Change Your Image
MrPrudence04
Reviews
Phar Lap (1983)
Commendable, but not admirable.
I thought Simon Wincer did an alright job of telling this story, although with a subject like Phar Lap he wasn't too hard pushed to stir emotions in the viewer, particularly if they're of Australian origin. To be truthful, it does fall short of the mark in some respects.
To start with, I didn't think the film's sequence of starting with his death, flashing back through the horse's life then back to the death really worked. I thought it was disjointed and didn't achieve anything. The death itself was also not treated with the proper attention given the enormous amount of hearsay and speculation about the poisoning and other circumstances surrounding Phar Lap's untimely end. We are pretty much picked up and dropped at the end of the film.
Also, the very title of this film "Phar Lap: Hero to a Nation" isn't indicative of the film's focus. A country that was suffering through the torments of depression had its hopes lifted by this single racehorse, and that wasn't given enough emphasis. The only real glimpse we got of the people's struggle through the era was Harry Telford's wife complaining they didn't have enough money. It really needed more of a macro perspective. Phar Lap was a legend for more reason than just winning races. He symbolised something far greater, helping resurrect an entire nation out of despair.
Some parts of the film were quite good, and before watching it I was hoping that it wouldn't be too sappy or indulgent with the orchestral backdrop. I was relieved to see that it was quite sincere in this respect, and the costumes and set were very fitting. The acting also was commendable, particularly Ron Liebman playing David Davis, who seemed to be channeling Al Pacino in certain scenes.
Overall I came away feeling a little disappointed with the treatment the film gave a figure such as Phar Lap. However, hiring the DVD is worthwhile for the Special Features that contain Wincer's interview with Tommy Woodcock, but prepare to cringe at Wincer questioning Woodcock on what he thought of his movie.
Batman (1989)
How in the world could ANYONE give this movie a 1 out of 10?
It just blows my mind that over 600 people out there would categorise this movie as awful? Arguably one of Jack Nicholson's most charismatic and believable performances, and Keaton was brilliant in this and the sequel. The plot, the script, the set, the dark undefinable quality from start to finish? This movie is dead set awesome. Easily one of my favourites.
Remarkable parallel with The Godfather series in that you see a very steady decline from the first to last(?) Not to say that Batman Returns was not an excellent movie. Likewise Batman Forever, which in its own way was commendable and ultimately very entertaining. I think we all have seen Batman and Robin. I think the word "garbage" is doing it too many favours. A very slow, steady decline - with an enormous leap downwards at the end. Let's all hope Batman Begins resurrects our faith in the series. And for god's sake, keep Joel S away from anything aside from coffee duty.