I've given this film 7/10 but as the film is largely about cycling, and I'm a cyclist, I may be a bit biased. Basically anyone who enjoys biking, whether on road or off, will enjoy "Premium Rush" – cyclists are in effect the action heroes of this film. However, for the non cyclist, this film will probably come across as a fairly standard action thriller with familiar themes and characters. It really is all about the biking and the stunts. These scenes are brilliantly captured and filmed, and while CGI was no doubt used, at times it is difficult to distinguish where. With a short running time of 90 mins (a refreshing change) and relentless pace, "Premium Rush" is simple, straight forward entertainment – and what's wrong with that? I can only think of two other films where cycling has been given the full Hollywood treatment – "American Flyers" (good) and "Breaking Away" (excellent) – next up the Lance Armstrong Story?
Reviews
11 Reviews
The Man with the Iron Fists
(2012)
Laughable - and not in a good way
20 January 2013
Dear oh dear - where to start with this one? Like others I was really looking forward to it - an action film called "The Man With the Iron Fists", with Tarantino's name attached (however tenuously) and Russell Crowe starring - how could it fail? I actually came away feeling annoyed. Annoyed that junk like this can even get funding. Imagine how many great scripts there are out there which can't get funding; how many great directors there are who can't get hired; how many great actors there are waiting for a break...and then this gets made! RZA cannot write screenplays. RZA definitely can't direct films. Bautista cannot act. Why can't these people stick to what they do best? Music in RZA's case and Bautista? Dave old son, do anything but please stay away from acting. As for Russell Crowe? Well he should be ashamed or at least embarrassed, especially with lines like "My name is Mr. Knife! But you can call me Jack!" Don't get me wrong - I understand this is supposed to be tongue in cheek but even tongue in cheek has to be witty and clever - this is neither. I can switch my brain off and quite happily enjoy an action film or comedy so long as it's done with a modicum of talent. In this case I should have pulled out my brain and thrown it out the nearest window. The absolute nadir of cinema.
Donnie Darko
(2001)
A Film to Ponder (and if you want answers read this)
6 November 2002
Warning: Spoilers
"Donnie Darko" is destined for cult classic status. Any film which can so boldly confuse an audience and leave such an open ending is bound for this. In these respects it is very similar to "The Usual Suspects" which also had a confusing plot and an ending so full of holes it resembled a cheese grater. But the great thing about this is that the film remains with you for several days later and keeps you thinking, which is surely what film making is essentially about, or should be anyway.
The film spans several genres (teen movie, sci fi, horror) and while many films would fail to hold it all together first time writer-director, Richard Kelly, succeeds admirably. However, Kelly has sense enough not to ruin the film by providing the audience with a perfectly packaged ending with everything nicely tied up. This film is supposed to make you think and is supposed to be open to interpretation - I bet even Kelly hasn't got a concrete idea of what is going on.
**SPOILERS**
My take on the ending is thus:
The Frank character is part of Donnie's imagination but subconsciously is based on a real life person he knows - the James Duval character. Donnie has the ability to see into the future the same way the crazy old lady can - when we see her looking in her mail box she is looking for the letter Donnie will send to her later in the film.
When they are in the cinema and Frank takes his rabbit mask off he has lost an eye, at the time we are led to believe this is because Donnie stabbed him while looking in the mirror but it is because in the future Donnie will shoot him in the eye.
The reason Donnie suddenly finds himself asleep in his bedroom at the end of the film is that he has used a wormhole to travel back in time to the moment the jet engine landed on the house. At the start Donnie leaves the house at night and sleeps in the hills and on the golf course. Ultimately this saves his life when the jet engine falls on the house - his family say if he had been there he'd be dead. Donnie subconsciously foresaw the future and told himself (through Frank) to leave the house that night.
The jet engine fell through a wormhole in the future, the same plane we see Donnie's mother and sister on at the end which is about to crash. The whole idea is that we live in a parallel universe - while the Darko family are asleep in the house in one dimension in the past, they are also on the crashing plane in the future. The same way that as I am writing this article now I am also sitting on the toilet two weeks ago, riding my bike ten years ago, sitting at school 20 years ago, sitting on my potty 24 years ago and doing something else 10 years from now in the future.
Get it? No. You see Donnie realises he should have died when the jet engine fell on the house; the fact that he didn't has had a huge effect on the future i.e. the Patrick Swayze character gets arrested, thus the teacher can't take the girls on the trip and Donnie's mother has to and she ends up dying in the plane crash. In order to prevent his mother and sister's deaths Donnie travels back in time to sacrifice himself. When Frank (Donnie's own subconscious) says the world is going to end he means for Donnie, Donnie's world will end because his mother and sister will die. That is why he's smiling at the end, even though he knows he is going to die, because he will be saving the lives of his mother and sister.
Yes it's that simple.
The film spans several genres (teen movie, sci fi, horror) and while many films would fail to hold it all together first time writer-director, Richard Kelly, succeeds admirably. However, Kelly has sense enough not to ruin the film by providing the audience with a perfectly packaged ending with everything nicely tied up. This film is supposed to make you think and is supposed to be open to interpretation - I bet even Kelly hasn't got a concrete idea of what is going on.
**SPOILERS**
My take on the ending is thus:
The Frank character is part of Donnie's imagination but subconsciously is based on a real life person he knows - the James Duval character. Donnie has the ability to see into the future the same way the crazy old lady can - when we see her looking in her mail box she is looking for the letter Donnie will send to her later in the film.
When they are in the cinema and Frank takes his rabbit mask off he has lost an eye, at the time we are led to believe this is because Donnie stabbed him while looking in the mirror but it is because in the future Donnie will shoot him in the eye.
The reason Donnie suddenly finds himself asleep in his bedroom at the end of the film is that he has used a wormhole to travel back in time to the moment the jet engine landed on the house. At the start Donnie leaves the house at night and sleeps in the hills and on the golf course. Ultimately this saves his life when the jet engine falls on the house - his family say if he had been there he'd be dead. Donnie subconsciously foresaw the future and told himself (through Frank) to leave the house that night.
The jet engine fell through a wormhole in the future, the same plane we see Donnie's mother and sister on at the end which is about to crash. The whole idea is that we live in a parallel universe - while the Darko family are asleep in the house in one dimension in the past, they are also on the crashing plane in the future. The same way that as I am writing this article now I am also sitting on the toilet two weeks ago, riding my bike ten years ago, sitting at school 20 years ago, sitting on my potty 24 years ago and doing something else 10 years from now in the future.
Get it? No. You see Donnie realises he should have died when the jet engine fell on the house; the fact that he didn't has had a huge effect on the future i.e. the Patrick Swayze character gets arrested, thus the teacher can't take the girls on the trip and Donnie's mother has to and she ends up dying in the plane crash. In order to prevent his mother and sister's deaths Donnie travels back in time to sacrifice himself. When Frank (Donnie's own subconscious) says the world is going to end he means for Donnie, Donnie's world will end because his mother and sister will die. That is why he's smiling at the end, even though he knows he is going to die, because he will be saving the lives of his mother and sister.
Yes it's that simple.
Armadillo
(2001)
First Class British Television
16 September 2002
"Armadillo" is one of those rarities in which the screen version of an excellent novel actually lives up to the original text. This is no doubt due to the fact that William Boyd adapted the script from his own novel of the same name and that Boyd is also no stranger to script writing, having penned "Chaplin", "A Good Man in Africa" and "The Trench".
The cast is first class, a who's who of film and television, with standout performances from James Frain, Stephen Rea and Trevor Peacock (also excellent in another great TV show "The Underworld"). The plot, far from being cliched or contrived, is actually quite complex, with a mix of dodgy geezers including shady loss adjusters, even shadier insurance companies, cowboy builders, Romanian gipsies and a half-mad juggler who's convinced his wife is cheating on him.
The photography is impressive with some good shots of London which appears dark and intimidating but also sparkling with affluence.
"Armadillo" shows just how good British television can be with the right material and a good cast - in other words someone showing a bit of imagination and ambition rather than pitching yet another boring hospital or detective series.
The cast is first class, a who's who of film and television, with standout performances from James Frain, Stephen Rea and Trevor Peacock (also excellent in another great TV show "The Underworld"). The plot, far from being cliched or contrived, is actually quite complex, with a mix of dodgy geezers including shady loss adjusters, even shadier insurance companies, cowboy builders, Romanian gipsies and a half-mad juggler who's convinced his wife is cheating on him.
The photography is impressive with some good shots of London which appears dark and intimidating but also sparkling with affluence.
"Armadillo" shows just how good British television can be with the right material and a good cast - in other words someone showing a bit of imagination and ambition rather than pitching yet another boring hospital or detective series.
Villain
(1971)
One of the Best British Gangster Films
10 July 2002
Michael Tuchner's "Villain" is everything a gangster film should be; tough, violent, grim and filled with loathsome characters who have no redeeming features. The film is clearly influenced by the Krays and does an excellent job of creating a vision of what the real underworld is like, with no comical scenes or foolish characters - the overall tone is ice cold.
The film's plot is pretty familiar with Richard Burton playing Vic Dakin, one of the top crime bosses in London, who is seeking more power through controlling a prominent politician (Donald Sinden) and planning a major robbery.
The film benefits hugely from the casting of Richard Burton in the lead role of Vic Dakin who, like Ronnie Kray, is a gay, mother-fixated psychotic. Although the Welsh Burton does struggle with the Cockney accent, he is totally believable as the character and must be commended for his no-holds-barred performance, which few other Hollywood stars would have dared risk their career on. It is testament to Burton's performance that a former Kray henchman rates it as the most realistic portrayal of a British gangster on screen and very close to what Ronnie Kray was really like. In other words not a very nice man as the film stated at the time - "Meet Vic Dakin, then wish you hadn't."
Why "Villain" has become so forgotten is a mystery. It was made in the same year as "Get Carter" in 1971 but neither film was a hit. However "Get Carter" eventually found a large cult following and is now widely regarded as a British classic. Although "Villain" is one of the top five British gangster films it is not quite in the same league as "Get Carter", "The Long Good Friday" and "Brighton Rock" but it does deserve wider recognition.
The film's plot is pretty familiar with Richard Burton playing Vic Dakin, one of the top crime bosses in London, who is seeking more power through controlling a prominent politician (Donald Sinden) and planning a major robbery.
The film benefits hugely from the casting of Richard Burton in the lead role of Vic Dakin who, like Ronnie Kray, is a gay, mother-fixated psychotic. Although the Welsh Burton does struggle with the Cockney accent, he is totally believable as the character and must be commended for his no-holds-barred performance, which few other Hollywood stars would have dared risk their career on. It is testament to Burton's performance that a former Kray henchman rates it as the most realistic portrayal of a British gangster on screen and very close to what Ronnie Kray was really like. In other words not a very nice man as the film stated at the time - "Meet Vic Dakin, then wish you hadn't."
Why "Villain" has become so forgotten is a mystery. It was made in the same year as "Get Carter" in 1971 but neither film was a hit. However "Get Carter" eventually found a large cult following and is now widely regarded as a British classic. Although "Villain" is one of the top five British gangster films it is not quite in the same league as "Get Carter", "The Long Good Friday" and "Brighton Rock" but it does deserve wider recognition.
Scarecrow
(1973)
Superior Road Movie
6 May 2002
This is a forgotten classic from the 1970s and a film which few will find on the list of great films made by Al Pacino and Gene Hackman, although it is close to both actors' best work. As with most road films there is very little plot but what plot there is concerns two drifters (Pacino and Hackman), who meet while trying to hitchhike and, after quickly bonding, decide to become partners in a car wash.
They are both very different characters with Hackman dominating as Max, an irritable tough guy, and Pacino, for once underplaying, in the lesser role of Lionel. Although Hackman can play hard-nut characters in his sleep, the role of Max offers him more range than he often gets. This comes mainly through the quirky aspects of his character, such as his obsession with having to wear several layers of clothing, and also in the more tender and comical scenes.
Despite a running time of nearly two hours the film never drags, unlike many road movies, and this is largely due to the performances, especially that of Hackman. There is also another excellent sinister turn from Richard Lynch, a token 1970s villain, who befriends Lionel (Pacino) after he and Max (Hackman) have been sent to prison.
If there is one aspect which lets the film down it's the ending. "Scarecrow" is one of those films in which very little happens and thus it is tagged with an unnecessarily dramatic ending, which is pure Hollywood schmaltz. It would have benefited far more if the film-makers had simply ended the film where it began, rather than struggling with the choice of an overly happy or sad conclusion (I won't tell you which).
They are both very different characters with Hackman dominating as Max, an irritable tough guy, and Pacino, for once underplaying, in the lesser role of Lionel. Although Hackman can play hard-nut characters in his sleep, the role of Max offers him more range than he often gets. This comes mainly through the quirky aspects of his character, such as his obsession with having to wear several layers of clothing, and also in the more tender and comical scenes.
Despite a running time of nearly two hours the film never drags, unlike many road movies, and this is largely due to the performances, especially that of Hackman. There is also another excellent sinister turn from Richard Lynch, a token 1970s villain, who befriends Lionel (Pacino) after he and Max (Hackman) have been sent to prison.
If there is one aspect which lets the film down it's the ending. "Scarecrow" is one of those films in which very little happens and thus it is tagged with an unnecessarily dramatic ending, which is pure Hollywood schmaltz. It would have benefited far more if the film-makers had simply ended the film where it began, rather than struggling with the choice of an overly happy or sad conclusion (I won't tell you which).
Barquero
(1970)
Underrated and forgotten but classic Western
23 April 2002
Lee Van Cleef had already become an international star late in his career, following his success in the Sergio Leone Spaghetti Westerns, when he starred in "Barquero", made in 1970. The film is clearly influenced by the Spaghetti tradition, most clearly displayed in the drugged-up, psychotic villain, Jake Remy, who bares similarities to the character of Indio in "For a Few Dollars More". However "Barquero" is far superior to the many "Spaghetti" imitators and deserves to stand on its own as a great Western.
The plot is fairly simple, beginning with the massacre and plundering of a peaceful town by Jake Remy and his crew of assorted bandits. Their only escape from capture is to cross the river to safety but the only person who can help them is the Barquero, played by Lee Van Cleef, who refuses, and a violent stand-off ensues.
The film is aided immeasurably by the performance of Warren Oates as Jake Remy, in one of his best roles. Remy makes even most the evil Western characters look saintly in comparison, as he kills and butchers anyone who gets in his path (check out the scene in which he sleeps with a woman and then casually kills her) and his only redeeming feature is his loyalty to his men. This is perhaps the only Western in which the bad guy is given more screen time than the hero and is one of the most complex villains ever seen on screen. Remy has a past which he is haunted by, and is slowly driven mad by his determination to cross the river and by the stubbornness of the Barquero.
The film does not really have a hero, as the only two characters to resemble this are the Barquero and Mountain Phil, a truly bizarre character, excellently played by Forrest Tucker. The Barquero is prepared to help the endangered townsfolk against Remy, but only because he wants to bed one of the women and Mountain Phil does not help out of kindness but more so because he is slightly insane.
"Barquero" was directed by the undistinguished Gordon Douglas, although he did direct the classic 1954 Sci-Fi/horror "Them". Fans of Sam Peckinpah will be pleased to see the villainous pairing of Warren Oates and John Davis Chandler, although Van Cleef fans may be disappointed as he is given little to do, besides having to wear one of the worst shirts ever committed to film.
"Barquero" should be seen by anyone who is serious about Westerns and is required viewing for fans of the great Warren Oates.
The plot is fairly simple, beginning with the massacre and plundering of a peaceful town by Jake Remy and his crew of assorted bandits. Their only escape from capture is to cross the river to safety but the only person who can help them is the Barquero, played by Lee Van Cleef, who refuses, and a violent stand-off ensues.
The film is aided immeasurably by the performance of Warren Oates as Jake Remy, in one of his best roles. Remy makes even most the evil Western characters look saintly in comparison, as he kills and butchers anyone who gets in his path (check out the scene in which he sleeps with a woman and then casually kills her) and his only redeeming feature is his loyalty to his men. This is perhaps the only Western in which the bad guy is given more screen time than the hero and is one of the most complex villains ever seen on screen. Remy has a past which he is haunted by, and is slowly driven mad by his determination to cross the river and by the stubbornness of the Barquero.
The film does not really have a hero, as the only two characters to resemble this are the Barquero and Mountain Phil, a truly bizarre character, excellently played by Forrest Tucker. The Barquero is prepared to help the endangered townsfolk against Remy, but only because he wants to bed one of the women and Mountain Phil does not help out of kindness but more so because he is slightly insane.
"Barquero" was directed by the undistinguished Gordon Douglas, although he did direct the classic 1954 Sci-Fi/horror "Them". Fans of Sam Peckinpah will be pleased to see the villainous pairing of Warren Oates and John Davis Chandler, although Van Cleef fans may be disappointed as he is given little to do, besides having to wear one of the worst shirts ever committed to film.
"Barquero" should be seen by anyone who is serious about Westerns and is required viewing for fans of the great Warren Oates.
Bio-Zombie
(1998)
Zombies on the rampage Hong Kong style
19 April 2002
Another little gem from Hong Kong which should be filed alongside "The Untold Story II" and "Made in Hong Kong" for its stylish take on a familiar theme. "Bio Zombie" could easily be dismissed a yet another addition to the tired zombie genre but it is raised several notches by the energetic performances of Sam Lee and Jordan Chan in the lead roles.
"Bio Zombie" has the standard storyline for films about the undead, beginning with a shady business deal involving an incubated zombie which escapes and reeks havoc. The first half of the film takes time to introduce the various characters while the second half contains the necessary action and bloodletting.
Most of the action takes place in a shopping mall, similar to George Romero's "Dawn of the Dead", and there are several horror film cliches such as the tough guy who turns out to be a coward and the friendly zombie who helps the humans. However, this is a worthy addition to the genre mainly because of the often bizarre characters and unnerving imagery, something which also typified "The Untold Story II".
There is nothing particularly scary about "Bio Zombie" and some horror fans may be disappointed with the lack of gore and special effects. The film was obviously made on a micro-budget and the overall feel is of comedy and parody, best displayed in a scene in which the two heroes use video games for advice on how best to kill the zombies.
"Bio Zombie" is flashily directed by Wilson Yip who makes good use of the sets and photography to give the film a strange, futuristic feel. As with most small-budget horror films "Bio Zombie" is filmed economically at 94 minutes and is most likely to appeal to fans of other recent Hong Kong films rather than hard core horror fans.
"Bio Zombie" has the standard storyline for films about the undead, beginning with a shady business deal involving an incubated zombie which escapes and reeks havoc. The first half of the film takes time to introduce the various characters while the second half contains the necessary action and bloodletting.
Most of the action takes place in a shopping mall, similar to George Romero's "Dawn of the Dead", and there are several horror film cliches such as the tough guy who turns out to be a coward and the friendly zombie who helps the humans. However, this is a worthy addition to the genre mainly because of the often bizarre characters and unnerving imagery, something which also typified "The Untold Story II".
There is nothing particularly scary about "Bio Zombie" and some horror fans may be disappointed with the lack of gore and special effects. The film was obviously made on a micro-budget and the overall feel is of comedy and parody, best displayed in a scene in which the two heroes use video games for advice on how best to kill the zombies.
"Bio Zombie" is flashily directed by Wilson Yip who makes good use of the sets and photography to give the film a strange, futuristic feel. As with most small-budget horror films "Bio Zombie" is filmed economically at 94 minutes and is most likely to appeal to fans of other recent Hong Kong films rather than hard core horror fans.
The Gambler
(1974)
Classic 70s film about addiction
17 April 2002
The theme of addiction is a favourite area for film makers and "The Gambler" stands as the best and most intelligent film about the addiction of gambling. The fact that it is a little known or seen film is perhaps to do with its intellectual script which, with references to Dostoyevsky, may be too pretentious for some. However, rather than being a cleched film about a good man's decent into the hell of addiction this is a film about a selfish, egotistical man, from a good background, who happily wades deeper and deeper into his obsession.
The film's title pretty much sums up the story, with the character of Axel Freed, played by James Caan, beginning the film as a compulsive gambler but sinking further and further into his habit as the film goes on. He does this despite his undoubted intelligence - he is a college lecturer - and despite the pleading of his mother, rich grandfather and friends.
Freed is by no means a likeable character. Like most addicts all he cares about is his next fix and will happily ask his mother for tens of thousands of dollars to repay an outstanding debt. No one, including his girlfriend, played by Lauren Hutton, and his college students, remain untouched by his addiction, a decision which comes back to haunt him in the film's climax.
Many people have been left puzzled by the film's ending which is cryptic and unresolved. However this merely stands as a metaphor for addiction generally, that it can never be fully cured or ever totally go away. Axel is, however, obviously disgusted with himself and the effect his gambling has had on those around him and his late night journey into the all-black neighbourhood is his way of seeking retribution for his sins.
"The Gambler" provides James Caan with, alongside Michael Mann's "Thief", the best role of his career. The character of Axel Freed provides him with a range of emotions, especially in the way he treats those he cares about, as his gambling slowly takes precedence over everything else. Anyone who thinks James Caan's career began and ended with "The Godfather" should definitely see "The Gambler", as this proves he is one of the top actors of his generation and that he can play more than just the tough guy roles he is too often saddled with.
The film is brilliantly directed by Karel Reisz as not a single scene rings false despite a 111 minute running time. After directing the classic "Saturday Night and Sunday Morning" in Britain, Reisz relocated to America, but, unfortunately, "The Gambler" represents the only time he reached those heights again.
The film's title pretty much sums up the story, with the character of Axel Freed, played by James Caan, beginning the film as a compulsive gambler but sinking further and further into his habit as the film goes on. He does this despite his undoubted intelligence - he is a college lecturer - and despite the pleading of his mother, rich grandfather and friends.
Freed is by no means a likeable character. Like most addicts all he cares about is his next fix and will happily ask his mother for tens of thousands of dollars to repay an outstanding debt. No one, including his girlfriend, played by Lauren Hutton, and his college students, remain untouched by his addiction, a decision which comes back to haunt him in the film's climax.
Many people have been left puzzled by the film's ending which is cryptic and unresolved. However this merely stands as a metaphor for addiction generally, that it can never be fully cured or ever totally go away. Axel is, however, obviously disgusted with himself and the effect his gambling has had on those around him and his late night journey into the all-black neighbourhood is his way of seeking retribution for his sins.
"The Gambler" provides James Caan with, alongside Michael Mann's "Thief", the best role of his career. The character of Axel Freed provides him with a range of emotions, especially in the way he treats those he cares about, as his gambling slowly takes precedence over everything else. Anyone who thinks James Caan's career began and ended with "The Godfather" should definitely see "The Gambler", as this proves he is one of the top actors of his generation and that he can play more than just the tough guy roles he is too often saddled with.
The film is brilliantly directed by Karel Reisz as not a single scene rings false despite a 111 minute running time. After directing the classic "Saturday Night and Sunday Morning" in Britain, Reisz relocated to America, but, unfortunately, "The Gambler" represents the only time he reached those heights again.
Horror Meets Spaghetti Western
15 April 2002
While few of the Hammer horror films took themselves too seriously it was in the 1970s when the cycle became almost a parody of itself and "Captain Kronos, Vampire Hunter" is perhaps the best example of this. Although it is a little known film it is certainly one of the best horrors, largely due to its original take on the vampire theme and imaginative, albeit risky, casting.
Rather than offer the audience another Christopher Lee dominated vampire flick, "Kronos" features Horst Janson in the title role and he is essentially the Clint Eastwood character from the Sergio Leone Spaghetti Westerns. This means Kronos is unstoppable with a sword and can kill several men with one quick swish of his blade, best displayed when the brilliant Ian Hendry and his mob make the mistake of picking a fight with him.
It is important not to take the film or the cast too seriously as this is essentially a comedy-horror. There are several very amusing scenes such as when Kronos and his hunchbacked helper struggle to find a way to destroy a particularly nasty vampire, making light of the many and varied ways to supposedly kill one of the undead.
Like all Hammer Horror films "Kronos" benefits from having a short 90- minute running time, concentrating more on action and bloodletting than the idle chat that typified Francis Ford Coppola's "Bram Stoker's Dracula". It is also good to see a vampire film in which the hero is dangerous and unpredictable and not entirely wholesome such as the Van Helsing character often is.
Anyone who found "Blade" to be too noisy and over-the-top (karate and vampires do not go together) should watch "Kronos" which is essentially the same film but far more subtle - like the difference between using a scalpel and a chainsaw.
Rather than offer the audience another Christopher Lee dominated vampire flick, "Kronos" features Horst Janson in the title role and he is essentially the Clint Eastwood character from the Sergio Leone Spaghetti Westerns. This means Kronos is unstoppable with a sword and can kill several men with one quick swish of his blade, best displayed when the brilliant Ian Hendry and his mob make the mistake of picking a fight with him.
It is important not to take the film or the cast too seriously as this is essentially a comedy-horror. There are several very amusing scenes such as when Kronos and his hunchbacked helper struggle to find a way to destroy a particularly nasty vampire, making light of the many and varied ways to supposedly kill one of the undead.
Like all Hammer Horror films "Kronos" benefits from having a short 90- minute running time, concentrating more on action and bloodletting than the idle chat that typified Francis Ford Coppola's "Bram Stoker's Dracula". It is also good to see a vampire film in which the hero is dangerous and unpredictable and not entirely wholesome such as the Van Helsing character often is.
Anyone who found "Blade" to be too noisy and over-the-top (karate and vampires do not go together) should watch "Kronos" which is essentially the same film but far more subtle - like the difference between using a scalpel and a chainsaw.
The Devils
(1971)
Excellent but flawed British film
14 April 2002
British director Ken Russell's adaption of Aldous Huxley's book "The Devils of Loudun" is one of the most origional, controversial and daring films ever made. The film takes place in 17th-century France and centres on the hypocritical and licentious behaviour of debauched priest Father Urbain Grandier, brilliantly played by Oliver Reed. A second plot strand involves the humpbacked nunn Sister Jeanne, played by Vanessa Redgrave, who, along with her fellow nuns, is obsessed with Grandier. When the nuns become seemingly possessed, disgruntled representatives of the Catholic Church and corrupt officials move in and seize their opportunity to get rid of Grandier.
The film gets off to an excellent start, gradually building up the tension and highlighting the flaws within the Catholic religion. However the middle section involving the possession of the nuns is far too theatrical and over-the-top and the action becomes weighed down by the overbearing performance of Michael Gothard as Father Barre and Derek Jarman's lurid sets. The final section of the film, however, is mightily impressive and well-scripted and benefits hugely from Oliver Reed's committed performance.
While Vanessa Redgrave impresses in the role of Sister Jeanne this is Oliver Reed's film and a performance which proves he was a great actor and not just a great hellraiser. This film illustrates that he is easily the equal of his contemporaries including Caine, Connery, Harris and Finney.
While director Ken Russell's films can range from the very good to the absolutely awful "The Devils" is without doubt his best. This is perfect material for Russell to work with and the ideal outlet for his unique vision. Russell was part of the new breed of controversial directors who emerged in the late 1960s and 1970s who courted controversy with images of sex, nudity, violence and shocking images. "The Devils" is no exception and while it will by no means be to everyone's taste it should be commended for its daring take on the hypocritical side to religion and for helping to pave new ground in cinema.
The film gets off to an excellent start, gradually building up the tension and highlighting the flaws within the Catholic religion. However the middle section involving the possession of the nuns is far too theatrical and over-the-top and the action becomes weighed down by the overbearing performance of Michael Gothard as Father Barre and Derek Jarman's lurid sets. The final section of the film, however, is mightily impressive and well-scripted and benefits hugely from Oliver Reed's committed performance.
While Vanessa Redgrave impresses in the role of Sister Jeanne this is Oliver Reed's film and a performance which proves he was a great actor and not just a great hellraiser. This film illustrates that he is easily the equal of his contemporaries including Caine, Connery, Harris and Finney.
While director Ken Russell's films can range from the very good to the absolutely awful "The Devils" is without doubt his best. This is perfect material for Russell to work with and the ideal outlet for his unique vision. Russell was part of the new breed of controversial directors who emerged in the late 1960s and 1970s who courted controversy with images of sex, nudity, violence and shocking images. "The Devils" is no exception and while it will by no means be to everyone's taste it should be commended for its daring take on the hypocritical side to religion and for helping to pave new ground in cinema.
Tell Your Friends