'If you dream, dream big.'

The Bad and The Beautiful

Directed by Vincente Minnelli

A film about Hollywood made by Hollywood. Kirk Douglas plays a producer, Jonathan Shields who screws over a director, actor and a writer, the three recall their experiences with the man a.k.a Spartacus. It is interesting to see Douglas play a man obsessed, work and play are intertwined in his yearning for success. But the film should be treated with suspicion, what is the Hollywood establishment trying to say here, indeed the credits thank A.M.P.A.S for lending them some Oscars which are on display in Douglas' office. I couldn't help but feel this film had a motive to portray the glamour and graft of Hollywood. Sure maybe Douglas does nasty things – but the film is all deals and cocktail parties, where is the common man? 'Poverty Row' is mentioned once in the entire film and you can't help but feel in the age of McCarthyism, Hollywood was keen to portray itself in a certain if somewhat conservative light. It's enjoyable and Douglas is a charmer, this is Entourage for the post-war generation.

'You're so fucked. Here let me get a picture while I'm at it. '

Michael Clayton

Directed by Tony Gilroy

A big western conglomerate conspiracy cover up. It looks nice, I like Clooney driving his S-class Mercedes, I like Tom Wilkinson playing the crazy lawyer, and I like Tony Gilroy's work and yet I felt disappointed come the credits. The credits should be mentioned as they were peculiar, they started to roll when Clooney is riding in a taxi – very pretentious. The film was one step behind the audience – it was very easy to second guess the story (not that this is a bad thing) but for a conspiracy thriller it had a very pedestrian pace. Tilda Swinton takes an impressive turn as the ice queen of this evil company but she was on the peripheral of the film – she seemed simply to be meeting muscle on street corners and asking them to carry out some murder cover up etc. It felt clichéd and well again predictable – the story was lacking details - nuances which shed light on these kind of operations. I hate films which play and then cut and say x amount of days earlier- events unravel and you then precede to watch the same action but with a 'new perspective'. Michael Clayton does this and you watch the same shots again – this is not acceptable. So the film looks great, Clooney is Clooney, who doesn't like a conspiracy cover up and yet this is very average.

'Which religion is funniest?'

The Infidel

Directed by Josh Appignanesi

Omid Djalili plays a muslim who finds out he's adopted and is not actually Muslim but Jewish. Cue: identity crisis, upsetting the extremist in-laws and bar mitzfas...I know..More predictable than a Thai massage, except no happy ending here. The film is truly awful. I laughed, but that's not saying much. Sure Djalili has a very hairy body and that's funny but that doesn't translate to good film making. I felt David Baddiel who wrote the screenplay was just pawning the director in his master plan of a Jewish identity crisis comedy. Any positives? I like the sparse use of shots, each scene usually consisted of one set up. It was nice to just let the action unfold in front of your eyes – but this was not even an artistic decision but a budgetary constraint apparently. I feel bad knocking the film, because any British film is an achievement. But there in lies the problem.. why would someone want to make a film out of this? It's feels like a thirty minute pilot at most. £1.3 million, I shake my head in shame at the money wasted.

'Why are you doing this to us?' 'Why not?'

Funny Games

Directed by Michael Haneke

Why is it when I watch a Michael Haneke film where there are simply two characters standing in a room talking am I scared? The man is the master of suspense. Funny Games is a critique on society's all consuming appetite for violence. The film is punctuated with post-modern references to television, music and even the audience watching this film. I played right into the Austrian's hands enjoying or rather watching every second of this suspenseful violent encounter of a family taken hostage by two youths. The opening titles are genius. Ulrich Mühe's performance is outstanding, Sussane Lothar playing the hapless mother, also gives a riveting performance, for real the two actors were actually married which translates to wonderful chemistry on screen. Very Austrian, very Haneke, an excellent film.

'The clocks stopped at one seventeen one morning.'

The Road

Directed by John Hillcoat

Depressing stuff. It felt like John Hillcoat's other work The Proposition - same pace but lets replace the outback with Cormac McCarthy's post-apocalypitc world. I haven't read the book, so I can't pass comment on the film adaptation as such. The story: a father and his son walk a little, they eat a little, they cry a lot and run away from the few remaining humans left, who all appear to be cannibals. The performance from Viggo Mortesen is most impressive, both phsycially and emotionally he looks worn, it came across that he really had been trudging the land in fear and search of food for some time. I found his son, played by Kodi Smit-McPee , annoying and whiney (just like the sound of his name) – but I suppose that's what you 'act like' if you had no other contact with humans apart from your daddy and all you knew was the virtues of a child.

What's most impressive about the film is the lack of CGI used, Hillcoat on countless occasions has trumpeted this fact. Not only does this decision lend a realness to the film that could not be achieved with a CGI image – but these images document a side of America not many people know about: 'The abandoned Pennsylvania Highway' has been listed in many reviews but throughout the film, scenes using real landscapes show that America isn't all skyscrappers, McDonalds and gas guzzling trucks.

Hillcoat says there's no such thing as a 'depressing film' - I've been stalking all his interviews... I'm of the school of thought that a depressing film is a bad film. So yes, this story, this world may be depressing but it filled me with hope and fear; the incongruity of our little lives. Indeed I suppose the film's conclusion asks the question how insignificant are we? As the credits rolled I was left with the thought what would I do with myself if the world became apocalyptic. And well.. I felt grateful and relieved to catch the tube home. So well done Hillcoat for making me happpy for using London's public transport.

Conclusion: Not a depressing film but has depressing elements in it.

'If you want to kill, kill.'

Izgnanie (The Banishment)

Directed by Andrey Zvyagintsev

The story is simple: a criminal gets in trouble, so retreats to the countryside with his family – here his wife makes a confession – setting in motion a tragedy. Alex, the film's protagonist played by Konstantin Lavroneko carries a reserved demeanour to the extent that it is intimidating to an audience. Set in the Russian countryside (though filmed in Moldavia and Belgium) the film is full of meandering hills and barren planes. Everything about this film is laconic; the performances are succinct, the frames feel as if they have been deliberated over and over again as Zvyaginstev strives for perfection, some of the compositions are simply stunning. The interiors of the cars, the houses, the landscapes– are rich in detail, and portray a different world to the west.

Car chases are great in films – see The French Connection and Ronin - but The Banishment suggests that the most powerful scene involving a car in a narrative sense is when you have two characters in a stationary car just talking. The scene in question allows the camera and actors just to focus on each other – no distraction. Case in here point, Alex asks his brother, Mark, what action should be taken after digesting some new events. Mark replies:

Whatever you do will be right.
If you want to kill, kill.
The gun's in the dresser upstairs.
Then, that's right.
If you want to forgive, forgive.
Then, that's right.

The camera majestically moves between each character developing a tension and malevolence between the brothers. It's impressive and the film should be viewed for this scene alone.

The film is full of religious undertones – children piecing a jigsaw together of an angel visiting the virgin Mary, revealing that she will give birth to little baby Jesus – cue a black cat walking over the jigsaw, with choir girls singing. It's all dramatic and beautiful. The lives of Russian criminals is a world unknown to me and it is mesmerising to see how these people operate.

Recommended.

'Never trust anything that can bleed for a week and not die.'

In the Company a Men

A cult indie directed by Neil LaBute

A monomaniac story of two work colleague as they hatch a plan to take revenge on the female race: they will wine and dine the same woman, the romance will blossom and then dump her within a blink an eye. Why? Because they can....

Two men standing around and pontificating about how much they hate women yields some truly memorable dialogue. Aaron Eckhart, plays a chauvinistic, sadistic marketing executive, fanatical in his distaste of women. Eckhart is one smooth operator when it comes to fucking over women, and though you may despise this man, you admire his vernacular. Chad's physical presence juxtaposes nicely with his colleague, Howard played by Matt Malloy, who has the stature of Gary Coleman, and brings new meaning to the word 'seedy'.

It just so happens that the female target, Christine, played by Stacy Edwards, is deaf. LaBute brilliantly tests the conscious in even watching the film, when we know she is simply a lamb to the slaughter. Even with her impending suffering, the performances of Eckhart and Malloy make it hard not to be fascinated and drawn into this world of two men orchestrating evil.

The film seemed to consist of wide shot after wide shot – a lot of the frames felt cheap – wide and yet limited in exploring each location – perhaps bullshit - but it gave a lot of frames a space to let the actors perform, it somehow felt intimate – observing these characters in their element, listening to every word that was uttered from their lips. A nice touch that a lot of the scenes were either in the toilet, a bar or some place where the two men were eating. LaBute clearly has an understanding of the primal instincts of man: shitting, drinking and eating.

Chad and Howard's line of work is never revealed – yes they work in an office – but it could be any office. Along with their garish ties, LaBute puts these highly individualistic characters in a generic space which works brilliantly to illustrate it could be any office environment in a capitalist world where these men prey. Men doing the obscene to women is a universal fable.

The film was reportedly made for $25,000 -this is hard to believe for a feature made on 35mm. LaBute must have called in a lot of favours or sucked a lot of dick...Either way this is not a criticism but a nod to the director's ingenuity and perseverance in getting this impressive low budget indie made – it is truly a feat to marvel at.