bbhlthph Reviews

9 Songs (2004)

Why did this sensitive story of a contemporary affair raise such a storm?.

[7/10 · 12 November 2010]

This is another of the numerous films which chronicle the history of a short affair. Not surprisingly such films became very popular during World War II; and for me 'Brief Encounter' remains the finest erotic film ever created, but in its style and pacing '9 Songs' owes more to '9 1/2 weeks' which provided a template that has been followed by many more recent films. In '9 Songs" the spacing element that controls the timing of the affair is a series of nine rock concerts attended by the couple; but their relationship, although very fresh, is not as impersonal as it was in '9 1/2 weeks'. This film brings out the very real problem young people today face in building a career at the time when strong biological urges dictate that their first call should be to create a family. Whilst not taking sides in any obvious way, it is made very clear that the demands of society can often be impossible to reconcile with our instinctive urges. It features a young man who works as a research scientist in Antarctica except for brief periods of leave in London, England. A common attraction for rock music leads to friendship with a student from the U.S.A., who will only be in London for a very limited time before she has to return to the U.S.A. They can either ignore each other or respond to their mutual attraction whilst recognising that any continuing relationship appears virtually impossible, and they choose to accept the latter alternative. This award winning film provides a very sensitive and thought provoking glimpse of the type of relationship that can develop under such circumstances.

Like many similar films, '9 Songs' started as a film festival project. It was featured at Sundance, the Toronto Festival and also at San Sebastian where it was an award winner. It then received a limited general circulation on the strength of its festival record, but its backers probably recognised from the start that its greatest returns should come from DVD sales, a situation which often makes it hard to decide whether the theatrical release or the Director's Cut DVD should be regarded as the definitive version. Whilst the latter is usually sexually more graphic, the greater differences in this case appear to be regionally based.

The storm began when Michael Winterbottom, the Director, went on record as wishing to blur or break the distinction between softcore and hardcore sex which is currently maintained by the mainstream movie industry. I have strong reservations about this. Films are created by actors trained to simulate every kind of activity and emotion. There seems no reason why the simulation of sexual activity should necessarily be any less satisfactory for a normal audience than its actual performance.. An actor is never going to be asked to kill or wound his colleagues, we readily accept that when this appears to take place it is simulated. Today the same is true even of sequences involving the apparent death of animals, and there is no reason why it should not also be true of explicit sexual activities. However I watched the unrated Canadian version of the DVD which runs for five minutes less than at least one of the versions referred to in other IMDb user reviews, and did not include some sequences IMDb viewers in Europe have discussed. It contained nothing that I have not also seen in many other mainstream films. Those who are uncomfortable with any nudity or any simulation of sexual activity will of course choose to give this DVD a miss - others need feel no concern. The film is a serious attempt to take a realistic look at one of the problems associated with the society in which we live today, and in my view drawing attention to such problems can do nothing but good. My version of the DVD made no implicit attempt to preach to us - it simply presented an entertaining and well made story which brought out some of the problems inherent in our present day lifestyles.

Basic requirements for viewer enjoyment are fully satisfied. The film-script is largely believable; the cinematography is competently done (some of the sequences featuring Antarctica are alone sufficient to justify watching the film); the acting, particularly by the young couple who carry most of the acting burden right through the entire film, was, I felt, remarkably natural; and the all important rock music sound track (which I am too deaf to assess for myself) has been commended by many others. This film is not intended to be a tearjerker, the couple concerned knew the implications of the situation in which they found themselves and got as much pleasure and satisfaction out of their brief romance as they could possibly have expected. But many older viewers who have been blessed with lifelong supportive relationships starting at a similar stage in their own lives, will probably look back over their own good fortune, and may even experience a hint of damp eyes from sympathy with the dilemma faced by the couple portrayed here.

Unfortunately however, whilst remaining an enjoyable movie, '9 Songs' was too documentary in style and too short to enable its principal characters to become adequately developed, a problem that also led to unacceptably frequent and over-abrupt switches from domestic bliss to frenzied rock concerts - filmed in totally incompatible ways. I first intended to give '9 Songs' an IMDb rating of 6, but I unexpectedly found the film quite hard to forget - not because of any of the controversial sexual sequences, but because of its treatment of an affair that circumstances would never allow to become a romance. This aspect of the film has had little discussion here, but because of it I am raising my rating to 7.

Evening (2007)

A well made film which fails to meet expectations.

[5/10 · 12 November 2010]

'Evening' is a film to ponder over rather than to enjoy. It currently has an IMDb user rating of 6.5 stars, but in general it has only received a moderate reception from film critics. We are told that it is a film about an elderly lady who is on her deathbed throughout the entire movie and is looking back on her life to review the mistakes that she feels she has made. Supported by two daughters who had different fathers, she tells us very early on that she has had 'several' husbands. The film opens when in a half conscious state she keeps speaking the name of another man of whom neither of her daughters are even aware. The story behind this emerges slowly through a series of half remembered flashbacks - often in a way that is quite difficult to follow on first viewing. 'Evening' is clearly intended to be a film of some significance, its theme, the self-assessment of ones own life as it draws to a close, is a universal one, and it must be reviewed on this basis - not simply by a trite comment that it was less (or more) enjoyable than expected. Unfortunately the unfolding of this story is an integral part of its appeal, so a detailed discussion would completely spoil the film for anyone yet to see it. Rather than this I have decided to restrict my comments to impressions formed when first watching it, followed by a brief assessment made after the second viewing which I found was necessary before I could fully follow the story. Readers should be aware that 'Evening' is much more polished than most new films and this critique may therefore not adequately reflect its very considerable qualities.

1. 'Evening' is ultimately a 'soap opera' - probably intended to appeal primarily to women - but it is more profound than most films of this type and should provides equally enjoyable viewing for both sexes.

2. Good points include its overall visual appeal and superb photography (which reminded me of Jack Cardiff's work at many points). Also I am hard of hearing and I appreciated that the optional DVD subtitles were firmly located in the black band below the wide-screen image. Oh how many fine films have been spoiled for me by a line of script superimposed along the bottom edge of the image and often unreadable.

3. Next in importance to the general image quality is the acting, the cast here were given the opportunity to create real characters - not cardboard cut-outs - and they largely succeeded in this. Most films that include so many great actors feature several cameo performances presented largely in isolation, but here the interaction between these characters was exceptional. In particular I must rate a reminiscences sequence between Vanessa Redgrave (Anne) and Meryl Streep (Lila) as truly superb cinematography.

4. The flashbacks feature a Newport "Blue blood' family which still believes in arranged marriages to secure the continuance of the family line and fortune. This is not P.C. today and is intrinsically hard to fully accept.

5. The sound track is an abomination - whenever a Director fails to appreciate the proper impact of periods of silence many scenes become ruined by totally intrusive background music. If I want to see a musical I will pick one and enjoy what I am expecting, but too many dramas today are presented as half baked musicals and I have no time for this.

6. The flashbacks are not presented as fragmentary dreamlike recollections but as an ongoing almost continuous story, which is very confusing

7. Much of the sequencing seemed all wrong. Anne on her deathbed appeared as if she should have had teenage grandchildren around her; instead one of her daughters was just considering starting a family. Anne tells us that she has had several husbands but the story as presented seems very incomplete as all the flashbacks relate to one of her pre-wedding romances.

My final assessment after later consideration:.

This film would have been better scripted sequentially. with the story gradually developing, and viewers left unaware of how things worked out in advance. This would have eliminated a lot of confusion, but might have conflicted even more with the original novel (which I have not read). Many database users have commented that the film already departs too far from this novel - but they have also suggested that the novel as written is almost unfilmable. Whether based on history, literature or drama; a film must never distort its source, but there is a solution to that problem.. Instead of claiming to represent the source material, the film can claim only to be a story inspired by it. By mutual agreement the necessary recognition can be paid in this way without inhibiting the screenwriter from doing his job properly.

Ultimately we go to the cinema to be entertained, and I have to report that despite all its qualities I did not enjoy this film as much as 'Soft Fruit' - an Australian film with a very similar theme but clearly made with a much lower budget. Directed by Christina Andreef and produced by Jane Campion (the conjoint creators of 'The Piano'); this was filmed with a much less experienced cast, but somehow by the time it ended I found I was feeling as if I really knew the characters (and was wanting to root for them too!}. This never happened with the much more reserved characters portrayed in 'Evening" - leaving the viewer with something of the feeling of having watched a documentary presentation which gave no real sense of involvement.

Himalaya (1999)

Please try not to miss this masterpiece of the cinema.

[8/10 · 6 September 2010]

This is a superb example of the film genre which originally did most to establish cinematography as an important new art medium - it is a visually very striking tribute to a traditional lifestyle that is most unlikely to be able to continue for very much longer, and that would be lost forever if not recorded on film. Even back when feature films were still regarded as only poor shadows of stage presentations such films had already established themselves as a unique and irreplaceable adjunct to written or hand drawn records.

For many years documentaries were probably the type of film most extensively made and, although the development of lightweight equipment that could be used in all weathers only took place very slowly, many anthropologically important works such as "Nanook of the North" or "Legong - Dance of the Virgins" began to appear soon after WW-I. Some were true documentaries where the photographer tried not to interfere with the normal activity pattern of his subjects, whilst in others the cast are deliberately acting out such activities for the exclusive benefit of the camera. Nanook of the North is an example of the former group whilst Dance of the Virgins has a story line built around the traditional ritual dances that are the principal cultural activity of the Balinese villagers who acted in the film. Himalaya is also an example of this latter type of documentary. It features the people of the Dolpo region, a high altitude plateau situated on the border between Nepal and Tibet in the Himalayas and so remote that its population appears to have only been estimated (somewhere between 5,000 and 18,000 according to Wikipedia). At an altitude of around 4,000 m this is one of the highest agricultural areas in the world with poor mountain soil, extremes of weather and a very short growing season, so not surprisingly the communities living there need to supplement their own food production through trading. For many centuries the traditional method has been to take salt (plentiful in Tibet) to Nepal by an annual Yak caravan trek across the mountains following the primitive trails developed to permit such trade, and to exchange this salt for grain. When Eric Valli made his documentary in 1999 this traditional practice was still being followed in a way unchanged for many centuries, but he appreciated that it was a fragile lifestyle and wanted to capture it for the world in case it came under threat. Since then a two prong threat has developed - the absorption of Tibet by the Peoples Republic of China has led to attempts to close the Nepalese Tibetian border which makes it harder for the Dolpo people to acquire the salt needed to continue this form of trade, and alternative sources of salt from other parts of the world have reduced the dependence of the Nepalese on the Dolpo caravans. It is hard to be optimistic that major changes will not become inevitable - a poignant concern whilst watching this beautiful film..

Valli's team must have spent a long time getting to know the community and achieving a concensus on the story which would be presented. The final product is so realistic and documentary in effect that one almost feels it must be auto-biographical, but I believe this is unlikely as it would then have threatened to re-open the conflicts shown with potentially disastrous effects. It is much more likely to be a re-creation of legends and oral history from sometime in the past. It features an aged tribal leader Tinli, whose family has held this position for many generations, ready to hand over to his son just when the young man is killed in an accident. We learn that the role of tribal leader is not quite the hereditary right of this family, being subject to community approval which is based on proved ability to provide strong leadership - most effectively demonstrated by successfully leading their vital annual yak caravans. The old man's grandson is only a child - his other son is a monk in a Buddhist monastery with no experience to match the communities needs. He decides to once more lead the caravan himself and determines the departure date ordained by the gods. The community is split, many supporting another leader who spurns supernatural guidance and plans to leave earlier. Ultimately two caravans leave four days apart. They rejoin near their destination, the old leader dies of his exertions and the split in the community is healed. - this simple but very effective story provides a framework upon which Valli has created a memorable film that can be recommended unreservedly. The Himalayan scenery is unsurpassed and creates a must-see for all mountain lovers, but the most memorable sequences are those where we see (and experience) the vitality of the community when discussing the wisest course of action to follow..The ultimate triumphant success this almost unique movie achieves is the way in which its viewers come to feel they really know Tinle, the aged leader, and his contemporaries - this is an experience which is truly not to be lightly passed over. .

For me the climactic sequences were those showing Tinle's followers waist deep in snow, battling their way through a storm which had created white-out conditions.. One could not but reflect that even the short time interval between the grain harvest and the onset of winter is always subject to storms which would render mountain travel hazardous or even impossible, Over several centuries many of the caravans must have just disappeared in such storms without trace. Every time this happened it would have been a very traumatic loss to the community concerned. What determination and trust in their gods must have contributed to their survival on such occasions. There are lessons for us all in this!

Angel of Passion (1991)

Whatever went wrong here?

[2/10 · 6 September 2010]

The IMDb does not provide a great deal of information about this 1995 film except that it has an 'R' MPAA rating, has achieved an impressive IMDb viewers rating of 1.4 stars and has a theme based on the fantasies which may be experienced by anyone hovering between life and death. In the past I have watched one or two films with similar themes which provoked some quite challenging thoughts so, when I saw this was scheduled for showing on a local TV channel recently, I decided to take a chance and watch it despite the low rating. A few comments follow, but my principal interest is to see whether other IMDb users can help fill in some of the gaps currently existing on this database.

This movie was based on a series of sequences showing a young woman undergoing a preliminary time of death interview by a 'Guardian' responsible for assessing her life. These were filmed reasonably adequately using soft focus, low contrast, muted colours and lots of swirling mist. But all of the associated flashback sequences were totally unacceptable, their quality was appalling and even worse they differed so drastically amongst each other that the viewer was left to constantly fiddle with contrast, chroma, brightness, gamma or hue controls every few moments. If this was the fault of the film it deserves to be very quickly forgotten, but producers put a lot of effort and money into creating a film and I cannot think that this is so. It seems more likely that the TV station concerned transmitted it with all their video controls badly mis-set. Despite these problems I felt it had the potential to be a marginally adequate minor film and, more important, that its final sequences provided an unexpected ending which was challenging enough to deserve mention here. But as I saw it on television the quality was way below what would be expected from any film destined for public release. It seems unlikely that there will be a DVD release soon, and I would be interested to know whether this film has been previously shown in a more acceptable form elsewhere. As seen, it was reminiscent of the output from a short film school project, although its R rating suggests that it was not made exclusively for TV and at some point must have also received a cinema release.

Warning:! Although this film may possibly be worth more, on the basis of what I actually saw its present IMDb rating of 1.4 might be judged by some viewers as a little generous.

Battle of Britain (1969)

The Window of Time....

[10/10 · 6 September 2010]

I was a youth living near Hornchurch RAF aerodrome during this battle and vividly remember the hot sunny September afternoons when we could watch great aerial dogfights in the skies above almost every afternoon. We ducked into the shelter if the dogfights were directly overhead, but the drama was too great to stay there if the coast seemed clear enough (This was probably unwise- on one occasion a piece of metal, later identified as part of the engine cowling from a Me 109, whistled into our garden a few yards from us - but what wonderful memories it has left me throughout a long life.) I avoided watching this film depicting the events for a very long time - I did not want to come up with some lukewarm judgment that yes it was quite a good attempt to re-create what I remembered so well. The greatest compliment I can pay this film is to acknowledge that I made a mistake - watching it, I learned what it means to be transported back in time and to be present again during one of the great moments in history. This experience totally transcends any reality TV.

My heading - the window of time- refers to the short period following any great event during which it is possible to create a worthy reproduction of it in pseudo-documentary form. Once this opportunity has slipped away it will never return. Recognition of this finally led to the long planned film actually being created - there were only just enough of the aircraft left flying, many of them having reached the end of a long period of service with the Spanish Air Force. Details like antennae changes were not really important except to survivors of the battle, but it was sad that the film has had to reinforce the myth that the United Kingdom was saved by the magic of its new Spitfire fighters - actually the brunt of the battle on the British side was carried by the more venerable Hurricanes which achieved the majority of the "kills" during this phase of the war. There were not enough Hurricanes still in serviceable condition to enable this to be shown accurately (one of the very few minor historical 'errors' in the film). We can all envisage an attempt to create a similar film today if it had not been made when it was. Very carefully constructed flying models, assisted by close-ups shot in re-constructed cockpits and some computer generated fighting effects, would all look incredibly real on the screen but at the end our reaction would be that we had watched a technological masterpiece, not a feeling that we were present during real events! The cast list reads like a who's who of the great British actors of the period, but as with the real events the Germans and all important Canadians, Poles and Czecho-Slovakians were also appropriately represented. Overall the acting level was consistently good and this film also incorporates one of the all time great moments on film - I am thinking of four very brief linked sequences totalling not much over a minute which essentially summed up the complete story. First Londoners, sheltering underground from the nightly blitz on September 15th, listening to a news bulletin reporting heavy German air attacks all day, their losses 163 planes with RAF losses 40 and 10 pilots safe; then Air Marshall Downing, asked by Churchill for amplification because Capital Hill believed German claims that the low RAF losses showed the final destruction of the RAF, responded "I am not very interested in propaganda, if we are right we have won this battle - if wrong the Germans will be in London in a week." These were coupled with two very brief sequences, one showing returned German pilots assembling for their evening mess dinner and staring dismayed at all the seats which were not filled, the other the German invasion flotillas in the Channel ports being dismantled two days later. Historically this film has few inaccuracies but wisely does not address the ongoing question of whether the Battle of Britain or the Battle of the Atlantic (almost equally well served by the film "The Cruel Sea") was the more important. Whilst both were vital to an allied victory, the former was shorter and more intense - which made it easier to reduce to the scale of a film - whilst the latter dragged on right until the end of the war and ultimately claimed many more lives.

For a very long time to come this film will remain a standby in schools trying to increase awareness of key events that have shaped their world among today's children - many uninterested per se in history, But I was too personally involved to assess its likely appeal for other IMDb users - all I can say is that it a well made and gripping film which will not be quickly forgotten. Some critics dislike a very minor romantic sub-plot involving the wife of a squadron leader serving in the WAAF, who fears hearing of his death every day as she is plotting the movements of the planes - eventually he experiences a bad crash, surviving severely burned and facing a very long period of rehabilitation. But I believe this provided a very necessary reminder that great events are achieved only at high personal cost.

Real history buffs may note that there is a later DVD also entitled 'The Battle of Britain' (Classic Pictures- 2004) It carries the sub-title 'The Official History' and is essentially a documentary assembled from contemporary monochrome newsreel sequences, spanning a longer period that includes the night bombing 'blitz' which followed.

Easy Virtue (2008)

Vintage Noel Coward - a rare joy - Sophisticated humour.

[7/10 · 5 September 2010]

Although not of aristocratic birth Noel Coward became the protégée of Mrs Astley Cooper at an early age, and through her gained access to London Society where his sharp eye and keen perception enabled him to achieve an almost unique appreciation of both its strengths and its weaknesses. He exploited this shamelessly in a steady stream of very popular plays as well as such epic dramas as the award winning WW-II film "In Which We Serve".

Easy Virtue, first staged in New York in 1925 and one of Coward's earlier plays, was completely reconstructed to become an almost incredible silent Alfred Hitchcock film made in 1928 shortly before the Hayes Code came into force. It was a daring film even for this period, mocking divorce laws which ignored such trivial matters as love, support or understanding from a spouse, in favour of a black and white judgment based solely on proved infidelity. This film turned on a divorce court action brought by a wealthy husband against a wife he accused of having an affair with an artist who was painting her portrait. Little evidence was shown but it was made clear that the jury picked were likely to side with the husband. When awarded his divorce his wife became an outcast - a lady of 'Easy Virtue'. Both Coward's play and Hitchcock's film contrasted this standard with the failure of the husband to make any attempt to provide his wife with the love and support to which she was entitled. Coward's play went even further, comparing these domestic failings with post-WW-I failings of the British aristocracy to recognise their long established obligations to attempt to create an acceptable lifestyle for all those living on their estates. He portrayed landowners, depleted in both number and wealth by the conflict, as becoming sterile and embittered - with their energies spent almost entirely in trying to preserve their line and as much as possible of their estates. This is hardly the subject for a traditional comedy but Coward's biting wit and mastery of irony made for dialogue which was often both absorbing and enjoyable. .

Hitchcock's early film was thought to have been lost until a copy was discovered in Austria, and later featured in one Hitchcock collection. But it would be hard to obtain a copy today, and for most people probably not be worth the effort. By 2008 it was time for this remake from Ealing Studios who have a long tradition of filming major British comedies. Their film-script only broke with Coward's play at two significant points. It is both well made and well acted so it provides very enjoyable viewing, but I do not think it deserves the 8 or 9 IMDb rating that some reviewers here have given it. Its re-written dialogue attempts to reproduce the irony and sardonic humour in Coward's play, but does not always succeed. Some of the humour almost approaches slapstick and is rather out of place in this comedy of manners, leading to a few sequences which induce shudders. Nevertheless its makers deserve recognition for creating a sophisticated comedy rather than relying on belly laughs. I felt that, if the dialogue had been a little more true to Coward's original, this film could have been in the running for an Oscar, but its box office appeal might then have been less. Most North American film-goes remain conditioned to expect the types of situation comedy so brilliantly exploited by Chaplin, Lloyd, Keaton, Langdon and many others - all working before effective dialogue became practicable; and sophisticated comedy still seems to have very limited appeal here.

This film features Jessica Biel as an American racing car driver, Larita, who captures the heart of a young and immature English landowner John Whittaker (Ben Barnes). Married, they return to his family estate where he totally fails to provide his wife with any support against the onslaughts of his horrified and gorgon like mother (Kristin Scott Thomas). Larita's only support comes from John's alert and observant father (Colin Firth, giving the best of many consistently good performances) who unfortunately still suffers from experiences as an army officer during WW-I that have left him rather ineffectual. We also meet Sarah (Charlotte Riley) John's former girlfriend and daughter of a wealthy nearby estate owner. We find it easy to understand why Mrs Whittaker with a loveless marriage and facing an unending battle to manage the estates and deal with the debts, is so anxious to destroy John's marriage and encourage him to re-marry Sarah. Our natural sympathy with Larita, who has blown into the Whittaker household like a much needed dose of salts, is tempered by the fact that she is not presented as an entirely sympathetic character, leaving us free to sit back without taking sides and simply enjoy the dialogue (often witty and still showing glimpses of Coward's original brilliance) whilst closing our eyes and ears occasionally for a few shudder inducing sequences. With Coward's plays it is often true that the characters are almost caricatures designed to complement the author's plot, nevertheless the resulting ride remains a lot of fun. The film-script differs from Coward's play both in the nature of the scandal in Larita's past and in the ending. The former change I felt was unfortunate - it opened up a whole new playing field which there was no time to explore; but I do commend the scriptwriters for their ambiguous new ending that seemed to me to be more in accordance with today's lifestyles. As usual the credits were overlong, but those to "the orchestra" were delightfully original. The film probably deserved an IMDb rating of 6, but because sophisticated comedies are as rare as hens teeth today I felt compelled to rate it 7.

Recommended!

The Moon and Sixpence (1942)

A good film but a lost opportunity!

[6/10 · 5 September 2010]

There have been few other actors, before or since, who could play the part of a cad better than George Sanders, and he was at his best in this film. Nothing will ever alter the fact that he gave a very fine performance in a film which any movie-goer is likely to find rewarding, and I recommend it to any IMDb users who happen to have so far not seen it. It is based on a great fictional work by Somerset Maugham that is clearly and openly acknowledged to be a non-biographic fictional reconstruction of the life of the artist Paul Gauguin who walked out on his wife, family and friends in Paris to spend the last days of his life in a wild painting spree in Tahiti - so poor that many of his final works were painted on the walls of his hut because he could not afford to buy more canvasses. Similarly Maugham's artist, named Charles Strickland, was a well to do Englishman, and the book starts by picturing the build up of frustrations he found in his very conventional life there. He eventually walked out of it to spend many years of penurious and bohemian living as an artist in Paris before his culminating mad dash to the South Seas finally provided a sense of release and freedom through the copious colours and lifestyle changes he found in his final destination. It is a book I first read as a boy and have always loved, but it is a long time since I last read it so I should now download or purchase another copy.

This said, my expectations exceeded what this film provided. The film of this book appeared during the war in 1943 - a time when many of us were experiencing symptoms of escapism. It can perhaps best be described as having achieved modest success. For many years I did not want to spoil my fading memories of Maugham's great book by watching another version presented on celluloid - many others may have felt the same. But I vividly remembered reading a review of it which described the tremendous visual impact it achieved when the black and white images associated with Strickland's drab life in Europe finally gave way to the riotous colours he found in Tahiti. I immediately felt that here was a perfect example of how monochrome and colour sequences could be integrated into the same film to increase its emotional impact. By then early home videos of this film had been released entirely in monochrome, this seemed to me to miss the whole point of filming the book so I never bought one.

A DVD claiming to present the complete cinema version of the film as it had been originally screened, finally appeared in 2007. I bought it with great expectations and waited with breathless excitement to see the transition to colour when Strickland reached Tahihi. Unfortunatelty the report on which I based this expectation proved a little misleading - only the almost final sequence was in colour, and this showed only the paintings Strickland had completed on the walls of his hut before his death, not the third or so of the story which took place on the island. I still enjoyed the film and this relatively small difference should not affect any viewers coming to it with no prior expectations, but for me it was not the film I had been waiting to see for so many years. I believe a great opportunity was missed here for creating a visual impact that would perfectly compliment the emotional impact experienced by Strickland when he changed his lifestyle. Whilst I still have no hesitation in recommending this DVD to IMDb users who are interested in art, this has been one of the extremely few occasions where I felt that I would like to see a film remade. True today's directors would probably film the European sequences in muted colour with a heavy sepia over-wash rather than in black & white, but with enhanced colouring used for Tahiti the overall effect would be the same. Sadly such a future film could not star George Sanders, but maybe Michael Douglas would step in here.

Angel Heart (1987)

A very misguided attempt to create horror.

[1/10 · 5 September 2010]

Verbal stories, books and dramas, based on the theme of someone prepared to bargain with the devil, and ultimately selling their immortal soul in return for worldly treasure of one type or another, have been a part of the literature of almost every culture and religion since the dawn of writing - so it is inevitable that the cinema has its share. I will nail my colours to the mast right away - in my opinion none of these works surpass the classic play "Dr Faustus" by the early English dramatist Thomas Marlowe, either in well rounded dramatic appeal or theological relevance . For me, this play although not totally original towers above later and often better known versions of the Faust legends such as Goethe's dramatic poem or Gounod's opera. All of these however transcend Angel Heart. This popular film still carries a (for me) incredible IMDb users rating of 7.3; if compared with them it can be seen as the absolute trash that it was. Assuming the supernatural was what its makers wanted to feature they would have done far better to base their film on Marlowe's great out-of-copyright drama rather than to purchase rights to a twentieth century imitation set in New York, and then stiffen the content by stirring in a gratuitous mix of voodoo rites that had nothing to do with the book they were filming. But they appear not to have known or even cared, whether their aim was simply to create a horror film designed to appeal to impressionable young people or whether it was to provide some sort of morality linked message - ultimately they achieved neither. True the film has a certain superficial gloss which is initially attractive, but ultimately most of it is simply ludicrous and where its search for horror runs unchecked it becomes crude and disgusting.

If its makers aimed simply to create a horror film they needed to recognise that horror comes from showing ordinary normal people going about their normal days activities, and then to gradually make the viewer aware that these people are unknowingly only a hairbreadth away from some contingency that will change their lives for ever. Think not of imaginary monsters or supernatural events, but of such ordinary situations as 2,000 people following everyday activities on the Titanic when they were told that most of them were five hours away from spending their last five minutes battling the cold waters of the North Atlantic. Or think of the office workers in the twin towers carrying out their normal daily activities five minutes before the terrorist's 'plane struck and doomed almost all of them. Among films, few create such a sense of horror better than 'Naked Fear' where a young girl quietly trying to earn her living in a strange town suddenly discovers she is on the hit list of a maniacal serial killer. But Parker's films are always flamboyant and he is not the right director to produce such a film. Instead we have a film steeped in necromancy which can raise little more than a chuckle with its juvenile efforts to make our skin creep. Murnau did far better with his silent classic 'Faust', filmed in 1926 but still supporting an IMDb rating of 8. Did the makers of 'Angel Heart' ever watch this? I have not read their original novel but I understand its scenario was entirely set in New York. Parker has attempted to rake up the horror by shifting the scene to New Orleans and bringing in some lurid voodoo rites. Voodoo beliefs provide much of interest but I felt they were better featured in such simple low cost B movies as 'French Quarter' or 'Barravento' and I do not know what place they were supposed to have here unless it was to provide justification for some of the extremely crude and gross, but totally pointless images - often verging on the obscene - gracing this film. Ultimately for me the only real emotion these raised was extreme distaste. I can only hope that those responsible for the planned re-make are determined to avoid repeating Parker's fiasco.

The Dreamers (2003)

A reverie about the realities of life

[8/10 · 2 August 2010]

If, like me, you have reached the age when you need assistance in understanding how today's young people behave, watching a North American movie production may help you. However if you want to understand not only how they behave but also why, what they are really thinking, and how they regard today's world, then you may get more help from one of the better European or Asiatic films, and "The Dreamers" might provide a very good starting point. If you recognise any need to become more aware of the factors contributing to the evolution of the society of the future you have few other options, but you might also be helping to reduce the generation gap and its associated stresses that have led to much recent street violence. My generation has no obligation to accept the judgements or wishes of a younger generation, but it has a real responsibility to at least understand them; young people today are very ready to discuss and defend their beliefs and this needs to be encouraged.

My apologies - I am writing a review - not preaching. Films like "The Dreamers" are less common in North America than in Europe and therefore tend to finish up more controversial here where far too much attention has been paid to the sexuality in the film. Not this but the more appropriate thoughts above came to my mind when I started commenting on it for IMDb. This film nominally follows the inter-relationship between three young people with an intense love for the cinema, an American student in Paris at the time of the 1968 student inspired street riots and French twins of a similar age. But this only provides a background against which its director Bernardo Bertolucci used the individual frames and sequences to build our appreciation of both the intensity and the shallowness of the beliefs that motivate his principal characters. It is easier to follow this film if one is a movie fan - flashbacks from classic films called to mind by one of the characters are used to set moods or changes of emotion. Street activities and even their layout or architecture are built into the fabric of the film. It would take many viewings before a critic could develop a full understanding of the message the director is trying to convey. Quite correctly this was an NC17 film in the US and Canada, much of its imagery would merely be confusing or disturbing to anyone younger, apart from this its very frank portrayal of the sexual interactions between the characters has also proved disturbing to many adult viewers. It is certainly not a film with universal appeal, although it is extremely rewarding for those viewers open to its attempts to probe the generation gap. Isabelle and Theo, the French twins, initially appear to their very conventional American friend Matthew to be modern radicals in full tune with the many concerns about society that young people were feeling during this period, and he willingly allows them to induct him into the various causes the rioters were attempting to promote. But gradually as the film runs we see him becoming disillusioned. He starts to appreciate that circumstances have led the twins into an over-close relationship which has begun to dominate their lives, so that despite lip adherence to these various progressive causes they are really becoming addicted to a personal lifestyle that is essentially self destructive. The film's ultimate message is obviously subject to the interpretation of the individual viewer, but in essence Bertolucci very gradually shows the twins as parasitic, they are not producing but are becoming conspicuously greater consumers, and this is clearly intended to be a parallel progression to that of the street rioters who initially have many very genuine concerns, but whose behaviour evolves in a way which makes their protests increasingly ineffectual. There is no future in anarchy as it rejects the very concepts of compromise and working together which provide the only basis for eventual progress.

No film attempting to convey such an ambitious message could totally succeed, nor could it hope to appeal to all filmgoers. Anyone planning to view it should at least read some reviews first to prepare them for what to expect, and if it does not sound the type of film they would enjoy they would be wise to stay away. But for those prepared to view it both closely and sympathetically this film can be a very rewarding experience. The credit for this must be shared between the director and the three young principal actors. Theo is played by the son of French director Phillipe Garrel and his background may have made it easier for these three actors to achieve the confidence in Bertolucci which must have been essential during the filming of some of the more intimate sequences; but all three of them have a remarkable maturity and offer us superb performances.

The film is based upon an original novel by Gilbert Adair. He also wrote the film-script so it should reflect the intentions of the original work fairly well; but I still want to read the book to assess whether Bertolucci has merely attempted to recreate it as a movie; or if not how far he has gone in re-interpreting it. Meantime my tentative rating for "The Dreamers" is 8 stars.

Big Bad Mama (1974)

Hilarious, fast paced and incoherent fun

[4/10 · 31 July 2010]

Released in 1974 and not viewed again since I saw it in a local late night theatre back then, I remembered this only as a rather crude B film which provided an enjoyable romp for killing a few hours, but was not intended to leave any lasting memories. I was vastly surprised when I saw it listed on Turner's Classic Movies program recently. A Classic! - what was wrong with my recollections of it.? So I decided to watch it again and find out. As I remembered, it was a well made but essentially very bad film, most of which is in very poor taste and was difficult to justify watching. Nevertheless it proved to be a classic guilty pleasure that I kept remembering and drawing amusement from for a long time afterwards, so I found myself again facing the eternal question to be answered by every movie enthusiast - what constitutes a good movie? Does it have to be educational, enlightening or inspirational? Can't it just be lighthearted fun, perhaps in bad taste, but nevertheless welcomed for providing a little real relaxation after a period of hard work? I have always accepted the latter position, so after re-watching Big Bad Mama I am happy to report that, although it is a movie in rank bad taste which deserves only a low IMDb rating, it provides a hilarious and very enjoyable viewing experience. I am now on the lookout for its successor "Big Bad Mama 2 " which I have never seen.

Its failures are largely in content, it makes fun of every serious concern it can look at during a relatively short running time of just over 80 min (ideal for cramming onto an 80 min VCD disk). These are all covered at a cracking pace that leaves viewers with little chance to think seriously about any message. In retrospect I am sure it tackled as many targets as it could possibly cover, but with no objective other than to amuse, certainly with no intention of forcing us to think. Politics, religion, the law, prohibition, misuse of firearms, bootlegging, taxes, burlesque, kidnapping - you name it they were mostly there (although I do not remember any references to race relations, which was probably wise.) Its period was set squarely in the middle of the depression and the location was somewhere in the deep south of the USA where this was biting particularly severely. The pace was such that each sequence tended to end just a tad too soon, so there was no opportunity for any boredom. Its ending was interesting. As Mama with her daughters escaped from their last shoot out, (apparently) with a minor wound to her arm, she suddenly collapsed and passed out. Her implied death tied up loose ends and no doubt pleased advocates of Hayes Code, morality rules, without prohibiting her eventual recovery to participate in a sequel 13 years later. Bravo RC - too many sequels created recently have been spoiled by illegitimately changing the ending of the original film.

What more should I say? First I should commend Angie Dickinson who has undertaken an incredible range of roles over almost 50 years. Perhaps none were truly memorable, but I can't remember going home unhappy after seeing any of them. This film earns one star for excellent photography, including some extremely enjoyable shots of many delightful 1930 era vehicles, another for Roger Corman's usual impeccable direction - it is incredible how many different genres of film he has made that deserve this comment, and a third for its very acceptable acting - far above what I remember as the standard I used to expect from B movies, especially those seen in Drive-in theatres. Despite its entertainment value; I found difficulty in justifying another star without ignoring artistic quality, but eventually recognised its outstanding and almost unmatched pacing by awarding a fourth. I must also thank TCM for giving me this chance to see it again, and look forward to doing so next time if they decide to give it another spin. If not - with a bit of searching I might find a DVD still available, or perhaps I should suggest the release of a Blue-ray edition.

Soft Touch II (1988 TV Movie)

Eye candy with dual sweetening!

[5/10 · 31 July 2010]

Birds of Paradise, originally televised as a short series in the late 1980's, is now scheduled for a composite screening by Encore Avenue early next Monday morning. It was created by Playboy Enterprises in 3 or 4 episodes I think of 30 minutes each, and I have never seen it screened again so I was surprised to find it still extant. Presumably the recent financial problems of the Playboy Empire have led to films from their archives being dusted off and again offered to late night TV channels, so perhaps we may find it on offer more than once in the near future and brief comments may be justified..

My wife and I saw the first episode on the Canadian Superchannel movie channel, probably very soon after it was released, and we quite enjoyed it as very light late night entertainment. There was a lot of eye candy in its simple script, and this was a time when women were becoming concerned about exploitation movies, but my wife also enjoyed it and was equally ready to watch the second episode probably a week later. I do not remember whether just one or more episodes followed this, but next Monday's running time is listed at 85 min so there was probably one, which we certainly missed. The very thin story featured three young women in an inherited motor yacht - they were pulchritudinous and their cruising grounds were equally attractive so the viewer could not lose either way despite the nasty young men who tried to prevent them from having fun, but ultimately of course paid an appropriate penalty by being unexpectedly ducked in the sea.

Watching these two episodes was very similar to looking at a magazine in a professional office whilst waiting for an appointment - this helps pass time enjoyably, but one does not expect to remember it a few days later. Whether one picks up a Playboy pictorial or a National Geographical illustrated travelogue matters very little, both provide plenty of interest to look at without becoming demanding. One simply looks for magazines with copious eye candy and not much obtrusive text material, so that it does not matter whether or not the call comes before finishing reading. I have spent over 20 years without any distress from not finding out how this series ended, and am certainly not getting up at 3.30 a.m. to rectify this next Monday (although if I can find an old VHS tape to overwrite I might record it). Perhaps there should be more of this type of harmless ultra-light entertainment on offer, unfortunately this seems unlikely as few budding directors want to sharpen their teeth producing material likely to receive more criticism than praise. Maybe one solution might be a Harlequin division among DVD distributors.

Please note that these comments relate to the televised version with the title "Birds of Paradise". The "Soft Touch" title appears to relate to a VHS cassette version which I have not seen but which I believe provided the candy with better wrapping.

Whale Rider (2002)

A Classic of the future!

[9/10 · 31 July 2010]

After many months of watching films of which the best deserved IMDb ratings of six. seven or eight, I viewed this really exceptional film that I felt deserved at least double anything else I had seen recently, so a comparative rating of 15 would not have seemed out of place. This, and the many 'best film' awards it has received from film festival audiences, leave me with little doubt that here we have a classic of the future. Surprisingly it comes into that most difficult of categories - the family film - not a film that Dad can sleep through whilst the kids enjoy it, or one which gives Dad and Mum some pleasure whilst the kids wish they had not been dragged away from the telly, but a film that can really be enjoyed by all the family - except perhaps teenage boys at the age where their horizons have just widened to the extent that they are interested only in films featuring unrelenting action and adventure, preferably accompanied by unremitting violence.

The DVD of 'Whale Rider' was released in 2004 but it never attracted me greatly. and getting round to watching it has taken me some time. There are so many films of a similar type where the story sounds very admirable and wholesome, but experience warns that the combination of a cast of enthusiastic and largely non-professional actors, a limited budget, and over-enthusiastic direction by somebody not fully understanding the limitations of the medium, often culminates in a rather mawkish product. The fear that this might have happened here has kept me away for a long time. To anyone else in this position let me recommend getting a disk and giving it a spin as soon as possible.

Admittedly promoters of such films take a considerable risk - often their final budget stands or falls largely on the performance of the star. The rest of the cast are essentially ordinary people playing themselves and even though they may not have much acting experience, their parts are not too demanding so minor imperfections are often not too disruptive. But one minor glitch in the performance of the star can break the spell which is created when the audience begins to feel involved in the story and concerned about what happens to the individuals portrayed. This is essentially a film by a woman director about feminine empowerment, but not the sterile antagonistic type which looks for a world run exclusively by women (preferably with only a few men left around to keep the sperm banks well stocked). Here we are looking at the true equality that first began to be recognised during the World Wars of the twentieth century when everyone understood there was an enormous task to accomplish and we could never finish it unless we harnessed the full abilities of everyone in our society. This is a film from New Zealand where the leaders of a traditionally male dominated Maori culture, badly disrupted by the impact of the more sophisticated civilization of western settlers, are attempting to go back to their roots to avoid being totally absorbed into the new colonial culture but remain unable to fully recognise that women must play a vital part in any process of cultural regeneration. This film, based on a book by the first Maori author to have a work published in North America, is a fictional fable that shows one way in which such an essential change to the fundamental structure of their traditional culture might take place.

This may not sound like the basis for an enjoyable film for a Western family audience, but the host of best film awards it has received does convey some sense of the extent to which it is a very exceptional movie. Although almost everyone involved played their full part in its success; it was ultimately the outstanding Oscar nominated performance given by its star which made the film memorable. Keisha Castle-Hughes was 12 years old when this was filmed and it won her the youngest ever Best Actress nomination. If there were only more young actors of this calibre, we might have more films fostering positive values in society, rather than often competing to outdo each other in violence, horror or degradation. Incidentally, but more importantly, we might also begin to find that the former films are capable of providing us all, including the younger generation, with a generally more enjoyable viewing experience.

Lifeforce (1985)

Even worse than I remembered

[1/10 · 27 July 2010]

Recently I was enjoying re-watching two films with scripts by Charley Kaufman from the 1980's, both were full of very challenging and rewarding concepts which I was finding quite stimulating. Then I recollected that, although many of "The Critics" seem to have awarded the accolade for writing bizarre and incoherent scripts to Kaufman, there have been many others equally strange such as Boorman's 'Zardoz', Greenaway's 'The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover', or ...... ........ and I suddenly thought of Tobe Hooper's 'Lifeforce'. My recollections of this 1985 melodrama were principally of a totally incoherent script, a sound track loud enough to damage normal hearing and video sequences perversely designed to force viewer's to close their eyes if they wished to avoid a headache. The only thing I could remember about its story was that vampires originate in outer space (where it seems it is very difficult to get any clothes) and are BAD. Perhaps, I thought. these limited memories are unfair, or maybe my appreciation of unusual scripts has matured. So I decided to watch it again (on DVD with the volume turned down to a safe level!). The experiment was not a success. Its script seemed no more coherent - whilst a Kaufman's script challenges viewers to think, that of 'Lifeforce' seemed to dare them to do so. Deprived of any touch of logic, I wanted to reach for the on-off switch..

Part of my problem is that I am used to employing the word 'Lifeforce' in the sense in which George Bernard Shaw used it in the prefaces to so many of his plays. GBS was an agnostic, but never an atheist, he was a firm believer in the gradual evolutionary improvement of the human species which could be attributed to a natural progression based on the cumulative experiences of mankind since our species first evolved. and which is manifested in the almost universal desire of parents for their offspring to have a 'better' life. He always described this guiding process, which is perhaps similar to the Eastern concept of Kama, as due to the "lifeforce". This is a much more sophisticated meaning that that used in the film where it has been reduced to just the potential energy stored in every living body to sustain essential life processes such as breathing, blood circulation, and mental control of bodily functions when we are tired or asleep (SPOILER - In this film it also became a target to be acquired by the space vampires who have presumably run out of other energy supplies from their own planet. There could be a challenging theme here for a film looking at a coherent situation where external energy supplies gradually dwindle to almost nothing, but 'Lifeforce' was not interested in any of this - only in exploiting the maximum shock effect it could achieve within its running time.) Mostly it was inherently boring, often distasteful and sometimes downright unpleasant. All this could be forgiven for the right story but here any intended story line was contemptuously disregarded.

A few sequences were visually imaginative and challenging, so I did consider awarding 'Lifeforce' 2 stars, but what the heck - If I go out and shoot a visually stimulating movie in the grounds where I live, this could not warrant 2 stars in the absence of any coherent film-script. I recognise that tastes differ and not all IMDb users will agree with me in my assessment, but if I am to try to provide some honest guidance to my readers, it has to be one star.

Carrington (1995)

Watching this resembles reliving memories of people you knew well

[8/10 · 27 July 2010]

Biography and history are not well represented among great film productions, one can sense that most film makers prefer to allow their imaginations free rein and avoid any factual constraints. But I always enjoy good biographies, whether in the form of books or films, and for me Carrington is a delightful film to be both savoured and treasured.

However London was home to the so-called Bloomsbury group so they became best known in the U.K., and this film would be more readily appreciated there than in North America. The group consisted mainly of the leisured and fairly well to do junior offspring of aristocratic families who were able to spend almost all their time actively participating in the worlds of literature, drama or the arts. Its members were unusual in being very contemptuous of the contemporary moral code, whilst still having strong moral scruples that essentially governed all their actions. World War 1 occurred during the period when they had their greatest influence on British society, and many members of the group became infamous for being conscientious objectors to participating in the war on ethical rather than religious grounds. Sexually they had very progressive attitudes, and generalizing to perhaps a dangerous extent, they viewed personal commitments which had to be preserved as all important, but believed these commitments were made between the individuals concerned and were no business of either the Church or the State.

Featured in this film are Emily Carrington and Lytton Strachey. She was a very well regarded artist who seemed to have some repugnance about exhibiting or selling her works in the usual way. He was essentially an essayist who achieved both fame and success with the publication of "Eminent Victorians" - a book of condensed biographies, many only a few paragraphs long but all showing considerable ability to pick out the key character traits that ultimately contributed most to the public image of the individuals concerned. Both are played (by Emma Thompson and Jonathan Pryce) with remarkable depth and sincerity.

These brief comments may help anyone who has read little of the characters involved to understand why the film is of real interest to so many older viewers; they can do nothing to convey the charm and yet knife sharp precision it shows in displaying the activities of its principal protagonists. I find it hard to assess how far their activities might become of interest to younger viewers who have no familiarity with the period, purely on the strength of this film. I can however assure those who do not share my background that I found the film not only truly fascinating but also an immensely satisfying viewing experience. Usually, if a film biography causes me to look out for the book on which it was based, this is an indication that the film did not really succeed,; but not so on this occasion when I just felt the urge to enjoy more of the fascinating story.

I rate this film at eight stars on the IMDb scale - if I had felt it would have a more universal appeal this would have probably been nine. In what they attempted to do its makers have shown near genius, and both the cinematography and acting are almost above reproach. Today I suspect that some will find it boring, but I believe they will be far fewer than might be expected from the subject matter - this is a prime example of one of the very few outstanding film biographies where a viewer almost feels he or she has got to know the actual characters being portrayed..

Zardoz (1974)

Do you want a mental challenge?

[6/10 · 23 July 2010]

DVD's provide a very reasonably priced way for most families to see a film in which they are interested, but for some pensioners, single parents, or others with limited incomes they are a semi-luxury which can not be indulged in too often. Many who miss a film when it first comes out, study the comments in this database and, even more helpful, the user ratings of the film concerned before deciding to make a purchase. Naturally these ratings typically follow a normal distribution curve with a peak in the range 4-7 and very few ratings at the extremes of 1 or 10. For really good films we can expect this peak to be shifted upwards by two or three points, the reverse for poor or unpopular films. Double peaks are interesting, they show two very different groups of viewers with very different opinions have responded - surprisingly these different groups seem to almost never be gender based. Zardoz is quite unusual as there is the usual distribution, centered around a mid-scale rating, but with two - not one - other peaks occurring (one at each end of the scale) leading to ratings widely spread between 1 or 10. Clearly most viewers find it an interesting and challenging film incorporating both features of interest and significant faults, but there are also relatively small groups of viewers apparently either sufficiently thrilled by the intellectual challenge it offers to give it a rating of 9 or 10, or totally unable to relate to the message it attempts to convey and rating it at no more than 1 or 2.

To make some sense of this I finally purchased the DVD and watched the film. I quickly discovered from one of the bonus files on the DVD that its director, John Boorman, has recognised many faults in the film as originally released, this rather invalidates any ratings close to 10. Equally, after watching the film, I felt most viewers should have had no difficulty appreciating the many challenging ideas it presents with varying degrees of success; as well as the parallels between the story in the film and many aspects of society as we know it today, so I also decided to ignore the ratings of 1 and 2 made by those unable or more likely unwilling to do this. This left a fairly normal rating distribution with the bulk of those commenting on the film apparently commending the challenges it offers to its viewers but far from satisfied with the way in which these challenges have been presented to them. This film is far too complex to discuss fully in a relatively brief review, but with this background in mind it becomes relatively easy for anyone, whatever their personal beliefs, to assess the film and make their own judgment of its success in achieving its objectives.

Zardoz is often referred to as a science fiction work but this is most misleading. To me it is much closer to Jonathon Swift's "Gulliver's Travels" where the hero finds himself in unknown lands occupied by totally strange people, and by observing their lifestyles he is able to perceive many of the faults and failings of his own society. This film takes a tilt at many different windmills but those of greatest significance are probably the overburdening of resources through excessive population growth, attempts to account for anything unknown or unexplained by attributing it to a God which must then be worshiped, and yearning for an immortality which is not associated with any ongoing duties or responsibilities. These features of present day society are assumed to have gradually led to the highly divided future featured in the film, where our descendants have become split into three groups - the brutals who are forced to labour to produce everything needed, the exterminators charged with ensuring that the population of brutals does not rise too high, and the immortals who have discovered how to avoid death from natural causes, but have little to do and therefore suffer from a debilitating ennui. This fanciful framework provides the basis on which the film brings an astonishing number of very significant issues to its viewers attention.

For those merely interested in killing a little time this film will hold no attraction, but for those who occasionally enjoy having their minds challenged it has a great deal to offer. I am now sorry I did not see it long ago, and am finding my mind actively occupied in criticising or commending many of the scenes from it. It is likely to remain an ongoing and respected part of my personal collection of well regarded films for quite a long time, but it does not warrant an IMDb rating of higher than 6 stars and although it certainly deserves viewing more than once, I suspect doing so frequently would become unusually boring

Human Nature (2001)

How do we differ from other animals?

[8/10 · 23 July 2010]

Most films, other than remakes, originate when a film studio commissions a writer to prepare an outline script and suggest a treatment for adapting some best selling book to movie form. Indie Directors may work quite closely with a script-writer of their choice right from the start and this gives the procedure a better chance of ultimate success; but too often the storyline for a book that one may read over a period of days or weeks is almost incompatible with the requirements of a two hour movie. Charlie Kaufman was a script writer who learned this the hard way, and who has since become respected by cinema-goers throughout the world for the very challenging original scripts that he has created. "Human Nature" was the second of these; but to better appreciate its unusual structure and meaning, it is helpful to first take a birds eye look at what his works are typically about. He learned his trade working for television, often episodes of established serials, and then amazed the cinema world by writing a new and very different script which became the enormously successful film "Being John Malkovich". This was so bizarre that it is almost impossible to describe before it has been viewed, but essentially it features the concept of a number of different individuals sharing the same personality simultaneously. I am amazed (although very grateful) that it was able to attract investors and actually reach the screen. Its success showed there is an unsatisfied demand for films which make us think deeply about our own nature, and it helped Kaufman to write and co-produce "Human Nature" (2001). This perhaps remains his most ambitious film, and is the first I am commenting on for IMDb, but a overview of all his works remains helpful when considering any Kaufman film. 1992 brought a semi-autobiographical film in which he clearly outlined his approach to preparing a film-script. Columbia had film rights to Susan Orlean's book "The Orchid Thief" and had commissioned him to prepare a film-script. After months of work he was convinced this lengthy and rambling book could not be effectively condensed into the span of a movie. With considerable trepidation he submitted a fictional script based on his struggle to create a work of art, but contrasting this with that of an imaginary twin brother who became rich by shamelessly churning out scripts for stereotyped action thrillers. To his relief this script was accepted and became the film "Adaption" in which Kaufman explores the conflict so many experience between artistic, commercial or scientific integrity and financial gain. By this stage he had gained a cult reputation for scripts which examined what it was in human nature that could sometimes raise humanity above, and sometimes force it below, the level of other animals. His later films, including "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind" (which examines the implications of an ability to selectively erase specific memories) or "Synecdoche, New York" (with many targets including formal religion and the need to exploit every chance for personal fulfilment during life) have only added to this. Cinema-goers may love his films or hate them, but few will remain indifferent.

To those who have not seen any of his films the only sensible recommendation is -Try one. This lengthy introduction should give some idea what to expect. The most conventional is probably "Adaption" but I would suggest "Human Nature" because, whilst not the most profound, it is among the most comprehensive in its chosen targets and yet it does not seem overloaded or obtuse, also it includes a great deal of deliberate comedy which maintains both interest and enjoyment. The story involves a young woman, unhappy with her hirsute appearance, who abandons society and reverts to nature; but also writes a very successful book about her experiences which finances her to return to have her problem corrected.. She then becomes mutually attracted to a nerdish repressed scientist struggling to teach mice good manners. On a field trip they encounter a youth brought up in the forest as an ape by a father who threw up a good job in order to revert to nature. They take him back to the laboratory too see how easy it will be to teach him normal human manners. Much of the film is devoted to the strong pulls he experiences both towards his new cultured life and back to his previous uncontrolled environment. These of course become particularly severe when he becomes involved with young women. Such sequences bring out a favourite Kaufman theme - the necessity for personal fulfilment if one is to avoid mental breakdown.

This summary does little to explain the charm of the film, but to say much more would spoil it. It discusses a wider range of issues than most of his works, has an easy to follow story and is full of very amusing sequences; so I would have expected it to be the most popular. Instead it's IMDb rating (currently 6.9) is lowest. I cannot help wondering why; but Patricia Arquette as Lila (the hirsute young lady hero) displayed her unusual although not unattractive fur covering during several of the earlier sequences in the forest, explaining why it is R rated only in US theatres, so we can suspect the widespread North American distrust of any displays of nudity in films. Maybe there are other reasons that I did not notice, but I would be interested to know if it was also less successful in Europe where nudity is less of a concern.

One big question remains: How many other script-writers have also created outstanding stand-alone scripts they have never been able to bring into production?

New Best Friend (2002)

A Chick-Flick that doesn't quite succeed.

[3/10 · 21 July 2010]

This film follows the established template for a successful "chick-flick" very closely. It's story, written by a woman, is about an exclusive young ladies finishing school. It is directed by a woman, has a largely female cast, and is designed to appeal most to maturing young women at the time when they leave their protective homes and move into a tempting and exciting world that they probably appreciate may be hazardous; at least until they understand it better. Sensible girls who were brought up by mature mothers are generally duly cautious, but obviously remain curious and plan to paddle a little once they are sure they will not get out of their depth. Such films help them develop a perspective from which they can establish a behaviour pattern that will hopefully be appropriate for their personality, ambitions and life objectives, and there will always be a big enough demand for them to make any appeal to other segments of the movie going population optional. Why then should I, an elderly widower have watched this film; and what right would I have to write comments such as this afterwards, or to pass judgement on its success or otherwise?

The answer to the first question is simple - I had not even heard of this film when a librarian I know well chanced to remark whilst shelving their DVD's that it was a very similar story to "Cruel Intentions". This piqued my interest so I looked up other comments in this database. At least two IMDb users have referred to it as reminiscent of both "Cruel Intentions" and "Wild Things", two films I very much enjoyed, so I borrowed the DVD to assess it for myself. Unfortunately, despite quite high expectations, I was very disappointed; whether the fault lay with me for watching the wrong film or reflects more general problems, is for others to decide but I will comment briefly on it whilst answering my second question above.

"New Best Friend" certainly showed similarities to both "Cruel Intentions" and "Wild Things". Some of its more extreme characterisation reminded me a little of David Lean's "Wild at Heart" (which I also enjoyed watching), and I also found its emphasis on drug culture reminiscent of "Total Romance". All five of these films (yes I can count - there were two parts to "Total Romance") had one thing in common. After viewing them I felt I had been watching a slice of real life - not just reel life (only an enjoyable story). Unless the acting is really poor, which I do not think was the problem here, this is a very intangible distinction. Ultimately it arises when the viewer never forgets he or she is watching somebody play a part. This may not be due to the actors but to a poor script, bad direction, improbable locations, faulty cinematography or any one of a number of other factors. In this case I believe it was the life experience of the principal members of the cast that was the problem. I did not feel they were too old - good actors can and do often overcome considerable age barriers in the parts they undertake (consider for example Krystal Nausbaum in "The Memory Keeper's Daughter"), and can also simulate many characteristics, such as violence, hatred, piety, devotion, etc. which may not be natural to them, when required for a part. However some things mark a person in ways which are difficult for even the best of actors to emulate, and one of the most important of these is the experience which comes with maturity. These remained a cast of mature actors playing young ingénues and it was never possible to be unaware that they had been out in the world for quite a bit, totally unlike young girls who had been sent straight from protective homes to an exclusive finishing school. Some of these problems of course were due to the script requiring the characters to think and act unrealistically, but I believe the impact of this would have been less with a much less worldly wise cast, with only the detective old enough to give any appearance of having post-schooling experiences of life.

How can I give a helpful and appropriate rating to this film? I enjoyed watching it enough to avoid any feeling that I had wasted my time. The cast had obviously tried very hard and I would like to simply thank them for their efforts. This was not designed to be a memorable film carrying an important message. It was one of the 95% of films designed to be enjoyed and then, like most paperback books, forgotten. If almost perfect, it might have qualified for a maximum rating of 5 or 6, badly made probably 1 or 2. As it stands my rating - which I recognise would be of no interest or value to the young viewers forming its potential audience - would be 3. I do not enjoy being destructive about other peoples creative efforts and submit this only because I recognise that IMDb ratings may be helpful to future script-writers or directors considering similar movies.

One Million Years B.C. (1966)

Not pre-history, but still a great adventure story

[7/10 · 21 July 2010]

You appreciate the full meaning of this title best if you express it as 1.002 million years B.P. (Before Present). - the extra 0.002 million years represents the bulk of all recorded history, and we are looking a very long way further back. But don't worry - this film does not claim any allegiance to known facts. I remember it from when it first appeared and, with most of my contemporaries, I particularly enjoyed it for the magnificent battling dinosaurs so vividly created by that special effects master Ray Harryhausen. But I also remember its total rejection by most of us later when maturity set in and we began to appreciate the difference between the Pliocene and Jurassic ages, recognising that the only mammals alive in the age of dinosaurs were no bigger than a modern rodent. Probably we also gradually became aware that Raquel Welch really looked a lot more attractive to us than we might have expected from the reconstructions of female skeletal fossils from the Pithecanthropus Erectus era which we can see in museums. However Raquel has had many more worth while roles than wearing a rabbit skin bikini and grunting at potential paramours from other tribes. This role was pure fun, but even without it the film would remain very watchable thanks to the magnificent dinosaur battle sequences generated in his backstage workshop by Harryhausen. Copies of the DVD are now beginning to be hard to find, but this film is also included in a Raquel Welch DVD collection, although not as far as I know in any Ray Harryhausen collection which would be equally appropriate. 20th Century Fox, now have the North American distribution rights for this British classic, and I urge them to ensure the contribution he made to cinematography as we know it today remains appreciated by modern film-goers by ensuring that this film (preferably also with others featuring his work) is released again soon in the form of one or more Blue-ray disks so that we can all continue to marvel at his gripping illusions which still match any CG sequences I have ever seen. .

"Quest for Fire", a later and equally memorable film with a similar theme but greater scientific credibility, perhaps provided more fascination but many also felt it gave less entertainment value - it had no RH to spice up its video sequences and it never achieved the fame of "One Million Years BC". Another work with a similar theme which was written almost like a film-script and has been crying out for filming is Jack London's book "Before Adam", but as yet no director has dared to accept this challenge. As for "One Million Years BC", let's forget the fur bikini, watching battles between these scaly monsters and our puny ancestors, followed by its dramatic volcanic sequences remains a cinematographic experience comparable with that from any average adventure film made today, so it still deserves an IMDb rating of at least 5 or 6. But it is now also a genuine classic which should increase the rating we give it by at least one star. If database users show clearly that this remains a realistic assessment of the film, it is hard to believe that it will ever be allowed to drop into total oblivion.

Electra (1996)

Far from the ribald rip-off of the Classics which I had hoped for.

[1/10 · 19 July 2010]

Shown on local TV recently, this film attracted my interest because of its classical title, (totally belied by the contents). Sadly I found it a very ugly film that I would not recommend to anyone except perhaps those who enjoyed the live dismemberment sequences in such turgid melodramas as "Bordello of Blood". In retrospect, I regret that I did not turn it off promptly, but it was saved by a sort of perverted style and logic. For example the chief villain was a paraplegic named (Cock)roach,. which somehow got reduced to Roach - this unfortunate loss seems to have started the long sad story. It stars Shannon Tweed who is not noted for sophisticated performances. Films in which I have previously seen her have been straightforward action thrillers, often with added eye candy in the form of the lightly clad and highly gymnastic unarmed combat sequences in which she excels. Some of these movies had even incorporated "naked into their titles - the last that I saw was Naked Lies, a fairly straightforward and business like thriller no better and no worse than many others featured on late night television. It is now too late, but consideration could have been given to re-making this as Naked Electra, to enable some of its more gross sequences (such as one character cutting out the heart of another and passing it on to a third as a snack) to be exorcised and replaced by a few more sequences where Shannon could have displayed her undoubted combat ability, and also perhaps some of the sundry other assets she often featured when she was Queen of the Playboy empire. Done well enough, this might even have justified increasing the rating I have given it from an undeserved one star to as high as perhaps three stars.

After the North American film industry abandoned the Hayes code, it retained for many years a series of unofficial voluntary taboos on displaying material regarded as still being extremely controversial, or socially unacceptable. These taboos have gradually faded away but I believe they could still serve a useful function in protecting the industry from rising public wrath when they find they have paid good money for what is quite simply disgusting material - such as the sequence referred to above. Had I unsuspectingly bought this film as a DVD I would have been furious. Cannibalism is an acceptable component of some serious movies as well as others which are simply satirical; but films which present it as pure humour are simply gross and should never have been released. I know some will wish to raise an outcry about this statement, but I believe most IMDb users would agree with me. In the old days we would have demanded our money back from the cinema manager, today major studios should be expected to give all DVD purchasers the right to a refund if any such contents are not clearly and adequately indicated up front.

Legong: Dance of the Virgins (1935)

A memorable example of a documentary from silent film days

[7/10 · 17 July 2010]

It is three quarters of a century since this documentary was released, but the date I am submitting these comments to IMDb is of course no accident. Seldom featured in local cinemas, such films only remain alive for their fans through DVD's and occasional TV presentations on channels such as Turner's Classic Movies,. these comments were written a day or two after TCM featured this film I want to express the appreciation all cinema enthusiasts have for the dedication shown by TCM staff not only for the selection and composition of their program but also because of their contribution to the restoration of well remembered masterpieces which we might otherwise have never seen again. Many of these films are documentary or semi-documentary in character and are not only important for the history of movies, but also for recording details of lifestyles that have long disappeared and that would otherwise be as cloudy as are the details of life in the Middle Ages or earlier. The world owes a large debt to the pioneers of documentary film such as John Grierson with films like "The Drifters" (the herring fishermen - not the characters in Michener's novel) or Robert Flaherty with "Nanook of the North." . We see their heritage today in films like "March of the Penguins" and "Himalaya", films which always have a particularly great appeal for those of us who have a strong interest in the region or culture that is being featured.

I have always been fascinated by Bali, a relatively small culture of gentle family loving people who have clung onto their historical Buddhist faith, resisting all attempts by the surrounding Muslim cultures to overwhelm them. It was one of the great highlights of my life when I was able to finally visit Bali and meet some of these people myself. Naturally I have long wanted to see this film which attempted to capture the essence of their culture at a historical period when it was changing rapidly as a result of European influences, and many people thought was unlikely to survive the impact. I would have liked to own the DVD of the restored film which I understand is of very high quality, but it is expensive and I am living on a pension with rapidly shrinking purchasing power so TCM provides an alternative solution for which I am deeply appreciative.

This film is not quite comparable with some of the other documentaries of a similar type where the film-makers sometimes spent months or even years in the community they were studying before shooting any film-stock, but it remains a very honest attempt to let the Balinese people tell their own story, largely in the form of traditional dances and ceremonies. Its photographer did an outstanding job using two strip (red and green) Technicolour film, employed almost for the last time here. This is one of the early processes which colour an underlying silver image to leave a solidarity that pure dye images have lost. The iridescent colours of modern films can often provides wonderful visual impact but only at the cost of losing the sensitivity provided by the unending graduations of gray that can be shown in a silver based image. Our old monochrome films will never lose their appeal so long as this feature can be preserved from deterioration. Today two strip red green Technicolour is often commended for its good colour rendering, but with the proviso that it is usually spoiled by green tinted skies. "Dance of the Virgins" appears to have avoided this pitfall very successfully by exposing the film sufficiently to almost burn out much of the sky colour and having the sky fringed by verdant green tropical foliage wherever possible. Whilst quite different to what we have become used to, I think most viewers would have found the colour rendering in this film very acceptable.

We were informed that the restored film, whilst primarily based on the copy in the UCLA archives, incorporates material from three copies preserved in different countries, each of which had been cut by censors in different ways to meet local expectations. It features cock fighting which was very popular in England in Shakespearian times, and continued underground for a long time after being banned. Apparently the British censors exorcised these sequences (although it would be hard to claim that cockfights are more cruel or violent than fox hunting). A different concern arose in the U.S.A. The custom in Bali at the time the film was made was for both sexes to dress stripped to the waist for working in the fields. In Shakespeare's England it was also a traditional custom for young unmarried women to wear costumes which exposed their bosom (Queen Elizabeth causes a minor scandal when following this practice at court whilst trying to overcome prejudice against an unmarried female monarch by claiming that because she was married to her country, she did not need a husband), and this practice caused no concerns for the British censors, but all close up sequences of bare breasted women were deleted from American copies of the film. Whilst this may have been a trivial problem for the restoration process, it provides an interesting and very dramatic illustration of the impact of censorship on artistic creativity, even in countries where freedom of expression is most deeply rooted.

Judged by the standard of other documentaries referred to here, it would be difficult to award this film more than 7 stars, but it remains one that I would have been exceptionally reluctant to forgo enjoying, and I cannot too strongly recommend anyone who missed it to watch out for a repeat showing.

Excalibur (1981)

Thru' mists of time

[9/10 · 17 July 2010]

Most film directors spend available time watching well regarded films made by other directors; both learning from them and, equally valuable, considering how they could have been improved. Often the director concerned develops a strong urge to re-make a film which he or she feels could have been created much more effectively. Conversely established studios may reward in-house directors for exceptionally financially successful films by providing full support to make any film of the director's choice. In this way James Cameron's success with Titanic gave him the opportunity to create Avatar, and Peter Jackson, after directing the Lord of the Rings trilogy, became able to create the 2005 version of King Kong. John Boorman had long wanted to make his own film of Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, but was beaten to the post by Ralph Bakshi's 1978 animated film - now overshadowed by Peter Jackson's award winning trilogy but still a remarkable film which has just earned a new lease of life as a Blueray release. Film enthusiasts must be grateful that Boorman sought the opportunity to film the Arthurian legends instead. Although never accurately dated, these relate to the period immediately following the withdrawal of Roman forces from Britain in the first half of the fifth century. In AD 379 Christianity had became the official Roman religion and these legends have it that Arthur battled to preserve both Christianity and Roman civilization from Barbarian invaders. Although his name is found in some Roman records, there is no record of his exact status, or even any convincing proof that he ever lived. Despite prolific legends, other written records all date from a much later period so historians still put them in the unproven category. Clearly all the written accounts of battles between armies of knights in the type of shining armour only developed in the twelfth century must date from this period or later and, if not fictional, can only be reporting verbal traditions. This situation is similar to that with Troy, which, until archaeologists finally unearthed the remains of the city, was long regarded as a legend to be found only in the pages of Homer's Illiad. There have been many attempts to unearth remains proving the Arthurian legends in this way, but to date nothing totally convincing has been found. Many feel that such a mass of detailed stories is unlikely to have arisen without any foundation, but as with Troy this would not confirm the individual tales which have been passed down for so many centuries. We may never know whether Achilles or Hector really existed but even if this is one day proved we will still not accept the legends linking them to the immortals of Mount Olympus. Similarly with Arthur, archaeological discoveries confirming his participation in some of his legendary battles would not even prove that he was a legitimately crowned monarch, let alone support the stories of magical interventions on his behalf by Merlin. .

Historically, Arthur is a Celtic hero and these legends appear to have emanated from the Celtic refuges in Cornwall, Wales and Brittany. This might point to a slightly later historical period when the Celts had been driven far to the west by the invading Saxons. But the legends speak of Arthur's conquests, at their peak, extending over most of Britain and parts of both France and Scandinavia so it is equally easy to understand why oral legends of past greatness would have become increasingly important a few centuries later when his people had been forced into a smaller and less hospitable area. Early written records come mainly from Wales where Geoffrey of Monmouth incorporated many of the legends into a history of the Celtic kings. These and other similar works were used by Sir Thomas Malory to create his major work -:"Le Morte d'Arthur", printed by Caxton in 1485. Prepared as eight books covering the entire life of Arthur, this was perhaps the most important work he printed. An excellent summary of the contents of each book can be found on line in Wikipedia. Four hundred years later Tennyson, using considerable poetic licence, converted them into the soaring blank verse of "Idylls of the King" which so naturally complemented Victorian concepts of Christian morality. John Boorman clearly knew and loved the works of both Malory and Tennyson. Perhaps more important this was also true of his scriptwriter Rosco Pallenberg. For them, history was uncertain, this was to be the film of a legend; and I believe they produced the most atmospheric film of legends almost lost in the mists of time ever to have been created, a film which deserves a place in any list of the hundred best films.

But both critics and the public have been split on this. This is one of the films that is either loved or hated. The problem I think was that many who saw it were expecting a fictional reconstruction of the life of the great King Arthur. This could make a good film but it should be called King Arthur, not Excalibur; and it was not Boorman's film. He did what he set out to do incredibly brilliantly and I find it hard to criticise his great work. However, disappointed with its reception, he is now in the process of filming it again with an IMDb expected release date of 2012. Boorman is a director capable of creating an even more outstanding film, but because re-makes have a history of so often falling short of the original I am writing these comments now to urge fellow film lovers to buy the DVD of the existing film before it is withdrawn and becomes a very elusive masterpiece to track down. I rate it at a rare but well deserved nine stars.

The Sister of Ursula (1978)

Dark psychological obsessions on the bright sunny Amalfi coast

[6/10 · 8 April 2010]

The early Italian Giallo (yellow) films first appeared in the 1960's and were erotic thrillers which featured minimal nudity and largely avoided direct horror, but still had arresting and unusual story lines created largely through the complexities of everyday sexual interactions among ordinary people. At this time Hollywood, which had barely escaped from the rigid requirements of the Hayes code, still believed a flash of bare breast guaranteed an erotic film. Later, as North American films matured, the giallos tried to keep a step 'ahead' by an increasing emphasis on nudity and sometimes S & M practices. Eventually, when Hollywood moved to 'slasher' films that showed vastly more nudity as well as greater horror and violence, the giallo films which had remained relatively restrained, began to lose market share; and by the mid 1970's their end was in sight. 'The Sister of Ursula', first released in 1978 is a late film of this genre, I missed its perfunctory first release, and it only became accessible again here after a DVD was released by Severin in 2008. Its director, Enzio Milioni, probably sensing that his opportunity for creating many more films would be very small if 'Ursula' was not a major popular success, clearly decided to stir in everything he could to increase its viewer appeal. This did not work - I gather he only completed two more major films after making 'Ursula', even though the murders were plentiful, the work of a serial killer who used a most unusual murder weapon (No spoilers here - see the other reviews), and there were enough extended nude scenes, some portrayed in near porn style, to satisfy even today's jaded hotel viewers or late night cable TV audiences. I felt these interrupted the story to a point which eventually became very irritating, and overall most viewers have rated this film as inferior to many of the earlier Giallos. But whilst 'Ursula' is a violent story, the actual violence - unlike the eye candy - is not shown, only its consequences. To my mind this brings it much closer to being family entertainment, and ultimately it is still quite an enjoyable thriller with a psychologically interesting story line.

Film Noir is a genre which is certainly not everybody's choice, and 'Ursula' has more sleaze with less satirical bite than many of the earlier giallos. But although it has too many plot holes and is clearly not a great film, 'Ursula' does have a number of other features going for it. It has easily read sub-titles which I find far preferable to the more usual very bad dubbing, and both the characterisation and acting are well above average. It is set in a magnificent period hotel offering a flamboyant art nouveau decor that is a joy to see; as well as interesting classical architecture and plenty of the requisite old stone walls or cellars. I wish a few more film makers would take the trouble to identify locations as good as this before they decide to start shooting. The lighting and the camera work also both earn high commendation. The story takes place on the lovely Amalfi coast of Italy, not far from Capri; and the Mediterranean scenery (for which I am a complete sucker as can be seen from some of my other reviews here) is intensely evocative. I had already reconciled myself to the thought that I would probably never travel in this area again, but after watching 'Ursula' I am already weighing the possibility of changing my mind. What more can an old man want or expect from a movie than this?

I Spit on Your Grave (1978)

On the fringe!

[30 March 2010]

This has become one of the most controversial films ever released in North America. It features a very prolonged gang rape where the victim, intended to suffer the ultimate penalty of death to protect her attackers, finally escapes only because the retarded individual detailed to kill her did not understand why, and failed to carry out his mission. After she recovers physically the mental scars are such that she can only think of revenge, and eventually she goes to a church to ask for absolution for taking the law in her own hands before killing all four of her attackers. These brutal and degrading events provide a synopsis of the complete film which has nothing in it that could conventionally be called entertainment. Many viewers called it misogamist, some felt it encouraged extreme male superiority views, others that the latter part showed it favouring feminine empowerment. In practice the story is presented essentially in a documentary style, not from the point of view of either assailants or victim. Its author and director has related how he was once instrumental in providing assistance to a girl he found in some bushes who had been gang raped, and left with a broken jaw. His horror both at what had happened to her, and at the way the authorities responded when she reported the rape, led him to appreciate how such a victim could be traumatised to the point of becoming mentally unbalanced. Gradually these thoughts coalesced into a script for a story designed simply to depict the reality of the utterly mindless violence experienced by the victim and of its effect on her psyche. Clearly this is a valid subject for either a book or a film, equally clearly reading or viewing such a work would not be enjoyable; and if the characters were real enough could prove very distressing, severely limiting its audience. Ultimately perhaps this audience could even be limited to those perverted enough to identify with the assailants, so enabling them to gain some sort of pleasure from watching the ongoing suffering. This seems to be the assumption made by Roger Ebert who described it as the sickest film ever made and attempted to have its screening halted. His review reported that when he saw it some men in the audience were applauding and cheering the attackers on. If such perverts were the only people likely to view the film it would be better for it not to be screened.

It is a valid point of view even if only a small proportion of the audience falls into this category. After Kubrick's "Clockwork Orange", which also featured graphic scenes of rape and violence, was released these were a significant number of violent crimes in England, which exactly copied the scenario of the film. This was reported to Kubrick who in response withdrew the film from distribution there for a number of years. But logically if such films cannot be shown because of fears about their impact on the sanity of unbalanced characters in the audience, the same would apply to news stories about violent events such as accounts of torture, massacres, suicide bombers and all too often genocide. We must keep what man can do to man firmly in our attention if its total unacceptability to all normal people is to have any effect in restraining those not blessed with even a modicum of normal humanity, and there is no other method of restraint which can be effective before rather than after these individuals go off the rails. A different reason for putting a ban on this and similar films is an assumption that there are basic universal standards of taste which would justify it. But this does not follow even when there is nobody who enjoys watching them. Who enjoys watching newsreel shots of a major earthquake with the survivors attempting to dig into the ruins by hand to rescue their loved ones? Distaste does not universally lead to rejection; the wish to remain well informed forces us to watch, and sometimes even to join, or at least support, the work of rehabilitation.

I watched this film largely to find out why Roger Ebert wanted to prevent it from being shown, and now feel sure his reaction was due to the behaviour of the fellow members of his audience, not to the nature of the film. Most people would not want to watch it, but they are free not to. It is no more unpleasant to watch that many other scenes depicted on television and even though watching it was unpleasant I am now glad I did so. I am probably more aware that if I see a girl alone who looks spaced out, it just might be because she is not on a drug trip but needing help and support. Ultimately this is not a bad thing. Another good reason to see it is the tremendous performance by Camille Keaton - her grandfather 'Buster' was noted for the discomfort and pain he accepted whilst making many of his films, Camille was certainly a chip off the old block and could only have endured what she did because of a conviction that in the long run it would make a small contribution to the evolution of a more caring society. As to the film itself, I felt the rape sequences, which were almost documentary in character, did not comfortably integrate with the revenge sequences which were made less realistic and more stylistic by attempts to bring out the almost unbelievable egos behind the behaviour of the rapists. Otherwise it was very well made.

I do not feel it would be appropriate to give this film an IMDb rating. but I do recommend it without reservation to those who feel, despite the comments above, that they still want to see it.

Revenge of the Nerds (1984)

Rude,crude and raunchy but deservedly successful

[5/10 · 27 March 2010]

Rude, crude and raunchy but also consistently good humoured and almost consistently funny. This is a film that it is impossible to commend but whilst it should have sunk into oblivion long ago, it still has enough consumer appeal to remain readily available. In fact it is even well on its way to becoming a cult classic. The reason is partly of course that most of us enjoy any film about underdogs who are being abused by their more successful contemporaries but find a way to strike back and earn their place in the sun. None of us can hope for a continually successful life without setbacks, and such films provide necessary encouragement at these times. This was an early example, and it may even have saved a few unhappy young nerds in unsympathetic Colleges from suicidal thoughts. So roll on ROTN, continue to earn new DVD releases and to maintain a user rating that remains just above the unviewable range. - 5 stars is probably about fair.

Sherrybaby (2006)

If you enjoy 'tearjerkers' do not miss this.

[7/10 · 26 March 2010]

The title says it all - Sherry is a young woman who still in many ways acts like a child. She has had an unfortunate start to her life which culminated with her becoming a single mother saddled with a drug habit she could not support financially that inevitably led to her appearing in Court for petty theft. She received quite a long jail sentence and the film opens when she had served enough of this to be released on probation. We quickly appreciate that her problems largely resulted from immaturity which was mainly a consequence of her home upbringing rather than due to any basic character fault of her own. She was released with a very good prison record after making a real attempt to rehabilitate herself; with the one unwavering objective of getting re-united with her daughter Alexis, now living with her brother and his wife, as quickly as possible. But we also appreciate that she is far from mature (even though not quite a baby) and will have difficulty finding a successful way forward on her own in our complex modern society. It looks long odds that before long she will revert to using drugs again and will be back where she was when she first became entangled with the law. This film is a real tearjerker - Sherry is played as an immature character with whom one can sympathise; so when the film bluntly shows the problems such an individual faces, and we watch the many blows that life outside prison is inflicting on her, we have imminent expectations of seeing a final blow which will overwhelm her and lead to her return to prison with the prospect of no more than an unfulfilled lifetime of petty crime in front of her.

This expected ending might be a route for achieving an art-house film award, but the scriptwriter and director clearly recognised it would not be likely to to lead to box office success, particularly as the story is filmed in a totally non-judgmental style so that it screens almost like a documentary crying out for a final resolution. However Sherry's battle for acceptance and respect will clearly be a long one and any quick definitive ending which implied the end of Sherry's problems would be artistically unrealistic. Instead the film wisely ends at one significant staging point in her long struggle. (SPOILER AHEAD} Her brother, although anxious to give her his full help and support, is unable to do so effectively whilst she continues to believe all her problems result directly from the unjustified suspicions of her contemporaries. Eventually this dichotomy drives her back to heroin again, but she bravely pulls up short, recognising both that there were legitimate fears on the part of her so-called friends, and that she needs more help if she is to finally develop a lifestyle acceptable to those among whom she is living. The film ends with her going into a detox centre, but before doing so she returns to her brother to accept the offer of help she had been rejecting before . We know she will still have many battles ahead of her, but at this point she has won the first and greatest of them; and she now has a real chance to eventually become fully reintegrated into her community. We wish her well as the film ends at what would otherwise have been a very uncertain point. Although simple, in my experience such an ending is unusually realistic for films dealing with this type of subject matter.

Without the truly outstanding performance by Molly Gyllenhaal as Sherry this film would provide very flat viewing, like a rather sterile documentary intended to make us more sympathetic to those who have stumbled along the wayside, but not really involving our emotions. Molly has lifted it well above this level and most of the other performances (including that of the young actress who played her daughter) are also excellent. Some IMDb users have said that they do not care for her acting, but her award winning portrayal of Sherry has been acclaimed by so many critics and viewers that all I need add is the recommendation - If you have not already seen this film, find a copy of the DVD as soon as you can.

7 Stars