Film Reviews by TB

The film which in many ways launched Saoirse Ronan's career and put her front and centre on the list of the most talented actresses working today. This film is a gentle, but also at times powerful & heartbreaking film. It charts the life of Ellis, who is born in Ireland into a large family, but as a young woman does not find the town she lives in a place that she feels that she can make her life in. Her sister makes contact with an Irish priest living in New York City to help Ellis move over to the USA and start a new life there.

The film then follows Ellis as she makes the horrible and hazardous journey across the Atlantic and tries to settle in the USA. She also falls in love and starts to build a life, before having to come back to Ireland again. Things then get complicated with a man who she had been interested in before she left, as well as the family politics.

The whole film is brilliant. I loved not only following Ellis's journey, but also seeing the various characters that she encounters. Saoirse Ronan at the centre is absolute perfection. I loved her & she totally anchors the film. The other cast are great, but the main two that stuck for me were Julie Walters as Mrs Kehoe the strict landlady and Emory Cohen as Tony, Ellis's love in Brooklyn. But everyone does amazing work.

This film doesn't put a foot wrong. It is the perfect length, great script, looks amazing and brilliant soundtrack. It is also, despite it's 12 rating, a very mild and uncontroversial film. Watch it and fall in love with this incredible world.

The Inbetweeners was a cultural phenomenon in the UK. Starting with the TV show, which was so successful that it was given three series and then two movies which broke records for the highest gross for British comedy films in cinemas, this was a concept which whilst it had been done before, at its best felt totally irreverent and fresh.

But, as time went on with the TV series and which was then exacerbated with the films, one thing became painfully clear: The Inbetweeners either worked brilliantly or totally failed. With the final TV series and the 2nd film, it was either the funniest thing ever (Simon trying to lose his virginity in the TV series, Will having a meltdown around a load of spoilt brats who have gone travelling to "see the real world" whilst living in 5 star hotels and off Daddy's trust fund in the film,) or completely unfunny and totally failing (pretty much everything else in the rest of the 2nd film.) For me, the worst thing about comedy films is when they are not only unfunny but aggressively so, with the performances/script getting more and more ridiculous to compensate for this.

And this is everything that this film is and more.

From the opening scenes, it is clear that Joe Thomas, who plays Simon in the Inbetweeners, has been brought in to tap into that fanbase and also to be subjected to many of the same embarrassing things which the characters encountered in that show. But none of it is in any way funny, at all. It just comes off as desperate. In the 40 minutes that I watched it, I saw exactly the same things that I would have expected in the show, but without anything funny to anchor them to. We see Thomas’s character Nick have a sexual accident, get dumped, embarrass himself in front of everyone, get himself into an extremely awkward sexual situation ect ect in the first 40 minutes. I had by then lost all interest in the film and switched it off, as I just didn’t care about it.

It was, to me, just a lazy and cynical cash grab aimed at the extremely vocal & at times crazed Inbetweeners fan base who have never been able to get over that there hasn't been any more content since the second film. And the biggest irony in this whole sorry saga is that after watching this, they will probably feel even more short-changed...

This film isn’t funny, edgy, radical, provocative, interesting or even controversial. It is simply bland, boring & uninspired. Can we please now stop having Inbetweeners inspired films which cast actors from that world and leave well alone. Stop traducing what was for many of us a wonderful and brilliant part of our teenage years.

It might have good intentions, but I just couldn't get into it. It was a very loud, slightly obnoxious film and the central message was noble but the way it was being done just grated.

Not one for me unfortunately.

The events of the moon landings have been extensively covered through all types of media over the years, such as Apollo 11. This film covers the build-up to and the actual journey itself.

But as much as there is a rich amount of detail and everything looks great, this was at times a very long and heavy-going film. Gosling does try his best and bring gravitas to the role of Armstrong, but also he is an impenetrable character. The rest of the cast also give their best.

By a country mile, the best parts of this film are the final shots on the Moon, shot in stunning IMAX. They are worth waiting until the end to see. They just about make the build-up worth it.

For people who love watching anything space-related, they will lap this up. For others, it is a somewhat interesting but long film. Definitely stay to the end though.

I really enjoyed this and rented it solely because it was Mortensen's directorial debut & attracted excellent reviews.

It is a very beautiful, slow and gentle film. There is a very strong naturalistic feel, with frequent cutting back and fourth between the past and present. Mortensen is shown as a skilled writer as well as a bold and competent director.

The performances are also great, but front and center is Lance Henriksen. For many people, he will be known as Bishop from the Alien universe, But he is also an exceptional actor and here he is giving a massive, meaty role to inhabit. It is a towering performance, full of upset, hurt and hate. But underneath all of it is a deeply miserable and scared man. Mortensen is also great, perfect as a deeply hurt and wounded man, trying to do the right thing which taking a torrent of disgusting abuse, much of it homophobic.

If this is what Mortensen has done with his first attempt of directing, I cannot wait to see what he does next. A brilliant debut.

The first Mummy film was great in so many ways. And re-watching it 15 years after I first saw it, I was reminded again how good it was. Everything just worked and welcomingly there was an unbelievable lightness of touch that ran through all of it. I had remembered that when I watched The Mummy Returns all those years ago, it was my favourite, but that was mainly due to the fact there is much more action in this one. Watching it back 15 years later, I have changed my mind and now feel that the first one is the better of the two.

But that doesn't mean there isn't a lot to love. Starting with the positives, it is wonderful that pretty much everyone has been brought back from the first film, although some people get less to do this time around sadly. Brendan Fraser & Rachel Weitz continue on their perfect chemistry. I just love spending time with them & it is nice to see that their romance has really believably blossomed. They now have a son, who to me was actually the best character in the whole film. Freddie Boath as the son is so so good & manages to do the almost impossible thing of being both extremely likeable and precocious without being annoying. The scenes of him with Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, continually antagonising him are hysterical. We also see the return of both Arnold Vosloo & Oded Fehr, both excellent company.

One character who sadly falls into the category of less to do is John Hannah's Jonathan. In the first film, he was really good comic relief but also fitted well into the story. Here, he makes an appearance early on, then is relegated for the middle part to the background before being almost shoehorned back into the film for the finale. And the pompous blustering did get annoying after a while.

Welcomingly, after the huge success of the first film, there is a significantly bigger budget for action & this is something else that Returns delivers on in spades. As much as the ending fights might get a lot of attention, for me the chase with the London bus was an absolute masterpiece of choreography, fight work and seemless melding of CGI. And as with the first movie, you have to remember that this film is 22 years old now and the sheer amount of films back then which has CGI which was done appallingly were off the charts. So to have this film's action sequences still standing up to scrutiny today is a massive achievement.

The production values are also outstanding and the film, as with the first one, looks spectacular. The sets & costumes are beautiful & so much effort and thought has gone into how everything looks. The remaster in 4K is also brilliantly done as well.

But sadly this film does have its problems and the biggest one by a country mile is the middle section. After the amazing first act, where it so seamlessly slips back into the pace & quality of the first film and in some ways improves on it, we then get a stodgy middle section full of exposition and nothing really happening. By the time the film starts to pick up again, all the wonderful work done previously cannot bring it back. I did enjoy the final battle in the pyramid, but also it was a little too long and bloated.

As much as there is this criticism though, I still had a blast watching it. And it is a worthy successor in many ways to the first film.

I love this film. It takes a genre that has had so many films made about it (boxing) filled it with relatable & colourful characters, used the true story to brilliant effect and builds up to a genuinely thrilling finale.

Massive credit needs to be given to Mark Wahlberg, without whom quite simply this film would never have got made. For years & years whilst it was stuck in development hell, he not only didn't give up, but consistently trained throughout that entire time to ensure that he was match-fit and ready to shoot at a moment's notice.

Every performance is flawless, although for me my favourite was Christian Bale as Dickie. When you see the real Dickie in the behind-the-scenes footage, it is staggering how perfect Bale's characterisation of him is. Amy Adams also perfectly pulls off the tough as nails barmaid and later wife too.

The fight scenes are shot perfectly, the locations great and like with many other films made this way, the vast majority of the smaller bit parts/background characters were real locals from the Boston neighborhood where the film was shot & and the brothers came from.

A flawless, brilliant boxing film and richly deserving of the huge praise given to it.

Imagine you are directing your first film and you manage to get Robert De Niro, Clive Owen & Jason Statham to star in it. Then added to this, you get a $70 million budget, which is roughly $68 million more than most first-time film directors get to play with. This means that you have the ability to get the best stunt teams/action department available. And finally, you are adapting a celebrated although controversial novel by one of the UK most well-known ex-special forces authors and explorers.

You would think: what could go wrong? How could this not be an even halfway-decent film, with some great action to offset any script failings? And after watching the trailer, which even to this day still stands up to scrutiny as a brilliant action preview, I was absolutely pumped for this film.

And then it started...

This film is rubbish. Total and utter boring dreck. It takes a premise which should have been great (ex-special forces mentor kidnapped & his protégé forced to complete the job otherwise the mentor will be killed, whilst also battling against his old colleagues; so in other words, a perfect Statham vehicle,) and turns it into a movie full of schlocky dialogue, rubbish pacing & boring action.

The cast are wasted. Clive Owen & Jason Statham, who can both absolutely hold their own in action scenes & also have incredible screen presence, are reduced to chewing scenery & spouting off exposition. Their much hyped-up (in the trailer) confrontation is also a wasted opportunity, despite the considerable effort both men bring to the table. De Niro is also wasted, given a thankless part which requires him to sit in a cell for most of the film before being allowed to show his military credentials, in an action scene which is blink-and-you'll-miss-it length.

It is actually quite sad to see this decent cast bringing their A-game to a movie which simply doesn't deserve them or use them in any meaningful way. And like with other terrible films I've seen like this, if it wasn't for the A-list cast, you'd find this film in the bargain bin at your local Poundland.

When Mark Wahlberg & Peter Berg first started their collaboration, the results were spectacular. Lone Survivor was a masterclass in tension-building, incredible action and the amazing true story of an American soldier who was trapped & wounded being cared for by what most people regarded as the enemy. Then Deepwater Horizon was made, with a massive budget due to the success of Lone Survivor. This was in every way a masterpiece, building on everything that had started with the previous film. The stunts, script and look of the film perfect, with Wahlberg anchoring everything with his amazing performance.

After that, things started to get a bit wobbly. Patriots Day, whilst again mining a real-life tragedy for the story, was notable for its lack of true quality after the previous works of perfection. But it was still great in parts and every collaboration has a mis-fire, especially when the bar is so high. But compared to this, Patriots Day is Citizen Kane in every way. 

Mile 22 is a genuinely terrible film, total garbage, but loud and obnoxious with a really nasty streak running through it. Wahlberg plays James Silva, who the film tells us, from a very small child had an enormous IQ and all-round lightening-fast reactions. He was then enlisted into the military and rose to the top. He is also an absolute arsehole in every way: confrontational, rude, threatening, belittling and demeaning. Just imagine all the worst traits of Dignam from The Departed turned up to 11. But the film also feels that the best way to portray Silva is frantic, almost epileptic-style frenzied cutting and close-ups. All this does, within the first 10 minutes, is make you hate the film and realise that you have a very long watching experience ahead of you. 

And the worst part about all of this is that everything that you felt Berg & Wahlberg worked so hard to achieve in the previous 3 films has been totally ruined and destroyed in one fell swoop. There is not one element of this film that is likeable, competent or enjoyable. If it hadn’t have said Berg’s name in the credits/I’d gone in and watched this movie cold, I would have refused to believe it was made by him. 

And there are so many missed opportunities. After his incredible work on The Raid, Iko Uwais is probably the hottest actor/action star who does his own stunts working in films today (who are his age.) His ability to craft and act in these scenes is in the same league as Jackie Chan and Jet Li. And to be fair, in this film he is the only one who manages to emerge with any type of dignity. But even so, he is absolutely wasted and worse than that, all the stunts he is involved in are shot & edited so badly, you can’t see what’s going on. Every fight/hand-to-hand combat scene is just cut cut cut cut cut cut cut. You cannot tell what’s happening, and instead you are left wondering who the hell is in charge of quality control and how did this get cleared to be released. 

By the time you get to the end, you are left with a headache and in my case, a sadness that a collaboration which had produced so many great films before had managed to, in one film, totally desecrate all that brilliance and good will. 

In the mid-90’s, the film world was in a glorious state of craziness. As much as there was a huge amount of rubbish released, there were also some absolute gems. I recently watched Basic Instinct for the first time and absolutely loved it: totally crackers off the wall craziness. As well as Hollywood making these sorts of erotic thrillers, there was also another welcome consequence of this: A-list actors signing up to star in these films meant there were massive budgets to play with. And like with Color of Night, welcomingly a vast amount was spent on the actual productions, not just on actor’s wages and their expensive trailers.

This film looks stunning. As much as it is marketed as and will be remembered by many people as simply another erotic thriller with a famous cast, the cinematography, lensing, colours, locations, wardrobes and sets are the best you could possibly hope for. Even Bond films didn’t look this good at that time. This film literally is a visual feast for the eyes. And speaking of Bond films, the stunts and hand-to-hand combat is also great too. 

The story is about an explosives “specialist” called Ray Quick (Stallone) who, after a mission goes awry, quits the CIA and moves to Miami, becoming a hit-man. He is then contacted by Mae Monroe (Stone) who has sworn vengeance on the mafia crime family who years earlier slaughtered her own family. Added into the mix, the mafia family’s head of security is Ned Trent (Woods) who is Quick’s ex partner who he violently fell out with. It then becomes a classic cat-and-mouse thriller which reaches ridiculous levels of silliness. 

Stallone and Stone have excellent chemistry, which is vital because the film simply wouldn’t work otherwise. Woods also chews up the scenery for all he’s worth and even Nicolas Cage might say to him “You need to tone it down a bit!” The thrill of this film is simply that everything is so gloriously silly and stupid, but all done with a totally straight face. 

Amusingly, this film and Color of Night also share another similarity: they both have unbelievably over the top, protracted sex scenes. Whereas Color of Night used pretty much every room in Willis’s character’s mansion to bang, here is it a 7 star hotel room which is the size of an aircraft hanger. And with Stone bringing her Basic Instinct credentials/reputation with her, this just adds to the mix. Part dance/part erotic fantasy/part total cheesy schlock, it’s a great addition to proceedings. 

If you come to this film expecting a masterpiece, you won’t find it. This is a film to be watched exactly as it comes across: tongue firmly in cheek craziness, clichés aplenty but all wrapped up in beautiful production values. A great Friday night film to watch with your friends.  

A film that was devised by Sam Mendes after listening to conversations with his grandfather about his days as a war messenger, 1917 concerns 2 young soldiers who are tasked with delivering a vital message to a commander who is about to lead a charge which is a trap set by the Germans. 

The main draw of the film is that it is a “one-shot” movie with no visual cuts. So you literally spend the entire time following the soldiers and experiencing the danger and threat that they face, at the same time. It is is a technical marvel and as much as there should be the praise for Mendes & his writers, this film belongs to the staggering genius of Roger Deakins. The look, feel, pace and cinematography is his incredible work. I cannot think of another recently comparable example. 

The young actors, who star alongside many Hollywood A-listers, absolutely hold their own and we really root for them the whole way through. It is also a reminder of just how many young men were conscripted and lost in this barbaric & horrific war, which sadly was repeated in many ways a few short years later. 

Essential viewing.  

I realise the title is an enormously bold claim to make, but I absolutely stand by it. I will come to it properly later on though.

This film is like nothing I have ever seen or probably will ever see again. There is a certain element of when you try to explain it, people just won't believe you & think you're either embellishing it or just making it up. But everything I say now is true.

This film is about a 17 year old French boy called Pierre who goes to live with his parents in their villa in the Canary Islands. The father leaves for business and then a couple of days later, Pierre is told by his mother Helene in a totally uninterested & matter of fact way that his father has died in a horrific plane accident. It is then revealed that Helene is unbelievably promiscuous and well-known in the neighborhood for this, has slept with pretty much every man she meets, all with the acceptance of her husband and organises mass orgies. She then demands that Pierre accepts this about her and also become involved.

From there, we are treated to seeing Helene's friend forcibly taking Pierre's virginity on Helene's instructions in the middle of a public town square; Pierre finding his father's pornography collection & deciding that the only course of action is to masturbate then defecate over it; taking part in his mother's sex parties which eventually lead to incest; I mean the list just goes on. And mixed in with all this, the script also has this obsession with Pierre repeatedly pleasuring himself in public places, for inexplicably no reason.

In terms of acting, Huppert, who is usually flawless, just looks like she's coasting through and is totally bored with the whole thing. She has pretty much one expression: blank boredom. Even in the midst of an orgy she looks like she is about to drop off to sleep. There does, however, need to be significant respect given to Louis Garrel. What he does in this film is at times absolutely cringe-worthy and mortifying. He doesn't leave himself with a shred of dignity and I actually felt embarrassed for him, after watching him repeatedly giving himself one in various grimy situations.

As much as seeing the above acts may to some be unbelievably provocative, the honest truth is that for me it was just boring. Once you accept the premise of the film, which is just that it's entire MO is to shock you in whatever way it can, it just becomes like a child who has learnt swearwords and keeps shouting them out. The first time you may be mildly shocked, by the 10th it's just boring and attention seeking.

Then we come to the ending. I mean, it is not a stretch to say it is a work of genius. But genius as in "We have just spent the last 90 minutes putting the audience through the biggest sleaze-fest imaginable, where literally nothing was off-limits. We have to top that and have a memorable ending for people to leave with." However, nothing in any way, shape or form can prepare you for what you see. When the film finished, completely abruptly and with no warning, I just burst out laughing. I then immediately went back and re-watched it, just to make sure I wasn't imagining it. And the second time I watched it, it was even funnier.

As much as I give this film 2 stars, for me, it was worth sitting through all that dreck just to have this piece of cinematic genius wrap it all up. You'll laugh, rub your eyes and genuinely question what you just saw. And you'll never, ever forget it.

This is totally off the wall filmmaking. A complete guilty pleasure. As much as I wasn't old enough to remember it being released, I can see why it made the massive impact that it did. Many people forget that in the late 80's to early 90's, there was still the enormous fear and paranoia over sex/intimacy due to the AIDS crisis. And Michael Douglas has stated that that's what made him committ to making this film, to push back against the fear and lack of sex on screen.

The story is a brilliant cat and mouse thriller. A record producer is brutally murdered and the prime suspect is his girlfriend Catherine Tramell, who also has links to many other people who have been involved in murder. The detective in charge, Nick Curran, who has plenty of skeletons in his closet, investigates and slowly begins to fall dangerously in love with Tramell, whilst all around him people start to die.

The biggest things which I loved about this film were its totally out-there craziness and the brilliance of the cast. Put simply, if either of these things were not fully committed to, the film would have failed. Douglas, who was a massive Hollywood star by the 90's, took an incredible risk by starring in this film. It could so easily have gone so badly wrong and destroyed his career. Likewise, as much as Stone wasn't a household name, she was at the beginning of her career & a point where most actors/actresses make very safe bets in order not to damage their images and potential. But both of them fully commit to not only the madness but also the sexuality of the film: there are no nervous looks or self-consciousness on display.

And at the center of it all, everything is masterfully directed by Paul Verhoeven. So easily this film could have descended into a schlocky mess with the sex simply used as a distraction from what was going wrong elsewhere in the story. But that it remains a pulpy, wonderfully crackers whirlwind is to everyone's credit.

It isn't just the acting which is great. The budget for this film was massive and it looks amazing. The cinematography, colour palette & lensing is beautiful, as are the locations and chase sequences. And remastered in 4K, it looks amazing.

This is a guilty pleasure, but more than that, it is a reminder of a time when films and established stars genuinely took risks. It's a shame that some of that cannot be applied today, with the sheer amount of turgid re-heated dreck that is released by movie studios and streaming services.

The true story of Garrard Conley is one that is not only extremely adaptable for the screen, but also carries significant emotional weight. Whenever the subject of gay conversion is looked at in the media, there is understandably and rightly a strong reaction to this. It’s just a shame that, like with Freeheld (another inspirational true story that was the subject of a relatively weak film adaptation,) there are as many hits as there are misses. 

The main good point is the performances, although sadly there are also some wasted opportunities too. Lucas Hedges, who was great in Manchester by the Sea, takes the central role and is really good, imbuing Jared with an optimism and Everyman likability that does strong foundation laying in the early minutes. It is vital that we sympathise with him for the later scenes and Hedges more than succeeds in this. Nicole Kidman is also great as Jared’s devout baptist mother, who whilst she holds her religion close to her, also is shown wrestling with the feelings of love and horror she has for her son’s treatment. Sadly, whilst this film has another incredible cast member in Russell Crowe, he is absolutely wasted in his role. The film almost doesn’t know what to do with him, so he is almost relegated to a backseat minor supporting character which is a tragedy. I appreciate that this may be based on a true story, but I do feel there was much more that he could have been used for.

Similarly Joel Edgerton, who also writes and directs the film, stars as Victor, the head converter and therapist. Whilst Edgerton brings a ferocious & horribly intense energy to the role, the problem is that his performance is in many ways one note. He does try to flesh it out, but mainly comes across as a Jeremy Kyle-esque caricature without the TV show, constantly shouting & belittling in order to get his point across. 

But the underlying message is a powerful one and it is a horrific look inside these types of conversation therapy, which can be so damaging to people who are either taking part willingly or, as in this case, forced to attend them. There is also a very amusing revelation in the final credits which is not only unsurprising but also sad. 

I was never a big comic book or indeed Batman fan. My sole reason for watching these films was down to my love of Christopher Nolan as a filmmaker before he got involved with Gotham, primarily due to the magnificent Insomnia, which still today is for me his best film.

The Batman films themselves are brilliant, as they perfectly weave a completely credible story with great performances. Christian Bale is and always has been a magnificent Batman/Bruce Wayne, his emotional delivery as the orphaned child who becomes the thing that scares him in order to right the wrongs of the world. In this film we get a monster of a villain in Bane, a muscle-bound super strength psychopath who presents himself as a revolutionary but in truth is just wanting to kill everyone who isn't associated with his army. Anne Hathaway is also wonderful as Selina Kyle/Catwoman.

After the incredible Dark Knight, most people were probably thinking that there was no way Nolan could top that. And one of the best things about this film is that he doesn't even try. This is, as much as it is a sequel, a film that does firmly go in a different direction. The Gotham we go back to is one that has changed significantly in many ways since the events with the Joker. And I did massively enjoy and get swept up in this film's epic scale, on a par with the David Lean masterpieces of old.

Everything else is perfectly in check. Amazing stunts, stunning cinematography from Wally Pfister fresh from winning his Oscar for Inception and finally an incredible soundtrack from Hans Zimmer.

A brilliant film and an outstanding finale.