Change Your Image
istuart0
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Omnibus: Patricia Cornwell: Stalking the Ripper (2002)
I assume Patricia had read...
In the late 1980's I went on holiday for three weeks to Thailand. And, as I always do, I took several books with me. One of the books was "Jack The Ripper: The Final Solution" by Stephen Knight. It was published in 1984. In the book, almost every painting that Patricia Cornwell identified as having clues that Sickert was Jack The Ripper, are also analysed in the Knight book. Knight also implies strongly that Sickert could have been the Ripper. I find it somewhat disingenuous that at no point in this documentary did Patricia Cornwell ever mention that the Sickert connection had already been postulated nearly twenty years before she began her "research". In my humble opinion, her book (that she says cost her over $6,000,000) could not possibly have been written, nor the documentary made, had Stephen Knight not written his book first.
Death at a Funeral (2007)
Atrocious
A amateur drug maker "hides" his latest batch in an empty valium bottle then leaves the room. Two people enter the room and one person gives the other a pill from the valium bottle. They go to a funeral where the taker has hallucinations and very predictable stuff happens. Then at the end there is the compulsory morality speech. It is tripe and I would really like to see the notes that must have been made at the production meeting where someone agreed to stump up the money for this unfunny, drivel. It might be worth noting that Jane Asher has a range of own-brand cooking products that can be bought only at Poundland, for £1 each. And, because of the vapid nature of the writing quality used to make this production, Rupert Graves could easily be tempted to bring out an exclusive range of bin liners for sale in 99p Store or Matthew Macfadyen wouldn't say no if he was asked to be the front man for a range of one-use plastic food boxes.
Malice in Wonderland (1985)
A rather dull experience
I first came across these two harpies when I read Kenneth Anger's superb "Hollywood Babylon". His waspish descriptions of this brace of bitches is both hysterically witty and makes you eager to learn more about them. I bought "Hedda and Louella" by George Eells from The Strand book shop in New York but found it rather plodding - I didn't wade too far into the tome. Apparently, this film is based on that book and I was hoping it would be a condensed precis that would make me re-engage with the book, but it didn't. My word, is it dull! The script is dull, the direction - is there any? - is dull and the performance of most of the actors with the exception of Dame Liz and Richard Dysart (who disappointingly plays Louis B. Mayer as a human being instead of the baby eating ogre Kenny Anger makes him out to be). Oh for the film version of "Hollywood Babylon"!
The Town (2010)
A Town? Perhaps. A Yawn? Definitely
A bloke in a bank-heist gang falls for the bird him and his mates kidnap for a little bit then release during their last job. Er, what else happens? Oh yeah, they put rubber masks on so they look like old nuns and do another (but that's in the trailer) and then do another but without the same success as the previous two. The End.
Unoriginal, unsurprising, unexceptional, uninteresting and at times Ben Aflick's attempts at Brando-esquire mumbles are unintelligible.
This film certainly wasn't unpredictable, unexpected, unusual or unique. Don't bother seeing it or renting it, just wait for it to be aired on either Sky3 or ITV4.
Kill or Cure (1962)
A Comedic Curate's Egg
Parts of this film are excellent, the rest (about 50%) are average.
*** Here be a few spoilers ***
The best parts are definitely towards the beginning of the film when Terry-Thomas (a private detective) is asked to keep an eye on someone. His 'hirer' puts him up in what he thinks is a very expensive hotel. But there is something very odd about the place. For a start, everyone in the lounge area is wearing thick dressing gowns. The second is that there is a gale forever blowing through the place. He is then examined by Eric Sykes who declares him almost at death's door even though he is perfectly well. Therefore he needs to go on a strict diet before 'gradually working up to grass salad'! His accommodation is somewhat strange considering how much is being paid for it. Shortly after, something happens to his hirer and the mystery starts which is where the film gets a bit patchy IMHO. But there are still a lot of funny scenes like the various 'treatments' T-T receives and the bother they have with the dogs. The film is also peppered with funny one-liners (especially the reason why the early morning swim has been cancelled) and for that reason it is worth watching. But for a considerably better film that has Terry-Thomas and Denis Price, I do recommend 'School For Scoundrels'. For any Brits' information, I saw it on TCM early this morning.
Rope (1948)
"A Horrible Film"
When I first saw this film, I was appalled at it. These two friends decide to kill a third friend just for the thrill of it. Not only that, they put the lad's still warm body in a trunk, serve a cold buffet from it and invite the poor boy's dad and aunt. I couldn't believe how ghastly the subject matter was. This is a horrible film, I thought.
But that is exactly what Hitch wants the viewer to think. Perhaps I'm too emotional but the portrayal of the lad's dad by Cecil Hardwicke was exemplary and had me feeling upset for him too. The callousness of Brandon, the way he lords it over the party cum wake, the way he manipulates his (patently obvious) boyfriend who genuinely regrets the whole business. I hate him to death!
If you have a strong conscience this is tough meat to digest but very, very worth it. 10/10
Goodbye Charlie Bright (2001)
For Paul Nicholls fans only
I stumbled across this filler while I was skating through the late night cable channels. Catchy title, nice star, good premise, I thought. But, what was it about? It was about nothing, boys and girls, nothing. The script had obviously been forced out of the word processor because the writer must have been on a contract to produce something. Anything. There's no emotion, no passion, no continuity (and no calf muscles!). The threadbare story is this. A group of twenty-something (no-one is going to convince me that these guys are supposed to be teenagers apart from the little guy in the bike) drop-outs, burgle to keep themselves out of work (not to support a drug addiction - as the write up says - as they hardly use 'em), they fall out with each other (wow!), go to a party (or was it a waxworks museum, I couldn't tell), shoot a guy they hardly know in the leg, Charlie Bright runs very quickly and then the closing credits come on the screen. Why did I keep watching? Hmmmm, 1) I was hoping the thing was going to get started at some point 2) I was glued to the delicious Paul Nicholls - I met him once on Old Compton Street (Soho, London) and WOOF!! is he a honey! The main flaw with this length of celluloid, is that it's a list of set pieces strung together to make a film. But as the writer wasn't really into his work, it plods with glacial vigour and is pock-marked with chasmic holes. After the black guy is burgled and finds the lads, why did he give up his chase so, well, so bloody cheerfully? How did 'Hector' get the money to buy Essex? From selling houses?! Where did their third friend clear off to? Why, if the lad was so passionate about his wife-to-be/mother of his child, weren't they seen together? Was the father of the lad who joined the army old enough to have served in the Falklands? Why, when Charlie's sat next to the girl he fancies, does he just up and walk away? What did he give the gun to his dodgy mate for? Why, after using the shooter, did they run UP a block of flats with no other way out? Why didn't the police go up and get them? Why was Phil Daniels allowed on the screen again without proper tutelage of his bottom lip? I know a lot of Saaf Landan lads have gushed about this film, but boys, is this all your life's about?
The World According to Garp (1982)
Utter Tripe!
Tediously long dreary cinematic waffle. I couldn't believe how bad this film was. I watched it merely because of the numerous people who gushed about it on this site. Was I watching the same film? The entire episode is one-dimensional. Nothing that happened in Garps' past affected his (or anyone else's) future and no-one was affected by their past. I think it was Socrates who said about plays that if a scene can be removed from a play without having any effect, then it shouldn't be there. Obviously, the director didn't know this rule and, so, stuffed his 'work' with one dire scene after another. Even the plane crashing into the house was unexpected, it wasn't a surprise, but it was unexpected!
It is worth mentioning that at the time of writing this (1st Dec 2002), even though many people say it is one of their favourite films, no one has bothered to add a memorable quote. The reason being that there simply aren't any.
Don't waste your time watching this, watch a plank warp instead.
Meet the Feebles (1989)
The most different film there is
I originally saw this film when I was addicted to watching midnight movies without knowing what they were about. When it started I thought "Oh no, it's a children's film". It is impossible for me to be more wrong!. It the story of a puppet repertory theatre company. Unlike its subject matter, the film is far from warm and cuddly. You will see a rat pornographer who's convinced the next big thing will be nasal sex and promptly gets a creature with a long nose and a cow (with her nipples pierced) to shoot his latest video, a ten foot walrus whose supposed to be dating a hippo but is 'intimate' with a siamese cat, a substance abusing frog who is haunted by his tour of duty in 'Nam, a sex-mad bunny who is incorrectly diagnosed as having the big 'M' (Myxamotosis) by a goose - who does the best Paul Lynde impersonation I have ever heard, a blue elephant that gets a chicken 'into trouble' and much much more. If you've ever heard the phrase 'has to be seen to be believed' then it might well have been coined just for this film; miss it and weep!