Change Your Image
jrichards2-1
Reviews
My Fair Lady (1964)
Brilliant but a sad ending
Yes, this is a lovely film. I always enjoy watching it; of course, that has absolutely nothing to do with gorgeous Rex Harrison and his scandalous Professor Higgins...I adore some of the songs, though I admit they're light and not the kind of things to really take to heart. One of my favourite characters is Eliza's father, and his song 'With A Little Bit O' Luck' is hilarious.
My only problem is with the ending, though. Am I the only person alive who thinks it's sad? The Prof clearly isn't going to change much, and I can't see them marrying or sharing anything but a chummy relationship. I wonder how long the beautiful Eliza will be satisfied with such an arrangement.
This film is very much of its time, I think. To an extent the themes are dated, but there is enough charm, in my opinion, to keep it sparkling. I wouldn't put it right up there with, say, The Sound of Music, but still good.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
Really good, but...
I love this film. It's an exciting and well-thought-out adaption of the book. I particularly like the fight between the wizards; I always wondered exactly how Saruman managed to keep Gandalf in his tower.
The person I don't like so much is Frodo. That might sound nasty because Elijah Wood was perfectly good, and it's a much harder role to play than the tough orc-hacking characters. Have you ever heard those tapes they made of The Lord of the Rings back in the 80's? Ian Holm, who is Bilbo in the films, did the voice of Frodo. He's my favourite actor of all time; he was absolutely brilliant, and really did the disturbed side of Frodo in a more subtle and more convincing way.
I also liked the Aragorn on the tapes better - Robert Stevens, now deceased, I believe. There was a darker edge to him than in the film. Aragorn in the film is also a bit too nice-looking in the role, though I suppose that was the best way to popularise his character. Vigo's acting made up for it, anyway.
One Million Years B.C. (1966)
Rubbish
This film is an absolute load of rubbish! OK, fine, maybe I just feel that way because, as a woman, I am unable to appreciate Welsh's charms to the same extent as others might. I don't mean to be a kill joy, but really...
Alright, maybe the special effects were good for their time, but they're laughable now. That wouldn't make a difference if the plot were sensible, but it's not. Perhaps there is something compelling about a dumb caveman who has to over-come giant lizards, ridiculously proportioned dinosaurs and killer turtles on a desperate quest for survival, but it just doesn't cut with me. That's not to say that others aren't allowed to enjoy it, though. I'm just in a bad mood and want to rant about something. Sorry.
The Land That Time Forgot (1974)
Weird ending
In a lot of ways, the plot of this film is extremely clichéd. (SPOILER!) A bunch of people discover some weird, isolated place where evolution hasn't gone the same way as it has everywhere else. We encounter all the usual tropical undergrowth, toothy dinosaurs and fierce tribes, not to mention an explosive volcano into the bargain.sometimes is. The mystery element becomes almost compelling at one point, although the revelation is confusingly disappointing; there are also some intriguing two-dimensional characters, particularly the German Captain.
The ending really took me by surprise. I was expecting the conventional miraculous escape; I was astounded when the submarine sunk and everyone died. The last shots of the hero and heroine struggling over the mountains, with no hope of ever escaping the island, were actually kind of moving. Mm. Maybe I'm getting soft in my old age.
Dune (1984)
Disappointing - SPOILERS HERE
Dune begins rather promisingly: freaky aliens, cut-throat space politics and a truly revolting villain. Don't you just love that old hand-in-the-box scene? 'Flesh burning...flesh falling off...' He he! And later on, down on the creepy planet, we have that excellent bit with the flying needle thingy. I remembered it from yonks ago, when I watched the film last. Stuff like that sticks on the brain.
I realized that the film was plummeting towards a low when Paul harnessed the giant sand worm and started riding it about the place. This, combined with a dopey girlfriend ('You're my whole life...bla bla bla'), the suspect return of Patrick Stewart from what I thought was certain death, and lots of weird visions of water drops and hands drifting around the place, makes for a rotten conclusion. Rarely have I seen such a good start squandered! The last word was when Sting, who'd already been given a lot of time on screen moping about the place giving his uncle something to look at, challenged Paul to a knife fight. It wasn't good. There was no excitement in the scene because by now we all know that our hero's going to survive and rule the universe. No fun at all.
Six out of ten. That's misleading, however. The first half is eight and a half whilst the second half is more like three. Ko, Izzy.
Sharpe: Sharpe's Sword (1995)
A bit off, but still good.
Sharpe's Sword has three main faults.
1. The dialogue. Not as good as in some of the others. Unrealistic at times, even leaning towards slapstick. The scene where Sharpe is being briefed by Munro is funny, but not in line with the more strained relationship we see in Sharpe's Battle. Equally, Pat's relationship with Sharpe seems inconsistent.
2. The woman. OK, I've got used to a lot of other women lusting after Sean Bean by now, but this one is oh-so-annoying. The only time she's good is when she rejects Sir Henry Simmerson's disgusting offer so well, but other than that I find her infuriating. She just mopes around, whimpering, feeling sorry for herself and trying to get Sharpe to fall in love with her, which thankfully he does not.
3. The bad guy. By this I mean the Frenchie, not Sir Henry. You see a lot of him pretending to be good, but not much of him actually being bad; he's not a figure I ended up hating all that much. There was good swordplay in the last fight scene, and the injuries of both him and Sharpe added excitement and desperation, but it wasn't as intense as, say, the priest's encounter with Simmerson.
The good things were the priest (naturally), and Sean Bean's all-redeeming presence. Watch it, by all means, but it isn't the best. 7 out of 10. Ko, Izzy.
Sharpe: Sharpe's Battle (1995)
Top entertainment!
This is the first Sharpe film I've ever seen, and according to other reviewers it isn't the best. Even so, I thought it was top entertainment. There's plenty of action and all that. (SPOILER AHEAD!) In my opinion, the most important scene was when Lady Kiely offers herself to Sharpe, and he refuses in a very honourable manner - I can't see James Bond doing that, can you? Mind you, anyone with looks like Sean Bean can't exactly be desperate... Did you know he was voted second sexiest man in Britain?....sexiest man in the world, more like...Sorry, am I diverting?
Yes, right, back to the film. Sharpe is such a great character, and Sean Bean does portray him really well. Unlike most British officers of the time, he actually earns his place, and the snobbery against him is hideous. Still, he survives. South Essex my ass. Sounds like Sheffield to me, mate.
8 out of 10
Sharpe: Sharpe's Battle (1995)
Top entertainment!
This is the first Sharpe film I've ever seen, and according to other reviewers it isn't the best. Even so, I thought it was top entertainment. There's plenty of action and all that. (SPOILER AHEAD!) In my opinion, the most important scene was when Lady Kiely offers herself to Sharpe, and he refuses in a very honourable manner - I can't see James Bond doing that, can you? Mind you, anyone with looks like Sean Bean can't exactly be desperate... Did you know he was voted second sexiest man in Britain?....sexiest man in the world, more like...Sorry, am I diverting?
Yes, right, back to the film. Sharpe is such a great character, and Sean Bean does portray him really well. Unlike most British officers of the time, he actually earns his place, and the snobbery against him is hideous. Still, he survives. South Essex my ass. Sounds like Sheffield to me, mate.
8 out of 10
Die Another Day (2002)
Poor
Up til now, I thought that Pierce Brosnan was one of the best Bonds ever, after the excellent Roger Moore, of course. He really brought it into the 90s with Goldeneye (although Sean Bean is better looking, even when playing a horrible baddie). The subsequent Tomorrow Never Days is possibly the best Bond film ever, with a rivoting plot and great supporting cast. The World Is Not Enough looked a little bloated - Robert C doesn't make that convincing a terrorist - but still excellent.
Now enter Die Another Day. Well, there was a change of director, so things were bound to be looking a bit different. But I thought the film was far too long. There were too many flashy special effects, and not enough good old Bond charm, in my opinion; somehow things didn't fit together. I hated the beginning bit because it dragged on for ages and I didn't think Bond looked particularly rough after all those months of torture. There was some unconvincing dialogue in there, too.
I know it can't be easy to follow the excellent Q from the previous films, but John C is really getting me down. I thought he was the weak point in Shrek 2, as well - he's always playing Basil F, and the joke's been done to death by now. The only film in which I've ever seen him with a difference is A Fish Called Wanda, but that has so many strong characters that it's hard to tell whether he should take the credit for it or not.
Well, 5 out of 10. Yes, maybe that sounds harsh, but I REALLY DIDN'T LIKE IT. Ko, Izzy.
About a Boy (2002)
Bewitching
Normally I'm not a huge fan of Hugh Grant. He seems to play the same role again and again. His plumby accent also promotes a sort of stereotype for British people, which is pretty unfair - take the divine Sean Bean for a grittier model.
There are two films in which I have been impressed by Hugh Grant. One is B J's diary - he seems to ring truer playing a nasty character. The other is in this film. In About A Boy, he is a lazy b*****d with few morals - the kind of person with more money than they deserve who annoys the rest of society, unless he's buying something expensive from your shop. Alone, this portrayal would be amusing. But what makes About A Boy great is the other characters in combination with this one. It is the relationship with the child, and to some extent his mother, which really provides the bewitching charm.
8 out of 10. Ko, Izzy.
The Long Kiss Goodnight (1996)
Not quite hitting the spot - moderate SPOILERS but no details.
Long Kiss Goodnight is entertaining, but it doesn't smack of originality and I think it rather misses the spot. First of all there's the whole amnesia thing, which has really been done to death. Every now and again you get a new film with an interesting take on the topic, but THIS ISN'T IT. Then there are the characters themselves. We briefly see Brian Cox in a brilliant role as an unsympathetic husband, but he sort of drifts away and I think we should see more of him. Samuel. L. Jackson puts in a good, solid performance - he usually does - but Geena Davis could be better in my opinion. OK, perhaps it's not her fault, but I find her character a bit uninspiring, both before and after its transformation.
One thing I do object to is the inclusion of Annoying Children in action films like this. Yes, children are sometimes essential to a plot. They arose protective parental instincts and are often the tools of hideous villains. Some children can have seriously cool characters - see About A Boy. But Annoying Children are mega limp, and as I see it the kid in Long Kiss Goodnight could do with bucking up a bit. She comes up with such helpful comments as, 'Mummy, it's cold in here', (well, of course it's cold in here, you little idiot; you've just been locked by bad guys in a giant freezer intended to reduce you both to ice statues/corpses.)
Then again, I guess the child is pretty important in waking up our main character's 'nice side' and getting her out of Utter B**** mode. But I still think that being nice to children in films is about on par with rescuing helpless animals - a cheap and easy way to prove that our spiky character is Alright Really.
Despite these complaints, the action is fast, the special effects are cool and it's probably worth a go. 6 out of 10. Ko, Izzy.
The Ladykillers (1955)
A real classic
Alec Guiness has to be one of the greatest actors of all time, and his role in The Lady Killers does not buck the trend. From the first moment I saw his dark shape looming through the doorway, I knew the character would be well creepy. And boy was it! With that horrible grin, those horrible teeth and that horrible laugh, it's little wonder that even the grim Herbert Lom starts to get a little freaked out.
Nevertheless, Katie Johnson as the infuriating Mrs Wilberforce almost succeeds in stealing the show. There cannot be a more annoying person in the world, from the point of view of policemen, criminals and baggage handlers alike.
The best scene of all, in my opinion, is the very last one, but I won't spoil it for you if you haven't seen it. I haven't actually watched the re-make of the film, and I'm certainly a big Tom Hanks fan, but I think it must be hard-pressed to beat this hilarious original. 8 out of 10. Obviously, it's rather old-fashioned and might not appeal to everyone's sense of humour. Ko, Izzy.
Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Best Star Wars Film
I love all of the original Star Wars films, but for me this one takes the biscuit. I have heard some people say that The Empire Strikes Back is the weakest of the trilogy, and that it suffers for being in the middle. I would dispute this utterly. For one thing, the plot has a slightly different format to the other two: instead of the old destroy-a-death-star scenario, we have the chance to learn more about the galaxy in general and to explore the characters in more depth. This is the film in which a lot of key character relationships are forged in earnest. It also includes, in my opinion, the best light sabre sequences: Alec Guiness may be a super actor, but he's not desperately nimble, whilst we do not have the same confidence in Luke as we do in Return of the Jedi.
Some people these days are dazzled by the modern films, but believe you me, the old ones are better. They have better characters, and are not bloated in the same way. Carrie Fisher is super as our fiesty heroine, whilst Harrison Ford takes a strong role and Mark Hamil excels as the ultimate hero. You don't get much better than this. 9 out of 10.
Hellboy (2004)
Pleasant surprise
The trailer for Hellboy didn't set my pulse raising. I rejected it as rubbish before I'd even given it a chance. But when I went out with some friends and ended up seeing the film, I got a rather pleasant surprise: Hellboy actually has something to it. Red is quite a character, and in a weird, simple way he's very charming - more so, at least, than some of the dire action heroes we see around. The plot has drive, if it does occasionally stagger, and there is a supporting cast strong enough to be at least vaguely memorable. I've heard a lot of people moan about the dialogue, and true, it is often uninspired, but it certainly beats the Matrix Reloaded: 'No.' 'Why?' 'The problem is the choice.' That is to say, I didn't expect much more from this, but from The Matrix Reloaded I expected far more.
If for no other reason, you should see Hellboy because it's damned exciting! With this kind of film, that's what matters. Hellboy fits the bill and if you've ever liked this sort of thing, you'll like Hellboy too. 7 out of 10.
Van Helsing (2004)
Dismal with highlights
OK. I admit it. I usually have a soft spot for things like this. I like to see a bit of mindless action every now and again, and as I shuffled into the cinema with my mountain of popcorn I was eager to see the latest take on the vampire story. Yes, my expectations were pretty low, but I still anticipated a certain basic standard.
Van Helsing, however, sets itself an extremely low standard which it fails to maintain. A cross bow which fires with the speed of a machine gun. Ridiculous Romanian accents which wouldn't convince a deaf person. A sniveling, cowardly monk who makes a limp attempt to imitate Q from James Bond, and FAILS. I'm sure you're getting the picture. But let's not be too hasty. I'm not saying this has nil points for entertainment value. There is action, even if it is bloated with special effects which make the film look like a computer game. It's simply rather uninspiring and not anything we haven't seen before. Certainly not enough to make up for the poor script, ill-planned plot and disconcerting length, though.
Hugh Jackman was the big disappointment for me. He looked like he'd spent a bit too much time applying fake tan; his character was meant to be rough and over-worked, but he turned out far too pretty to be convincing in the role. Overall his performance was dire. Richard Roxborough was much better as Count Dracula (not to mention better looking), but he was also weaker than he should have been. Roxborough is a fair actor and I think he could have made the role more his own if there wasn't so much focus on special effects in the film. Unlike Jackman, he is not beyond redemption.
Finally, there is the lovely Kate, who from her clothing I gathered to be some kind of Romanian cowgirl. Well, she can saddle up and ride away, so far as I'm concerned. She was stronger than Jackman, though, and I certainly preferred her to the leering vampiresses. The scene in which she danced with the count was visually one of the most spectacular, although the dialogue was intensely annoying at that point. Nice dress. Wouldn't mind one of those.
Well, if I haven't put you off, please get down to a video store right now and rent out Van Helsing. It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that you'll enjoy it. But it isn't a GOOD film, and that's the material point.4 out of 10. The only real highlights are in Hugh Jackman's hair.
The Full Monty (1997)
Brilliant!
I have to admit that this is probably my favourite film ever. That's a pretty self-indulgent choice, and part of it, I confess, is probably because it's British. America does make a lot of great films, but watching something set in your own country does stir you up more, and that's a fact. Although I'm not from Sheffield, I love what we see of Sheffield culture in the film. I also love all the characters, because they seem to make such an unlikely combination but they end up going so well together. They have their flaws, but deep down they're NICE; OK, it doesn't usually turn out that way in real life, but it made me desperate for them to succeed and it's really important that there are characters you can care about in a film. Looking through other people's comments, it seems that a fair number hold the view that The Full Monty is a shallow film, owing its success to the constant anticipation of men taking their clothes off. As a woman myself, I can't claim to be free from bias. However, I do feel that it's a harsh and undeserved judgment. Although a comedy on the surface, the film isn't all light-hearted and it does raise a lot of very serious issues, such as the impact of the steel industry's decline on communities. The various men all have low self-esteem for different reasons, and this isn't to be taken lightly either. Plenty of people really do feel terrible about themselves, often with little genuine cause; anyone who says that kind of thing isn't serious and important needs to think again.
At the end of the day, The Full Monty has a good plot, super characters and great music. It is funny and entertaining, but also strangely thought-provoking. I sort of missed out on it at the time of its release, but now that I've seen it I'm extremely impressed; perhaps the acid test for a film is that it adds interest to a rainy day even on the seventh or eighth viewing, and this certainly does that for me. 9 out of 10.