nicniewart Reviews

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

So dull I fell asleep

[2/10 · 5 October 2017]

The original had a story that was clear and a driving narrative. This had effects over story and even the music was a copy ... of Vangelis. It was just plain dull. I kept wondering when Harrison Ford would appear and live up to the posters ( the last 10 minutes ). A lot of directors have made the mistake of concentrating on Ryan Gosling's face in the belief that the camera can see him think. He's no Eastwood, or Jimmy Stewart. Another fault of sci-fi films are the lengthy speeches about the state of the the outer quadrant, and the reasons why Tharg must be destroyed etc etc. This was no different. There was the Robin Wright character, Jared Leto, et al. I liked the abandoned casino set. Something for the eye to rest on and take the whole story in. The original had much of this. This hadn't. The use of original footage was gratuitous, and by then I had stopped caring. So many movies this year have had good posters but poor product:The Dark Tower, Kingsman, And now this.

The Lost City of Z (2016)

Fawcett Facts. Contains spoilers

[1 April 2017]

Trying to film an unsuccessful man's unsuccessful search for a city that did not exist is sure to cause problems. Early Spanish explorers from the 16th century onwards told of wide avenues, canals, palisades, cities of tens of thousands. Trouble was, when organised searches entered the land, everything was gone, and had disappeared into the jungle. So was it all hokum? Well no. There was never a city as Fawcett imagined, a Machu Picchu, made of stone. It was all earthworks, which after just two generations had been abandoned and returned to jungle. The Indians living there were all but wiped out by diseases brought by the first Spanish. They were not aware that their ancestors had built this remarkable system which only started to show up in the latest satellite imagery and was confirmed by on the ground digs in the past 20 years or so. Indian soil management techniques had reached a high level to transform human waste and leaves into rich compost enabling long term stay in villages. Fawcett was part adventurer, Indiana Jones, part David Attenborough, and part war hero, who was always skint. Rather than being a systematic geographer, he embarked on a poorly financed gung-ho expedition and vanished in 1925, being killed by Indians, without ever realising he had probably walked across part of the "city".Just how big this complex was, what language they used, how it was commissioned, we will never know, nothing was ever written down. Did it all link the Amazon from north to south and from east to west? Perhaps it did. What drove Fawcett ? Certainly the lure of gold; he was skint after all. And he was sure there was a city. But is it the "sure" of the gambler, who is sure he has the winning lottery ticket?

Meek's Cutoff (2010)

Pointless Waste of Film Stock

[1/10 · 8 November 2012]

Watching paint dry. Having root canal work done. Mowing the lawn. Clearing the gutters of old leaves. All of these have a point to them. They achieve something. Meek should have cut his own throat, and not made this film, for this is such a waste of film stock. The script: what script? European film has some subtle use of narrative, whether spoken or implied visually. Whoever made this deliberately avoided such references. Words fail me. The only other waste of time lately was watching the restored Max Ophuls LOLA MONTES. That at least was sequentially boring. This has nothing but the cattle pulling these miserable wagons over ridge after ridge. When they have done that,they go over more ridges. Then guess what? They go over more ridges yet. Then still more. Then some more for good measure. We get the idea that the early settlers had long distances to go. Then they go over some more ridges. The End.

Defiance (I) (2008)

One Of The Dullest Films Ever

[3/10 · 13 May 2009]

Two hours plus of phony mock east European accents (like the ones from the TV series Mission Impossible made in the 60's set usually in a town called Plotnik, in a country called Brudny, where the team has to steal a plutonium warhead)are very trying. As everyone was a Pole- there was no Latvia,or Lithuania- and the foes were either Russian or German, it would have made more movie sense for the Westerners to speak in natural English accents, with only the baddies having accents- and no need for subtitles then- which would have made it easier on distribution as well as less painful to the ear. As the film goes now- every one has an accent for over two hours. whether they have to or not. Two: It is a worthy topic, having so far been ignored by film makers. But why is it so dull? the camera work is good, the film stock grading is OK, the editing a little perfunctory, the direction so-so, which means the casting and the script must be to blame. To have James Bond in the lead was to guarantee distribution- but there was no one else to have the eye rest easy. Liev Shreiber has that face that is made for difficult roles. Obviously talented, but somehow yes he showed there was tension between those who supported the Russians and those who didn't- but as a film....it's a different case. The other vignettes about Jewish stereotypes- put two intellectuals together and you get three opinions- the Rabbi, the school teacher, the man hungry woman, the comely lass, were just those. It's from a WELCOME TO ISRAEL KIBBUTZ pack for beginners. I found it irritating: just why, I have been thinking overnight, it's a combination of things, mainly they come under the heading just not good enough.

Tales from Earthsea (2006)

Good But Not Great

[7/10 · 25 September 2007]

This is by the son, not the master. As a Studio Ghibli piece, it's not bad, no Ghibli film is ever bad. It's just not there yet. The things we all know and love about Ghibli- the clouds, the sky, the Joe Hisaishi piano driven music are absent. Those things gave time to take in the majesty of the piece, and to think about the action- so rare in a piece of animation.That was one of the most salient points about Japanese animation- there was time to think. Disney is forever action and then the song- then more action. This has very little, in fact none of it, and the music is from the western action-action-action school. Many cuts are just plain irritating- they're too quick and what follows is not a progression or step forward- they're just jarring. The remedy comes with improving technique- easily rectified by experience and age. That said the story seems to be truncated and not having read any of this sort of book- as Clive James said- I too was inoculated against mythical beasts and magic at an early age- I find there's perhaps too many things going on. There's the court scene- we never go back for a resolve- the dragons- seem to be just there as dragons and could have been just as easily sheep, whales or guinea pigs. But without them there wouldn't have been a wow! Totoro had many wow objects- the tree, the Totoro itself, the Catbus. Spirted Away had legions of wow things. The spirits, the dragon, the witch, the railway, the bathhouse. Princess Mononoke had the Akudama, the forge, the boar beast, the great forest spirit, the battles. Tales From Earthsea had some of the same feel as The Little Norse Prince- one of the early Ghiblis- with which it shares its semi-Nordic/Celtic scenery. Overall it's good, but it's not great.

Harry Hill (1997–2000)

Harry Hill is a Comic?

[1/10 · 12 February 2007]

I think it's an age thing. People below the age of 30 find him funny. Anyone on the wrong side of the tracks doesn't find him amusing. His latest series on British TV is where he reviews the most funny parts of the past week's TV, and still fails to raise a smile. That said none of my teenage daughters find him funny. Did I say funny? well, sometimes slightly, ever so slightly, almost mildly amusing, but I just sit there with a frown. I think he is a con on the verge of a breakdown. Given the same sort of budget as Benny Hill (no relation) got all those years ago, Benny gets the laughs, 20 and 30 years later from beyond the grave. There is something of a Methodist preacher about these scripts-vetted by a parish good suburb committee; they are so clean, as to be emasculated. I know it takes all sorts to make a world, but it ain't my world. You need an occasional barb in life, to convince yourself life is real. His thing is the over sized late career-Elvis white collars, bald head and 1960's glasses. He qualified as a doctor. That's all I know. But give me Harold Lloyd's 1930 glasses and I am falling about, biting the carpet. Just put on a Laurel and Hardy, and I am already giggling like a loon. The same with Will Ferrell, you either find him funny or like me, I think it is something about the eyes that is so uneasy. I would never sit at a table where he's carving the thanksgiving turkey, just in case. Having said that I don't find Ricky Gervais even remotely funny either. Another con, who has been seized upon by the under-30 humour police and made mandatory. Harry Hill is part of the new wave of British humour. It's the same as the old wave, but without any funny bits. Maybe it is an age thing. What do any other IMDb readers think?

Children of Men (2006)

A Dank Dismal View of Post Blairite England

[1/10 · 24 January 2007]

Britain's best film making was the golden age of Ealing Studios, where such gems as KIND HEARTS AND CORONETS,THE LADYKILLERS,THE LAVENDER HILL MOB,PASSPORT TO PIMLICO were at one end and by the time of the lavish blockbusters of David Lean the era was already in decline. The films showed honest labourers with a charm and humanity, and also the rich at play with style and elegance. Consider then the subject matter of CHILDREN OF MEN: a dismal world that England has become under Blair, rank, decaying, everything broken, covered with mildew, graffiti, nothing working, abandoned old cars, dodgy looking immigrants everywhere, shoddy clothes, smoke and pollution everywhere, everyone looking and being unpleasant, 1984-style guards in a shadow of SS or NKVD lookalikes. What is there in this film so the eye can rest on? There is no comfort anywhere. Everything is dirty, the colours bleached, the greens made khaki, sour orange. There are no nice cars, no nice houses, kitchens, gardens, anything. At least Tarkovsky had a driving narrative, critically composed frames, and a superior moral stance as he was battling the Soviet regime from within. This has no such claims. The hero is played by Clive Owen who resembles a block of wood, inheriting the role once made famous by Liam Neeson. Julianne Moore is in it for about 15 minutes then gets shot dead (a merciful release) and then so does Michael Caine, who is the sole positive thing about this movie. The subject matter concerns that the authorities in this future world are preventing/have prevented/ or maybe considering to prevent/ any more babies being born. I couldn't care less which of those it was. On fast forward, it doesn't really matter. The film shows an England in a world devoid of any reference to God, or the joys and compassion it brings to life, so the whole tenet and tone of this film to me is utterly pointless. It has all the air of a made for TV BBC film, did I say film? more like the filmed bits in a dismal 1970's BBC video tape series like Doctor Who. In the 40's someone faced with the subject matter of this film would just run away to Florida, or Utah. In a French film of the 50's everyone would have a car crash; in the 60's people would sing; in the 70's they would turn to drugs; in the 80's they would turn to technology. In the 90's they would send a rocket to some distant planet to summon help; now we have no solution, only the off switch. The whole thing is so joyless and unsympathetic that I had given up caring what the plot was, or what the outcome was, and the only thing that baffles me is why such obvious talents as Cuaron, Lubetzki, and Caine should waste on such subject matter. The last time I watched something so awful was in student days when the film club had booked a documentary with the irresistible title of LABOUR UNREST IN SAO TOME. (Well it was the late 60's) And this has been nominated for some Oscars? Please, Gentlemen, try harder.

The Dark (2005)

The Brits can't make decent horror

[1/10 · 3 October 2006]

There is something of the smell of the tea van and the sandwiches which gets in the way whenever the Brits want to make a horror film. Maybe because they are not used to big budgets, or to spend when they have to spend, and scrimp when they have to scrimp. "The Dark" is one such film. It is a low budget device (like all British films, apart from James Bond) pretending to be a three/four person psycho thriller. It is the script, the direction, the casting (crucial always, but more so when you only have three people). In the end, it is not a satisfying feeling. A hamburger filler in the suburbs when for the same money you could have had something spicy, exciting and wonderful in Chinatown. If use could have been made of the ancient Welsh connection to its fullest, then you would have had something, or some recent crime which yearns for atonement, as it is, no use is made of the landscape. It's neither here nor there, and could have played in North Zanesville or Pumice, Montana. "Shaun of the Dead" could have been extended and a mockery of the whole psycho movie would have brought in millions. It would have been enjoyable, funny, and something the Brits have a track record in. Probably for less money and without the need for stars. On the Blockbuster website, there is a rating box. I ticked the bottom one.

Steamboy (2004)

Very Good Example of Anime Marred by Poor Story

[6/10 · 25 July 2005]

Wonderfully drawn, very dark in many places (as in nearly black screen) creative poetic licence would have helped; unusual story setting as it's in Victorian England. The Crystal Palace has been moved from Sydenham Hill to somewhere near Tower Bridge; the hero engineer died in the 1840's, but this is set in the 1860's;Arab arms buyers would not have been visible in those years(they would have left it to the western powers to do it for them, as the West claimed all the Middle East); and there is a robot war at the end somehow force-fitted onto basically a hunt-the-maguffin widget story. CASTLE IN THE SKY was consistently better story telling. The true marvel of STEAMBOY is the artwork, and that is pretty good- much better than anything Disney has done for decades, or probably will do in the foreseeable future. The sound editing is very good too. You get your money's worth- it's 2 hours long, compared to the usual measly 74 minute Disney, but at the end, overall,the feeling is somehow flat.SPIRITED AWAY it is not, more's the pity, but then the director came from the world of robots and sci-fi, and for this attempt to widen the scope of technological interest, we should be grateful. I would not have seen this were it usual Japanese anime sci-fi, and there is a case in point. 7/10 for effort, but it could have been so much better, were it a better story.

The Chorus (2004)

A Wonderful Warm Life Affirming Film That Only The French Can Make

[9/10 · 25 July 2005]

England used to make good films, still copied today but not as well (THE LADYKILLERS), but now all it makes is two types of shows: those with shotguns, seedy tattoo parlours, graffiti inner city streets, junkies and fighting and the second about toffs in period costume. Alas there is nothing in between. Only 25 miles away, is England's neighbour, France, which makes regular masterpieces, of which this is a prime example. It is set in the recent past, the late 40's, and concerns the redemption of a failed musician posted to a rural boy's school for rough kids and orphans. Gradually, and you know he will, he forms a choir from these no-hopers, transforming their lives and his own. It is full of charm, warmth, in the best classical way of film-making. A splendid effort, and rightly belongs in your DVD library. Excellent acting,art direction, confident and intelligent direction (surely big projects will now come his way). The music CD is on the best seller charts throughout Europe and understandably so. The music is different by juxtaposition: you see these poorly dressed scruffy boys, living under a repressive regime, yet singing ditties by Rameau like angels about dreams, oceans, and zephyrs. A VERY LONG ENGAGEMENT, released at the same time, is a big slick version of quirky Gallic charm, and also excellent, full of crane moves, great cameraman's set ups, and a big-scale version of personal versus macro scale ( a fiancée searching for her missing soldier who did not return from the WW1 trenches ) yet between the two, THE CHORUS lingers in the mind with a fondness and a smile.