Change Your Image
J_Cheever_Loophole
Reviews
Minder (2009)
Surprisingly quite enjoyable
I've never liked Shane Ritchie so I wasn't expecting to like this Minder re-make. But, actually, he's quite good in the role. It may not be as good as the original but they've done well by not making it too similar.
The plots aren't brilliant but this is light entertainment, and doesn't need to be too closely scrutinised. The main characters are likable and sufficiently different from 'Tel' and 'Arthur' that comparisons aren't a big problem. And the 'Minder' in this series isn't quite such a pushover for Archie Daley as Terry was for Arthur. The episodes also got stronger as the characters developed.
All in all, a reasonable hours entertainment that doesn't require too much concentration. You need to give it a chance and watch a few episodes.
Fargo (1996)
A bit disappointed
I eventually got around to seeing this film after years of meaning to. It's very well made, well produced, acted and directed, I just didn't really like it very much.
Firstly, there's not really any main characters in the film that I felt any liking or sympathy for. OK the female cop, but she wasn't that much of a character, or, at least, not one we really learnt that much about.
Secondly, it was always very obvious what was going to happen, right down to the ending. Such was the general incompetence of the perpetrators, there could hardly be any other outcome.
So, all in all, not a film that really engaged me or one in which I cared about what happened to the characters.
Quantum of Solace (2008)
No solace in the plot
The movie proves, if proof was needed, that endless action sequences are no substitute for a half decent plot.
You'd think that a franchise like the Bond movies would have access to the very best in story and script writers, but it seems not. There is almost no plot to speak of and the film lurches, uncomfortably from one location to another with little reason other than to provide exotic backdrops. Dialogue has never been a great strength in Bond movies but in 'Quantum' it plumbs new depths and is contrived and flimsy.
It's also a bit disappointing that the film doesn't have a Bond atmosphere to it. Whilst the move away from gadgets and towards a 'harder' edge, is good, they could at least have used the Bond theme music to remind us occasionally that this is Bond and not Bourne that we're watching.
The lack of anything resembling a plot probably explains why the film is 40 minutes shorter than most Bond exploits and it's stretch even at 90 odd minutes.
On the plus side; Craig is excellent and the action scenes are good. But you just don't really care anymore after about an hour.
After the terrific 'Casino Royale', 'Quantum' is a big let down. I sincerely hope Craig's era in the role isn't going to go the same way as Brosnan's after the classic 'Goldeneye'.
The Dark Knight (2008)
Can't understand what all the fuss is about
I find myself bucking the trend a bit with regards to the Dark Knight. It is a very good film but I really struggle to see why so many viewers are going overboard about it. As I write, it is rated, by posters on here, as the best ever film. Frankly, it simply isn't that good.
I know it's fantasy but the Joker is not a credible character, or at least his actions are not credible - just how did he manage to plant explosives in every ward in the general hospital? The plot really doesn't hang together with wild leaps in logic such as the Joker knowing that there will be two ships leaving the city, one full of convicts, one of innocents - and he manages to plant huge amounts of explosives on both.
And, all this tortured, self-indulgent, soul searching by Batman and his confederates, it just serves to pad the film out and give it airs and graces that it doesn't need. At well over two hours, the film is already much too long and the first hour lacks pace. I'd rather the 'darkness' come across via the plot and the character's actions rather than being force fed it by being told by the characters every few minutes.
The special effects are, by today's standards, nothing special. Even his 'toys' are a bit average.
Nonetheless, it is an enjoyable film, well worth seeing. Bale is an excellent Batman despite his 'deep throat' voice when he dons the suit. Ledger is also on great form.
I just don't see 'The Dark Knight' as a movie that, in 30 years time, will be regarded as one of the top 100 films of all time - let alone the very best of them all.
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)
A series that lost it's way
Whilst this is an OK film I firmly believe the makers of this series lost their way after a brilliant initial instalment. It's always difficult to recreate the magic of something like the Curse of the Black Pearl but they mislaid the ingredients that gave it such charm.
Instead they've gone overboard creating 'myths' and supernatural characters, which consequently appear very contrived. The 'normal world' characters now take the 'supernatural' ones as commonplace, hence, so does the viewer.
The writers also cheat, by which I mean that they've changed the rules as they go along. It is very important in Fantasy/SF etc that the writer outlines the rules in which the world they portray operates, and then stick to it. As soon as you bring someone back from the dead, there is no meaning to anyone else dying since they can just be brought back again at any time. Likewise when a character gets into a spot of trouble we don't want to see the writers just invent a new rule/character/myth that gets them out of it.
Maybe it's just too easy when they have a surefire hit on their hands - all they need to do is get a film released and the money will roll in, no matter what. Filling a film full of special effects, big names and scenes is a cop out when what is called for is a good story and script. Rather than invest so heavily in CGI and so much make up, the producers would do better to employ the best authors and writers that money can buy, it'd still be far cheaper. And the result would be immensely better.
As it is, they've wasted the brilliant 'Jack Sparrow' character in an overlong muddle of SFX, manufactured myths and silliness.
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
Dire
The voting system doesn't really go low enough to do this film justice. It is simply dire. The characters are one dimensional, the action is 'cartoonlike', the love interest is totally unconvincing and the comedy relief is completely out of place and childish.
There isn't really much plot, apart from setting up the basis for episodes 2 and 3. Most of the film is padding and meaningless set-pieces. Even the much famed 'race' has been totally over-hyped.
And, worse of all, the baddies are not developed enough for us to to really hate them. In fact, I felt more dislike for the 'heroes'.
I realise it just wasn't possible to create a film with the sort of impact that the original 'Star Wars' had but surely, with the money available to them, they could have found a writer who could have delivered a good story and some believable dialogue.
Totally lacking in any charm or magic.
The Postman (1997)
Don't be put off
One moment Kevin Costner was a big box office hit, the next, a huge flop and no one had a good word for him. It had become seriously uncool to like anything with Kevin Costner in it. This film took such a panning from the critics that I almost didn't see it.
Hence, it was purely by accident that I started watching it on the box one evening. I soon realised that far from being a pile of dross, the film was very enjoyable. OK, you shouldn't take it too seriously, and I'm not suggesting it receives posthumous Oscars, but I've seen nominated films that were far worse.
The plot is a bit daft, but then that's pretty much par for the 'post apocalyptic' genre. So it's just as well it's all a tad 'tongue in cheek'. Costner is very good, the Production is excellent and the scenery fabulous. It's a bit long but surprisingly kept me engaged sufficiently to keep me up until the early hours even though I had work the following day.
So, if you haven't seen it, turn off your prejudices (if you have them) and give it a go. It isn't up to the standard of his earlier 'Dances with Wolves' or the excellent (later) 'Open Range' - but it's worth making your own mind up about.
Open Range (2003)
Terrific Western
There simply are not enough Westerns made these days so it's a lovely surprise when a really good one comes along. Open Range is tough and gritty and has a old fashioned Western feel about it but served up with modern production values.
It's also a welcome return to top form by Kevin Costner who directs and stars. Needless to say Robert Duvall is excellent and together with Annette Benning and Michael Gambon makes up a top quality cast.
Like most Westerns you don't need to be Einstein to follow the plot. Costner, an ex gunman, and Duvall, his boss, are moving a herd when they come across a town led and controlled by the corrupt and sadistic Gambon. Events, pride and the need for justice, force the two to take a stand against the Gambon, his Sheriff and their hired guns. A very violent confrontation ensues.
The (Canadian) scenery is beautiful, the film is nicely paced and suitable time is devoted to ensure that the characters have depth. This character development is important, not just to the motivations that make them do what they do, but because you then care about their fate. The dialogue is definitely a case of less is more, which is just how Westerns should be.
It all adds up to a very enjoyable film which everyone should enjoy but which lovers of Westerns will errr... love.
Bad Day at Black Rock (1955)
Classic post WW2 Western
If you haven't seen this film, add it to your must do list.
The plot is fairly simple; one armed Tracy seeks the truth about a dead army friend's father in a 'Hick' desolate and isolated western town. He meets with a conspiracy of silence and threats but is not easily put off.
As you'd expect, with a cast including Anne Francis, Lee Marvin, Ernest Borgnine, Robert Ryan and led by Spencer Tracy, the acting is superb. The script is solid and the dialogue, for the most part, avoids the 'corniness' of many 50's movies. The characters are inevitably a bit one dimensional but the director builds the tension nicely, there are some nice set piece scenes and very little padding. The ending is, perhaps, slightly weak but not anti-climatic. The film has a distinct moral to it but this is not rammed down your throat in a way that prevents you just sitting back and enjoying it. Not to be missed.
Adventures in Babysitting (1987)
A great fun movie
This movie is hugely underrated, it's always surprised me that it isn't more widely acclaimed. The story follows a teenager babysitter who ends up, for one reason or another, taking her charges through the city and through a catalogue of incidents and accidents. It doesn't set out to be anything other than a fun movie and it succeeds admirably - it's simply great fun from start to finish.
OK, it's not deep and meaningful but it has oodles of charm and is pacey and funny. There's also some very good set pieces, I particularly liked the scene in the club when they have to 'sing the blues'.
The film is also well produced, directed and acted. The plot is not complicated but the script is tight and the dialogue believable. It's not a film that really needs analysing, just watching and enjoying.