Film Reviews by PV

I loved this director's MISOMMAR and also the later EDDINGTON. And he produced DREAM SCENARIO one of the best films I've ever seen. That film and MIDSOMMAR also fall into what call the TRICKSY FILM category - very meta and post-modern. THE JOKER film is like that too as is I,ROBOT the TV drama. Loads more out of Hollywood in recent years. Not a genre I enjoy, in general.

Is this real or it s fantasy? Who knows? The danger is the viewer won't care, however, and sadly that is the case here as it was not with the much better MIDSOMMAR and DREAM SCENARIO.

It starts strongly, though events made the viewer wonder how real it all is, as do images, and characters. So instantly we have an uncomfortable feeling something is amiss. Then the plot develops in random ways, (NO SPOILERS) and it goes on and on and on, for over 3 hours. Someone badly needed to tell the writer-director to hire an editor, kill a few darlings, maybe an hour's worth.

Much of the latter part of the film is unnecessary imho, and/or baffling and/or silly. But who cares? We do not because the main character is annoying more than anything else. It all needs to be streamlined and simplified imho.

I was gonna give it 3 stars, but that last hour was very trying, so 2 stars. Baffling that it's labelled a 'comedy' too.

OK so I really wanted to love this film. The South African gay director made MOFFIE a superb film from 2020, based on his own experience I think.

This is from a short story, which seems a sort of fictionalised account of famous song collector Alan Lomax and/or his father John, with added value with the gay love affair.

To be honest, this could have been an hour-long TV drama, in fact 48 minutes to allow for adverts. I say that even as I liked the film BUT I was expecting a long ride and got it - and I am a big fan of songwriting and the history of it, so this was right up my alley. More impatient viewers may switch off which is a shame because the final scenes (no spoilers) are crucial and made sense of all that has gone before.

One issue I have with this story is that I really do not BELIEVE the character,. WOULD someone born and brought up in such dire poverty turn down the chance to live the high life, and not a normal working class life in Europe either, but a seriously loaded upper class one? I don';t buy it. This was my issue with that 1993 Indecent Proposal - as if someone would really turn down $1 million dollars for doing the dirty for a few minutes. Maybe I'm just cynical. No, not maybe....

Anyway, I did not dislike this BUT be warned, you need to be in the right mood for it, let it wash over you.

I felt the inclusion of black families singing traditional British folk songs was pushing it, a tad too tickbox for me. And no, it does not always rain in Britain - as I remind Paddington fans worldwide always. In fact Rome has more annual rainfall than London, fact.

Nothing explicit here sex-wise so fine for any young one who may miraculously have managed to retain an attention span in our age of AI slop on social media turning em all into brainrot zombies.

3 stars

The deep irony about this film is that it claims to be some sort of profound satire on AI, but is actually little more than AI slop itself, dominated as it is by crash-bang-wallop CGI at every turn.

It is neither profound as satire or original as scifi, and if anyone laughed at this, they have a lower comedy threshold than me, for sure. All influenced by The Matrix, The Terminator films, Zombie films galore, Spielberg's AI, The Fisher King/Brazil in the Terry Gilliam film universe, steam punk etc. Meh. This is NOT the first film to mine the topic of brainrot zombies focused on their smartphones either.

In fact this sort of thing has been done for many decades on film and in novels, esp short stories. One, from 1910, by genteel repressed English author EM FORSTER of ROOM WITH A VIEW fame called THE MACHINE STOPS from 1910. Yes, 1910. It's free to read online if you search.

It reminded me more than anything else of one of the lamer episodes of Dr Who, with loads of running around to a thumping soundtrack (hallmark of Russel T Davies).

This may appeal to lovers of Sci-fi more than me, I do not know. Maybe I'm too old... Truly silly plot and the sort of CGI scenes that 13-year-old boys would come up with in a brainstorming session, which says it all.

Did I care about the characters? No. Did I believe the plot? No. Did I think it was 1 star unwatchably awful. No.

So, 2 stars.

I so wanted to like this. Written/directed by the late Ron Peck (1948-2022) this is a gangland thriller focused on the 1980s redevelopment of London's Docklands. But I was prepared to give this a try, especially as Ron Peck was a pioneer of independent British gay cinema since the 1970s. His NIGHTNAWKS (1978) my well look dated and even amateur now, even a tad boring, BUT it was a first - I watched it on Channel 4 in the mid-late 80s. A film that matters despite its many flaws.

This, however, is all a bit of a mess - surprising when the screenwriter is by now more experienced in film-making. A confusing plot, perhaps too many characters, which makes one wonder by the final climactic scene just what that is all about and even who that man is. The whole thing needs streamlining into a 3 act structure, with plot points, and focus.

The classic British film about that is the sublime THE LONG GOOD FRIDAY (1979) which made a star of Bob Hoskins (and also features future James Bond Pierce Brosnan as a gay Irishman in his first big screen role) with is 5 stars any day of the week. That has a fantastic synth score. This EMPIRE STATE has a soundtrack of Bronski Beat and others.

So a curiosity piece really. is it a good film? No. Is it worth a watch for those interested in British independent/gay cinema of 1970s/80s? Yes.

This film is VERY loosely based on a real operation - I'd advise all interested to search for the real story online.

As per usual these days, they have to have a black member of the SOE team when in reality there was none; the Marjorie SEO agent role was a real woman BUT she was in London and did the planning for the mission and others, so was not some Mata Hari temptress in nightclubs. In reality, the operatives were all white British males except the Danish Anders Lassen who joined the British army.

The location is real, was a Spanish colony and Spain was neutral in WWII - Franco sat on the fence, would not let German troops in Spain, supplied Germany with copper ore as neutral Portugal did tungsten ore and neutral Sweden iron ore (in 2 world wars too). There's no such thing as neutral, then... Major March-Phillipps was indeed handed over to the Germans by the Spanish, who shot him!

Researching the real men the characters were based on, most died in the war it seems, 2 in Italy 1 in France. The Anders Lassen character was real and his bow and arrow were his preferred weapon, though the British army in which he was a private refused him permission to use it!

The hokum re this raid stopping the U-boats in the Atlantic is nonsense - when ended the success of the seawolves was radar and triangulation which enabled destroyers to drop depth charges and destroy U-boats, and 75% of them were destroyed, and 75% U-boat mariners died. In the early part of WWII they sank so many ships trying to supply the UK from neutral (until December 1941) USA (the UK only finished paying back the warloan from the US in 2006). The ship's cargo was unknown, suspected to be arms and weapons, which is why it was targeted.

Anyway, feature films are not documentaries... SO does this work as a film? Yes, as a cartoon character action movie, and I enjoyed it WAY more than the awful Inglourious Basterds nonsense with its rewrite of history. The cartoon character pantomime baddie Nazis reminded me of the Indiana Jones movies. I do wonder how much better this film would have been made in the 1950s, 60s and 70s, however...the golden age of war films.

So, 3 stars. If you want a cartoon character caper action movie set in exotic climes in WWII, this is for you.

One irritation - the dissing of British cuisine as 'only fish & chips'. Unforgiveable from a British director. SUCH ignorance, though to be fair, German food is similarly dissed.

This film seems very derivative - of so many 'detain dramas' where people are abducted and imprisoned. THE SECRET IN THEIR EYES (2009) is THE classic one, but there are many.

The plot and character arcs make political/social points bluntly, as in sledgehammered, but it's a decent enough watch, if unbelievable.
I was frustrated by the lack of information here, on character backstories and dark whispered parts of the plot and motivation for a random abduction. It seemed almost dystopian fantasy at times, with the odd 1950s-style family (and we know the father is a baddie as he says LONDON'S NOT WHAT IT WAS - he fails to pass the diversity-worship test so is branded a baddie from the start). The boy claims to be 10 but sounds 13 which is odd.

It felt very stagey and wordy, could have been a theatre play - the first-time (Polish) screenwriter will no doubt have a theatre background. The studio scenes are filmed in Warsaw in Poland too, and I found the whole setting odd. Maybe the Polish director does not realise how much such a mansion would cost in the UK, even Yorkshire? Stephen Graham the actor could afford it of course, but would someone with his accent who does not work be able to? Nothing is explained and it jars. Maybe he won the lottery eh? Maybe a British director/writer could have seen the lack of consistency here with socio-economic class issues?
The accents jar too - the abducted boy has a very broad local accent (Leeds?) yet seemingly lives in a detached executive home. For me, as a Brit, that needs explanation.

Anyway, watchable enough - the sort of thing that used to be PLAY FOR TODAY or similar, made for TV. This is not a cinematic film - outdoor scenes of lovely Yorkshire landscapes notwithstanding.

3 stars therefore BUT just watch THE SECRET IN THEIR EYES to see how it's done.

This film and others of recent years show me how far the Oscars have fallen - they used to matter. Do they now? Who knows who wins Oscars now, or cares? Some awful films have won in recent years and this is better than some, but is not Oscar-worthy at all. The Academy parachuted lots of black voters in after BLM protests, and #Oscarssowhite and that is why this won so many awards (BAFTA has similarly rigged its voting to go peak woke and tickbox). The acting is fine and Michael B Jordan and some tricksiness enable him to play two twins/cousins, which always plays well with Oscar voters.

This is one of those films which I realised, by the 30 minutes point, was not for me. By the first plot point and minute 24 we all know where this is going.

I am not F1 or sports fan BUT I did rather like RUSH (2013) with the excellent German actor Daniel Bruhl.

What this lacks is heart - it is ALL about racing F1. Some speedqueens may enjoy it, and its laddish angle - though I very much doubt there are many bigbusted blonde babes in the pit stops...

Not my sort of thing, and amazed it won an Oscar for sound as I can barely hear the dialogue - obvs one needs a decent 16 speaker surround sound set-up to appreciate the brrrrums and the rrrrroars and the rrrevs, Yawn.

It's produced by Lewis Hamilton, which shoudl have been a warning sign for wokeness and tickboxery.

I'd only watch all of this film if you paid me folding money.

I REALLY wanted to like this - I like small indy films and coming of age tales too.

However, after a strong start, this falls apart somewhat and loses focus. It's as if it cannot decide if it's a quasi-gay coming of age tale, or a crime mystery or thriller. Too much packed in here. A cruel edit would have been good for the screenwriter, tbh.

The actors so fine. The main actor who plays the boy Sebastian has never done anything else, which is a shame. Just been watching veteran French actor Thierry Godard in THE LINE/A FRENCH VILLAGE 2009 series (x7) on ITVX. Like in Australia, the same actors pop up everywhere.

It's watchable but disappointing in the end, gets confused and muddled, overloaded with issues and characters by the end, after a strong start.

Meh. 3 stars.

Famous now as the (5th) movie Peter Jackson wrote and directed before first Lord of the Rings in 2001, this is also all made in New Zealand, with the team that went on to work on the blockbuster Hobbit stories.

It's one of those fastpaced cartoon comedies that Hollywood does so well, (and the UK and Europe don't), with Touchstone pictures often, Chris Columbus stuff and Back to the Future franchise. It's highly entertaining, fast-paced, with the usual leering baddies and goodies, and the characters on journeys. It's fun.

A prefect Friday night movie to watch with friends, laughing and screaming and jumping in unison.

4 stars

I love films about songwriters, so this was right up my alley. However, I am not sure how those not so interested in the lives of songwriters will be.

This looks as though it's adapted from a stage play - because most of the 'action'/dialogue takes place in one room, a bar. But no, it's based on letters from Hart to the young woman here.

Anyway, I loved it. I agree with 'quietly sad', or maybe 'doomed hopefulness' as Hart himself says, aware of his own tragedy as he lives it.

It reminds me a bit of SET FIRE TO THE STARS, a biopic of Dylan Thomas starring Elijah Wood. Also stagey and talky, low budget.

I liked the notes at the end, and those unaware of Rodgers and Hart should read those and wait for the song credits on-screen to see the classic songs they wrote, BLUE MOON and MY FUNNY VALENTINE amongst others, but those were adopted by pop singers and jazz musicians like Chet Baker respectively.

One for songwriting fans, like me. So I give it 5 stars.

When creating a film about sport, a writer has to make decisions. What is the genre? Sometimes as with WIMBLEDON it's romance; sometimes as with the watchable ESCAPE TO VICTORY (1981) it's a WWII-set thriller. Here's it's REDEMPTION, 1 of 7 story themes cited by Aristotle in his POETICS (c 300 BC). Just that.

Frank Boyce the writer started on soaps, Brookside/Corrie, and it shows, as does his far light views (he once wrote for Living Marxism). One does not have to be of that political mindset, however, to support the Homeless World Cup - though perhaps the UK letting in 10-12 million immigrants in the last 30 years has been a or the major factor in our housing crisis & spirally costs of rent/property (also, over half homeless on the streets have homes - in Eastern Europe often). He also lays on the schmaltz with a trowel in his books and adaptations - watch MILLIONS if you can stand it! Beyond sentimental. Thick gloopy schmaltz.

All that said, this is a watchable if achingly pc/woke tickbox drama - you can tick off the issues on a list as you go, to enhance the viewing experience.

Some fun stuff, esp with Japan, which is underdeveloped and way too much focus on South Africa, a romantacised view of that crime-ridden nation with all its racial issues. This is common in leftwing writers, I find. I';d say romantacising a culture is as racist as demonising it actually.

This is overlong for sure, too much pondering on Vinny, too much South Africa dancing and a cheery Sister Act nun. But I won';t be too harsh. It's better than the awful AFRICA UNITED (2010). Rose-tinted spectacle cuddly views of AFrica may work for some, not me.

Some issues are dealt with well - each player has an issue, you see, stealing, gambling, drugs etc. A STREETCAT NAMED BOB mines the same seam. The writer shoehorns in some Syrian beef, which is resolved with hugs as are all issues in the world, in Frank-fantasy-land. You have to be in the right mood to watch this!

It's never explained by a young man with a Welsh accent, like his mum, are living in London of why he is playing for England - though of course Hal Robson-Kanu who scored the magic goal for Wales in the glorious 2016 Euros had played football for England under 21s before that.

But this is Vinny's film, his story as the central character dominates - perhaps too much. The actor plays him very well indeed, no idea if he is that skilled at football but it's fun to watch and not just for football fans.

I had no idea they let female teams play male teams in football either. According to wiki, there are no male v female teams as the 2001-founded homeless world cup has a women's section since 2008 . So WHY the fake news and lies by the writer? I put it to the accused, M'lord, that as football is irredeemably male (at the top pro levels and boys all play it on streets worldwide; girls tend not to), this was quite deliberate to increase the % of female characters on screens (ditto the wives, mums, nun, Italian host). I dislike such social engineering tbh - now many films/TV series INVENT female characters when remaking old shows (eg Name of the Rose), as I dislike colourblind casting parachuting black/brown characters into the 16th century in period drama. SO one star lost for that.

No idea why others rate this movie. I doubt it would have been made had it not been based on a Stephen King 1966 unpublished novel.

It's an old theme, was then. Think the original DEATH RACE 2000, or indeed BRAVE NEW WORLD; or THE RUNNING MAN (watch the original Arnie version not the remade rubbish). Then there's the Hunger Games, made for teens like this is too - it's like a YA read - and the director of this directed the Hunger Games. Then the hit TV series SQUID GAME and plenty of novels, like the excellent 2016 RASMUS - A TELEVISION TALE - the 3rd part of that is like SQUID GAME before SQUID GAME with a Death Hunt reality TV Game Show in the streets of London.

I doubt King's novel had the tickbox black and Asian and native American faces/characters and that is rubbed in a tad too much imho. The USA is 12-13% black (UK just 4%, up from 3% a decade ago) but here it is 40%. I dislike preaching woke sermonising issue movies massively.

On the plus side, the film-makers do what so many movies do now and replace male characters in the original novel with female ones. They even discussed doing that with the TV adaptation of the classic novel LORD OFR THE FLIES recently. It seems male-only or mostly-male is problematic now, just as all-white is. so we get absurd colourblind casting with black/brown faces parachuted into historical drama. It is absurd. I am fine with black-only movies (MOONLIGHT) or female-only ones for female-themed ones - which is most movies now as it is most novels. BUT let's have more of the equal and opposite then!

The expected back story of main characters, the types, the tropes, the archetypes so no surprise for me how it all pans out. In a word, this is BORING.

Almost a 1 star. 1.5 stars rounded up.

if you like caper movies populated by cartoon characters then this is for you.

I found the tone very odd. Very violent at times then comedy, allegedly. Almost slapstick at times.

The sort of big money plot used countless times in films from Shallow Grave to Breaking Bad and more movies than I can say. It motivates, big money, makes people do bad stuff. Cue loads of twisting in the plot and caper chases. It could be a cartoon.

I liked the Hassidic Jewish gangsters - reminds me of the great Alfie Solomons in Peaky Blinders... but doesn't. This is 2-D cartoon character stuff, if you like that sort of thing.

Matt Smith plays a cartoon character punk. I did like the cat though so that gets an extra star, so 3 star not 2.

Austin Butler carries this film, to be honest, and maybe he should have won the Oscar for Elvis. of course, as per usual in movieland, serious alcoholics are always pretty, slim and healthy - as in The Wolf of Wall Street. The reality is so different...

Hmmm, what to make of this. well, if you wait till the credits at the end you'll see it's funded to the hilt by state-funded bodies, including BFI and the UK film fund, because this is an Ireland -UK-Belgian productions (the producers have Flemish names). So if you're in the UK, your taxes went into funding this (as well as the odious Kneecap movie).

For me, the most interesting this about this film is the multiple points of view, You have to concentrate! It's not signposted with captions and dates etc. This has been done before in movies - and loads of times in novels.

But some of it is unclear and should be spelt out a tad more - for example that one man's girlfriend because his enemy's wife. Though why she'd bother with ether is beyond me.

Not sure I believe the plot or what happens (NO SPOILERS) - just to add that most here have a backstory in horror movies. it shows,. Or screams.

No, this is not about that made-up modern manhating concept 'toxic masculinity' at all. It's about a family/neighbourly dispute getting out of hand. The location looks blealy beautiful but this ain't an ad for the Irish Tourist Board, for sure!

The actors do well wallowing in perpetual misery. Knowing how speech coaches can train actors and singers to speak/sing in a foreign language, I'm not as amazed by actors speaking the Irish language here as some - both Elvis and the Beatles recorded songs in German and other languages, just parroting the sounds phonetically without knowing the languages.

Note that as with the awful Kneecap film, if you make a movie using it you are more or less guaranteed state funding from the Irish government schemes AND bizarrely from BFI and the UK FilmFundx. HY? Because they are diversity-worshipping bureaucrats obsessed with such stuff.

Not awful, Not great. But very VERy miserabilist and depressing, so I'm sure the same writer/director will get oodles of state funding (from Ireland and the UK tax payer) for his next pet project.

3 stars.