Daniel's Reviews

→ in
Tools    





nice reviews. I love reading movie reviews though at times when i saw a perfect score i kind of doubt them as of course we do have different opinions on each things and preferences with movies.
__________________
I have had a lot of time to think it, think about what it is, that makes somebody a good parent, and it's about a constant scene, and it's about patience; and it's about listening; and it's about, and it's about pretending to listen, even when you can't listen anymore; and it's about a love like she said. - Sam





Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (2004)


After many recommendations from my friends I finally decided to watch Anchorman, a film which I had surprisingly failed to see before recently. Like “Step Brothers” the film is directed by Adam McKay and stars Will Ferrell in the lead role in another childish (not meant offensively, but the best description of the characters as the film) comedy style film.

Anchorman is also produced by Judd Apatow and features Steve Carell who worked together in The 40 Year Old Virgin, a comedy which I very much enjoyed. This film begins by introducing the legendary Ron Burgundy, the number one new anchor in the country, with his team that includes Carell as Brick Tamland. Life is good for Burgundy who enjoys being famous and well respected by everyone, in and out of the station before everything changes.

Veronica Corningstone, portrayed by Christina Applegate is a woman set to join the same network as Burgundy with very high ambitions, to become the first female anchor. As Ron’s news team take turns to flirt with their attractive new colleague it is Ron whom she falls in love with having previously met him one of his parties. All is going well with their new relationship until Ron is missing for a broadcast and Veronica steps in to his outrage.

For most of the time Anchorman is very funny, with the best moments normally coming from Ferrell such as his conversation with Veronica at a local bar, we also often find ourselves laughing at his companions, in particular Brick who describes himself as ‘mentally retarded’ and provides us with some stupid yet funny quotes such as “Where did you get those clothes? The toilet store?”. In some parts the comedy isn’t as funny as the film goes a bit over the top such as a massive fight scene that sees a cameo from Ben Stiller and a man losing his arm as violence ensues, although the film is meant to be stupid this does seem a bit too silly. Another cameo includes Jack Black as an angry biker who Burgundy manages to hit in the face with a burrito, before he proceeds with his revenge.

Anchorman is light-hearted fun for those with a particular comedy taste; if you enjoyed Ferrell in Step Brothers for his performance as an immature character then I’m guessing you’d enjoy this as well. Although Burgundy is stupid, he is also a hero with a cheesy and romantic plot at the heart of the film with him and Veronica. The film isn’t a comedy masterpiece but it’s a light-hearted film in which you’ll enjoy, one that’s also quoted often with immature style humour providing many laughs. It succeeds as what it tries to be though and I like many others will be looking forward to the film’s sequel.

RATING:





Borat: Cultural Leanings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan (2006)

Borat is a comedy that follows the journey of a Kazakh named Borat as he travels through the America, hoping to learn from the country and report his findings back to Kazakhstan, as the title suggests – for the country’s benefit.

At the time of watching Borat I thought it was definitely one of the funniest films that I had seen, I watched it again recently (probably a few years since my last viewing) and it still had me in stitches from laughing. Borat is filled with hilarious scenes throughout, most of them are intended to be offensive and/or racist but are very cleverly done – if you are really easily offended then this film will not be for you, however the majority will find it hilarious.

Sacha Baron Cohen is Borat Sagdiyev from Kazakhstan; I don’t think the Kazakh people will be among the film’s biggest fans with the beginning of the film immediately showing the country as a very underdeveloped one, a literal dump filled with all sorts of strange people, and prostitutes.

On Borat’s journey he is accompanied by camera man Azamat, the two are given clear instructions of where to go in America, Borat diverts from the set plan and finds himself stumbling upon many unexpected places and having many disagreements with his partner. The film is shot documentary style as Borat narrates his journey, there are no special affects or anything like that, we are simply seeing Borat and his rather odd character interact with others in America which inevitably leads to more than one funny situation. Some of the scenes are meant to be staged whilst others are more obviously not.

Borat has a hatred for Uzbeks, Jews and Gypsies and his racial views provide many funny scenes throughout such as one involving cockroaches, I wont go in to too much detail about particular scenes at the risk of spoiling the film, if you have seen the film you’ll remember the best ones for sure including ones where Borat attempts to buy a new car, attempts to sing at a rodeo and having a dinner with upper-class Americans. We also get to see Borat’s ignorance throughout such as when he unknowingly attends a gay festival, this is largely down to the culture differences between Kazakhstan and the USA.

If you did not find the film funny then I guess the film’s style of humour is just not for you, in my opinion it’s one of the funniest comedy films made, an excellent film that since has seen Sacha Baron Cohen go on to star in Bruno and The Dictator, films that have arguably failed to reach the high standard set by Borat.

RATING:



Borat is one of the funniest films I have ever seen. I have never seen anything like it at a cinema before, from start to finish everyone was laughing non stop, it was surreal.

By the way, as always, a great review!



Borat is one of the funniest films I have ever seen. I have never seen anything like it at a cinema before, from start to finish everyone was laughing non stop, it was surreal.

By the way, as always, a great review!
Cheers, definitely one of my favourite comedies although I need to see some more, my favourite is probably The Big Lebowski which I'll also have a review of soon
__________________





Boyz n the Hood (1991)


“Boyz n the Hood” is a brilliant story about a group of friends growing up in a Los Angeles ghetto, and that’s exactly what it is. There’s no dramatic plot twists, scenes filled with effects, special techniques used or anything like that. It’s a powerful and mature film that looks at the realistic lives of different friends with them growing up with themes such as violence and crime constantly in their lives, everything seems natural.

Starring Ice Cube as ‘Doughboy’ and Morris Chestnut as Ricky Baker, the half-brothers lead very different lives. Ricky is an athlete who has ambitions to win a football scholarship to USC where as Dough is less-ambitious, remaining involved in the ghetto lifestyle, hanging around with his friends in an environment surrounded by violence and crime.

The film is John Singleton’s first as a director and unlike many modern directors he doesn’t fall in to the trap of spoiling the film with needless effects, the story is a powerful one and the actors fulfil their roles brilliantly, everything seems real which is very important especially in such a powerful and emotional tale where the film’s environment is filled with so many social problems.

A friend of the two brothers is Tre Styles, portrayed by Cuba Gooding Jr., he is raised by his father Furious Styles, portrayed by Laurence Fishburne who does his best to raise his son in the best possible way, teaching him lessons to avoid his son getting involved in the problems that surround him.

The mother of Doughboy and Ricky clearly favours Ricky, but this is down to his athletic ability and ambitions to get in to college, unlike doughboy who spends his time on the streets, involved with drugs and alcohol. The relationship within the family, particularly between the two half-brothers is the main theme of the film with the two turning out completely different.

The final scenes are extremely powerful between the two brothers, if you’ve seen it you’ll know what I’m talking about, if not then I recommend that you watch the film now. A brilliant and emotional story that is brilliant for Singleton’s first ever film as a director, perhaps one of the most underrated films I have seen as I have rarely seen any others talk about it yet there aren’t many films that are as mature and emotionally powerful as it in recent years.

RATING:



mirror
The Big Lebowski (1998)

The Coen Brothers are perhaps better known for their work in colder films such as ‘Fargo and ‘No Country for Old Men’ but with ‘The Big Lebowski’ they manage to create a clever and highly enjoyable comedy.

I’ve seen the film a number of times now and on each viewing I have been more impressed by what I have seen. The movie combines a talented cast with each actor bringing their own unique character to the screen, humour that is intelligent and subtle in places, brilliant sets such as those used in the bowling alley, costumes and a soundtrack that brilliantly adds to the feel of film.

Although ‘The Big Lebowski’ is nothing like the films of ‘Fargo’ and ‘No Country for Old Men’, it contains many of the Coen Brothers usual plot devices and techniques that they used. The plot of the film is relatively straight forward, but is layered over with bizarre twists with nothing going as easy as planned. The film is focussed around a millionaire whose wife is kidnapped for a $1,000,000 ransom with Jeffrey Lebowski hiring a ‘bum’ of the same name to act as a middle man in a deal to get here back.

Immediately ‘Dude’ as he likes to be known suspects that the kidnapping is not as straightforward as outlined and that Lebowski’s wife Bunny has kidnapped herself in order to get rich from a man who would not normally allow her such money, sound a bit like ‘Fargo’?

Unlike Fargo which can be seen as a ‘dark comedy’, The Big Lebowski is more a feel-good film that’s style can probably be better compared to an earlier comedy of the Coen Brothers ‘Raising Arizona’, a film also which featured John Goodman (who also appeared in the Coen Brothers’ film ‘Barton Fink’).

I feel that John Goodman’s performance in this film is one worthy of a best supporting actor Oscar. Goodman portrays Walter; one of the Dude’s bowling buddies that becomes involved in the Dude’s task to transfer money between Lebowski and the kidnappers. Walter provides a lot of the film’s humour and best scenes; he is an aggressive war veteran who makes constant references to his fighting at Vietnam and is constantly arguing with fellow bowling buddy Donny.

Donny is portrayed by Steve Buscemi who is one of my favourite actors who seems to play a totally different character in every film he appears in. It seems strange that him and Goodman would go on to star together again in ‘Monsters Inc.’ but the two have great chemistry in this film, Donny is mocked throughout by Walter and the two provide some great scenes for us such as ‘I am the walrus?’.

John Turturro (who starred in ‘Barton Fink’ and later ‘O Brother, Where Art Thou?’) also features in a less prominent role as Jesus Quintana, a convicted paedophile that is set to facethe Dude’s bowling team in an upcoming tournament round. Although he doesn’t have much time on screen, when he does he provides us with some of the films most enjoyable scenes, in fact this is the case for nearly all the scenes that are set in the bowling alley. Sam Elliott is also used effectively in his role as the mysterious narrator.

There are other strong supporting performances such as those from Julianne Moore and Philip Seymour Hoffman but the star is undoubtedly Jeff Bridges as ‘the Dude’. Jeff Bridges brings character and style to the leading character who is ultimately a bum that spends his life getting high and bowling with his friends. It’s hard to imagine anybody else in such a role, the film acts an ode to the characters laid back, chilled lifestyle which makes the film so enjoyable.

As it is with other Coen Brothers’ films, the cinematography is superb and the duo have created a fantastic setting for a film. In ‘Fargo’ we saw the gritty and dark atmosphere reflected in the cold setting of North Dakota, in ‘The Big Lebowski’ the Coen Brothers’ use Los Angeles as their location, at times the film can feel dark but at others we get light, as already said the bowling alley provides an excellent setting for many of the films’ scenes. The Coen Brothers’ also use a number of bizarre yet enjoyable dream sequences to give their film another dimension.

RATING:



I don't know what it is about this film. I just watched it for the 2nd time and I want to like it so much more. I like everything about it but I don't love it like everyone else seems to. I'm going to watch it a 3rd time and see if I feel differently.



I don't know what it is about this film. I just watched it for the 2nd time and I want to like it so much more. I like everything about it but I don't love it like everyone else seems to. I'm going to watch it a 3rd time and see if I feel differently.
Fair enough, the first time I watched it I though it was a good film, I've watched it a few times since and I've come to love it. I suppose it's because I know exactly what the characters are going to say and fully understand what they mean and the context of each line/conversation which just gets funnier each time, particularly with Walter.



To Catch a Thief (1955)

In some of Alfred Hitchcock’s most famous films he uses fantastic scenery and backdrops to create a superb visual setting for his films such as the San Francisco backdrop in Vertigo which produced some of the most iconic images in film history with the famous Golden Gate Bridge.

“To Catch a Thief” is one of Hitchcock’s most superb visual efforts with the film taking place along the French Riviera which allows for some glamorous scenes filled with life and colour, with the film winning an Oscar award for “Best Color Cinematography”.
The film picked up an Oscar award for "Best Color Cinematography"


The plot is centred on a famous retired jewel thief the ‘Cat’ who after a series of robberies is wrongly accused and chased by the police. Cary Grant is brilliant as John Robie (the Cat) who - like in Hitchcock’s more famous “North by Northwest” – finds himself on the run despite being an innocent man. Grant is brilliant in his role as the calm and cool Robie who attempts to track down the real thief and prove his innocence.

Grace Kelly stars as Frances Stevens, a young woman who Robie gets close to as he believes her mother may be the thief’s next target and her performance is superb. Some of the most enjoyable scenes in the film come in the middle where we see the two interact with each other; the chemistry is superb with both smart and humorous dialogue between the pair.

Hitchcock is known as the ‘master of suspense’ having created some of the most superb psychological thrillers there is. Although this film may be a thriller it is far from what you may expect from Hitchcock who instead focuses on creating a lighter, more pleasant and beautiful story filled with an enjoyable romance. That’s not to say that the film does not have any elements of a usual Hitchcock thriller, after all the film is centred around uncovering the mystery that it the new ‘Cat thief’ and it’s the mystery that makes for some great final scenes along the rooftops of Cannes.

I highly recommend “To Catch a Thief”, a film that are you are very much likely to enjoy. It’s certainly not a Hitchcock classic that is spoke about in the same ilk as the likes of “Vertigo”, “Psycho” and others but for what it is, it is a highly likeable film that combines great acting, beautiful scenery and a highly enjoyable plot.

RATING:



I can't say I particularly like or dislike this one. Visually gorgeous, as you say, and Grant and Kelly are great but the story is too scattershot and unfocused for me to give it any more than
.

Love the new layout, by the way.



I can't say I particularly like or dislike this one. Visually gorgeous, as you say, and Grant and Kelly are great but the story is too scattershot and unfocused for me to give it any more than
.

Love the new layout, by the way.
Fair enough mate can't disagree with your reasoning because in terms of story it's definitely not as strong as it could be (and other Hitchcock) films. Fortunately that didn't both me much and I still found it an enjoyable lighter film, think my quite high rating might be down to my love for Hitchcock and his films, speaking of which whilst I'm in the mood I might write up a few more of his I've seen



Cary Grant waits as the famous scene unfolds
North by Northwest (1959)

1958 to 1963 saw the production of four Alfred Hitchcock films. In 1958 there was “Vertigo”, followed the next year by “North by Northwest” and the next by “Psycho”, then three years later “The Birds”. These are four of the most famous films from Hitchcock and it is incredible to think he was able to create four fantastic films consecutively.

“North by Northwest” is probably my favourite Hitchcock film that I have seen so far. I love them all but this film in particular stands out for me, it was one of the first Hitchcock films I had seen and it was one that immediately attracted me to the work of the director.

The plot is one that Hitchcock loved to use, an innocent man that becomes
Hitchcock uses the famous Mount Rushmore to create the film's most iconic scenes
the victim of mistaken identity. Cary Grant stars as Roger Thornhill in the lead role and does a fantastic job as a man running to escape from foreign spies attempting to kill him.

Grant was actually wanted to star in a James Bond film in his career however he turned down the opportunity, only willing to participate in one film where as the producers wanted to tie him down to a franchise. If you’ve seen “North by Northwest” then you’ll know why Grant was wanted for the role with his cool and confident personality and physical appearance seemingly perfect for the role.

“North by Northwest” is everything you could want for an adventurous thriller and makes for an extremely enjoyable and fun movie. Hitchcock uses his famous style to create a suspenseful escapist film as Grant is chased across America with some fantastic scenes displaying this such as the famous Plane scene in the middle of nowhere.

As usual Hitchcock casts a beautiful young woman to support the main star, in this film it is Eva Marie Saint who works perfectly alongside Grant, and thanks to her we can see the full capabilities of Grant’s acting as his character shows his different reactions to different situations. Throughout the film the character is put in a variety of different scenarios where we see different sides of him such as his conversations and sexual awkwardness with Eve Kendall (E. M. Saint), his calmness in dangerous situations and also his humour such as the great auction scene and some of the opening scenes with his mother.

The film is not without its flaws however and watching it over 50 years since its creation we certainly see some of the elements differently now, some of the screens and backdrops used are less than convincing and the editing of the final scene has been criticised by some but this is not enough to detract from what is an exhilarating and exciting film that is filled with everything you could want for a film of its kind.

Another thing that is great is Hitchcock’s use of famous scenery to create iconic images as mentioned in my review of “How to Catch a Thief” where I talked about those created by the Golden Gate Bridge in “Vertigo”. In this film the setting is Mount Rushmore which he uses to create a terrific chase scene.

In terms of filmmaking perfection, frame by frame you will not get the quality achieved in a film by “Vertigo” but I love this film because of its plot which allows us to sit back and enjoy this incredibly fun thriller.

RATING:



Miss Vicky's Loyal and Willing Slave
(and with that, I convert to your 5 star pop corn system )
We have drawn him in people, welcome to the dark side! Although I'd have to agree with Skepsis, I couldn't give that any higher than a 3. Amongst my least favourite Hitchcock films so far.

I really need to try and catch up on all your past reviews mate.



Andy Serkis gives a fantastic performance with motion capture, once again
Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

When the film came out I wasn’t expecting as much positive reviews as this film has received, probably due to how much I dislike Tim Burton’s remake of the 1968 original. Unlike Burton’s remake, “Rise” is an almost completely new film, not a remake but a reboot for the franchise with the film leaving the door open for further sequels.

Overall I enjoyed watching this film, it was far from bad but I must admit I felt it could have been improved even more to make it a ‘great’ film. For those who don’t know, the story is set prior to the events of the original film with the main character Will Rodman (A lab worker portrayed by James Franco) adopting a baby ape after a experiment gone wrong,
James Franco stars as a lab worker attempting to find the cure for   Alzheimer’s
the story follows the apes progression in to adulthood and inevitably comes to explain the ‘rise’ of the apes.


The biggest positive of the film is the special effects on display, particularly those used for the film’s main character, the ape Caesar who is magnificently crafted as a result of a motion capture performance from the ever brilliant Andy Serkis and the work of the CGI team.

Unfortunately the same praise can not be applied to the other actors involved in the film. Caesar ultimately is the film; everything else is just there to allow the story to develop. The film wants to show the ape’s emotions, his life and his intelligence, and it certainly does that with some powerful scenes involving Caesar. Unfortunately this focus on the apes comes at a cost to the rest of the film that seemingly sacrifices the development of its other characters.

James Franco, whilst putting in a decent performance, fails to go beyond the expected and give us something to remember. The same can be said for John Lithgow (an actor who was brilliant in one of my favourite TV shows Dexter) who plays the part of Will’s dad, an Alzheimer’s sufferer, once again his character is only used simply to advance the plot, to show the affects of the drug and not much more in terms of the actual character. Will’s girlfriend who is portrayed by Freida Pinto is simply there and does absolutely nothing to contribute to the story; their relationship not really looked at all despite the film being set over a number of years.

Another criticism that goes in hand with the limited characters is a poor script, some of the dialogue just comes across as a little weak and strange, such as the unnatural change in attitudes when Will is trying to persuade his boss to develop the Alzheimer’s drug once again. The film is lacking in realism, overall you can only be so realistic with a bunch of super-intelligent apes taking over the world, but like I said some of the conversations and things that happen are a bit strange and unnatural.

The ending is good, and because of heavy focuses Caesars development it means we get what we want and expect. I also enjoyed the little touches such as the rocket getting lost in space shown throughout the film that leave the ending open nicely for possible sequels and show exactly how it all fits in with the original.

Perhaps I’m being too generous with my rating although I feel that “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” succeeds at what it attempts to be and because of that I found myself enjoying the story which is important in a film that focuses on our emotions with the apes throughout. It’ll be interesting to see what will happen now with a potential sequel in the pipeline, at least I think.

RATING:



A young Charlie Sheen is excellent as a young soldier who narrates the film
Platoon (1986)

Oliver Stone
participated as an infantry soldier in the Vietnam War so what we see get in “Platoon” is a breathtaking look on the life of a soldier, shown through the eyes of a soldier named Chris who is portrayed young Charlie Sheen.

Whilst the film largely showcases the negatives of war, the horrors that came with being a soldier and ultimately the mistake America made by fighting in Vietnam its primary agenda is not to be an anti-war film. In fact, the conflict between the Americans and the Vietnamese army is not the main focus of the film at all, instead it acts as a great backdrop to create a variety of situations that challenge the films characters in a number of different ways, and it is the actions and different attitudes of the characters that are important.

Instead the film’s conflict is between two camps that emerge as the American’s divide over split attitudes. On one side we have Sgt. Barnes portrayed by Tom Berenger and on the other Sgt. Elias portrayed by Willem Dafoe. These two actors provide us with two fantastic performances and make the film what is it is. Elias can be viewed as the ‘good’ soldier, a kind, lesser-spoken sergeant who goes by the book and serves his country how he should. On the contrary we have Barnes, a man with a completely different set of morals, a loudmouthed soldier who will take action in to his own hands to do what he thinks is right. The divide occurs when Barnes becomes responsible for the massacre of a Vietnamese village, whilst others are willing to accept his actions and choose to protect him there are others who are not so willing to go along with a cover up including Elias.

“Day by day, I struggle to maintain not only my strength but my sanity. It's all a blur. I have no energy to write. I don't know what's right and what's wrong anymore. The morale of the men is low. A civil war in the platoon. Half the men with Elias, half with Barnes. There's a lot of suspicion and hate. I can't believe we're fighting each other when we should be fighting them.”

That quote is from Chris, the young soldier who narrates the film for us through a series of letters sent back to his grandmother. He dropped out of college to join the army through choice and immediately struggles to fit in with the others, however throughout the film he progresses in to a more respected and adequate soldier. His progression is important to the film as he adapts to the harsh life and is influenced by others.

The film’s cinematography and editing is superb, most of the films scene take place in the thick forest, with extremely heavy rain painting a dark image for us that helps show the grim conditions the soldier’s were really in. The film does not glorify war at all, there is no unnecessary action or over the top heroic scenes and instead everything seems real and sometimes it really is not pretty. Some scenes are really uncomfortable, especially those that involve the inhuman actions of Barnes that really do a good job of amplifying our disgust towards his character which is important as we side with Elias and Chris.

Dafoe, Berenger and Sheen make this film what it is and ultimately the final scenes that involve them are the most iconic and memorable. Dafoe provides an unforgettable scene which I will not spoil. And one of the final scenes that Chris and Barnes share gives us satisfaction despite being brutal and far from a happy ending.

I can not recommend this film enough; it is one of my favourite war films and a fantastic and emotional tale. Unlike other glorified films this one does not sacrifice its brutal and deeply affective centre for cheap affects and fake scenes. The heart of the film lies with its trio of star actors who are each brilliant as we see the real conflict that arises from the war and its affect within the platoon.

RATING: