infuriated that the government have never issued the truth that they so obviously hold. It also reminded me that the democracy we live in disadvantages us in terms of not being presented with vital information that we deserve to be given. And if Oliver Stone was able to trigger such thoughts in my mind, he has done his job correctly.

"I love robbing the English, they're so polite."

How does one distinguish the difference between a masterpiece and just another ordinary comedy? For starters, an ordinary comedy is commonly clichéd beyond all comprehension - i.e. characters are standard, events are glaringly foreseeable and the structure is far too formulaic. In addition, an ordinary comedy usually features well-known actors who are so desperate for laughs that they overact (like Will Ferrell, Jim Carrey, and so on) rather than dispersing clever, witty, cerebral dialogue. In an ordinary comedy the laughs are also predominantly forgettable. And finally, an ordinary comedy is funny but nothing further. It doesn't break new boundaries...it's just another comedy that'll be long forgotten and relegated to the $5 bargain bin at your local shops. But when we're talking about Hollywood movie studios, the executives just want a quick buck to raise their annual profits. Ordinary comedies are easy to make, cheap, and quality is never the concern. Genuine masterpieces of the comedy genre are close to non-existent. Only John Cleese of the Monty Python fame could've been capable of developing the perfect comedy...and he succeeds!

A Fish Called Wanda ticks all the boxes to pull it out of the "ordinary comedy" territory. The film isn't clichéd at all; characters are extraordinarily well-written, the film isn't predictable, and the structure is original. The script is peppered with dynamite dialogue, in-jokes and memorable lines (that I continually quote almost daily) as it moves from one hilarious, creative scenario to the one succeeding it. It even breaks new boundaries with its prize-winning combination of laughs and creativity. It's purely one of the most entertaining films of all time! Best of all, despite countless viewing it always seems fresh and never fails to entertain me. And I'm not alone in my sentiments. The film pulled in $60 million in the USA, making it the highest grossing British picture in America at that time. All these ingredients ensure that A Fish Called Wanda is anything but ordinary.

On the surface, it probably seems difficult to imagine this film being even considered funny. After all, this is a flick concerning diamond robbers double and triple crossing each other, not to mention it's also somewhat mean-spirited at times and cruel to animals. But by golly the package works! The result will bring tears of laughter to your eyes and side-splitting pains to your stomach as you roll all over the floor laughing uncontrollably.
A Fish Called Wanda is reminiscent of the days of Fawlty Towers and Monty Python. This is Cleese in his element: finding himself in awkward situations and having to worm his way out of them. If you're a fan of Fawlty Towers (or is it Flowery Twats or Flay Otters or Watery Fowls?), like I am, you'll have a good grasp of the laugh-out-loud comedy I'm referring to. Considering John Cleese's mostly awful recent work, it's terrific to revisit those winners he scored back in his glory days. Seriously, not many comedies get nominated for Oscars! Let alone a comedy of British origins up for Oscar noms, ultimately walking away with one win. If you want the short version, here it is: if you haven't yet seen A Fish Called Wanda then you're missing out and should immediately visit your local shop to secure a copy.

A Fish Called Wanda is a simple tail...erm, tale about betrayal, love, lust, greed and seafood. Wanda (Curtis) and Otto (Kline) are a duo of American thieves who visit Britain to pull off a diamond heist. They team up with George (Georgeson) and the animal-loving Ken (Palin) to commit an armed robbery, walking away with a loot worth $20 million US. Trouble is...Wanda and Otto are lovers posing as brother and sister who plan to double-cross their collaborators, taking off with the loot themselves. But it also seems George and Ken are mistrusting of Wanda and Otto (despite George and Wanda commencing a relationship, which Wanda faked of course). George double-crosses Wanda and Otto by secretly moving the loot before Wanda and Otto have the opportunity to finalise their double-crossing of George! Anyway, George is dobbed into the police and is arrested. When Wanda and Otto realise they'll need to figure out the new location of the loot, a somewhat complex plan to find it becomes necessitous. This involves Wanda inveigling her way into the life of jaded Etonian Archie Leach (Cleese), George's barrister. However...what begins as a simple spot of using somebody to further her own means becomes more complicated as Wanda's attraction to this somewhat repressed and cute ("in a pompous sort of way") barrister grows. Oh, and then there's Ken's little project to dispose of the only witness to their diamond heist. Utter anarchic hilarity ensues.

The plotline is fun to be sure, but it's the characters that are at the heart of the film. The central appeal is the characters' faults and peculiarities - George is your typical evil mastermind, Wanda will sleep with anybody if the occasion calls for it, Ken prefers animals to humans, and Archie is a snobbish and repressed Englishman hen-pecked by wife (Aitken) and daughter (Cynthia Cleese, who's John's real-life daughter). Then there's Otto. He's...well...Otto. Kevin Kline plays the malicious and cruel but incompetent Otto with such wild abandon.

John Cleese is in his element as writer and an actor for the film. In addition to conceiving such rich characterisations and providing a tradition Cleese-esque performance, he also sprinkles the film with the kind of devilish humour he's revered for. His character of Archie Leach is a variation of Basil Fawlty from his popular TV series. He's a stiff-upper-lipped English barrister not above a little avarice and hanky panky. Cleese said he chose the name Archie Leach because it's Cary Grant's real name, and this was about as close as he'd ever get to being Cary Grant in a film. However, the film doesn't rely solely on John Cleese for the laughs as the rest of the actors are total knockouts.

Kevin Kline won an Oscar for his eccentric performance as Otto: an ex-CIA operative who reads the philosophies of Nietzche to make him look smart. But in reality he's so stupid! ("Don't call me stupid") He thinks Aristotle was Belgian, the central message of Buddhism is every man for himself, and that the London underground is a political movement. When Wanda calls him an ape, Otto replies with "Apes don't read philosophy". "Yes, they do, Otto," Wanda then replies. "They just don't understand it."
Otto's character is so well-written that there's always something new to pick up on. Kline never strikes an incorrect note, and definitely deserved the Oscar he received.

Playing Wanda, Jamie Lee Curtis is an absolute delight. She's as smart as she is sexy. From the deadly serious Halloween to a light-hearted comedy...Jamie Lee Curtis demonstrates her talents as a versatile performer. She even does a fine job of making Wanda curiously nefarious but intriguingly beguiling at the same time - when she's not snogging everyone that moves, that is.

Then there's Michael Palin (from the golden days of Monty Python) as the hapless K-K-K-K-Ken. He spends most of his time stuttering hopelessly (this is absolutely side-splitting at times) or tending to his animals. Kevin Kline is given a batch of hilarious lines in relation to Ken's stutter: "Are you thinking, Ken? Or are you in mid-stutter?", "...those phoney accents! Not you Ken, you've got a beautiful speaking voice...when it works" and so on. In Ken's assignment to kill a witness before George's trial commences, he instead accidentally targets the old woman's dogs in gruesome ways. This is all the more ironic because Ken is such an animal lover who wouldn't hurt a fly. Seeing him at each funeral for the dogs is just hilarious.
For Tom Georgeson's character, Cleese decided to do a clever name switch...calling the character George Thomason.

Despite its runaway success, A Fish Called Wanda wasn't all good news from the start. It was helmed by a director who hadn't worked for 25 years, it featured a male actor on the wrong side of 40, and it also featured a sexy female with a great body who refused to do any nudity. But those that gave the film a chance walked away raving. It established a template for the future of British comedy exports. Even Richard Curtis was taking notes at this time. The film walked away with a basket of awards. In order to reach such perfection, the script went through 13 drafts. Director Charlie Crichton and John Cleese got together three times a month for two-and-a-half years to give the script touch-ups.

When production finally started, they managed to wrap up filming in a mere four weeks. Crichton's economic direction meant not a day was wasted. This also gave the film its glorious fast pace. Before you realise it, the film is over and you're howling for more. Thankfully, though, none of the gags have dated and they seem fresh even after constant viewings. The snappy dialogue, the subtle images...even John Cleese's striptease are wonderful no matter how many times you watch the film. And finally, the film was given its definitive touch in post-production: the music. John Du Prez's music is catchy and atmospheric, and you'll be humming the theme for weeks.

Mixing Python-esque humour with a sweet touch of rom-com, A Fish Called Wanda is the greatest hour for any former Python. Originally known as the working title of A Wish Called Fonda, Cleese then reworked his original ideas and the result was this masterpiece of cinematic comedy. It even has a universal appeal, with characters being featured of different nationalities. This film is totally faultless. It's a solid movie that holds up surprisingly well after a number of decades. If the words uproarious, hilarious, or side-splitting mean anything to you, this is your film for sure! It improves with each new screening as a matter of fact.
This film doesn't rely on swearing for its laughs, nor does it rely on overacting either. It relies on its clever script and an impeccable bunch of actors instead. The same crew tried again about a decade later with Fierce Creature. A good attempt, but it wasn't the same. A Fish Called Wanda is one of a kind...and that kind is very, very funny and just plain FUN! Fans of John Cleese or Kevin Kline will not be disappointed. Come on, how can you resist the prospect of seeing Michael Palin running over Kevin Kline with a steamroller after Kline eats Palin's tropic fish?!

Highly recommended!

"Wanda, do you have any idea what it's like being English? Being so correct all the time, being so stifled by this dread of, of doing the wrong thing, of saying to someone "Are you married?" and hearing "My wife left me this morning," or saying, uh, "Do you have children?" and being told they all burned to death on Wednesday. You see, Wanda, we'll all terrified of embarrassment. That's why we're so... dead. Most of my friends are dead, you know, we have these piles of corpses to dinner."

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his."

General George S. Patton emerged as a prominent military leader during World War II. He got things done by way of heavy discipline and a dedication to his country.

Patton is a biopic of the life of General Patton during the Second World War and it contains one of the greatest performances of the 20th Century. George C. Scott won an Oscar for his portrayal of the man behind several illustrious military campaigns. And there is little wonder. Scott remains focused and full of concentration; never breaking his character for a moment.

Patton used drastic measures, even utilising some that made troops terrified of him, and made sure his soldiers were well trained. Patton was one of the greatest military figures of the modern era; he commanded many attacks that proved successful, and struck a massive blow to the German side. General Rommel was even petrified of the man, and Rommel was the one who had to plan the German attacks!

The film opens with a brusque, stirring and famous speech delivered by Patton before an enormous American flag. The speech proved inspirational to the soldiers in times of combat, and set the atmosphere for the amazing experience that was to come.

Although a brilliant general, Patton was well known for shooting his mouth off; saying inappropriate things, being too harsh on men and raising his voice at the slightest things. In some scenes the audience can empathise with the man's situation, in others we sit in awe as George C. Scott delivers lines that are so powerful that in turn the audience will become increasingly scared.

But there was a lighter side to Patton that was never seen by any of his soldiers that didn't hold a position of power, and this side is exposed frequently. The man had a sense of humour; he says some very amusing things that are blunt but true. In a word, the man was interesting; volatile temper, vast array of knowledge of battle tactics, belief in reincarnation, fascination with history and yet a very dry sense of humour.

Patton is one of the greatest war movies ever to hit the big screen. Although essentially a drama, the film has its fair share of elaborate battle scenes that aren't necessarily gory but with an enormous body count. The battles look spectacular, and that's only putting it mildly.

The scale is enormous; detailed costumes, genuine props, and tonnes of extras. Not to mention the very impressive array of tanks present during the battles that add to the high level of authenticity in the production.

The film also uses grainy black & white footage as a medium for outlining events that have happened between scenes. But the boldest aspect has yet to come. The film also examines the other side of the battle - the planning strategies of the Germans who are working to ensure they don't let Patton get the upper hand.

And as a result the film is an absorbing character study that is not action orientated but rather focused on the drama that unfolded in between the battles. We see the planning; the brains behind the operations that have now become famous amongst modern historians.

Patton is a moving portrait and a patriotic tribute to a man who was so dedicated to his career as a general. The film is long, but not overlong. It's drawn out, but always fascinating.

Patton is a film that will be remembered as fondly as the general whose life spawned the tale. A film you cannot afford to miss.

"She says the jungle... it just came alive and took him."

There was a period back in the 1980s when Arnold Schwarzenegger ruled Hollywood. He was the ultimate action hero, and it didn't matter in the slightest that he was a one-dimensional actor who favoured snappy one-liners over Oscar-worthy dialogue. Whether he was the action hero in Commando or the villain in The Terminator, "Ah-nuld" was a force of star-power to be reckoned with, and movie-goers flocked to see any of his action films. 1987's Predator is simply the perfect '80s movie, offering an amalgamation of the three most popular mainstream genres of that decade: action-adventure, horror, and science fiction - and it's a Schwarzenegger flick to boot. All of these components are mixed up to form this heady brew of violent action, macho posturing and ridiculously quotable dialogue, which is all set at a breakneck pace.

At its most basic narrative level, Predator is your usual men-on-a-mission movie (think The Wild Geese or The Dirty Dozen) with added flourishes of horror and sci-fi. At the beginning of the film, Dutch Schaefer (Schwarzenegger) and his battle-hardened squad of elite commandos begrudgingly accept a mission set by the CIA to rescue a group of political hostages from guerrillas in the remote jungles of Central America. The assignment seems simple enough, but shortly after rappelling into enemy territory, Dutch and his team get the feeling that something isn't quite right. Not only have they been set up by the CIA who in reality wants them to recover military intelligence, but there's also something lurking in the jungle...a creature from another planet watching their every move. As the men head to the extraction point, they are slowly targeted one by one...

The rest of the movie sustains a skilfully realised dance between the increasingly desperate commandos (who are stripped of their physical and military superiority, and must resort to any trick in order to stay alive) and the titular Predator (who mixes futuristic technology with a taste for sadistic rituals). The fact that the Predator never gives a reason for its presence on Earth makes its hunting far more ruthless. Moreover, this creature has no voice and it can't be reasoned with - it's a hunter; pure and simple. And it slaughters the commandos for no reason other than it wants to. Unsurprisingly, the movie eventually boils down to a mano-a-mano standoff between Schwarzenegger and the Predator, with the stakes more equal when Dutch discovers an invisibility method. At this point Predator announces its affinity for all things primeval, as Dutch has to reach deep inside himself and become a primordial warrior stripped of all guns and armour. The battles between Dutch and the Predator are highly exciting, and have been bestowed with an element of danger rarely felt when Arnie is typically dodging bullets - he's far more vulnerable when pitted against this strong otherworldly entity. Predator is a rare film in which a viewer gets the sense that something might just defeat Ah-nuld.

A huge part of what makes Predator such a top-shelf action flick is that it never stops charging ahead. There's a refreshingly uncomplicated plotline in place which is never dragged down by sprawling back-stories, rambling chunks of exposition or gratuitous distractions. Dutch and his commandos have a hell of a lot of personality, and the screenplay (credited to Jim & John Thomas) doles them out without ever stopping to catch a breath. The lulls in the action are always filled with something: mistrust, pig-sticking, pussy jokes, the nagging sense that something's not quite right, intense character interaction... The pacing never has the chance to drag. On top of this, Predator is one of the most quotable films in history (not far behind Arnie's Commando) - "If it bleeds, we can kill it"; "Get to the choppaaaah!"; "I ain't got time to bleed"; "You're one ugly motherfucker"...the list could keep going, but you get the idea.

This was director John McTiernan's second film, and his work here is brilliant. McTiernan has become famous for generating tension and suspense using confined locations, and for Predator he certainly uses the steamy jungle to great effect. His direction is claustrophobic and assured; confidently staging amazing action while also concentrating on tension and atmosphere. The jungle itself plays a crucial part in the proceedings, and it's wonderfully photographed by Donald McAlpine. Then there's the Predator itself. Despite being little more than a man in a suit that bleeds highlighter ink, it's a marvellous creation engineered by effects maestro Stan Winston (with some input from James Cameron). Played by Kevin Peter Hall (who stands an imposing 7'2"), the Predator is an unnerving combination of insect, reptile and professional wrestler. The creature effects are immaculate, with the invisibility camouflage optical effect still impressing to this day. Naturally, not all of the special effects stand up to this day. But happily, even the phoney-looking effects are still serviceable.

Predator features countless large and in-charge actors. Arnold Schwarzenegger leads the pack. He may not be Hollywood's greatest actor, but at the peak of his career he certainly knew how to entertain an audience. Interestingly, the film features another actor who went on to serve as Governor - Jesse Ventura. The most dynamic action sequences are saved for these two very large men, whose oversized physiques are in full display here.
Two of the most macho African American performers of the 1980s also feature in Predator - Bill Duke and Carl Weathers. Both men submit highly authoritative performances. Sonny Landham was hired for the film under one condition: that he had a bodyguard with him at all times - not to protect Sonny but to protect everyone around the actor (he was prone to starting bar fights). That trivia fact reveals pretty much everything you need to know about the badass Landham. Rounding out the cast is the endearing Elpidia Carrillo as Anna, in addition to Richard Chaves and Shane Black as members of Dutch's unit. This was the film debut of Black, who became famous for his screenwriting. Indeed, Black penned Lethal Weapon, and spent his free time on the Predator set writing his screenplay for The Last Boy Scout.

With its thrilling, high-octane mix of Rambo and Aliens, Predator certainly delivers on its promise of non-stop, energetic action - and it does not disappoint in the macho department. It's cheesy as hell, of course, and slightly dated, but it's also entertaining and cool as hell, with tonnes of quotable lines and an utterly unforgettable villain. Predator is an action movie with something for everyone, and a jewel in Arnie's career.

"Strange, isn't it? Each man's life touches so many other lives. When he isn't around he leaves an awful hole, doesn't he?"

Frank Capra's It's a Wonderful Life is an endearing masterpiece that remains timeless in its messages and thoughtfulness. This sentimental and honest motion picture conveys a fantastic story of self-realisation and the significance of a single human soul. There's little doubt that Capra's classic fantasy-drama has become practically synonymous with Christmas, and it's one of today's most popular Christmas movies. It's a Wonderful Life has become a seasonal favourite (despite producer-director Capra never intending it as a Christmas film) chiefly due to the crucial scene at the film's dénouement occurring on Christmas Eve, and (of course) because this is a film about giving rather than receiving. For any film buff, cinema connoisseur, or average movie-goer, this film demands to be viewed at the earliest opportunity. This film is magnificent, charming, remarkable, heart-warming and uplifting. Not only is it one of the greatest Christmas films, but it's also one of the greatest films in history - period!

There's a question surely all of us have pondered at some point in our lives - what if I'd never been born? If I was absent from this world, would it really make a colossal difference? Whilst most of us can do nothing more than merely hypothesise, the answer to this philosophical (and probably alcohol-induced) question is offered to this film's protagonist - George Bailey (Stewart) - who actually witnesses his hometown had he not ever existed to help shape its development.

"You've been given a great gift, George: A chance to see what the world would be like without you."

It's a Wonderful Life is based on Philip Van Doren Stern's story The Greatest Gift. Stern was struck with the concept of a suicidal man being confronted by his guardian angel, but his story was rejected by several magazines. He subsequently added the seasonal setting, printed 200 copies and sent them as Christmas "cards". Among the recipients was his agent who then sent it to the studios. At Cary Grant's urging, RKO bought the film rights and hired Dalton Trumbo to adapt the story. Trumbo (never credited) was the first in a long line of screenwriters who contributed. Supposedly his version was too dark, too sophisticated and too political...but it was he who wrote the immortal line: "Every time a bell rings, an angel gets its wings".

After World War II had concluded, director Frank Capra was yesterday's man. Narcissistic, embittered and cynical, Capra went independent and founded Liberty Pictures. Sensing an affinity with its darker aspects, Capra purchased the film rights for It's a Wonderful Life from RKO, hired his own group of screenwriters and financed the production at the Bank of America.

At the commencement of It's a Wonderful Life, it's Christmas Eve. Up in heaven, a chorus of prayers are heard coming from the town of Bedford Falls. These prayers plead for those above to assist the despairing George Bailey - the unsung hero of Bedford Falls who begins to contemplate suicide. Clarence Oddbody (Travers) - George's appointed guardian angel who's yet to earn his wings - is sent down from heaven to pay George a visit and heighten his spirits. Roughly the first 100 minutes are dedicated to recapping George's life so far. Initially, George is a young man who's entirely selfless - he courageously saves his brother's life, and forfeits his dreams in order to help his town. Eventually George accomplishes the American Dream; he has a loving family, a great home, and he has inherited his father's business. But as financial and personal troubles mount, George plunges into a tragic abyss of despondency. Enter lovable guardian angel Clarence. Following a nightmarish vision of Bedford Falls without his influence, George ultimately concludes that his life is a wonderful one...and at long last Clarence earns the beloved wings that he has desired for 200 years.

"Look, Daddy. Teacher says, every time a bell rings an angel gets his wings."

It's a Wonderful Life earned its legion of fans because it effectively communicates one basic truth of life: everyone, regardless of how seemingly insignificant a single person may seem, has the capacity to make a difference. It additionally reiterates the values of the WWII generation - patriotism, hard work, and sacrifice - while heralding the values of the Baby Boomer/Eisenhower generation (i.e. the perception of the American Dream which entails family, home ownership, children, and not just tolerable, but wonderful neighbours).

The underlying themes are obvious: our lives positively affect the world more than we believe, and we touch many more people and than we realise. Until Clarence reveals it to him, George doesn't realise how much good he has done in the world. Furthermore, we're led to believe that no-one who believes in themselves is a failure. George is simply depressed, and just needs his confidence restored. This is the type of experience movies were intended for.

A common philosophy frequently embraced by cinema enthusiasts claims the non-existence of a perfect movie. It's a Wonderful Life, however, is rock-solid proof that perfect movies exist. Capra's masterwork is a flawless tour de force - an enduring masterpiece of the highest order that entertains, inspires and uplifts. It demonstrates the capability of the indelible power of friendship, and reminds us that a loving family and a bunch of great friends are all that truly matter in the grand scheme of things. This is an enriching experience full of warm characters and edifying, poignant messages about life. It's a Wonderful Life has become a generational favourite, probably because of its sweet, stirring story that merges two time-honoured Hollywood plots: rags-to-riches, and romance.

Frank Capra and James Stewart always declared that It's a Wonderful Life was their favourite film. It's undoubtedly one of mine as well. After all, how can you not like it? It has an excellent script, it's marvellously acted, and it's resplendent with Capra's proverbial touches in casting and the underlying messages.

There's little doubt that It's a Wonderful Life could be considered the definitive "feel good" movie. Yet the film stands out due to its sometimes darker tone to counteract the occasional uplifting moment. George's nightmarish odyssey through the garish Pottersville and a community in which he was never born - dubbed by the filmmakers as "the unborn sequence" - is noticeably noir cinema; gloomy and disenchanted. The result is a wistfully realistic movie, yet it also maintains the Capra spirit of belief in the ultimate triumph of right over wrong, and the importance of an ordinary person contributing to that triumph. Anybody who isn't sincerely moved by the film's conclusion should wonder what the heck is wrong with them.

Technically, It's a Wonderful Life is very impressive indeed. A gigantic construction of Bedford Falls' main street was built, with over eighty stores and buildings, as well as twenty transplanted oak trees. It's virtually impossible to view Bedford Falls as anything but a genuine town. Production transpired during summer, thus a large quantity of snowflakes for the winter scenes had to be artificially created. Through the magic of the movies, every flake of snow looks authentic (in fact I had no idea the snow was artificial until I conducted research!). If anything is be criticised (perhaps that word is too strong), it's the sporadic technical fault - like a wide shot not precisely matching a close-up. That aside, Capra's direction is solid. Each shot is infused with magnificent visual flair. The black & white photography looks stunning.

It's a Wonderful Life will be primarily recognised as a significant component of popular culture. It's a Christmastime television tradition worldwide. All these decades later, Capra's masterwork is still viewed by its loyal fans annually on Christmas Eve. Movies recurringly pay tribute to this picture as well. Sesame Street even contained two characters named after Bert the cop and Ernie the cabbie. There's even a band called Zuzu's Petals. Even in National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation (my favourite Christmas movie) the characters are watching It's a Wonderful Life at one point.

Surprisingly, this wonderful movie was not an immediate hit. It's a Wonderful Life received mixed reviews, ranging from a lionisation in The Hollywood Reporter to a vicious trashing in the New Yorker. Although nominated for five Academy Awards, it was shut out the ceremony. Worse still, the film was a box office bomb...spelling doom for Capra's newly established Liberty Films. It wasn't until the 1970s that It's a Wonderful Life was transformed into a Christmas staple. The expiration of the film's copyright and its descent into the public domain was the cause of this. It could be played ad infinitum by any television station without being charged. TV stations seized it as a time-filler for the Christmas season. Capra's oeuvre was ultimately rediscovered by a new generation of movie-goers, and the reviews were almost unanimously positive. Finally, Capra's masterpiece received the recognition it deserved, albeit several decades after its theatrical release. Now it's a perennial Christmas favourite. This is the ultimate comeback movie!

While Frank Capra must claim some of the recognition for the brilliance of this masterpiece, it's the phenomenal performance of James Stewart that truly makes an impact. He infuses George Bailey with a deft mixture of innocence and integrity, but also humanity and fallibility, which has the viewer rooting for him from the outset. Stewart fits the role like a glove - he's amiable and convincing, and when plunged into the garish vision of Pottersville his desperation and despair is increasingly apparent.

As Mary, Donna Reed embodies the independence and sweetness required to capture George's heart. Reed wasn't Capra's first choice, yet it's difficult to visualise any other actress in the role. On the surface the character of Mary may seem straightforward, but Reed is required to display genuine emotional depth during the film's climax and does so ably. Henry Travers appears as the charming Clarence; George's guardian angel. His performance is simply glorious.

The rest of the supporting cast is memorable and uniformly excellent. Lionel Barrymore provides the character of Potter with the correct degree of cunning and malice, Thomas Mitchell is very watchable as the lovable - albeit incompetent - Uncle Billy, and the duo of Frank Faylen and Ward Bond appear as Ernie the cabbie and Bert the cop. Capra never allows a faulty performance to slip under the radar.

"A toast to my big brother George: The richest man in town."

Underpinned by a fascinating philosophical conceit, It's a Wonderful Life remains one of the most watchable and enjoyable movie classics in cinematic history. Capra's commemoration of the power of community and defiant optimism is orchestrated with consummate mastery; flawlessly combining laughs, poignant sentiment and exuberant allure with imagination and a beautifully rendered tone. Critics back in the 1940s may have blasted the film for the sentimentality that characterises a Capra film, but it has grown more beloved over the years.

Not merely just a Christmas film as it can be viewed anytime throughout the year, It's a Wonderful Life conveys one of the most transcendent and joyful experiences a movie-goer could possibly ask for. It delivers a wonderful message of morality, values, principles, and what's truly important in life. Words fail me when I attempt to describe how brilliant, timeless, inspirational, original, touching and wonderful this masterpiece genuinely is. I defy you to not produce a tear as the film winds down to its uplifting conclusion. It's a Wonderful Life is treasured for good reason, and is particularly noted for its heart-warming insistence that "no man is alone who has friends..."

If It's a Wonderful Life was never born, the world would truly be worse off for it.

"You see George, you've really had a wonderful life. Don't you see what a mistake it would be to just throw it away?"

"I am not an elephant! I am not an animal! I am a human being! I am a man!"

Based on a true story, The Elephant Man is a drama that unconditionally blew me away.

The film is a dramatisation of the life of Englishman Joseph Merrick (Hurt), known as John in the film, who was born with a grotesque physical deformity. Due to the nature and severity of the man's malformation he is unfortunately condemned to a life as a circus freak as people profit by displaying him in a freak show.

But all this changes when a London surgeon named Frederick Treves (Hopkins) discovers John in a street freak show. Frederick notices that John is also suffering from severe injuries due to improper action on the part of his owner. To treat his injuries, John is moved to a London hospital where Frederick also studies John's anatomical structure.

But while John is in hospital it is discovered that although suffering from rigorous deformities, underneath he is in fact a highly intelligent man capable of discernable speech, cerebral thought and sensitivity. Frederick is determined to make sure John is never mistreated again and isn't looked upon as just a freak with a physically deformed face.

This altruistic act of compassion and benevolence alters John's life forever. The film was shot in grainy black and white. In many ways this style suits the film perfectly. The picture looks dated; almost like genuine footage shot during the turn-of-the-century in London. I couldn't fault anything that I saw on the screen. Everything was able to catch my eye. Costumes looked authentic and the sets create the desired atmosphere of 19th Century London.

The make-up was outstanding! Every time the character of John 'The Elephant Man' appears on screen you can't recognise actor John Hurt underneath the elaborate make-up. His face looks authentically deformed and helps the audience get engaged in the film a lot easier.

On the topic of the performance, though, I get goose-bumps at the thought. John Hurt was robbed of his Oscar. The man's performance was a textbook example of portraying a character perfectly. His character is so poignant and so powerful. The world around him is so malevolent and prejudiced due to his appearance and we feel his pain like it's actually happening to us. The first time he utters a word in character I was in tears. And I stayed like that for the whole movie. I cried like a baby. And the thought that it actually happened and there was a real man of such animalistic appearance...made me cry even harder.

Anthony Hopkins was the ideal choice for his character of a London surgeon. I couldn't fault him anywhere because he's always so focused on bringing life to his character.

Many will not recognise this work being under the cap of director David Lynch. The storytelling isn't as bizarre or unusual as the kind of movies he became famous for. Instead the film is told using straight-forward storytelling that sometimes uses peculiar imagery to convey the situation to the audience. These instances include montages utilising images of elephants that contrast to the title character's outward show. Editing was sublime in these certain instances.

Overall, The Elephant Man is a brilliant piece of filmmaking in every sense of the word. The film is powerful, moving and unfathomably astounding. I cried for most of the film's duration. You will too.

"Conscience. What a thing. If you believe you got a conscience it'll pester you to death. But if you don't believe you got one, what could it do t'ya? Makes me sick, all this talking and fussing about nonsense."

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is a riveting classic adventure tale that made a huge impression on global cinema. Even though it's over 60 years old the film holds a major influence on the way adventure films have been made to this day.

Many will wonder what makes the film so special. For me it was a great way to spend two hours because it was highly entertaining, fascinating and has a high sense of excitement. Then underneath the surface we have a great underlying message about human nature and the lust for greed.

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is a tale set in 1920s Mexico. Two poor men named Dobbs (Bogart) and Curtin (Holt) are desperate for a pay check and will do anything to strike wealth. Lucky for them they run into an old codger named Howard (played by director John Huston's dad Walter) who endlessly drones on about mining for gold and knowing the spot where one can find gold worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

And so the three men set out into the mountains for a spot of gold prospering after pooling together their funds to purchase all necessary equipment. During their adventure they encounter bandits and Indians but none of these threaten them as much as something they never anticipated - human nature and greed.

This classic tale is one high adventure film that you won't want to miss. It delivers a sense of true adventure; making the experience exhilarating and a whole heap of fun. But what really makes this one unlike all other adventure films is its subconscious message about how easily mankind can be corrupted and manipulated by the thought of money.

Some of the scenes throughout the movie during which characters quarrel over the gold is spellbinding. Because of the fantastic characters we can easily find ourselves engaged in what's going on for the film's two hour period.

And what was imperative for this to work? It's simple - the extraordinary performances from everyone in the cast. Humphrey Bogart was already an established star and was raking in lots of money. Especially after The Maltese Falcon and Casablanca this man was extremely distinguished amongst the thousands of other actors working at the time. Bogey's portrayal was captivating and brilliant. He got his role perfected in no time. He seemed like a gruff, poor beggar at the beginning of the movie. And by the end we get the sense of what occurred after he got his hands on such a large amount of gold. His lust for wealth got the better of him, and Bogart gets his character across in a stunning way.

Walter Huston, father to director John Huston, finally received an Oscar as the aging gold prospector. Clearly there are little flaws to find in his character. Tim Holt was only known for trashy B-Grade flicks up until he got his big break here. He is always so focused, and so dissimilar to the other two protagonists. With this in mind, each of the three title characters are so divergent.

John Huston both wrote and directed the film himself. He was without question the perfect man for the job. He excelled himself, and I liked this film better than The Maltese Falcon which is also among the screen greats.

Above all this, the cinematography is what sold the film for me. Each location was brilliant and looked completely gorgeous on the big screen. The use of such dense bush and the sense of isolation totally blew me away.

But wait - there's more. Just when you think things couldn't get any better, I also found the invigorating score by Max Steiner to be the perfect way to top it all off. I don't think there are any flaws to be pointed out in this classic production. Quotable lines, great messages about humanity and just all round inspiring filmmaking.

The Treasure of Sierra Madre is a phenomenal achievement and will forever be a movie that stands the test of time. It's groundbreaking, exciting and adventurous. Quite simply if you've never seen this classic cinematic gem then you have no idea what you're missing out on.

" I was sheriff of this county when I was twenty-five years old..."

The Coen Brothers have had their finest hours and weakest hours, but No Country for Old Men will forever stand as their best hour. The film just manages to beat Fargo (a film which I loved) with its mix of engaging drama and a script that doesn't feel compelled to follow the standard conventions.

The trailers didn't do much for me, and I was a little bit apprehensive at first...but it raked it awards endlessly and I felt like it was my duty to investigate. Boy am I glad that I did. "Do not judge a book by its cover" is all the advice I can give you in this case.

A hunter named Llewelyn Moss (Brolin) stumbles across a pile of dead bodies, a stash of heroin and millions of dollars in cash. After collecting the money for himself, he is endlessly stalked by a madman named Anton (Bardem). Violence and mayhem ensue as the bloodbath commences, and there will be no stopping it until someone is dead.

The plot is a lot more complex and interesting, but I found the film more enjoyable when I didn't know where it was going. Every scene is filled with intelligent dialogue and necessary character development. On top of this, the Coen Brothers have injected their special kind of subtle humour into the mix.

The film is incredibly violent, and some of the scenes are really hard to stomach. But the film is well made, and once the intensity begins it never eases up. During some of the scenes I was on the edge of my seat, with the slightest noise causing me to jump uncontrollably.

The way that the film is constructed and crafted is superb. There is not a scrap of music to be found during the film. Only during the end credits. Without music, we are able to be further engaged in the action, and I think we're more able to feel a certain character's emotions to an extent that can't be beaten.

The ending was something that had me thinking for about half an hour as it felt incomplete at first, but then I realised how clever and unconventional it is, albeit quite sudden. The ending just put things into perspective and kept the story out of standard Hollywood territory.

Kudos to the Coen Brothers for keeping the violence taut, the dialogue worthwhile and the characters realistic. Although I had little hopes for this film, No Country for Old Men is one of 2007's best movies and truly worthy of its Oscar nominations.

"It takes a certain kind of person to do what I do. No-one's ever impressed; no-one's ever fascinated. If you're a fireman, all the kids will want to jump on the back of the truck and follow you to a fire. There's going to be no kids willing to do that with me. So, I don't do it to impress people - it's a job, it's my trade, and I actually think I'm pretty good at it."

There is one undeniable, inescapable bona fide fact regarding humans that we rarely like to discuss or even mention: everybody poos. Generally speaking, mainstream movies exercise this fact for brainless comedy. Modern comedies usually toss in a fart gag or a diarrhoeic outburst in a desperate attempt for a laugh. From such scenes in Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle or Dumb and Dumber, to dramatic shit smearing in North Country...even to German hack director Uwe Boll whose films are pure cinematic semi-liquid nuggets of week-old vindaloo proportions.

Kenny serves a potent yet valuable reminder regarding everybody's need to poo. At first it most likely seems like a daft single-joke comedy overflowing with scatological humour. During its marketing campaign and preliminary hype, there wasn't much to convince anyone otherwise. But Kenny is something radically different. This is a hysterical, enormously entertaining mockumentary featuring an impeccable blend of humour, pathos and heart-warming moments. It delivers a poignant and effective snapshot of a forgotten cog in society who's frowned upon due to the nature of his trade. The character of Kenny (played by little-known actor Shane Jacobson, who won an AFI award for his performance) is commonly alienated from family and friends due to his job. But with this mockumentary we're reminded that he performs an essential public service: if the "Kennys" of the world didn't exist, where would we take a dump at a big festival? It's a trade no-one wants to think about, yet someone needs to do it.

The Jacobson brothers themselves were sceptical as to whether this concept would actually work as a film. Kenny was originally a short that debuted at a major Aussie film festival. Astonishingly, the audience reaction was enormously positive. Due to massive demand, Splashdown (the toilet company which the character of Kenny works for) persuaded the Jacobson brothers to develop the concept into a feature-length movie...and Kenny was eventually born.

Kenny Smyth is a typical Everyman trying to make a living. He works at a Corporate Bathroom Rental company known as Splashdown. Kenny is a knight in shining overalls, taking care of business with his faithful Splashdown crew by his side. The film follows Kenny as he tackles all troubles great and small...from the biggest festival to smallest social gatherings; Kenny confronts every septic challenge that comes his way. He also battles his way through personal problems, dealing with his bitter divorce during which he lost custody of son Jesse (played by Shane Jacobson's real-life son), and he also must tend to the blossoming romance between himself and an airline hostess (Bibra). Every challenge in Kenny's life he faces with charm, humour and unflinching dignity.

"I'd love to be able to say "I plumb toilets" and have someone say "Now that is something I've always wanted to do"."


Kenny lifts the lid on the very real issues in contemporary society. No-one is ever impressed or fascinated with what Kenny does. Kenny even expounds on the glories of his craft. It isn't as glamorous as being a fireman but it's also more secure than a desk job. ("It's not like my business is ever going to dry up overnight!") In addition, he's treated badly by the members of the general public he's forced to interact with. Barely anyone will shake his hand, his own father (played by Shane and director Clayton Jacobson's actual father) orders him to remove his work overalls before sitting down, and people shun him at social gatherings. When Kenny's son assists in cleaning the port-a-loos, members of the public complain indignantly and inquire "What kind of diseases could he get?". This film presents us with disillusionments and misunderstandings in relation to Kenny's trade. For its brutal honesty and realism, the filmmakers deserve to be lauded.

Director Clayton Jacobson (who gets a very small role as well) lensed the movie using suitable digital photography. It feels like a home movie at times, which is the desired effect. Lots of people (myself included) were under the false impression that Kenny was a real person, and that the events were real. Make no mistake: 95% of the film is staged and rehearsed, with the fantastic naturalistic acting generating the ingenious illusion that we're watching genuine documentary footage. The cinematography is extremely accomplished with its fly-on-the-wall style.

"There's another classic example of someone having a two inch arsehole and us having installed only one inch piping."


Shane Jacobson earned an AFI award for Best Actor. His acting can only be described as faultless. In real life, Shane doesn't have a lisp. I, like many others, was under the impression that the lisp was genuine. This is a testament to the masterclass of acting offered by Jacobson. Kenny Smyth is the best Aussie character to hit screens since Michael Caton's Darryl Kerrigan in The Castle and Paul Hogan's Mick Dundee in Crocodile Dundee. He presents the essential Australian: simple, hard-working and looking forward to having a beer at the end of the day. Kenny's naivety is emphasised by his family's simplicity. He's the first person in his family to fly out of Australia, and he's utterly curious about the workings of an aeroplane. When he arrives at Nashville, Tennessee in America for the International Plumper and Cleaner Expo - i.e. "Poo HQ" as Kenny affectionately calls it - he's bewildered by the size of the expo. Kenny is also your typical Aussie using ockerisms and slang that may appear pretty peculiar to an international audience. His similes are particularly amusing. "Sillier than a bum full of smarties", "Mad as a clown's cock", and so on. Kenny is irresistible and charming, humorous and kind-natured. He's part philosopher, part comedian and all heart. Shane Jacobson gives the film the gusto and momentum it needs.
The other actors deserve a brief mention. It was a family and friend affair, with Shane Jacobson's real father playing Kenny Smyth's father, and Shane's real son played Kenny's son. Ronald Jacobson was nominated for Best Supporting Actor at the AFI awards. He's brilliant, witty and quotable.

The Jacobson brothers may have built the film's premise around toilets and poo, yet a brown log is never actually shown at all throughout the entire film. They never cross the line...the "mud biscuits and apple juice" are merely referenced instead of being shown. The humour of the film is in Kenny's delightful matter-of-factness in his observations. He cleverly describes his trade and things going on around him...and it's hilarious. Better yet, it's all done with a straight face. At the beginning of the film Kenny is interviewing a potential client via phone. As he asks whether this client will be serving food or drink at the event, the implications of his questions are hilarious. "Are there any Indonesian foods or curries?" The opening 30 minutes are probably the strongest part of the movie. We are offered a very intimate insight into the life of Kenny Smyth. Kenny is developed as a three-dimensional human, and in his personality fragments we see ourselves. From start to finish, it's a mosaic of hilarious and quotable lines with an adequate dosage of pathos and heart. The concoction works incredibly effectively!

"There's a smell in here that is gonna outlast religion."


When all's said and done, Kenny simply reminds everyone that in the age of big-budget adventures and CGI spectacles, engaging characters and a good story are all that matter. Kenny has both. This is a little-known film that scored big at the box office. It remained in cinemas for roughly a year. Even after the DVD was released, selected Australian cinemas were still showing it. As a character study so singularly focused on its central character, a film like this relies on its central character for its success. Shane Jacobson delivers a delightful performance. Kenny is a man with good intentions, and this comes across very powerfully. Shane has impeccable comedic timing as he deadpans a series of hilarious lines in expert fashion. Aside from being consistently laugh-out-loud funny, the terrific script generates real affection for Kenny in order that we desperately root for him to succeed. The character makes several valid observations about family, work and the value of human dignity.

Kenny is a masterpiece for its expert amalgamation of great comedy, pathos and terrific touching moments. This is a hysterical movie that holds up admirably no matter how many times you watch it. I still laugh at every joke after 50 viewings. It's a very entertaining movie, and I absolutely love it. At first I had no interest in seeing this picture. But on a firm recommendation I attended a screening (which required a lot of searching to determine which local cinemas were showing it), and it was the best cinematic experience in my entire life. It was a full house, and every single person in the cinema was crying with laughter. It was the most entertaining two hours of my entire life, and now I constantly revisit the movie. This is the greatest mockumentary in history! Yes, it's better than This is Spinal Tap!!

Followed by a spin-off TV series entitled Kenny's World.

"We have 11 Palestinian names, each one of them had a hand in planning Munich. We want them all dead."

Steven Spielberg has always been capable of achieving excellent results when behind the camera. I have been a massive fan of his work for years now and I always anticipate the release of his latest movies.

Munich was a film that I had wanted to see ever since I learned he was at the helm. The film met with major criticism preceding its release because of the short time in which the film was made. Filming began in June 2005 with a December 2005 release date in mind. Spielberg has always been good at making films in a very tight shooting schedule.

While watching the movie I couldn't believe the focus and concentration that is obvious while watching each frame of film that has been produced.

Munich is a riveting, powerful, involving and confronting human drama that is one of the most important films of this century. It was a daring move to produce such a confronting piece of cinema due to how incomplete the facts are; make no mistake, the film is no history lesson. But then again it was never meant to be a documentary. The facts presented may be seen as agonizingly erroneous, but what actually happened will always remain a mystery.

Munich is also a milestone in Steven Spielberg's career. He has been well known for making family-friendly blockbusters that sometimes mirror his childhood. The film represents a step up for maturity in Spielberg's filmmaking.

Based on true events; Munich chronicles the fate of 11 Israeli Olympic athletes who were brutally murdered during the Olympics of 1972 in Munich. In response to the savage massacre the government commissions a group of agents to track down and eliminate those responsible for the tragedy that occurred in the Olympic village that fateful day. The five-man team carry out their mission with the knowledge in mind that they officially have had no contact with those who hired them. The mission is confidential and officially does not exist. As the team eliminate men in the most callous of ways and the body count rises - so do questions, uncertainties and sleepless nights. They begin questioning the justification of the counter-violence and loyalties begin to blur.

Munich is a film that asks a lot of its audience as Spielberg presents questions without answers; offering no easy answers and keeping firm focus on the human response and the conflict between the motivations behind their actions and the consequences.

The tension built up between the characters is insurmountable. Some of the pivotal roles are executed in outstanding style; the accents seem genuine and each line appears to be said with meaning. The film wastes no time getting into the nitty gritty suspense sequences.

Spielberg has also integrated archive footage that gives the film a high level of chilling realism. The beginning events are essentially told through the archive footage presented. And throughout the movie we are shown clips that look in detail at the tragic massacre during which 11 athletes lost their lives. Some of these clips are shown in harrowing realism; startlingly showing brutal violence and heart-wrenching sequences that will have your mouth gaping open.

Cinematographer Janusz Kaminski achieved fantastic results with this film. The action and suspense scenes were filmed extremely well. From the opening sequence I was already engaged in the film; although production was rushed it never feels this way.

John Williams' score creates a brooding, maligned atmosphere that is intense and malevolent. The key suspense scene had me sitting in awe at what was going on.

Munich was a daring film but was executed spectacularly. The film is challenging, pulse-pounding, captivating and involving. The whole film is an extraordinary experience marred only marginally by its over-length. Highly recommended.

"When you decide to be something, you can be it. That's what they don't tell you in the church. When I was your age they would say we can become cops, or criminals. Today, what I'm saying to you is this: when you're facing a loaded gun, what's the difference?"

Most people were very sceptical about Scorsese approaching a remake of a highly successful original Asian movie. Personally I really liked the original Asian film Infernal Affairs and was hoping Scorsese could once again pull off his magic.


The Departed is an infinitely better movie than its Asian counter-part in my opinion. I found myself completely engaged in this movie from start to finish. The Departed has all the same key plot points as the Hong Kong picture that spawned it.


For this film Scorsese is not focusing on the usual Italian American gangsters; instead the film is set in Boston where the Irish gangsters dominate the mob and the police. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Billy Costigan; a man on the wrong side of the tracks who has mobster blood in him. Billy graduates from the Massachusetts State Police Academy with plans to bury his mob heritage. But those higher up in the police force have other plans. Because of Billy's background he's the perfect man to infiltrate the Irish mob. Billy is assigned to work undercover (extremely confidentially) and penetrate a group of Irish gangsters lead by infamous Irish mobster Frank Costello (Nicholson). Billy's mission: to acquire enough evidence to have Frank Costello arrested.


Unbeknownst to the police, Frank Costello's protégée Colin Sullivan (Damon) is another young cadet who graduates from the police academy with excellent results. Because Colin reaches a position of such power and importance he is the perfect man to be Frank's mole inside the police. New clues lead to some unfortunate discoveries and both sides soon realise that they're being scrutinised by the enemy. Of course both sides do not desire this close scrutiny; each respective side assigning their mole to discover the identity of the other mole.


One of the main elements of The Departed that made it far superior to Infernal Affairs is that Scorsese takes his time to develop the characters. Infernal Affairs moved so fast and contained cryptic dialogue, hence I had no idea what was actually going on. The characters in that film were also poorly distinguished. With this film, we take a deeply penetrating look at the life of each character. Scorsese is never in a rush to get anywhere. If anything this slow pace made the film a lot more fascinating.


The Departed is an incredible crime thriller that also contains some truly breathtaking performances. Leonardo DiCaprio was an actor I had little respect for. Prior to 2006 he was too much of a pretty boy who gets the girl. With this film and Blood Diamond in the same year, DiCaprio produces his best two performances to date. At the Golden Globes he was nominated twice for Best Actor; one for each respective film. What makes DiCaprio so excellent is his deep and confronting portrayal. Billy Costigan is a profoundly insightful, multi-faceted character. At first he displays professionalism. But when he is put undercover he has become the bad boy. I never expect him to pull off such a stunning portrayal after all his 'pretty boy' roles. Matt Damon is every bit as brilliant as DiCaprio. He shows a wide range of emotions and he never strikes a false note. Jack Nicholson is truly electrifying! He plays Costello with an intimidating screen presence. Like each amazing performance, there is believability and vulnerability expressed throughout the film.


The film's screenplay is fantastic. Heavy drama is balanced out with a high level of violence and bloodshed. When Scorsese wants a character's death to be violent he doesn't hesitate to add endless amounts of blood into a shot. After decades of moviemaking and decades of making the best quality crime films around, Martin Scorsese finally scored an Oscar at the Academy Awards for his extraordinary directing. The film clocks at approximately 140 minutes; however director Scorsese maintains focus and concentration for every frame that appears in the film. It's impossible to fault the filmmaking in any way.


I particularly liked how classy its style is. There's catchy music played frequently, compelling drama and violent action. You know this is definitely a film by Martin Scorsese.


The Departed could be Scorsese's best film. Personally I loved his movies like Taxi Driver, GoodFellas and Casino. Like the films he made beforehand, Scorsese does not disappoint. He continues to remind us why he is the guru of the crime thriller genre. The only drawback on The Departed would be its shocking and depressing conclusion. Although because of the film's nature and style it was almost to be expected.


Overall, this is a thriller you simply cannot afford to miss. Winner of several Academy Awards including Best Picture and Best Director.

"E.T. phone home..."

I don't know if it's possible, by any stretch of the imagination, to find Steven Spielberg's E.T. anything less than a perfect movie. The whole experience completely blew me away, and just the thought of this movie being made almost 30 years ago makes the film seem even more amazing.

The whole movie has not dated one bit. Every time we see that little fat alien it never looks fake - not even for a second. For the whole time he looks incredibly real, without any hint of flaws at all. The whole story is classic, and the whole experience is filled with moments of true nostalgia.

E.T. is the tale of a little ugly-but-loveable alien who comes to Earth with others from his species. But as the government arrives at the scene, the aliens pack up and leave...inadvertently leaving behind one of their own. The story then turns to a young boy named Elliot (Thomas) who lives with his family. In a bad state of mind because of the recent divorce of his parents, Elliot is having trouble coping. But one night his whole life is changed when he finds the little alien in his garden shed. Of course, no-one believes what he saw...until Elliot decides to bring the alien into his home and harbour him from the harsh world that surrounds them. But the government have not called off their search for the little extra terrestrial they know was left behind, and now know where he is hiding.

E.T. is a film filled with incredible power. With each new film Spielberg sets the bar even higher with his new state-of-the-art special effects and innovative concepts. Spielberg conceived the whole concept himself, and this only heightens my respect for the man. His directing is always done to perfection. He knows how each shot will play out, and must reach perfection before the film's completion.

And John Williams' score...was absolutely flawless. The music gave me goosebumps because it was so powerful, and it still gives me goosebumps every time I watch it. The power of the movie never wears off no matter how many times you've seen it. If anything, it's more powerful with each new screening. The score is triumphant, inspirational and poignant.

The whole sound design was amazing. The little alien sounded so oblivious and innocent, and his tone of voice is so gorgeous not to mention adorable.

Performances are loaded with power. Young Henry Thomas, star of the show, carries the film incredibly. He's a young actor, but he can't be flawed in terms of acting skills. He had me in tears. It was interesting seeing young Drew Barrymore in the cast. She's still a young girl and she looks so delightful.

Almost 30 years on, E.T. is a film that still captures the hearts of contemporary audiences. It stands the test of time and is a true classic. I was in tears for the whole movie, and you will be too - in terms of both sadness and the poignancy of the experience. Do not miss this one or you will be passing up one of the greatest films of all time.

"Sometimes it's easier livin' the lie."

Catch Me If You Can is one of Spielberg's best films of late. The whole film is told with a very bright, charming atmosphere accompanied by great filmmaking in every aspect.

Based on the real life story, Leonardo DiCaprio plays teenager Frank Abagnale Jr. who runs away from home at a tender age of 16. After the bitter divorce of his parents, Frank can't deal with the emotion and flees his home in an attempt to escape what is happening. But Frank soon discovers that he has very little funds to keep him going, and realises that he can pose as someone employed in a high class occupation to get him a nice fat paycheck.

Before Frank reaches his 21st birthday, he proceeded to impersonate a pilot, a doctor, a lawyer and became a dab hand at forging cheques and making millions in the process. Tom Hanks is FBI agent Carl Hanratty who is assigned to the case. Over the course of many years, Carl chases Frank in an attempt to bring him to justice for his brilliant crimes.

The film's running time hinges on the lengthy chase that ensues when Carl is chasing Frank who appears to be one step ahead all the time. Many may complain about the running time, but I was engaged in the film from start to finish.

Spielberg's direction makes for a fascinating visual feast for the eyes, and John Williams' jazzy score creates an audio feast for the ears. The style of the film has yet to be matched in a film of this genre. Because everything is done to perfection there are little flaws, and hence an astronomically high entertainment value.

From the cleverly animated opening credits that set the atmosphere right up until the brilliant conclusion, I was hooked.

Leo DiCaprio was a great choice for the title role. Although I'm not an overall fan of the young fellow, I felt that only Leo could pull this one off. Tom Hanks is exceptional as an FBI agent.

Catch Me If You Can is a high energy romp that is truly one of Spielberg's best films in recent years. It will surely provide great entertainment for a rainy afternoon or a boring evening.

"I see dead people..."

M. Night Shyamalan both wrote and directed this phenomenal thriller, marking his first work outside of family/comedy movies.

In this chilling psychological thriller, Bruce Willis is disheartened child psychologist Malcolm Crowe. After making a mistake with a patient, Crowe later discovers that he failed to help him. Several months later, Crowe learns of a young boy whose circumstances are similar to those of the ex-patient he failed to help. Hoping for redemption, Crowe visits eight-year-old Cole Sear (Osment) who claims he is visited by ghosts, and can "see dead people".

The Sixth Sense received acclaim from critics and audiences alike, and rightfully so. Not since Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho have audiences refused to give away the ending of a movie. The twist...is absolutely mind-blowing.

Shyamalan crafted the movie amazingly, and as a result upon our second viewing we can pick up clues that we missed the first time around. Aside from that, the film is incredibly intelligent and absolutely terrifying at times.

Unlike most thrillers, Shyamalan relies on psychology and our own imagination to scare us rather than using extensive gore. There are plenty of disturbing images throughout the movie as well.

Bruce Willis was absolutely exceptional in the lead role! Haley Joel Osment was nominated for an Oscar for his portrayal of the troubled young boy. He is extremely chilling at times, and some of his lines send chills down your spine. Toni Collette was also nominated for an Oscar, and rightfully so.

The Sixth Sense could be the best thriller film ever made. The film is brilliant. Pure and simple. Shyamalan's exceptional filmmaking techniques create some haunting moments and memorable creepy images that will still leave you terrified after the credits commence rolling. If you have not seen this movie then you have no idea what you're missing out on. It will blow you away. Watch out for a cameo appearance by director Shyamalan.

"Life will find a way."

Jurassic Park is a truly amazing movie, and one of Spielberg's true masterpieces.

Although made over a decade ago, the special effects still look phenomenal and fundamentally flawless to this day. The powerhouse effects make the dinosaurs live and are truly breathtaking at times.

Based loosely on the novel by Michael Crichton, billionaire John Hammond (Attenborough) creates a remarkable theme park on an isolated artificial island filled with real dinosaurs that have been brought to life using huge advancements in state-of-the-art scientific technology.

Hammond invites a group of special guests to the island for a weekend, to show them the park and hopefully get their stamp of approval. But on the first night a security breakdown is succeeded by the dinosaurs escaping their enclosures and roaming free around the park. What starts as a pleasant weekend becomes a race for survival.

Jurassic Park is a groundbreaking production. Never before have we seen dinosaurs with this degree of realism, and never before had audiences witnessed dinosaurs that look so breathtaking. The special effects are still almost impossible to fault. And even with CGI in its infancy, it still looks fantastic on screen.

The film is a definitive blockbuster and still one of the greatest movies ever made.

As a child of the 90s I still remember watching this film constantly and even now I love the film as much as I did when I was a youngster obsessed with dinosaurs.

Sam Neill is an amazing actor and was the perfect choice for the role of a palaeontologist. Jeff Goldblum was also extremely good. As one of my favourite characters, I always found his performance to be fantastic.

It would take a long time to mention all the members of the tremendously good cast, needless to say they all did a remarkable job.

John Williams' evocative score, including the memorable theme, is also hard to fault. It gave the film its 'wow' moments, its exciting moments and its tragic moments. Williams is a composer who knows his stuff very well and is without a doubt one of the greatest film composers of all time.

It goes without saying that Spielberg's direction was phenomenal. The man has a clear vision, and knows how to accomplish it.

Jurassic Park is a much loved screen gem and a sensational experience. For those of you yet to see it, do not hesitate to get your hands on a copy. Followed by The Lost World: Jurassic Park.

"Drainage! Drainage, Eli, you boy. Drained dry. I'm so sorry. Here, if you have a milkshake, and I have a milkshake, and I have a straw. There it is, that's a straw, you see? You watching? And my straw reaches acroooooooss the room, and starts to drink your milkshake... I... drink... your... milkshake!"

Words cannot do justice to accurately describe this movie; Paul Thomas Anderson's There Will Be Blood is an unmissable event and without doubt one of the best movies to hit cinemas during 2007.

This is another of those masterpieces that separates those who love the blockbusters and those who love good filmmaking. In order to appreciate the movie, you must be in the latter category.

Daniel Day-Lewis completely stole the show here; his portrayal is unlike anything I have seen in such a movie. Set in the oil fields at the turn of the 20th Century, the film chronicles the rise of prospector Daniel Plainview (Day-Lewis) who becomes an independent oil man. He becomes a very wealthy man as his oil wells begin to take in lots of money.

This sprawling epic is a tale about greed, corruption and the pursuit of the American dream. Focusing heavily on the troubles and dangers of working at an oil well; some of the scenes of brilliant, compelling drama are never likely to be seen again. This powerful drama is reliant on performances by the actors; without Day-Lewis or the members of the supporting cast the film would not have succeeded. There are many other memorable characters who are developed perfectly over the running time, but it would take too long to talk about each individual, brilliant performance.

The film is a prime example of a modern masterpiece with improper marketing. The marketing campaign for the movie didn't do much for me, and it was only after the reviews I read that sparked an interest in seeing it.

The script is exceptionally well written. There Will Be Blood is a character study that shows us many scenes of drama and development of characters. Because of the strong script (based on Upton Sinclair's novel "Oil!") and remarkable direction, the film works. We can feel the tension between the characters due to such accomplished performances.

Overall, There Will Be Blood is among the finest films to hit cinemas during 2007. In a year filled with disappointing sequels and remakes, it's great that masterpieces like these get made. Highly recommended if you can spare 150 minutes of your time.

"Hot in here, or am I just scared to death?"

The first Die Hard instalment hit cinemas back in summer 1988. Produced by Joel Silver (whose name is also attached to the Lethal Weapon series and The Last Boy Scout, just to name a few), Die Hard set a new paradigm for action films. Gone was the indestructible hero capable of shooting his enemies with infallible precision while bullets magically skirted around him. In its place was an ordinary bloke who gets involuntarily entangled in circumstances that necessitate his heroics. Die Hard was also set in a claustrophobic location. This formula proved popular as it was soon applied to incalculable other action films including Air Force One, Passenger 57, Under Siege, and so on. Fox enjoyed the critical and commercial success of Die Hard, and within two years a sequel found its way into worldwide cinemas. Die Hard 2: Die Harder was an abundantly entertaining action film undermined by its utter implausibility and the exasperating affinity to the original film.

Die Hard: With a Vengeance is the third entry in the Die Hard series. There was a gap of five years between this third film and the earlier second film. These five years facilitated numerous things. For starters, the clichéd formula was modified and given a substantial spruce-up. The creative team realised yet another Die Hard facsimile would produce a mediocre sequel. So they adapted, and the plot was expanded into a buddy cop movie similar to the Lethal Weapon series.

John McTiernan (the man responsible for directing the original Die Hard) was brought back onboard as well. Naturally, Bruce Willis also agreed to reprise the role that made him a star. This third film also opted to eliminate much of the nostalgia aspect. The film's plot may have relevance to the preceding films, but returning characters are kept to a minimum. Die Hard: With a Vengeance is consequently a radically different addition to the Die Hard canon - but it's a good different and a change for the better. The claustrophobic setting is replaced with the far more expansive location of the city of New York.

In the opening scenes of the movie, a bomb is detonated in downtown New York City on a seemingly regular day. The mastermind behind this bombing identifies himself only as Simon (Irons). He contacts the police and informs them of his intentions to set off another bomb. He explains that another big bang will occur unless Detective John McClane (Willis) completes a number of set tasks. This instalment finds McClane on the booze, on suspension from the police force, and with his marriage in tatters. But he still dons his trademark vest, he's still handy with a gun and he's still wholly vulnerable. Anyway, McClane's first task takes him to Harlem where he meets Negro electrician Zeus Carver (Jackson). After Zeus becomes involuntarily intertwined in the state of affairs, he's forced to partner with McClane as Simon appoints them a number of tasks that take them around the city. The remainder of the plot is a series of contrivances to propel the terrible twosome of McClane and Zeus from one end of New York to the other (stopping in Canada of all places for the climax).

Die Hard: With a Vengeance is more destructive, more exhilarating and far more intense than the previous instalments. Yet it's still grounded in more reality than the second Die Hard entry. With a wider space for plot gestation, there are a wider range of possibilities for stunts and action sequences. Generic action film elements are added such as car chases, interesting arenas for shootouts, and general vehicle mayhem. Entire streets are blown up in sequences that stretch credulity almost past the point of breaking.

It should probably be noted that this is the most graphic Die Hard film in terms of language (about 90-10 f-bombs are dropped), violence, gory deaths (one guy is even sliced in half!) and even a brief sex scene. John McTiernan is of course at ease with the screenplay. He formerly helmed Predator and The Last Action Hero, as well as the first Die Hard film. He knows his way around an action scene, and he knows how to orchestrate this kind of action. Cinematographer Peter Menzies captures the action with consummate skill, making the action thrilling in its own right. As a result it's imbued with great energy. The definitive layers were added in post-production: John Wright's competent editing, Michael Kamen's impeccable music and the booming sound mix. Explosions and gunshots will give a speaker system one heck of a workout! And, of course, special effects are absolutely top-notch. As the digital age was slowly developing, there are a few CGI instances but they're not too noticeable. For the most part the special effects are quite seamless.

The original screenplay written by Jonathan Hensleigh wasn't meant to be a Die Hard film from the outset. When it was discovered that it could easily be moulded into the third Die Hard movie, re-writes commenced. Thankfully, there are plenty of wisecracks and amusing witticisms courtesy of John McClane's badass attitude. Bruce Willis plays the role with such ease that he improvised one-liners while the cameras rolled. The laughs are reasonably frequent and moderately droll. The searing chemistry of Willis and Samuel L. Jackson is off the chart. Their volatile attitudes generate very interesting scenarios. The film moves at an invigorating pace. It encompasses sufficient character development mixed with satisfying amounts of pure adrenaline-charged action: bombings, subway crashes, car chases and helicopter pursuits altogether creating the ultimate roller-coaster ride. While this description would usually fit any generic Van Damme or Steven Seagal action vehicle, Die Hard: With a Vengeance is cut above the pack. The intelligence of the first movie has made a welcome return. There are great unpredictable plot twists and clever set-ups. For an action movie it's fairly subversive.

Bruce Willis gives further weight to the argument that no-one can portray an action hero better than he can. The reason why we love John McClane so much is due to his attitude towards the situations he finds himself entangled in. Here's an interesting fact: the part of John McClane was originally offered to all the conventional 80s action stars. Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Van Damme, Seagal - they all had a shot. The beauty of casting Bruce Willis is that it avoids the clichés. Had it been one of these abovementioned names, Die Hard would have been a clichéd action ride that fell dead in the water after the first instalment. But they stayed away from conventions, and Willis immersed himself into the role perfectly.

Samuel L. Jackson is the ideal companion for Willis' John McClane. Jackson is a scene stealer and he rises above the material. Bruce Willis was reportedly unhappy about sharing the spotlight with Jackson. It's also been reported that Willis disliked the focus shift from lone ranger to buddy flick. Only really die-hard Willis purists (pun truly and absolutely intended) side with the actor.
Jeremy Irons is evil and sadistic and above all memorable as the villain. When it comes to Die Hard, a memorable villain is essential. His crisp European accent and interesting screen persona elevates him above the one-dimensional villain present in Die Hard 2: Die Harder. Even so, Alan Rickman remains unthreatened.
This time the cast is accompanied by such names as Graham Greene, Colleen Camp, Larry Bryggman, Anthony Peck, Nick Wyman, Sam Phillips and Kevin Chamberlin. These precise performances keep us engaged from the remarkable first frame to the last.

Die Hard: With a Vengeance opened a short time following a bombing in Oklahoma City. Needless to say, both critics and audiences were still shaken up from the bombings, and the film (although scripted, filmed and edited before the bombings took place) was treading on sensitive territory. It would be justified to state that viewers were unfairly harsh while watching the film for two reasons. Firstly, the Oklahoma City bombings affected them greatly. Secondly, this was a radically different Die Hard movie, exercising a different formula and a new batch of characters. Personally, I think this third Die Hard film is damn close to equalling the original. It only falls short due to its mildly sluggish pace at times. From time to time, logic is also the film's enemy (falling about 20 feet onto metal without a broken bone? I don't think so). Nevertheless this is excellent entertainment and a worthy film to sit under the Die Hard banner. It provides the rush of adrenalin, the witty one-liners, the exhilarating action and the outlandish stunt-work. It's an endearing, thrilling ride guaranteed to keep an audience on the edge of their seat.

Followed in 2007 by Live Free or Die Hard

"Listen, we got a report of a guy coming through here with, uh, eight reindeer." [shoots terrorists] "Yeah, they said he was a jolly, old, fat guy with a snowy, white beard. Cute little red and white suit. I'm surprised you didn't see him."

"Introduce a little anarchy... Upset the established order... Well then everyone loses their minds!"

The Dark Knight easily establishes itself as the greatest movie of 2008 thus far. Considering the unfathomable hype surrounding the production one would think that the set expectations would be absolutely impossible to fulfil. After all, director Christopher Nolan had some serious shoes to fill with the quality of the preceding Batman adventures taken into consideration. Personally, Tim Burton's 1989 masterpiece Batman is a film I cherish very dearly. Through my eyes Burton's original film was the best Batman movie of all time and it's too perfect to be surpassed. However, Nolan has achieved an unprecedented feat with The Dark Knight. This is a phenomenal movie...an artistic accomplishment that exceeds standards set by its hype and trailers. Everything has been executed with filmmaking of the highest regard: from the sheer scale, the dark atmosphere, the acting, the music, the action, the concept, the production design, the script...there are essentially no faults to be pointed out. The special effects, as well, are absolutely mindblowing.

The Dark Knight is a wholly gratifying, realistic, down-to-earth comic book movie. Just like Batman Begins, the film feels far more potent and gritty. Gone is the over-the-top, colourful visuals that once plagued the frame in Joel Schumacher's Batman Forever and the disastrous Batman & Robin. Do not mistake this for a Batman flick aimed squarely at the kids. This is the darkest Batman escapade so far. This can be looked upon as a fault as it alienates its target audience, but some children may enjoy the stylish visuals. The Batman outfit is more eye-catching than ever! The film is deep, satisfying, gripping and enthralling - and at the same the film is immensely entertaining, and permeated with fascinating undertones that effectively contrast good and evil in a way that isn't even slightly exaggerated. Every shot is enriched with realism and infused with visual intrigue. Superhero films have never reached this quality ever before!

Bruce Wayne (Bale) spends his nights masquerading as the Dark Knight as he raises the stakes in his war on crime. Bruce aims to dismantle the remaining criminal organisations that still plague the streets. As Batman he aims to inspire a sense of good in a city dominated by evil and malevolence. Bruce now exists in a life of complete desolation, anguish and seclusion, which is fuelled by his passionate abhorrence for crime and his dedication to its abolition. Batman, already partnered with Lt. James Gordon (Oldman), unites with new District Attourney Harvey Dent (Eckhart) in his perseverance for the strengthening of justice on the streets of Gotham City. Amongst the already overwhelming organised crime numbers, a new prominent figure emerges in the form of The Joker (Ledger) who elaborately schemes to unmask the Dark Knight whose identity is always concealed. As days pass by, The Joker creates a new wave of chaos unlike anything Gotham City has previously experienced. Beneath that menacing grin of scars and heavy make-up, the perplexing figure unleashes a heinous agenda. What follows is a game of cat-and-mouse as The Joker hunts Batman and vica versa.

The foremost thing that will remain unforgettable about the film is the cast. Christian Bale surpasses his previous performance in Batman Begins. Batman is a far deeper and more developed character in this film, and his loyalty to preserving peace is significantly more palpable. Bale's character of Bruce Wayne has a flawed personality that Bale pulls of with extraordinary skill. His perception of justice and the methods of its execution eventually cause a shift both personally and mentally. As he drifts further away from the people that love him the most, his choice to become a superhero transforms into an unnatural obsession. It's easy to sympathise with Bale's faultless embodiment of the character. But this is not Bale's show...this is Heath Ledger's time to shine. I was among the many millions of people mourning his tragic death in February 2008. Even more tragic is that his portrayal here would have guaranteed him a place on the A-list. Michael Caine even spoke excitedly regarding Ledger's performance as The Joker. Caine, a veteran actor, forget his lines due to the level of intimidation instilled by Ledger's character rendering. This is wholly understandable: Heath Ledger's portrayal as The Joker is electrifying and terrifying! We have never seen this actor reach this standard before. If the actor was still alive, acting offers would have gone through the roof! Ledger masters the creepy, psychotic side to the character. It would be unfair to compare him to Jack Nicholson's performance from almost two decades prior. Where Nicholson was frequently reeling out gags and making us laugh, Ledger is occasionally very funny but at the same time psychotic and sinister. Ledger's posture and facial expressions (hidden behind that intimidating make-up) are enough to make you laugh. His hand gestures and dialogue are the icing on the cake. I agree with the hype: Ledger deserves a posthumous Oscar nomination at the very least. Deciding the man of choice to portray The Joker...I call it dead equal between Nicholson and Ledger.

Thankfully, Katie Holmes stepped away from the role of Rachel Dawes. Maggie Gyllenhaal takes the role with style and a subtle screen charm. Maggie is beautiful and dashing, presenting the audience with some amazing acting skills. Aaron Eckhart undertakes the duel roles of DA Harvey Dent and Two-Face. It goes without saying that Tommy Lee Jones' past portrayal is left far behind. He was too much like a comic...whereas Eckhart is more realistic and looks far more credible. He's downright terrifying with a half-scarred face. Michael Caine once again displays his talents for tackling the role of Alfred the butler. Caine has always had a charming screen presence, and on top of this his voice is soothing and poignant. Gary Oldman is a far younger depiction of James Gordon who's more commonly known as Commissioner Gordon to the Batman fanatics. All those characters previously stranded in a world resembling a comic book have now been brought to the screen with a truly amazing host of actors. Look out for a brief appearance by actor William Fichter. Blink and you'll miss him!

The creative team involved in The Dark Knight ensure that their efforts match all expectations. Thankfully, Nolan's previous creative choice to use quick cuts and shaky cam isn't as distracting here. Instead the action is far more involving and stimulating as the film moves at an invigorating pace. Interestingly, the filmmakers have also employed a shock value. There are abusive beatings, intense action scenes (more so than its predecessor) and some frightening images. The moody visuals are mainly attributed to the cinematography. The city of Gotham feels like a character in the piece with the visuals that encompass the intricate locations within the complex metropolis. Although the city isn't as visually stimulating as Burton's neo-gothic vision that was brought to life in the late 80s, I must give credit to the production crew for topping the cheesy interpretation presented in later films. It may still seem like just another American city, but this time every facet is far more involving.

The music conforms to the standard set by Batman Begins. The joint musical skill of Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard produces fantastic results. Every piece of music is ear-shattering, and is complimented by the equally loud sound effects. Each gun shot, each punch, each piece of dialogue will have you riveted. When the action comes booming onto the screen, you'll be giddy with delight. The sheer scale of The Dark Knight is a marvel to behold. This isn't just a superhero movie...it completely rises above the superhero genre. The filmmakers cited Heat as a key influence on their filmmaking. This film is simply a dark, bleak, realistic multi-layered crime tale. The film is long but not overlong. It certainly feels like one heck of a lengthy movie and it will frustrate you due to the length. However, it's impossible to remove a thing. The screenplay is so well written and its execution is so stylish that you'll be riveted the entire time. It's a saga of crime set in a superhero setting.

Overall, I don't think anyone imagined The Dark Knight to be this good. The whole film is lacking clichés, instead presenting the audience with something unpredictable. This film is on par with Burton's original Batman film. It's impossible to choose a winner, although that is subject to debate. However, I think Two-Face was a bit underused and his participation is a wasted opportunity. Bottom line: The Dark Knight is an awesome movie with more tragedy and a less sentimental approach to characters.

"Tell me something, my friend. You ever dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?"

When director Tim Burton grasped the reigns of the first serious screen manifestation of the DC Comics superhero, The Dark Knight (a.k.a. Batman), fans were understandably slightly nervous considering the director's little prior experience as a filmmaker. If one inspects director Burton's current résumé, it's crammed with some of the greatest fantasy films of all time - from Big Fish to Edward Scissorhands. However, towards the end of the 1980s he was only commercially recognised for Pee-wee's Big Adventure and Beetlejuice. Tim Burton's Batman marks the first escapade of the illustrious superhero since the incredibly campy 1960s TV show. It was apparent from the outset that Burton's intent was to visibly separate himself from those roots, instead opting to return to the menacing psychopathology of vigilante violence amidst a neo-noir atmosphere with chilling gothic connotations. Burton's amazing vision is a mix of noir mobster clichés with remote psychotic notions that appear to encompass their origins in dreamlike imagery cast over with the compelling spectacle of the legendary Dark Knight. In a nutshell: this makes for equally a visual and an expressive extravagance.

Batman introduces an innovative interpretation of the renowned character: a traumatised albeit determined vigilante...a spot on blend of hero and anti-hero. The creative team eliminate the embarrassingly atrocious blue tights worn by Adam West in the 1960s TV show (and the campy film): these are substituted with smooth leather, latex and marvellously meticulous body armour. To contrast the dark image of Batman, we are presented with a flamboyant, vivacious Jack Nicholson portraying Batman's arch nemesis...the Joker. The characters are wholly believable as opposed to over-the-top and campy. They are placed where they belong: in a serious film noir. Burton's Batman is a template for the superhero genre that also introduced an innovative formula. This masterpiece gave birth to both the summer blockbuster and the contemporary superhero genre in general.

Bruce Wayne (Keaton) is a millionaire whose parents were killed when he was a boy. Bruce is now residing in Gotham City which is governed by fear and crime. By day he's a bland rich man with seemingly nothing to do. But by night, he masquerades as the Caped Crusader who's an illustrious, albeit mysterious figure. Jack Napier (Nicholson) is a criminal being hunted by the authorities. Following a disastrous encounter with Batman, Jack Napier returns as the Joker who threatens the entire population of Gotham City. The Joker is a brilliant but unreservedly crazy criminal mastermind capable of heinous and unpredictable brutality.

There are countless reasons in relation to why Tim Burton's Batman is a masterpiece of the highest regard. Principally, its brilliance is due to the director's decision to make his production as dark and realistic as possible while still preserving a comic-book sensibility. There's impressive stylised violence that's spectacular but not brutal. The kids will love the film due to its visuals, while the adults will appreciate the film on a much broader scale. It's a daunting task to convincingly pull off a film concerning a crime-fighter in a bat suit swinging from one building to the next in a fictional Gotham City. Burton manages the achievement by making us believe the characters, their ambitions, and even believe in their predicaments. Burton helps us suspend our disbelief by crafting a noir-ish atmosphere reminiscent of the best Hollywood film noirs of the 40s, the 50s and the greatest graphic novels of the 80s and beyond: we are presented with shadowy rooms; gloomy, rain-swept streets; and dark, smoke-filled alleys. This is a towering spectacle that stands as a monumentally creative reinvention of a superhero for the big screen.

The vision of Gotham City is an unparalleled feat. Instead of a typical city setting similar to those frequently seen in America, we are transported to a visual feast that is marvellous to behold. It's like a page of the comic being transported to film. The combination of Anton Furst's production design and Peter Young's set decoration makes everything look truly impeccable. On top of this, the action is satisfying and abundant. People watch superhero films to see their favourite superhero overpowering their adversaries. From start to finish we have a clear-cut villain, and we're rooting for the good guy. Then there's Danny Elfman's invigorating musical score containing a theme as recognisable and as energetic as the Superman theme. Prince also contributed a few songs to the film's soundtrack. Sure, they may sound silly but it adds to the film's perfect tone. One glance at the opening sequence alone and you know it's Batman: a unique labour of love flaunting considerable inspiration and imagination.

Michael Keaton shall always be Batman through my eyes. Burton's decision would have been considered slightly peculiar as the actor was known mainly for comedic roles (like featuring in Burton's Beetlejuice), however Keaton proves capable of pulling off a complicated role. Jack Nicholson is brilliant as the Joker. Granted he's over-the-top, but he nails the character's sinister undertones while maintaining a colourful appearance. His laugh and smile are faultless here. Kim Basinger would probably be considered an odd choice as well. But lo and behold: she also nails her character of the nervous and determined journalist. Also in the magnificent supporting cast you'll find such names as Robert Wuhl, Pat Hingle and Billy Dee Williams. Michael Gough is perfect as Alfred. He has a warm feel to his character and it's impossible to imagine someone pulling off a better performance.

All in all, Tim Burton has accomplished a groundbreaking masterpiece with his neo-gothic vision of Batman. The comic has been brought to life in an amazing cinematic event. I remember watching this classic film as a child and adoring it. Years have passed, but I'm still in complete awe at everything about this film. It's perhaps needlessly long and slightly slow-paced around the middle section...still, this is possibly the greatest superhero affair of all time: a groundbreaking visual and aural onslaught that altered the way in which comic book adaptations were viewed. Followed by Batman Returns, and an additional two sequels before the series was rebooted in 2005.

"Nazis. I hate these guys."

Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade is the third, but not final instalment in the legendary Indiana Jones series. The first film is still one of the best movies in cinematic history, with the second film grossly incapable of recapturing the charm and appeal of its predecessor. This next Indiana Jones adventure is the best sequel thus far. The filmmakers have almost equalled the brilliance of the first flick. Just like the original movie, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade is a faultless blend of action and adventure with intrigue and romance thrown into the mix.


The opening sequence is always a pivotal part in the success of these movies. In this case the film opens with a prologue that traces the roots of Indy as we now know him. This prologue digs into his fear of snakes, delves into why he has a scar on his chin, the reasoning behind his passion for relic hunting and how he came into possession of his trademark items. This prologue also serves as an artefact hunt that acts as a bridge into the main plot.


Everyone's favourite treasure-hunter-come-professor Indiana Jones (Ford) whips back into action with a hunt for yet another ancient relic. Indy is taken to meet a wealthy ancient relic devotee named Walter Donovan (Glover). Walter explains that recent discoveries have been made that may possibly point to the locality of the Holy Grail - the cup Jesus Christ theoretically drank from at the last supper. Indy is also informed that the project leader has gone missing; said leader is none other than Professor Henry Jones Sr. (Connery), Indy's father. With his father's Grail scrapbook in his pocket, Indy heads to Venice in search of his father. The adventure then moves to Germany during the height of the Nazi regime. It then becomes a race against time as Indy and his father scramble to find the location of the Holy Grail before the Nazis get there first.


Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade is of course filled with endless action and excitement. Just like Raiders of the Lost Ark this film is a myriad of now memorable scenes. Some of these unforgettable scenes include a desert scene with a large tank, Indy inadvertently getting the autograph of Adolf Hitler, avoiding a nest of rats in the catacombs underneath a library, a battle in the air and a great scene set inside a German blimp.


Harrison Ford is every bit as charming and appealing as he was when the series commenced in 1981. Ford is always fit for action and is given a plethora of clever lines to work with. The casting department of these films will endlessly receive compliments and recognition for their superb choice of actors. Sean Connery is perfect in the role he was born to play. Formerly playing the role of James Bond, Connery is an absolutely ideal choice. The chemistry between Ford and Connery never feels at all contrived. The two feel like a genuine pair of father and son. More appraisal for the casting department as the rest of the supporting cast is equally remarkable. Denholm Elliot, John Rhys-Davies, Julian Glover, Alison Doody...they are all outstanding.


No Indiana Jones film is complete without the brilliant directing from Steven Spielberg and the exciting music from John Williams. Composer Williams excels himself with the music in this film. There is plenty of action accompanied with a perfect score. The special effects still look elegant and hard to fault. I adore the use of old school effects. In this case everything is done practically and all special effects objects actually have a screen presence. The cinematography is also a major stand out with this film as well.


Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade satisfied my every requirement in an adventure movie. Loads of action, plenty of witty dialogue, well conceived characters and a high level of excitement. Many have tried, but no-one can ever match the brilliance of the Indiana Jones movies. They don't make movies of this elegance anymore. Followed 19 years later by Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

"Remember, remember,
The fifth of November,
The gunpowder treason and plot.
I know of no reason
Why the gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot."

V for Vendetta is a monumental science fiction action-thriller, denoting the duly excellent redemption of The Wachowski Brothers. After helming two horrendously disappointing sequels to their landmark sci-fi picture The Matrix, the brothers have irrevocably redeemed themselves for past blunders with estimable elegance. This outstanding comic book blockbuster is everything one could possibly desire - it's exhilarating, riveting, intense, chilling, electrifying, heartbreaking and extraordinarily entertaining. V for Vendetta is fundamentally a cautionary tale about the rise of fascism and totalitarianism, but it thankfully packs summer-movie pyrotechnics to accompany.

"Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea, Mr. Creedy, and ideas are bulletproof."


Based on the Vertigo/DC Comics graphic novel (by Alan Moore, illustrated by David Lloyd), V for Vendetta is a futuristic action film set in a dystopian vision of 2020 London. In the wake of a series of devastating terrorist attacks, Chancellor Adam Sutler (Hurt) has ascended to unmitigated supremacy. The general public have forfeited their independence for security; accustomed to exist in a relentless condition of apprehension. Consequently, the perception of constitutional rights for citizens has vanished completely.

A freedom fighter only known as 'V' (Weaving) exercises terrorist diplomacy in an effort to combat the tyrannical society. On the night bridging the fourth and fifth of November, a young British woman named Evey (Portman) is caught by a horde of secret policemen violating the inequitable curfew. The swashbuckling vigilante anarchist V, concealed behind a mask of Guy Fawkes, rescues Evey and she develops into his dubious ally.
Invoking the spirit of Fawkes, V begins the fifth of November by blowing up the Old Bailey to the strings of Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture. He subsequently ignites a subversive rebellion, marching towards breaking down the fascist government that has taken jurisdiction of Great Britain and has committed atrocities that led the country to its existing condition. V endeavours to eventually reinstate freedom and justice to Britain, as opposed to a society burdened with malice and corruption.

"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people."


The Wachowski Brothers humbly stepped away from the director's chair, instead adopting a sideline position as writers and producers. Newcomer James McTeigue is an ideal replacement, capable of infusing the film with breathtaking visual flair. Action sequences generally exercise slow motion, but it never grows monotonous. This is one of the only films in history to use slo-mo effectively, which is a testament to the direction and superb cinematography.

V for Vendetta is a solid action film that delivers an insightful political message. The film flawlessly merges a socio-political statement with highly intense stylised action scenes featuring some of the finest cinematic moments of 2005. V for Vendetta is saturated with issues and concepts that permeate the global political climate of the early 21st century, and is endowed with an immense timely relevance that belies its trappings as a mere action adventure. The film is equipped with an intelligent character-driven plot coalesced with greatly assured direction generating the illusion of complete immersion. The action is enthralling and the imagery is stimulating. In addition, the film is kept taut as it moves along at an invigorating pace. The script is smart, thoughtful and provocative. The powerful score is also incredible. Classic orchestral overtures are employed to astonishing effect as an act of anarchy is implemented.

" told you, only truth. For 20 years, I sought only this day. Nothing else existed... until I saw you. Then everything changed. I fell in love with you Evey. And to think I no longer believed I could."


The imagery of 2020 London is marvellously conceived and executed. The intricate metropolis has become grim, depressing and dark. Production design is first-rate, and the top-notch cinematography captures it with consummate skill. The world of V for Vendetta was created mostly with sets and miniatures in Berlin, with some local landscape to finish the portrait of a more noir-ish and sinister London. The filmmakers commendably eschew stereotypical futuristic concepts. There are no flying cars, nor are there any truly notable technological revelations - it never tries to predict any outlandish technology for the future. For this reason (and for many others, like the rare usage of special effects that never exhibit the slightest iota of phoniness), V for Vendetta will never grow outdated.

"A building is a symbol, as is the act of destroying it. Symbols are given power by people. A symbol, in and of itself is powerless, but with enough people behind it, blowing up a building can change the world."


Hugo Weaving is impeccable in his portrayal of the violent anarchist 'V'. Throughout the movie his face is never revealed as there is no need. V is permanently concealed behind a mask of Guy Fawkes. The mask is not to disguise his identity but it rather acts as a symbol to proclaim his rebellion. The real Guy Fawkes was a Catholic terrorist who unsuccessfully attempted to blow up the British Houses of Parliament in the 1600s. V is a violent man; however his actions are supported by strong logical reasoning. Society becomes governed by fear and violence. As a counteraction, fear and violence is therefore the ideal instrument for change. Weaving's role would have been tremendously challenging to execute as he is always donning a mask; relying solely on his gestures and voice. In all likelihood, V's face is never exposed on account of Weaving's appearance in the Matrix movies - there were so many copies of him (as Mr. Smith) that the actor probably opted to keep his face concealed throughout this film's duration.

Opposite the first-rate Weaving is young Natalie Portman, displaying her unremitting capacity as an actress. She even sports a symbolic Joan of Arc hair-cut in the movie's second half. Evey is the real anchor of the story. The audience automatically empathises with her. She's a reflection of their hopes and fears, and functions as a mirror. She has immense chemistry with Weaving as V, regardless of his face forever being masked. The character of Evey is more impetuous and independent than her comic book counterpart, to the betterment of the film.
The supporting cast is armed with magnificent names like John Hurt, Stephen Rea, and Stephen Fry in addition to numerous others. Hurt in particular is perfect as the narcissistic and cruel tyrannical ruler; ranting and salivating in true fascist style.

"Strength through unity. Unity through faith."


Believe the hyperbolic hype regarding this motion picture - V for Vendetta is an outstanding multi-faceted sci-fi production. In addition to being an astonishingly entertaining film it also poses the question of what you're willing to surrender for security. With the contemporary world ruled by fear and dismay, would you renounce your freedom to feel more safe and secure? The film also serves a reminder that the term "terrorist" is defined purely by perspective. As the media poisons us against terrorist actions and utilises propaganda to promote its country, V for Vendetta subtly questions who the terrorists actually are - the anarchists or the government?

V for Vendetta is a revolutionary production that uses its imagery and underlying philosophies as a medium to trigger thought. It's uncommonly provocative for a mainstream movie, and it's pervaded with a marvellous comic book ambiance faithful to its source material. Natalie Portman and Hugo Weaving are a spellbinding duo, and first-time director James McTeigue (who was a second-unit director for The Wachowski Brothers during their Matrix years) demonstrates his ability to stand on his own two feet. In a modern cinematic world, blockbusters prevail and masterpieces are limited. V for Vendetta is both a blockbuster and a masterpiece. It's entertaining and enjoyable, as well as stirring, moving and filled with emotionality. You'll enjoy, you'll cry, and you'll be taking heed of V's immortal words.


"Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is a vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished. However, this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation, stands vivified and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin van-guarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta, held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose, so let me simply add that it's my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V."

"As far back as I can remember, I always wanted to be a gangster."

Martin Scorsese is a director who will always be remembered for a long list of classic mob dramas. The beginning of his career was marked with the brilliant Taxi Driver. Since then, Scorsese has continued to produce great quality work. It's a rare occasion if he produces a faulty product.

GoodFellas is arguably Scorsese's best film to date; this slick, fast-paced crime drama is engrossing, captivating and riveting. Before GoodFellas many had regarded The Godfather to be the best mob drama in existence. Since the release of this film, that statement continues to spark debate.

GoodFellas is based on the true story about a gangster named Henry Hill (Liotta). As a teenage local boy Henry becomes part of the mafia. He becomes partners with gangsters Jimmy Conway (De Niro) and Tommy DeVito (Pesci). The film is a tale that follows this certain mafia family over the course of about 30 years; chronicling the rise and fall of Henry and his two counterparts.

Even with its 140-minute running time, GoodFellas is exceptionally told. The film encapsulates everything that should be present in the genre; strong characters, heavy profanity and lots of repulsive violence. Each performance is engaging and compelling with a smart script to boot.

The script is smart and enthralling. The whole film is told with outstanding voice-over narration that gets us into the mind of the character being portrayed.

This could be Robert De Niro's finest hour. His screen presence is brooding and unnerving. Because of his character's reputation there is good reason to fear him. De Niro plays Jimmy Conway as terrifying and intimidating.

Ray Liotta is a realistic gangster figure. At times his bitter anger seems very genuine. He spits out a tonne of profanity during the compelling drama that frequently occurs during the film's running time.

Joe Pesci pretty much stole the show. De Niro may be terrifying, but on the other hand Pesci is the epitome of sadistic gangsters. He frequently swears and cannot hold his temper. Whenever he's in a fit of rage it is quite menacing.

GoodFellas is a film that exposes gangsters for what they truly are - people who preach loyalties, respects and principles. But when it comes down to it they are just a bunch of two-bit criminals that will stab each other in the back for money, power or otherwise. They have an outward persona of being calm and tolerant. Underneath they are capable of incredible rage and are quite detestable people.

Martin Scorsese is very talented when he is at the helm of a mafia drama. His directing makes everything seem so authentic like it's actually happening. Of course this is the beauty of Scorsese's work - that nothing ever feels contrived or staged.

GoodFellas is an exceptional movie powered by remarkable performances and great directing. The R rating truly signifies the film's nature. The profanity levels are through the roof, the violence is off-putting, the experience is unnerving. But despite its ghastly nature the film is a brilliant mob drama. For aficionados of Scorsese or the genre, this is a must.

"Bring the noise!"

After the great success of the 2004 British comedy Shaun of the Dead it was inevitable that the filmmakers would team up for another spoof. Unlike the brainless spoof films created by the Americans who never have any conception of plot, Hot Fuzz is unique and brilliant. Instead of brainlessly spoofing films while focusing on the laughs, Hot Fuzz is a parody of the action genre as well as an addition to the action genre. There are plenty of clever laughs that improve with every screening, not to mention a lot of high-energy action and a genius amalgamation of every action film cliché under the sun. It would take a very talented bunch of filmmakers to actually make this idea work; needless to say I was very impressed with the efforts of everyone who took part in the filmmaking.

Simon Pegg is a big city cop named Nicolas Angel who has a mighty impressive record during his career: an arrest rate 400% higher than any other police officer, and very skilled in every aspect of being part of the force. Nicolas' jealous colleagues conspire to get rid of him because he is making them all "look bad". And hence Nicolas is reassigned to the sleepy, pleasant little village of Sandford.

He is teamed up with an overeager police officer named Danny Butterman (Frost) whose father runs the local police force. Danny is an eager action movie fan who is desperate to see real action; that is, intense gun fights and high octane car chases. Danny's enormous ego really gets on Nicolas' nerves. But the sleepy town is soon rocked by a number of gruesome deaths that are dismissed as accidents. Nicolas, however, becomes convinced that these people were in fact murdered. As the intrigue deepens, Danny's dreams of explosions, high-octane car-chases, gun fights and all-out action becomes more and more like a reality.

In tradition with Shaun of the Dead, the filmmakers spend plenty of time fleshing out a discernable plot while filling the screen with laughs. Unlike the brainless laughs supplied by American films, it seems the British gags are a lot more cerebral. And it's this fact that moves the film out of the "brainless entertainment" category; instead becoming a damn fine piece of cinema that is also quite groundbreaking and creative.

For a comedy, the filmmakers made no attempt to hold back on high levels of strong gruesome violence during the action scenes. The action scenes were filmed using shaky cam style and quick cuts for the modern action movie-goer. This may be looked upon as a negative aspect, but the point of using this style was to spoof the modern action genre. And it's a lot more kickass than the usual Bad Boys II kind of action scenes.

Hot Fuzz is nothing short of a brilliant movie. It's superb entertainment filled with laughs and jammed with references to classic action films. Although a bit of a slow build up, the final action scene is a no-holds-barred piece that last at least 20 minutes. Even though it's a long action scene, the filmmakers sustain the intensity and excitement from start to finish.

Hot Fuzz is immensely superior to the usual American spoof movies we've seen far too much of these days. The film is creative, enthralling and extremely entertaining. The creators of Shaun of the Dead have recaptured the magic and spoofed another genre. I hope the team spoof another genre sometime into the future.

"Where do you think you're going? Nobody's leaving. Nobody's walking out on this fun, old-fashioned family Christmas. No, no. We're all in this together. This is a full-blown, four-alarm holiday emergency here. We're gonna press on, and we're gonna have the hap, hap, happiest Christmas since Bing Crosby tap-danced with Danny fucking Kaye. And when Santa squeezes his fat white ass down that chimney tonight, he's gonna find the jolliest bunch of assholes this side of the nuthouse."

Quality Christmas movie are hard to come by. Awful Christmas films are all over the place. Santa Claus Conquers the Martians, Jingle All the Way, Deck the Halls, Christmas with the Kranks...the list is endless. Over the years it's become an unfortunate time-honoured tradition for studios to distribute holiday films as the Christmas season approaches, quality be damned. Only a handful are destined to become true holiday classics. National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation is one such classic. In the grand pantheon of classic Christmas films, Christmas Vacation - the third (mis)adventure of the Griswold family - is undoubtedly one of the best (if not the best). Everyone has a favourite Christmas film to view as part of their annual customs on Christmas Eve. For many (myself included), it truly isn't Christmas unless a screening of Christmas Vacation is beheld. Why is this film held in such high regard? The answer is simple, really - it's a terrific onslaught of memorable, hilarious laughs combined with a poignant sense of the Christmas spirit.

"I dedicate this house to the Griswold Family Christmas."

In this entry to the Vacation series, the Griswold family are staying at home for the Christmas holidays. Clark Griswold (Chase) is really getting into the spirit this year, and aims to create the perfect old-fashioned family Christmas. There isn't too much plot to be observed here - just a straightforward string of great laughs and enjoyable scenarios. The basics of the story concern Clark's struggle to create the ultimate picture-book Christmas for his family. The in-laws turn up, as do Clark's parents and a barrage of other family members. But, predictably, things go from bad to worse as the Griswold family Christmas descends into total catastrophe. Clark's dreams are slowly squandered as the holy day approaches. With irritable neighbours, odious relatives and plain bad luck, this season will test Clark's endurance as he tries to weather this storm and provide a decent, memorable festive season.

"We're kicking off our fun old fashion family Christmas by heading out into the country in the old front-wheel drive sleigh to embrace the frosty majesty of the winter landscape and select that most important of Christmas symbols."

At its heart, Christmas Vacation is about the struggle to go above and beyond for the sake of family. Clark (God bless him!) is willing to move heaven and earth in order to guarantee his family will experience the best "Griswold Family Christmas" possible. Perhaps he's slightly over-the-top most of the time, but on the inside Clark is just a hardworking bloke trying to ensure the contentment of his family. Christmas Vacation was written by John Hughes (also responsible for The Breakfast Club, Ferris Bueller's Day Off - i.e. the classic 80s teen flicks), and therein justifies its boundless appeal. Hughes' screenplay isn't merely a brainless sequence of slapstick - there's an abundance of quality humour for sure, but it has a strong heart at its centre, and Hughes manages to encapsulate the true spirit of the festive period. Time and time again, Hughes has demonstrated that familial values and the little things in life are worth pointing a magnifying glass at. Christmas Vacation is extremely easy to enjoy, and even easier to relate to - whether it's troubles with the Christmas tree, irritating oldies, the decorations, the gifts, the turkey...Hughes effortlessly captures the magic and the familiar dilemmas of the period with sugar-coated merriment.

Christmas Vacation also conveys a strong message, as all Christmas movies do. It has nothing to do with the birth of Christ or the Three Wise Men...instead it speaks volumes about being with loved ones and family during the holidays, and that regardless of any mishaps that materialise one can always find fun and laughter in the little moments that make life special.

"I don't know what to say, except it's Christmas and we're all in misery."

This reviewer watches National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation every Christmas Eve. No matter how many times one views this wonderful movie, it never gets old. First-rate laughs are continuous, and even after multiple screenings they're still funny. There are countless moments capable of triggering uncontrollable laughter due to their relatability and realism (if that's the correct term to use). Clark's road rage with two hillbillies interfering with the perfect Christmas tree search...Clark's constant struggle to get the Christmas lights working...a ruined Christmas dinner...we've all been there before, and can all relate to at least a few of the scenarios. Hughes rarely goes over-the-top, instead primarily grounding the gags in reality. The over-the-top laughs are still hilarious nevertheless (a saucer travelling as fast as lightning may be impossible...but I'll be damned if I ever stopped laughing as it looks hilarious, and small lines of dialogue (most of which will be inaudible amidst your uncontainable laughter) will tickle your funny bone). The film moves at a pleasing pace from one memorable scene to the one succeeding it. Every single scene will become eternally embedded in your memory, yet you'll want to view another screening before the credits even begin to roll.

John Hughes scripted the first two Vacation entries (National Lampoon's Vacation and the decidedly disappointing European Vacation), but left the director's chair vacant. Those who directed the first two films (Harold Ramis directed Vacation, Amy Heckerling helmed European Vacation) went on to become household names. It's somewhat surprising that Christmas Vacation director Jeremiah Chechik went on to create such dirge as The Avengers. Regardless of Chechik's rather tragic career as a whole, he nevertheless still directed this Christmas classic. Christmas Vacation is competently-made; special effects have barely dated (the saucer scene does look a tad dodgy, though), production values are wonderful to behold (Clark's decorated house looks magnificent), key scenes are superbly orchestrated (the squirrel attack sequence never treads a foot wrong) and director of photography Thomas Ackerman captures the sets + locations skilfully (the opening tree hunt takes great advantage of the capabilities of widescreen). On top of this, the soundtrack is an enchanting cocktail of timeless Christmas tunes and original music. From the Griswold rendition of Deck the Halls to Ray Charles' The Spirit of Christmas, the songs included will further evoke the holiday spirit in a viewer.

"Well I'm gonna park the cars and get check the luggage, and well, I'll be outside for...the season."

National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation also proves that Chevy Chase was once funny. Even if you're not Chevy Chase fan (I simply tremble at the thought), it's difficult not to laugh at his blundering antics as he fumbles his way through the jolliest holiday of all. Chase may not be the most honoured thespian in history, but when it comes to Clark Griswold he has it down to a tee. Initially a merry soul before delving into frustration and anger, Clark is the definitive embodiment of all who have endured the trials and tribulations of the Christmas season. Hughes' screenplay sheds light on all the nuances and dilemmas that constitute one of the most jolly (and stressful) times of the year. While Clark searches for the perfect gift for his wife at the mall, he continually sputters words as he pretends not to notice the store clerk's bountiful bosom. When the word "nippley" is substituted for "nippy", you truly know you have something special on your hands.

The always watchable Beverly D'Angelo shares great chemistry with Chase, making their marriage a great comedic partnership. As for the kids (Rusty and Audrey) there's young Johnny Galecki and Juliette Lewis, respectively. They're arguably the best pair to tackle the characters.

"Can I refill your eggnog for you? Get you something to eat? Drive you out to the middle of nowhere and leave you for dead?"

Chase doesn't deliver all the best laughs - he receives great assistance from Randy Quaid playing the repulsive Cousin Eddie who shows up unannounced with maniacal energy (it's hard to believe Randy and Dennis Quaid are from the same gene pool). Quaid's best moment is, of course, when he stands outside in his bathrobe emptying the contents of his "shitter" into a storm drain. As Catherine - Eddie's wife - Miriam Flynn is very appealing. Both Quaid and Flynn also starred in the original National Lampoon's Vacation.
The two kids of Eddie and Catherine provide great moments of comedy. Oh, and I can't forget to mention their dog (named Snots, for obvious reasons).
Also in the supporting cast are two sets of grandparents, a cantankerous uncle (Hickey), a clueless aunt (Questal, who was the voice of Betty Boop) and two arrogant neighbours condemned to suffer through Clark's shenanigans (Louis-Dreyfus, Guest). So many greatly realised characters vying for screen-time, with some quite underused to be honest.

Frequently cited as the best of the Vacation series and one of the best Christmas films ever made, nothing can seriously derail National Lampoon's Christmas Vacation. First-time director Chechik has transformed John Hughes' masterful screenplay into a tour de force of comedy; a rare film balancing hilarious laughs with moments of satisfying poignancy. Even the opening credits sequence is terrific - a wonderful nod to the classic animated holiday movies of old. Christmas Vacation never gets mired in cringe-worthy sentimentality, nor does it deliver hackneyed messages. It reminds us that no matter what mishaps or disasters befall us...familial relationships are what truly matter.

That, and never light a match near a sewerage drain.

Christmas Vacation is funny, touching, entertaining and extremely watchable. It's a Christmas classic that continues to delight audiences when the annual festive season is upon us. We all have a favourite Christmas movie...this is mine. It's more memorable and enjoyable than A Christmas Story, far jollier than It's a Wonderful Life, and far better than all those trite Hollywood holiday flicks (i.e. those mentioned at the commencement of this review). If you've never viewed this classic, wonderful gem, then watch it at the earliest opportunity. It's full of funny moments and great performances, and it will warm the coldest heart.

If Christmas Vacation doesn't make you giggle numerous times, then you obviously don't understand the true meaning of Christmas - which is, of course, flammable toilets and electrified cats.

"The most enjoying traditions of the season are best enjoyed in the warm embrace of kith and kin. Thith tree is a thymbol of the thpirit of the Griswold family Chrithmath."

"Don't go..."

Edward (Depp) lives as an exile shunned from society; an artificial man with scissors for hands. Edward lives in a secluded historic mansion where his creator (Price) lived, working on finishing his creation. But his creator's sudden demise changes this, resulting in Edward living alone and afraid.

That is, until local Avon Lady Peg (Weist) befriends Edward and invites him into her stereotypical suburban community. Edward must navigate a society that is often prejudiced against him because of his uniqueness. While adapting to his new lifestyle, Edward falls in love with a young teenager (Ryder) who develops a soft spot for him. But Edward is not cut out for a suburban life, and severe trouble for Edward's safety is what transpires.

Edward Scissorhands is the crowning creation from visionary director Tim Burton, and is my favourite fairytale movie. The film is enjoyable and exquisite is every sense of the word; Edward feels real, and all other performances add more to the already extraordinary experience.

The performance by Johnny Depp, in one of his first film roles, is probably his finest hour. Not only does Depp do a superb job of bringing the character to life, but he also lets us forget that this is an actor that went on to become a famous figure.

At first I figured Edward Scissorhands to be a weepy chick flick/fairytale...but this is a textbook example of incorrectly judging a book by its cover.

Edward Scissorhands is a film that will always remains one of the greatest films in existence; it's humorous, well made and quite frankly a modern masterpiece. The ending, no matter how many times you see it, will always be a tear jerker because of the sheer power of Tim Burton's storytelling and Danny Elfman's compelling score.

"This is the story of Harold Crick..."

Stranger Than Fiction is a film that completely blew me away. Still minutes after concluding my screening I have tears wetting my eyes, goose-bumps covering my body and I am still trying to figure out what I have just experienced.

Before watching this movie I had only glanced at the film's theatrical poster and thus I had no clue as to the plot of the movie. I had no expectations at all and began watching the movie with absolutely no ideas what to expect. In all honesty I couldn't shake off the feeling that it was going to be another dumb Will Ferrell comedy during which he overacts to get some laughs.

But Stranger Than Fiction is none of that. Instead of a no-brainer comedy we are presented with a masterpiece; a heart-warming, touching comedy/drama that is pretty much unbeatable. If you're expecting another Anchorman or Talladega Nights then I suggest you go rent something else. But if you can look past Ferrell's type-cast performance and instead clear your head of all expectations then you will see what a genuinely outstanding film this truly is.

Stranger Than Fiction is filled with originality, fascinating characters and unpredictable twists. Not to mention the film is groundbreaking, innovative, thought-provoking and captivating. I doubt we will see any films of this stature for a very long time to come.

While watching the movie I enjoyed it a whole lot more without any conception of the plot of the movie. And because of this, I must recommend experiencing the movie without any pre-gained knowledge of the plot. I will just tell you that the film is the story of an IRS agent named Harold Crick (Ferrell) whose organised lifestyle is suddenly interrupted.

Stranger Than Fiction is an extraordinary tale that is engaging and enthralling from start to finish.

The first thing that I noticed was the way in which it was created; there's bright scenery, appealing actors, realistic setting and some catchy music to accompany this. The establishing few shots were enough to keep my attention throughout the whole movie.

Will Ferrell is a man I respect because of his overzealous comedy roles. Ferrell is outstanding in a drama such as this. The man is focused 100% and never breaks his concentration. He's deadpan, dedicated, and charming. Ferrell also had me in tears towards the end because of the poignancy of his performance and the way we could actually sympathise with him. Dustin Hoffman is another person one would hardly expect to find in a film such as this. But he is absolutely superb and lets his character live. Emma Thompson has never been like this before, and she will probably never be this good ever again. She seems concentrated on getting her character perfected. The supporting players are a very weird bunch of big names including Maggie Gyllenhaal and Queen Latifah.

Marc Foster was successfully able to set the atmosphere of this movie within the first five seconds. From that point on I couldn't take my eyes away from the screen. And of course Foster's direction was supported by the great music. I loved the music used in this film as it is catchy and it triggers your imagination.

Stranger Than Fiction is a lot better than I originally thought it would end up to be. The film is a masterpiece - pure and simple. I loved it and found it to be one of my favourite movies of 2006. Not to be missed.

"Peter, what's happening?"

Office Space is a film I had no interest in seeing at all. The front cover of the DVD was something that never sparked my interest; the cover was not enticing and it made the film look like some silly child comedy. But I am very glad that I finally took the time to sit down and watch this gem.

The first shot was enough to have me allured. And after the opening scene I was already laughing and clapping due to the comedic genius of the whole thing. And yet the whole film maintains this high level of comedy genius.

No matter how many times I watch it I have a tremendously good time. I had no idea the film was going to be this enjoyable. Office Space is bright and funny; it contains a sleuth of fantastic, quirky characters and amusing one-liners that will have the audience laughing the whole way through.

Peter Gibbons (Livingston) lives a mundane life. He despises his miserable dead-end job, finds out his girlfriend is cheating on him and has an irritating neighbour. For Peter, everyday is the worst day of his life. At his job he's forced to spend the whole day in a cubicle in front of a computer screen and has a sleazy boss named Bill Lumbergh (Cole). At the request of his girlfriend Peter sees a hypnotherapist who dies before releasing Peter from a state of complete and total bliss. He is then free of worrying about making a living; instead just not caring anymore about the company he works for. Instead he decides that he just won't go to work anymore. Ironically the more Peter malingers, the more he's seen as management material by the idiotic consultants. To add further insult to the situation, two of his hard-working co-workers are set to be dismissed from the company. To get revenge the three men team up and hatch a cunning plan that will rip off the company.

Office Space is excellently played out like a simple comic strip, and it works. The film is based on comic strips conceived by director Mike Judge. He skilfully retains this charm. But I think many audiences like this film so much because of its accuracy in displaying the dull life of sitting in an office cubicle all day long. The surrounding characters are all 100% accurate! I loved the way that the actors executed their roles.

Ron Livingston was very good as Peter Gibbons. He was accurate and wasn't too over-the-top. Stephen Root was the stand out here for me. He nailed his character. Every time he says a line it was enough to make me chuckle. Gary Cole was also a stand out as the sleazy boss. His droning voice is an aspect of a boss that we can all relate to. Cole delivers his lines in a memorable fashion. Heck, I could go on about every cast member present here but this review would go on for ages. I loved each and every person present in the cast. They all had their moments of genuine hilarity.

Office Space is hands down one of my favourite films of all time. The whole film is surprisingly unpredictable with an ending that is highly unconventional and unexpected. I cannot express how much I love this movie. Needless to say, you must see it without hesitation.

"I've seen horrors... horrors that you've seen. But you have no right to call me a murderer. You have a right to kill me. You have a right to do that... but you have no right to judge me. It's impossible for words to describe what is necessary to those who do not know what horror means. Horror. Horror has a face... and you must make a friend of horror. Horror and moral terror are your friends. If they are not then they are enemies to be feared. They are truly enemies."

Apocalypse Now is a genuinely revolutionary war movie from legendary director Francis Ford Coppola. The film is a confronting, haunting war epic that is stimulating and monumental. Not only is it a fantastic war movie but it's also the most honest account of the futility of war.


Loosely based on Joseph Conrad's classic novella 'Heart of Darkness'; Apocalypse Now is a film that tells a story set in the Vietnam battlefields. The year is 1969 and the Americans are still battling the on-going Vietnam War. U.S. Special Forces Captain Willard (Sheen) is sent on a confidential mission that officially 'does not exist - nor will it ever exist' to terminate a renegade Green Beret named Walter Kurtz (Brando) who has established himself as a God amongst a local tribe. Captain Willard travels up the Nung River in a U.S. Navy Patrol Boat into Cambodia to carry out his mission. He is accompanied by a faction of soldiers who don't have a clue about the nature of the mission due to its high level of confidentiality. As Willard descends into the jungle, he is slowly taken by the jungle's mesmerising powers. As he battles the insanity around him, the journey slowly makes Willard more and more like the man he was sent to kill.


Apocalypse Now is a harrowing war film that will always be distinguished due to its power as well as its hypnotic, virtually unsurpassed brilliance. The unnerving, unforgettable images only heighten the film's reputation as one of the most graphic war films ever made. It will take days, perhaps weeks, to get over the haunting visual images that are a prominent element of this outstanding movie.


The production was plagued with troubles; including wild weather that destroyed the sets, and the elongated production period due to unforseen consequences. Regardless of this troubled production director Francis Ford Coppola delivers an extraordinary, controversial addition to the multitude of Vietnam War movies. And of course the film was shot beautifully on location; showcasing some utterly gorgeous landscape and some eye-catching dense jungles as well.


However the film is about 150 minutes in length, and unfortunately outstays its welcome and loses the attention of the viewer at about the two hour mark. Of course, it was still tremendously well made but I felt that some trimming would have been necessary. And that's only the theatrical version - there's also a 200-minute 'Redux' cut.


Although my attention was thrown a few times as I was watching the movie, Coppola's directing always ensured there was something fascinating going on during the film. This could be a battle, an absorbing dialogue scene or some haunting voice-over narration.


Martin Sheen makes a very credible American soldier. There is always something about him that keeps the audience enthralled during the scenes of heavy drama. Marlon Brando had already made a name for himself after such films as The Godfather and On the Waterfront. Surprisingly his role is very minor in this movie. Nonetheless his performance is superb. During his final monologue it felt like he was a man on the edge; someone who is very close to insanity. His credibility is never thrown. As Brando aged he only became better. The supporting cast is a mixed bunch of now-famous actors including Robert Duvall, Laurence Fishburne, Harrison Ford and Dennis Hopper. All of these actors made an appearance before they became really famous. With this film they are given the opportunity to display talent while still youthful.


Apocalypse Now is a stunning film that will always be not only one of the greatest war movies, but also one of the greatest movies in cinematic history. This Vietnam tale is one that does justice to its source material. Be warned that the film is quite painfully long.

"I feel like I've been in a coma for the past twenty years. And I'm just now waking up."

American Beauty is a virtuoso, provocative, multi-faceted, incisive and unconventional drama that takes a comprehensive glimpse at the American dream gone wrong. I had approached this movie with a great deal of hesitation. There were reviews aplenty from people who praised this film as a wonderful masterpiece of the highest order. Before watching this film I could never have believed that making a film of such stature and power would actually be possible.


American Beauty is a magnificent psychological drama that takes a satirical at the American community. The characters are versatile and intricate. The movie demonstrates the darkest things of a person's personality. Even though the characters do some truly appalling things the audience can still be involved with the characters because although bad, they are still shown as unexaggerated and human.


Lester Burnham (Spacey) is a forty-something year old suburban father who is depressed and unhappy. He has a wife (Carolyn; played by Benning), who is looking for sexual pleasure elsewhere, and he has a daughter (Jane; played by Birch) who hates her father and falls in love with their new next door neighbour Ricky (Bentley). Lester's job is leading nowhere when his company decides they have to cut back on their staff due to money issues. Lester also becomes fascinated and infatuated with one of Jane's friends; Angela (Suvari). Lester's behaviour drives him further and further away from his family that already detest him. From there, we follow each family member who are on their own emotional journey of life.


American Beauty is an extremely powerful drama carried by some superb performances. The acting is truly amazing with Kevin Spacey in a performance that won him an Oscar. Spacey has the look and feel of your usual stereotypical suburban American father. He may seem conventional but these stereotypes are explored; revealing a personality with a lot more depth and complexity. There are several horrible character traits he exhibits; however it's impossible not to empathise with him. His family drifts away from him and we can genuinely feel his motivations.


The driving force behind the film is not only the performances but the screenplay. Each line of dialogue is intriguing and enthralling. There is never a wasted minute during the film's duration because of how meticulously the dialogue was written; intelligent, fascinating and profoundly insightful.


The direction, which also gained an Oscar, is utterly flawless. Sam Mendes compliments the great screenplay with equally accomplished directing. Each scene is both engaging and meaningful; it gives the audience further insight into the characters that are being examined so deeply. On top of this, it's compelling storytelling as well as being occasionally humorous.


American Beauty is a lot more complex and eloquent than it sounds; it's a brilliant and amazing story that constructs an indication of the sad reality of contemporary American society. I never expected a film like this to be as brilliant as it turned out to be. It's relevant to today's society, it carries a good message about life and it is extremely potent. Winner of 5 Oscars including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Cinematography and Best Writing.

"Well I ain't sorry for you no more, ya crazy, psalm-singing, skinny old maid!"

By this time in his career, John Huston was already established as a capable filmmaker who had previously helmed such classics as The Maltese Falcon and The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. And of course, Huston could only call one man to fill the title role: Humphrey Bogart. The African Queen is deservedly an incredible classic that rightfully sits amongst the greatest films of all time. Films like these can still be thoroughly enjoyed even during the time of modern cinema.

Humphrey Bogart and Katherine Hepburn make a magnificent screen couple in this dazzling, exciting adventure film set during World War I. Bogart is Charlie Allnut; an aging alcoholic who lives in the forests of Africa and owns a boat called The African Queen. As Charlie arrives at a small African village he discovers that the Germans had attacked recently; capturing many of the Africans that resided there. Charlie agrees to take a woman missionary named Rose (Hepburn) under his wing to ensure her survival for the duration of the war. Although the two have their bitter differences, they travel in The African Queen downstream with hope of sinking a German ship that would assist the allies in winning the war. Predictably, the two fall in love during their unique river adventure.

The African Queen was widely acclaimed by both critics and audiences upon release, and is still a much loved classic to this very day. It's a shame that many moviegoers overlook this movie due to its age because quite frankly this film is superior to a lot of rubbish produced by Hollywood in this day and age. Humphrey Bogart delivers another critically acclaimed performance as the aging sea captain. This is most certainly a change on his usual character; instead of being charismatic and charming, Bogart is an alcoholic with a short temper and doesn't care much for his surroundings. Katherine Hepburn was a remarkable companion for Bogey in this one. Because she is so sophisticated and a real lady, it was quite hilarious at times because Bogey's character is the complete opposite.

John Huston's directing is superb as always. He is able to utilise such gorgeous locations to make the viewer really feel in the centre of the dense jungle. The atmosphere is very genuine and very colourful. On top of all this, some great visuals are accompanied by a pleasant score. The script was exceptionally written and contains some very naturalistic dialogue.

The African Queen scores as a highly enjoyable adventure film that was filmed beautifully on location in Africa. Highly recommended!

"So in the book, I wanted to give Robbie and Cecilia what they lost out on in life. I'd like to think this isn't weakness or... evasion... but a final act of kindness. I gave them their happiness."


It is indeed an extremely rare event that a masterpiece like Atonement comes along. After a tedious wave of mediocre films and straightforward blockbusters throughout the year, Atonement is an extremely good and effective war drama that ended up being one of the finest films of 2007.


I had wanted to see this production because of the critical acclaim it received and its successful trip to the Golden Globes (during which it walked away with Best Motion Picture for Drama; beating other films like No Country for Old Men that were heavily favoured). After seeing the trailer only minor interest was sparked in my mind. On a recommendation I approached this film, and ended up leaving the cinema completely speechless.


It's an unfortunate fact that films of this stature are few and far between. In the course of a year only a very limited amount of films can be found of such quality in the case of contemporary cinema.


Like many other people have stated, it is a fact that the plot cannot be revealed in any depth. The brilliance of the movie is the audience's inability to predict what is going to happen next. If you ruin one part then the impact of the movie will be slightly lessoned. The story is gradually built up throughout the film's running time. With each new scene the story continues to unfold and expand.


The first half of the movie is a compelling drama set within the confines of a mansion. Cecilia Tallis (Knightley) lives with her family and is in love with a man named Robbie (McAvoy). Cecilia's snobby, jealous little sister Briony (Ronan) is unable to completely understand the concept of love and hence cannot precisely comprehend the sneaky relationship that Robbie and Cecilia share. The second half of the movie unfolds because of a significant event that happens towards the end of its preceding half when a man is wrongly convicted of a crime he did not commit. Because of a lie one of the characters told, the lives of several people are irrevocably altered. The film is then a powerful war drama set during World War II that follows a host of different characters living their lives after the tragedy that previous transpired.


Atonement is a breathtaking, emotional tale that asks patience from its audience. At first the film is slow-paced but captivating. The drama that occurs throughout the movie grasps your attention. If you appreciate fine filmmaking in lieu of blockbuster rubbish then you will find it impossible to feel bored.


The film's brilliance can also be attributed to its realistic atmosphere that is especially well established by the performances. We have never seen Keira Knightley in a role like this before. I usually find her performances cardboard and lacking any emotional depth. She briskly breaks out of her acting confines; instead becoming both realistic and breathtaking. It's impossible to fault her portrayal. James McAvoy is remarkable as well. There are a number of scenes when no words can describe how powerful his depiction is. I must also mention young Saoirse Ronan. She wouldn't have been any older than 12 or 13 when the cameras rolled. It's rare to compliment an actress so young whose career has barely even started. Ronan is exceptional!


The direction by Joe Wright was also extraordinary and brings the script to life with excellent results. I felt that the storytelling was unique and memorable; and I will admit being confused by the frequent change of setting. Like the rest of the filmmaking aspects, this is extremely unique. The film's pacing varies; however for the most part the acting is so focused that the film doesn't feel so long.


When the credits rolled I sat speechless; entirely satisfied with the film I had just exhibited. The tragic part was that those around me did not seem to share my sentiments because of its uniqueness. I'm not going to lie to you: the film is not for those who seek entertaining blockbusters. It's strictly for those who look past the entertainment value and examine it for what it is: an exquisite masterpiece. Atonement is beautiful, memorable, poignant, emotional and unique. It's a film that is well told with an inspiring script adapted from the novel by Ian McEwan.

"Good morning, Dave."

Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey is a truly groundbreaking, unforgettable, incredible science fiction experience unlike any other film you are ever likely to see. Kubrick is a true visionary, and the entire film is a visual feast that will be devoured by the eyes of science fiction fans.

Many filmgoers will look upon 2001 as a load of tripe that is boring beyond belief. While these people are entitled to their own opinion, I still regard the film as a masterpiece of the highest order.

2001 is a vastly unique film that is mysterious, thought-provoking and just immensely fine filmmaking. The special effects won an Oscar for a very good reason, as they present viewers with an astounding vision of the future. The state-of-the-art special effects are still fundamentally impossible to fault; the filmmakers use models, matte paintings and extensive sets. For a film of the 1960's, it most certainly does not feel dated one little bit.

As the movie opens, we are shown the dawn of man; a time when monkeys still occupied the planet. Fast-forward many thousands of years and we are looking at space-crafts in the depths of space. The film mainly centres on the crew aboard a space ship controlled by the advanced HAL 9000 computer (voiced by Rain).

The crew are on a voyage to the moon to investigate a mysterious monolith discovered beneath the surface. The plot is expanded over the film's 140-minute running time, and to be honest I felt that Kubrick wasted no time during the film's duration.

While many will think the pacing is painfully slow, I found the film not slow but fascinating. The visual effects showcase some marvellous special effects that even had me in awe. The effects were created in the pre-CGI days, and yet the effects are still even more effective than much of the CGI we see in modern productions. It's blended seamlessly and Kubrick uses brilliant camera work to further solidify its overwhelming impression. It never seems to be in a hurry to get anywhere; and thus takes its time for maximum impact. Some scenes are merely shots played out to minor voices or heavy breathing. And the conclusion of the movie is simply hypnotic imagery with spellbinding music.

The film was much talked about after its initial release, and it is still widely discussed to this very day. The movie is very mysterious, with multiple layers piled on top of each other to present the audience with the opportunity to make their own interpretation. The magnificence of the filmmaking lies in the fact that the film defies explanation. It's a visual marvel and a groundbreaking achievement in motion picture history because of this very fact.

When I was younger I couldn't understand what on Earth was going on because of how enigmatic the film was. But I've grown to understand that this was the very point of the movie. It was never meant to surround the viewing audience with blatant information, but rather the unfathomable nature lets the audience draw their own conclusions.

The end of the movie leaves a baffling, profound impact on the viewing audience; it's overwhelmingly different, it sets a new genre, it sparks thought. In a nutshell, 2001: A Space Odyssey is a sci-fi masterpiece that cannot be missed. It's provocative, brilliant, fascinating, engrossing, stimulating, enthralling, captivating, influential - and any adjective branching off from those words, as the film wears them all with aplomb. This is by far Kubrick's best work, and is still up there with the best films of all time.

"You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend: Those with loaded guns and those who dig. You dig."

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is hands down the greatest western of all time - the third and final of Sergio Leone's trilogy of westerns with Clint Eastwood is the best of the bunch.

This film succeeds in every aspect where its predecessors failed, making it the essential spaghetti western. Clint Eastwood rides back into action as "The Man With No Name" - the good - who is now living in the time of the Civil War. Eli Wallach is a filthy outlaw named Tuco - the ugly. And finally Lee Van Cleef (returning from the cast of the previous film playing a different role) is a man known as Angel Eyes - the bad. In a remote cemetery an outlaw has buried a stash of $200,000 which immediately sparks interest from the 3 protagonists. Tuco and "The Man With No Name" form an uneasy alliance and have no choice but to trust each other when it's discovered that each possess half the information of the location of the hidden treasure.

Angel Eyes is also focused on finding the money and thus begins a race as the three men move through rugged landscape and across harsh deserts to get to their desired destination.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is a very unconventional western. The plot of this third instalment is actually pretty easy to follow, and this simplicity makes the film not as confusing as its predecessors.

Each moment of the film is enthralling, and exceptionally created. Although clocking at almost 160 minutes, the film is not too long. My interest was sustained for each minute of its running time; containing intriguing characters and clever set-ups.

Clint Eastwood is fantastic as always. As always he plays the part to perfection - never showing signs of emotion and always being dark. Eli Wallach was a welcome addition to the cast. He portrays a very realistic outlaw, and his character is most certainly "the ugly". I was disappointed that Lee Van Cleef didn't stick to his original character from For a Few Dollars More, but he still plays this new part exceptionally well.

Of course what addition to this trilogy would be complete without Sergio's magnificent direction and Ennio Morricone's triumphant score. Ennio's music is nothing short of remarkable.

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is an enthralling western. For those with short attention spans, go rent a Michael Bay flick. But for those who enjoy good quality westerns and don't mind the slow pacing then go right ahead. One of the best movies of all time!

"It's a hell of a thing, killin' a man. Take away all he's got, and all he's ever gonna have."

Unforgiven could be the greatest western film in the history of cinema. Clint Eastwood proves an able director for this stunning film, and shows that he has learnt much from starring in spaghetti westerns by Sergio Leone.

Clint Eastwood and Morgan Freeman play William Munny and Ned Logan; two retired gunslingers who live tranquil lives. After a group of cowboys horribly disfigure a prostitute, a bounty is put on their head. Eastwood and Freeman answer the call, hoping to put an end to their gunslinging after picking up the sizable reward of $1,000.

As the two ride across colonial America with the help of a young wannabe cowboy (Woolvett), the sheriff of the town of Big Whiskey, Little Bill (Hackman), is doing everything he can to discourage bounty hunters as an act of social prejudice.

For its whole running time, the film is absolutely remarkable. Eastwood's sublime direction allows us to get to know each central character; as there are no good guys or bad guys here, this was a pivotal part of the movie.

Eastwood also acted tremendously well here, and displays major depth in his role as an old gunslinger. Morgan Freeman was never an actor one would expect to see in a western, but he pulls it off incredibly well. Gene Hackman, as the sadistic sheriff, was also just exceptional.

Of course the movie is primarily dialogue driven so people looking for action will find precious little, unfortunately. But Unforgiven is a character western that focuses on the drama. And when we do get to some action in the last 15 minutes or so, it's gritty and brutal. Not so much the violence displayed, but the brutality of the characters.

The film contains a very simple plot, granted, but it's not what is on the surface that actually matters here. On the surface it would seem like a dull journey into the old west, but underneath there's plenty of hidden layers and meanings told with the well-developed characters and gorgeous scenery.

Overall, Unforgiven marks the only time that Hollywood actually got a western right; in a money-orientated system, this movie shows us that something truly beautiful can come out of it. It's not concerned with the action or the blood, but rather with developing the characters and showing that there's more to a western than just the action. It's not a spaghetti western and it's not the work of Sergio Leone, but it's an utterly sublime movie. Highly recommended.

He chose you, honey! From all the women in the world to be the mother of his only living son!"

Roman Polanski's classic horror film Rosemary's Baby is the best and most terrifying supernatural horror film of all time bar none.

This movie is an example of the horror genre done right; there are spine-chilling moments, satanic images and horror themes that will stay with you forever.

A young couple named Rosemary (Farrow) and Guy (Cassavetes) move into a new apartment in the city of New York. The couple have plans of raising a family there, and start trying for a child.

But the two soon meet an elderly couple living in the same building who seem peculiar but caring. When Rosemary ends up pregnant, Guy strikes a deal with a group of devil worshippers unbeknownst to his wife. Rosemary's pregnancy is plagued by troubles - odd pains that last for extended periods of time, ill health and lack of good advice from the people around her.

Slowly, and surely, Rosemary learns to realise that she may be having the son of Satan.

Polanski has made this film nothing short of perfect - the film is effective, terrifying and spine-chilling. Some of the satanic images and black magic rituals will leave you terrified...and towards the end it's impossible to feel bored or to tear your eyes away from the screen.

The themes of witchcraft and devil worshipping are the icing on the cake. Mia Farrow's performance was astounding. It's obvious that she put everything she could into portraying such a pivotal character.

John Cassavetes is just brilliant here as well. He is able to play his character so well and believably. Both Ruth Gordon and Sidney Blackmer are superb as the very strange neighbours.

Rosemary's Baby is unmissable for any horror fan. It's incredibly creepy, atmospheric, eerie, brooding and creates an incredible sense of unthinkable danger.

Heck, Polanski even tops a bunch of Hitchcock's classic thrillers...and this is coming from someone who adores Hitchcock's work. Adapted from the novel by Ira Levin, and basically a modern take on demons and witchcraft.

In a nutshell, it's absolutely unthinkable to miss this movie. It's just an incredible experience and one of the most terrifying movies of all time.

"The eagle never lost so much time as when he submitted to learn from the crow."

Dead Man is definitely not a film for all tastes. This stylish production is sometimes difficult to watch due to the grainy black and white imagery, not to mention some of the harsh images of violence and even cannibalism.

Certainly not your average western, we follow a young accountant from Cleveland named William Blake (Depp) who takes the train into a town for an accounting position. Coming into town dressed in a smart suit and carrying a briefcase, he is the odd one out among the murderers and outlaws. But he is informed that he is too late for the job despite pouring every cent he had into coming to the town. After a number of mishaps, William begins to undergo a massive physical, mental and spiritual journey.

William is a young man looking for a steady job, and ends up taking a tragic descent into personal oblivion as he transforms into a wanted outlaw being hunted by numbers of bounty hunters.

To assist in his spiritual journey, William is accompanied by an Indian named "Nobody" (Farmer) who is rich in the ways of his tribe and ancestors. The transformation from meek accountant to hunted outlaw is emphasized by the weight of the wounds William carries, both physically and spiritually. His world becomes increasingly distant and he becomes ever more reliant on his Indian companion.

Dead Man is told with very alluring, unique cinematography and a very certain style. The director's prominent use of fades to cut shots together works exceptionally.

The film is also very ambiguous, told with deliberately slow pacing and performances that wouldn't normally grasp one with a short attention span. This style will not be embraced by modern audiences who crave fast-paced action, but the film will be adored by those who love art house cinema.

The director, Jim Jarmusch, struck massive success with the movie. He was finally discovered with the release of this movie, mainly due to the lead role being portrayed by Johnny Depp.

Depp's performance is sublime. He is able to let the audience empathize with his situation while never looking entirely vulnerable to his surroundings. The transformation of Depp's character was crucial for the success of the movie, and Depp played his role to perfection. If Depp isn't the greatest actor of all time, I don't know how to describe him.

The musical score is good at times, and creates a very haunting atmosphere to compliment the already exceptional visual images. At a glance, many might see Dead Man as one to leave on the shelf. If you crave simple mindless garbage that Michael Bay rolls out, you are correct to leave it alone. But if you are looking for a multi-layered production rich in messages about life, then I suggest you pick this one up without hesitation. I couldn't recommend this any higher.

"You don't hurt Arnie, you just don't."

What's Eating Gilbert Grape is an amazing movie. The performances are absolutely sublime, the script is fantastic, the score is remarkable...and the overall result is near perfect.

Gilbert Grape (Depp) lives in a small town with essentially no future. He works at the unsuccessful local grocery store, and is stuck caring for his mentally challenged brother Arnie (DiCaprio) as well as his morbidly obese mother (Cates). A small family of campers are stranded in the town, and a young teenager named Becky (Lewis) takes an interest in Gilbert.

The whole film is an emotional journey that is told exceptionally. Although the film seems to go no-where at times, each scene is carried by flawless performances from everyone.

Depp is just brilliant. He played his character extremely well, and even at a young age he can still act superbly. DiCaprio's performance (which earned an Oscar nomination) just blew me away. Because he plays a mentally challenged boy, you'd need a damn fine actor to sell this and DiCaprio did it perfectly. When I watched the movie, it honestly seemed like DiCaprio wasn't acting because he played the part so well. Juliette Lewis does a great job here as well.

The film expertly combines some compelling scenes of drama with a few good laughs and some very heart-warming moments. No matter who you are, you will be in tears by the end of it. The score accompanying the already perfect acting was just inspirational.

By putting Leonardo DiCaprio and Johnny Depp together in a movie, you are guaranteed a winner. What's Eating Gilbert Grape is unmissable, unforgettable and heart-warming. In short: if you haven't seen this movie, you MUST. Highly recommended!

"Not so fast, my young friend! No-one can outrun their fate."

F.W. Murnau's 1922 silent film Nosferatu is a groundbreaking masterpiece of the vampire genre: a truly fascinating film that is the essential blueprint for all vampire movies that were to follow. Murnau fundamentally gave birth to the horror genre with this silent film from the German Expressionism era of filmmaking. At the time of release, no moviegoers had ever experienced this genre embodied on film. In essence, this film contains all the exemplary vampire components and is still the archetypal vampire movie experience.

The story is based on Bram Stoker's classic novel Dracula, but director Murnau was unable to get the rights to the novel. Not willing to accept defeat, Murnau made 'cosmetic' changes to pass it off as his own creation. However after the film's release, Stoker's widow perceived that it was a blatant version of her late husband's novel and sued the filmmakers. As a result, the studio went broke (this was the studio's only movie) and the settlement resulted in an instigated court order to have all copies of the film destroyed. Obviously, not all copies of the film were thrown onto the fire. Thankfully, a limited supply of original film negatives actually still exist and can still be exhibited. Said negatives (that is, primary copies of the film that were originally distributed in 1922) that survived the fire are now a prized possession among film buffs and cinema collectors.

Recently the film underwent a massive restoration effort: missing frames and missing scenes were collected from all over the world to be inserted back into the final film and create the definitive Nosferatu experience. Over the years, cheap cut versions running at 70 or 80 minutes were common. This restored version runs over 90 minutes and is never boring for a second.

Gustav von Wangenheim plays Thomas Hutter: a successful realtor who works for the town's local real estate agent. Count Orlok (Schreck) from an isolated castle in Transylvania expresses interest in the acquisition of a house in the peaceful town that Hutter inhabits. Hutter is given the overwhelming assignment of travelling to Transylvania to complete the transaction, but as he draws nearer to the castle he begins to comprehend the genuine malevolence he is walking into. Hutter realises that merely mentioning Count Orlok's name is enough to arouse fear and dread in the local townspeople. While Hutter resides at the castle he discovers quite a bit regarding the true identity of Count Orlok...also known as Nosferatu the vampire. Orlok travels to Germany to live in his new house, said journey causing the deaths of all the crew of the ship he was on. As this terror unfolds, Hutter frantically hastens home to save his beloved wife Ellen (Schröder). Little does Hutter realise that Orlok has developed an obsession with Ellen and wants to have her under his spell. To tell you even more would be unimaginable...

This symphony of horror is the original archetypal film. Over the years it has succumbed to rotten spoofs, remakes and retakes on the story. Nosferatu accurately portrays the potency of the fear of vampires throughout the 19th century. Around this time they were portrayed as seductive and were metaphors for transmitting sexual diseases. These prominent sexual themes sparked controversy at the time of the film's release. In the film there is also frequent mentioning of rats and vampires spreading the bubonic plague. Throughout the 19th century, the plague was a tremendous worry (the last massive outbreak of the plague was as late as the 1890s).

The film is crafted to perfection by F.W. Murnau. Behind the camera Murnau's determination was palpable. Whenever the camera rolled, everything in his frame was used to great effect. He employed extreme expressionist angles that effectively create anxiety and intrigue in the viewer.

Max Schreck is one of the most terrifying and ugly screen vampires of all time. Even with modern make-up technology it is an extremely daunting task to replicate the realism of Schreck's animalistic features. When I first saw Schreck walk into frame...I found it difficult to breathe and chills ran down my spine. His appearance is truly terrifying. If you don't find him scary, you're far too familiarised with Hollywood vampires (I'm looking at you, Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise among many others). This brings me onto a myth that quickly circulated in the decades following the film's release. Legend has it that Schreck was, in reality, an actual member of the undead - a genuine vampire! Ostensibly, director Murnau was so committed to producing the definitive vampire experience that he was willing to risk the safety of his cast and crew by using an actual vampire. During the production, the crew had to deal with crew-members turning up dead or going missing. This is a fact. Even despite this evidence people can be naysayers on the issue. Everyone can draw their own conclusions and judgements on the matter. The prolific myth will never be confirmed or invalidated.

The supporting cast is equipped with a host of talented actors. By today's standard, bored audiences will just laugh at the exaggerated mannerisms and be annoyed at the titlecards which were used for the dialogue. It's very simple: if you think the acting is bad and that silent movies are boring, stick to Hollywood blockbusters please. I'm sick of the usual complaint of "it's just so old" or "it's very boring". Got news for you - you're part of the "four-minute music video generation" and should never watch an actual masterpiece.

Nosferatu is only for those with the patience to sit through 90 minutes of brilliant cinema history accompanied with a sinister score. Beware: only the recent 2006/2007 restored version contains the actual original music (a new recording of it). All versions before that include the appalling techno version and many other poor orchestral compositions. Do not judge the films score until you've seen the latest restoration!

The film flaunts visual effects that were state-of-the-art when first released in 1922, but the impact has slowly disintegrated over the decades. In my opinion, Nosferatu is a riveting horror film deserving of the acclaim and accolades that were to follow over the years. Some will love it, some will hate it. Personally I can understand why some contemporary audiences dislike the film because of its age. Be that as it may, this is the best vampire movie ever made. In the decades to follow, imitations were very regular in the form of blockbusters made for a quick buck. Even TV shows use the premise of vampires in which to create a new tale of vampirism.

Nosferatu will never be tainted in my opinion. Although today it is regarded as clichéd, just remember that this is a film made before the times of clichés: it was the first horror film ever made! Respect its age! On the whole, the film is atmospheric and compelling. It's simple and not complex, but this quote from director Murnau accurately defends this observation: "Real art is simple, but simplicity requires the greatest art". Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens (the original German title that commonly translates as Nosferatu, a Symphony of Terror) is true art that is hard to match. I studied this film extensively in school. Despite this broad study of the film, I never grew sick of its brilliance. It only heightened my respect. I am truly waxing lyrical when I discuss this legendary horror film.

"I could have killed 'em all, I could kill you. In town you're the law, out here it's me. Don't push it. Don't push it or I'll give you a war you won't believe. Let it go. Let it go."

Because of Sylvester Stallone's reputation as being the tough, unstoppable action hero (an image painted in films like Cobra, Cliffhanger, and all the Rambo sequels) people have immediately type-cast Stallone as a luminary of the 80's action genre who can't act and doesn't display much depth.

First Blood is something far from a brainless 80's action ride. In fact, it's one of Sly's most intelligent films. Before Rambo the only recognisable action hero would be someone like James Bond; a man who always stays calm and never seems to display any real vulnerability. The character of John J. Rambo is the most unconventional action hero of all time. Rambo shows that he is not invincible - he bleeds, he screams, feels pain and has emotions. This is different to the character featured in the novel by David Morrell of the same name; but in my honest opinion I felt this was a more human image, hence a change for the best.

John J. Rambo (Stallone) is a disillusioned Vietnam vet who has become a drifter eschewed by a prejudice society. Rambo is an ex-Greet Beret and a medal of honour recipient. On a journey to visit an old Vietnam buddy he drifts into a small town where he is made very unwelcome by the local Sheriff Teasle (Dennehy) who doesn't accept drifters in a town that he rules with an iron fist.

Rambo comes into the town looking for something to eat, instead he is turned away. He is arrested for resisting his unwarranted mistreatment. Beaten and humiliated, Rambo utilises his skills to escape and flee into a neighbouring forest where his one man war commences...on his own terms. Using his extensive knowledge of guerrilla warfare and setting traps, the local police force have no idea what they are about to walk into.

First Blood is an unconventional entry to the 1980's action genre; instead of frequent violence and a high body count we instead are shown an engaging, absorbing character study of a man who is pushed over the edge. Rambo is mentally unstable and is still haunted by his Vietnam days. Flashbacks are triggered when he is given nothing but unprovoked treatment from the police.

Unlike most action films, First Blood develops the characters and doesn't focus on the action. Rambo does not want to kill someone unless absolutely necessary. Even after being treated so badly by a discriminatory society he does not wish to start mindless killing and violence.

Stallone is John Rambo. There is no-one else who could possibly play the role. It's like Harrison Ford as Indiana Jones or Bruce Willis as John McClane; a replacement would be futile and offensive. Stallone's muscles aren't exaggerated or bulging. He is a trim man with innocent facial expressions that tell his story. For most of the movie he says very little dialogue; instead staring at someone or yelping in pain. His final monologue is one of the most poignant few minutes of any action movie. It has heart and it helps us empathise with the character. If someone can find an 80's action movie featuring Van Damme or Dolph Lundgren that has heart or soul I beg you to recommend it to me.

Richard Crenna is a fantastic patriarchal figure who was once Rambo's mentor during Vietnam. Crenna's performance is also heart-felt and further allows us to get engaged in the spellbinding personality of Rambo.

The filmmaking in every aspect was fantastic. The lush scenery of the forest gives one the feeling of isolation. And it feels like just your average common town that Rambo finds himself drifting into.

Action scenes were accompanied with taut direction and a riveting score by Jerry Goldsmith. Goldsmith's score is outstanding. The Rambo theme is poignant and powerful. When there's an action scene the music is intense and engrossing. The audience are compelled to keep their eyes ardently glued to the screen. You won't want to miss a second.

First Blood is one of the best 1980's action films that is a perfect vehicle for Stallone to display intensity and aptitude as an action hero. I always find myself captivated and mesmerised, as well as highly entertained. The credibility is sometimes thrown to the wind which is the only drawback on an otherwise superb production.

Even if you're not a fan of action movies, First Blood is a must see movie that cannot be missed. Followed by 3 sequels.

Captain Stanley: Now, suppose I told you there was a way to save your little brother Mikey from the noose. Suppose I gave you a horse and a gun. Suppose, Mr. Burns, I was to give both you and your young brother Mikey, here, a pardon. Suppose I said that I could give you the chance to expunge the guilt beneath which you so clearly labour. Suppose I gave you till Christmas. Now, suppose you tell me what it is I want from you.
Charlie Burns: You want me to kill me brother.
Captain Stanley: I want you to kill your brother.

The Proposition is an artistic tale of disloyalty, honour, rituals of violence and familial bonds. Not only does this gritty film accomplish a new standard for the western genre (previously shaped by Sergio Leone's spaghetti westerns and other such films as Unforgiven and The Wild Bunch), but it additionally inaugurates a new era of Australian filmmaking. The Proposition is a peculiar film that can best be described as a beautiful nightmare mixed with an absorbing character examination and some unconventional underlying messages. Nick Cave, the famous Aussie rocker, wrote the screenplay as well as assisting in the creation of the powerful and evocative musical score, with John Hillcoat at the helm. In a nutshell: this is one of those westerns you will either love or loathe. It is a strange, unsettling film that is both gratuitous and relentless - exactly the tone of the period in which it is set. Some people criticised the strong explicit violence; however I find it necessary to underline the strong moralistic message that stimulates the film's proceedings.

The title of The Proposition refers to a significant facet of the film's plot: a facet that virtually fuels the film for its duration. The typical plot for a western has been transplanted into the harsh sands of rural outback Australia. Mikey (Wilson), Charlie (Pearce) and Arthur Burns (Huston) are three brothers who are prime suspects in raping a pregnant woman and subsequently murdering an entire family. A British lawman known as Captain Stanley (Winstone) is hired by the local Australian authorities to track down the three brothers. At the beginning of the film, Charlie and Mikey Burns lose in a shoot-out to the authorities and are arrested by Captain Stanley. But the supposed mastermind of the brothers, Arthur, is on the loose. Stanley strikes an impossible proposition with Charlie. Basically, Stanley will agree to pardon both Charlie and Mikey if Charlie agrees to venture out into the desert and hunt down his brother Arthur. If Charlie does not return by Christmas Day then young Mikey will be hung by the neck. Either way, one of his brothers will be killed on Christmas Day. Charlie is faced with the gruelling decision of choosing which brother he must sacrifice to save the other.

The plot is straightforward and easy to follow, but at the same time it's also highly effective and embodies tremendous emotional depth. This praiseworthy emotional depth can be attributed to the potent screenplay penned by Nick Cave, the powerful performances, astonishing direction and the captivating cinematography that accurately encapsulates the unsympathetic rural outback. Using beautiful cinematography, the filmmakers present a commendable portrayal of the landscape of the Australian desert. This aforementioned landscape is a character equally as vital as any of the damaged souls wandering through it. The outback is laudably photographed by Hillcoat and cinematographer Benoit Delhomme: it's beautiful yet hostile, recognisable yet alien and ultimately indifferent to humankind. The sands of this desolate area are spectacular to witness. Scorched and sun-blasted - this is the kind of location where awful, violent things are bound to transpire.

The Proposition returns the western genre to its roots by resurrecting classic trademarks. One of these admirable qualities is the equivocations while establishing the heroes from the villains. The three Burns brothers are portrayed as evil, but on the contrary the film explores this facet to be marginally untrue. Charlie in particular is on the road to redemption and this film depicts the change of mindset. This inner journey is a deeply explored, leading to an remarkably potent final shot. The authorities of the genre are stereotypically depicted as the heroes of the film. The Proposition blurs that convention and presents us with a diverse slate of characters. For the most part, the authority figures are shown as brainless and inept, but above all are even more heartless than the outlaws they are currently hunting.

The transformation of locations is another innovative feature in this particular film. Filmmakers have endlessly portrayed the period in different American locations, so when the creative team shifted the focus to Australia they were already breaking new ground. There are many stirring and memorable things about this brutal Australian western, but personally the flies created the most potent effect. Possibly this is for the reason that they're absolutely everywhere; the majority of the film's scenes feature the omnipresent buzzing of hundreds of hungry flies. Whether indoors or outdoors, moving or standing still, it matters not - they're there and you cannot avoid them. Some scenes even highlight the fact that inhabitants of the outback have learned to eat food even if infested with the entire fly population. Their presence is inescapable in the blistering outback wasteland in which The Proposition is set, and that impression of suffocating inevitability is raw, visceral and uncompromising: ultimately an admirable component imperative for the film's success.

Each character of the film is played to absolute perfection. This is an Australian film with British financing, hence a rare instance when an Aussie film contains a cast filled by international stars. Guy Pearce is fierce and haunting in the lead role. We've all seen him in films such as Memento and Factory Girl, and he's tremendously suitable as a typical gunslinger. His character undergoes a subtle moralistic internal journey that leads to an unexpectedly, unforgettably brutal climax. Surrounding Pearce we have a number of fantastic international stars filling the supporting cast. Ray Winstone plays a principal character that is explored powerfully. His character of Captain Stanley does not succumb to the expected hateful authority figure. Stanley is a rational man trying to do the right thing and yet realising that he's hopelessly overwhelmed. Gazing out at the despondency of the desert, Stanley has no idea what will materialise and his uncertainty is where the central plot is constructed. The Proposition sees Stanley trapped in a hell that is partly his own doing and partly circumstance. He asserts his control early and makes his goal clear: he wants to civilise the country. However it doesn't take long before things slip from his grasp. This is especially palpable when he's upbraided by his superior: the commanding Eden Fletcher (Wenham) who's furious that Stanley allowed a prisoner to go free. Stanley becomes reduced to a dumbstruck child, unable to do much more than weep for the destruction of his pride and all he thought was right. Part of Stanley's downfall can be attributed to his desire to civilise the outback and his willingness to strike deals with devils to do so. Although actor Guy Pearce is the lead, I see the story as being more about Winstone's character of Stanley. While Pearce's Charlie confronts his inner demons to achieve a moral awakening, Stanley is also undergoing a spiritual journey as he comes to terms with the destruction of his merits. Danny Huston brilliantly portrays the murderous rage of Arthur Burns and creates a career-best performance. Also in the cast there's a superb John Hurt as a quirky bounty hunter, a unique David Wenham as the aforementioned authority figure, and Emily Watson as Winstone's bride.

Overall, The Proposition is one of the best Australian productions I have seen for years! This is an intense, riveting, wholly gratifying and poignant addition to the western genre that has remained dormant for years. Not since Jim Jarmusch's 1995 film Dead Man have I been this impressed with the genre. Before that, Clint Eastwood's Unforgiven. Every generation has its definitive western and, until persuaded otherwise, The Proposition stands as this generation's definitive western. There may be a shortage on action, but it doesn't matter through my eyes. This is a beautifully filmed movie that is both powerful and challenging. The film's climax is particularly haunting. The final shot shows two characters sitting motionless in front of an achingly gorgeous sunset as one asks the other, "What're you gonna do now?" The answer goes unspoken, however it rings clear anyway: sit here and wait for the flies to come take them just like everyone else.

"The core of mans' spirit comes from new experiences."

Sean Penn's beautiful film Into the Wild is yet another masterpiece of 2007 that divides the blockbuster/action lovers from those who seek magnificent filmmaking.

Into the Wild is a gorgeous production affluent in poignant messages about life. The 140-minute film is exquisitely paced and carried by not only the performances but elegant shots that depict beautiful pictures of nature.

The film is based on a best-selling novel by Jon Krakauer that tells the tragic tale of a young man who escapes the banalities of life, leaves his middle-class family and explores the world. Christopher McCandless (Hirsch) graduates from university with fantastic grades. His marks will open up endless opportunities for jobs and careers for his imminent future. But Chris doesn't want to continue an acquisitive life that is orientated by money and materialistic possessions. Instead he wants to travel to Alaska where he feels nature will provide true happiness free of obligation and relationships. Chris donates most of the remaining money of his college fund to charity, burns the rest and hits the road as a dirty hitchhiker under the alias of Alexander Supertramp with the goal of Alaska in mind.

His excursion introduces him to a procession of people whom he becomes emotionally involved with. These people shape Chris' life and are touched by his vigour and dedication that will lead him to his eventual ambition of reaching the wilderness of Alaska. Chris is an inexperienced bushman but is devoted to his belief of finding contentment in the natural world away from a world that relies on wealth and materialistic belongings.

Into the Wild is powerful, riveting and moving. Sean Penn's direction is fundamentally perfect. He wrote the screenplay and transitioned this script to the big screen. The cinematography was one of the first things that really struck me. The colour palette felt natural; showcasing some landscape scenes that are absolutely beautiful to watch. Be it running water, stunning mountain ranges, animals in their natural habitat or the wind grazing the trees; these are all unique examples of accurately showing the mainstream environment of its location. Even shots that show the mundane city or the typical life of suburbia look graceful thanks to the great cinematography and powerful score. The soft guitar music was frequently utilised and it gives each shot a magical feeling to it. The music suits each and every scene it features in; each note was carefully planned out to suit the shot that it's being used for. This care and dedication to on-screen perfection means that the audience can never be bored.

I was never bored in amidst the fascinating events and the engaging story. Emile Hirsch's performance as Chris/Alex is close to Oscar worthy. I will admit that his character was a selfish human being who brought the tragedies upon himself, but Hirsch plays the role faultlessly. Hal Holbrook was nominated for an Oscar for his minor role in the film. He only appears for little time during the final quarter, but the character is one of the most significant in the film. Hal's performance has a heavy, powerful impact on the audience. He almost had me in tears during his important lines that are vital for the advancement of the story. Jena Malone was a stand out as Chris' sister who also delivers lines of narration throughout the film's duration.

Into the Wild is a remarkable tale that is thoroughly engaging and immensely entertaining. Into the Wild is stunning, gorgeous and memorable. It celebrates the extraordinary, tragic tale of an ambitious man who abandons his money-orientated existence and gives up all possible prospects of becoming highly successful in the pursuit of happiness. Highly recommended.

"I'm gonna be a day behind you, William. Unless something happens, and if it does, I need a man at the ranch to run things, protect our family, and I know that you can do that because you've become a fine man, William. You've become a fine man. You got all the best parts of me. What few there are. And you just remember that your old man walked Ben Wade to that station when nobody else would."

In this current generation of cinema, hardly any people remember Delmer Daves' classic 1957 western film 3:10 to Yuma that was based on a short story by Elmore Leonard. This is an extraordinarily rare occurrence when a remake actually outshines and surpasses the original in every aspect. In a sense, James Mangold's 3:10 to Yuma symbolises a glimmer of optimism for the future of cinematic remakes. For years, Hollywood has persistently remade classic films with completely catastrophic consequences. Mangold's film also signifies a new Hollywood generation for the western genre. In 2005, Australian filmmakers reinvented the genre with The Proposition. Although this film cannot improve on the Australian production, this is a western for the history books. Critics have praised this movie as the best western since Clint Eastwood's Unforgiven (which collected the Best Picture Oscar back in the early 1990s). There can be no dispute: 3:10 to Yuma is a riveting western abundant in underlying psychological messages analogous to those present in the original. Most commendably, this remake avoids replicating the original. As an alternative the script employs roughly 30% of the 1957 film. The rest of the script builds deeper characterisations in the protagonists, and stretches out the plot for a more expanded running time of about 120 minutes (as opposed to the original's 90 minutes). Normally this could be disastrous, however to the credit of those involved the additions don't feel fabricated: they feel natural and completely fitting in this version of the story. Kudos to director Mangold for maintaining the conflict and central spirit of Daves' original, while still managing to accommodate a fairly serious expansion of a terrifically original story.

3:10 to Yuma is a character-driven western fuelled by astounding performances. The seemingly never-ending string of exposition pays off when the action kicks in. These are possibly the most intense, riveting, stimulating western action scenes the genre has ever seen. Mangold has always been a completely focused director; confident and proficient behind the camera, determinedly manufacturing fine results. The technical aptitude is palpable in all filmmaking aspects. Mangold and cinematographer Phedon Papamichael produce the amazing visuals that are assisted and complimented by the accomplished sound mix: ear shattering sound effects for the gunshots amalgamated with silent but effective music composed by Marco Beltrami. The music isn't overbearing to the point of distraction like a majority of modern action movies; instead it's subtle, exciting, powerful and artistic. The production values are a marvel to behold. A modern western will of course appear completely authentic in terms of props and costumes, and this is no exemption. The period is depicted with brutal honesty and an astronomical level of legitimacy. This portrayal will essentially transport you back to the represented time period for the film's duration. The absorbing drama mixed with this authenticity will suck you in from start to finish.

In this remake of the 1957 film, the plot remains virtually untouched. The difference is in the storytelling and the plot progression. Ben Wade (Crowe) is a notorious outlaw with a solid reputation for robbing and murdering. After Wade robs a stagecoach, he is arrested by the law and held prisoner. Rancher Dan Evans (Bale) heads into town to clarify concerns pertaining to the sake of his land when he beholds the closing events of the stagecoach robbery. Shortly thereafter, Evans is offered an immense amount of money to be among those escorting Ben Wade to the town of Contention where he will be placed on the 3:10pm train to Yuma. Once the train reaches its destination, Wade will be incarcerated. Evans' calamitous endeavour to transport Wade to the train station is in part an effort to save his land but also a component of an internal conflict to determine whether the man can prove to be more than a mere naïve rancher in the eyes of his impulsive and gun-slinging young son William Evans (Lerman). The transport to the town of Contention is perilous and overflowing with ambushes by Indians, pursuits by Wade's rancorous gang and Wade's personal manipulative and surreptitious conduct that makes the journey far more intense.

As I previously stated, 3:10 to Yuma is driven by the remarkable performances from an outstanding cast. Russell Crowe proves that he is still among the greatest actors of this generation. Crowe makes the role of Ben Wade his own. The character is endowed with additional depth in this remake, as opposed to the slightly underdeveloped outlaw in the original. Christian Bale also brings tremendous depth to the character. His version of Dan Evans is a lot stronger than the Van Heflin portrayal in Daves' 1957 version. There's excellent hostility leading to chemistry as Bale's humourless stoicism is jabbed for feebleness and mercy by Crowe's jovial, joking outlaw. Character notes are sufficient - like Dan's necessity for the approval of son William, and Ben's early abandonment - for a density that compels us to be concerned. The taut script never bogs in unnecessary analysis or sentimentality. All characters are pampered with the brutal reality from the period.

Both Crowe and Bale submit dynamite performances and execute a fine job of playing cowboy. Each actor creates depth to his character, and when you insert convincing western action, intelligent dialogue, and elegant cinematography it produces a strong western film for the ages. It's interesting to note that the evil is not drawn from Crowe's Ben Wade. Instead, Wade's motives are kept clouded with mystery until the finale while hinting that there might be a heart in him after all. The evil in the film is drawn from Ben Foster's Charlie Prince: a man who leads Wade's gang to the town of Contention for the irrevocable final stand-off. The brilliant acting never permits you to grow bored. The film is gripping and stimulating, eventually ending in an ultimately perplexing conclusion that avoids duplicating the somewhat conventional conclusion offered in the original.

Overall, 3:10 to Yuma is an extraordinarily rare event when a remake is superior to the film that spawned it. Delmar Daves' 1957 flick is still a brilliant western on its own merits, whereas James Mangold's remake improves the original in every aspect of filmmaking. 3:10 to Yuma is one of the finest westerns of this era. It's indeed an infrequent event when two groundbreaking westerns are created in the course of a few years - in this case The Proposition and 3:10 to Yuma - that rival the last truly brilliant western that was Clint Eastwood's Unforgiven. Perhaps this film represents a new Hollywood era for westerns. The filmmakers remind the audience that westerns are about old-school, gritty action scenes built around some amazing character development. This film is simply far too brilliant to miss: an enduring story that offers first-class acting, heart-racing action, mind-blowing stunts and filmmaking of the highest order.

Girl: "How come you don't play during daytime? I see you here everyday."
Guy: "During the daytime people would want to hear songs that they know, just songs that they recognize. I play these song at night or I wouldn't make any money. People wouldn't listen."
Girl: "I listen."

The film industry has witnessed its fair share of low-budget independent movies that yielded embarrassingly bad results. Once is a blueprint example of an extraordinarily rare event when an independent filmmaker has created a product far superior to incalculable quantities of Hollywood blockbuster rubbish dominating the market that have too long been getting the green light. Writer/director John Carney proves that a straightforward concept can generate groundbreaking results if a clever script is at its core. He also proves that the requirements for a good movie do not include a big budget, a renowned group of actors and some lavish special effects - at the end of the day, it's the script that carries everything and a quality script fundamentally ensures a product to cherish.

Contemporary movie musicals are an interesting subject to explore. Audiences have observed the thriving individualism in musical cinema, from adaptations of successful Broadway musicals (The Producers, Sweeney Todd), cheesy teenage flicks (High School Musical) or even the unique biography of Dreamgirls: there is no single musical style that has dominated the box office. Once is from an entirely different spectrum; a unique Irish "modern musical" that has proved to be among the best date films of all time. This film is wonderful, touching, charming, sincere and very romantic. This is not your typical musical at all: the characters do not sing as a form of dialogue...the characters are musicians who write deeply poetic lyrics. In essence, the lyrics mirror the emotions of the characters: as the characters are developed and the story progresses, the fascinating lyrics increase in their poignancy and relevance.

Once is a mature musical aimed at a target audience of mostly adults who are mature and can fully comprehend the themes and potency. While adolescents predominantly prefer the blockbusters, it's comforting to know that the film industry also produces these magnificent magnum opuses. These great films are limited for sure, but wholly worth it no matter how rare they appear. Essentially, this masterpiece feels like a captured moment of life - a slice of kismet where you just happen to be in the right place at the right time to observe a spectacle of nature, a feat of compassion, or a stream of light bequeathing its benediction on a landscape you pass every day but otherwise fail to notice.

Once uncovers a soft, romantic side of Dublin. Most of the characters have not been named, and this is pivotal as the characters merely symbolise just another person off the street. Each character represents a facet of the culture, and the film explores the inner emotional journey that the respective characters undertake. Above all, it's also an examination of the human spirit and the determination to reach a desired ambition.

The film is a simple story about a struggling Irish musician only known as 'the Guy' (Hansard). He makes his money by helping his dad run a repair shop for vacuum cleaners, and in his free time he's on the streets participating in the strum trade by playing songs he wrote himself about the girlfriend that broke his heart. The Guy yearns for recognition and wishes for a lucrative contract in the music business. He lacks the drive to take his career to the next level as he has never dared to give it a shot. It seems like a simple day when the Guy is approached by the Girl (Irglova): a poverty-stricken Czechoslovakian immigrant with a small child. She is emotionally struck by the moving lyricism of the Guy's songs. The two are lost souls, and begin intimately bonding. This bond only becomes stronger when the Guy discovers that the Girl is also a musician specialising in playing classical piano, and he is equally as moved when he hears her music. Thus begins a clever and wholly unconventional love story.

Once was made on a meagre budget and shot over the course of 17 days. When one compares it to the blockbusters like Pirates of the Caribbean or Transformers you can tell which is going to come out on top at the Box Office. However the revenue does not reflect the quality, as Once only took in a modest amount of money but is superior to both aforementioned films. This is true art and an example of an incredible movie...and I would watch this film any day in lieu of clichéd big-budget action flicks.

The atmosphere truly captures realism in its depiction of the locations. Writer/director John Carney opted to shoot the film in a realistic fashion: almost to the point that it feels more like documentary footage than a staged movie! This obviously reflects the transcendent direction that is continually stunning. The script is solid. Some people have complained about the constant swearing. Yes, they swear a lot. This happens in real life! I've studied the background of Irish history, and after the way they were treated it's hardly surprising that they use such foul language. Don't let the watered-down, inaccurate Hollywood clichés taint your image of everyday Irish dialogue.

I doubt anyone had set any expectations for this movie as I hadn't - all I knew was that it's a musical love story. However after the first five minutes I was already under a powerful, transfixing spell. The exuberant performers also deserve loads of credit. As this is an independent film made on a small budget, the cast was filled by mainly non-actors. Glen Hansard is frequently stunning: while drama is filling the screen he's marvellous, and when he opens his mouth to project his riveting lyrics there are no faults in his determination. Hansard's character is your typical, lonely everyday Irishman trying to make a living. Marketa Irglova delivers a performance that really hits home. She is constantly extremely beautiful and is blessed with a charming screen presence. She was only 17 when this movie entered production. That is a reflection of her talent while she was a mere teenager.

The music throughout the movie is gorgeously written and brought to life faultlessly by the two talented protagonists. You will not forget the spellbinding songs that the filmmakers have produced. Quite simply, you will be absolutely mesmerised whenever a song is being performed.

Overall, Once is a little film that went a long way. No-one ever expected this film to score so wonderfully. In a nutshell this is a charming film that manages to avoid the conventions that too long have plagued the screenplays of Hollywood movies. This film is potent and poignant: a moving, realistic, unexaggerated portrait of characters. Upon theatrical release, this lovely independent movie captured the hearts of many. The enjoyment of this movie is not only dependent on the soulful music, but also the realistic portrayals of an array of un-stereotyped characters.

Once is a warm, tender and revealing journey that's 60% music and 40% slice-of-life. The small cast are wonderful despite no prior acting experience, and the director is intelligent enough to realise he's created a strong story that can practically tell itself. Alas, he stands back and allows the string of events to unfold. The product is a contemporary fairy tale that confronts our perception of happy endings.

"What do you want me to do, dress in drag and do the hula?"

I still remember when I was a tender age of 3 and first saw The Lion King on the big screen. When it was released on VHS it became a film I watched almost everyday. I would not be alone in saying that this film was an essential part of my early childhood. Because I had watched this film so much I have basically committed every scene to memory.


It had been about 5-10 years since I last watched this brilliant Disney movie. Needless to say, a re-screening was highly necessary because of how powerful this film was on my childhood years. The Lion King was first released in 1994. Now the film is regarded as a classic. Currently as a teenager I can say that this film still has the same impact and power despite what age range you have reached. As a child you appreciate the slapstick humour on screen. When characters do amusing antics the kids will have a good laugh. Of course they don't know what is going on most of the time. In later years the magic is still present. You can devour the film for its plot and clever script. You can analyse how innovative the animation is. And yet, you can still laugh at the mannerisms of the animals.


The Lion King is the story of a young lion cub named Simba (voiced by both Thomas and Broderick) who is heir to the throne of Pride Rock now run by his father Mufasa (Jones). But Simba is forced into exile when he is at the receiving end of a treacherous, deceptive plot courtesy of his jealous uncle Scar (Irons). After the death of Mufasa the kingdom is now ruled by Scar who will essentially spell doom for Pride Rock. While Simba lives another life he becomes the unlikely friends of a meerkat named Timon (Lane) and a warthog named Pumbaa (Sabella). But as Simba's rightful kingdom is crumbling due to its poor leadership, his past returns and leads him to his rightful destiny of becoming king.


The Lion King has a fairly straight-forward plot that will work on the surface for the kids. As you grow older you look past its pretty pictures and see something a lot deeper than you would have originally remembered. In a nutshell, the film is loosely a Shakespearean drama rich in themes of jealousy, deception, betrayal, murder and redemption. In essence this formula we have seen countless times before. It's just not as noticeable because of its pretty new packaging for the clichés to breed inside. Of course this is a children's film so these clichés and formulaic plot points can be excused.


The Lion King is one of the cleverest Disney films in existence. Its appeal stretches to each and every age range. The film has its adorable moments, hilarious moments and of course the intense or tragic moments. This is not your average Disney movie at all!


The most memorable image for me was the introduction of the renowned Timon and Pumbaa. These two were a particular favourite of mine when I was a youngster. Nathan Lane is a piece of perfect casting. His excellent lines of dialogue had me in stitches. The rest of the voice cast are outstanding. Jeremy Irons is another stand-out as the sadistic, evil Scar. Many of his lines are memorable because of how brilliantly he delivers them.


The animation is indeed incredible even after all these years. The film is breathtaking in its amazing images shown using simple animation techniques. Naturally, the cherry on top is the music. Elton John contributed to the music here. In addition to Elton we also have Tim Rice and Hans Zimmer collaborating to produce the music, songs and score. Do you expect this to go wrong?


The Lion King is a treasure chest rich in nostalgic memories from my childhood. It has been so many years but this film is still one of my favourites. The Lion King is the fundamental embodiment of a children's animation film. Laughs, clever characters, witty dialogue and great animation. If you haven't seen this for several years I suggest another screening is required. You will become addicted once again.

"Joy Division, you cunt!"

The band Joy Division managed to generate an astronomical fan base when they helped change the face of music during the 1970s. Control is a poignant, moving, emotive accolade to the life of an ill-fated rock-star named Ian Curtis (Riley) who was the lead singer of Joy Division.


Control is a film that delves deep down into the profoundly troubled life of Ian; a man who died far too young. Ian had a sincere fondness for rock-stars like David Bowie and Iggy Pop. The film's hypnotic opening scene introduces us to a 17-year-old Ian Curtis who is on his way home from school. Control traces the circumstances that initiated his career. He felt that youthfulness meant that he could do whatever he wanted. In this case he married at a tender young age and gained a daughter. When Ian joins a band made up of his mates they call themselves Joy Division. The band quickly becomes increasingly more successful. Ian is soon distracted from family commitments by a new love and the growing expectations of his band. This severe strain manifests itself in his physical condition. With epilepsy adding to his guilt and dejection, despondency holds a firm grip. Conceding to the burden on his shoulders, Ian's tortured soul consumes him.


Control is the feature debut of director Anton Corbijn who was obviously very committed and passionate about making a wholly accurate film. The cinematography was especially effective. People who grew up during that period will tell you that life was black & white. This was the atmosphere director Anton wanted to create, hence shooting the film in evocative, hypnotic black & white photography. The film's ambiance is captivating and mesmerising. The directing in particular never made the film seem like a staged production.


The title itself refers to Ian's troubled existence. The film is absolutely heart-wrenching as Ian believes he failed his wife as his marriage draws to a close, failed his daughter because he was never a good father, failed his band because his health condition forbid him to perform well, but most of all failed himself for destroying his fragile spirit - Ian lost control.


Sam Riley is a little known actor who proved accomplished with his display of acting skills portraying the principal character. He let the audience believe that he is actually this tragic iconic singer whose life was plagued with piles of concerns. Riley was especially haunting during the more tragic scenes. When he collapses on stage the audience's heart also collapses at the catastrophic sight. Riley is amazing. Samantha Morton plays the part of Ian's young wife Debbie. She held a strong love for Ian despite the things he did to jeopardise their marriage. During scenes that required tears and a realistic break down, both Sam Riley and Samantha Morton are exhilarating.


The soundtrack is quite electrifying at times. I thought the music was used sparingly, and it was a very wise choice on the part of the filmmakers. When some of the more poignant scenes are without music it creates an even more devastating impact on the viewer.


Control is a depressingly beautiful production. Although far too short, it is a tribute to the talented, enigmatic Ian Curtis and a fitting portrait for such a man. Ian used so much of his extraordinary ability during his fairly short life. The filmmakers sensitively approached the source material. No-one ever strikes a false note in this stimulating, stunning, incredibly heart-breaking experience. Control cannot be missed at any cost.

"What's the matter? Haven't you ever seen a gun before? What do you want me to do, count three like they do in the movies?"

Regarded as one of the essential Bogart/Bacall films, The Big Sleep is a stimulating plunge into an entertaining slice of detective fiction. Filmmakers these days just don't make movies like The Big Sleep anymore; the film is stylish and atmospheric, set in a world where tough guys are tough guys and women were babes.

The highlight of the classic picture, of course, is the rich screen partnership of Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall (they were married at the time). When one thinks of Bogart, his big break usually springs to mind; that is, The Maltese Falcon. Howard Hawks is no John Huston; however Hawks' refined direction sets the atmosphere of intrigue and exhilaration. From the first scene I was already hooked; sharp screenplay, witty line dispensing from first-rate cast, classy atmosphere. It's this combination that keeps the audience spellbound from start to finish.

Based on the Raymond Chandler novel of the same name, Bogart plays private eye detective Philip Marlowe who is given the assignment of sorting out a simple blackmail case for a wealthy old man. The case involves the man's younger daughter Carmen (Vickers) and it appears to be fairly straightforward. However, the plot thickens when Marlowe discovers that there is more to the case than meets the eye.

What follows is an absorbing tale filled with murders and abundant intrigue; there is certainly nothing dull to surface around here.

Some people fed The Big Sleep a mouthful of criticism because of how convoluted the plot turned out to be. This is true; the film is full of plot twists and is so complex that not even the author knows who committed one murder, but the film is so incredibly entertaining that I was willing to overlook it.

The Big Sleep is a sizzling thriller that features a first class array of actors. Humphrey Bogart is formidable in his quintessential role of a private detective falling for a dame. Bogey seems to never tire of playing the same kind of role on many occasions. Of course, this is no drawback. The man is now experienced in such a role and his stature perfectly suits the character of Philip Marlowe.

Lauren Bacall will always be an exemplary accompaniment for Bogey on screen. The chemistry is sizzling between them when the screen is shared. The supporting cast is a dazzling array of stunning female actresses, including Mary Vickers and Dorothy Malone among many others.

Director Hawks had some serious boots to fill due to Bogey being one of the world's much loved actors working at the time of release. After The Maltese Falcon and Casablanca it would have been a hard act to follow. But Hawks is skilled in the director's chair; always establishing a very classy atmosphere that keeps the audience enthralled as the mysteries keep getting unravelled.

The film also boasts quite a large on screen body count and quite a bit of violence. This only heightens the film's status as one of the most unforgettable films in cinematic history.

The Big Sleep will always be remembered amongst the most memorable films from Bogart's career. From start to finish I was completely captivated by the impressive filmmaking in every aspect. The film is another classic that continues to deepen my fascination in old black and white movies. I can't stress this enough; no-one would be able to match the mystery and captivation if the film was made in colour, or make during present day.

"Look at me boy! Take a good look! Cause I'm the last living thing you're ever gonna see!"

Truman Capote painstakingly wrote a non-fiction novel of the true story surrounding the brutal slaughter of a Kansas family in their home. This novel was a literature masterpiece that is still widely acclaimed to this day. The novel was titled In Cold Blood and was the source material for this film of the same name.

The true story that is told in the movie: Perry Smith (Blake) and Dick Hickox (Wilson) were convinced (by Hickox's former cell mate) that a wealthy family in Kansas possessed a safe containing $10,000. Driven by the promise of cash they drove several hundred miles to the home. On November 14, 1959, the two men broke into the Kansas farmhouse belonging to the Clutter family. Failing to find the safe, they killed all four members of the much-respected Clutters.

The film chronicles the lead-up, then the aftermath of the murder. The men are on the run as they travel first to Mexico before returning to the United States where they are eventually caught. The other half of the film tells the story of their conviction and subsequent execution. While we see Perry and Dick on the run we are also shown the other side of the story; the investigation by Kansas Bureau of Investigation (they are called this because the FBI did not approve of the script) as they work to find the identities of the men who committed such a heinous crime.

Some criticism the film received (from dumb audiences) is in relation to the film following the two men who executed a horrendous crime. Why are we supposed to care about them? It's very straightforward - the men are not shown as psychopaths or deranged killers. There is no need. In real life the men were ordinary and real. This makes the film even more chilling; that individually they are two personalities incapable of conceiving the crime. But together they form a third personality that committed the quadruple homicide.

In Cold Blood is a character film that boasts several fine performances. Robert Blake's performance is iconic and flawless. I was immediately engaged in everything he was doing. And the final shot of the movie really hit home. Blake is truly electrifying. The poignancy of his portrayal broke me down to tears. He is matched by an equally superb performance from Scott Wilson as his partner Hickox. Both men never appear to be acting; they are wholly believable and engaging. For a few times during the film I forgot I was watching a movie.

The direction and cinematography assisted in this feeling as well. Using grainy black and white photography almost makes it appear to be archive footage. The film has been tagged as a "semi-documentary" because it frankly feels like a documentary rather than a staged movie. The writer/director Richard Brooks created an unnerving atmosphere. This is definitely one of his best movies. His script was naturalistic and exceptional; even finding space for some sneaky film references (such as Blake talking about The Treasure of the Sierra Madre). Topped off beautifully with a jazzy score courtesy of Quincy Jones. The score really helps to establish the atmosphere as well.

Overall, In Cold Blood is a powerful and compelling experience that tells a truly fascinating story. Like the book, the film is a documentary-style narrative that portrays the characters exactly how they were without being over-the-top or typical Hollywood. In this day and age it's very hard to find a movie as moving and potent as this sublime production. In a nutshell: In Cold Blood cannot be missed at any cost. The story of Capote writing his novel is told in the film Capote.

"The closer you get to being a pro, the closer you can get to the client. The knife, for example, is the last thing you learn."

On the surface, Léon is an easily dismissible film because it just seems like a simple French drama. But Léon is something far from that. Léon is an absorbing character study that has all the elements of gripping drama mixed with the elements of an exciting American action film. The combination equals one of the most intelligent American action films in cinematic history.

Léon is the first American film by director Luc Besson and it's a masterpiece. The film is exciting, suspenseful, taut, smart and awesome.

Jean Reno plays the title role of Léon; a professional assassin with a robust reputation. In his apartment building an abused, alienated 12-year-old girl named Mathilda (Portman) is left alone when the rest of her family are slaughtered courtesy of crooked, two-faced, psychotic DEA cop Norman Stansfield (Oldman). Léon reluctantly takes Mathilda under his wing; providing care and a place to stay because she has no-where else to go.

But Mathilda is intrigued by Léon's profession of being a hit man. In order to avenge the death of her little brother (the only one in the family she cared about), Léon teaches Mathilda the art of his trade and reveals the secrets of how to become a professional cleaner. But this blooming friendship opens up new doors for Léon; he feels the ability to care and love.

Léon brilliantly combines scenes of violent, awesome action with some compelling drama that showcases wonderful performances. Jean Reno begins as a cold assassin who feels nothing. Every turn for his character is felt strongly by the audience. He's reluctant to shelter young Mathilda but when he finally does it alters his life forever. Being a professional hit man he should not have the ability to love and strongly feel emotion. Jean Reno never breaks his profound concentration for the film's duration. The opening 20 minutes showed Reno as ruthless and cool; everything one should find in such a character.

Natalie Portman is in her film debut with this role. She's extremely young, but her acting can't be faulted. Her performance is heart-felt and sincere. Whenever she cries it doesn't feel at all contrived. For someone in their early teen years, this is a quality almost unheard of. Kudos to Portman for pulling off such a convincing first role!

Gary Oldman is sadistic and cynical but at the same time energetic and occasionally amusing. His character was despicable; however Oldman plays the role to perfection.

Luc Besson really knows how to direct a film like this. The cinematography in particular was outstanding! The action scenes don't suffer from the usual fast cut syndrome. They are filled with creative camera angles, ultra violence and the camera was utilised in a highly inventive way.

Léon also boasts a great story that suffers from a very small number of typical clichés. Sure, the love story was a little embarrassing at times but that's only a marginal fault. Aside from that the script is smart, the action is taut and the film is dazzling entertainment.

Léon is highly recommended for a night of action, laughs and drama all rolled into one masterpiece.

"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"

Stand by Me is a timeless screen gem based on a Stephen King novella called 'The Body'. The film marks one of the best Stephen King translations to the big screen; this poignant, touching classic is quite simply a masterpiece.

Stand by Me is a film that follows three young boys about to enter their teen years; Gordie (Wheaton), Chris (Phoenix), Teddy (Feldman) and Vern (O'Connell). The plot is quite simple; Vern is underneath his house digging furiously for his pennies when he overhears a conversation regarding the final resting place of a missing boy who is presumed dead. The boy was hit by a train but has not been found by authorities. The four young boys decide that they want to be heroes and head off on a journey to find the corpse. They figure that if they report the location of the body to the authorities they'll get their 15 minutes of fame in the local newspapers. With this goal in mind they set out on a journey to the location of the body. This journey is filled with bonding and arguing that you'd come to expect from 12-year-old boys.

Not only is this a tender narrative but also a coming-of-age tale of young boys ascending into manhood. The film's story is told in flashback to narration by Richard Dreyfuss. The opening introduces us to Dreyfuss' character, which is followed by the aforementioned flashbacks that accurately display pre-pubescent males of the 1950s.

Dreyfuss' character amusingly uses a complex vocabulary while the title characters on screen speak so immaturely; cheaply throwing insults at each other and each other's mothers.

The problem with most child actors is that they usually fail to engage the audiences during complex situations. Stand by Me contains performances prominently by a group of boys between the ages of 11 and 12. Understandably, I was reluctant about this idea at first. Maybe it was Reiner's skilled directing, or maybe it was the acting talent of the four principal children; either way I found the acting to be stellar. I was astounded at the brilliant results achieved by the young actors. There's also a very recognisable Kiefer Sutherland who pops up as a typical teenager bully. Because I had seen so much of Sutherland's recent work I was shocked at how youthful he looks.

Thankfully the whole cast were given a remarkable script to feast on. The dialogue is realistic, as are the members of the cast. Some scenes called for sublime acting, especially when the boys were meant to be in tears. The young cast pull it off with wonderful results.

Stand by Me can't be missed because of how moving, touching and emotive the whole experience is. Stand by Me is a simple story but contains a powerful message about the ascension in adulthood. Memorable, riveting and brilliant. I can't believe it took me so long to finally watch this one. Funniest moment: the gross (but amusing) story about a young fat boy getting revenge on his enemies by initiating a barf-fest in a tent during a pie-eating contest.

"You know what you are. What you're made of. War is in your blood. Don't fight it. You didn't kill for your country. You killed for yourself. God's never gonna make that go away. When you're pushed, killing's as easy as breathing."

It's been a long time since the decade of the 80s concluded. This was a decade when action films were ripe and extensively successful: they were brutal, violent and entertaining. In the era of contemporary action movies, violence is commonly diluted to accomplish a docile classification appropriate for a mainstream audience. Action lovers desired more...they were sick of the childish, watered-down violence being portrayed. When an aging Sylvester Stallone announced the creation of a fourth Rambo movie, his objective was to resurrect the classic gratuitous violence merged with scenes infused with utterly incredible action. Stallone acknowledged what his fans sought after. Thus when he produced the fourth adventure for the illustrious John J. Rambo he wasn't making it for box office receipts, he wasn't making a film that would be hailed by critics...Stallone was making a movie purely and genuinely for the multitude of fans that yearned for the return of old school, over-the-top, hardcore action violence that was once so prominent in the 80s. On this guarantee he delivered. He delivered perfectly.

Stallone was commended when he wet the appetites of his fans, and the first trailer for Rambo (at that time entitled John Rambo) was distributed over the internet - this was a red-band, uncut trailer that displayed several incredible minutes of hardcore violence as graphic and realistic as Steven Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan. Hordes of fans were already aching to see the final product because they distinguished that Stallone had completed his job correctly. Of course, the critics severely panned Stallone's Rambo - they labelled it as pointless, pure action porn. On the other hand, the audiences received what they had expected and applauded Stallone for his relentless images of war. The writer/director/star did not succumb to the watered down violence for juveniles, and for that he gained loads of respect. The man returned action to its roots: interesting characters, witty lines, classic formula and lots of violence. The character of Rambo is also returned to his roots: not much dialogue, instead using facial expressions to tell his story. Even more impressive is the lack of clichés. Sure, the whole film is structured using the old formula. But there is no love interest despite the presence of a female, there are no dumb characters that have little faith in the hero, and there are no futile set-ups for elaborate deaths. In fact, the action scenes are scattered sparingly across the film's running time. For a man over the age of 60, Stallone deserves nothing but commendation and admiration for his persistence and ultimate success.

The film finds legendary troubled Vietnam veteran John J. Rambo (Stallone) living a secluded, inconsolable life in Thailand. Rambo has left his past behind him, instead indulging in the undemanding career of a snake wrangler. Rambo currently resides just downriver from the appalling genocide unfolding in nearby Burma. He is approached by a group of Christian missionaries, lead by a man named Michael (Schulze). These missionaries implore him to assist in taking them upriver into Burma. Although reluctant at first, Rambo agrees to take them into the chaos that has been the site of genocide for many years. Following the apprehension and incarceration of the missionaries by the fierce Burmese military, their church are informed and become determined to save them. The pastor of the church hires a group of mercenaries to travel into Burma to extract and rescue the innocent Christian missionaries. John J. Rambo dons his head-band and comes out of retirement one last time to battle the malicious Burmese soldiers in the thick jungle...the landscape in which Rambo was trained to battle.

Screenwriter Stallone takes his time building up to the action sequences. The film's first half sets up a plot that exists before diving into a world of utter chaos and incredible action. For authenticity in its depiction of the Burma, Stallone decided to dedicate the film's opening sequence to a montage of actual newsreel footage portraying the atrocities that are occurring in that part of the world everyday. Throughout the film's first half, we are incessantly shown the genocide that continues to unfold as the military choose new target villages with each new day. Stallone announced in an interview that he wanted the fourth John Rambo film to be about something...about humanity and its current state. Thus, he dives head first into the site of the longest running war in the world. Stallone handles the material with style: his uncompromising representation of Burma is gritty, brutal and horrifying. Rambo masquerades as an action/adventure film when in fact it's also a film that spreads awareness of the Burmese situation. By portraying the area using so much graphic violence the audience therefore considers the situation with greater scrutiny. The critics that despised the film so much simply do not understand the film. It's their loss.

Even at a ripe old age of 61, classic action icon Sylvester Stallone still has it in him. I do not care for those who find ease in insulting the man due to his HGH scandal in 2007. People's judgments on actors sometimes taint their image on the certain actor's films. If you're seriously avoiding this film because you believe Stallone is on steroids then it's impossible to take your cinematic views sincerely. Julie Benz is a superb member of the supporting cast. She plays a Christian missionary named Sarah. She is not a love interest so to speak, although Rambo does jump through hoops for her. But it's not because Rambo has taken a fondness for her and is looking for a lay - Sarah has profoundly touched his soul, and has allowed him to heighten his faithfulness towards humankind. Rambo is happily oblivious to world events because he's living a life of desolation, until Sarah opens his eyes to the capability of one human life. Also in the cast there's an ideal bunch of actors portraying the mercenaries who travel into Burma. There are some great lines of dialogue for all of them to deliver.

Rambo is also equipped with homages to the previous films, including a dream sequence depicting a montage to remind the audience of Rambo's past, and music that suitably mirrors Jerry Goldsmith's original score. The music present here is astounding. When powerful atrocities are being showcased there's a profoundly, deeply moving score to accompany the visuals. Sometimes the touching music will bring you to the verge of tears. If something like that is present in a pure action movie then the filmmakers have completed their objective. Also worth noting is the film's sound mix. The ambience of the Burmese jungle is captured wonderfully...all the gunfights and explosions sound spectacular. It's easy to become engaged in the action with such amazing sound effects that all sound natural.

Overall, Rambo is a perfect way to bring the infamous action hero full circle. We find the character returning to his roots and returning to a life he once knew before experiencing an unplanned turmoil in First Blood. Stallone reminds his fans that he is still here and ready to work despite his age. After striking such triumph with Rocky Balboa, another of his characters has been brought to a wholly satisfying conclusion. Of course, this film is far from perfect. It's very formulaic, but all audiences just love cheering when they witness the bad guys getting their comeuppance in brutal, satisfying ways. The intelligence of First Blood also lacks (like Rambo setting traps and ambushes, etc); however it would be hard to imagine the character pulling off elaborately planned traps at his current age. Rambo is solid, top-notch entertainment. It's incredibly awesome, absolutely entertaining and very realistic. The gore factor is, at times, astounding! Stallone promised to dish up violence that the action genre hasn't birthed for decades. He succeeded beyond all expectations. Despite the negative reviews from the critics, I wholly enjoyed Rambo and will continue to do so with each new screening. If you're looking for a good old-fashioned action movie full of realistic violence and gore then it's time to visit the latest adventure of John Rambo. This is an action film masterpiece!

"It's always difficult to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this. And wherever you run into it, prejudice always obscures the truth. I don't really know what the truth is. I don't suppose anybody will ever really know. Nine of us now seem to feel that the defendant is innocent, but we're just gambling on probabilities - we may be wrong. We may be trying to let a guilty man go free, I don't know. Nobody really can. But we have a reasonable doubt, and that's something that's very valuable in our system. No jury can declare a man guilty unless it's SURE. We nine can't understand how you three are still so sure. Maybe you can tell us."

Based on a teleplay by Reginald Rose, 12 Angry Men marks Sidney Lumet's magnificent film debut. This masterpiece is a dynamic, intense, searing, spellbinding morality study and a brilliant portrayal of our justice system at work. 12 Angry Men was first released decades ago in 1957, yet this potent social microcosm still feels as relevant as ever.

On paper this straightforward courtroom drama probably wasn't much to get excited about - a single room setting (with little to no exceptions), a dozen old-timers arguing, and a first-time feature film director. But when preserved on the medium of film, 12 Angry Men is transformed into a consummate fermentation of acting prowess and dynamite direction. This is a movie that could stand as a screenwriting masterclass in the development of character and plot without resorting to big stunts, grandiose locations or special effects. From start to finish the film is just the story of twelve men on a hot, stuffy afternoon in a single room debating the guilt of a teenager on the wrong side of the tracks. The fact the film kept me riveted and entertained for its entire length is a gratifying testament to everyone involved. In an age dominated by summer blockbusters and teenagers merrily chatting about the latest action fest, 12 Angry Men serves a simple yet powerful reminder that a solid script, a good story and vividly-drawn characters are all that matter at the end of the day.

To the untrained eye, the plot of 12 Angry Men probably appears pretty straightforward and quite boring. Do not be fooled by the apparent simplicity of the plot. Instead of being single-note, it's a multi-faceted and deeply provocative examination of the flawed nature of the justice system. There are twelve main characters altogether (this is usually a recipe for cinematic suicide); however the complex story and dynamite dialogue allows an audience to get to know each and every main character in the picture. Even more amazingly, the characters are never given names (until the very end when two men introduce each other). As an audience member, you will never realise that the characters are nameless. The proceedings are so mesmerising to the point that character names don't even matter.

The central narrative of 12 Angry Men focuses on a jury's intimate deliberations on a capital murder case. The case concerns a teenage Latino accused in the stabbing murder of his father. The defence and prosecution have rested, leaving only the jury to contemplate the facts and reach a verdict. A guilty verdict means an automatic death sentence. To the inexpert eye, it seems like a straightforward open-and-shut case: the defendant has a weak alibi, the key body of evidence points to the defendant's guilt and eyewitnesses have come forward, claiming to have seen the murder taking place.

Rather than chronicling the happenings of the trial and the pomposity of the attorneys, the film commences as the jurors are being released into the deliberation room. This sole location is where the film will remain for almost its entire length. As the twelve-man jury file into the cramped jury room of a hot afternoon, the men seem willing to take the case at face value and lock in the "guilty" verdict. The men are more concerned with getting to a ball game on time, and aren't even prepared to spend five minutes discussing the matter. However, the guilty verdict can only be reached if all twelve men agree on it. During the initial vote, eleven vote "guilty" whereas one member of the jury (Fonda) opts for the "not guilty" verdict. After the customary disparaging "there's always one!" comments are elicited, this juror begins to defend his decision: the boy may be guilty of murder, and probably is, but there is a sufficient amount of reasonable doubt to consider the "not guilty" verdict as the more appropriate decision. The rest of the film follows the escalating apprehension in the room, and the conflict between the jurors as they endeavour to reconcile their divergent beliefs concerning the guilt of the defendant.

In this day and age, 12 Angry Men is a forgotten gem overlooked by the current generation of movie-goers who tend to view the latest action/adventure flick in lieu of the classics. This is also a film with a fairly unexciting premise. It's also fairly offputting to set an entire film in the confines of a single room! Only three minutes in the film's 96-minute running time transpire outside the jury room. Needless to say, it'd take a filmmaking team of remarkable skill to achieve the desired result. Director Sidney Lumet was up to the task. He managed to have this film in the can after only 21 days of shooting! The director employed a number of subtle cinematic techniques to enhance the claustrophobic atmosphere of the jury room. As the film progressed, the camera levels kept descending. At first moderately higher than eye level, the camera steadily moves downwards to below eye level. In addition, the initial stages of the movie were achieved using wide shots. The shots progressively move further inwards as the film draws closer to its enthralling conclusion. Different lenses were also applied to elevate the claustrophobia levels. This approach serves the film well. One can almost feel the heat of the non air-conditioned room and the intensifying emotions of the jurors.

"Well, I'm not used to supposin'. I'm just a workin' man. My boss does all the supposin' - but I'll try one. Supposin' you talk us all out of this and, uh, the kid really did knife his father?"

Lumet does a commendable job of building tension. The director also manages to deal effectively with the social issues (including racial bigotry) which arise in the course of the heated discussions in the jury room. Lumet accomplishes a dreadfully gruelling task here; by sticking to the format of the play and allowing almost all the events to transpire within one room, while still managing to keep things fresh and rattling along at a brisk pace.

The film's script explodes like twelve sticks of dynamite. Snappy dialogue and realistic human depictions are the highlights of the screenplay. It's also a multi-faceted tale, unfolding on various different levels. On the first level it's a mystery. The interplay between the jurors throws up several feasible scenarios for the crime. Although differing theories as well as inconsistencies in the official statement are raised, we're left to draw our own conclusions. On another level the film is a deep scrutinisation of human character as revealed by the actions of the twelve grouchy men in dealing with their dilemma. On top of this, 12 Angry Men is a study of the failings of the justice system which relies on imperfect human beings to determine its outcome. These small-minded humans are left to judge who should live and who should die. The film acts as a worthwhile reminder that our justice system is based upon the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" and that all have the right to a fair trial. The suitably idealistic message of 12 Angry Men is pure and simple, yet it offers so much more. We witness our own personalities as fragments in the twelve jurors, often times letting personal biases and impatience cloud our judgment.

One of the most stirring parts of the film is when the provocative question is asked: "What if it were you that were on trial?" If my life was in the balance I'd hope a juror like Henry Fonda would be sitting in the jury box. It's disturbing to contemplate the fact that so many men are willing to dismiss the case within five minutes because of other priorities on their mind. What about the poor boy whose life is in question? What if he isn't guilty and is consequently executed on false charges? It's easy to put oneself into the place of both defendant and juror, which demonstrates the potency of both the story and the performances.

Henry Fonda leads the cast as the juror who reminds us that we shouldn't be afraid to go against the herd. His character opposes the opinions of eleven others! The cast is a powerhouse. All twelve members of the cast (there are a few other minor cast members, but they aren't on screen for any more than a minute each) are impeccable. They bounce off each other's lines naturally and credibly. Each actor is brilliant and serves a purpose. The cast is a mosaic of the typical Average Joes compelled to do jury duty. There are the younger ones, the elderly ones, the impatient ones, the foreigner, the old crone, and the smart one. Just simply sit back and enjoy the scorching performances of Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, Ed Begley, E.G. Marshall, Jack Warden, Martin Balsam, John Fleder, Jack Klugman, Edward Binns, Joseph Sweeney, George Voskovec and Robert Webber.

"Nobody has to prove otherwise. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. The defendant doesn't even have to open his mouth. That's in the Constitution."

12 Angry Men has been classified as a "legal thriller". It's also known as a courtroom drama. Sidney Lumet's directorial debut is a sizzling courtroom drama done right: easy on the courtroom, heavy on the drama. Lumet went on to make such films as Dog Day Afternoon, Network and The Verdict. Not many of the world's greatest directors can boast a debut of this quality. Not even Alfred Hitchcock got it right the first time...neither did Steven Spielberg or George Lucas or Martin Scorsese. Even M. Night Shyamalan tried unsuccessfully before receiving critical acclaim with The Sixth Sense. 12 Angry Men is a lesson on the perfect film debut. No first-time director has ever done it better. 12 Angry Men is a masterpiece. It's an engrossing film that consumes you in its happenings. Filmed in less than a month on a measly budget, this shining example of efficiency has held up amazingly well for more than 50 years. I consider this an absolute must-see movie that's being overlooked far too often.

"In this world only the strong survive. The weak get crushed like insects."

Shine is a deceitfully straightforward and disposable title for an unreservedly amazing motion picture. This low-budget Australian feature illuminates the strength of the human spirit and the triumph of the heart as it depicts the tremendous courage of a troubled individual. The story it conveys is incredibly poignant - a young man driven to breaking point by his father, and defying his father's wishes in order to pursue his dreams. Provocative, enthralling and potent, Shine offers a tale of insurgence and individuality through the eyes of a pianist whose sole form of self-expression is in the ivory keys of a piano. Shine may superficially appear uninteresting and depressing - yet, quite simply, it's anything but. Writer-director Scott Hicks' biopic is an astonishingly well-made saga of triumph over adversity and the destructive power of love that's compelling viewing; leaving no emotional chain unyanked.

At the Sundance Film Festival of 1996, Shine was among the hottest properties being offered. This unforgettable tour de force ignited a distributor bidding war between Harvey Weinstein of Miramax and Bob Shaye of New Line. Upon its eventual theatrical release, Shine was acclaimed by critics and movie-goers alike. Despite its low-budget origins, this film was among the must-see movies of 1996. It earned 9 AFI (Australian Film Institute) Awards, including those for Best Picture, Best Actor (Geoffrey Rush) and Best Supporting Actor (Armin Mueller-Stahl). Noah Taylor was additionally nominated for Best Actor, competing against Rush.

Astonishingly, Shine even reached the Academy Awards! Geoffrey Rush received the Oscar for Best Actor for his memorable performance as the mentally unstable adult David. The film was nominated for additional Oscars - Best Picture, Best Director (Scott Hicks), Best Supporting Actor (Armin Mueller-Stahl), Best Screenplay, Best Editing and Best Music. Although it only gleaned a single Oscar at the ceremony...for a little Aussie movie it's extremely impressive nonetheless. On top of this, it also acquired an incalculable amount of prestigious awards worldwide. This includes awards at the BAFTAs and the Golden Globes (Rush continually won Best Actor). After viewing the first frame of Shine, it's already obvious why it garnered so much acclaim. This is a testament to the glorious filmmaking in all departments.

The film is a fictionalised account of the life of Australian pianist David Helfgott. Shine chronicles David's life from childhood (played by Alex Rafalowicz), through to adolescence (Noah Taylor), and onwards to adulthood (Geoffrey Rush). David's father, Peter (Mueller-Stahl), is a Polish Jew who settled in Australia following his devastating experience during the Holocaust. The anguish of losing loved ones impels Peter to keep his family together at all costs, and his drive to teach David music from a young age is a direct reaction to his own father's dislike of music. As a little boy, David is a child prodigy who shows phenomenal promise. After performing at a school recital, music teacher Ben Rosen (Bell) notices David's obvious talent and offers to teach him. As an adolescent, David wins several competitions and is offered a scholarship for the Royal College of Music in London. Even despite his father's pungent objections, David departs for London...and Peter summarily disowns his son. In London his brilliance flourishes, and he opts to attempt a notoriously difficult piece of music. The cumulative pressure overwhelms David, and after playing a perfect rendition of Rachmaninoff's Third Concerto he suffers a mental breakdown. Ten years on, David resides in mental institutions who frown upon the piano in fear of a relapse. An unlikely romance eventually brings stability, and through several twists of fate (more unlikely than those told in the film) he makes his return to the concert stage.

Gillian: "How do you feel?"

David: "I'm shocked, stunned and amazed."

In 1986, Scott Hicks read a newspaper story about David Helfgott - a pianist who performed a flawless classical catalogue at a Perth restaurant. Hicks' interest was immediately ignited, and he arranged to witness Helfgott in concert. For the majority of the following year, Hicks worked to earn Helfgott's trust with the goal in mind of committing his story to celluloid. Jan Sardi's screenplay was admittedly fictionalised to an extent, in fact Hicks is emphatic Shine is not a straight biography despite including real people and events. Although it'd be interesting to behold a more faithful telling of David Helfgott's life & career, Shine is 1996's most stirring and inspirational movie. The decidedly inaccurate story is both powerful and affecting. It's riveting from the first frame 'til the last, which is a combination of the wonderful script, the engaging performances, the focused direction and the banquet of striking locations. The passion for the music incessantly clattering around in David's head fuels the film. Handsomely photographed concert scenes are bequeathed with the energy of a shootout in a John Woo picture. It's pianist vs. music in a contest of wills, and this is embodied by swirling, dizzying camera work.

Sardi and Hicks elected to tell the story of David Helfgott in a non-chronological manner. While the structure isn't totally jumbled - ala Pulp Fiction - the film is predominantly told through flashbacks. This bestows the movie with a unique dynamic. Fortunately, there is no voice-over narration - the proceedings speak for themselves without the support of a disembodied voice adding "valuable" comments. Those behind the camera have made few, if any, mistakes with Shine - and the fashion of its unique presentation is just one example of a perfect creative decision.

Love can flaunt various different faces, and Shine illustrates two of the most extreme. The first is Peter Helfgott's compulsive, domineering love. Mueller-Stahl's performance challenges a viewer to label Peter as just another abusive father attempting to live vicariously through the talents of his son. Peter can be consoling and gentle every so often, and there's no denying that he holds genuine feelings for David. Nevertheless there are instances when his outbreaks cause violence, and cruel results are the outcome.

The other face of love is the healing, undemanding one - as personified in a middle-aged astrologer named Gillian (Redgrave). As the two fall in love, Gillian offers her strength and understanding to David in order to help him rebuild his life. The final scene depicts the synthesis of both these faces as David attempts to at long last bring closure to one of the great, unresolved issues of his troubled life.

Ardently character-driven from the opening sequence, Shine is carried by phenomenal performances right down the line. Geoffrey Rush makes short, infrequent appearances during the film's first half before being brought to the fore for the film's final half. Rush's Academy Award was well-earned (as was his AFI Award, for that matter). His stuttering delivery exemplifies the unbridled genius of the adult David Helfgott. Noah Taylor was also nominated for an AFI Award as the adolescent David. Even though the two actors worked together to perfect specific mutual mannerisms, each offered a unique interpretation of the character. Taylor is young, energetic, and highly-strung. Rush, on the other hand, presents a recuperating David who - while still hyperkinetic - is progressively learning to face the world as opposed to hiding from it.

David's childhood is dominated by Armin Mueller-Stahl as Peter Helfgott; a man who recognised his son's remarkable abilities and pushed him to practice and learn. Fatherly love becomes single-mindedness - when David is accepted into prestigious international music schools, his father refuses him permission to go due to an obsession with family unity, strength and pride. "You will destroy your family!" he screams.

The supporting cast includes Alex Rafalowicz as a wonderfully assured infant David, Googie Withers, Lynn Redgrave, Nicholas Bell and John Gielgud as a crusty, cravat-sporting piano teacher.

"No-one will love you like me, no-one like me."

Shine primarily concerns building strength from weakness. It's inspirational due to the fact David fights his way back. He never renounces, and his triumph becomes ours. David may not have experienced these precise events, but he most certainly endured the basic outline - becoming an exceptional pianist, collapsing, and putting himself back together again. This basic structure alone is astonishing, and perfectly conveys the consequences of a strong human heart. Shine is extraordinarily compelling for essentially a character study of one man, and director Scott Hicks masterfully uses the camera to capture an inner turmoil. The acting is immaculate (Rush's frantic babbling as the insane David perfectly encapsulates the nature of the real-life David), the classical soundtrack is stirring, and the story is told with warmth and humour that prevents it from being the self-pitying wallow it could easily have become. The protagonist veers between poignant depression and touching eccentricity, coming across as an adorable innocent and giving rise to an uplifting ending. The picture also presents its own inimitable impression of genius, arguing that even the greatest talent needs to be nurtured. Through the power of David Helfgott's virtuoso musical performances, Shine illustrates that there are other, more effective ways of self-expression than mere speech.

"You must play as if there's no tomorrow."