Scoop - well Match Point was a change in direction and a return to form somewhat, but this is basically the same type of Woody Allen film we've been getting for the last 15 years or so, a tired attempt at trying to recapture the wit and freshness of his earlier years.

This extremely slight comedy/murder mystery runs briskily but that's about all it has going for it. Scarlett Johannson is way out of her league in trying to put in a comic perfromance, Allen is annoying, and Hugh Jackman doesnt havemuch to do. The script is less than half baked and the whole thing is quite uninspired.

5/10 

Bringing Up Baby (1938) - not sure why I didnt really like it the first time around but upon a rewatch I was quite impressed by the zaniness of the whole thing. It still drops in the second half but to keep up this amount of wackiness for a whole movie should not really be expected anyway.

I'm also unsure what I thought about the performances last time around, but Katherine Hepburn really worked for me here. This is an inspired performance, which is much more than I can say for some of her later (and more celebrated) efforts. Cary Grant does well playing off her too.

7/10


Manhunter (1986) - Michael Mann's pre-Silence of the Lambs version of Red Dragon is, as usual, moody, well shot and well directed. However, it is also clusmily scripted, not very well acted and hampered by a very dodgy 80's soundtrack.

Brian Cox is actually pretty good as Hannibal Lecter but Lecter's character is not given as much screen time here as he was in the remake. But it's William "CSI" Petersen who is really unconvincing in the main role that later was played by Edward Norton. Petersen singlehandedly manages to undo all of Mann's good work with a fake performance that doesnt ring true in any way.

5.5/10 

Ringu (1997) - rewatch, and I still think this is one case where the american remake is far superior. For one thing, Naomi Watts is much better in the central role of the journalist investigating the mysterious video tape deaths. Also, gore verbinski's version had some nice memorable imagery which the low key japanese version is lacking and there was also a more well created sense of weirdness and dread in the remake. The original has a slightly better plot, with the remake adding in some unnecessary and silly scenes, but given that the whole setup was fairly preposterous anyway, that didn�t bother me. I liked the ending on the remake, but I do think the ending on this version is superior (although it wouldn�t really have fitted in with the remake).

5.5/10

Red Dragon - Michael Mann's Manhunter was fairly average but this version of the novel is even weaker. Edward Norton is slightly more watchable than William Petersen in the role of Will Graham but only just, its still a fairly lacklustre performance. And although the dodgy 80's soudntrack from Mann's film is not present, the replacement by a generic thriller score isnt all that much better. Obviously, Hannibal Lecter's role is expanded, but this time Anthony Hopkins phones in his perfromance from Camp Cheese. And even though both movies had virtually the same plot and an identical screenplay, this version had the addition of an extremely dumb and silly hollywood ending. Mann's film was better directed, better shot and also much more moodier (despite still being very average).

5/10

A Scanner Darkly - Richard Linklater's lucid and trippy film is perhaps the best realised version of the essence of Phillip K Dick's work. Total Recall was a decent film, but its only the expansion of one of his short stories. Blade Runner is a great film, but it deviated significantly from the source material. And Minority Report is only above average.

The animation style adopted (basically real footage superimposed with animation) suits the material very well, and renders a drug induced world quite nicely. The first 2/3 is short on substance, but is surprisingly very funny, with Robert Downey Jnr and Woody Harrelson providing plenty of laughs.

But the movie takes a different turn in the last 1/3 and if you can withstand a meandering and sometimes aimless screenplay till then, you get a pretty good payoff as all the lightheartedness gives way to a rather haunting little sequence of events.

The final end credits, replicated straight from the book, make sure that feeling stays with you for a little while.

7/10


Thank You For Smoking - hmm, it's perfectly watchable but it definitely feels stuck in middle ground, where it's thankfully not as soppy as a feel good redemption tale, but is also not as biting and cynical as it could have been.

It's arguable that going further in either direction would have resulted in a lesser film, but as it is I found it to be a nice enough distraction but not really engaging.

6.5/10 

The Bad Sleep Well (1960) - Akira Kurosawa's loose adaptation of Hamlet mixed with equal parts film noir, procedural thriller and corporate corruption expose is a great film let down slightly by a few missteps in the last act.

The opening twenty five minutes is devoted entirely to a wedding sequence and is a sheer masterclass as Kurosawa flawlessly sets up all the characters and slowly reveals all the information that will be necessary for the next two hours. Francis Ford Coppola must have been taking notes as his vitrual rehash of the scene to open The Godfather is as perfect.

What follows is a brilliantly shot, paced and acted movie that has a lot going on, and its only the anticlimax right at the end that doesnt quite deliver after the tremendous buildup.

8/10 

Futurama Season 3 - Nowhere near as consistent as seasons 1-2, and there's no real great episodes either, although there's a handful of very good ones. The second half's probably the strongest so I hope that continues on to season 4.

6.5/10

The Black Dahlia - I really dont get all the negative criticism this has been garnering. Sure, it's a flawed movie that feels a bit empty and flat, is awkwardly paced and is miscast, but its also quite evident that its made by a real filmmaker.

Brian de Palma's skills have almost always been compromised by shoddy material (which he sometimes writes himself) and it's arguable that he blew a chance to make a great film here given the quality of the source material, and it does feel like the movie's missing several crucial scenes, but what is there is quite well made. He and the scriptwriters just needed to let it breathe more.

6.5/10 

The Lady in the Water - M. Night Shyamalan's stories become increasingly childish and pie-eyed as this one revisits his theme of opening with a bedtime story he made up and then dwelling on characters that play parts in that story except he never told them. They spend two hours coming to terms with their 'purpose', having magically skipped over the part where they might actually question why their superintendent is telling them they have to protect a naked chick he found in the pool from a red-eyed dog made of grass so that the sky eagle can take her away. It might have been nice to throw that kind of bone to the audience first, because we're not buying it either, but instead Shyamalan almost acknowledges that he had no idea how to solve the problem of using his characters to elicit suspension of disbelief from his audience by ignoring the fact that he needed to in the first place and hoping we wouldn't notice. In one shot, frumpy stuttering protagonist learns that one of his tenants fits an archetype in this sea nymph myth the director made up, and then in the next that tenant has now miraculously been fully convinced of the reality of this myth by the frumpy stuttering protagonist and is totally cool with the whole thing.

Cinematography was the directorial equivalent of speaking in a monotone - nearly every shot is a long static cut from an utterly neutral angle, with editing that completely ignores all action and emotion his characters attempt to convey. It's like Stephen Wright was reading me the words to a lullaby he didn't care about. That's apparently Shyamalan's style, but I don't see how it adds a thing to his storytelling. 

but usually christopher doyle is pretty impressive behind the camera. But I guess you can only shoot in the way you are told to :) 

I saw the trailer yesterday evening, and it seems the movie will be interesting. The story comes from a legend of ancien Greece. the action takes place in Spartes. 300 Spartes warriors have to fight against hundreds Persians to save their city. It is as dark as Hell, the battles seems to be epic as "The Lord of the Ring" battles, and bloody as far as possible ! Everything I like in a movie... 

fight against hundreds Persians

should have writen fight against thousands Persians .. otherwize the movie would not have any interest... :P 

Every school boy knows it is not a legend

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Thermopylae 

From some of the folks behind Blair Witch Project comes this well-written, well-acted and paranoid as fuck tale of alien abduction. While it is similar to Blair Witch in some ways (a small, tight cast, simple sets), it has a higher budget and for the most part doesn't take place in the woods or use shakycam. I can't really praise this movie enough, it's the best horror I've seen in a long time, and I watch a fair amount of horror films. The script is so well done, the way things are implied or slowly revealed really works to keep one engrossed, intrigued and increasingly worried and disturbed. The actors were all convincing and were all given a chance to let their characters come across as real over time. 

You know, I'm not a specialist of ancien Greece story... and it makes almost 25 years I for sure saw that at school... (remember I'm 37 this year... *sight*...) 

yes, trailer looks interesting but this could be either really good or really bad. 

The Beat My Heart Skipped (2005) - Three reasons I wanted to see this, it was Jacques Audiard's followup to the fantastic Read My Lips, it was almost universally well received, and it has a plotline about a street level thug/debt collector whose interest in being a pianist is revived after spotting an ex-teacher. From then on, he is a conflicted soul who is torn between his art, his loyalty to his father, and his work. I wanted to see how you could make a good film with a storyline like that.

Well it's pretty easy to see why. Jacques Audiard is on fire behind the camera and Romain Duris is on fire in front of it. Audiard decides to basically just keep the camera as close to Duris as possible, which is not a bad move when your lead actor puts in such a magentic performance. He comea across as a mixture of pacino and deniro from their earlier 70's roles. The movie also has a terrific support cast and a good script for what the plot is. Ultimately its not a great film because there are only so many things that could be done given the general plot, but its sure is a very good one.

7.5/10 

That came across as harsh, I'm sorry and didn't intend anything more than a rasberry.

When I think of schoolboys, I get a picture of Angus Young in my head. Angus Young whistling 'you are only young but you are going to die' as he wacks Xerxe's Immortals with his six string axe. 

Don't be sorry, I was not hurted at all... It is just a fact that I'm getting older and older each days... and it is nobody's fault ;)
However, I agree that I could have take time to find more infos/references about the movie story... sorry for this... ;P 

http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/300/trailer1/ 

This trailer looks just like Frank Millers comic book. I think it will be next SinCity (in the comic book > large screen way). 

Pan�s Labyrinth � Guillermo Del Toro�s latest movie shares many similarities with his 2001 effort, The Devil�s Backbone. It�s probably slightly better than Backbone in depicting the cruelties of the world through a child�s eyes.

The child, Ofelia, is unhappy with her current world after her mother remarries a sadistic captain upholding the post civil-war Spanish fascist regime and Ofelia creates her own fantasy world to escape from these realities. Unfortunately for her, in Guillermo Del Toro�s film, the fantasy world she creates is more an articulation of her realties than an escape.

I thought it started shakily but the longer it went on, the better it became both in terms of direction and scripting. Del Toro�s vision and aim are precise but I thought the execution was lacking in a few parts. Still, overall it�s a very good dark fantasy film with some very unique touches.

7.5/10 

Swimming Pool (2003) - Francois Ozon's slow burn, well made psychological drama is not quite as clever as it thinks it is, but its well acted and shot and those two aspects put it in the above average category.

There's not a whole lot going on, a disillusioned writer takes a holiday in France at her publisher's holiday house only to find his irritable daughter present, and once you've twigged onto it, the rest of it is fairly predictable. Charlotte Rampling does well with her role and Ludivine Sagnier looks amazing.

6.5/10


Harper (1966) - Paul Newman tries hard to overcome the lacklustre material and direction in this film noir without the noir but doesnt quite manage it. Apart from Newman, everything else about this is fairly average, with next to zero atmosphere and mood, and a very predictable script.

5.5/10


La Haine (1995) - Matthieu Kossowitz's bleak look at a society in free fall makes for compelling viewing. Kossowitz has a unique style that seems to borrow a lot from Godard, and is quite chaotic as first, but once you get used to it, it is very effective.

There's not a whole lot of plot, the movie follows three 'suburban' french youths the day after a fatal riot, and whilst there is not a whole of on screen violence, the whole film is definitely saturated with a threat of it and you can feel the "hate" of the title in every frame.

Vincent Cassel is excellent in his portrayal of a disillusioned youth at breaking point due to society's inequality and again demonstrates that when he is not choosing poor roles like Ocean's Twelve, Elizabeth or Brotherhood of the Wolf, he is a very capable actor.

7.5/10


Spirit of the Beehive (1973) - Guillermo del Toro cited Victor Erice's debut as his biggest influence on Pan's Layrinth (and to a lesser extent, The Devil's Backbone) and it's not hard to see why.

In Beehive, Frankenstein is shown in a small spanish village and it has a lasting impact on two small girls, highly affecting their view of life. It's set in the same time period of post civil war Spain and has the same theme of the view of the world from a child's point of view, but the other thing you notice is how simple and forced Labyrinth seems in comparison.

Erice's movie is a sheer masterwork that operates on many levels and effortlessly succeeds on almost all of them. The technical aspects are first rate, but it is 5 year old Ana Torent's perfromance that keeps it in your head long after the movie is over. Its quite possibly the best work a child actor has ever done and I have absolutely no idea how Erice would have coaxed such a performance out of a 5 year old. Either way, it makes for compelling viewing and the ending is one of the great ones.

8.5/10 

So I watched a movie trailer some time ago. It seemed to be about a guy who has been away (in prison?) who returns after the death of his (retarded?) brother at the hands of his abusive friends. The guy hunts them down and terrorizes them, and wears a gas mask at some point. It's a British film set in current times.

Anyone know what I'm talking about? nitin, maybe you do with your extensive movie knowledge base? 

A thoroughly fucked up film that leaves you feeling a little bit tainted after watching it.

It's good though! 

/afterthought 

Beer for you! 

but yeah that's the one, pretty good. Shane Meadows' other stuff is owrth checking out too.