Film Reviews by PV

This film is brilliant! It may be 2 hours long but I was never bored and never looked at my watch once! It knocks the spots of pretentious royal dramas like Young Victoria or Mrs Brown. It is the best foreign film of 2012, IMHO.

It is in Danish and occasionally German with subtitles (my ONLY criticism is of these - which are white, so which don't show up well whe a snowy landscape is on screen!) But it's only a minor quibble. In general, the subtitles do their job adequately enough.

This film is very well structured and written - unlike so many dull historical and royal dramas (which wallow in the sparkle of historical monarchs) - and the tension is kept up throughout.

The acting is first class - though the Danish actors are all unknowns.

The scenery is delightful too, and the direction captures the era well.

And the story itself is fascinating - and one I did not know (not being well-read in Danish history).

I would award this the prize for best foreign film 2012. I might award some of the actors Oscars too.

In a word: BRILLIANT!

Anyone who has missed this movie is in for a delightful surprise!

Five stars out of five.

This film is just dreadful: clealry filmed in studios mostly in close-up (justifiable for new directors who can't get funding for location shooting, but maybe not for experienced ones showered with state funding from Canadian taxpayers).

The novel is by a good writer who writes intelligent novels. It is such a shame that what is probaby a decent book has been ruined so much by an up-himself director who really is not as clever and talented as his thinks he is.

A turkey. Not even interesting in an arty way. Just pretentiouc and dull. You might as well turn the pictures off and juts listen to the repetitive tedious badly-written dialogue, because that is all the movie is: words words words, signifying nothing.

Watch MARGIN CALL if you want to see a really decent film about the financial crisis.

Nul points.

I really disliked this film. It starts OK - some nice scenes of Peter Parker discovering his powers - but after that? Oh dear. Just another CGI computer game for hyperactive teenage boys - and when the lizard man appeared and started talking, I really saw a 'jump the shark' moment.

It's a shame really, because there are some good lines in the script.

But I think the actor who plays spiderman is not a patch on Tobey Macguire.

The second half of this movie really is boring - I can almost hear the scriptwriters saying 'let's up the jeopardy again...and again...and again...' I was looking at my watch over and over again.

Watch through the credits to see a little snippet shamelessly setting up a sequeal - which I truly hope is never made.

And - typically - a Brit actor and accent signifies a villain. Racism, really, and lazy cliche.

This first half of this movie gets 3 stars' the second half less than 1. So 2 stars average.

This film gets 1.5 stars from me - and it would be lower were it not from the nice Utah scenery and the good performances by supporting actors (rounded up to 2 stars for that).

This film feels VERY long. That is because of a terrible performance by the ever-irritating Sean Penn pretending to be an aging goth pop star, but only partly. This also feels yawn-inducingly long because the script is a mess, there are too many insignificant characters (in the Irish scenes) who are just clutter and flab that should have been cut in the script edit, and generally it is amateur in its self-indulgence, like a vanity project.

What is very weird about this movie is that it's like 2 films in one: the first about an aging rock star in Ireland - which then morphs into the hunt for an auschwitz guard in the USA.

The simple fact is: this just does not work. It might have worked if one or the other. But as it is, it is shockingly bad - and Sean Penn deserves to be tied up and have his oscar melted in front of him for this atrocity of a lead performance. David Byrne also derves a slap for his silly cameo.

Far better to rent out Killing Bono or That'll be The Day - both great movies about the music business (the former in Ireland).

Then watch The Boys from Brazil or The Music Box - both superb films about hunting down nazi war criminals.

Watch this only to learn how not to make a good film.

The critic's review is wrong: this movie is more than adequate (and it is WAY more intelligent and memorable than the tedious Knocked Up).

It is original, funny, well-written, and moving at times though overblown and emotionally sentimental at others (I suppose some like the other reviewer would cry at these yawn-inducing moments - where the director gives his American audience the hugs and tears they love so much). However, this gurning sentimentality is countered by the arch and cynical dialogue elsewhere, rescuing the movie from its otherwise girly-girly movie emo-hell fate.

The weakest part of the movie is probably Seth Rogan, whose character doesn't need to be so crude either (the teen market is aimed for though) - the acting kudos goes to the key character actor and the women.

There are some killer lines which made me laugh out loud (the one about Frodo being one), and some well-drawn supporting characters, notably the chaotic tyro therapist and Angelica Huston as the mum.

And some refreshing male focus - where, for once, a man can't be sweet talked by a woman and instead does what he wants (the film is perhaps a typical female movie with male characters?)

A memorable and unusual comedy which rings true and has a nice resolution. Four stars and a bit.

I agree that this is a real girlie movie - well, it was directed and produced by Noro Ephron - but I enjoyed it WAY more than I thought I would.

The blending of the the biographies and stories of 2 women works wonderfully well, and Meryl Streep's performance is superb (it is just plain silly to call her 'annoying' for portraying an annoying real life woman! Or are we going to call all actors who portray Hitler, 'evil'?)

I had never ever heard of Julia Child before this movie - but then Americans have never heard of Elizabeth David, the British equivalent to her (NOT Fanny Cradock who was later and no elite cook either).

One major flaw here is that this film claims no book in English exists on French cooking and so Julia decides to write one. Balderdash! There have been such books since 19th century at least (Alexis Soyer onwards) and Elizabeth David beat Julian Child to it by a decade or more too! Still, we are all used to Hollywood rewriting history for American audiences.

I got bored with a lot of the girlie loss of confidence piffle of the modern character (Julie), and thought her rather wet and self-pitying: but the story was obviously trying to gain sympathy for the character amongt a female audience who were probably rooting for her and feeling her pain...

The revelation here is that a male audience can also enjoy this movie - especially those men who love cooking and food.

Anyway, this is a feelgood movie, stuffed with delicious food, and nicely paced, acted and directed. It won't knock your socks off, but it's a pleasant watch - and Meryl Streep's husband's character is superbly portrayed (though the director trying to make the upper class old money East coast Julian into a Democratic anti-McCarthyist heroine is clumsy and unnecessary: the movie needs food, not feminist or Democrat politics!)

Four stars easily.

This movie is the Coen Brothers best ever movie - it is a brilliantly realised tragi-comedy, where one man's decision leads to both his downfall and the demise of many others. It is straight out of ancient Greek drama actually - but none the worse for that.

The snowbounds scenes are beautifully filmed and make a great change for the usual Noo Yoik or LAla land settings. The Montana (?) accents show a little seen US Scandinavian ancestry, yah!

Superb acting all round; superbly structured unfolding of the tragedy; unusual and excellent music; intricate and believable plot. Everything in this film is spot-on!

The script is where it all starts and that is superb: the main plot is deepened by subplots - the police officer's pregnancy, her old mental friend etc.

The tragedy unfolds inevitably - like watching a car crash in slow motion: there is no way of stopping this juggernaut of consequences, not after the main character Jerry (who has money problems left unspecified) stars it rolling down the hill. You know people are gonna get hurt. Everyone in this movie is attempting to swindle everyone else, with tragic consqeuences. It's like Hamlet in the snow!

Those will small attention spans who want shoot-em-ups and car chases may be bored (but there are actually both in this). This unusual film makes a change from most Hollywood crime stories or TV series.

The acting and direction are brilliant throughout.

This movie well-desrved all its awards and probably should have won the best film Oscar too (I think that pile of piffle Braveheart beat it that year?).

I have watched this movie 3 times and loved it every time!

Highly Recommended. Maximum marks! Five stars with bells on and a sprinkle of snow on top!!!

I give this 2.5 stars rounded up.

I don't usually like Bill Murray (I hated Lost in Translation) - and neither do I like the sort of hipppy-dippy Californian-style movies - all the self-obsession and focus on 'being happy' and finding 'closure' bores me.

However, this is watchable - it is all saved by the comedy of situations, the hilarious amateur detective neighbour (though why a poor family is living next door to a rich man is never explained! Or are they in his garage? I dunno!).

There are funny encounters - and believable types.

But I agree with other posters: the lack of resolution in this movies goes beyond ambiguity to be very annoying - as annoying in fact as the DREADFUL Ethiopian jazz music that made me wince every time it played.

No doubt the writer/director thought the ending would be ambiguous and make people think; sadly, it just annoyed - because more clues were needed so the audience could think: of the mum could be that one or that one, and the son could be... etc.

Instead this film ended prematurely. Very annoying.

The writer/director needed another pair of eyes and ears to tell him: this does not work. Stories need resolution of the main plot - and that would STILL leave ambiguity and many questions unanswered (subplots can stay unresolved). This, I suppose, is the problem with writer/directors and vanity projects: they're too quirky and desperate to be different for their own good.

Worth a watch though - and some funny lines make it worth the trip.

This is the sort of film I could happily watch all over again after a first viewing - it's intelligent, well written and directed, and oh so timely about how betting on the moeny markets created credit and free money, and the subsequent 2008 crash.

It is shame there is no 'subtitles' option on the DVD - some dialogue is drowned out, and with complex financial stuff like this, it's worth watching the film again with hard of hearing subs. I had to rewind in some scenes to make sure I heard all the mumbled and fast dialogue.

The screenplay for this is intelligent and excellent - though on occasion some may find it a little preachy (as if characters are presenting a paper in a college class) - and the characterisations of those working in the money markets is spot on.

But why oh why oh why do they (as in Hollywood) have to use a British actor to play the bad guy always?! Jeremy Irons is a good 'baddie' actor, and one could say he's balanced by the nicorette-chewing unlikeable but goodie character of Paul Bettany, but perhaps if Hollywood always used blacks or Jews as bad guys, it would be called sort of, er, racist?

Fact is this: it was the easy credit that came out of Wall Street and the US government's deregulation of the money markets in the 1990s that precipitated the financial crash of 2008. Blaming the British is as silly as the anti-Brit nonsense about the Gulf Oil disaster (also caused by US govt deregulation).

Kevin Spacey is always a joy to watch - and I loved the arc of his character - and the dog. I also loved all the references to bridge-building, digging, real work versus the better paid non-useful work of being a trader on the markets. Hammered home at times, but still effective as a contrast - and true too.

So, despite the anti-British racism, this movie gets 4.5 stars rounded up. Recommended.

If you want to watch the definitive version of Room with a View then watch the 1985 version starring Daniel Day-Lewis, Simon Callow, Rupert Graves, Denholm Elliot. One actually wonders why on earth this remake was made - but anyhow, it is mostly an entertaining film, and great fun for those who know Florence to location-spot.

The scenery and acting is fine as one would expect from Timothy Spall and others. The vicar is better cast the the earlier movie actually, and I liked the more explicit mention of his reasons for bing the 'non-marrying kid'. However, Laurence Foxx seems miscast as the intellectual character who the main character gets engaged to - he just looks too cool and not nearly gawky enough. One also expects Lewis to walk by investigating a murder...

Sadly, the wonderful poppy-dotted Tuscan countryside is devoid of poppies, unlike the 1980s version, and at the end we realise that this is symbolic with First World War relevance. This addition at the end was utterly unnecessary - as was the sex scene in this film. The screenplay was written by Andrew Davies who has adapted many an old book for television and who always adds sex scenes of the proto-feminist variety. Fin, but not realistic - this would not have happened in 1912!

So a flawed film though, not as good as the original film version, but still worth a watch.

I give this film 3.5 stars rounded up to 4, because despite its wit, sharp script, interestig premise and snappy dialogue, good visuals etc, the pomposity of the ending spoils the movie for me.

The first half hour and hour are the best; the rest delves into unnecessary mataphysical spiritual territory. That's a shame really and the movie would have been better without foolishly veering down that path in the final minutes.

As a parody and pastiche of horror movies (especially the wonderful Wrong Turn) it's great fun. The characters - especially the stoner - are great fun too, with some sharp lines.

The underground lab scenes initially confuse, but then it all comes together like mind and brain connecting as it dawns on everyone (incl the audience) what's happening.

Fans of blood and gore with like the final half hour - me, I didn't really need that. But the Grand Guignol is fun anyway and suitably modern in its in-yer-face blood n guts. I actually saw some of this as comedy, especially all the references to past movies, though I'm not sure others will.

This movie is basically a horror version of The Truman Show - though it's less intelligent and original than that movie and I have no idea why people are using the word 'genius' about this film. It's a good fun movie, which is great, but that's it!

It is clearly aimed at teenagers - but sneaks in a lot of intelligence that will go over many of their heads, especially with dialogue unclear and action so fast I had to rewind and play again to see and hear everything!

Many I am sure with just watch for the gore - and there are some genuine jump-out-of-your-seat surprises too!

There is also enough intelligence here for more demanding viewers, so all in all, a movie wel worth watching. 3.5 stars

I loved this film, despite not usually liking family dramas of kitchen-sink-style misery memoirs. Its story, characters, acting, direction were all superb - spot-on - and the well-written part of the boy loyal to a father who is uninterested in him struck true. The music too is great.

The film never drags and is an efficient 80 minutes or so. Perhaps because it concentrated on action and the kid's reaction to actions against him - rather than staring into space and talking philosophically (like many French films) or wallowing in poverty porn polemic (like many British films of this kind).

In essence, this was a modern fairytale - with its darknesses, villains, heroes, and a boy negotiating them all: like Oliver Twist or Pip.

I could watch this film again right now - it's an enjoyable and intelligent drama, which explores the morality of family loyalty. The ending sort of fizzles out a bit, and one does have to suspend disbelief then and occasionally, but no matter: a clear 5 star winner! From Belgium too.

This is an interesting film well worth watching. It was a bit spoilt for me by the fact I knew the story and also that the women-dressed-as-men really do still look like women - albeit manly women or lesbians, but still very much female - so the suspension of disbelief is tested.

But this film really falls down when it starts to become a sort of campaign for women's rights or lesbian rights, instead of telling a story: it seems at time like propaganda, a manifesto, a polemical appeal for gay rights and women's rights. For example, EVERY single male character in this movie is a 'bad guy' - even the kindly doctor is a drunk - and all the men here are useless at best, bastards at worse, and treat women badly and run away from their responsibilities. One wonders if Glenn Close would be uncritical of a movie that did the equal and opposite and stereotyped all women as child beaters and devious sleeparounds to blame for all bad in the world?

Using modern standards to criticise the thinking and behaviour of others who lived in the past is wrong and silly - but it is the basis of much politically correct and revisionist thinking (and most university history courses too, it seems!)

Having said that, the film is based on a short story by a well-known Irish writer who no doubt witnessed a lot of drunken boorish oirishness and abuse of women by macho countrymen, so if this is faithful to the story then one has to blame the novellist and not the screenwriter!

But really, if black people were portrayed as men are in this, then that film would be banned.

Apart from that, it's still enjoyable - though the sets do not look nearly dirty and poverty-stricken enough, and pretty boy Aaron as an illiterate drunken waster is arguably miscast. Really it's juts a love story and a melodrama - but really sexuality or gender would not be the most important problem faced back then: poverty would be. The identity politics of the 60s onwards which put race and gender and sexuality above all else are on display in Albert Nobbs.

So really, an average 2.5-3 star rating. Worth watching as a curiosity piece.

This film is classified as a 'Thriller' on Cinemaparadiso. Well, if you watch this for thrills then you are going to be sorely disappointed: it is one of the slowest films I have ever watched (even at 88 minutes) with so many static shots of people standing around and staring meaningfully into the distance. Maybe the director is aiming for 'Seventh Seal' Euro arthouse? Or maybe the source book was dull too. Frankly, Welsh hill farms are not very dramatic places,, unless you're a sheep, I suppose.......

The premise of this movie is ridiculous. It is set in 1944/45, and the caption at the start says 'The D-Day landings have failed and Germany has invaded Britain.' Utter tosh! IF the D-Day landings had failed, Germany would NOT have invaded Britain at all - they would have focused on fighting the Russians in the East, and stopping the invasion that had already happened in southern Italy. The East and South would have been the scene of invasion and fighting - NOT Britain.

And the idea that the invading Nazis would have bothered to go to a Welsh hill farm area is nuts anyway - they would not have bothered with sheep, and would have focused on the industry in Swansea and Cardiff areas, and the ports. A Nazi farm show at a showground with cows winning prizes is pure comedy - I actually laughed out loud during this film.

Moreover, the concept that the German soldiers in this film would do what they do is absurd too (I won't reveal the plot) - but that is the fault of the book, not the film.

Perhaps the novel on which this movie ('or 'still-ie') is the problem: it is hard to make a Welsh hill farm with pretend Nazi soldiers in it dramatic - though the writer tries with some old guff about an old map (which is never clearly explained).

If you want to see a really great film imagining a possible Nazi invasion, then rent out 'Went The Day Well' or 'Fatherland' (or read that book). Rent this only for curiosity interest, and don't watch when tired or you'll nod off - this film is SO SLOW that it could be rather a good sleeping pill actually.

I really wanted to like this film. I loved the story of Faustus, and have seen many versions on stage (Marlowe's Faustus) and is films. But this film was just 2 things: 1) bonkers; 2) boring. So yes, there was surreal arty camerawork.

Yes, the scenery and acting were fine. This is a German/Russian/Czech co-production I think, and was made at the Prague Barrandov studios - so we know that is quality. But really, this goes on and on and on, with typically pretentious arty European faffing about, before ending as confusingly as it began. I think I ordered this because it was recommended by a critic or was nominated for a prize at Cannes or somewhere. All I can say is: avoid unless you have the patience of a saint - though if you look arty films then you'll be in heaven. One for the most pretenious poseur film studies students... 1.5 stars.

For a REALLY great German film, rent out The Wave.