dmnkeen Reviews

A Beautiful Mind (2001)

Enough is enough.

[6/10 · 25 March 2002]

I don't really dislike this movie, but giving it Oscars for Best Picture, Best Director and Best Adapted Screenplay!!! Come on, Academy, snap out of it: let's try giving the award to something that really deserves it and not something that is merely worthy.

Although A Beautiful Mind is well made (Roger Deakins' cinematography in particular being a standout), it is not in the same class as fellow nominees In The Bedroom, Lord of the Rings, Gosford Park and Moulin Rouge. All of these other movies take enormous risks, inflame passions and debate, and look like labours of love. Ron Howard's movie, regardless of the makers' intentions, comes over as a well intentioned but flatly earnest big budget made for TV issues movie. At it's worst, the movie is more about emotional manipulation than it is about producer Brian Grazer's aim of opening a window on understanding mental illness.

Russell Crowe has done much better work than on show here (and, deservedly, lost out to Denzel Washington for Best Actor); and Ron Howard himself has produced better movies like Ransom and Apollo 13; even his underrated The Paper is much better than this. That Howard at his least effective has beaten directors like Altman, Jackson, and Scott at their peak does not reflect well on the Academy's judgement.

When all is said and done, however, what does it actually mean? The history of the Oscars is littered with movies which lost out but are more memorable than the winners: Raging Bull, Jaws, It's A Wonderful Life, Psycho (hell, Hitchcock never ever won an Oscar - what does that tell us?), The Searchers, etc, etc, so it will not surprise me when, in a few years, this movie has been largely forgotten or reevaluated for it's true worth (a la English Patient) while Rings, Rouge, Bedroom and Park will stand unblemished as the true master classes in making stimulating cinema that they really are.

6/10

Mulholland Drive (2001)

It can't be just me...

[2/10 · 30 January 2002]

Have I missed something? Has my IQ suddenly plummeted to an all-time low? No, I refuse to believe that I've lost my senses here and that, in true Lynchian paranoia mode, it's everybody else that's gone crazy. But, my oh my, did this movie suck big time!

It's the same old David Lynch formula (which, believe it or not, I actually like) as seen in Twin Peaks, Blue Velvet, Eraserhead, Wild at Heart et al. But here, it feels not like Lynch himself, but some hack Lynch wannabe who has taken control. The acting, apart from the two female leads, is appalling - whoever cast Justin Theroux should be shot - the camerawork stodgy for the most part, and even Badalamenti's score sounds like he was composing in his sleep.

I'm all for innovation and challenging cinema, but this movie disappears up it's own rear end (and I don't mean in the intended way). Some scenes were also cringemakingly embarrassing to watch.

This is definitely, in my humble opinion, a sad case of the Emperor's New Clothes where a director has started pandering to the critics and vice versa. Who cares what it all means? When it's this badly, lazily, and pretentiously done, there's no point in even thinking about it. Along with Lost Highway, this definitely Lynch's worst.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)

Everything you've heard is true.

[10/10 · 22 December 2001]

As someone who has continually put off reading Tolkien's novel, I finally gave in and read this weighty tome this year. I completed it just before the release of Fellowship of the Ring, and have to admit that, while the book was very good, I found it to be extremely heavy handed in places, downright dull in others and not a little dated in a lot of ways. It's still a classic book, and well worth reading, but contrary to the whinings of Tolkien fanatics, I'm not convinced by it's place as the Novel of the 20th Century.

So to the movie. It, too, may have it's flaws (and God knows, it certainly has it's detractors, many of whom, I suspect, regard themselves as the guardians of Tolkien's book), but I have to say I liked it. In fact, I loved it. More than that, I believe it is easily the best thing I've seen projected on to the screen this year. You can go through it scene by scene, referring back to the novel, moaning that Peter Jackson's vision of Middle Earth and it's inhabitants doesn't match yours, but hey, TOUGH! Peter Jackson and New Line Cinema have taken a huge gamble in bringing LotR to the screen in the first place and you have to ask yourself, rather than carping, would you prefer that they hadn't bothered at all? If you seriously think that the little movie you played in your head when you read the book should be the sacrosanct blueprint for something that has cost $300 million, then I suggest you stay at home and read your tattered copy of The Silmarillion or The Hobbit (which, incidentally, I think is a less pretentious and more rewarding book). If you accept that the book is just the starting point for a movie (as it should be: Harry Potter is an example of what happens when you are slavishly faithful to a source novel), go and see it. I think you'll like it.

I was literally blown away by the spectacle I saw here. Jackson's imagining of Tolkien's world is magnificent, creating something that is both intimate in it's examination of friendship and camaraderie, and epic in it's presentation of evil threatening good on a large scale. Visually, the movie is continually interesting and, if there are a few ropey moments a la dialogue or whatever, the cracks are plastered over expertly by a great cast (McKellen, Wood, Astin, and Lee being particular standouts). My favourite characters in the book (Sam and Gollum) are tantalisingly shown here, promising great things for their expanded roles in the next two chapters.

Hoeward Shore's pounding score deserves a mention, matching the fierceness of Jackson's passion for his material on screen, and providing a strong emotional accompaniment to the director's unfailing eye.

There will be people who don't like this just as there many highly regarded movie that I don't like. But if you are being dismissive because of an occasional lapse in a special effect, or whatever, please get a life. Great movies all have their flaws and Fellowship of the Ring is a great movie. It is also a big movie, important and even classic and in a year where you sometimes you get the impression that filmmakers have lost all nerve and ambition (Pearl Harbor and Planet of the Apes, anyone), thank God for it.

Along with equally flawed, risk taking projects in 2001 like Moulin Rouge and A.I. Artificial Intelligence, The Fellowship of the Rings should be what movies are all about. Excellent stuff.

10/10

Bandits (2001)

Where did all that money go?

[3/10 · 6 December 2001]

Honestly, can somebody justify spending $80million on this tripe? Where did it go? Sure, there are a couple of big set pieces, but nothing worth $80million. The obvious answer is that it was spent on the big name cast and director. And if this is what the ordinary money paying cinemagoer gets for all that money, then God help us!

You can see "Bandits" working (maybe) as a low budget indie flick with a no-name, but talented, cast and an exciting new director. Maybe Harley Peyton's original screenplay was quirky, funny and entertaining (I always am prepared to give the writer the benefit of the doubt), but in these hands, and with this cast, it unexpectedly has become one of the most annoying, tiresome vanity projects ever made.

I have read and seen interviews where Willis, Thornton, and Blanchett have all talked about being the best of pals, and have so much respect for each other, and how this project was a blast to make. And this, unfortunately, is all too apparent in the finished project. There is an obvious amount of adlibbing going on, scenes are allowed to run beyond the point of tedium, and you can almost hear the cries of "That was cool!" or "You were wonderful!", backed up by cast and crew laughing their socks off, between every single scene. I am certain there are loads of out-takes from this movie that are more entertaining than the movie itself.

And the butt of this great joke is Joe Public, duped by the big names into putting down hard earned cash to watch what is, ultimately, a big, boring home movie. If the cast want to self indulge so desperately, don't do it at everyone else's (including the studio accountants) expense.

There are moments of hope: the supporting cast (especially Richard Riehle as a bank manager who responds hilariously to threats and stress) are quite good when the three stars can deflate their egos enough to get out of the way. And there are some good songs. But, all in all, this movie should be a lesson for all involved: Blanchett and Thornton will, I'm sure, redeem themselves with their next projects; but Willis (with superduds like The Kid and Breakfast of Champions on his CV) and Levinson (a talented director who seems to have lost it big time with turkeys like this and An Everlasting Piece) really need to get their acts together and produce something of real entertainment value.

Because, quite honestly, this ranks right down there with Pearl Harbor as the worst movie of 2001. Avoid.

Band of Brothers (2001)

A masterpiece.

[10/10 · 2 December 2001]

There have been so many superlatives hurled at this series (and a few misguided or uninformed detracting remarks) that it's probably pointless to state the obvious once again, but two days after viewing the final episode and thinking about little else but BoB since then, I feel compelled to say that it is one of the most powerful pieces of television I have ever seen.

It is not simply a poor relation of Private Ryan: Brothers, without belittling the achievement of that movie, expands on and enhances the WWII experience as seen from the eyes of the ordinary foot soldier. Rooted firmly in fact, the series, with it's incredible writing and directing, not to mention the spectacular production values, takes on a life of it's own once the final images fade away. By the end, you are left wondering more about these men, how they adapted to civilian life, how, after sharing the camaraderie in conflict that they did, were they able to go home and continue their lives and return to some sense of normality under the shadow of everything they had witnessed and done. There is no cosy conclusion to BoB as such, no sense of total completion (and some have been annoyed by this), but I feel that this is the proper way to end the story. Sure, you want to know more, but the fact that you are grateful for men like Winters, Nixon, Lipton, Roe, Randlemann et al, and comforted that someone like that can go through hell for everything you take for granted, only adds to the undiluted realism that Brothers strived for and achieved so stunningly.

As for the acting: Damian Lewis, Ron Livingston, Donnie Wahlberg and so on deserve all the kudos that have been bestowed upon them, but for me there is a trio of actors who have not been mentioned nearly enough and deserve a substantial share of the plaudits.

Shane Taylor as Doc Eugene Roe can muster a response or emotion from the viewer with just a glance: the pain and anxiety of his character, as well as his determination and his sympathy for his fellows was illustrated beautifully by this incredible actor who does not need dialogue to stamp his authority on a scene.

Michael Cudlitz as Sgt "Bull" Randlemann was just as incredible, making the

most of the episode that focussed on his character's plight behind enemy lines (Replacements) and exuding the firm and steady nature that instilled the confidence which those in his charge must have shared. "Bull", in lesser hands, could have descended into a sheer war movie stereotype (the big, cigar chomping sergeant), but Cudlitz's quiet but authoritative presence throughout all 10 episodes marks him as an actor to watch.

Dexter Fletcher as Sgt John Martin provided another rock for the other characters to play off. I've been aware of Fletcher as an actor since Bugsy Malone, through Press Gang, The Rachel Papers and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, but here more than anywhere else before does he demonstrate his versatility and effortless ability and propels himself into the ranks of Britain's finest actors.

Singling these three out is not meant to diminish the other performances in any way as the acting throughout was faultless (and I normally hate David Schwimmer!). Indeed, if this is an indication of the wealth of new and upcoming talent out there as an antidote to the Freddie Prinze's of the world, it instills nothing but hope.

Finally, in a year that produced the frankly risible and obnoxious Pearl Harbor (a comic strip bastardisation of history made for morons), it is good to know that the likes of HBO, Dreamworks and Playtone are prepared to take risks, present the horror and humanity of war in the most unflinching way, and produce something both passionate and intelligent. It is equally heartening to know that there is a sizeable audience for such fare. There may be other war movies and shows to come, but they would need to be very special indeed to match the achievement of Band of Brothers. It is, in short, an unqualified masterpiece.

10 / 10

Band of Brothers (2001)

A masterpiece.

[10/10 · 2 December 2001]

There have been so many superlatives hurled at this series (and a few misguided or uninformed detracting remarks) that it's probably pointless to state the obvious one more time, but two days after viewing the final episode and thinking about little else but BoB since then, I can only say that it is one of the most powerful pieces of television I have ever seen.

It is not simply a son of Private Ryan project: Brothers, without belittling the achievement of that movie, expands on and enhances the WWII experience as seen from the point of view of the ordinary foot soldier. Rooted firmly in fact, the series, with it's incredible writing, directing and spectacular production values, takes on a life of it's own once the final images fade away. By the end, you are left wondering more about these men, how they adapted to civilian life, how, after sharing the camaraderie in conflict that they did, were they able to go home and continue their lives and return to some sense of normality under the shadow of everything they had witnessed and done. There is no cosy conclusion to BoB, no sense of completion (and some have been annoyed by this), but I feel that this is the proper way to end the story: sure, you want to know more, but the fact that you are grateful for men like Winters, Nixon, Lipton, Roe, Randlemann et al, and comforted that someone like that can go through hell for everything that you take for granted, only adds to the undiluted realism that Brothers strived for and achieved so stunningly.

As for the acting, it's already understood that Damian Lewis, Ron Livingston, Donnie Wahlberg, and so on deserve all the plaudits that have been bestowed on them, but for me there is a trio of actors who have not been mentioned enough and deserve a substantial share of the plaudits. Shane Taylor as Doc Eugene Roe can muster a response from the viewer with just a glance: his pain and anxiety, as well as his determination and sympathy for his fellows was illustrated beautifully by this incredible actor who does not need dialogue to stamp his authority on a scene; Michael Cudlitz as Sgt "Bull" Randlemann was just as incredible, making the most of the episode that focussed on his character's plight behind enemy lines (Replacements), and exuding the firm and steady nature that instilled the confidence which those in his charge must have shared: this character could have descended into sheer war movie stereotype of the big sergeant with the chomped cigar, but Cudlitz's quiet but authoritative presence throughout all 10 episodes marks him as an actor to watch for in the future; and Dexter Fletcher as Sgt Martin provided another rock for the other characters to play off: I've been aware of Fletcher since Bugsy Malone through Press Gang, The Rachel Papers and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, but here, more than anywhere before, does he demonstrate his versatility and effortless ability as an actor and propels himself into the ranks of Britain's finest performers. Singling out these three actors is not meant, in any way, to diminish the other performances (the acting throughout was faultless - and I normally hate David Scwimmer!), but these three are, hopefully, an indication of the wealth of new and upcoming talent out there that it would be a crime not to see more of in the very near future.

Finally, in a year that produced the frankly risible and obnoxious Pearl Harbor, it is good to know that there is a willingness for production companies to make, and audiences to watch, an intelligent and passionate take on the 20th Century's most obvious historical touchstone. There may be other war movies and shows to come, but they would need to be very good indeed to match the achievement of Band of Brothers. It is, in short, an unqualified masterpiece.

10 / 10

The Micallef Program (1998–2001)

Indulge your wildest desires for the kiddies...

[8 August 2001]

Thank God for the Paramount Comedy Channel for bringing The Micallef Program to these comedy starved shores. In anticipation of the new series of the only homegrown comedy shows worth talking about (Spaced, Black Books), I thought I would give Micallef a try and see if those kind souls at Paramount were telling the whole truth about how good it was.

At first, I wasn't sure; but, after 20 seconds or so, I was laughing. By the time Spiffington Manse came on, I was on the floor, holding my sides in convulsions: this is one show that should definitely carry a public health warning!!!

Maybe it's because I'm so jaded with so-called comic talent here in Britain and Ireland, or maybe (and more likely), the standards of British TV comedy recently has (with very few exceptions) fallen alarmingly low, but Shaun Micallef is like a blast of fresh air on the scene. I would love to see his live show; I'm eager to see his work on the Aussie show, SeaChange; and I wish Paramount would show all three, original series uncut instead of a series of best of shows. Micallef combines all the best elements of Steve Coogan, Monty Python, The Fast Show, but puts his own spin on proceedings which makes even the most basic comic premises (the quiz show, the sarcastic interviewer, the cop documentary) refreshing.

Aided and abetted by a brilliant cast (Francis Greenslade, Roz Hammond, and Wayne Hope should all hold master classes in how to be funny over here), the viewer is spoiled for choice when trying to pick a favourite moment or performance. The telekinetic peasant woman; the Nazi encouraged to kayak off a building and die on "I Bloody Dare You"; the death of the Australian funeral industry; the blasphemous Fat-o-gram sketch; the AmWay selling gameshow host, and so on are all classics which deserve mention in the same breath as other classic comedy moments like The Dead Parrot Sketch, Fork Handles, and the little bit of car trouble Basil has in Fawlty Towers.

I've already ordered my Micallef video from the ABC online shop, and eagerly await any repeats and new material that Paramount (or any other channel) may have in store for us. If you have seen Shaun's show, you'll understand why I'm raving so much about it; if you haven't, then I can only feel sorry for you.

10 / 10

Pearl Harbor (2001)

The cinematic equivalent of defacing a war memorial

[2/10 · 7 June 2001]

This honestly has to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Never mind the plagiarism of other, better movies; the empty-headed and monumentally annoying love story; the pathetic so-called "acting" (only Dan Aykroyd and Tom Sizemore make any sort of impact); the banal script and laughable dialogue; the cheesy music and rock video editing; or the gee-whizz attitude to violence and explosions. What really galls about this turkey is its offensiveness: surely none of the poor souls who perished at Pearl Harbor behaved as stupidly as portrayed here!

One scene sums up Jerry Bruckheimer, Randall Wallace, and Michael Bay's attitude in making this film. While military personnel and civilians are bombed and blasted, raked with gunfire, drowned and crushed in a sickeningly titillating way (whoever described this as war as pornography was spot on!), the filmmakers are more concerned with the plight of a small dog whose owner has just been shot. When the pooch is rescued, the obvious intent was for a heartwarming moment; but this was the moment at which this trash went from being extraordinarily dumb to being extraordinarily infuriating. Thousands of people dying, but we are expected to relate to a bloody dog!!!

Who are these people? I agree that there is a place for mindless action movies and a comic book approach to violence. But when you impose such an approach on what should have been a human (not to mention, humane) drama, evoking the terror of war and remembering, respectfully, the memory of those who sacrificed everything in one of the great turning points of 20th century history, I'm afraid that you have lost the plot in a big, big way.

The shame of it is that, given the budget and the resources at their disposal, Bruckheimer and co have missed a golden opportunity to present a really memorable, classic, and respectful motion picture. But, as they count their earnings, I am more than confident that making such a movie was the last thing they ever intended.

Cynical, mawkish, cliched rubbish of the highest order, this is the cinematic equivalent of defacing a war memorial.

The Dish (2000)

Best of the year, so far.

[10/10 · 18 May 2001]

Needing a pick-me-up after one of those days where every little thing seems to go wrong, I decided to go and see The Dish to cheer myself up. Ninety or so minutes later, I emerged with all the crap that was in my head going into the cinema forgotten about. By that measurement, I would give The Dish a very big 10 out of 10, and say that it is probably the best movie I've seen so far this year.

Now, I know by saying this that other reviewers will be encouraged to give this movie a thumbs down because of all the good reports they have heard about it, or all the great reviews thy have read. But that's the danger with a film like The Dish: the earlier you actually go and see it, the more immune you will be from all the hype of word of mouth and box office success that goes with leaving off seeing it too late.

All I can say is that this is a movie which achieves the onerous task of taking potentially stale subject matter and transforming it into something wonderful. The filmmakers (who also made The Castle, which I shall be watching tonight) have taken the slim notion of small-town Australia's involvement in the Apollo 11 Moon mission and, by offering numerous quirky, interesting and affable characters and incidents to flesh out their story, have created one of those movies which makes you feel good about yourself, other people, and mankind in general. Belly laughs follow on from real, humane drama, while little details beautifully observed spotlight the bigger picture of one of the human race's greatest achievements of the 20th Century.

I don't want to give anything away because The Dish is full of gems which it would be cruel to tell anybody who has not seen the film for themselves about. All I can say is, if you're feeling a bit down, tired and depressed, just watch this: it's a real tonic!

Captain Corelli's Mandolin (2001)

Expecting the worst...

[8/10 · 8 May 2001]

I have to admit that I approached this movie with a sense of expectation and dread. Louis de Berniere's bestselling novel is one of my favourites and anyone who has read it will realise that there is no way in hell that any screen adaptation can be 100% faithful.

All the way through I found myself convincing myself that the movie was unsuccessful, and had stripped the book's plot back so far as to render it redundant. The ending, however, is much better than that in the novel, and I could not stop thinking about the movie afterwards. Still, the plusses (John Toll's magnificent cinematography, Stephen Warbeck's great score, etc) I felt did not outweigh my initial negatives (Cage's miscasting, a heavily diluted script).

But, two days later, I was queuing again to see Corelli, and although not perfect, I have to admit now that the movie is the best anyone could have expected. Cage is actually brilliant in a role that even de Berniere was concerned was not a fully rounded character: his carefree spirit which gives way to shattered remorse is spot on, and complements the superb double act of Penelope Cruz and John Hurt perfectly. David Morrissey is quietly effective as Weber, the Nazi officer trying to reconcile his feelings for his newfound Italian friends and his inbred superiority complex to those around him. And the fine Greco-Italian supporting cast bring de Berniere's sundrenched world of Cepholonia dazzlingly alive.

On leaving the cinema second time around, I finally let go my passion for the novel which prevented me from fully appreciating the story of WW2 Cepholonia in cinematic terms. My hat goes off to John Madden who, despite the almost expected critical drubbing he is receiving from the British critics (any director who has had a major success like Shakespeare in Love behind them is always a target for these moaning ninnies!),has managed to transfer a terrifically difficult book to the big screen with such heart, verve and humanity (the core virtues of the novel, in fact) that he has created another classic love story that will probably only be fully appreciated when the dust has settled a few years from now.

If you are a fan of the book, like me, it's hard, but try not to make the same mistake on your initial viewing. Try to erase the book from your mind for two hours, bathe yourself in the glorious Mediterranean atmosphere, and discover Corelli, Pelagia, Mandras, Dr Iannis, as if for the first time (pretend you're watching something made from an original screenplay), and I guarantee you won't be disappointed.

In fact, you'll be eagerly waiting to own your own copy of this delightful movie on video or DVD.

8/10

Spaced (1999–2001)

All comedies should be like this

[3 February 2001]

Having just watched this series again, I am prepared to say that "Spaced" is definitely one of the greatest comedy shows EVER!

Funny, striking, imaginative, clever, compassionate, sarcastic, inventive, etc, etc, etc. You get the impression that co-stars and co-writers, Simon Pegg and Jessica Stevenson, just cannot write a boring line of dialogue or envisage a predictable scene. Using its "nothing new" premise (mismatched couple pretend to be romantically entangled to find a place to live), this show twists and turns its way off into many brilliant and original directions, while never failing to provide the required belly laughs along the way.

It uses movie in-jokes and references in a way that would make Tarantino envious, and the hipness of its execution makes it both a show that, paradoxically, is of the moment but is also certain to be talked about in ten or twenty years from now.

The cast are all first-rate: Pegg and Stevenson manage to be both madcap and touching, and are backed up by a sterling supporting cast of fresh and exciting talent. Julia Deakin as Marsha, the flirtatious middle-aged landlady and Mark Heap as the pretentious but vulnerable artist from hell, Brian, make a hilarious double act; Nick Frost is a real find as military mad Mike; and Katy Carmichael as the initially snobby Twist manages to be dotty without turning up the annoyance factor.

Even the guest appearances are great. My two personal favourites are Michael Smiley as the chemically enhanced Tyres O'Flaherty, a non-stop raver who even dances to the ringing of a telephone; and the excellent Charles Dale (II), who is usually cast as the heavy, but gives a marvellous comic performance here as the "yes man" security guard who helps our bumbling heroes rescue their beloved pooch, Colin, from an evil freelance vivisectionist!

Credit must also be given to director Edgar Wright who has created a unique and vivid look to the show, enhancing the script's wired look at the banalities of everyday life with his brilliant use of camera movement, lighting, cross-cutting, flashbacks, etc. Even if it wasn't funny (which it most emphatically is), "Spaced" would get top marks for being the best looking show on the box.

I could go on, but "Spaced" is a comedy that needs to be seen to be believed, and then seen again...and again...and again...

The Patriot (2000)

A missed opportunity.

[5/10 · 29 January 2001]

First things first: The Patriot is by no means terrible, but it could have been so great.

Instead of a powerful historical epic which, given its premise, should have been as gut-wrenchingly emotional as Braveheart or as visceral as Gladiator, we have a big budget movie which leaves the viewer surprisingly cold.

Mel Gibson is pretty good to start with but then resorts to the old tried and tested formula of self-deprecating action hero a la Lethal Weapon. Heath Ledger makes a pretty strong impression, but like Joely Richardson in a thankless mannequin-type role, is given precious little to do. And as for Jason Isaacs: he has provided us with one of the worst cinematic villains in an age, all flaring nostrils and evil glances. This is a truly awful performance from a normally reliable actor. Only Tom Wilkinson rises above it all in another award-calibre performance.

Historical accuracy and dramatic liberties aside, I can only say that this movie fails because of its director. God only knows what talented screenwriter Robert Rodat's script was like before Roland Emmerich got hold of it, but it's safe to say that Roland is not exactly the right choice to combine human drama and epic sweep into one satisfying whole. He stages the set pieces predictably and with little visual imagination, and he seems more interested in his special effects than in the plight of his characters. Any memorable pictorial flourish is there because of the talented cinematographer, Caleb Deschanel, and not, I believe, because of any directorial insight from this Independence Day and Godzilla hack.

All in all, it's a shame. The Patriot should have been joining the ranks of classic American historical dramas such as Glory and Dances With Wolves. Instead, it just sits there, inert, uninteresting, occasionally striking, but mostly just average.

5/5

The Lakes (1997–1999)

Naughty and nice...

[10/10 · 22 November 2000]

I've just watched this again and the misgivings I had when I first saw it have dispelled somewhat. Following on the heels of, and attempting to continue, the first self-contained (if open-ended) saga of Danny and the residents of the small Lake District town he finds himself in might seem foolhardy and unnecessary, but the finished result proves these assumptions wrong.

True, "The Lakes 2" (as it is called on video) does stray into soap opera territory at times; some changes in certain characters behaviour does require a seismic suspension of disbelief; and some plotlines almost fall into self-parody. But, as with the first series, what pulls you into this drama and keeps your attention throughout is the incredible combination of superior acting, writing and directing.

Danny, the hero of Part One, takes more of a back seat here as the action focusses on the Hitchcockian story of the teacher who murders his philandering wife; the devout Catholic mother who sleeps with her priest; the bitch of a rich girl who gets more than she bargains for at the hands of three local rapists; and, best of all, there's Chef who, despite being run over repeatedly at the end of the last instalment, proves that he is still as nasty as ever, polluting the lives of all around him, especially his long-suffering but sluttish wife.

The Chef storyline actually provides a brilliant backdrop to the foreground drama of rape and infidelity, simply because the character is such a great creation: an immoral bull of a man who uses sex as a weapon, hates everyone around him, and who is motivated by an unrelenting vengeful streak against the (obvious) culprit who ran him down. Charles Dale plays Chef perfectly, making him one of television's most memorable and despicable characters who gets his delicious comeuppance courtesy of two very strong women and a rusty straight razor! Compare Dale's performance here with his Mr Nice Guy character in "Coronation Street" and you'll see just how good this actor is.

That's not to take anything away from the rest of the cast: they are all fine, and Bob Mason's world-weary police sergeant deserves a special mention. The team of writers and directors (including original scribe Jimmy McGovern) manage to create a seamless whole, and this is well worth watching and rewatching.

Is it as good as the original? Not quite, but if you take this as written before you sit down to watch, there are just as many enjoyable and striking things on offer here.

The Lakes (1997–1999)

One of the best TV dramas of the 90s.

[10/10 · 19 November 2000]

Nobody can accuse Jimmy McGovern of settling for a quiet life. His dramas, right from "Needle", through to "Cracker" and "Priest", to this masterpiece confirm him as one of the most exciting writers in any medium to emerge in the last decade.

And a masterpiece is what "The Lakes" is, even considering its flaws. Occasionally, McGovern seems more concerned with hitting home his messages (about Catholicism, country-versus-city, sexual politics, etc) at the expense of his characters, but he still creates dramatic situations which are credible, raw, and overwhelmingly moving without succumbing to sickly sentiment.

Focussing on the story of Danny, a Liverpudlian drifter and compulsive gambler, who marries Emma, the daughter in a devoutly Catholic family living in a small Lake District town, and who is implicated in the drowning accident which claims the lives of four local children, McGovern wrings every piece of emotion from his storyline, and supplies a script which his excellent cast are obviously having a field day with.

John Simms is remarkable as Danny, perfectly realising the inner conflict facing his outsider character who craves to do the right thing while aspiring to escape the emotional prison he finds himself in. Robert Pugh and Mary Jo Randle as the parish priest and would-be middle-aged lover handle their roles with compassion and truth, and Paul Copley as Randle's unknowing and decent husband also deserves some kudos.

In fact, the entire cast is outstanding, all perfectly getting under the skins of their characters, and the action is all brilliantly orchestrated by director David Blair, who brings all the initially disparate plotlines into one immensely satisfying whole.

In an age of endless costume drama, "The Lakes" comes like a blast of welcome fresh air, and very few other dramas produced in the 1990s (with the exception, maybe, of Alan Bleasdale's "GBH") come anywhere near matching its heartfelt intensity.

35 Aside (1996)

Funny and knowing

[9/10 · 28 October 2000]

"35 Aside" is one of those rare treats that cheers you up every time you see it. The acting, especially from James Mahon, is terrific, and Damien O'Donnell's confident handling of the material shows he has a great future ahead of him. Every camera angle and edit adds to the humour and the plight of the film's young protagonist, and there will be nobody who does not cringe at their own schoolday memories whilst watching this.

All in all, great stuff which paved the way for O'Donnell's equally skillful treatment of the marvellous "East Is East", which I also urge you to see.

Longitude (2000– )

Top-notch historical drama

[7/10 · 21 October 2000]

Being a big fan of Dava Sobel's bestselling book, I wondered how this intricate and, on the face of it, not particularly exciting story would translate to the screen.

For the most part, director Sturridge has succeeded and with a sterling cast headed by Michael Gambon, Ian Hart, et al, really brought the race to resolve the longitude problem to brilliant life.

Unfortunately, for me, the overall effect was disastrously marred by the framework narrative involving Jeremy Irons, which did not really add to the central drama. Every time Irons with his haughty-taughty constipated look appeared, I found myself counting the minutes until we were back in the thick of the real action and the real story involving Gambon.

Nevertheless, this was a really accomplished production. Maybe when they repeat it or release it on video they could whittle it down to the bare necessities of the story and leave Irons on the cutting room floor.

7/10

Billy Elliot (2000)

Powerful character study dressed up as a feel-good movie

[10/10 · 9 October 2000]

MAY CONTAIN SPOILER!!!

The most amazing thing about this film is to be found in what is not said. The unspoken motivation of Julie Walters' dance teacher and the spiteful silence of her young daughter towards Billy; the lack of initial emotional connection between Billy and his father (and the father's own reasons for pushing Billy into boxing); and the confrontation between father and son where not a word is spoken but where the father recognises for the first time the gift his son has. These are all extraordinarily powerful scenes in a movie which has been unfairly criticised in some quarters for wearing its heart on its sleeve and for inconsistencies in characterisation.

I believe these criticisms are totally unfounded. Lee Hall's brilliant script and Stephen Daldry's inspired direction take basically Rocky-style material and overhaul it with terrific characters and truthful sentiment. Billy's dad does not act inconsistently when he is confronted by his son's talent - although times are hard, and he is on the face of it inattentive to his youngest child, he does finance his boxing lessons. Like the ballet teacher who sees her own missed opportunities in Billy, the father sees his own discarded potential in the ring in his son - the father's boxing prowess is referred to twice in the movie - and this clarifies even more his outrage when he discovers the hard-earned boxing money has been "squandered" on "friggin' ballet".

There are many moments like this which underscore the characters' motivations in the film and critics who insist on inconsistencies really should pay more attention. This is one movie where we have to look deeper into background detail (which is sometimes placed discreetly before us) to get our answers as to why the people in this movie behave in the way they do. And that is a refreshing change from the characterisation-by-numbers tat which often disgraces modern movies.

For these reasons above, I think "Billy Elliot" is not only one of the movies of the year, but one of the best for many years, especially from Britain where it seems crappy gangster movies are all filmmakers are interested in inflicting on us. Everything rings true in it and the acting is some of the best I have ever been privileged to see on screen.

Julie Walters is, unsurprisingly, terrific as Billy's teacher; Jamie Draven is a revelation as Tony, the eldest brother; and everything that has been said of Jamie Bell as Billy is totally justified: this is the best performance by a young actor since Christian Bale in "Empire of the Sun".

But, for me, the best performance (and the emotional core of the movie) is provided by Gary Lewis as the father. The pent-up rage which spills over into genuine grief and, finally, an act of unbridled desperation is all realised perfectly by this Scottish actor who, what with "Carla's Song", "My Name Is Joe", "Orphans", and now this, is fast becoming one of the most dynamic performers on the screen. If his name does not feature prominently come awards-time I will be sorely disappointed.

Oh, and if all this sounds very serious, I should point out that the film is also incredibly funny, and ends with a smile fixed squarely on your face. Highly recommended.

10/10