BMX Bandits (1983)

 "Your little walkie talkies... have gone walkies."

I had my opening line all planned out. You know, Mad Max II, Picnic at Hanging Rock etc always get cited as Australia's greatest cinematic achievement, yet this- a childhood favourite of mine, hired often from a local video shop- never gets a mention.

Well, having seen it again for the first time since the '80s I must admit it's not quite in such exalted company: this is a fairly formulaic action film for kids, notable, to those without my nostalgia, only for the early appearance of Nicole Kidman. But, while a formulaic film can't truly be compared to the greats of the cinematic arts, there's absolutely wrong with using a formula if it's executed well, as this film is. It may not be one of those films helmed by Brian Trenchard-Smith that makes one Mr Tarantino rate him so highly, but it's bloody good fun to watch and a perfect example of this kind of film.

We have charismatic young leads, a quietly witty script, loads of kid-friendly action sequences, and baddies who never actually kill anyone while striking the right balance between comedic and threatening. Best of all, we have loads and loads of extremely cool BMX stunts. This film is every bit as good as my fond memories were hoping for.

Even better, it wears its 80sness loud and proud. One of the baddies wears a Minder T-Shirt with Arthur Daley's face plastered all over it. And Sydney has never looked better than when BMX bikes are being chased by cars. This is a very, very fun way to spend ninety minutes,

Eyes Wide Shut (1999)

 “Please don't despise me!"

This is not the film I was expecting to see.

Around the time of the film's release I recall the critics were mildly disparaging of what they saw as a film about titillation and in which Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman exhibited suspiciously little chemistry for a married couple.

...All of which is utter bollocks, and a quick glance shows me the ritcal consensus has thankdully shifted somewhat. This is perhaps the pinnacle of Stanley Kubrick's career, a film dense with subtext far beyond what is apparent to me on a first viewing, and a film which actually treats sex as a serious part of life as opposed to something to giggle at.

The first half of the film is a meditation on monogamy vs polygamy, as the naive Dr Bill is tempted by various opportunities for extra-marital action while Alice confesses to her own sexual fantasies. The pivotal scene, a stoned bedroom argument, sees them both being somewhat naive and unwittingly purotanical as they skirt around the old gendered ideas that sex is something men, being active, do to women, who are passive. This is, of course, nonsense: even if we look at heterosexual coupling only, desire is no different between the sexes, just society's expectations. 

And then Dr Bill, constantly awkward with women, moves into the world of the elite, into what looks like a cross between a ritualistic sacrifice, a BDSM club, a religious ceremony and a dodgy secret society. There is much coupling, but Dr Bill is excluded. He, a medical doctor, is successful and well-off- yet he exists on a different plane from the decadence of the elite. And the scene where he is found out by men in truly terrifying masks is truly terrifying, as is the sense of tension that follows. So is the implication that a girl whose life he saved dies so that he may live- although he is offered a comforting fiction to believe.

The cinematography and direction is sublime, with wonderful use of colours to contrast the world of the mundane with the dark ways of the elite, and much in the way of disorienting use of the camera at appropriate momnts. The score, and that repetitive piece in particular, is not only very good indeed but perfectly integrated with the visuals.

There's so much going on here- musings on monogamy; the objectification of women; the intersection of sex with money and power; so much more. This is cinema of the very first rank.

Aquaman (2018)

”Show off... I could have just peed on it."

Unusually for a superhero movie, I'm going in blind. For once I know pretty much naff all about the superhero in question and his supporting cast. What I do know, though, is that DC Universe movies, to the extent that's still a thing, have been decidedly mixed. Fortunately, the gods be praised, this is a Wonder Woman and not a Justice League.

Some of the typical DC sins are found here as well, mind; CGI abounds and, certainly, it makes for a visually impressive and rather awesome set of scenes in Atlantis with Atlanteans riding sharks and giant turtles as beasts of burden, but we also get CGI countryside, de-wrinkled faces and all sorts of unnecessary nonsense.

I know nothing of DC’s Atlantis (I’m a Sub-Mariner kind of guy) but we get a real exploration of its history, fantastic though it seems- an ancient technological civilisation (are they Minoans? Is Atlantis in the Med? They seem a bit Greek to me, culturally) which sank because of hubris and where there are now various different kingdoms which are disunited and where, in spite of only a few thousand years presumably passing, people have evolved very differently- one kingdom is of met-people.

In spite of visually following the unfortunate DC house style, though, this film is warm and human, and solidly entertaining. It helps that Jason Momoa’s Aquaman is likeable- humble, bloke USA and fun-loving, a hero you could have a pint with. And the plot is a solid little quest narrative as Aquaman follows a series of tasks to retain a weapon which can be lifted only by the one true king and which shows his right to rule- no surprise he happens to be called Arthur. He also knows his early Roman history, which is a plus.

The cast is superb, too, although the appearance of Amber Heard leads to the same awkwardness as appearances by Johnny Depp- one of them is a domestic abuser, and we know not which. But it’s great to see the great Dolph Lundgren, Willem Dafoe, and even Nicole Kidman is actually pretty good. This is a good old-fashioned blockbuster, and fun with it.

Batman Forever (1995)

“It's the car, right? Chicks love it."

 Incredibly, I've never seen this until now, after 23 years.After the two gritty Tim Burton films, which I'd seen at the cinema and enjoyed, I wasn't impressed by the prospect of a film that dialled down the atmosphere and just tried to tell an exciting story.

So did I enjoy it? Well, yes, it's a fairly good Hollywood blockbuster action film, and it's even pretty good with the Batman mythos- we get a pretty good Robin origin with the Flying Graysons and the character is made not to look silly, which is no small achievement, even if the fact that the Flying Graysons all wear costumes while performing that Dick's eventual Robin costume will pretty much mirror means that it's pretty obvious who Robin really is, so Bruce's secret is shot too. But then, in this film at least, it pretty much is anyway.

I also like both Tommy Lee Jones' performance as Two-Face and the fact they only did his origin in flashback. But the Riddler, well, Jim Carrey is really annoying and the riddles are a bit perfunctory, the character seemingly being really about those silly brainwave machine thingies; this doesn't really feel like the Riddler.

Also, Joel Schumacher's directorial style is so very generic Hollywood compared to Tim Burton's unique and very fitting style, and even Gotham itself suddenly looks just like an ersatz New York, complete with Statue of Liberty, rather than the Gothic, Expressionist nightmare we've become used to. This is connected to the first two films only by Pat Hingle, Michael Gough, and the design of all of Batman's stuff. And Brude actually gets a girlfriend and still has her when the film ends- what's going on?

Plus Val Kilmer is, if not awful, not great either, and not a patch on Michael Keaton. This just isn't the same introverted, brooding character. But then this isn't really part of the same series of films in any meaningful sense. It's pure Hollywood spectacle, done well but with no real depth or meaning.

Paddington (2014)

“Um, you're not using those ear brushes to clean your mouth are you, Mr Brown?"

Ok, this isn't my usual type of film, but I happened to watch this on the telly with my wife and daughter. Any you know what? It's bloody brilliant, far better than, frankly, it needed to be, genuinely clever and witty, Little Miss Llamastrangler was glued to the telly, and I can't say enough nice things about it.

I have only vague memories of the books and 1970s BBC series, so I can't compare the film to Paddington's previous outings in other media. But this is a perfectly plotted film where all the characters, even the stuffy Mr Brown, are ether fundamentally likeable or splendidly comical grotesques or both, unless they happen to be the delightfully dastardly Miss Clyde. The film knowingly plays up all the London visual cliches for an international audience and, most heartwarming for these days of Brexit, tabloid stupidity and a worrying insularity, is fundamentally a positive story about an immigrant, an asylum seeker, who may look different from everybody else but is just as easy to love.

All this, and a cockney Peter Capaldi. The film is quirky, uplifting, gripping and frequently laugh out loud funny. It's a film that has to be seen, and not jut for those of us who can use our young children as an excuse. Brilliant stuff.

The Stepford Wives (2004)

"And I'm gonna attach a pine cone to my vibrator and have a very merry Christmas."

Before anyone says anything... no, I don't blog remakes of films I've not already blogged. But this isn't a remake, just the second cinematic adaptation of a novel. Right? Right.

The critics didn't like this film. Frank Oz directed, and vilified he was. Stick to playing Yoda, he should. Or that was the general gist.

I can see why purists would be put off: this is hardly a faithful adaptation. A gay couple is rightfully included, in a bid to modern sensibilities. And the brainwashing of the Stepford womenfolk is no longer left as a creepy mystery but explained in detail, with Glenn Close's Claire (gosh, a woman!!!) behind it all, and to top it all off the film has a distinctly comedic tone.

But if you judge the film for what it is- a satirical comedy- instead of what it isn't- serious, hard sci-fi adaptation- it becomes rather enjoyable. Nicole Kidman, not usually my favourite actress by any means, is great, although of course completely overshadowed by the great Bette Midler. The script is laugh out loud funny. The skewering of reality TV at the start is delicious. There's even a robot dog, for crying out loud. What's not to like?

Try it. You might like it.