Hot Fuzz

Hot Fuzz is the second film in the Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright ‘ice cream and blood’ trilogy, and follows much the same pattern as Shaun of the Dead except there is a totally different storyline. In Hot Fuzz, Nicholas Angel is a dedicated and hard working police officer who is sent to the countryside village of Sandford. Here two different worlds collide and Angel uncovers a village-wide murderous rampage all motivated by a desire to win the Village of the Year Award.

It sounds pretty funny already doesn't it? It is quite difficult to know whether or not to describe it as a sequel. It has many of the same running jokes as were in Shaun of the Dead, such as crossing gardens by jumping over fences and the ‘do you want anything from the shop’ line. However the completely different storyline makes it more of a second collaboration than a sequel. With several of the same actors and actresses from Shaun of the Dead making a re-appearance in various roles, this is definitely a very similar film to Shaun of the Dead. However, it is good because it avoids following the same pattern too exactly. While there are obvious similarities, they are incorporated into the film rather than being relied upon.

So once again Simon Pegg and Nick Frost are hilarious in their role as best friends. Simon Pegg is the hardworking Nicholas Angel who finds the policing methods used in the countryside completely foreign to him. Nick Frost is the young police officer in Sandford who tries to help Nicholas switch off once in a while. Their onscreen chemistry is as perfect as it was in Shaun of the Dead and as I mentioned in the last post, this can only be aided by the fact that they are so close offscreen.

However, for me this film isn’t as focused on Pegg and Frost in the same way that Shaun of the Dead was. Hot Fuzz focuses more on the supporting cast who play a bigger role than previously. Jim Broadbent plays Inspector Frank Butterman, who is leading the murderous rampage in Sandford. As ever, he is thoroughly enjoyable in this role, and delivers his more comedic lines with a serious and deadpan manner which makes them much more amusing. There are a number of other actors and actresses who play the residents of Sandford who you swear you have seen before somewhere. The most notable of these is Anne Reid, who has appeared in quite a lot of television series. I was astounded to find out that Simon Skinner was played by Timothy Dalton, who I just did not recognise from his James Bond days. I haven’t seen much else that he has been in since Bond, and so was pleasantly surprised to see him in the cast. I also loved Olivia Colman in this film. She is such a versatile actress and seems capable of adapting her style to perfectly suit the role she is in.

As with Shaun of the Dead, a lot of the quality of Hot Fuzz can be found in the writing and direction, which Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright excel at for a film of this type. Instead of a Hollywood blockbuster which tries to seep laughs out of the audience, Hot Fuzz (and Shaun of the Dead) feel like two films that are simply the work of Pegg and Wright enjoying themselves with a series of actors and actresses.

Hot Fuzz is much more gruesome than Shaun of the Dead in many ways, and although there are some pretty grim scenes in Shaun of the Dead, you sort of expect it because it is a Zombie film. With Hot Fuzz, the blood is more spread out, and comes in much higher quantities. The scene where the segment of the church roof falls onto Tim Messenger is the most gruesome of the film, and yet the script writing for the film makes this potentially disturbing scene into a good laugh for the audience.

In much the same way as Shaun of the Dead, Hot Fuzz seems to engage the audience. You find yourself entirely captivated by the story you are presented with and cannot help but enjoy yourself as you watch it. It is a film in a very similar mould to Shaun of the Dead, but it stands as an individual film as well because it is quite different. It is no less funny than Shaun of the Dead though, and if you liked Shaun of the Dead and haven’t seen Hot Fuzz then I strongly suggest that you do before you see The World’s End.

You may also like:

Shaun of the Dead - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/shaun-of-dead.html

Paul - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/paul.html

Shaun of the Dead

As British comedy films go, it doesn't get much better than Shaun of the Dead, the first in the ‘ice cream and blood’ trilogy from Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright. It is a typical zombie movie, where the hero (Shaun, played by Pegg) and his friends (including Nick Frost) are some of the only survivors when a mysterious zombie plague affects most of the city. Naturally they have to find a way to survive and in doing so, entertains the audience in a number of ways.

With jokes and lines running throughout Shaun of the Dead it is still funny after a few watches. It got to a point where each time I watched it, I picked up on something new. However, now I can practically recite it so I think the novelty has worn off. It is fantastically written and each actor/actress delivers their part with a perfect level of comedy.

Simon Pegg and Nick Frost really broke through with this film (I think). At the very least this was the first point that I became aware of them. As a partnership they are fantastic and bounce off each other exceptionally well. The best part of their friendship on screen is that you can tell how close they are off screen. In the three major films that they have starred in together (the other two being Hot Fuzz and Paul), they are best friends as well, and for me it is this friendship that brings the whole film together. Both actors deliver an immensely comedic performance in Shaun of the Dead and they both manage to portray the best friendship perfectly, with all its little idiosyncrasies and quirks. Most of all they are believable as best friends (largely because they are I reckon).

The supporting cast is also very entertaining and there are a number of stars in the cast. Bill Nighy is every bit as deadpan as ever in his role as Shaun’s ‘father’ and works very well with Penelope Wilton. One of my favourite scenes of the whole movie is where Shaun is talking to his mother about the difficult relationship he had with Phillip as a child, and both Pegg and Wilton deliver perfect comedic timing in this scene, which makes it quite amusing (to me at least). Peter Serafinowicz appears as Pete, the flatmate of Shaun and Ed, and despite his role being relatively small, he does very well.

Kate Ashfield plays Shaun’s long-suffering girlfriend Liz, and works wonderfully with Simon Pegg to convey the difficulties of their relationship. She also works brilliantly with Lucy Davis and Dylan Moran to create a little friendship group. It’s just occurred to me that one of the main reasons why Shaun of the Dead is a very enjoyable film is because the characters are relatively relatable. Shaun is stuck in a job that he hates and his life has grown stale. His girlfriend hates this and decides to change things by leaving him. Throw in a zombie epidemic and the whole thing becomes much more entertaining. Dylan Moran works perfectly and delivers such a unique performance that he became one of my favourite comedic actors. I loved Black Books and find him so funny in every role he’s in. In Shaun of the Dead his dry and sarcastic attitude makes him one of the funnier characters of the film.

Overall I think Shaun of the Dead is a unique idea. Obviously the zombie genre is not unique or original, but Shaun of the Dead takes a typical zombie film and reshapes it to the style of Pegg and Wright. This works perfectly, and with a fantastic cast who link very well together the whole film becomes very entertaining and immensely engaging. I love watching Shaun of the Dead and it makes me laugh every time I do so. The success of Shaun of the Dead has resulted in two ‘sequels’ being made, with Hot Fuzz being equally successful and The World’s End which has just been released.

If you haven’t seen Shaun of the Dead yet then you really must see it as soon as possible. It is an exceptionally funny film and will be guaranteed to entertain you in one way or another. It’s an original British comedy film with a very amusing cast which shines in this film.

You may also like:

Paul - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/paul.html

Shutter Island

When I first saw Shutter Island it absolutely blew me away. It was a film that I knew nothing about and I picked it up relatively cheap on the recommendation of a woman who I did not know. It was a complete unknown. However, skipping forward two and a half years and it is one of my favourite films. It is the film that cemented Leonardo Di Caprio as one of my favourite actors, and to this day whenever I watch it I pick up new things about the story.

Basically it’s about a guy called Teddy Daniels who is sent to investigate an escaped patient at a hospital for the criminally insane. Alongside his partner Chuck, he investigates her disappearance in the eerily creepy hospital. However, things start to get a little bit mysterious and scary. Added to Teddy’s flashbacks to his experiences in the war and his hallucinations of his dead wife, the audience is soon aware that something isn’t right. By the time the twist came around there was no way I saw it coming, and even at the end there is an ambiguity which leaves me pondering the outcome for hours after I see it.

Like Gangs of New York, The Aviator and The Departed before it, Shutter Island is another collaboration between Martin Scorsese and Leonardo Di Caprio. Of all the Di Caprio-Scorsese films I have seen (three out of five) this one is the one I enjoyed the most. While it is not Scorsese’s best film in terms of direction and impact and what not, I found it so fantastically enjoyable that I rank it up there with some of his best work (much to the dismay of many Scorsese purists I’m sure).

Leonardo Di Caprio is fantastic in the film. He plays a character who starts out angry, and by the end of the film, what with everything that has gone on, is positively fuming. If you haven’t seen the film before then skip over the next couple of sentences because there will be spoilers. Ready? Good. His acting is so convincing that even when Dr Cawley and Chuck were telling him the truth about his identity, I was fairly convinced that it was part of the plot to trap him there. This is a credit both to Di Caprio’s involvement in his character, and to the writers for making the story so absorbing. I have nothing but praise for Di Caprio in this film and, although it is not one of the best acting performances ever, it comes in a film that is so engaging and enjoyable that it is hard not to like his character, and feel for him at the end of the film.

Ben Kingsley is riveting as the enigmatic Dr Cawley. Throughout the film, largely due to the emerging plot around Ashecliffe, the audience is unsure whether he is trustworthy or not. Ben Kingsley, in the nicest possible way of course, has an appearance that breeds a certain ambiguity about his character. At the end of the film though (spoilers) he is revealed as an inherently caring man who always wants what is best for his patients. Although there is evidence of this throughout, it only becomes apparent when the audience is made aware of the twist.

Shutter Island is based on a book by the same name. The film does follow the book relatively closely. However, the ending of the film and the book are relatively different. While there are some parts of the book that the film would be unable to include (for obvious reasons of time) the film adds one line in at the end (“is it better to die as a good man or to live as a monster?”). This is the line which makes the ending so much of a mindblower. However, it isn’t in the book and creates a more pointed sense of ambiguity. The inclusion of this line points much more towards one direction of the sane-insane ending. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing though, and I fully trust Scorsese’s judgement on this one. Ultimately, he has directed more candidate films for the ‘best of all time’ than I have.

When you watch the film for a second time, with knowledge of how it is going to play out, it becomes much better as you are able to appreciate every little bit of information that points you in the direction of the conclusion. From the initial reactions of the guards when Teddy and Chuck arrive through to the fear that the patients have of the marshalls, the exchange between the Warden (Ted Levine) and Teddy, and the nature of Dr Naehring’s (Max von Sydow) conversations with Teddy. Everything becomes apparent the second time and this is why I enjoy the film so much, even now when I have seen it more times than I can remember. I pick up new bits of information every time I watch it, and it is a film with many different layers to it. That probably sounds weird, but it is a film with every last bit of Scorsese’s subtext as his other masterpieces. There is ambiguity over the positioning of the lighthouse and the angles from which it is viewed, as well as the flashbacks Teddy has.

Ultimately, Shutter Island is one of those films that you have to make your own mind up about. Personally, (spoilers) I think that he is sane but realises that he is too dangerous to risk relapsing again and sacrifices himself. I cannot recommend that you watch Shutter Island strongly enough, just so you can make your own mind up about what is going on. It is a fantastic film, very enjoyable, and captures your attention without difficulty. Unmissable in my opinion. 

Other films starring Leonardo Di Caprio
Django Unchained - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/django-unchained.htmlThe Great Gatsby - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/the-great-gatsby.html

Other films directed by Martin Scorsese
Casino - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/casino_28.htmlRaging Bull - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/raging-bull.html

Other Scorsese-Di Caprio films
The Departed - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/the-departed.html
The Aviator - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/the-aviator.html

The Emperor's New Groove

The first time I watched The Emperor’s New Groove I was a kid and I absolutely adored it. As a fairly hyperactive child (I think my Mum would say very hyperactive) I used to act out the movie. When I re-watched it again recently I found that me getting older had not dampened how much I enjoyed the film. In a similar way to The Mummy, the films that you see in your childhood and adore stick with you, and you always seem to hold a small candle for them.

The plot, unsurprisingly, isn't complex. There is an Emperor who is quite self-absorbed. His ‘evil’ advisor Yzma is jealous of his power and plots to take it for herself after he fires her. With the help of her assistant Kronk she poisons Kuzco, but accidently turns him into a llama. Kuzco winds up in the home of a man whose village he plans to destroy to make way for his birthday present to himself. The man tries to help Kuzco get back to the palace and on the way Kuzco changes as a person and agrees to build his summer house somewhere else. It’s a fairly standard story of changing people through time but directed at kids.

Beyond telling you how much I liked it, and describing the plot, it’s difficult to know where to take this review now. The characters are not deep, profound or particularly interesting. The only change in any of them throughout the film is Kuzco’s personality. The animation is fairly average, and there’s not much, good or bad, to say about it. The characters are voiced fairly well. David Spade (8 Simple Rules, Rules of Engagement) voiced the Emperor, and does so very well. The interesting voice is Patrick Warburton. He voices Kronk, and has a very distinctive voice. When I started watching Family Guy I could not place the voice of Joe, until I realised that it was the same guy!

Anyway, I've decided to focus on the comedic side to the film. As with most animated children’s films there is a comedic element to the story. On the journey back to the palace Kuzco and Pacha get into a number of scrapes which provided great amusement to my childhood self, and reminiscent memories to my (only slightly) more mature self. The film is quite quotable and I’m fairly sure that my girlfriend (who has been watching more and more films with me lately) was utterly sick of me talking along to the characters as the memorable lines came out. The scene at the end of the film where Kuzco and Pacha are escaping from Yzma and trying to turn Kuzco back to a human is quite funny.

It’s difficult to identify exactly what I like most about The Emperor’s New Groove. It is definitely the kind of film that you can relax to, but I feel that if you haven’t seen it before then you will hate it. When I watched The Rock, I didn't see why my flatmates had hyped it up so much, but then I figured that they had seen it when they were younger, and so the memory of enjoying it once sticks with them. It’s the same with me and The Mummy, which one of my flatmates doesn't seem to enjoy as much as I do. I guess it is also the same with The Emperor’s New Groove. If you have kids and they are younger than eight I think they will love this film. However, if you are looking for a new film to watch one evening then I would avoid this. It is the memory of seeing it before that makes me enjoy it so much.

The Aviator

The Aviator is a biopic about the aviation magnate and Hollywood director Howard Hughes. With Leonardo Di Caprio in the title role, Martin Scorsese directing it, and a supporting cast including Cate Blanchett, Alec Baldwin, Kate Beckinsale and John C. Reilly, I was really looking forward to watching it.

Howard Hughes starts out as a director, and produces a few very successful films. Early on we see that he is completely devoted to this, and has a really need to get every aspect of his production as perfect as possible. This manifests later as profound obsessive compulsive disorder, but the early signs are there once you watch it back. After a very successful directing career he marries a woman (Cate Blanchett), but his successful lifestyle soon begins to causes their marriage problems. Hughes starts to focus on aviation and buys a large share of an airline company. Breaking a number of airspeed records, and experiencing a number of horrific crashes, Howard Hughes soon becomes a massive influence on aviation but then the cracks start to appear. His life becomes thrust into the public eye more and he becomes paranoid and compulsive. He is then investigated by the Senate and manages to defend himself successfully. However at the end of the film his compulsions become worse and the film end with him repeated ‘the way of the future’ over and over.

Scorsese is an absolute genius in my opinion, and has directed some of my favourite ever films. While The Aviator does not quite make the list, it is a very good film, and is fantastically made. For example, all the aeroplane scenes were shot using scale models because of the criticism that Pearl Harbor received for using CGI. This makes the film more of a spectacle, and makes it seem a lot more realistic. Scorsese’s impressive attention to detail shines through as well. For example, he made Cate Blanchett watch all the film that her character Katharine Hepburn had starred in up to the point of filming so that she could perfect her mannerisms. Not being particularly knowledgeable about Hepburn’s films, I can’t say whether or not Blanchett does a good job, but the level of devotion to perfection that Scorsese has (and indeed that Hughes had), is a hallmark of the best directors.

Di Caprio is wonderful to watch as the main character Howard Hughes. I really like him as an actor, and as a person, and think that The Aviator marks another example of his impressive skills. His perfection of the obsessive compulsive mannerisms of Hughes is brilliant, and while I don’t know how true to Hughes they are, he is very convincing when he displays them. Di Caprio conveys the fill range of emotions that Hughes experiences in the film with immense precision. When he is directing the films there is a sense of tension when something hasn’t gone perfectly, and when Hell’s Angels premiere’s the anxiety Di Caprio shows in anticipation of the audience’s reaction permeated through the screen (although that might just be me getting weird). He seems completely comfortable in the cockpit of an aeroplane, and Di Caprio’s ability to turn this joy and elation into sheer panic so convincingly completes the tension of the crash scenes. Since 2002, Di Caprio has appeared in all but one of Scorsese’s films and, given time, this could become as iconic a pairing as De Niro and Scorsese. Di Caprio’s acting stock is definitely on the increase, and The Aviator is just one example of why.

Although, it is not a film that is completely made by Di Caprio, and the supporting cast add an awful lot to the impact of the film. Cate Blanchett is fantastic as Hughes’ first wife, and manages her accent perfectly throughout the film. Her relationship with Hughes is intriguing. Although they may grow apart, when she comes to visit him in his isolation there is a sense that the chemistry is still there. Alec Baldwin plays Hughes’ main rival Juan Trippe, the chairman of Pan Am airways. His determination to impede the progress of the protagonist makes him a dislikable character in the film, and this is only compounded by the influence he has over the politicians. No-one seems to want to help Hughes succeed except those who he employs. Even then Hughes is suspicious of nearly everyone around him. Alec Baldwin comes to represent the people plotting against Hughes and the eventual defeat of the Senate investigation is one of the best moments of the film. A quick mention must also go to John C. Reilly. When I reviewed Carnage I think I mentioned how strange it was not to see him in a comedy role, and once again in The Aviator it felt a bit odd. However, he does very well and seems to be forging himself a more serious acting career. All the evidence so far suggests that this can only be a good thing.

The Aviator is not a high powered, joy-filled, rollercoaster of a film. It does have its ups and its downs in terms of keeping the audience’s interest. However, as with any biopic, it is an opportunity to find out a little bit more about something new, and if you get into it, it is thoroughly enjoyable. It is very long (just short of three hours), but if you have the patience to sit down and engage with it, I think it will be well worth your time.

Other films starring Leonardo Di Caprio

Django Unchained - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/django-unchained.html

The Great Gatsby - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2013/06/the-great-gatsby.html

Other films directed by Martin Scorsese

Casino - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/casino_28.html

Raging Bull - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/raging-bull.html

Another Scorsese-Di Caprio film

The Departed - http://mattsthoughtsonmovies.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/the-departed.html

The Damned United

The Damned United is a film about the legendary British football manager Brian Clough and his time as manager of Leeds United, which only lasted 44 days. It is adapted from the book of the same name by David Pearce and is an interesting insight into the history of football.

Before moving to Leeds United, Brian Clough had worked with Derby County, alongside Peter Taylor, and had enjoyed enormous success. Before he took over, Derby were at the bottom of the old Second Division and Clough helped them to win the First Division and play in the European Cup. The film (and book) present Clough as obsessed with Leeds United and their manager, Don Revie, since they played each other in the FA Cup and Revie ignored him. Brian Clough was a very outspoken man and frequently made comments in the press against Leeds United. However, after he left Derby County and agreed to join Brighton & Hove Albion with Taylor, Leeds United made him an offer because Revie had taken the England job. Clough goes to Leeds without Taylor and things very quickly fall apart. His unique style of management was foreign to everything the Leeds players had known under Revie, and is sacked after 44 days.

Michael Sheen is fantastic as Brian Clough. He does very well to get the tone and speaking style of Brian Clough very near to perfect. His mannerisms in television interviews are also fantastically detailed. Sheen does an excellent job of conveying the character of Clough as well. He comes across as a man who just wants to win. His short temper and hunger for victory is seen continually throughout the film, and the audience often feels a bit sorry for Clough as his reign at Leeds seems doomed before it even began. Sheen has a bit of a knack for playing famous men with such skill and ability that you almost forget who the actor is.

Timothy Spall plays Clough’s assistant manager Peter Taylor. Personally I think he does very well and is exceptionally likeable. Both Clough and Taylor come across as exceptionally good friends in this film, which of course they were, and both Sheen and Spall do a good job to present this so enjoyably. There are a number of minor characters who do very well. Jim Broadbent is thoroughly dislikable as the chairman of Derby County, and this is fantastic acting from Broadbent. I don’t think I've seen a film in which I've disliked Broadbent’s character too much, but The Damned United is definitely him at his most despicable. The actors who play the Leeds United team do very well too. They feel like a strong unit of players and come across as a small family for the parts of the film when they are on-screen. The flashbacks to the past with Don Revie as manager only serve to reinforce this, and when Clough arrives at Elland Road (Leeds United’s home ground) he never fits in. From the first image of the players standing around looking at their new celebrity manager it is apparent that Clough’s time at Leeds will be short-lived. These actors do very well to convey such hostility as a group.

The Damned United book is very gripping and fantastically entertaining because of the way it is laid out chronologically. The film does a fantastic job of translating this exciting story to the screen. In both the book and the film Clough’s time at Leeds is interspersed with his success at Derby so that by the time he is sacked as Leeds manager he is also leaving Derby. This serves to make the book seem very cyclical, and while the film missed out on this slightly, the scene at the end where Clough and Taylor make up serves to complete the notion that all is well again. Indeed the little montage at the end shows just how successful this partnership would be. However, the Clough family, who are largely critical of the book, maintain that neither the book nor the film truly represent what actually happened. Many people in football have said that the film isn't a great representation of the truth, and some have said that the film plays up the friendship between Clough and Taylor.

I don’t think that this is a massive problem though, because regardless of whether the film is a detailed historical account or not, the basic ideas are there. Clough was critical of Leeds, and then became their manager. The more recent example of Rafael Benitez as Chelsea manager shows just how difficult this can make your job. The filmmakers wanted to focus on the ideas of jealousy and betrayal more than historical accuracy, and for the purposes of cinematic entertainment, this works perfectly. It’s a very enjoyable film and serves to inform people about the ups and downs of football.

Personally, as a massive football fan, I really enjoyed The Damned United, and it should definitely appeal to other football fans. If you are not a football fan though, this doesn't mean that you won’t enjoy it. I watched this with my girlfriend, who is very apathetic when it comes to all things football, and she really enjoyed it as well. It is a very entertaining film and, despite some historical inaccuracies, has fantastic actors playing fantastic characters. All round, The Damned United is sure to provide some entertainment.

A Clockwork Orange

A Clockwork Orange is one of the most famous (or infamous) films of all time. It is a Stanley Kubrick adaptation of Anthony Burgess’ book and is basically a social commentary on a future Britain. With very violent, very graphic scenes and fantastic direction from Kubrick it is in my mind one of the best films ever made. It was withdrawn from release in the UK by Kubrick himself, and represents a turning point in the use of violence in British filmmaking.

Alex is a young sociopath who likes violence, rape and Beethoven. He goes around with his gang of droogs attacking people for entertainment until one day he goes too far and kills a woman. This leads to imprisonment and a form of psychological conditioning, a scene which has become famous in its own right. The film then focuses on the effects of this conditioning, which has made Alex averse to violence and lust. It is very violent and quite sinister in places, but it is a very important film, and one which should not be missed.

Normally, I start by talking about the lead actor, but with A Clockwork Orange, all the plaudits go to Stanley Kubrick in my eyes. The best directors are those who seek perfection and it is reported that Kubrick scouted potential locations for filming and took thousands of photos. He also didn’t care how many takes it took to get a scene spot on. Luckily, Malcolm McDowell (who plays Alex) was quite good at getting what Kubrick wanted. Kubrick chose an extra wide lens for filming much of the film in order to convey a dream like state, and he achieves this masterfully. Further, his use of music and colour in this film is magnificent. I don’t think I’ve seen many films in which the music is so perfectly fitting for the scene, or used to such great effect.  There is much debate as to which of Kubrick’s film is his best, and I’m not going to put my opinion across just yet, but there is absolutely no doubt that A Clockwork Orange is one of his finer accomplishments.

Malcolm McDowell is also brilliant in this film. It is quite a surreal role to be playing, but he does it perfectly. His character is utterly without morals and McDowell portrays this perfectly. In some of the more violent scenes, which must have been quite difficult to film, McDowell excels, and has obviously thrown himself into the role. I was quite surprised that he wasn’t nominated for the Best Actor Academy Award for this role, just because of how sinister his character comes across as. He manages to create a sense of fear, and yet empathy with the audience. It is like I have said with many other film villains: the audience knows how horrible, twisted and wrong he is, but at certain points of the film they cannot help but feel sorry for him. For example when you realise that during his correctional therapy, his favourite song is playing, it is a pivotal moment. Further, when he is released into the wide world and attacked, his sickness as a result of violence means he cannot defend himself, and this leave a very pathetic character compared to the one presented at the start of the film.

It is always difficult to make a film based on a book. The film is relatively faithful to the book. However in the book, the last chapter sees Alex ‘recover’ and leave his sociopathic past behind him. In the film there is some ambiguity (or not) as to whether he is really cured of his psychopathic ways. This was the main problem that the author had with the film. Another difference between the film and the book is that the ‘Singin’ in the Rain’ scene did not happen. In the film it is a tense and sinister scene and one of the more famous one of the film, but it was completely improvised by Malcolm McDowell in order to add a little more ‘flavour’ to the scene. In the film everyone seems a lot older than in the book, and a lot of the seriously graphic and twisted scenes are aged up a bit. The two girls that Alex takes home and has sex with are a lot younger in the book, and are actually raped. I think that this level of difference is justified though, given that the film was released in 1971. Even now, that sort of scene would be questioned. Burgess (the author) absolutely loved the use of music though, and got on very well with Stanley Kubrick. There aren’t too many differences between the film and the book, and in any case, the changes that are made are usually for the better and increase the cinematic effect of the film.

Stanley Kubrick is a genius, and A Clockwork Orange is one of his masterpieces. It is a film that should remain in the public domain for a very long time. It has very profound implications for morality, psychology, society and criminality, and is a film that provides an entertaining commentary on these themes. However, it is serious too and is one of the most thought-provoking films you will ever watch. I can only recommend that you watch A Clockwork Orange because it is one of the best directed, best produced and most important films I have ever seen.

Defiance

Defiance is a film set in German-occupied Belarus during World War Two and tells of the Bielski brothers who set up a camp in the middle of a forest and recruit Jews to live there. Slowly the camp builds up with survivors and before long there is a small community living in the forest, hiding from the Germans. It’s a gripping, inspirational and more importantly, informative film and makes you think that more people should know about the Bielski brothers.

The Bielski brothers, Tuvia, Zus, Asael and Aron, were Jewish Belarussians who were imvolved in rescuing Jews during the War. The film primarily focuses on Tuvia, who initially brings a couple of Jewish refugees to his camp to help them survive. Before long he had saved more than 1,200 Jews and had built a community in the forest, complete with a school, hospital and nursery, according to the film. When you think that they were continually hunted by the Nazis because of their reputation, this becomes all the more impressive. They lived in the forest for two years and when the war was over Tuvia refused any recognition and started a trucking firm with Zus which he did for thirty years. Him and his brothers never sought any sort of commendation for their actions, and I bet you most people won’t have heard of their heroic story.

Defiance is very action packed, and often involves the men of the group fighting at gunpoint against the soldiers and anyone who threatens their freedom. Daniel Craig stars as Tuvia Bielski and because of his James Bond past, does very well in this role. Most impressive is the accent he puts on throughout the film though. Anyone who has seen anything he has been in before will know that he sounds fairly British, but in Defiance he puts on a Belarussian accent, and maintains it pretty much throughout the entire film. This is by far and away the best thing about him in this role. He also does very well in the scenes which require a bit of emotion. His character is not afraid to kill when his community is threatened, but when it looks like their hope has been lost at the end of the movie, he is so believable as a man who has tried so hard and come as far as he can. This makes it all the more sweet when he is hauled to his feet once more.

Liev Schrieber stars alongside Daniel Craig as his brother, Zus. His character is much more complex and has a long standing conflict with his brother. He frequently complains that the size of their group is getting too big, and one big disagreement causes him to leave the community and join the Russian army. Schrieber was a relatively unknown actor to me before I researched this post. He does very well though, and is portrayed as being very concerned about his brothers’ well being, despite leaving them. When he is with the Russians his first thought is usually about the impact his actions will have on his brothers and the community, and the scene where they are reunited is enjoyable.

There are a number of other actors in this film that are very enjoyable to watch. The audience cannot help but engage with Shimon Haretz and his more learned friend, and the scenes where they exchange opinions on politics are some of the more entertaining ones of the film. However, despite the obvious camaraderie of the community, there is a sense that there is something hanging over them for the whole film. The director, Edward Zwick, does very well to communicate this, and there is a nearly constant threat hanging over the characters for much of the film. Jamie Bell also appears as the third Bielski, Asael, and is much more likeable than the authoritative Tuvia and the absent Zus. He comes across very strongly as a young boy who has found himself in a completely unfamiliar situation. However he rises to this situation splendidly.

A lot of the criticisms of this film focus on the implications it has for the perception of the Jews. I don’t really want to get into these because they are quite heavy going. If you are really interested then check this out: http://movies.nytimes.com/2008/12/31/movies/31defi.html?scp=2&sq=defiance&st=cse&_r=0. For me, the film has the potential to be an emotionally charged rollercoaster, which has some gritty fight scenes and a few really engaging characters. However, what it turns in to is a film which seems to focus more on the action than the actual survival, and this detracts somewhat from the overall story.

This doesn't make it a bad film however. I didn't know anything about the Bielski brothers before watching this film, and now I realise that these cases of heroism tend to go unnoticed in the public consciousness. The Bielski brothers did an inspirational and incredible thing, and they deserve more recognition for this. Defiance is not the film to provide this recognition, but it tries, and more than anything else, it makes you aware of what happened. 

The Bielski Partisans

The Mummy

When I was growing up I used to watch the cartoon series of ‘The Mummy’ and I absolutely adored it. When they made a film by the same title I simply had to see it. It is without a doubt one of the best films I saw as a child. Obviously it’s not an incredible film when I watch it back now, but I liked it so much as a child that I enjoy it every time I see it again.

As the title suggests, the film is about a mummy. Specifically it is about an Egyptologist, Evy (Rachel Weisz), who is searching for the lost city of Hamunaptra and seeks the help of an imprisoned adventurer (Brendan Fraser) to get there. Her bumbling brother (John Hannah) tags along, and is often the source of a series of mishaps. While reading from The Book of the Dead she inadvertently resurrects an evil Egyptian mummy, Imhotep (Arnold Vosloo) who begins to kill people in order to regenerate himself and then attempts to resurrect his former lover. Naturally, it is the task of Evy, Rick and Jonathan to destroy the mummy.

Now the film isn't exactly high brow and will not leave any form of lasting impact on you. I encouraged my girlfriend to watch it at the weekend and (to her credit) she did because both my flatmate and myself were praising it so highly. She couldn't see what all the fuss was about with the film. I guess it’s the kind of film that you watch when you are younger and because you enjoyed it back then you enjoy it later on because of its associations. Even if you haven’t seen it before then you can sit back and enjoy the film. It doesn't take much to get into it, and if you let yourself enjoy it then I can guarantee that you will.

One of the best things about the film is the interaction between John Hannah, Rachel Weisz and Brendan Fraser. It may just be the number of times I've seen the film but I cannot see anyone else managing to play these roles quite so well. The comedy moments between the three actors are timed to perfection, written very well and delivered humorously. I’m not going to delve into the intricacies of the acting though, because it’s obviously not incredible. It would spoil a very enjoyable film if you compared the acting abilities of these three to other performances they've done, and I think that if I don’t try to analyse it too much then it will be better for many people’s perception of the film (myself included). Actually, given the comedic nature of the film, the acting is very good and often lightens the mood of what would otherwise be a very dark and ominous film.

The special effects in the film are marvellous, given that it was released in 1999. As a child I found Imhotep very scary when he was in his various stages of regeneration, and I now particularly like the visual effects on his mouth. The scene where he is chasing the plane through the desert without actually moving is magnificently done given the year of production. A wall of sand rises up and takes the form of Imhotep’s face, which stretches beyond normal proportions and swallows the plane up. Equally impressive are the special effects on Imhotep’s skeletal priests and other subordinates. Watching it back now I almost forget how old the film is because the special effects impress me so much. I mean obviously 1999 isn't a million years ago, and Star Wars Episode I was released in the same year, but I didn't appreciate the graphics as much when I was younger. They do say that age makes you appreciate things more (probably) and this is definitely true in this instance.

There have been two sequels to The Mummy and a couple of spin-offs/prequels around the character of the Scorpion King, who appears in The Mummy Returns. However, and as is so often the case, these films are nowhere near as enjoyable as the original film. I have seen The Mummy Returns, and it is not a bad film, but I didn't even bother to watch the third film when it came out, and will only watch The Scorpion King if I find it on television at some point. Having now seen The Scorpion King I realise that watching it was two hours of my life I’m never going to get back.

The Mummy is a very enjoyable film, and the best audience is probably the early teenage boy. Personally, I enjoyed it when I was in my early teens, and really enjoyed it. You cannot take it too seriously, because you will be disappointed, but if you just sit back and watch it then you will find yourself engaging with what is a very entertaining and funny film.