mikhaigh Reviews

Rear Window (1954)

A Classic

[9/10 · 19 June 2000]

Wheelchairbound Photographer James Stewart spends all day and night spying on neighbours from his "Rear Window". Believing he has witnessed a murder in apartment opposite he tries in vain to alert others to the vile crime.

This film was way ahead of its time and is even more amazing in the way it tackles the relationship between men and women in a time when in thrillers men where the boss and women screamed. were kissed and did little else.The mere mention of sex was not an option in hollywood movies. The way Kelly invites herself to stay at the apartment and is the more active in suggesting an obvious sexual relationship must have been shocking for the time.

In a way, the role of manly male and feeble frightend female are reversed. James Stewart although desperate to maintain his credibility as a man, is a mere onlooker on the microcosm of society that is represented by the closed block of apartments that he inhabits. By contrast, his girlfriend Grace Kelly is fearless and inclined to action once she begins to believe also, that a crime has been committed.

The callous way that Stewart rebuffs the obvious sexual advances of Kelly adds to the impression that deep within Stewarts psyche he believes that without the ability to control events he is not a man.

The photography is superb, from the way that you see the lives of the other inhabitants from a distance through their ever open windows, (haven't these people heard of curtains?) but in silence, apart from the ever present music of the composer, trying to finish his film score.

Raymond Burr as the suspected villian is superbly sinister, but James Stewart really showed what a magnificent actor he was by shedding the tough guy image and taking on a role that took guts in real life. For me the most frightening part of the movie is when Kelly is discovered in the apartment opposite and Stewart is powerless to help her. This reminds me of all those nightmares when you are powerless to move and avert disaster.

Grace Kelly is possibly the most gorgeous woman ever, and has that innocent yet woman of the world quality that most guys would gladly jump over cliffs for.

A Classic.

The Skulls (2000)

Rubbish

[4/10 · 2 June 2000]

I'm not going to waste words on this film, only to say It's awful. The end of the film is the most improbable ending that I will ever see. So don't waste your money.

Pulp Fiction (1994)

Brilliant!

[9/10 · 2 June 2000]

This film is in so many peoples top ten and for a very a hundred good reasons.

There is not 1 story but 3, effortlessly intertwined like a woven fabric.

The first involves Tim Roth and Amanda Plumber as rather amateur gangsters who have an unusual idea for a heist.

The second and dialogue-wise, the best, has John Travolta and Samuel L Jackson as hit men who experiance a few unexpected problems.

The third has Bruce Willis in his coolest role as a boxer whose payday has come.

What is unusual is that these three story lines cross over each other at certain points and flick backwards and forwards in time, yet at no point (if you are really paying attention) are you confused.

What makes this film a cut above all films of the 1990's is the dialogue.

Above all it's a Black Comedy, a very black comedy and thats what makes it so cool. To be able to get a laugh out of an audience when you have just shown a needle plunging into someones chest takes some doing.

This is the film that made Travolta for a second time, but for me the stars where Uma Thurman and Harvey Keitel. Keitel as The Wolf is just magnificent, my favourite part of the film is "The Connie Situation" with Keitel as the fast talking fast thinking solver of "Problems".

Uma Thurman is supercool as the gangsters mol who needs a "Night out".

I could go on for another 1000 words praising this film so if you are one of the few unfortunates that haven't seen it I think you've by now got the message.

Interview with the Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles (1994)

Bloodsuckers Convention

[2 June 2000]

I've just watched this film again, and wow I'd forgotten how powerful and dark it is.

There is not a bad performance from any of the actors, easily one of Tom Cruises(Lestat) finest performances and Brad Pitts only better film in my mind was Kalifornia.

The film is based around an interview between Christian Slater and Bradd Pitt (Louis) in current day America. Louis declares that he is a Vampire and begins telling the story of his 300 year existance.

The main storyline of the film takes place in 18th century New Orleans and Paris. It becomes quite believable that a disfunctional family such as Lestrat, Louis and Claudia could exist in these places without being noticed. The film is full of strong sexual suggestion, especially between the Doll Like Claudia (Kirsten Dunst) and Louis. This adds an intensity to the plotline that keeps you hooked the entire time.

Kirsten Dunst really does manage to hold the uncontrolled blood lust and innocence together and slowly throughout the film show more of the woman within a childs body, amazing.

The sexual side of things does not stop there, since the relationship between Louis and Armado (Antonio Bandaras) looks decidedly more than just friends!

The Vampire has always been a symbol for seduction and female Submission but I feel that this film has captured a human side to the immortal vampire that other films missed.

The main point of the film appears to be that even though these characters are vampires, Lestat & Louis are individuals with differing morals. Louis does not agree with drinking the blood of humans, even though he craves it. Lestat enjoys his powerful role as predator and bestower of immortality. Louis wants to understand the purpose of his existance,and why he has become what he has become. Is the vampire any more evil than another predator? Lestat accepts the role of predator on humanity just as the wolf accepts his role in the food chain. Who is right?

Thats all I'm going to say for now so just get this out on video.

I gave this film an 8. Enjoy

U-571 (2000)

Well worth a trip to the cinema.

[7/10 · 27 May 2000]

Ok, so it's historically incorrect, but if you want to see a documentary just stay home and watch the Discovery Channel.

If you would prefer to see a rip-roaring war film packed with the cat and mouse suspense that is the territory of most Submarine based films then you'll like this one.

The plot is based around the capture by the allies of the German enigma machine (the Germans used this machine to send all coded signals to their forces) in the 2nd World War. A US Submarine is sent to capture the machine from a stricken U-Boat stranded in Mid-Atlantic.

Bill Paxton as Captain Dahlgren and Matthew McConaughy as XO Tyler have a strained relationship due to Dahlgrens recommendation that Tyler should not be made captain of his own sub. Tyler has yet to learn that leadership comes at a price..... Harvey Keitel is the star of the movie as Chief. As usual Keitel manages the hold the movie together and it is his presence that adds class to the film.

Bill Paxton gives a good performance but I felt Matthew McConaghys performance wooden, compared to the rather similar role played by Tom Hanks in Saving Private Ryan.

In fact there area number of parallels between this film and "Ryan" although to reveal them would be a Spoiler.

The special effects are great. I especially like the exterior underwater shots of the sub as it is depth charged. You actually see the hull being shaken apart and that . submarine looks very, very fragile.

This is nowhere near as good as Das Boot or my other favourite Submarine film The Enemy Below but I gave this film a 7.

Well worth a trip to the cinema.

The Ipcress File (1965)

A Class Movie

[24 April 2000]

Michael Caines first outing as secret agent Harry Palmer is set in 60's London. This is not the Psychedelic London of Austin Powers or the Beatles, neither is it the sophisticated aristocratic London of James Bond. This London is drab and populated by civil servants & bedsits. This London is still coming to terms with the end of World War II and the advent of a modern world.

Working Class Palmer is an unwilling Home Office agent with criminal tendencies who is more interested in a pay rise so that he can indulge his true passion, gourmet cooking, than serving his country. His superiors, Ross (played by Guy Doleman) & Dalby (Played by Nigel Green) represent a microcosm of the British Upper & Lower Middle Classes. Palmer is clearly more cultured in his appreciation of food, music(Mozart & Bach) & women, "I like Birds Best" Palmer admits to Courtney played by Sue Lloyd (of Crossroads fame in UK).

Palmers superiors appear uninterested in the fate of their subordinates and this is one reason why the character of Palmer works so well, we are him, he lives our lives and we want him to win through. This perspective is aided by the stunning photography that uses every conceivable camera angle (even views from a light bulb!) to see the world from the characters perspective.

Look out for the supermarket scene between Ross and Palmer, my vote for the most violent use of a supermarket Trolley in a movie.

As Palmer slowly unravels the mysterious disappearance of top government scientists it becomes clear that there is someone close to the top of the British Secret service acting as a double agent. Who is it, Ross or Dalby? Who is Courtney, Palmers love interest, working for?

In the background is a rather sinister looking CIA, who always appear to be one step ahead of the Brits. (A reference to the decline of Britian as a world power and its reliance on America?) Wether intentional or not, this film has captured a London of the 60's that was going through substantial social change, gone are the class paradigms that suggest that the working class could never be cultured, gone is is the unquestioning loyalty to the upper class. This world was forever changed after the war. This is a film I can watch time and time again, if only to watch the title sequence as Palmer gets up for work as if he is going to just another office job.

This is a stylish movie and one of the greatest British films ever made. If you havn't seen it watch it now!

Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me (1999)

Dr Evil for President!

[23 April 2000]

I don't know how Myers does it, but this guy just goes from strength to strength.

Seeing Man of Mystery before The Spy Who Shagged me is a must if you are to really benefit from some of the gags in this film.

Austin Powers International Man of Mystery sets the scene with Austin being cryogenically frozen in the 60's in case his nemesis Dr Evil should return. Austin is Thawed out and Myers then has the oppurtunity to have fun with the 60's using a backdrop of the 90's. In the Spy Who Shagged me, the reverse happens and Austin must travel back in time, to the sixties to retrieve his "Mojo".

Both films brilliantly parody 60's spy movies such as Dr No, You only live twice,In like Flint e.t.c.

Since the first movie introduced the characters, Myers and Roach have been given more freedom to develop the relationships between the characters and this is where the film gets top marks. Some of the funniest parts of the film involve the sibling rivalry between Scott (Dr Evils real son) & Mini-Me (Dr Evils 1/8 sized clone).

The relationship between Dr Evil & Frau Farbissener takes a new twist and a nice little parody of office relationships develops. I didn't even really appreciate that part, until I watched the film again on VHS. I just love it when Frau Farbissener says "No Dr Evil, I'm Laaaaaaaaate!"

The lovely Heather Graham as Felicity Shagwell replaces the slightly wooden Elizabeth Hurley as the love interest, but once again the tables are turned, after all Austin is back in the sixties and Felicity ends up being more liberated than Austin.

Dr Evil is easily Myers greatest comic creation to date, there is so much more that this character has to offer, that I sincerely hope there will an Austin Powers 3,4,5 e.t.c.

Myers and Roach have combined to pack a nice balance of visual and non visual jokes with a big dollop of toilet humour and guarenteed that this video will not be collecting dust on my video shelf.

American Psycho (2000)

A must see

[23 April 2000]

Having read the novel by Easton-Ellis a year ago I was intrigued to find out how it could be made into a movie.

Whilst turned off by the totally uneccesary details of Batemans crimes in the book, I felt that Easton's insight into superficial 80's yuppie culture made it a classic.

Who could play a credible Bateman? Leonardo Di Caprio? I think not.

How would Mary Harron deal with those controversial torture scenes?

What we got was one of the finest movies I have seen for some time. Of course, those of closed minds will slate this film without even bothering to see it, simply because of the book's notoriety.

I was impressed to see how closely Harron followed the book, replacing the un-filmable seens with suggestion, aka ear-cutting scene from resevior dogs, so that you believe you have seen more than you have. There are more parallels with Tarantino, such as the use of classic (& non classic ) 80's pop to create a stylised feel to the movie, that has not been seen since Pulp Fiction.

Casting was superb, with Cristian Bale giving the performance of a lifetime, We, the audience, saw the souless monster within, Batemans superficial aquaintences, saw another faceless human being.

Just like the book, you are never sure wether Batemans crimes are real, or just imaginary, but his slide into insanity is clearly real and paced expertly by Bale.

Rheese Witherspoon as Evelyn was disappointing, "Election" showed what a great actress she is and although this role called for an airhead performance, it was clear that she was cruising.

Mary Harron deserves the credit for creating an excellent film, that could have so easily been just another slasher movie.