Reviews

Wow. What a terrible, terrible film.

This is quite a well known film so I was expecting it to be one of JCVD's better ones, an action classic. But sadly not. The story was almost absent, characters were (despite some out of place, and repetitive flashbacks) shallow, and the acting was some of the worst I've ever seen.

All this I can expect and will normally forgive in a martial arts film, but they at least require some decent fight scenes. Instead there's some general punching and kicking, but no real sense of danger or intensity, and there are breaks in the fights when JCVD stops to look around as if he's forgotten that someone is attacking him.

The only positive thing I can say is that I was rooting for the hero at least. I wanted the villain, Fender to be killed just to shut him up, especially in the last few minutes when he's constantly shouting "RRAAARRGGHH!!" for absolutely no reason.

People kept referring to how strong and dangerous Fender was, but I saw no reason why. He's just a big man with sunglasses who likes to roar.

With its origins as the lesser known fake trailer of Rodriguez & Tarantino's Grindhouse, this film delivers exactly what you might expect. The story follows the familiar formula of westerns such as A Fistful of Dollars, as Rutger Hauer's Hobo enters the ironically named Hopetown, witnesses the chaos as criminals have free reign, and decides to take the law into his own hands, "delivering justice one shell at a time".

For a film with such an absurd title and premise, the tension is racked up and it pulls you in straight from the opening scene as we are introduced to the merciless Drake (Brian Downey) and his two sons Slick and Ivan (Gregory Smith & Nick Bateman respectively), some of fiction's most viscous villains. The typical characters you find on 'best villain' lists – Darth Vader, Hannibal Lecter, Lord Voldemort to name a few – at least have an element of human in them, but you certainly wouldn't want Drake and his sons (or any minor criminal in the town for that matter) to get their hands on you. Even the armoured samurai-like demonic soldiers that Drake summons, The Plague, seem a preferable opponent. But at least there's still hope in Hopetown (yes I said it) as the headlines read "Hobo stops begging, demands change".

Hobo with a Shotgun is comparable to the other Grindhouse films in its ridiculousness but as pure enjoyment goes, it is far superior and coming from an unknown director seems more genuine as a B-movie. Rutger Hauer brilliantly underplays the Hobo, just trying to get to grips with the tough world he lives in, contrasting the exaggeration of the remaining characters, including the cartoonish Ivan, and Molly Dunsworth as prostitute Abby who screams the most chilling cries of rage and delivers a near-inspirational speech defending the homeless, "they got the biggest home of any of us, it's called the streets!" For those looking for a high-paced insanely mindless movie, and who found Planet Terror, Death Proof, or Machete lacking something, Hobo with a Shotgun may be the most entertaining film released in years.

Buried is a concept film showing how a normal man would react when waking up to discover he's buried alive. Paul (Reynolds) has a handful of items buried with him, including a phone which he uses for the majority of the film in his efforts to reach help. I generally enjoy watching simple thrillers like this, however Buried was a disappointment.

We join Paul as he wakes up, follow him throughout his predicament, and share the tedium and frustration that you might imagine comes with the situation. So in that sense the film is a success. But for a thriller, it's not very thrilling. Any genuine excitement is replaced with a generic humming soundtrack and the attempts at misdirection are clichéd and easy to spot for anyone familiar with thrillers or horrors. On the topic of clichés the dialogue on the phone is full of them, including "Did you get the flowers I sent you", aimed at his elderly mother who seems to have dementia.

Looking back, I wonder what else I might have expected in a film about a man in a box. Perhaps a character study with more realism would have been an improvement, with an absence of a soundtrack or the writer's efforts to engage the audience, such as a set piece with a snake, which just seems forced. While being only 90 minutes the film still felt too long, so maybe it would have worked better as a short.

A classic gangster film of Hollywood's Golden Age from Casablanca director Michael Curtiz, Angels with Dirty Faces is one of James Cagney's most well known films and had him nominated for his first Academy Award.

Rocky Sullivan (Cagney) and Jerry Connelly (Pat O'Brien) are childhood friends who are caught robbing a train as kids. After Rocky takes the rap the two set on different paths, Jerry becomes a priest while Rocky can't escape the life of crime. Years later they reunite on friendly terms but each have a different influence on a group of street kids who resemble the lifestyle they once shared.

The film for the most part may seem to be just a typical 1930s gangster quota quickie from Warner, with Rocky as a tough crook being screwed over by his former ally Humphrey Bogart. But the focus is instead on the relationship with Jerry who looks out for the best interests of the kids (to whom the title refers), and by the end Rocky must make a decision which, to a Depression era audience, would have been quite inspiring. Cagney also gives Rocky a moral grounding which has the audience sympathising with him from start to finish.

Overall a decent crime story with a message about the kind of courage that is not "heroics and bravado", and you can clearly see its influence on modern characterisation, but perhaps this means the novelty is lost to today's audience.

"Only you saw it. Only you can save them" the tagline reads. This is more or less the theme of this British thriller. Zakes Abbot (William Ash) spots something rather disturbing on the road, a woman caged in the back of a van, and has a dilemma of whether to follow and help or shrug it off as someone else's problem. After a small effort of calling the police and attempting (and failing) to read the dirty number plate, Zakes chooses the latter. That is until his girlfriend goes missing and he realises he has a more personal stake in pursuing the captor.

What follows is a fairly straight-forward cat & mouse chase as Zakes tails and evades the villain simultaneously, bringing to mind the 2003 French thriller High Tension (AKA Switchblade Romance) which as you might expect with that title is essentially one long suspense sequence. The tension in Hush doesn't quite allow it such a cocky title as the French film, but it is a good attempt nonetheless and it provides a few "No don't go there!" or "He's behind you!" moments. The film does however contain almost all the horror clichés, and although it tries to subvert one or two, this is nothing new and horror fans will see everything a mile off. As far as the plot goes, it would have been acceptable as a simple chase-thriller if it weren't for one scene (involving the security guards) which just seemed unnecessary and too contrived even for this already improbable story. Still, at 90mins it's an easy, enjoyable thriller that's worth a watch.

In the days leading up to the millennium, society is panicking over predictions of the apocalypse, and the death of influential rapper 'Jeriko One' has created tensions between the police and the man on the street. Ex-cop Lenny Nero (Ralph Fiennes) deals in 'playbacks', recordings you can wire into to see, hear and feel an experience as if you were there. When a playback of a murder is sent to Lenny, he teams up with limo driver Lornette "Mace" Mason (Angela Bassett) to unravel a conspiracy in order to protect himself and friends.

Firstly, bear in mind while watching a film set in a year that has already passed you have to suspend some disbelief. Strange Days' vision of the "future" is a familiar one, leather-clad cyberpunks included, and the opening sequence sets the kind of pace you might expect in an action-thriller collaboration from adrenaline junkies like Kathryn Bigelow and writer James Cameron, so the film is an easy watch and you can enjoy it without worrying about the inaccuracies. The pace does slow down at points however, giving some parts a noirish feel similar to Blade Runner. Unfortunately at 140 minutes it did drag on a bit and some irrelevant sequences could have easily been cut out.

The first person long takes in the 'playback' sequences, shot almost like a computer game, are a good feature and reminded me of both Halloween and strangely Being John Malkovich at the same time. As Lenny directs his actors playing out these recorded experiences, it suggest that maybe if technology advances enough these 'playbacks' could be the next step in film after 3D, allowing us to actually become a character. However, like in most James Cameron stories, there is hint of fear of this technology as it is sold in the black-market like a drug, people becoming hooked on these false experiences and using phrases like "wired" and "jacking in".

Ralph Fiennes does a decent job as a cocky rogue with a sensitive side, pining over ex Faith (Juliette Lewis), and his James Woods style American accent is a nice change from his usual characters, but the majority of the performances are fairly mediocre.

Overall despite having several flaws, as any film will, Strange Days is an enjoyable classic 90s thriller and is definitely worth a watch if you don't take it too seriously.

Some may say it's best to go into Elephant not knowing where it is leading, this way the climax will have greater impact. Unfortunately for those people, with such a delicate subject matter, the film has become fairly well known. I personally believe it is better this way so that otherwise mundane scenes will keep you on the edge of your seat, anticipating the outcome without knowing exactly when it will happen. But if you are one of the few people unaware of this film and wish to stay in the dark, I suggest you stop reading now.

For the most part, Elephant simply shows an average day in an American high school, from the point of view of a select few students. Each character is introduced with their name in a caption, and a short segment of them simply walking around the school. With a mostly improvised script, it doesn't exactly matter what is being said, but the relatively inexperienced and unknown cast do a good job making it feel natural. Although there is little character development, we begin to care for these people, they fit nicely into stereotypes we can connect with without being clichés (with the bulimic girls as an exception). It is later revealed to us that we are about to witness a school shooting, and thanks to the preceding scenes, the victims aren't just red shirts taking one for the team.

Without an individual main character, the cinematography is star of this film. Full of single almost hypnotic long takes you might associate with Stanley Kubrick, the film draws you in and really involves you in an experience that, following the Columbine shooting, the public were still anxious about. These tracking shots, combined with an overlapping timeframe between each character, allow the audience to create a mind-map of the school layout and the whereabouts of each person, and predict the following events. One such shot follows three girls into the cafeteria, and takes a tour around the area before showing another character through a window, doing what we have previously seen him do, minutes before the shooting starts.

If you're looking for an all out no holds barred high school massacre action-thriller, maybe give this a pass, you may feel the build-up drags on. If you're looking for an effective, yet simplistic drama portraying the shocking things young people are capable of, this may be the film for you.

A brutal film that remains the most notorious of the incredibly controversial "rape/revenge" horror sub-genre, I Spit on Your Grave makes The Last House on the Left look like The Benny Hill Show. The plot is simple – a woman is raped... she then carries out her revenge on said rapists.

The violence depicted, rather than being gratuitous entertainment, is disturbingly effective, particularly during the first act as the unfortunate protagonist undergoes several brutal attacks. But worry not, her assailants soon get their just desserts, and if any women feel outraged by the acts performed in the previous scenes and want the male audience to squirm just as much, your wish is granted.

While this film is far from enjoyable, it is not your average exploitation movie and the uneasy feeling you might have while watching it is exactly what is intended in a film displaying the horrific experience of a rape, and it is not surprising that writer/director Meir Zarchi never broke into the mainstream. Sadly I find this hard to recommend to anyone for any reason other than curiosity for such an infamous film, and it is definitely not suitable to watch on a date.

5/10