Trapped In Paradise (1994)

The second feature to be both written and directed by George Gallo (and I think we can agree that he has generally done better work on films that have hired him only for screenplay duties), Trapped In Paradise is an enjoyable and cute crime comedy that is constantly almost unbalanced every time Dana Carvey is onscreen.  Put anyone else in that role, or at least stop Carvey from doing a Mickey Rourke impression for most of the runtime, and you have a much better movie.

It’s all about three brothers. Nicolas Cage plays Bill Firpo, the only one of the three to stay on the straight and narrow, Jon Lovitz is Dave, a wily man who rarely tells the truth about anything, and Carvey is the kleptomaniac Alvin. All three brothers end up in the small town of Paradise, Pennsylvania, just in time to see the small-town bank stuffed with an enormous sum of money. It seems like a great time to rob the place, which is what they do. But, as has happened in many other movies before this one, the robbery proves to be a lot easier than getting away with the loot.

There’s a good movie here, one that is enjoyable enough to survive the antics of Carvey, but it’s also something that could have been much better. In fact, do we even need all three brothers? I would suggest that we don’t, and some minor tweaking of the script could have easily turned this into a low-key little gem. Some people do view it that way already, but it’s easy to see why most have forgotten it exists.

Gallo does a good job when it comes to setting up the well-populated cast of characters and various plot strands. There are family connections to establish, law enforcement looking to tighten a net, town residents being sweet and lovely, and other criminals, or wannabe criminals, who help to show just how good (deep down) our leads are. It helps that the screen is filled with so many people who are far less irritating than Carvey.

Donald Moffat and Angela Paton have main roles, and embody the good nature of the town, Florence Stanley is a tough and loving Ma Firpo, Mädchen Amick is a very believable potential romantic complication, and both John Ashton and Richard Jenkins portray two people approaching the situation from very different angles. Aside from some believable heavies, the hardened criminals who see the robbery and know someone has used information gained while alongside them in prison, that leaves our leads. Cage is a good mix of good behaviour and, well, Nicolas Cage, and Lovitz is amusing enough, if not best-served by a script that doesn’t make the best use of him. I think I have already mentioned Carvey enough. Maybe technology is available now that makes it much easier to replace him with someone less annoying. Like Carrot Top.

Enjoyable enough, and with the right amount of sweetness and hope that you want from any Christmas movie, Trapped In Paradise is one I would tentatively recommend to those who can overlook the one major problem it has. Although nothing really stands out, with regards to the visuals or score, it’s a generally solid piece of work that allows a few of the supporting players to shine whenever the focus turns to them. 

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Mubi Monday: Blue Steel (1990)

It is a happy coincidence that I have spent the past few months hankering for a rewatch of Blue Steel and it has now appeared on the MUBI streaming service. I couldn’t remember many details, but I remembered liking it. I hoped it would hold up as a solid thriller.

It does.

Jamie Lee Curtis stars as Megan Turner, a young woman who we see at the start of the movie finally achieving her dream of becoming a cop. She is barely on the streets for a few hours when she foils an armed robber in a store (a small turn from Tom Sizemore). One of the customers lying terrified on the floor is Eugene Hunt (Ron Silver), a man impressed by Megan, and also impressed by the gun dropped by the robber. Taking the gun away for his own personal use, Eugene complicates the situation for Megan, who is subsequently investigated for shooting an “unarmed” man. And things get even more complicated when people turn up dead, shot with bullets that literally have the name of our heroine on them. What could make the situation even worse? Maybe Megan and Eugene becoming romantically involved with one another?

Co-written by director Kathryn Bigelow and Eric Red, Blue Steel is a 1990 thriller that feels as if it belongs in a later part of the decade. It has everything you expect from this type of thing, including a supporting cast of characters containing one or two people you know aren’t going to make it to the end, but one or two elements that help it to stand out from the crowd.

The first USP here is Ron Silver’s villain, equal parts charming and completely psychopathic. Silver is the kind of actor I miss nowadays, we don’t have a modern equivalent, and he is superb here, especially once he drops any facade and reveals his true nature, at a surprisingly early stage in the proceedings.

The second USP here is the brilliant commentary on the fetishization of guns. From the title to the opening credits, from the motivation of the villain to the changing power dynamics that depend on who is or isn’t armed at any one time, Blue Steel isn’t just a typical thriller with gunfights here and there. It’s a film that uses the broken mind of one man to show just how strange and dangerous the typical American “gun-worship” mindset is.

Curtis is fine in the lead role, if a bit unconvincing, but her main reason for being onscreen is to look attractive while holding an attractively alluring weapon (in the eyes of the villain anyway). Elizabeth Peña is the best friend, which immediately puts her in danger, and Clancy Brown is a gruff detective who enlists the help of our lead, which immediately puts HIM in danger. Kevin Dunn is a standard superior officer, reminding our lead of the rules and her duty, and there’s an enjoyable little turn from Richard Jenkins, the sharp lawyer defending his “innocent” client, as well as welcome, albeit brief, performances from Louise Fletcher and Philip Bosco, playing the parents who view the career choice of their daughter in very different ways.

Although it feels a bit flat during the final scenes, and those thinking Bigelow would throw more action scenes into this will be disappointed, Blue Steel works as well as it does because it never loses focus. It’s about a dangerous man falling in love with a woman, but he falls in love with her only because he sees her attached to a gun. And it’s a gun that drives almost every decision in this film, by being present or being absent.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Nightmare Alley (2021)

When I finally got around to watching the 1947 film version of Nightmare Alley, it became a firm favourite. It's not a film easily forgotten by those who have seen it, a noir that skirts very close to horror as we watch a man on a journey that eventually takes him to . . . well, that would be telling.

I am not automatically averse to remakes, and Nightmare Alley has a story that you can see being attractive to others. It's also very much of a time and a place though, and it's already good enough that you have to wonder what others think they can do to improve upon, or just equal, it. At least you can start to feel optimistic when one of the people involved is director Guillermo del Toro. If there's one thing that Del Toro can do it's craft an onscreen love with style, beauty, and a wonderful attention to detail. He can also assemble a great cast.

Bradley Cooper is Stanton Carlisle, a shady character who ends up joining a travelling carnival. Once there, he starts to learn some of the tricks of the trade. He is especially interested in the feats of mentalism performed by Pete (David Strathairn), a fragile man cared for by Zeena (Toni Collette). Learning enough to believe he can make a name for himself, Stanton heads off with Molly (Rooney Mara) and performs for bigger and bigger crowds. This eventually leads to him crossing paths with Dr. Lilith Ritter (Cate Blanchett), and Dr. Ritter might be able to provide information that could lead to a huge payday.

If you like the selection of names just mentioned then you may be pleased to hear that this film also features roles for Willem Dafoe, Richard Jenkins, Ron Perlman, Mary Steenburgen, Holt McCallany, and Tim Blake Nelson. Don't get too excited though, a number of the cast members are either miscast or disappointingly underused. Cooper, likeable leading man that he is, doesn't feel right for the central role. Blanchett feels like the most wasted in her supporting role, and wasting Blanchett in your film should be a crime. It's the smaller roles that provide more of the treats, with highlights being Dafoe, Jenkins, and any scenes involving Strathairn and/or Collette.

Adapting the same source material as the original movie, a novel by William Lindsay Gresham, the screenplay by Del Toro and Kim Morgan seems to lose sight of what made the story so mesmerising and powerful. You still have a good story here, and it's supported by a smattering of very good performances, but the power is diluted by a) too many moments dwelling on the pretty visuals, and b) an ending that I feel lacks the full bittersweet resonance of the 1947 adaptation.

As good as a director as he can be, and as fired up about his chance to helm this remake, Del Toro feels as miscast in his role as Cooper. He aims for some style and grace that actively pulls the material away from that "down 'n' dirty" feel that the material has running through it. These characters are allowed to create wings and fly close to the sun, but it would be more appropriate to see them simply being allowed to bathe in warm water in between constant trips back to the sewer.

Undeniably enjoyable in places, and a visual treat throughout, it's a real shame that there's such a disconnect between the content and the form. It's a divide that I couldn't easily overlook, despite the many positives (such as the cinematography by Dan Laustsen or the wonderfully old-fashioned music from Nathan Johnson). I know a lot of people enjoyed it a lot more than I did. See it for yourself and let me know if you agree or disagree with me.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Noir-vember: The Man Who Wasn't There (2001)

A film I haven’t seen since I picked it up on VHS when it was first released, I was very keen to revisit The Man Who Wasn’t There, a film that arguably remains the most overlooked title in the filmography of the Coen brothers (certainly from the past couple of decades anyway).

Billy Bob Thornton plays the main character, Ed Crane. He runs a barbershop with his brother, Frank (Michael Badalucco), and plods along in his marriage to Doris (Frances McDormand). A chance encounter with a customer (Jon Polito) who has a grand business plan leads to Ed setting out to blackmail Big Dave Brewster (James Gandolfini). He knows that Dave and Doris have been having an affair, but this perceived opportunity for success could lead to disaster. And death.

Shot in beautiful black and white (courtesy of the great Roger Deakins), The Man Who Wasn’t There may not be as sharp as other Coen brothers movies, and it may run too closely to some of their best works, but it remains a fantastic slice of straightforward noir. The brothers don’t want to twist things too much here, they just want to tell a story well worth telling.

The cast are almost all perfect, with Thornton at his laconic best in the lead role. He has rarely been an actor who exaggerates his mannerisms or catches your eye with histrionics (the excellent Sling Blade aside), making him an ideal choice to carry a film with this title. McDormand is as good as ever, playing a flawed woman who clearly still has love there for her husband. Gandolfini and Polito both make a strong impression with more limited screentime and Tony Shalhoub has one of his best movie roles, playing an expensive lawyer who believes himself unable to lose a court case. There are also enjoyable turns from Badalucco, Richard Jenkins, and Scarlett Johansson, with the latter representing a fresh start, optimism, and purity in the mind of Thornton’s character.

It would be wrong to try and convince anyone that this is one of the very best movies from the Coen brothers. That isn’t true. But it would also be wrong to leave it languishing in the forgotten limbo it seems to have been cast into over the past twenty years. It may not be a masterpiece, and it isn’t out to feel fresh or full of surprises, but it is a lovingly crafted piece of drama, using a top-notch cast to draw you into a tale of love, death, and greed for a couple of hours.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Mubi Monday: A Couch In New York (1996)

A rom-com so strange that I am not entirely sure whether or not it is actually working as both a traditional type of film within the sub-genre and also some kind of knowing satire of the form, A Couch In New York nevertheless works any way you decide to take it.

Written and directed by Chantal Akerman, who developed the main story with Jean-Louis Benoît, what you have here is an apartment swap between a psychoanalyst (Henry Harriston, played by William Hurt) and a Parisian dancer (Béatrice Saulnier, played by Juliette Binoche). Both are seeking an escape, and both find themselves fascinated by the alternate lives the vicariously step into. Harriston struggles to deal with the messy chaos he discovers, but Ms Saulnier finds herself quickly growing to enjoy the role of substitute psychoanalyst when people turn up for appointments that they won't let her cancel.

Absolutely ridiculous once things start to play out, with both of the leads barely having time to adjust before the mistaken identity antics begin, there's something wonderful about just how this juxtaposes attempts at real with and intelligence with tropes that were already well-worn by this point. Hurt and Binoche bring a certain class to the proceedings, in a manner of speaking, and they have a good connection between them, but they have to work through scenes that have misinterpretations of cross-over talk, prolonged fakery stemming from an inexplicable inability to simply tell the truth and clear up any misunderstandings, and even a dash to catch a flight in the final act.

You could also check off some other very familiar rom-com elements throughout the course of the film. There's a cute pet, supporting characters who provide either help or obstacles (Anne, played by Stephanie Buttle, is a friend to Béatrice, while Dennis, played by Paul Guilfoyle, tries to advise Henry), some other people who pop in and out of the story long enough to help the main characters consider how they are acting, and that airport run.

I'm not meaning to sound like I am disparaging the rom-com at all when I say that Hurt and Binoche bring a certain class to the proceedings. I am just giving my own view of both leads. The rom-com is a type of film easily looked down on, and dismissed, by far too many people, but a terrible one will remind you of how much work it takes to make the great ones . . . great. Just watch Leap Year to see what I mean. No, don't watch that. Anyway, back to the cast here. The leads are great, although Hurt seems more ill-at-ease in his part than Binoche seems with what she has to do, and Guilfoyle adds some fun. Buttle has very little to do, which is fine when it allows for an extra minute or two of Richard Jenkins doing his stuff (he's a patient who comes to lie on the couch and discuss his problems).

Akerman knows what she's doing, as does everyone in front of the camera, but the end result somehow manages to feel both comfortably familiar and yet also slightly skewed. However you end up feeling about the film, it's an interesting viewing experience.

7/10

https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Prime Time: The Witches Of Eastwick (1987)

The more I think about it, the harder it is to think of a more bizarre mainstream hit (I believe it was a hit, it certainly seemed to be known and seen by enough people) than this movie.

It's essentially the tale of three women who would like a perfect man. You have Alex (Cher), Jane (Susan Sarandon), and Sukie (Michelle Pfeiffer). And it looks like their wish may come true when the mysterious Daryl Van Horn (Jack Nicholson) comes into town. He's devilish, direct, and deemed to be just what the women need. For now.

If you haven't seen The Witches Of Eastwick in many years, here are some things you may have forgotten. First of all, it is directed by George Miller. Yes, the George Miller who only seems to be remembered for the Mad Max movies or films about dancing penguins. Second, Veronica Cartwright is REALLY good in her role. She plays Felicia Alden, a woman afflicted by the presence of Van Horn as soon as he comes to town. You may remember her most memorable scene - spewing out a lot of cherry stones - but she does great work in every scene she is in.

If you haven't seen the film at all then just know that it has a great script by Michael Cristofer (based on a novel by John Updike), unfussy direction from Miller that keeps the focus on the dialogue and characters, and great performances from the leads, as well as that fantastic turn from Cartwright, who is given equally fine support from Richard Jenkins, as her husband.

Cher, Sarandon, and Pfeiffer are all excellent, portraying three very different women who want the same thing. Each one starts off as very different from the other, although the journey they go on together sees them discovering themselves in ways that bring them closer and closer together, as well as growing more similar in their outlook. Nicholson doesn't so much attempt to be all things to all women, but rather knows just how far he can push things and how much his charm and bluntness will make up for any perceived failings.

It's very interesting to rewatch this movie, and perhaps more satisfying than any first viewing. Knowing how things end, and I'll try not to give any spoilers, helps to put up with some of the more infuriating moments that take place in the middle section. It's a witty and insightful battle of the sexes that seems quite patronising at times before revealing its true colours.

There are issues. This is one of many films that have Jack Nicholson feeling very much like he's playing Jack Nicholson, the transformation of the female characters is quite clumsily handled, and there's one main special effect in the final act that may well have been best left offscreen, or created in a different way.

Those minor niggles aside, this is great entertainment. Smart, sexy, funny, and you'll never look at cherry stones the same way again.

8/10

https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Mubi Monday: Intolerable Cruelty (2003)

My reasons for picking specific titles to review are myriad and often a lot less organised, or sensible, than they should be. Take the choice for today, for example, a rom-com from the Coen brothers that many would probably often forget is even part of their filmography. Many might even prefer it not to be in there. Which is a great shame, as Intolerable Cruelty holds up as yet another showcase for the talented siblings to pick a genre they enjoy and have fun showing their mastery of it.

George Clooney is perfectly cast as the smooth-talking and perfectly-groomed divorce lawyer, Miles Massey. Often defying the odds, and relishing the challenge, Miles has an amazing record for helping his clients get everything they want, even if they are not the wronged party. But he's been finding himself thinking some quite unique, potentially dangerous, thoughts recently, made more troubling as he gets involved in a case that leads to him withholding a huge payout from the beautiful Marylin (Catherine Zeta-Jones). What follows involves love, pain, and the infamous "Massey pre-nup".

Very much in line with other Coen brothers movies, in terms of the snappy dialogue and assortment of memorable characters, Intolerable Cruelty is knockabout fare of the highest order, focused on two gorgeous leads who are surrounded by a fine collection of people taking on fun supporting roles. Geoffrey Rush is the cheated-upon spouse who finds his wife with another man, leading us to be introduced to the smooth ways of Massey. Edward Herrmann is the first husband of Zeta-Jones, bringing the two leads together for the central conflict, while Billy Bob Thornton is the second. Cedric The Entertainer is an investigator who often shouts out a catchphrase he has coined as he gathers video evidence of extra-marital affairs. And Paul Adelstein is Wrigley, a man in awe of Massey until he sees how major changes start to affect his life, while Richard Jenkins is the poor attorney often at the other side of battles against the winning teams.

It may not always look as good as many of their other movies, the production design is relatively clean and simple throughout, but shot choice and style are, as ever with the Coens, in line with the type of film they are most trying to emulate. Rom-coms are not known for their lavish sets or dizzying cinematography, therefore we don't get those things here.

The script is even funnier than I remembered, either in terms of the actual dialogue or the delivery (Clooney is so good in this kind of comedic role that I wish we'd seen him in more of them, classic deliveries matching his old-school movie star looks), and the whole thing sets all of the plot points up briskly enough and positively dashes through the 100-minute runtime.

I know that some automatically dislike the stars here, but they're both doing some of their best (or, at the very least, most fun) work, and casting them in these roles was a typically-great decision from the Coen brothers. It's hard to pick any one favourite from the supporting players either, with so many good moments to choose from. Everyone is hilariously over the top, and Rush sets the tone perfectly in the opening scenes, but I think I'll take this opportunity to highlight Jenkins, who does such wonderful work in a role that isn't as immediately full of comedic potential as the others, yet his performance just sprinkles more treats throughout the runtime.

The soundtrack is wonderful, the character developments, and small twists and turns, are constantly amusing, and this remains a fun time. I'm not going to argue that it's a masterpiece, or deserves to be in the top tier of a filmography from two men who have given audiences so many modern classics, but I am going to encourage people to either check it out or revisit it. You may realise that it's a lot more fun than given credit for.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

The Shape Of Water (2017)

Guillermo del Toro has made a career out of trying to convince everyone to view monsters and ghosts the same way that he does. They're just the same as us, but different. In fact, sometimes the very things that make them monstrous or scary are the things that make them a little bit better than your average Joe. The Shape Of Water may very well be his most overt guide to loving monsters yet, taking it quite literally.

Sally Hawkins plays Elisa, a mute woman who works as a janitor at a secret research facility. She spends her workdays alongside her friend Zelda (Octavia Spencer) and when at home she sometimes enjoys the company of Giles (Richard Jenkins), an elderly, lonely gay man. There's excitement in the workplace when a bipedal amphibious humanoid specimen (Doug Jones) is brought in, under the watchful eyes of Colonel Richard Strickland (Michael Shannon), and Elisa finds herself forming a strong connection with the creature. Some people might be happy to see that development, Strickland isn't one of them.

While it's certainly a very derivative film in many ways (from the obvious "gillman" movies to the tone and visual palate of Jean-Pierre Jeunet), The Shape Of Water takes the familiar and mixes it into something that feels quite unique. I would say that those looking to hammer the film for the range of influences on display aren't considering how well Del Toro has placed everything. Never one to skimp on the detailing of the worlds he wants to let viewers into, the director, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Vanessa Taylor from his own story, somehow manages to fill every scene with little touches and thematic strands without having it all feel too busy and overdone.

Dan Laustsen, the Director of Photography, deserves a special mention, because there are a number of scenes here that stand out as some of the most beautiful from last year (and I know I am terrible for not often singling out the DPs in my reviews), and Alexandre Desplat has come up with an appropriately beautiful score to accompany those visuals, with everything coming together to make a film that feels very much like a Del Toro film in content and theme, while moving away from his standard visual palette.

Hawkins gives a wonderful central performance, as does the prosthetically-covered Doug Jones. The two manage to say so much without actually speaking. Spencer and Jenkins both give great supporting turns, and chatter away to Hawkins throughout the film, and Shannon is the villain of the piece that the film requires (allowing him to have a lot of fun with some over the top moments). Michael Stuhlbarg is another good presence, but it's easy to forget the other people involved during the moments that show Hawkins and Jones wordlessly connecting with one another.

The biggest problem with The Shape Of Water stems from the biggest plus point. This feels very much like a film Del Toro has had in his mind for years, something he was just waiting to finally be allowed to do. Now, having been given permission, he loads it up with no small amount of self-indulgence. That is fine when it comes to the detailing and style of the film, but it also means that the runtime feels just a bit too long, there are one or two extra plot points that didn't really need to be in there, and some of the quirkier moments don't work.

Those minor mis-steps, however, are nowhere near irritating enough to detract from the gorgeous and uplifting experience that the film provides. It's not up there with the very best films we've already had from Guillermo del Toro, but it's leagues ahead of many other films that you'll see this year.

8/10

There's a lovely book available here.
Americans can order the film here.

Noir November: Killing Them Softly (2012)

A fun cast liven up this darkly comedic crime thriller, helping to elevate material that we've all seen a hundred times before, with everything underscored by a message that reminds people of how life is cheap, and how much cheaper it can get during times of economic recession.

The whole thing centres on a plan to knock off a crook (Markie, played by Ray Liotta) who runs a well-known card game in town. Knocking off any card game is usually a death sentence, but this particular crook once confessed that the only previous time he was robbed was an inside job that he arranged. That means that this time around the blame should fall squarely on his shoulders. Right? Well, that's supposed to be how it all works out, but the two robbers (Scoot McNairy and Ben Mendelsohn) are too incompetent to keep everything a secret, and the main man brought into town to clear up the mess (Jackie, played by Brad Pitt) knows that Markie wouldn't be THAT stupid. But things have to be done to restore confidence, whether Markie is guilty or not.

McNairy and Mendelsohn both do well with their roles here, but Killing Them Softly steps up a gear whenever Pitt is onscreen, his character always quick to clear away any confusing distractions and pinpoint what is needed to please bosses and get people making money again. It then steps up another gear when James Gandolfini appears, playing another body brought in to help fix the situation. Liotta is always good value, in my opinion, and Richard Jenkins provides a lot of amusement as the man relaying to Pitt's character just what action is deemed necessary to make things right.

Adapting the novel "Cogan's Trade", by George V. Higgins, writer-director Andrew Dominik may not do enough to let the film stand out from the many other crime flicks to have cropped up over the years, but he realises that the strength of the film lies in a few of the main characters and affords them some great moments. Whether it's Gandolfini throwing back Martinis as he tries to hold in a burning ball of resentment and anger or the last lines of dialogue spat out by a character summing up the entire theme of the film, every one of the leads has at least one memorable scene.

As expected, there are some moments of harsh violence. This isn't a world inhabited by girl scouts selling cookies, however, so the violence shouldn't come as a shock to any viewers, although some of it IS impressively shocking. There's also plenty of humour, as black as it is. All in all, this is a good, though unspectacular, crime flick. Not necessarily one to prioritise, but worth watching if the chance arises.

6/10

http://www.amazon.com/Killing-Bly-ray-Digital-UltraViolet-Blu-ray/dp/B009AMALBM/ref=sr_1_2?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1415878346&sr=1-2&keywords=killing+them+softly

Noir November: Sea Of Love (1989)

Sex sells. Everyone knows that. So adding eroticism to thrillers was always a way to spice things up, grab the attention of viewers, and make a moderate film into a moderate success. Add one or two big names (in this case, Al Pacino and Ellen Barkin) and you had a winning formula. Until, of course, it started to lose. Because there's not really any such thing as a winning formula in the movie business, unless you count the two main ways to make profit: either spend so little that profit is guaranteed or spend so much that the movie gets to eventually make profit by the sheer inescapability of the brand.

Harold Becker directs this slick slice of hokum, and the premise is as fun as it is silly. There's a killer on the loose, someone targeting men who have advertised in a lonely hearts column. Al Pacino teams up with John Goodman to catch the killer, and they decide that the best way to get their perp is to, yep, put an ad in the same lonely hearts column. A number of women reply to the ad, with Ellen Barkin being one of them. Pacino starts to warm to Barkin, even as it becomes more and more obvious that she's the best suspect they've had since starting the investigation.

Writer Richard Price really just goes through the motions here, as does director Harold Becker, but viewers are lucky enough to have the material lifted, ever so slightly, by the great cast. Pacino and Barkin may not be the top two people on your list of folks you wanted to see make out with one another, but they don't do too bad in the sexual chemistry department. In fact, the two central characters really make a good couple, with all of the baggage and cynicism that they have. The rest is all as you'd expect it to be. There's the kind of soundtrack that you'd expect, with the title song making frequent appearances, and one or two decent red herrings on the way to the relatively tense finale. Well, when I say "relatively tense" I actually mean "not tense at all, but still entertaining enough nonetheless".

As for the rest of the cast, Goodman puts in the kind of solid supporting turn that he's been doing for most of his career. He doesn't really steal all of his scenes, but he certainly leaves an impression. John Spencer and Richard Jenkins are both fellow members of the police force, with the latter involved in a couple of great run-ins with Pacino, due to the tension caused by him now living with Al's ex-wife. William Hickey and Michael Rooker do well with fairly small roles, and Christine Estabrook and Patricia Barry also make the most of their screentime, both playing different women putting themselves out there in the world of dating.

Certainly not as good as more delightfully sleazy entries in the subgenre, Sea Of Love is passable enough, mainly thanks to the cast, and I'm sure Pacino completists will be able to stomach it on their way through his filmography.

6/10

http://www.amazon.com/Sea-Love-Collectors-Al-Pacino/dp/B00008CMRK/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1415133173&sr=1-1&keywords=sea+of+love

The Broken (2008)

Written and directed by Sean Ellis, The Broken is an interesting and impressive horror movie that takes a number of well-worn genre tropes and blends them into something more than the sum of its parts. It doesn't become entirely fresh and unmissable, but it deserves to be discovered by horror fans after something that doesn't feature zombies, ghosts/demons or found footage.

Lena Headey stars as Gina McVey, a radiologist who finds her life turned upside down one day when she spots someone who looks exactly like her. Exactly. As she follows the doppelganger to find out just what's going on she gets herself hurt in a bad car crash.Then things start getting stranger and stranger.

Heady does her usual good work in the lead role, and she's supported by a cast of varying quality - the great Richard Jenkins does well with his limited screentime, Melvil Poupaud is okay, as is Michelle Duncan, and Asier Newman makes a memorable impression as Daniel McVey, Gina's brother.

There are some well-signposted jump scares, placed in the movie as if the director was contractually obliged to include them, but the majority of the movie is more concerned with setting an uneasy, off-kilter, mood. Writer-director Ellis walks a nice line between the requirements (cliches) of the genre and many moments that provide some food for thought alongside the chills.

As events unfold, viewers might understandably feel slightly underwhelmed. There is at least one major plot point that many could see coming wayyyyyyy down the line and the tension builds up only to be deflated during the last 10 minutes or so. But this is not a film about individual scares or a barnstorming finale. This is a film about a journey, and that journey is an interesting one.

As the end credits rolled, I considered my rating for the movie and was initially going to settle on something that would signify it as average or just above average, but the more I thought about everything I'd just watched the more I realised I'd been quietly and consistently impressed. I don't expect everyone to enjoy it as much as I did, but I do encourage others to seek it out and give it a go.

7/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Broken-DVD-Richard-Jenkins/dp/B001TDKJYO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1377005833&sr=8-1&keywords=the+broken

Cheaper By The Dozen (2003)

Steve Martin and Bonnie Hunt play Tom and Kate Baker, respectively. Tom and Kate are the parents of, in case you couldn't guess, twelve children. Hence the title. The movie shows the chaos of their daily lives and some particular highs and lows that the Baker family go through as they work together as a team to deal with whatever life throws at them.

Directed by Shawn Levy, this is Disney-lite fare. In other words, it's NOT a Disney film, but certainly tries to be one. The thing to remember, as hard as it can be at times, is that Disney can do this kind of thing brilliantly when it gets everything in place. It can take material like this and elevate it, turn it from something groansome into something really enjoyable. Levy doesn't manage that.

Based on a 1950 movie that was based on a biographical book by Frank B. Gilbreth Jr. and Ernestine Gilbreth Carey, this is an old-fashioned and a safe family comedy. It rarely feels as if much has been updated from when the original movie was made. That's not to say that kids won't enjoy seeing the kids all play around and cause some havoc, but it doesn't make it a completely satisfying experience for all the family.

Martin and Hunt are decent enough in their roles, given most of the screentime while also playing second fiddle to all of the kids. It's a shame, but inevitable, that they aren't given better treatment. The younger kids don't fare much better, with most of them struggling to stand out from the crowd (twins Brent and Shane Kinsman are the exceptions). The older Baker children benefit from the fact that they're played by well-known actors - Tom Welling, Hilary Duff and Piper Perabo - but the most fun comes from Ashton Kutcher, playing a vain actor/model boyfriend of Perabo. Kutcher stays well within his comfort zone, but provides some great laughs as he's pestered by the Baker children, who just don't like him. Alan Ruck and Richard Jenkins also appear, both are also underused but it's good to see them.

The script by Sam Harper, Joel Cohen and Alec Sokolow is insubstantial, content to simply link from one set-piece to the next with neither enough good bits in between nor enough value in the main, big sequences.

It's passable enough, especially if you have kids to keep entertained on a rainy afternoon, but only just.

5/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cheaper-By-The-Dozen-DVD/dp/B000E6UMEY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1375526309&sr=8-2&keywords=cheaper+by+the+dozen

Hall Pass (2011)

The Farrelly Brothers have come a long way since their paean to all things dumb, Dumb & Dumber, cleaned up at the box office. From that great starting point we’ve had the good (There’s Something AboutMary), the bad (okay, they only produced Say It Isn’t So, but their names were all over the marketing) and the divisive (Me, Myself & Irene and Stuck On You are two movies I really like but not everyone feels the same way). And now there’s Hall Pass.

Owen Wilson and Jason Sudeikis play two married men who are given what seems like a fantastic gift from their loving wives - a hall pass. A hall pass is, in the context of the film, a week off from marriage. The guys can relive their days of bachelorhood and get everything out of their system before returning to the family home and settling back down for the rest of their lives. With no restrictions, the two men should obviously be able to live out those fantasies that they've been harbouring for years. Well, while the theory is sound it turns out that the two men are a bit rusty when it comes to actually making any real moves towards ladies.

Written and directed by those Farrelly funsters (Bobby and Peter, who were both helped out in the scripting department by Pete Jones and Kevin Barnett), Hall Pass is an amusing comedy very much in the vein of their past works. There's plenty of refreshing honesty mixed in with the laughs, at least one gross moment and many lines of dialogue guaranteed to offend anyone who wants to be easily offended. Sadly, there aren't any memorable set-pieces and the whole thing suffers from the presence of Sudeikis (he was okay in Horrible Bosses, but I have no idea why the man is being given lead roles - he may get to deliver funny lines but he's not a talented comedic performer).

Thankfully, the cast also includes the lovely Jenna Fischer, Christina Applegate, Nicky Whelan, Stephen Merchant and Richard Jenkins. And Owen Wilson, of course. Some people don't like his standard laid back schtick. I do. There are also appearances from Farrelly regulars such as Rob Moran and Danny Murphy, while Vanessa Angel, Lauren Bowles and even Alyssa Milano join in the fun.

I laughed quite a few times while watching Hall Pass, but there were only two gags that made me laugh hard - one involving Wilson and two naked men and the other moment took place at the very end of the film - and I just don't think that's good enough for a film with this cast and those men behind the camera (yeah, yeah, roll your eyes all you want, I have loved a number of their past films).

It would seem that, for a change, most audience members agreed on this one. It had a fairly high budget for a comedy ($36M, apparently) and didn't exactly provide a rip-roaring return on that investment. Meaning that we've probably been spared a Hall Pass 2. At least that is an extra reason to smile.

5/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Hall-Pass-Triple-Blu-ray-Digital/dp/B004MYF6YU/ref=sr_1_2?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1365989019&sr=1-2&keywords=hall+pass