Generated quite a lot of interest upto and during it's release but the enthusiasm dampened once people had actually seen the film. Rather tedious, with a weak pay-off and silly humour, but it nevertheless has some hilarious moments.
Reviews
20 Reviews
Strange Days
(1995)
Definitely one to own!
21 March 1999
This film instantly had a "cult" feel to it. But that does not mean it is anything like "The Rocky Horror Picture Show". Ralph Fiennes is one of my favourite actors and although the film is too long there are plenty of spectacular scenes which hold your interest until the startling climax. Juliette Lewis is a fox, too.
GoldenEye
(1995)
Fantastic New Beginning for Bond
21 March 1999
Of course, I'm biased, but this film is fantastic - the villain, Alec Trevelyan (Sean Bean), who almost had more money than God, is excellent, the women are sexy, and the inclusion of Robby Coltrane and Minnie Driver as his mistress is pure genius. All the classic Bond elements are back in place, and the film spawned an amazing N64 game. Pity about Tomorrow Never Dies, though.
Before Sunrise
(1995)
Unpretentious romance between two young people.
21 March 1999
This is a lovely film about two young people (Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy) who meet by chance on the Eurostar and decide to spend an evening together before going their separate ways. It has no plot (in the mainstream sense), but don't let that deter you. The whole film is spent following the young couple around the city of Venice, whilst they talk about such subjects as reincarnation, ex- girlfriends/boyfriends, sex, politics, religion and love.
Groundhog Day
(1993)
What a charming romance!
21 March 1999
A great comedy starring the erratic Bill Murray. Basically he re-lives the same day over and over again, until he manages to get it right. This is one of those films which leaves you thinking about the immense possibilities of the premise, a bit like "The Truman Show". This film is great as a comedy, a drama and a sweet romance.
The Player
(1992)
Want to know about behind-the-scenes Hollywood? Look no further!
21 March 1999
This is a very funny film, a black comedy that also serves as a mystery and top-rate thriller. It is essentially a satire of Hollywood, and of the inept and insecure "players" that run it. There are cameos from dozens of real celebrities, such as Bruce Willis, John Cusack and Burt Reynolds. It is an essential movie for anyone with an interest in the industry, and although the plot flags in places, most people will enjoy the film.
L.A. Story
(1991)
Steve Martin at his best!
21 March 1999
This film is destined to become a classic as more people come to realise its strengths. This is top comedy courtesy of genius Steve Martin, and although there is a sweet romance somewhere in the screenplay, the film's raison d'etre is the hilarious depiction of life in LA. There are numerous standout moments, and some interesting cameos from the likes of Patrick Stewart (as a fascist restaurateur), Chevvy Chase (turned away from the restaurant by Stewart) and Woody Harrelson as an evil producer.
Delicatessen
(1991)
A weird, fascinating french fantasy.
21 March 1999
Get this for a weird plot: Set in a run-down apartment building sometime in a dystopian, post-apocalyptic future, the landlord, who is also a butcher, keeps the neighbourhood supplied with meat by slicing up applicants for the job of assistant in his shop. His daughter, who falls in love with the newest applicant Louison (Dominique Pinon) helps keep the butcher from chopping up Louison until he learns of the danger he is in, and escapes with the help of a band of vegetarian freedom fighters, and his new-found love. It is an incredibly bizarre film that contains painstaking details of the lives of some of the apartment's peculiar residents.
Dead Calm
(1989)
Suspense reigns supreme in this smashing film.
21 March 1999
Vastly underrated by most people, this is an intense, psychologically complex, cold-blooded film with plenty of suspense and a macabre sense of humour. Sam Neill and Nicole Kidman are excellent, and Billy Zane (better known for his role as Cal Hockley in Titanic) is vile and insane. In my opinion, this is an excellent example of how to direct a film well.
Withnail & I
(1987)
Everyone will enjoy this film!
21 March 1999
It's about a couple of unemployed actors who visit the countryside in an effort to 'rejuvenate'. Poverty and squalor is the name of the game here, and the two generally live on a diet of pills, booze, meths and grass. To really appreciate it you have to be drunk, but it is nevertheless a big favourite with just about anyone who enjoys a good comedy.
Aliens
(1986)
Probably the best movie ever made.
21 March 1999
Well, what can I say? This has to be one of the most exciting, action-packed and memorable films ever made, and hasn't dated a bit since its release in 1986. This time, it's war. Ripley is back, and so are the aliens- lots of them. Of course, the effects and creatures are nothing less than outstanding, but one of the best things about the film are the marines who go to battle with the aliens. Each soldier is extremely well written and the scenes aboard the Sulako, where we are introduced to the various characters, are fun to watch. When the action begins, it never lets up, right until the very end. My only complaint is that nothing this good has appeared in cinemas since.
This Is Spinal Tap
(1984)
The satire is razor sharp!
21 March 1999
The definitive Rock satire. This hilarious pseudo-documentary is all about a British rock group (Spinal Tap), and it spoofs everything, from the spontaneously combusting drummers to the amplifier that goes to 11, not 10. This rockumentary is a classic, watch it and get converted.
The Terminator
(1984)
The original Arnold action flick!
21 March 1999
A good film to watch every now and then to see how a film made with a miniscule amount of money can end up looking like a big-budget extravaganza. It was the film that made Arnold Schwarzenegger famous, and also put ace director James Cameron on the map. It is surprisingly fresh to watch 15 years later, and most notable are some good effects, and excellent stop-motion animation that must have required a heck of a lot of work. However, it is obvious that this film alludes to many other works.
The Thing
(1982)
Like lots of gore?
21 March 1999
Not as good as it thinks it is, this is a sub-standard horror flick with plenty of gruesome effects and scary transformations. It comes from director John Carpenter who otherwise has an excellent track record. The worst mistake that this movie made was wasting an excellent task- they are not really given a chance to act, instead, they grimace at all the (fantastic) special effects. Plus, the ending is far too vague.
Alien
(1979)
Space doesn't get much scarier than this!
21 March 1999
The first installment of the greatest science fiction saga ever. Alien was made in 1979 when Sigourney Weaver was a little-known actress, and she makes a lasting impression in this film. As you will no doubt know, this is an intense, claustrophobic film set aboard the space freighter Nostromo. An alien manages to get aboard the ship, via John Hurt, and slowly each crew member is picked off by the creature, until only Ellen Ripley (Weaver) is left to fend for herself. We only rarely catch glimpses of the creature, which makes it all the more scary when we do see it.
Casino Royale
(1967)
Complete Rubbish.
15 March 1999
Casino Royale is a mess. Originally intended to be a "serious" Bond Film, it was felt it could not compete with Eon's Bonds so it was turned into a spoof. I bought the video myself recently, because it was on offer for £4.99. I regret paying that much for a film which can be described as complete rubbish. It is disjointed, dizzying, embarrassing and chaotic. There are one or two bright scenes, which I cannot particularly remember, but on the whole, you get the impression the film was flung together by someone who had lost interest in what they were doing. The film had five directors, which says something in itself. Most agonising about this pile of unadulterated tosh is the sad fact that what was probably intended to be funny turned out not to be even faintly amusing. The final scene is probably one of the most confusing climaxes ever, and is badly edited to make it seem even worse. The £13 Million this film cost to make is a sad waste of money, which could have been better spent on something else.
Rent it or buy it if you must, but be warned that you will probably be wasting your money.
Rent it or buy it if you must, but be warned that you will probably be wasting your money.
Star Trek: Insurrection
(1998)
Genuinely Entertaining. What a movie!
7 January 1999
I would say that this movie rivals the skill of the first "Next Generation" movie, First Contact. If anything, the dialogue is more refined and the humour, of which there is a great deal, is well timed and raised smiles at suitable points in the movie. Many have criticised the writers for either making the humour too silly or, for not daring to take the jokes to the belly-laugh level. Personally, I think the film is richer for the homour, which seems natural, not forced, and generally hit its targets. After all though, it's not a comedy.
Insurrection is a movie which displays far more humanity than the cold, but nevertheless enthralling, First Contact. To compare the movies is difficult, as they are very different, and opinions will inevitably clash. Both movies have a different agenda, I think.
I would dare to say that Insurrection would do a better job at converting people to the Star Trek "cause" than would any of the other films. Before watching, I knew little about Star Trek, and it really stoked my interest in the series. In evaluating Insurrection I realised that the film has several outstanding set-pieces, some of which are very memorable, such as the high-speed chase between Picard and Data through the cloud layers, with The Captain trying to coax Data into performing a scene from Gilbert and Sullivan's HMS Pinafore. The scene is outrageous, and very surreal, and extremely well done. Another example would be the attack of the flying miniature transporter robots, where Worf really gets to prove how brave, and violent, he really is.
Finally, the acting is universally good, and Stewart puts in a performance of depth, although not as impressive as in First Contact. The plot of Insurrection is slight, and alone doesn't manage to hold the attention. But the other elements that go into producing a good movie, such as the script, acting, directing, and, dare I say it, special effects, add up to an entertaining whole.
I think that free of the limitations imposed by the "classic trek" rules, and the campy acting that dogged the earlier Trek flicks, the Star Trek franchise will flourish, and this movie shows how much a cast enjoying what they are doing adds to the fun and feel-good factor of watching the film with a cinema full of enthralled viewers. Well done Jonathan Frakes!
Insurrection is a movie which displays far more humanity than the cold, but nevertheless enthralling, First Contact. To compare the movies is difficult, as they are very different, and opinions will inevitably clash. Both movies have a different agenda, I think.
I would dare to say that Insurrection would do a better job at converting people to the Star Trek "cause" than would any of the other films. Before watching, I knew little about Star Trek, and it really stoked my interest in the series. In evaluating Insurrection I realised that the film has several outstanding set-pieces, some of which are very memorable, such as the high-speed chase between Picard and Data through the cloud layers, with The Captain trying to coax Data into performing a scene from Gilbert and Sullivan's HMS Pinafore. The scene is outrageous, and very surreal, and extremely well done. Another example would be the attack of the flying miniature transporter robots, where Worf really gets to prove how brave, and violent, he really is.
Finally, the acting is universally good, and Stewart puts in a performance of depth, although not as impressive as in First Contact. The plot of Insurrection is slight, and alone doesn't manage to hold the attention. But the other elements that go into producing a good movie, such as the script, acting, directing, and, dare I say it, special effects, add up to an entertaining whole.
I think that free of the limitations imposed by the "classic trek" rules, and the campy acting that dogged the earlier Trek flicks, the Star Trek franchise will flourish, and this movie shows how much a cast enjoying what they are doing adds to the fun and feel-good factor of watching the film with a cinema full of enthralled viewers. Well done Jonathan Frakes!
Tomorrow Never Dies
(1997)
When is a Bond Film not a Bond Film anymore?
22 December 1998
When is a Bond Film not a Bond Film anymore? I'm not sure I like the way the Bond films are heading. While GoldenEye belongs near the top of the Bond ladder and was certainly in harmony with the rest of the series, this latest effort by disagreeable director Roger Spottiswoode feels more like a run-of-the mill action film than a subtle, intelligent espionage thriller. It has some very mundane, over-long action scenes, and in terms of the traditional Bond elements, the producers have got it all wrong. The female members of the cast are, on the whole, undesirable, and the Wai Lin character looks like she just stepped out of another film, and seems to me to be ridiculously out of place. Sure, the uninitiated have claimed that she is Bond's equal, a woman who can look after herself, and doesn't shout "James! Don't leave me!" every time she's in trouble. This was done to better effect in The Spy Who Loved Me, where Bond was teamed up with Agent Anya Amasova (Triple-X). Instead, here, Michelle Yeoh has no charm, no sex appeal and makes a pigs ear out of her role. She is clearly not in Bond's league: She tries to gain entry to a top secret room using the (alarmed) door, setting the alarm off and putting both her and Bond in extreme danger, and she's supposed to be good at her job. Yeah, right. A lot of what we see in the rest of the movie is conveyor belt popcorn, and the plot is laughably thin. In terms of villains, Jonathan Pryce is too camp to be a threat to Bond, and Gotz Otto as Mr. Stamper would make a better living doing Calvin Klein ads instead of trying to be a vile henchman. While it's nice to see Desmond Llewellyn back again, he'd be far more sensible to use his technical know-how to design a chairlift for himself, instead of building cars for James Bond. Niggles aside, there are some decent moments in the film. The teaser, although nowhere near as good as GoldenEye's, is reasonably exciting and cleverly introduces us to some of the main characters The only thing that allows this film to rise out of the sub Die Hard genre is the outstanding car chase in the multi-story parking building. This short scene is accompanied by a thumping soundtrack by The Propellerheads and summarises everything we have come to expect from a Bond film- thrills, excitement, gadgets, some great stunts, Bond outwitting his captors and escaping, and a satisfying pay-off. This very weak entry into the series is not enough to make me lose my faith in Bond just yet, but if the Producers attempt to bring us more of the same with the next Bond film, i.e. numb the audience with banal action, and attempt a pastiche of Con Air, I might think again about my loyalty to Her Majesty's Secret Service.
House of Games
(1987)
A stylish and extraordinary film
9 November 1998
Get ready for it: This is one of my favourite films of all time. I am relatively unaware of David Mamet's (writer and director) other works but after having watched this film half a dozen times(it's always a joy to watch), I can say without hesitation that he is a genius. This film is extremely well written, and quickly draws you in to its milieu of deceit, con-artistry and back room hustles. The feel of the film is very similar to The Sting (1973) and it also pays homage to film noir.
It's quite a psychologically complex film and will definitely get you thinking about the various plot twists and motives of the shady characters. It is slightly predictable at times but the shocking climax is always exciting to watch.
Generally, the acting is superb- especially Joe Mantegna- but someone who I watched the film with remarked to me that it's not a good idea to have a heroine (Lindsay Crouse) who is not only a gambler, a smoker and a thief but also sports a bad 80's hairdo. I agree, but I think she is nevertheless outstanding in the role.
The less you know about the plot of this film, the better, just like Mamet's most recent film, The Spanish Prisoner, because the ending will be even more impressive. Just sit back and be prepared to be taken for a ride by a movie that comes dangerously close to brilliance.
It's quite a psychologically complex film and will definitely get you thinking about the various plot twists and motives of the shady characters. It is slightly predictable at times but the shocking climax is always exciting to watch.
Generally, the acting is superb- especially Joe Mantegna- but someone who I watched the film with remarked to me that it's not a good idea to have a heroine (Lindsay Crouse) who is not only a gambler, a smoker and a thief but also sports a bad 80's hairdo. I agree, but I think she is nevertheless outstanding in the role.
The less you know about the plot of this film, the better, just like Mamet's most recent film, The Spanish Prisoner, because the ending will be even more impressive. Just sit back and be prepared to be taken for a ride by a movie that comes dangerously close to brilliance.
The Living Daylights
(1987)
A classic Bond Film.
8 November 1998
It has everything that a good Bond Film should have: A good story, a beautiful girl, some spectacular action and a great Bond. I never liked this film at first- I was annoyed that Roger Moore had been replaced by someone who played Bond straight and down-to-earth, but recently I have come to realise it's strengths. Dalton is a talented actor, and this film reminds me of the gritty films of the Early 60's. No silly humour here, although there are some hilarious moments. Maryam d'Abo is very beautiful as the love interest, and Jeroen Crabbé is great, but not really up there with Goldfinger. The best things about the film in my opinion is the music (John Barry) which really puts an edge on the action scenes, and the amazing pre-credits sequence, which is what Bond films are all about.
Tell Your Friends