NicoDaFlagburna

Truly uplifting stuff, the lead figure Anderson Sa is a collosal character whose rhythm and soul puts mainstream culture to shame. You can criticize the film all day if you like but it portrays a moment in the lives of Favela culture that is true. I learnt about how vulnerable the strong are and that we should never take anything for granted. 90/100

The subject matter is heavy and reminded me how innocent people are abused and in desperate need of empowerment. There is so much factual content that any sense of creativity is pushed aside and the pictures you see are not only harrowing but hugely depressing. The inspirational women's movement provides an upbeat counterbalance to the human destruction and gives the film a reason to exist. My concern is that there seems to be a lack of historical references which could have increased the effect. Nevertheless the story needs to be told and there is no one better to lead the narrative than the Women's Liberation Movement. We must continue to give money to charities across the world. 93/100

It ticks all the right boxes for an action movie but it feels lacking in depth and slightly underwhelming in tone. It is enjoyable for around 30 mins then it becomes lame. The simplest description for this film is it is a mainstream film aiming to please all but ultimatel lacking in cinematic substance. It is certainly made for simple minds yet simple films are usually the most effective. This however is not very effective which is where my point lies. 55/100

A negative response would describe this film as a comedy that relies on tired, old jokes that only appeal to people without a sense of humour. I am struggling to find many positives (and trust me I want to give a balanced opinion) but it's a safe film that will appeal to a wide range of audiences and can certainly be considered a family film. Probably only worth your attention if you have low self esteem. 46/100

Solid adult fantasy that is charming but fails to probe the depths of the human psyche in response to fostering. The focus of the film is the beauty of nature which includes death, the role of the family and the physical countryside but there is a sense of detachment which is cold and unromantic. Unfortunately it means that the film is forgettable, though the Irish coast is notably breath-taking as setting. Paradoxically disappointing and worthwhile. 67/100

A good solid piece that starts with a bang but unfortunately fails to develop. The opening party scene is enjoyable but the rest of the film lacks dynamics. Durst and Eisenberg are positively unspectacular which benefits our perception of Ritter's sociopath but the director is guilty of boring his audience and ultimately nothing happens which leaves me feeling unfulfilled. 59/100

Pitch perfect romantic comedy which is subtle enough to love and funny enough to appeal to a wide audience. Again Hepburn proves that she was the princess of the silver screen and the film is a depressing reminder of just how far the industry has fallen in 50 years. The story is a masterpiece of simplicity and proves that complexity is not synonymous with effectiveness. The only way this film loses marks is because it is unoriginal but original films very rarely feel so rousing. 91/100

Good solid cinematic foundations that are let down by patchy direction. The film feels like it deserves better but the script, the acting and the narrative all interweave like a sweater knitted by your Gran. Not made with any nod to fashion and something that would have looked odd at any point in history. Though a sweater is a sweater and it will keep you warm but that depends on the fabric. 65/100

I am not going to review this film because it is a) shallow in tone and b) hilarious in its shallowness... but we all knew this anyway...instead I will leave you with these words: "Any film that makes you want to watch the credits is worth as much as you are prepared to pay..." 94/100

Totally on the money as a representation of dark humour but time has aged this film and there is no denying that it is not scary. Tim Curry is made of the stuff of legends and he is the only bright spark in an otherwise slightly dull experience. Wholly relevant but underwhelming and slightly too niche for my tastes. I am sure this works better as literature or musical. 72/100

All the fears we learnt from the first films have been completely wiped with this abysmal attempt at an Alien movie. If only there was some narrative significance, some fear to terrorise the screen or some philosophy relating to sexuality. Instead we are watching a visual representation of a theme park ride. Fortunately theme park rides are over very quickly. This **** being forced to watch would be almost torturous. 43/100

Unbelievably nonchalant in it's approach to existence and has none of the power exhibited by 'The Lawnmower Man'. It's simply uninspiring and feels like a real cold attempt at being daring or unique. All I could understand was how sarcastic this idea felt and that how the director has made a film that is inconsiderate to audience expectations. There is so little intelligence, flair or creativity on show that the good visuals are undermined. 40/100

Simply put this film is over dramatised and lacking any effective voice. Its violence is weak and chereographed and there is nothing but a slight glow of the city to warm to. In a way you shouldn't expect much from Hollywood productions but this film is lost in its own mise-en-scene and there is no one better at exposing this than Robert De Niro. 45/100

Lightweight comedy poking fun at the divide between Jews and Moslems. The film is more of a comment on Jewish tastes and is at its best when Omid Djalili is allowed free reign. There is more than enough sentimentality for a whole trilogy of Infidels and despite being well designed there is an obvious lack of perspective. This is disappointing as the groundwork has been laid well but nothing is built on top and therefore feels unnecessarily hollow. Still enjoyable for fans of Omid Djalili because he is a star. 6/10 61/100

A sweet film, with unassuming and natural performances from all involved. It's not a clever film, it's here to entertain and there is enough humanity to captivate and make light of a serious situation. There is nothing more fascinating than seeing the newly liberated Italy, post WW2, through Hepburn's innocent eyes. It is simultaneously educational, filmed on location in Rome, and hilariously funny and Hepburn has never looked so magnificent on film. They certainly do not make films with such integrity anymore. 9/10 91/100

The premise is standard-fare and undoubtedly lightweight but there is enough here to warrant my captivation. It is the dynamics of the male relationship that makes this film attractive and despite being almost ambient in tone there is a pervading sense of emotional friction. We are offered very little back-story about their lives which makes it difficult to judge the characters, particularly as it seems they are carrying a lot of baggage. The film raises questions relating to the roles of sexuality and violence existing either as a force for creation or destruction. Ultimately a simple film which is substantial in thought but maybe lacking in creativity. 8/10 78/100

A stylish film with a underlying current of fetishist violence. The tone of the film has impact and mimics the nature of apocalypse well. I feel compelled to reminisce about human existence, the artistic visuals are a treat and well worth the heavy-handed contrast. There is a heavy anti-human feeling which is counter balanced by the redemptive righteousness of Denzel Washington. Pretty much your Hollywoood norm but done with finesse. 8/10 81/100

Powerful matriarchs, a system of economic oppression and a culture told through the medium of food. Sleepy France is seen but never heard, instead the familial space centres the narrative and provides a framework for naturalism. The acting is spot-on, the camera innocently soaks up the atmosphere with a wondrous eye for detail and our perspective is that of an 'insider' like someone who is part of the cultural fabric or part of the family. A great learning experience and positively specific. 9/10 94/100

An effective assault on the moral fibres of human mentality, exposing the role of psychology as manipulated, criticizing humans as controlling, society as complicit to acts of social deviance and ultimately presenting the human as imprisoned with a natural tendency to question boundaries of existence. The topics of incest, prostitution, homosexuality, domestic abuse and cruelty to animals are intellectual properties highlighting social boundaries which directly reflects the physical boundary the family exists within. Psychologically disturbing and expertly constructed in equal measure making this one of the most valid films of the past decade. 10/10 96/100

Isolated as a narrative but powerful and educational in equal measure. Heavy-handed with the anti-capitalist message, the film is ironically exposed as a "how to succeed in business/marketing" and is repetitive at worst. Consider the words of Goodyear's CEO as insightful but the platform for change is anti-human and boundaries between positive and negative are never highlighted. Despite the many collaborations with learned figures there is little humanity on show and the subject matter is generalised. If learning is the mode of communication then this film has succeeded but it never delves deep enough to expose the truth instead opting to focus on entertainment. 10 for execution 6 for subjects = 8/10 (79/100)

Pretty like Amelie, but emotionally empty and heavily masculine in tone. Jeunet's panache and flair is evident through set design and camerawork but the story feels detached in a way that doesn't reflect the risk associated with life and death situations. Jeunet's sophisticated style is let down by narrative ironicism and though enjoyable, there is only just enough comedy in here to propel the lightweight story. Obviously if you are expecting fantasy and surrealism then you won't be disappointed. It sounds like I am being harsh, but Jeunet is a master of his craft and this is not a masterpiece. 69/100

Since Minnesota is the star of this film, an undiscovered cinematic landscape, expectations as an audience will be understated as a new frontier is established. The premise is noir-ish, a slick crime caper with twists, and the Coen's batter you with their isolated sense of belonging where character is not representative of action. Kind hearted men make mistakes, arrogant patriarchs are heroic and women are almost childlike. These examples build a topsy-turvy world where the stability of the wintry environment is redemptive and though not able to offer peace, it incubates life. Behind an implicit sense of humour that is never exploited is the warm tale of a cold world where beauty is detached from humanity. Possibly one of the greatest achievements in cinema to date. 100/100

A sleepy assault on the sixth sense, ambiently atmospheric with just the right blend of stagecraft and cinematics. The themes of loneliness and fear are combined with visceral horror though the tone of the film is unassuming and humble. Psychological instability is examined, our hero is a man unfulfilled with an empty soul who shares his thoughts with a soundtrack of reverberated pianos and domestic silences. Simply respectful, with an artistic awareness of death that feels uniquely Irish in a romantic sense.

This film is so pretentious I can feel Andy Warhol awkwardly turning in his grave. This serious attempt to expose the abuse of love plays like a preschool playground romance. It is shallow and of little value to those who can remember the 60s or the MTV generation. It's appeal is representative of glamour and on the surface is enjoyable as a caricature of history. Despite strong casting the illusion of performance is evidence of style over substance. Hickenlooper exploits the memory of Warhol and Sedgwick and disrespects art in the process.

On the surface the film feels compressed and seems to mirror the tone of Warhol culture. On a deeper level Harron is implicitly examining the role of violence as a part of the human experience. Solanas is used as a narrative frame and the audience see the world from her perspective. The film is not about Andy Warhol or the 1960s, it is an examination of the internal and external workings of the human mind. In this sense it is extremely complex, Solanas is exposed as a person who is organised and articulate yet weak and exploited. She doesn't see people as individuals, she sees them as personalities and defines herself the same way therefore leaving her vulnerable to violence. She is criticized as comfortable within a violent world and desperate to belong. You can learn about violence by watching how her world changes when she leaves confined settings and merges into the streets. Mary Harron is admirable in her attempt to criticize human desire and there is a great deal to talk about, though the film is not perfect. Is Solanas a hero or is she a loser? Nobody knows though she will sure argue her case.

The tone of the film is ambient and static, as fashioned by Jared Hess in Napoleon Dynamite, and the uniquely tongue-in-cheek observation of Los Angeles society is contrasted with the more serious theme of death. The toxic poisoning of her pet dog seems to be a catalyst for evolution and exposes the film as a medium for humility in which vegans and pro-animal activists are cast as socially detached. In fact humans are generally seen as undeserving of any sustained screen time. On a subconscious level White's satire questions the role of communication and whether what you stand for should define you as a person. In a sense it is anti-human but it also offers redemption through the medium of change.

The film examines the effect of war on the psyche of small town America and the role of the family as a cohesive unit. Since the Vietnam War it is implied that generations of Americans (though also immigrants) have been exposed to foreign conflicts causing a collapse in the foundations of domestic relationships. Moving at a conversational pace the film compares the Army to the nuclear family and the violence that exists within each relationship. On the surface it is an anti-war statement highlighting the nature of the Iraq conflict as being abusive and anti-social though on a deeper level it exposes violence as ingrained within the fabric of human desire. The film examines mental health and is quietly effective at drawing you into O'Nam's barren perspective where sunlight feels cold and death is never far away. The ensemble cast are vigorous and fortunately seem to drive the film with more authority than the director. As a story it is pleasant and heartfelt but as a film there is never any noteworthy flair or originality to warm to. It is a heavily biased film which can be criticised for being vein and shallow in style. It is probably one to avoid as a typical American product.

An exceptionally fresh film exploring the many diverse aspects of underground Iranian culture. It specifically explores the role of the underground rock scene but also references other musical tastes which enforce a theme of anti-establishmentarianism. Their artistic lifestyles are under threat of social and political repression and instead of being defined by internal factors, such as lyrics and songwriting, the survival of art is subjected to the mercy of external factors. Noteworthy is the film's naturalist aesthetic though I am critical of the party scene which is unconvincing and ruined visually by a dodgy faux strobe effect. However this is of small relevance when comparing the doctrine that bonds Iranian artists in comparison to the religious doctrines that form part of their everyday lives and which frequently destroy the things which they establish.

Metropia is dark like a Tim Burton or Terry Gilliam film which has been set in the toilets of an eerily deserted nuclear bunker. It suffocates you with gray monotones and darkened blue/brown hues to enforce an idea of repression which draws you into its soulless, post apocalyptic world where life is never questioned. The story alludes to a fuel shortage, yet trains can run non stop night and day across a whole continent simultaneously, and while portraying astonishing technical innovation the convoluted plot feels largely empty as if examined by an absent author lazily relying on aesthetic to convince. If I was to divide the ratings I would give the art 9/10 (though critically no artistic variety from Paris to Sweden) and the plot 3/10. A big gap which is too large for such an ambitious film to fill.

Initially I was stunned to witness photography taken 700 metres below the ground. Immediately I am instilled with fear and a heightened sense of awareness not to mention pangs of claustrophobia. My emotional balance continues to swing as I question why they have unnecessarily murdered a colleague. These clouds of confusion do not disperse within the Boss's Office or in the bathroom as his ashes are poured down a toilet. Only now am I realising that we are witnessing a couple of fraudsters who force vulnerable strangers to act as family members in order to receive compensation after their "accidental" death. **** not a great premise, a truly fresh one. The film encompasses all aspects of their daily routine including regular nods to specific Chinese culture and rites of passage that are considered norms within their densely populated but sparsely financed situation. After watching I felt like I had been educated by a documentary while also being treated to a rich narrative that would not have felt out of place in the pages of a book or in the realms of my imagination. It is for this reason that I cannot mark this film down. Furthermore the ending is truly fitting by subverting the roles and highlighting the fluidity of power. The intended message is delivered in a emotionally satisfying way without pandering to the audience and the anti-capitalists will hold this tale dear to their hearts. I urge filmmakers around the world to match the culture specific focus on show here. 10/10