1917 (2019)

 "Am I dying?"

"Yes, yes, I think you are."

Wow. How else can I begin? This film is at once a tour de force of cinematography, an epic quest that is at times both dreamlike and almost evocative of Lord of the Rings... and profoundly, deeply, realistic. It's a profound work of the cinematic art that will linger in my mind. And I'm sure there are subtexts and metaphors which have just swooshed right over my head.

The cinematography, by the great Roger Deakin, is sublimre, giving us a textured world that feels at once both of its time and utterly real. The first few minutes, from the field right through the trenches and what must be a cavernous set, are apparently a single shot... and the feat is repeated again and again as Schofield and Blake traverse the bleak sights of No Man's Land on their desperate mission.

The War and its very real horrors are superbly evoked- the rats, the mud, the fear, the grim humour, the bloody awful food, the normalisation of violent death. The dialogue feels real So do the characters- we get to know Blake and Schofield very well, and Schofield's slow metamorphosis from reluctance to absolute determination is well-earned and feels real.

And yet... there is also, somehow, a mythic element here, an epic quest, a kind of Odyssey, a picaresque tale of wanderings. It is hard not to see the cherry trees as metaphor- cut down in their prime, but they will grow again. And the poor orphaned baby, with milk from Schofield, is another sign that out of death comes rebirth. And yet, at the same time, war is unremittingly grim.

An extraordinary work of genius. Literally my only criticism is of Colin Firth's moustache.

The Imitation Game (2014)

 "You just defeated Nazism with a crossword puzzle..."

I've been waiting to see this film for years. It's very good: Alan Turing deserved a biopic, amd he needed to wait until an age where homophobia, if not cured, is at least disapproved of by the law. If only we could say the same of transphobia.

Benedict Cumberbatch is extraordinary. Keira Knighlley is good. Allen Leach is subtly superb as John Cairncross, a Soviet spy and one of the Cambridge Five. Bloody traitor, and blackmailer to boot. His development is very clever indeed. Mark Strong is perfect casting as Stewart Menzies, or C.

This ois a fairly standard film, not brilliant by any means, The script and plot are pedestrian. Yet the themes are huge: the appaling treatment, of gay men in the '40s and '50s; the fat that those who persecuted this war hero were traitors; and, most clearly, autism.

Turing's life was tragic. Deeply so. Cumberbatch shows this so well. Yet his genius shines through here, with allusions to the Turing Test. And, as important as the injustice dine to this British hero because of his sexuality may be, he is portrayed here quite explicitly as autistic. And that may well describe the man. But we should not assume either way. Whether autistic or living with metaphor-loving allistic behaviour like myself, we all owe a huge debt to the real Alan Turing. For our computing, and for our freedom. 

The film is... ok. But Cumberbatch is superb.

Kingsman: The Golden Circle (2017)

 "Well, if you save the world, you knoiw what that means...!"

I rather enjoyed the previous Kingsman movie, a fitrst class rollicking modern action movie which was basically a modern version of James Bond written by Jane Goldman and directed by Matthew Vaughn. I enjoyed this film for exactly the same reasons.

The first film was excellent. This sequel, unusually, maintained exactly the same level of quality, in exactly the same style. It's a blockbuster action film in the James Bond sort of genre, only without the historical weight and constraints on the visual style.

This works. Taron Egerton in=s a splendid lead. Julianne Moore is almost as good a Bond villain as Samuel L. Jackson was. We have a whole new American cast, led by Jeff Bridges, after Kingsman is destroyed, and are introduced to a new American secret socety based in the state of bluegrass and fried chicken, what would be the coolest state in the USA if it were not the fact that it votes for the Republican party, a fascist cult that hates democracy and is rightly despised by all who love freedom, including one hundred percent of the mainstream centre-right, . If you're reading this and you're a Republican, kindly cease doing so. And, indeed.cease reading my blog. You hate freedom and I loathe you as I loathed the USSR. Democracy hates you asv you hate democracy. Death to all you love. Thank you.

I admire the attitude this film takes to the drugs war. Personally, I'm on the fence. Cannabis obviously needs to be legalised, not least so that I can occasionally smoke it (at old-fashionred strength), but heroin? The film, while not telling us what think, addressed the topic thoughtfully, while showing us the cool side of Kentucky at the same time as giving us a US president almost as much as a prick as the criminal Trump. May he die in prison.

Anyway, superb film,.a blockbuster every bitbas good as the original..

Kingsman: The Secret Service (2014)

 "This ain't that kind of movie, bruv."

This, in spite of being from pretty much the same creative team as the rather good Kick-Ass and ultimately, indeed, the creation of Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons, is a film I've somehow avoided seeing for seven years. I'm glad thise years are now over; ths doesn't pretend to be anything other than a gloriously violent and stylish blockbuster, but it does this very well indeed, and with a great deal of visual flair.

The premise- a private secret service operated as a second venture of a posh Savile Row tailors- is intriguing although, unlike Eggsy, I'd be inclined to be concerned about the acountability of such a private organisation. I don't think we should read too much into the class subtext as chav Eggsy goes through a rite of passage to become an agent, but it's fun to see him succeed. Colin Firth, too, is superb as his effortlessly awesome mentor, and inevitably there's a cool role for Michael Caine. We also have Mark Hamill playing against type as a British professor, but the most stellar perfrmance by far is that of Samuel L. Jackson, as the Bond villain he was born to play, rather intriguingly pointing out that the Chinese secret service is rather worrying as it has no particular name..

The film works superbly as a straightforward Bond-Style action film, but with the added little touch of lots of nods at the fourth wall, from the verbal sparring between Harry and Valentine on old Bond film tropes to the moment where the latter seems about to tell the former all his plans before putting him in an elaborate death trap, but shoots him instead. 

This film may not have much to say about the world, but it entertained me an awful lot. One of the better class of modern Bond pastiches.

Green Lantern (2011)

"You haven't just been replaced by an alien or something?"

It's so frustrating. This film has stuff going for it. It could easily have not been rubbish with a few tweaks. But sadly that was not to be, and rubbish it is.

There’s so much potential here. Ryan Reynolds is genuinely great as Hal Jordan. The Guardians and hordes of alien Green Lanterns look awesome, particularly Mark Strong as Sinestro and a great cameo from Michael Clarke Duncan as Kilowog. All of that side of things is great; the whole thing looks fantastic, the fans get what they want. But no amount of polishing can disguise the fact that the script is a turd.

It tries to be epic, it really does. But it starts with a load of CGI aliens we don’t care about, for ages, and then moves to an extended F-35 dogfight. All visual spectacle, no heart, no real humour, no character, until the film is quite a long way in. And, while Ryan Reynolds is great at giving us a well-rounded Hal whom we can like, the film never really recovers from that. We aren’t given time to know and care about any of the characters until the plot starts in earnest. And there’s an awkward moment where Hal “wins” his dogfight by going to high altitude and the same stunt saves him at the end, which looks awkwardly derivative of Iron Man. And then there’s the onviousness of the plot- you know, man-child with aimless life and problems with responsibility is given great power and responsibility that he supposedly deserves; seems undeserving and gives up; is persuaded by a beautiful woman to try again and saves the world. This sort of formula isn’t unusual in Hollywood, but it’s seldom so blatant.

And it’s a real shame; the film is well shot and well made. But, well, it’s the script, stupid.

Kick-Ass (2010)

"How do I get hold of you?"

"You just contact the mayor's office. He has a special signal he shines in the sky; it's in the shape of a giant cock."

This is a brilliant, quotable, comics-literate film, adapted by Jane Goldman from the graphic novel by Mark Millar and, er, I like to think of myself as comics-literate- I mean, I've read most things by Alan Moore, Neil Gaiman, Frank Miller when we all thought he was good, Garth Ennis etc, but I haven't read much by Mark Millar. I'm impressed, though.

It's a witty and knowing look at the super hero trope from a writer who knows these tropes. It's also highly metatextual and you know how I love that sort of thing; I particularly adored the bit where Dave points out that we shouldn't assume he survived just because he's the narrator. And Mindy. Mindy is the coolest thing ever, and possibly the finest exponent of extreme swearing in cinematic history. Yes, we could finally have the first genuinely brilliant film since Leaving Las Vegas that Nicolas Cage (brilliantly cast) has appeared in.

The concept is brilliant: what if someone in the real world tried to be a superhero, without powers and where punches do actual damage and stabs mean extensive hospital treatment? This is done with wit and charismatic performances, making a film that whizzes by most enjoyably. And a bloke even explodes in a microwave at one point.

Sherlock Holmes (2009)

“No girl wants to marry a doctor who can’t tell if a man’s dead or not.”

Before you buy this DVD on film, you might want to consider that it forces you to watch an advert for Blu-Ray lasting several minutes before you get to the menu. This is unacceptable, frankly, and if, unlike me, you don’t prefer your films with subtitles, you’d be much better off recording it off the telly.

Not that my first film to be reviewed in 2012 is particularly great, although Robert Downey Jr’s superlative central performance and Guy Ritchie’s brilliantly executed set pieces make it well worth seeing anyway. It’s a nice idea- Sherlock Holmes as action film- which actually works quite well. Downey’s Holmes is decidedly bohemian, physical, fast-moving and decidedly not asexual, and while this is arguably a departure from “canon”, it’s no more so than many more boring interpretations. And this treatment of the Sherlockian world may not be as good, quality-wise, as Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss’ superlative Sherlock, it’s no less legitimate an interpretation.

There’s a touch of plywood to Jude Law’s performance, but Downey really shows what a first class actor he is, arguably the single best leading man in contemporary English-speaking cinema. His rakish charisma is reason alone to make this film worth watching, and he’s superb at physical comedy. His facial acting is first class, and it’s very noticeable that he spends the whole film speaking in an accent not his own (flawlessly, I might add, and I’m British) without forgetting to act as well, something which is all too common. His Holmes is as suited to the big screen as Benedict Cumberbatch’s is to television.

Mr Madonna is also a dab hand behind the camera, giving us enough adrenalin-fuelled action sequences to be worthy of a Michael Bay film, although the style is noticeably the same as Lock, Stock and Snatch, despite the period setting. Victorian London looks great, though, if a bit CGI-ey. Except… there’s a certain lack of substance to the storyline, although there’s certainly enough bangs and excitement to carry us through. This Watson, far from being a bumbler, is full of back-chat; I like that. But the characterisation of Holmes suffers from a slight problem. Actually it makes a lot of sense for him to be an action hero, but the deductive skills fall flat, often relying more on obscure chemistry factoids than the sort of deductive leaps that you really expect.

The plot is a rather odd mish-mash of tropes and explosions, taking us from an attempted virgin sacrifice by cowled figures (a nice familiar trope, that!) to alchemy and a vast conspiracy theories involving thinly veiled Freemasons which seem to come straight out of Alan Moore’s From Hell (if you haven’t already done so, read it!). Lord Blackwood seems to be based on the real life Francis Dashwood, leader of the Hellfire Club during the Eighteenth Century. His plan, bizarrely, involves conquering the United States, one of Britain’s main trading partners at the time, which would be a particularly stupid thing to do as it would entirely bugger up the British economy, and the whole point of the British Empire was to make money. Sorry, my bad: I probably shouldn’t be looking too hard at the plot.

Oh, and the scene where Dashwood is hanged is quite visceral and shocking. I don’t object to the violence per se, but people were still being barbarically killed like this well within living memory, and may presumably have living relatives.

There’s a fair bit of what we Doctor Who fans call fanwank here. The inclusion of Irene Adler (the rather good Rachel McAdams) is surprisingly justified here, though, establishing the non-asexuality of Downey’s Holmes, and I suppose Moriarty is in the film to do a bit of sequel-hunting. It tends to work out. If I might nitpick, though, Tower Bridge is still under construction, which would place this film in 1892. This is rather at odds with the Conan Doyle canon, as Holmes is supposed to have fallen down the Reichenbach Falls in 1891 and disappeared for three years. Not, of course, that this kind of obscure wankery is any excuse not to use a good idea for a set-piece.

So this is a rather good action film, although nothing special, but it’s worth watching for Downey’s performance alone.