guchrisc
Joined Jan 2013
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews111
guchrisc's rating
This StudioCanal film tells the true story of the attempt to break into the vault of the Hatton Garden Safe Deposit Company. It was intended to be the last big job, the crown jewels, for a bunch of old career criminals. It is not a gangster movie, nor a comedy crime caper, rather, it is a heist movie. A dramatic reconstruction that is surprisingly factual.
The 1934 Rubel Ice Corp armoured car heist of $427,950 in Bath Beach Brooklyn was hugely popular culturally. The majority of the money from the1950 Brinks Robbery in Boston was never recovered. Likewise, when Albert Spaggiari tunnelled from a Nice sewer, into a bank vault, the 30-60m francs stolen was never recovered. Spaggiari left behind his message that no violence was used.
However, it is the British, who have become known for their spectacular feats of thieving, be that as breaking and entering in peaceful burglaries, or be it robbery by violence, or the threat thereof.
In 1962, the London Airport Robbery was merely used as a fundraiser, to get money together, for the big one; The Great Train Robbery of 1963. £2.6m was stolen. Most was never recovered. A long sprawling story ensued. The Train Robbers themselves, mostly from South London, achieved cult status, thus creating a discernable criminal trend.
The Train Robbers themselves, got back together again, to tell their true story to Piers Paul Read for his 1978 book. It was only when Read was well into the writing of his book, that he discovered to his horror, that the gang were doing what all career criminals did, which was to try to do another job, this time with Read as the victim. Despite all that, the book is good, as is the more factual 1988 film 'Buster'.
The Train Robbers were born in the 1920s and 1930s, though mostly in the late twenties and early thirties. A Brian Reader, born around 1939 in South London, was thus already a young man by the time of The Great Train Robbery. The Great Train Robbers did not make Reader a career criminal, but perhaps they helped inspire this career criminal of a slightly younger generation.
A bank holiday is when most businesses, including banks, are shut. Many people are on holiday, including bank workers. However, not all workers are on holiday. Some are hard at work. A Bank Holiday is in fact an excellent time for a bit of thieving. The Train Robbers struck after a Bank Holiday. So too, the Nice sewer heist was done during the long-weekend after Bastille Day.
In 1983, there were two spectacular robberies. At Easter, the Security Express robbery netted £6m in cash. Then, in November, £26m worth of gold bullion was stolen from Brinks-Mat. The two robberies were done by two different firms or gangs. Terry Perkins went to prison for the Security Express job. Brian Reeder went to prison for handling the Brinks-Mat gold. Linked to these two men, and these two robberies, were some of the most notorious criminals, and all the top firms, or gangs, from the Train Robbers right through to the present day.
The Ealing Comedy film 'The Lavender Hill Mob' (1951) opens with Alec Guinness planning his own gold robbery, then recruiting his gang and then stealing, and transporting his gold. The 'The Italian Job' (1969) has a young Michael Caine playing Charlie Croker, breaking into prison, to talk to gang-boss Mr Bridger played by Noel Coward.
'King Of Thieves' opens, not with a robbery, but with Michael Caine working diligently at his smelter. A few other scenes then draw a poignant picture of an older man. This is Brian Reader, as played by Michael Caine. He is joined by Terry Perkins played by Jim Broadbent. In real-life, Perkins is about ten years younger than Reader. Very quickly, we then move into the heart of the film, when they start discussing that ultimate fantasy score, of taking down the Hatton Garden Safe Deposit Company. For it is in their vault, that Hatton Garden jewellers, and others, keep their safe-deposit boxes.
Charlie Cox, plays a younger man called Basil, who thinks he can help them get access to the vault. Others are recruited, as they think they can turn their dream into a reality. In the film, Ray Winstone plays Danny Jones, who seems to have been recruited for his physical abilities. In reality, it was Jones who in 2012 first had the idea for the heist, and started to plan the Hatton Garden heist. Winstone gives a tremendous performance as Jones. Winstone himself was a very useful boxer in his youth and is not doubt able to draw on that abilty a boxer is required to draw on to commit. This is not a violent film, but it is about older men who are not unfamiliar with violence in the past. Winstone gives a performance, particularly in one scary scene, that reminds you of Bob Hoskins in 'The Long Good Friday' (1980). It is of course the ability to work yourself into a rage, and to let the rage loose, which separates the violent from the peaceful. In reality too, Winstone is merely about two years younger than his character Jones. The two went to the same school. What are missing from the portrayal of Jones, are some of extremely bizarre elements in his life-style. Perhaps they were just considered too bizarre to be believable for the film.
Tom Courtney, Michael Gambon, and Paul Whitehouse, play the parts of others involved in the plot. The actions and dialogues of the plotters in the film, actually duplicate the known facts of the case. The gang-dynamics, based on the reality, are fascinating, particularly between Terry Perkins and Brian Reeder. The relationship of the two is fascinating, however, something there, in this film, is not explored. We know that it is there, but it is not revealed. It is the only flaw in the film, apart from the relationships of Basil, which probably of necessity could not be explored either. We are left with knowing what Basil's relationship isn't, just as we were perhaps thinking he was, but what the basis of his relationships was in the film, or in real-life, remains unexplored.
Film critics have either ignored this film, or condemned it because the characters are nasty. The film is about career criminals, thus they are not nice people. Their morality is explored somewhat in the film. Criminals are despised, feared, and hated, because like pirates and Vikings of old, they have no respect for the law. They have a concept of private property, but it is based on the concept of 'theft is property', and that 'whatever a man can take, and hold onto, that is his'. These are not men who wish to be paid a pittance by others to go down the mine. Rather, they wish to be self-employed as they seek to mine precious metals and minerals. The working-man working for a pittance, and respecting, or fearing, the law, admires those with the bottle to do the big jobs. If nothing else, the story is an interesting story to brighten the day. Those with the money, fear the criminal. For the middle-classes, there lives are much removed from the criminal, a distance that they wish to maintain. For the working man, and those who like him struggle to survive, the temptation to commit petty crime, to survive, is a reality of life. For those who are criminals, those who do the big scores, are looked up to. However, these criminals are no Robin Hoods giving money to the poor, but rather, they want to steal and keep it for themselves. They have no class-consciousness, thus they are hated by the communists. No such thing as society, except what you make for yourself. It is the law of the jungle, and they are the big beasts, the kings of the jungle.
The time of the old-style burglars and robbers may be passing. This seems a theme of this film. It is now harder to do the jobs, as this film shows. However, our old career criminals, in this film, decide that they will attempt this last big job. To do so, they will use all their old knowledge and skills. They were, and are, the best at what they do.
The acting, story, and filming, of this movie, are all first class. Iconic London scenes are well filmed. Bus journeys from South London do cross the Thames, and in the right direction too. Brief flashbacks pay homage to an earlier age of robbery. Homage is also played to the actors too. Perhaps some fear homage is paid to the thieves too, though they are not glamourized. 'The Italian Job' ended with scenes of gang-boss Mr Bridger being feted as the gold is driven through the Alps to the tune of 'The Self-Preservation Society'. Now Michael Caine, who played that young villain in 'The Italian Job' is now playing the older villain.
The film does not explicitly state who is the King Of Thieves, it leaves the question open, for others to decide.
Almost totally flawless! 9/10.
The 1934 Rubel Ice Corp armoured car heist of $427,950 in Bath Beach Brooklyn was hugely popular culturally. The majority of the money from the1950 Brinks Robbery in Boston was never recovered. Likewise, when Albert Spaggiari tunnelled from a Nice sewer, into a bank vault, the 30-60m francs stolen was never recovered. Spaggiari left behind his message that no violence was used.
However, it is the British, who have become known for their spectacular feats of thieving, be that as breaking and entering in peaceful burglaries, or be it robbery by violence, or the threat thereof.
In 1962, the London Airport Robbery was merely used as a fundraiser, to get money together, for the big one; The Great Train Robbery of 1963. £2.6m was stolen. Most was never recovered. A long sprawling story ensued. The Train Robbers themselves, mostly from South London, achieved cult status, thus creating a discernable criminal trend.
The Train Robbers themselves, got back together again, to tell their true story to Piers Paul Read for his 1978 book. It was only when Read was well into the writing of his book, that he discovered to his horror, that the gang were doing what all career criminals did, which was to try to do another job, this time with Read as the victim. Despite all that, the book is good, as is the more factual 1988 film 'Buster'.
The Train Robbers were born in the 1920s and 1930s, though mostly in the late twenties and early thirties. A Brian Reader, born around 1939 in South London, was thus already a young man by the time of The Great Train Robbery. The Great Train Robbers did not make Reader a career criminal, but perhaps they helped inspire this career criminal of a slightly younger generation.
A bank holiday is when most businesses, including banks, are shut. Many people are on holiday, including bank workers. However, not all workers are on holiday. Some are hard at work. A Bank Holiday is in fact an excellent time for a bit of thieving. The Train Robbers struck after a Bank Holiday. So too, the Nice sewer heist was done during the long-weekend after Bastille Day.
In 1983, there were two spectacular robberies. At Easter, the Security Express robbery netted £6m in cash. Then, in November, £26m worth of gold bullion was stolen from Brinks-Mat. The two robberies were done by two different firms or gangs. Terry Perkins went to prison for the Security Express job. Brian Reeder went to prison for handling the Brinks-Mat gold. Linked to these two men, and these two robberies, were some of the most notorious criminals, and all the top firms, or gangs, from the Train Robbers right through to the present day.
The Ealing Comedy film 'The Lavender Hill Mob' (1951) opens with Alec Guinness planning his own gold robbery, then recruiting his gang and then stealing, and transporting his gold. The 'The Italian Job' (1969) has a young Michael Caine playing Charlie Croker, breaking into prison, to talk to gang-boss Mr Bridger played by Noel Coward.
'King Of Thieves' opens, not with a robbery, but with Michael Caine working diligently at his smelter. A few other scenes then draw a poignant picture of an older man. This is Brian Reader, as played by Michael Caine. He is joined by Terry Perkins played by Jim Broadbent. In real-life, Perkins is about ten years younger than Reader. Very quickly, we then move into the heart of the film, when they start discussing that ultimate fantasy score, of taking down the Hatton Garden Safe Deposit Company. For it is in their vault, that Hatton Garden jewellers, and others, keep their safe-deposit boxes.
Charlie Cox, plays a younger man called Basil, who thinks he can help them get access to the vault. Others are recruited, as they think they can turn their dream into a reality. In the film, Ray Winstone plays Danny Jones, who seems to have been recruited for his physical abilities. In reality, it was Jones who in 2012 first had the idea for the heist, and started to plan the Hatton Garden heist. Winstone gives a tremendous performance as Jones. Winstone himself was a very useful boxer in his youth and is not doubt able to draw on that abilty a boxer is required to draw on to commit. This is not a violent film, but it is about older men who are not unfamiliar with violence in the past. Winstone gives a performance, particularly in one scary scene, that reminds you of Bob Hoskins in 'The Long Good Friday' (1980). It is of course the ability to work yourself into a rage, and to let the rage loose, which separates the violent from the peaceful. In reality too, Winstone is merely about two years younger than his character Jones. The two went to the same school. What are missing from the portrayal of Jones, are some of extremely bizarre elements in his life-style. Perhaps they were just considered too bizarre to be believable for the film.
Tom Courtney, Michael Gambon, and Paul Whitehouse, play the parts of others involved in the plot. The actions and dialogues of the plotters in the film, actually duplicate the known facts of the case. The gang-dynamics, based on the reality, are fascinating, particularly between Terry Perkins and Brian Reeder. The relationship of the two is fascinating, however, something there, in this film, is not explored. We know that it is there, but it is not revealed. It is the only flaw in the film, apart from the relationships of Basil, which probably of necessity could not be explored either. We are left with knowing what Basil's relationship isn't, just as we were perhaps thinking he was, but what the basis of his relationships was in the film, or in real-life, remains unexplored.
Film critics have either ignored this film, or condemned it because the characters are nasty. The film is about career criminals, thus they are not nice people. Their morality is explored somewhat in the film. Criminals are despised, feared, and hated, because like pirates and Vikings of old, they have no respect for the law. They have a concept of private property, but it is based on the concept of 'theft is property', and that 'whatever a man can take, and hold onto, that is his'. These are not men who wish to be paid a pittance by others to go down the mine. Rather, they wish to be self-employed as they seek to mine precious metals and minerals. The working-man working for a pittance, and respecting, or fearing, the law, admires those with the bottle to do the big jobs. If nothing else, the story is an interesting story to brighten the day. Those with the money, fear the criminal. For the middle-classes, there lives are much removed from the criminal, a distance that they wish to maintain. For the working man, and those who like him struggle to survive, the temptation to commit petty crime, to survive, is a reality of life. For those who are criminals, those who do the big scores, are looked up to. However, these criminals are no Robin Hoods giving money to the poor, but rather, they want to steal and keep it for themselves. They have no class-consciousness, thus they are hated by the communists. No such thing as society, except what you make for yourself. It is the law of the jungle, and they are the big beasts, the kings of the jungle.
The time of the old-style burglars and robbers may be passing. This seems a theme of this film. It is now harder to do the jobs, as this film shows. However, our old career criminals, in this film, decide that they will attempt this last big job. To do so, they will use all their old knowledge and skills. They were, and are, the best at what they do.
The acting, story, and filming, of this movie, are all first class. Iconic London scenes are well filmed. Bus journeys from South London do cross the Thames, and in the right direction too. Brief flashbacks pay homage to an earlier age of robbery. Homage is also played to the actors too. Perhaps some fear homage is paid to the thieves too, though they are not glamourized. 'The Italian Job' ended with scenes of gang-boss Mr Bridger being feted as the gold is driven through the Alps to the tune of 'The Self-Preservation Society'. Now Michael Caine, who played that young villain in 'The Italian Job' is now playing the older villain.
The film does not explicitly state who is the King Of Thieves, it leaves the question open, for others to decide.
Almost totally flawless! 9/10.
Sleeping passengers are startled to be woken up on their journey to their destination. However, being in a space-ship in space, this story is out of this world, rather than just being another everyday commuter horror story.
The film opens, travelling through space, and Chris Pratt being woken from his induced hibernation sleep. Those familiar with the trailer will enjoy seeing Mr Pratt preening himself before he goes off to meet the other passengers, as we know what he does not. There is comedy here, as well as some satire, that will be familiar to mere earthlings experiencing different classes of travel, and trying to work through computer options. As the full reality of his situation dawns on Mr Pratt the film becomes more serious.
Chris Pratt in Jurassic World (2015) played a likable action figure, whilst also giving us a comic touch too. Mr Pratt played the role well, though to be fair, it was his character who was responsible for the dinosaurs running amok. Here, in 'Passengers', he again has a role that combines elements of action and comedy. However, there is also much more depth to his character in this film, and Mr Pratt demonstrates this well in some superb acting as he faces his future choices.
This reviewer was excited to see this film, but was sadly put off by a critic who revealed a plot twist. However, going to see the film, I was happy to see that the plot twist, which is a major one, and which I believe is best not revealed, is central to the plot of the film, and is rightly dealt with, and explored, in depth. There are one or two other plot twists too, which again are best left to be discovered.
Louisville Kentucky gave us 'The Greatest', the three-times World Heavy-weight Boxing Champion Muhammad Ali, (who sadly died in 2016). In 1990 it also gave us another world champion, and star actress, Jennifer Lawrence.
Her appearance in 'Silver Linings Playbook' (2012) as a sulky and mad date for the equally mad and sulky Bradley Cooper, who then won his heart with her running and dancing, (as well as Robert De Niro's), was merely one of several tremendous performances in recent years. The three stars, followed that up with 'American Hustle' (2013), and 'Joy' (2015). In 'Hustle' Miss Lawrence again played a border-line mad, and this time, not too smart, but very manipulative wife of Christian Bale. This time last year, she starred in 'Joy' (2016), playing the eponymous real-life inventor of the Miracle-Mop, who was necessarily made of much sterner stuff.
Miss Lawrence must be considered amongst the best, if not the best, actress of her generation, and this era. She seems to be able to be truly authentic in her portrayal of her characters, exhibiting true and believable emotions in all of her character dramas. In this film 'Passengers', she again shows us her talent and is rightly billed with the first credit as the star of this film.
Miss Lawrence's character, (the appropriately named Aurora), like that of Mr Pratt, wakes up alone, before she meets him. These two humans are alone. It cannot really be said that this film has a cast of thousands, as all the rest are tucked up asleep for the duration of the trip. Our two woken humans face an awful future alone, with only an android barman as company. Barman Arthur, played well by Michael Sheen, will be easily recognized as being like all human barman on planet Earth.
'Passengers' thus does have a very small cast, though it does seem a spot bigger than that of 'Gravity' (2013) starring Sandra Bullock and George Clooney. The two films are similar, with both being dramas set in space with a small cast. Having seen both films in 3D, I can say they share excellent production values too. In 'Passengers' the interiors and exteriors of the space-ship are excellent, as too are all the shots of the rest of the universe. Music was excellent. It heightened tension and drama at the appropriate moments, whilst never intruding either.
'Passengers', and 'Gravity', have good plots and stories. Sadly, at the end of last year, 'Arrival' (2016), went nowhere, and could be best described by old Mrs Soprano as "just all a big nothing". 'Interstellar' (2014), did at least go somewhere initially, however both films were really ruined by silly time-loop stuff.
By contrast, 'Passengers' is recommended as a seriously well-made film, with a good story-line, that also raises some thoughtful questions that will need to be addressed before we move from our everyday commuter problems here on Earth to those involved in space-travel.
Miss Lawrence, sadly, only teases us with a dance in this film, but the silver-lining is more running, and some swimming too.
Whilst the film deals with some adult issues and themes, it's UK rating of 12A, means that it is suitable for a wide range of audiences.
Good stuff! 10/10.
The film opens, travelling through space, and Chris Pratt being woken from his induced hibernation sleep. Those familiar with the trailer will enjoy seeing Mr Pratt preening himself before he goes off to meet the other passengers, as we know what he does not. There is comedy here, as well as some satire, that will be familiar to mere earthlings experiencing different classes of travel, and trying to work through computer options. As the full reality of his situation dawns on Mr Pratt the film becomes more serious.
Chris Pratt in Jurassic World (2015) played a likable action figure, whilst also giving us a comic touch too. Mr Pratt played the role well, though to be fair, it was his character who was responsible for the dinosaurs running amok. Here, in 'Passengers', he again has a role that combines elements of action and comedy. However, there is also much more depth to his character in this film, and Mr Pratt demonstrates this well in some superb acting as he faces his future choices.
This reviewer was excited to see this film, but was sadly put off by a critic who revealed a plot twist. However, going to see the film, I was happy to see that the plot twist, which is a major one, and which I believe is best not revealed, is central to the plot of the film, and is rightly dealt with, and explored, in depth. There are one or two other plot twists too, which again are best left to be discovered.
Louisville Kentucky gave us 'The Greatest', the three-times World Heavy-weight Boxing Champion Muhammad Ali, (who sadly died in 2016). In 1990 it also gave us another world champion, and star actress, Jennifer Lawrence.
Her appearance in 'Silver Linings Playbook' (2012) as a sulky and mad date for the equally mad and sulky Bradley Cooper, who then won his heart with her running and dancing, (as well as Robert De Niro's), was merely one of several tremendous performances in recent years. The three stars, followed that up with 'American Hustle' (2013), and 'Joy' (2015). In 'Hustle' Miss Lawrence again played a border-line mad, and this time, not too smart, but very manipulative wife of Christian Bale. This time last year, she starred in 'Joy' (2016), playing the eponymous real-life inventor of the Miracle-Mop, who was necessarily made of much sterner stuff.
Miss Lawrence must be considered amongst the best, if not the best, actress of her generation, and this era. She seems to be able to be truly authentic in her portrayal of her characters, exhibiting true and believable emotions in all of her character dramas. In this film 'Passengers', she again shows us her talent and is rightly billed with the first credit as the star of this film.
Miss Lawrence's character, (the appropriately named Aurora), like that of Mr Pratt, wakes up alone, before she meets him. These two humans are alone. It cannot really be said that this film has a cast of thousands, as all the rest are tucked up asleep for the duration of the trip. Our two woken humans face an awful future alone, with only an android barman as company. Barman Arthur, played well by Michael Sheen, will be easily recognized as being like all human barman on planet Earth.
'Passengers' thus does have a very small cast, though it does seem a spot bigger than that of 'Gravity' (2013) starring Sandra Bullock and George Clooney. The two films are similar, with both being dramas set in space with a small cast. Having seen both films in 3D, I can say they share excellent production values too. In 'Passengers' the interiors and exteriors of the space-ship are excellent, as too are all the shots of the rest of the universe. Music was excellent. It heightened tension and drama at the appropriate moments, whilst never intruding either.
'Passengers', and 'Gravity', have good plots and stories. Sadly, at the end of last year, 'Arrival' (2016), went nowhere, and could be best described by old Mrs Soprano as "just all a big nothing". 'Interstellar' (2014), did at least go somewhere initially, however both films were really ruined by silly time-loop stuff.
By contrast, 'Passengers' is recommended as a seriously well-made film, with a good story-line, that also raises some thoughtful questions that will need to be addressed before we move from our everyday commuter problems here on Earth to those involved in space-travel.
Miss Lawrence, sadly, only teases us with a dance in this film, but the silver-lining is more running, and some swimming too.
Whilst the film deals with some adult issues and themes, it's UK rating of 12A, means that it is suitable for a wide range of audiences.
Good stuff! 10/10.
