lee_a_scott Reviews

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)

Fortune and glory make a welcome return.

[8/10 · 31 May 2008]

So much hype. So much hope. So many years of waiting and expectation. And, well? Well, I wasn't disappointed when I left the cinema, so that's something. It's hard to consider Indy IV as all the usual ways that I'd look at a movie seem redundant, somehow. It has moments that are utterly preposterous (nuke vs fridge, for example); the 'plot' is as detailed as an adult movie, essentially used to carry us from one implausible set-piece to the next; aside from Indy and Mutt, most of the actors don't really get enough screen time, and it all ends up wrapped up with a neat little bow at the end. But surely that was the point? It's exactly as dumb and just about as fun as the original trilogy, does not disappoint on any score (nor on the score – thanks again, great king John Williams) and is, I'd say, at least as good as Last Crusade if never quite as awesome as Raiders or preposterous as Temple of Doom.

Open Range (2003)

It's post-Unforgiven, it's slow, it's...not bad.

[7/10 · 31 May 2008]

It would be unfair of me to suggest that the moaning I am about to do was deservingly attached to this film, given that this is not a new film. So, briefly – good film; very 'modern' western, in a meaningful, paced kinda way. Good performances, pretty cinematography, good gunfight and, pleasingly, an actual storyline of which the gunfight is part (as opposed to a series of events designed to get from fight to fight). I enjoyed the film and it is worth watching. However, here's the moan – why does nobody make light westerns anymore? Has there been a western since Young Guns II that wasn't slow, deliberate, lengthy and intent on demystifying things? OK, I get it now, Hollywood. The west has been demythologised enough. We understand that it was not like John Wayne, enough already. Ease off. Let's have a western that isn't serious, navel-gazing, elegiac and well over two hours in length.

Swimming with Sharks (1994)

Good, but maybe not as good as you've heard.

[7/10 · 31 May 2008]

This is possibly one of those films that somehow ends up being better than the sum of its faults. The 'message' is heavy-handed and obvious, the character arcs pretty well sign-posted in advance and the scale of the piece rather small. Trading off against this, the performances are very engaging and enjoyable (especially Spacey, given an early chance to chew on some scenery and helpless assistants and poor old, forgotten Frank Whaley, whose career never really materialised – maybe he needed a stern boss to guide him?). I wasn't massively impressed with the ending, but then again it was a free DVD in a newspaper, so no complaints, really. Solid if unchallenging entertainment.

Son of Rambow (2007)

Skill!

[8/10 · 31 May 2008]

This film is, in my ever so humble opinion, skill on toast. However, if you don't have childhood memories of 80s Britain you may find less to enjoy, but even if that's the case you will still get a well-acted, sweet (but not cloyingly saccharine) and funny film about growing up and mates and all the stuff that gets rolled into that, along with sidelines like commentary on oppressive religion and how to worship a French exchange student! If you were a kid in 80s Britain, it gets better, as the perfectly observed (without sinking into caricature) language and costumes brings back a load of (mostly embarrassing!) memories. The film beautifully evokes just how big and intimate and scary and exciting and overwhelming and ace being a kid can be, and is well worth a watch.

Iron Man (2008)

As good as a man of steel!

[9/10 · 31 May 2008]

When the Iron Man movie was announced, I was unusually ambivalent (unusual as I'm a massive comics nerd with a ton of IM comics amongst my megaton collection). Casting news and rumours still failed to spark in my imagination (possibly as the scars of the execrable Spider-Man 3 had me fearing the comic movie bubble had burst). Then the news that Robert Downey Jnr came through and I thought "Mmmmm…interesting". Then, well, then came the first trailer – a riot of action, tongue in cheek humour, spectacle, rock n' roll and, in Tony Stark, possibly the best realised alter ego since Christopher Reeve first arrived in Metropolis. Against my usual efforts to not get my hopes up, I began to look forward to Iron Man, and by the time that I saw it, my expectations were huge. And, most shockingly of all, it totally delivered on all counts. This is, for my money, the best superhero film since Superman II. That's all I've got to say. If you haven't seen it, rectify that right now!

The Other Boleyn Girl (2008)

Banal but for Bana.

[6/10 · 29 March 2008]

Light on accuracy, light on characterisation and light on point – this film is essentially a vaguely pretty piece of flimsy material. Taking a famed piece of history and weaving some interesting supposition around it is a good start, casting some fine (and fine looking) actors is a great second step. Leaving them with nothing to work with and having the most interesting character (Henry) as little more than an extended cameo is disappointing and silly.

Johansson does her best with a tediously feeble Mary Boleyn, whose niceness quickly becomes insipid and annoying. Equally, Portman attempts to make Anne likable, when the script essentially has her as a spiteful bitch. Almost all the other characters are bland caricatures, with the exception of Bana's Henry, who would have been a great role if he'd had a few more scenes – powerful, conflicted and believable. Alas, this is a movie of poor decisions and the end product goes little better than Anne's marriage.

Glengarry Glen Ross (1992)

Needs talking cars in it!

[7/10 · 29 March 2008]

Sometimes you watch a movie that everybody tells you is awesome. And it has performances (from, let's say, Jack Lemmon, Al Pacino and others, in blistering form) that you can see are pitch perfect. And it has a great script, with endlessly quotable lines and a well constructed premise. And, in fact, the whole thing reeks of class and quality and all of that good stuff. And it still, somehow…just, sort of leaves you cold. I'm sure that Glengarry Glen Ross is great – that many critics must be right, but it really didn't do much for me. I watched the new Knight Rider pilot this morning, and enjoyed it more. Maybe I'm just a philistine, but the fact that I feel guilty about it suggests that maybe I just don't care about salesmen but do quite like talking cars.

Jumper (2008)

Enjoyably daft nonsense

[6/10 · 26 March 2008]

Sometimes things don't need to be big or clever (or even make a great deal of sense under even moderate scrutiny) to be a perfectly enjoyable night out, and that was my take on Jumper. It's a stylish, well executed, decently acted, thoughtfully crafted and entertainingly pile of old nonsense with plot holes you could teleport a London bus through. But it seems to come with a lack of pretension that's actually quite refreshing when most films dealing with a topic like this would usually be swamped with back story and earnest meaning. Simply, young and unusually healthy (given the total lack of exercise) young guys can inexplicably teleport around and get into mischief, and a completely arbitrary bunch of bad guys want to stop them. That's it. But it's fun – switch off brain and watch and enjoy.

The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada (2005)

Good, but not great

[7/10 · 26 March 2008]

A few things: first, making a film ponderous and largely uneventful does not automatically make it 'stately' and deserving of awards and this film, I think, does suffer delusions of grandeur. However, second: it's still very good. Not very, very good, which it'd like to be, but very good all the same. Tommy Lee Jones is as impressive in front of the camera as he is behind it, Barry Pepper is very good in an unpleasant role and the ending delivers the wanted punch, but this is just not quite a classic. So, third: watch this and like it, but in a toss up watch Unforgiven instead as it is better (and, you know, stately…) and treads very similar ground.

Juno (2007)

Pretty much as good as you've heard

[8/10 · 26 March 2008]

Everyone likes Juno, don't they? I don't think I've heard a bad word said about it – and I'm not about to spoil that run. Was it Oscar-worthy? No, I'd say not – it's touch was a bit too light and the performances a little too studied in the attempts to be indie/cool, but it is a touching and sweet little comedy with great performances all round (I particularly liked Ellen Page and Jason Bateman) which managed to come across as not being judgemental despite the situations it covers (pregnancy, abortion, adoption, divorce, etc), rather simply portraying some interesting and vaguely kooky people with nice teeth in a tricky situation. Nice, exactly like the reviews said.

Conan the Barbarian (1982)

Pretty good, by Crom!

[6/10 · 26 March 2008]

"To crush your enemies, see them driven before you and hear the lamentation of the women" or something like that. Great words, spoken by a great man. Obviously this film is silly. Bombastic, overblown, self-delusional, unintentionally funny. However, it's also a lot better than I was expecting, and is actually pretty decent, all round. Arnie is, well, Arnie, but with long hair and vaguely unsettling sex scenes, up against the endless forces (ok, about eight guys who he slaps with the flat of his sword) of Darth Vader's voice. It is worth watching, if only for the funny bits and Conan's less than heartfelt prayer to Crom before the final showdown. One to borrow, but give it a chance if you've not seen it.

Death Proof (2007)

A poor tribute? Actually, just a poor film.

[4/10 · 26 March 2008]

Death Proof…or How QT Fell so in Love with His Own Ideas that he Forgot to Make a Good Film. I'll be honest, for all that I've never really believed Tarantino's hype, I never expected to be bored by one of his efforts, but this is basically rubbish. If you want to see a homage to rubbish done in an entertaining way, seek out Garth Marenghi's Dark Places. If you want to see a lazy, indulgent, meandering, misguided, tedious example of what being too rich and famous can lead to (disguised as a homage to rubbish) then watch Death Proof. Quick summary to save you the effort, though: first hour – five minutes of character setting dragged out painfully for 60 minutes; next half hour – more of the same; last twenty minutes – a reasonably cool car chase. The end. Wow, how attractive does that sound? The patented QT dialogue now just sounds forced and unreal, and all the 'grindhouse' bits (random black and white, scratchy stuff on screen, etc) is a tiresome and inconsequential gimmick. Judging a film on a trailer can be rash, but Planet Terror looks to have nailed the idea that Quentin and Robert hatched together, whilst Death Proof would probably have looked poor next to a cheap-ass 70s car chase film. Avoid.

Superbad (2007)

I was Evan!

[8/10 · 26 March 2008]

As a guy who spent a good (well, maybe not so good) few years trying to get drunk and being baffled by girls, Superbad was always going to entertain. The mighty McLovin really reminds me strongly of one of my more unfortunate friends, and Michael Cera's affable but girl-blind loser was just exactly like the rest of us. A laugh-out-loud-funny film with sweet rather than overblown performances at its heart and some excellent set piece situations that are still honest enough to resonate with your own pathetic life (especially if you've ever responded to a girl throwing herself at you by being paralysed like a deer in headlights!), Superbad is a top drawer film.

Charlie Wilson's War (2007)

Vote for Charlie (and Gust)

[8/10 · 2 February 2008]

Three words: Philip Seymour Hoffman. He is worth the ticket price alone in a supremely entertaining performance as maverick CIA agent Gust Avrakatos, but he is not the only good thing about this film, an odd fusion of drama and comedy in which Tom Hanks is also very enjoyable as the titular congressman Wilson. Some reviews suggested the film was uneven, but I enjoyed the whole package – the serious bits were serious, the sad were sad and the funny were hilarious – and some scenes were all three. What more do you want? Somehow seeming honest despite much of it not resembling anyone's idea of real life, Charlie's highly successful war manages to seem like a good idea as you watch it, despite the lingering knowledge of what happened as a result of it. Go see.

Hollywoodland (2006)

Not quite Super.

[6/10 · 2 February 2008]

Hollywoodland is not as good as it thinks it is, I think. But I'm not sure. I can say that Ben Affleck is very good in it (although he was da bomb in Phantoms…) and Adrien Brody seems a bit motiveless at times and the narrative tries to be clever but is pretty straightforward, and it is maybe not quite as factual as it purports to be. That said, it evokes the mood and the times very well, and I found it perfectly enjoyable and interesting throughout. Some conclusions would have been nice, as the open-ended conclusion doesn't really satisfy. On reflection, it feels like an example of style over substance, and the aftertaste is bland and quickly forgotten.

Good Night, and Good Luck. (2005)

Fair and balanced film - unlike the characters.

[7/10 · 2 February 2008]

The allegory in this serious piece from George Clooney would only be hard to spot if you were locked in an isolation chamber and were not watching the movie – otherwise it kind of hits you in the face with its politics. Is that a bad thing? Well, that depends on your politics, I guess. Personally, I kinda liked it. Whilst blunt, I thought it managed to avoid being preachy, and the actors all get chance to act. There are a couple of nice side-steps, and the characters all feel like real people. Oddly, it's mostly Clooney who looks somehow out of place, but that's a small gripe. This is the sort of film that is nobody's favourite film, and will probably be forgotten by history, but it's a nice little history lesson and, worryingly, will probably resonate with the times more often than it doesn't.

Blade Runner (1982)

Genius.

[9/10 · 2 February 2008]

This was far from the first time that I'd seen Blade Runner, but it was the first time I'd seen the so-called 'final cut'. And it was great! I understand, but don't generally condone, directors wanting to revisit and polish their great works (the obvious example being Lucas' mutilation of Star Wars) but here Ridley Scott has done little more than put his picture in a shiny new frame – it's the same great piece of art, but it's a little better presented. I'll not list all the tweaks – lists of them are easy to come by – but I'll happily confirm the general opinion that the tweaks are seamless, as they should be. A great film, made a smidge more great. It doesn't get much more satisfying than that.

The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)

Superb.

[9/10 · 7 January 2008]

In a word: awesome. What a great film. I saw this as my birthday movie (32! Damn!) and it was a real treat. It is hard to say anything new about this film – the acting, especially from Pitt and Affleck, was pitch perfect; the cinematography was sumptuous and beautiful; the score haunting and evocative; the direction assured and delicate, and so on – the complete package. This elegiac movie stands alongside the likes of The Unforgiven as a fantastic post-Western, which should be seen by all who have the patience to appreciate a slow but bravura effort which surely won't go home empty handed come awards time. Excellent.

The Golden Compass (2007)

Not very good, essentially.

[5/10 · 7 January 2008]

I've not read the book upon which this was based, and I'm not sure if that helped or hindered my opinion of it – my opinion being that it was a pretty weak film. The lack of familiarity means that I can't comment on its faithfulness or otherwise, and I just assessed the film on its own merits (or lack of). So, the good: the polar bear things were pretty good and the world was, overall, well realised. Some of the CGI was a bit obvious, but then it generally is, and the actors did well with mostly underwritten parts. Eva Green is pretty. Sam Elliott rules. The bad: well, the rest, really. The plot was helped along by people randomly turning up (Eva Green in particular), delivering some clunky exposition, and then disappearing. It felt like a three hour film that had been edited down to two hours by a person both blind and blind-drunk – just messy and choppy. Without having fall-back knowledge of the novel, much of it barely made sense. The disappointment was that I suspect that there is a really good film in there, trying to get out. Maybe the DVD will rescue it, but this was a let down.

Enchanted (2007)

Close your eyes and jump in the well...

[7/10 · 7 January 2008]

You know when your girlfriend says "lets go see a film" and you say "ok" but think to yourself "damn, there's nothing out"? And then you get there and look at the 'Now Showing' board and you die a little inside? And, even though you are ace and your girlfriend is too, she says "what about Enchanted?" And what you think is not really repeatable in a place where innocent young minds could be subjected to it? But you've driven to the cinema, so you may as well go in, so you do. And you thoroughly enjoy yourself watching an essentially harmless and goofy comedy, with great, shameless acting from Amy Adams and James Marsden. And it's all a bit silly and all a bit fun and not very cool but good all the same? Well, this was one of those times.

Inland Empire (2006)

It was the butler all along...no, wait, what?

[7/10 · 7 January 2008]

(Deep breath) OK… ah, look, I like David Lynch, I watched Twin peaks, I've seen all the movies, you know, that sort of thing. I really liked Lost Highway and Mulholland Drive. I really have no clear idea if I liked INLAND EMPIRE or not. I suspect that it is not fair to assess it in the same way that you would assess a normal movie – I am probably supposed to see it as some kind of performance art or something. Which is, you know, fine. But I do kind of like just a teeny bit of sense and a vaguely, partially, slightly clear narrative to help me along the way. But really, it's all by the by. I don't know anyone who has watched INLAND EMPIRE who was not already a fan of Lynch's and thus was aware of what they were letting themselves in for. Art is self-indulgent. We, as fans, choose to indulge David Lynch's self-indulgency. And the world might be the better for that.

Beowulf (2007)

Beowulf in sheep's clothing?

[6/10 · 25 November 2007]

Hmmm, an exciting proposition. The director of some of the most enjoyable films of the last three decades in Zemeckis, the writer of some of the most original material in the last three decades in Gaiman, a crop of talented and award-winning actors and a source material so strong that they've been talking about it for a thousand years or so. A winning proposition? You'd think. But, overall, only Gaiman held up his end of the deal for me (neatly covering over the less than cinematic portions of the original text) as this all came together in an oddly flat and somewhat pointless exercise. I think maybe the much vaunted motion-capture performances were what turned me off, as I felt no connection or sympathy with any of the characters. Oh, it was all beautifully rendered and all of that malarkey, but I like my special effects to have a point and I'm not really sure what the point of mo-cap is. It took the heart out of this piece anyway (like tearing the heart from a fabled dragon), leaving a pretty but pointless two hours behind. Oh, quick footnote: Grendel, as portrayed by Crispin Glover, is an absolute show-stealer, and is almost worth the price of admission alone.

Saving Private Ryan (1998)

Not as great as you've heard

[7/10 · 3 November 2007]

When I first saw this film at the cinema I was, like everyone else in the world, blown away by the opening scenes and then mostly entranced by what followed. Upon re-watching it these years later, the overall effect has been lessened by familiarity and, possibly, by being Speilberged out after watching Munich last week! The battle scenes are still excellent – visceral, terrifying and all too real – conveying the calamitous confusion of war in a way seldom matched in the movies. When the action slows down, so does the film, and this often leaves you feeling a little disinterested as the characters lack of back-story and overly obvious attempts at making them look good (Woo! I've saved a child! Boo! I've been shot!) seem to jar with the realism attained elsewhere. It's still a cracking film though, and the weaker bits have actually stood up better than the strong bits in my opinion (although maybe I'm just more tolerant of schmaltz as I get older).

Munich (2005)

Mumbled mess

[6/10 · 3 November 2007]

In the interests of making it appropriate, I should probably make this review go on for ages and include a lot of heavily accented muttering and be really obvious in what I am trying to communicate with little by way of anything novel or new in there. At the same time, I should probably have a strong central effort to it, and make the whole thing look pretty. And that, pretty much, would be a fair summation of this mixed-bag from Spielberg. The subject matter was interesting and could have been substantially more thought provoking than it was. Eric Bana was good throughout, but the surrounding cast seemed a little muddled, and whilst the attempt to show a fluid morality was praiseworthy, the end result was just a bit flat and cold. Additionally, a good 30 minutes could probably have been lost without harming the end product. On reflection, I seem to have given the film a bit of a kicking, but that is probably just mainly down to disappointment, as it promised but did not deliver.

Stardust (2007)

Great fun and romance

[8/10 · 3 November 2007]

This was an unexpected pleasure. My lady is a big Gaiman fan and a big films-like-this fan, so the fact that we'd be going to see it was a no-brainer. The fact that it might just turn out to be thoroughly enjoyable did not occur to me. So, let's look at the bits: the direction was spot-on, dealing with the soppy and romantic bits with enough comedic or dramatic flair that, though never cynical, they were carried off with the right amount of tongue-in-cheek. The action delivered and the comedy was funny in the right bits. The weakest point of the cast was probably Claire Danes, and even she was engaging, believable and amusing. Pfeiffer's panto dame witch was a hoot, and De Niro…well, watch and learn. And laugh. Genius.

Overall, the film had, for me, no weak bits. Well written, cast, acted and shot. Well edited. Well…well, well everything. Never a work of art, and never a "film of the year" contender, but the sort of enjoyable, entertaining and classy film that you wish happened more often than it actually does. They make it look easy but, like a falling star, things this fun are not that commonplace.