Film Reviews by Frank TALKER™

It really required a better dramatic actress than Raquel WELCH to make this film work well since she is unable to successfully get across to the audience the trauma of having had her husband killed and then being repeatedly raped by the killers.

The strong comedy element is exactly what one would expect from director Burt KENNEDY and is well executed by Ernest BORGNINE, Jack ELAM & Strother MARTIN as three hapless outlaws. But this is not a black comedy so it all seems rather tasteless in the context of the moral degeneracy on show here.

Stephen BOYD and Diana DORS are largely wasted in somewhat pointless cameos which fritter away their talent. But the always-dependable Christopher LEE manages to convince as a Mexican - albeit with a decidedly English accent.

Interestingly, if Paco DE LUCÍA had written the musical score for this movie, it would have justified his pleasing, but too short musical cameo here.

The best thing about this movie is the rather tragedic performance of Robert CULP. He gives the movie the dramatic depth which it otherwise lacks as an aging bounty hunter with none of the fulfilling emotional ties that he clearly longs for in his personal life.

A diverting exploration of the essence of all horror: The implied mental illness of often feeling that the real world is ultimately unknowable.

This theme makes little sense in the context of a predicted global apocalypse since it implies that there is no actual distinction between madness and sanity despite the actual events depicted here being clearly distinguished from the more fantastic and brilliantly realised on-screen apparitions.

Julie CARMEN is sexily sinister and Sam NEILL expertly conveys a strong sense of the world turning upside down - both inside his head and in the world at large.

Not entirely credible but beautifully-acted -written & -shot diamond-heist caper.

The movie is filled with anti-mercantilist political points about greed as a substitute for genuine trade and the fact that capitalism in the West is little more than a facade for a rigged system designed to benefit only a few Caucasian males. This all made me root for the lower-class central character as he attempts a convoluted revenge against the world of global corporate exploitation-for-profit.

The clever twist in the middle of the film is quite surprising and forces you to reassess what is really going on here in thematic terms. All of which helps enforce the point that there is more to life than an all-too-necessary materialism.

White culture lives-off delusions of genetic superiority and, thus, White people frequently imagine that they would be singled-out for special attention by extra-terrestrials.

This White racialised wishful-thinking leads to the Caucasian gullibility we witness in this documentary "Mirage Men". With little evidence for the reality of flying saucers, White people are almost always the ones reporting a belief in the reality of such UFO phenomena.

This neurotic neediness ties-in with the White cultural belief in such things as White supremacy, the inferiority of White women, endemic homophobia & rigidly-hierarchical societies. Such attitudes make the believer feel distinctly superior, but without evidence, and this is much like the attention-seeking ploy that the loneliest kids in the school playground used to play: "I know something that you don't!"

Turned-out they didn't know anything of substantive value and that underneath all of their feigned excellence there lay a yawning inter-personal emptiness which seeks fulfilment in a belief in that which does not properly exist and a corresponding belief in themselves as the ones chosen to allegedly-enlighten others about that which does not exist. A blind faith which attempts to replace a similarly-blind religious faith because the latter was never genuinely practised by them to begin with for thousands of years.

Scientific rigour and self-respect are distinctly lacking here and helps explain why Western governments find it so easy to engage in disinformation operations - in order to conceal their actual behaviour and intent - by carefully implying to the unworldly among them exactly what the latter want to hear.

A well-written thriller, with an interesting premiss and a superb cast which suffers from lifeless direction by the male lead, Ralph RICHARDSON.

The thought of a successful marriage crumbling for no apparent reason should grip our emotions more readily than it does - especially given Margaret LEIGHTON's nuanced and subtle performance. But this film fails to really ignite, emotionally - unlike the original stage production in 1950. Perhaps explaining why it was RICHARDSON's only directorial credit.

Subtle spoof of adventure thrillers that - on the surface at least - appears very much an example of the movie genre being spoofed.

Once you realise, however, that the movie has no real hero nor heroine, you can sit back and enjoy the first-rate actors pretending to be characters whom are pretending to be otherwise than they are. (This makes it also something of a satire on the Hollywood film-production system and its combative egos, sexual perversion & illegal-drug abuse.)

Christopher NOLAN has run out of ideas. He now has to resuscitate concepts that are twenty years' old in order to keep his career going, rather than retire from being a creative himself and then to produce the works of the next generation of film directors.

The rampant egomania and intellectual arrogance here is emotionally depressing and distinctly un-entertaining as we witness an above-average talent reduced to hack work.

The characterisation is poor, the ideas ridiculous and the cast not always well-chosen. But the biggest problem is a script which gives little for the actors to do to enable them to breathe life into their characters. This lack of any possibility for audience identification leaves us with a psychologically-barren spectacle which occurs for no really-valid reason.

A waste of time.

Very funny movie about a White culture so neurotically obsessed with social conformity that social behaviour becomes largely a pretence in which observing others becomes a form of social control wherein everyone is watching everyone else for signs of non-conformity.

In this scenario, personal relationships are inevitably faked, with a concomitant preoccupation with physical appearance and smart dress - along with emotionally-repressed behaviour. The characters know whom they are and what their actual natures are, which tell them what to do, yet most are openly resentful and overtly jealous of anyone courageous enough to actually love themselves for themselves - no matter the potential for social censure.

The funniest parts of the movie concern affectionless upbringings which leave many of the characters with a great difficulty in creating meaning in their lives and, thus, any kind of personal fulfilment. They become physical adults yet remain emotionally-immature in repeating the same psychologically-conditioned and emotionally-conditioning mistakes of their parents. Only the ethnic-minority characters have any genuine and expressive sense of life for us to contrast with the idiosyncacies of the White ones.

Underneath all of this simmering self-alienation is a desire for the kind of impassioned sex which helps us to understand ourselves with greater clarity and others with greater insight. Rhys IFANS' hilarious attempts at sexual congress with objects and strangers (which lead to mild electric shocks administered by the disapproving and his subsequent immersion in the world of prostitution) makes this point brilliantly. But the focus of so many of the characters on science, as opposed to intuition, as a means of self-realisation means few succeed at developing a full sense of their own humanity.

Despite it being as sexually coy, this movie is an eloquent plea for the essential humanity of humanity, which still does not endeavour to explain why White culture is so enamoured of the emotional repression shown here.

Since White culture is inherently violent (eg, endless wars for other people's resources), disproportionate mass murder by White people is inevitable. This movie goes some way to explaining the Whys and the Wherefores for all of this - as well as the hows.

Poor parenting leads to attention-seeking children who become narcissistic and sociopathic adults without treatment - from self or others. This film presents few heroes and no preventions nor solutions for a culture dying-out from superficiality and materialism, such that meaning, identity & value have no practical place here.

The police (entirely curative since they cannot prevent people from choosing a life of crime) can only catch criminals after the fact - never before. They are viewed as generally ineffective in the face of the White-on-White crime shown here.

The personal relations between the White characters here are shown as being purely transactional: Give-and-take rather than share-and-share-alike. This lack of genuine personal relationships is caused by a politically-correct obsession with concealing the essentially-political nature of White culture behind a facade of the moral corruption inherent in the Manichean philosophy of "with-us-or-against-us". This inevitably leads to White culture becoming a protection racket for the benefit of White people and against everyone else.

Most of the murders here are not personal; meaning that they are attempts at political scapegoating and, apparently, are the only means of atoning for the baleful affects of a culture largely ineffective at satisfying its adherents psychologically, rationally or even culturally. This is an attempt to allegedly compensate for the parents blaming their children (in their turn, as their parents did them) for their collective failure to create more meaningful lives for themselves.

Money is not the motive for the random killings here, the irrational desire for it is the problem - as exemplified by our anti-hero robbing a bank and then promptly setting the stash on fire in a litter bin just outside the bank's entrance. The director, Uwe BOLL, is clearly suggesting that money is used by White people as a substitute for human value and meaning when it is merely a means to obtaining those things and not just an end in itself.

The apparently senseless violence mirrors the senselessness of White culture with its lack of moral compass or direction. Indeed, the ending explicitly suggests that crime does pay; making this movie a critique of a culture which the antagonist so effectively represents. (More personally, the White sociopathy on display here is also a coded attack by a disgruntled film director against the audience who pays to see Hollywood movies ostensibly like this. Here, BOLL mocks such movies for their restrained and, thus, designedly-enjoyable violence, while that same audience is supposedly being comforted that the central character is really nothing like them - when he so obviously is.)

The existential problems of White people are here shown to lead to functional neurosis; meaning being able to function politically, but never personally. This is especially emphasised here given that the only obviously-certifiable character (played by Michael SHANNON) is more sane in his understanding of the world than anyone else (albeit that his response to his own insights is decidedly anti-social).

White people's problems-with-living are inevitably passed-on to their children as they also, in their turn, seek to achieve the meaning, the identity & the value largely absent from a culture superficially-addicted to materialism. But this central theme is not fully-explored, save for the lead (played indifferently by Leonardo DiCaprio) working in the advertising business - which he hates for its essential phoniness. But what in his family made him that way, we might well ask? And why is his response to it so weak?

Thus, no solution to the problems of the two central characters is ever presented, except the pointlessness of running away from one's problem when they will never run away from you. The best that the wife (played by the always-superb Kate WINLSLET) can do is to procure an abortion so that no more suffering people are brought into the world.

That White people lack the courage to be themselves explains a lot regarding their higher rates of, for example, suicide, depression & loneliness. They are thus reduced to acting-out their lives (while never truly living them) according to stage-plays written by others, regardless of self-esteem or whether or not those others have their best interests at heart; ensuring that they never actually achieve any self-interest or self-esteem. (This is exacerbated by the fact that Caucasians are also taught to be morbidly fearful of other cultures even if they could learn something from those cultures to their advantage.)

This essential phoniness regarding one's relationship with oneself and regarding that with other people can only lead to bitterness, frustration & resentment at the resultant fear of social ridicule, ostracism & censure. Being different to other White people and, thereby, running the risk of psychological suffering for not confirming with their limitations and fears - albeit, paradoxically, conformity with those with whom one can never be friends with anyway precisely because of the difference.

The insightful writing is good, but the 1950s suburban milieu is largely pointless since the issues discussed here would be true in any White ghetto at any time during the last 500 years. Still, the acting performances generally excellent - particularly Kathy BATES in a supporting role - but where are the true revolutionaries? Not here!

This is a shorter version of "Project S" and is less entertaining. Watch "Project S", instead.

This is a shorter version of "Project S" and is less entertaining. Watch "Project S", instead.

Essentially a movie about science's inability to clearly define intelligence & mind and, therefore, state clearly if Artificial Intelligence (AI) is actually possible to create.

Instead, we have a thoughtless disquisition upon the nature of love as if it were an emotion rather than a state-of-mind. This leads to the false view that AI is only possible if machines can feel; while never bothering to explain why any machine would ever need such an ability.

This movie is not as clever as it thinks it is and merely plays Stephen Potter mind games with its audience - as the characters do with each other - to evade the fact that White people see AI as a projection of their own pseudo-cleverness. This is why a robot based upon the faces of all the world's mobile-phone users is White, when most of the world's mobile phone users are not.

A vapid comedy with a Jew portraying a son of the Devil despite there being no afterlife in Judaic theology. All to get in a few digs about HITLER being tormented forever in Hell with large pineapples.

This comedy isn't really about anything much and wastes the talents of all concerned, especially Rhys IFANS - who gives the best performance.

The usual thriller which does not explore its own theme about a culture where people have no true sense of themselves because they are devoid of a personal identity.

Without a heritage or a sense of achievement, the White characters here suffer endlessly in a world in which they are not securely anchored to reality; making them easy targets for exploitation and abuse.

These kinds of stories are impossible to imagine coming from any other culture. They strongly suggest a world of Caucasian uncertainty and irrationality which could be more fruitfully explored within a social context which this movie only pretends to acknowledge at the film's conclusion - when much is revealed. At the end, this movie pretends that such behaviour is universally-applicable, when it is largely the product of a White culture which is both directionless and superficial.

This is a film more concerned with gloating at the poorly-hidden psychological problems of those with apparently enviable middle-class lifestyles, while also wallowing in the fact that contemporary, heterosexual marriage in the West is in crisis because women do not feel adequately protected by men who secretly despise them.

A typically-White film which tries to turn the monstrous personality of Winston CHURCHILL into a hero of anti-tyranny despite the British Empire being one of the worst and longest-lasting tyrannies in all of human history. It even fails to note the irony that HITLER was democratically-elected in 1933 while CHURCHILL was not in 1940.

Not only does this movie avoid historical facts it invents them to make both CHURCHILL and the United Kingdom appear all alone in their fight against Nazi Germany despite the existence of the British - the largest empire of them all. It briefly mentions CHURCHILL's many political failures and his great political oratory but fails to dramatically-explore the essentially opportunist nature of the man - and of White culture itself - despite his appearing in nearly every scene.

Where it scores is on CHURCHILL's insistence that Hitler should not be negotiated with because such negotiations would be pointless because they would indicate the weakness that would eventually have led to war - in the long run. This psychological reality is the film's only real reason for being made and is designed for White people to continue to fight a war in their own minds which has already been won by the democracies - almost as if they know that this is just more propaganda for the modern, paranoid-schizophrenic White-British sense of identity. This living in the past without the necessary personal reflection to escape and face the future is neither good for the individual nor for the world of movies.

This entertainment is little more than BrExit propaganda based on the false assertion that Winston CHURCHILL was the greatest White Briton of all time.