Reviews

Worth watching because it isn't the usual standard, glossy, Hollywood slasher. On the contrary, if you want big budgets, star cameos, slick action sequences and spectacular chases my advice would be to stay away - go watch 'Scream If Your Urban Legend Destination Knows What I Did Last Summer II' instead.

If you like slow-building, atmospheric, nasty little shockers turn the fire off (and the lights out) and prepare to be chilled. And if you like this one, check out 'The Last Broadcast' which proves that Americans do actually make the odd decent horror flick.

As with all movies that gain a deal of critical acclaim, win awards and make a pot of cash, the comments on these pages veer from 'the greatest movie ever made' to 'overrated garbage'. And I knew before I had even clicked on Favorites that this would be no exception.

But reading through the comments here, barely ten minutes after having viewed the film, I am drawn to one particular contribution, the gist of which is that you either get it or you don't. I did... but I can understand the comments of those who didn't. To those people I would like to say one thing:

You have no idea what I'm talking about, I'm sure. But don't worry, you will someday...

From the 'Plan 9' school of film-making comes Phantasm - a landmark in horror/sci-fi from the late seventies. Not sure that landmark is quite the right word to use...

An unfathomable plot involving a killer sphere, a tall undertaker and psycho dwarves. Decidedly ropey acting. Glaring continuity errors. Laughably bad special effects. All of these can somehow be overlooked because, in the spirit of Ed Wood, the crew responsible are obviously trying so hard to entertain on a shoestring budget that you just can't help but enjoy the experience.

My advice? Try a few beers or, better still, a couple of joints, slip the brain into neutral and laugh until you spot your y-fronts. As the tagline (almost) says: 'If this doesn't amuse you, you're already dead'.

Very, very clever - making the audience empathise with the lead character by manipulating the time line. Not since 'The Usual Suspects' have I seen a film which so cleverly played with the viewer's perceptions as the central plot device. The sheer effort required to study every detail of every scene ensures that you just can't take your eyes away from the screen for a second in case you miss something. However...

Without the reversal of the time line the movie is a low-key affair with some OK acting and artistic camera work: Guy Pearce makes a passable hero and Joe Pantoliano obviously wishes his surname were Pesci instead.

But after the final frame of the film I had that feeling of 'so what' which is the dread of every film fan - at least when you know a film is crap before you see it, you're never disappointed by it - occasionally you find that it's not as bad as you were told.

But when a film is lauded as a landmark and voted into a top 10 placing as a result, you expect a little more. This film is a long way from crap though - the problem is that the concept IS the film and it can't quite carry the plot. Consequently, you're left with a feeling of resentment at having to expend all of the effort required to unravel the mystery.

As usual, Fincher's darkly stylish themes are to the fore - in lesser hands this could have been a disaster. But ultimately, the far-fetched ending lets it down: it's like one of those elaborate jokes which go on for twenty minutes only to have a punchline like "Rudolph The Red knows rain, dear". To suggest, as have some comments below, that this is Fincher's best work is an even bigger joke. It provides an interesting segue from 'Se7en' into 'Fight Club' but is certainly inferior to both. Compare and contrast with Scorcese's 'After Hours'.

I've just watched the un-cut version on BBC1 (as opposed to the 'fun you - you funny motherfunster!' version previously used by The Beeb) and I am reminded of just what a great film this is.

Plaudits as always go to Michael Douglas - a performance on a par with almost anything he has done before or since. He makes us empathise with a man who has finally just reached the end of his rope. And despite his destructive (and murderous) walk 'home', we actually feel genuinely sorry for him. Then again, how many times have you wished to wipe the smile off the face of rip-off shopkeepers, android fast-food workers, smug road workers etc.?

But a word also for Robert Duvall. Playing Prengergast, the old cliche cop-on-his-last-day, he manages to portray the perfect foil for Douglas's character. He is a man that has lived his whole life for a neurotic wife and is haunted by the infant death of his daughter. Both men have their reasons to rail against the world, but Prendergast is an easy-going guy who just keeps his head down and gets on with playing the hand life has dealt him. His final speech on the pier when he talks about his daughter is truly moving.

In spite of myself, I love this film! A bit like 'The Untouchables', I know I should be laughing at the cliched dialogue, the poor acting, the overblown patriotism - and yet...

The dialogue - In between the cliches there are some absolute gems - 'OK, but you gotta ask me nicely', 'one more and I get a set of steak knives' and, of course 'you can't handle the truth!'. The acting - Nicholson is superb and steals the show despite having only a handful of scenes. And Cruise is surprisingly effective as Caffey, although he does play the same basic irresponsible-but-talented-young-man-finally-grows-up role seen in Top Gun, Color of Money, Cocktail, Rainman etc.

But what I love about this film is the way it builds to the final courtroom showdown - we know it's got to happen, we know he's going to have to make him say it, but until we actually get there, we don't have a clue how. It is truly satisfying to see the frightening, smug and utterly self-confident Jessop destroyed by his own arrogance and misplaced self-belief.

Never underestimate the power of words.

Obsessive fans of 'The Office' should seek out the 'Dearth of a Salesman' episode and meet the monstrously cringe-inducing Gareth Cheeseman. Like David Brent, anyone who has worked in an office and attended sales conferences will recognise Coogan's salesman from hell. As with Alan Partridge, he is rude, sexist and bigoted... and absolutely hilarious. And, as always with Coogan, we are left with some excellently quotable catch phrases.

'Is that just for Junior, or can we all have some?'

Like Fawlty Towers, its influence goes far beyond entertainment - both series have become part of our everyday lives. This time next year, don't mention the war, he who dares, que?, during the war, he's from Barcelona. How many times have you heard a 'Fools & Horses' or 'Fawlty' reference in the past few weeks?

Like any long running series, there have been times when 'Fools' has been hilarious, times when it has been treading water, and times when it has been utterly classic. It also has the ability to touch us in amongst the laughter.

Personal favourites? The first series of the longer format commencing with 'Yuppy Love' when Rodney meets Cassandra through to the end of the following series when Damien is born. There are just too many classic moments to list here. Hard to pick one single favourite episode. And this selection of classic stories doesn't include hang gliders, dates, chandeliers, Freddie the Frog or 'The damned elusive Sh-a-dow'...

Favourite five in no particular order: 1. Dates 2. The Longest Night 3. The Unlucky Winner 4. The Jolly Boys Outing 5. Little Problems

One of those films that cause you to leave the cinema in a daze. A film about many things: fate, retribution, sin, religion, evil, society.

A tale about a serial killer who murders people for their sins, and a mismatched buddy cop duo who must stop him before they too become part of his 'game'. When you break it down to its basics you realise that this could have been a disaster - Joel Schumacher directs Seagal and Van Damme in a shoot 'em up action movie where our heroes save the girl in the nick of time...

The fact that the story works so well is testament to Fincher's marvellous vision and the performances of Spacey, Freeman & Pitt. The depth and originality that are added draw us into the picture and make us care about the characters. Think for moment: in a movie about a serial killer, how many people do we actually witness being slain? This isn't Jason or Freddie. What makes this scary is that John Doe is presented as a real person - a guy from the big, dirty, rainy city who just might live in the apartment below you. The fact that he is not just a random psycho who kills due to irresistable urges or the cycle of the moon makes him so much more frightening.

For sheer edge-of-the-seat cinema, the final twenty minutes are as good as any you will see. All of the pieces of the jigsaw come together and - unfortunately - they fit perfectly...

The perfect role for Arnold - an emotionless, musclebound robot who talks monotonously in a series of mono-syllables. Pity he thought that he could act after this, but on balance, I forgive him as this is one of the best sci-fi thrillers ever. Better than the sequel? In that respect it is similar to Alien/Aliens - the shift in emphasis makes comparison very difficult. Personally, I prefer to look at all four movies as classics in their own right.

But give Cameron his due, rather than retreading old ground with his main characters, Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley are fully rounded and deeply affected by their experiences. No Jamie Lee scream queens here. Compare the burger-flipping waitress in Terminator with the gun-toting borderline psycho in T2. It's almost as though she's turned into an emotionless, musclebound robot...

Scared me at the age of eleven. The best thing I can say about this film. It should probably have been renamed 'A Stake Too Far' as by this time the Christopher Lee Dracula franchise had been bled dry.

Watch it by all means. But whilst you're watching ask yourself this: The fundamental plot line has Dracula and his cohorts wanting to wipe out the entire human race by releasing a deadly plague. If everyone's dead, on whose blood are they going to survive?

A simple but superb film - it has no pretentions, clever camera angles or smart scripting. Adapted from the ponderous King novel, Cronenburg manages to filter out the superfluous waffle (too often present in Mr King's work) and give us a straight-down-the-line story with a couple of great twists and a satisfyingly intelligent ending.

Christopher Walken is perfect as the cursed/gifted Johnny Smith. He cuts such a sad and lonely figure throughout the film that it is difficult not to sympathise with him. And Martin Sheen throws in an excellently OTT performance as Stillson. Sorry America, but he is eerily convincing when on the campaign trail. It couldn't happen, could it? A man with an itchy trigger finger in the White House - surely not...

For those of us of a certain age, this was the must-see Saturday night TV event. And out of the 13 (very apt number...) individual episodes, there are several that chill my blood and haunt my nightmares to this day.

The luridly titled 'House That Bled To Death' was an excellent take on the Amityville theme - new owners of a house discover its murderous past, 'Thirteenth Reunion' takes the cannibal-aircrash-survivors story to a scary extreme, and 'Charlie Boy' gives us the cursed voodoo effigy from hell.

But undoubted winner of the 'Scare A Thirteen Year Old So He Pees The Bed' Award - 'Two Faces of Evil'. For any thirtysomething who has passing hazy recollections of this series, think rotten teeth and one sharp, black fingernail...

I'm off - I need the loo.

This is Dennis Potter's 'Sergeant Pepper' - the work of his life. One of those times when the recurring themes and characters from an artist's collected works come together at the right moment, with the right direction and the right actors.

The story is simple - embittered, sarcastic, over-the-hill author is admitted to hospital with a highly disfiguring skin condition. Whilst lying virtually helpless in his bed, he begins to rewrite one of his pulp novels (The Singing Detective) and to reminisce on his childhood in the Forest of Dean and London. But the memories and fiction start to overlap, with some hallucinations thrown in for good measure!

In the hands of lesser mortals, this could have been a disaster (I fear for the 2003 remake. Robert Downey Jr?!). But the direction of Amiel and the acting of the entire cast are outstanding. Michael Gambon is stunning as the (initially) sour and downright nasty Marlowe. That we sympathise with him given all of his shortcomings is testament to this.

The subtext is of a man exorcising his demons and coming to terms with his guilt: guilt about the death of his mother, guilt about his treatment of the women in his life, guilt about his victimisation of a schoolmate.

One of those films that is like a giant jigsaw - at first what appear to be a random collection of unrelated images which are rearranged, flipped over and pieced together. Ultimately we are presented with solutions to everything - almost.

After all, not everything has a solution...

A movie that only works if you think it's real - rather difficult when it's been hyped beyond all reason for six months before it opens!

I didn't so much watch the film as study it - the clever use of the handheld cameras, the disorientation of the viewer, the improvised script. I wondered how much of the participants' reactions were real and how much were acted. I wondered if the directors were really hiding in the trees and disturbing the actors in the middle of the night.

And that's the problem - the concept of the whole project got in the way. The sensationalist mass media world we live in today, where information is available at the fingertips 24 hours a day, cannot sustain the 'believablity' required to make this a great scary movie. Orson Welles' War of the Worlds could not happen today.

A huge disappointment, and certainly not the scariest movie ever.

Another one of those movies that I really wanted to like, but which turned out to be disappointing after all the anticipation. I remember finding myself forcing the laughs while sitting with my popcorn at the Coventry Odeon c1986. Reading the comments here, a thought comes to mind - the Americans seemed to love it. Is this a cultural thing. I think the Brits know the Aussies a little better and realise the gross caricatures and stereotyping that are going on in the movie.

Amusing rather than funny - file with Batman under 'over-hyped disappointments'.

I was 10 years old when Star Wars was released. I had the merchandise (pen, ruler, lunchbox, frisbee), I was smack in the middle of the target audience, all of my mates loved it. So why does this film leave me cold? I want to like it, honestly. It should be a defining movie moment for someone of my age - the film that held an entire generation in spellbound rapture.

I think I can answer my own question by referring to the opening titles of the film. The fact that this took place 'In a galaxy far, far away' made it unreal and something to which I will always fail to relate. That is probably why I consider Close Encounters a better way to spend two-and-a-bit hours of my life.

And another thing, why does this feature in the top 5 of so many 'all time' lists? I can name more than five better movies made in the 70's alone.

If you've never seen Stars Wars take my advice - if you want sci-fi try Blade Runner; if you want adventure try Raiders of the Lost Ark; if you want humour and a bit of romance try Aladdin.

Just say no kids.

Reading through the comments by other contributors here, I begin to realise the reason why this movie features in so many all time top 10s - the film means different things to different people.

As straightforward prison drama it is head and shoulders above others of its type - an epic story told with sensitivity and emotion, superbly acted and brilliantly shot. What makes what would have been a good film into a great one is the subtexts and themes which run through it that allow the viewer to actually think.

Personally, my more recent viewings of the movie have highlighted the religious subtext - the way that Red is influenced to 'get busy livin' (and find his way to the Promised Land) as a result of meeting Andy, the Crucifixion/Resurrection/Redemption metaphor of Andy's escape as he stands with his arms wide letting the rain wash away everyone else's sh*t/sins.

To be honest, I hate it when people try to look too deeply into art and identify supposed meaning of which the artist probably had no intention at all. I might be way off with these religious musings but the fact that I have been stirred to comment on them merely reinforces the power of this movie in the way that it can move us.

Pesci gives one of the finest cinema performances of recent years. He encapsulates the mood of the film - funny, disturbed, violent and with a total disregard for other people's lives. Yet we still love him!

The 'funny how?' monologue in the restaurant is one of the great movie speeches, right up there with 'you talkin to me?' and 'tears in the rain'. It is there that we discover just who we are going to spend the next couple of hours with - a borderline psycho with a sense of humour! A man who recreates the western 'dancing' scene with real bullets, a man who cold-bloodedly assassinates Sam Jackson's doped up musician then asks his dim-witted sidekick to make the coffee 'to go'.

If I ever meet Mr Pesci I'd like to think I had the bottle to thank him for one of my favourite movie turns. Or maybe I'll just ask him to go get his shine box...

One of the greatest 'cult' movies ever.

Like so many classics (Blade Runner, Shawshank etc) it was considered something of a flop on first release, the original film being severely shortened to fit it into the old 'double bill' format which was popular in the seventies (I believe it was twinned with another superb nervy shocker - Don't Look Now). As a result, there are several versions of varying length and picture quality doing the rounds.

The seemingly basic missing-child detective story begins to take some strange and unnerving turns involving pagan rites and free sexual morality. The 'seduction' scene involving Britt Eklund and a wall(!) stirred this teenager's hormones to a frenzy on first viewing back in the early 80's! My fantasy was destroyed when I learned recently that a body double was used!

I digress. What makes this movie stand head and shoulders above the horror films of the time (and since) is that feeling of a man losing control and falling inexorably towards his doom. Edward Woodward has seldom been better than when he portrayed Sgt Howie - a man so confident and stubborn in his righteousness that when Summerisle and it's inhabitants challenge his beliefs, he refuses to acknowledge the evidence in front of his eyes. Until he meets the Wicker Man...

The last five minutes are as good as any you will see - stay with it until the final frame when the Wicker Man bows his head to reveal the setting sun...