Film Reviews by Steve

Extreme Japanese body horror which looks like a live action Manga strip. This is a homemade, low budget project from writer-director-factotum Shin'ya Tsukamoto, who basically did everything in his workshop, and also co-stars. He has helpfully outlined the intended plot, though there isn't an obvious linear narrative...

We mainly see two men suffer trauma, who transform into grotesque metal machines. This is more about the style, with the beat up, grainy b&w expressionism and the gloomy kling-klang of the industrial techno soundtrack. It is a demented, gross-out sci-fi/horror with heavy use of prosthetics and animation.

There's obvious thematic content about the impact of technology on human evolution and post-Hiroshima fear of apocalypse. This is an immensely Japanese monster story which reflects their embrace of avant-garde automation. But is also spookily reminiscent of European surrealism from between the wars.

The relentless chaos is brutal- at least the blood/oil and the flesh/metal is in b&w. And its weird futurism is impressive and peculiar. There may be a limit to how much of this anyone would want to see, but as an isolated, 67m hallucinatory experience, it's a must-see for viewers with an interest in experimental cinema.

This looks like a John Hughes film because it's a coming of age story and it casts the same 'Brat Pack' actors, including several from The Breakfast Club released earlier in 1985. And it could be about those kids a few years into the future. Except this is made by Joel Schumacher, a writer-director of modest pedigree. 

While he is obviously inspired by Annie Hall (1977), this is melodrama, or a soap. The dialogue is clunky, the situations are commonplace, and the characterisations are superficial. This is pure nostalgia, an 80s time capsule which was a box office smash because of the young stars and the durable concept.

It reflects on the yuppie lifestyle of a clique of graduate best friends who go through a period of adjustment; because what gets you through school won't get you through life. It's about starting work and selling out... love and infidelity... drugs, booze and the hangover; the encroachment of responsibility.

It wonders when you will wakeup and be like your parents. Pre-surgery Demi Moore is top billed, but hardly recognisable in the bad girl role. In '85, Rob Lowe was the hot star, but my pick is Andrew McCarthy as a heartbroken journalist. Sadly, the soundtrack is a dud, though John Parr had a US no.1 with the title track.

Landmark high school romantic comedy which owes more to Woody Allen than Fast Times at Ridgmont High (1982).  It's the ultimate '80s experience with the hair, the clothes... And the alternative soundtrack including The Smiths, OMD... Plus of course the punky title song by The Psychedelic Furs. And many more.

Molly Ringwald gets to keep the unofficial Ms. Eighties title for all time as the boho scholarship student at a school full of rich kids, who is in a first-love triangle with a similarly disadvantaged admirer (Jon Cryer) and the sort of teenager who comes to class in a Mercedes (Andrew McCarthy). With prom coming up fast...

We get a female perspective on the rites of passage. The only significant weakness is neither romantic choice feels like a happy ending; writer-producer John Hughes swapped the outcome in post-production. There's more heartache in the scenes between Molly and Harry Dean Stanton as her deadbeat dad.

While it doesn't dig into the subcultures as deeply as its imitators (and everyone's white), there's plenty of genuinely witty dialogue. It's optimal to watch at 16. Otherwise, this is nostalgia. Even if you didn't grow up in Illinois, the music is British. This is a school where it's forever 1986, and Molly Ringwald is always a star.

The introduction claims this is based on a true story, and it's interesting how often the premise has been copied since, like its themes reflect the ordinary fears of our times. A nine year old boy goes missing from his rural community and his already unhappy family begins to come apart.

When he returns aged 15 he is considerably changed because he ended up on the street... Or because he's an imposter... The parents choose not to press on the details because they want to believe in the dream. This isn't so much a thriller, as an arthouse reflection on issues of identity and the role of the family.

They are a dysfunctional household and it's possible to plot a way through their incipient neuroses and sexual hangups... The conclusion has little impact as the parents and his older sister have mostly lost interest in the truth because it no longer seems to matter... They got used to a new reality.

There's an odd paranormal diversion which doesn't go anywhere but isn't intrusive. This is a slow, muted exploration of a family which is unusual, but by no means unknowable- and may upset some viewers. Writer-director Agnieszka Holland makes the group dynamics of these traumatised survivors weirdly mesmerising. 

Characteristically lavish/febrile Southern Melodrama from Douglas Sirk's classic period at Universal Studios. This is the 1950s of Eisenhower's America shot in gorgeous Technicolor with huge stars and exaggerated emotions... It is adapted from a novel based on a real life murder, but this is like a photographed airport blockbuster.

It brings together a few of Sirk's stalwart leading actors with Robert Stack as a crazy drunk/Texas oil tycoon who marries a classy Madison Avenue business secretary- played by Lauren Bacall- and goes on the wagon, for a while. Rock Hudson is the buttoned up adopted brother who holds everything together... but wants her even more!

Dorothy Malone steals the picture and won an Oscar as the younger sister, a volatile nymphomaniac who blows the family apart! There is more sex chat than usual for the period, though the attitudes are dated. And there's a chic production with Bacall in particular wearing some cool outfits, plus the sports cars and sumptuous set decor...

Sirk directs with his usual elegance including some eye-catching crane shots. And there's the Latin rhythms of the big band jazz. Everything is overstated and glossy and superficial and that's the main attraction. Once more, the director implies there is a sickness in US capitalism. But naturally, the postwar excess is the reason we're watching!

This gets marketed as an eco-thriller, which it hardly is. It's about three environmentalists who blow up a dam, but there isn't much editorialising on green issues. And it's scarcely a thriller; there is a moment of classic Hitchcock suspense when the bomb is activated, but it mostly eschews standard technique. 

This is more a showcase for the 2010s slow cinema revival, which was led by its director, Kelly Reichardt. So there are long edits, static camera setups and understated acting. This is not exciting; it is gently hypnotic. Jesse Eisenberg and Dakota Fanning as the eco-warriors barely give a performance.

The story is lifted by the slightly more animated involvement later on from Peter Sarsgaard as an ex-marine who assists in their mission. Then it becomes more about their guilt and how the trio respond to the consequences of their actions. And in this respect, it is hardly waving a flag for eco-activism.

Its merit depends on our response to its ostentatiously languorous aesthetic. This is an anti-thriller. It is quietly compelling for the first hour but lacks ideas for a second act and is sustained by the ambient music. Still, it's a must-see for students of slow cinema and a relatively accessible example of the style.

High concept Hong Kong crime thriller with a unique premise. We've seen cops go undercover into narco-gangs before, but what if simultaneously the mob sends one (or more) of their own the other way? Yes, this could be merely schematic...

Except the idea is developed with intelligence- though admittedly the psychology/philosophy more than the logistics. And as well as the hooky Hollywood style action, the pumped up score and cool photography, we get a twist of neo-noir sadness.

There are genuine star performances from Andy Lau as the nerveless gangster who takes over police internal affairs and particularly Tony Leung as the cop who spends a decade out in the cold. Naturally, there is some subtext about identity.

And co-director Andrew Lau says this is an allegory about the handover of Hong Kong to the Chinese... But it mainly operates as one of the better gangster films of this century. The remake by Martin Scorsese is redundant; this is near flawless.

Sumptuous but unconventional account of the later life and death of the low-born British landscape painter. While there is considerable reflection on his art, there is also an abundance of social history and an embellished private life. Timothy Spall plays the legend as a monosyllabic curmudgeon with a functional approach to sex.

The script hardly articulates his artistic philosophy, but we see the famous paintings. Mike Leigh constantly places Turner in the centre of a panorama, which is appropriate, though there is no visual representation of his expressionism. Still, this is a beautiful looking period drama, with the Oscar nominated photography, costumes and set design.

Broad strokes are applied to the detail of his relationships. While that is usual for a screen biopic, it serves to make Turner more of a degenerate than a standard hero. There's some absurd humour; time spent chuckling at the eccentricities of John Ruskin (Joshua McGuire) may be the furthest the new century ever got from gross-out comedy.

Many of the director's stock company turns up in support- Dorothy Atkinson damn near steals the picture as the Master's sad, docile housekeeper. This is more of an epic study of the iniquities of Victorian Britain than a celebration of a life. Though the genius is still there and such an extraordinary artist surely justifies the big screen treatment.

No surprise this started out as writer-director Joe Mankiewicz's own unpublished novel as he seems to have faithfully dumped the whole lot onto the screen. This might be the most overwritten picture ever. There are three narrative voices and long passages of elaborate speech, heavy with the constant drone of irony.

There's every kind of talk except a soliloquy delivered to a skull, but not much genuine wit. It's about a writer-director, so maybe Mankiewicz thought of this as important stuff, but it is a dramatised airport novel from the decade after WWII when Hollywood cut costs by moving into the spaces vacated by the European aristocracy.

Fans of '50s melodrama will find much to enjoy in the lavish production, with the classic sports cars, haute couture and historic locations- in Technicolor. There's a signature role for Ava Gardner as a low born Spanish dancer courted by the machinery of the Hollywood studios to grind out a profit for the bosses... Yes, there is politics.

Elderly Humphrey Bogart plays the old-school director who mediates between the beautiful naïf and the facts of life. Edmond O'Brien won an Oscar as a press agent who sells his soul to the highest bidder. There is surplus of glamour, star appeal and production gloss but anyone expecting a golden age classic is likely to be disappointed.

Since the millennium it feels like horror has become the hot spice of the big screen; a necessary stimulant for the jaded palates of a diminishing audience. This is superficially about rowing and obsession and maybe even an allegory on what society does to young people through the ordeal of educational hothousing...

But it is created in the cinematic language of horror, with the dark expressionism, minor chords and hallucinatory inserts. The climactic thunderstorm ultimately takes us into the gothic. Isabelle Fuhrman plays a recruit to the University rowing programme whose crazy work ethic makes her unpopular with the rest of the crews.

And it loosens her grip on reality. Or is this... all in her head? Writer-director Lauren Hadaway borrows some of her style from David Lynch, but the story is an original spin on a classic sport film scenario... the plucky challenger who overcomes colossal odds. Except the novice rower is in pursuit of a validation that will never be satiated.

Furhrman is suitably committed as the isolated outsider who is transformed by her addiction into a sort of psychological monster. And she dominates to good effect. The slender premise is stretched by the considerable atmosphere, but that's also fine. This is an impressive debut from Hadaway on multiple levels.

Fascinating dissection of postwar German guilt and denial. It is based on a real life young woman- Anna Rosmus- who investigates the secrets and lies of the respectable, stalwart conservatives of her provincial hometown who lived under the Nazis regime; and sometimes enthusiastically collaborated.

She is routinely blocked in her attempts to access public records and maligned and violently assaulted by the former disciples of the Third Reich, including the church. Plus a new generation of neo-Nazis. Lena Stolze plays the title character who presents her discoveries to camera as an irreverent lecture.

There are comical inserts and daydreams, but gradually the mood gets darker as the forces that oppose her research become ever more threatening. Writer/director Michael Verhoeven reflects on all sides of the issues, but this eventually becomes a polemic aimed at injustice and bourgeoise hypocrisy.

And we learn that there were concentration camps on the border of the community. It's a counter-view of the Geman Heimat, which implies that only the occupation prevented a post-WWII West German civil war. Yes it's a dramatised dissertation, but it makes its case with wit, imagination and intelligence.

This Scottish high school comedy was released well before Fast Times at Ridgemont High (1982), so really it inspired a whole new Hollywood genre. And this is despite the ultra-low budget, the amateur cast and a score which sounds borrowed from the music library at the Children's Film Foundation.

Gregory (John Gordon Sinclair) falls for the new female centre forward (Dee Hepburn) in his school's hopeless football team and discovers he in turn is being pursued... Well, most teenage viewers at the time preferred Clare Grogan anyway. Though romantically, he'd be out of his depth in a puddle.

But woah! He's a 15 year old boy. It's about the awkwardness of male adolescence and first love, but without any of the darkness. The whimsical comedy is fun but not hilarious. Yet these eccentric kids with their weird obsessions and naive misunderstandings make up in charm what they lack in authenticity. 

The lack of sophistication  is one of the attractions. These are all nerds and no jocks. And no cheerleaders. Credit to writer-director Bill Forsyth for making something seminal out of almost nothing. And tells us that when it comes to dating; the boys may do the asking, but it's the girls who get to decide.

Sincere and uplifting account of the early life of Irish writer/painter/nonconformist Christy Brown, based on his autobiography. Being born into the poverty of Dublin in the depression was a struggle for everyone, but he was also handicapped by cerebral palsy, which left him to create with his only functional limb...

The point is made twice that his mother gave birth to 22 children, and nine of them died. Which makes Christy's survival a triumph of the spirit, even before he made a reputation as an artist. The boy is well played by Hugh O'Conor until Daniel Day-Lewis takes over after half an hour as the angry young man.

And of course, he won an Oscar for his signature performance. As did Brenda Fricker as his stalwart- and heroic- mother. Their scenes together are understated and sometimes comical, but ultimately heartbreaking. There's a strong impression of family with Ray MacAnally as the alternately brutal and buffoonish father.

In addition to the inspirational portrait of a life, there is also some sombre social history of resilient working class Dublin and the supremacy of religious dogma. Apparently a few of the details have been improved for dramatic purposes... but as a tribute to an extraordinary man, it could hardly be bettered.

Maybe Sam Goldwyn's version of Wuthering Heights now matters most for cinematographer Gregg Toland's new camera with the deep focus which was a screen revolution. There is lots of shadowy atmosphere but the usual virtues of a '30s studio production are not a perfect match for Emily Brontë's novel.

Mainly, the exteriors are photographed on a soundstage. Of course, this was standard, but Brontë's gothic romance is about the wild and windy moors almost as much as obsession, pride and revenge. And her classic text is adapted by MacArthur and Hecht who were better known for screwball comedy.

And yet... they retain a fair amount of the dialogue and have a decent go at reducing the sprawling narrative to feature length. There is a genuine frisson in the moments when the voice of the author filters through. Also, in omitting the second half of the novel, a mainstream audience gets what it pays for.

Which is Cathy and Heathcliff's spectral/stormy romance. Laurence Olivier's Yorkshire accent fluctuates and Merle Oberon doesn't even try but they have chemistry. Though she seems more petulant than wild. There's a decent British support cast and a great Hollywood director. Ultimately, Brontë's novel survives the Goldwyn production.

Punchy black comedy which starts out like a glossy spin on the rules of 21st century dating, set to songs by Elvis Costello. But a satisfying late twist takes it somewhere completely unexpected. Though my main thrill is to notice how much Rachel Weisz looks like superstar of '30s melodrama, Sylvia Sidney.

Weisz plays a sexy, subversive arts student who meets cute with a chubby, shabby English undergraduate (Paul Rudd). And the unlikely romance seems to demonstrate the malign consequences of their inequality. It's a four hander with Gretchen Mol and Fred Weller as their mismatched double date.

Neil LaBute adapted his own play, in a period when he was controversial (and hip) for exposés on the cynicism of millennial metropolitan life. Maybe the highly designed plot overwhelms the realism this implies, but the cruel, final reveal still has the potential to shock. Though the impact only works once.

Anyone expecting a romcom about the rules of attraction may be surprised to be eventually confronted with an actual lecture on the ethics of creativity. There is something for either potential audience, but those mainly interested in the status of post-modern art are more likely to be satisfied.