Showing posts with label Adam Driver. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Adam Driver. Show all posts

Saturday, 29 March 2025

Paterson (3 Stars)


"Paterson" is about a man called Paterson who lives in Paterson, New Jersey. He works as a bus driver and writes poetry. Maybe I should put those two activities in the other order. He's a bus driver because he needs money to survive, but poetry is his first love. He's the sort of person who would benefit from Universal Basic Income.

He wakes up every morning between 6 and 6:15. He doesn't need to set an alarm. While working he listens to people talking on the bus. Back at home he talks to his wife. He loves her, even though he frowns when she buys expensive things such as a guitar. In the evening he visits a bar and he takes his dog Marvin for a walk.

It's a low-key film with a lot of repetition that doesn't really go anywhere. Paterson could be you or me. My life isn't exciting, and neither is his. What about yours?

Success Rate:  + 0.2

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Wednesday, 25 December 2024

White Noise (3 Stars)



I have a Netflix account that I share with my son Benjamin. He doesn't have many films on disc, so he uses it a lot. I don't use the account much. Sometimes I don't log in for months. Recently I received an email advertising "White Noise" as a new film on Netflix. I checked the trailer, and it looked interesting, so I decided to watch it today.

How can I describe it? It's well filmed and the acting is competent, but what's the point? In the first half of the film there's an environmental disaster, when toxic chemicals spill from a train and a poisonous cloud spreads through Ohio. In the second half a college professor finds out his wife is secretly taking pills to stop her being afraid of dying. What do the two subjects have to so with one another?

The film is based on a novel, so it's possible that the book would answer my question. I won't bother reading it to find out. "White Noise" was a monumental box office flop before being taken to streaming. That's one of the good reasons for Netflix. It collects films that nobody wants to pay money to watch.

Success Rate:  - 1012.1

Annette (5 Stars)


I have over 2000 films on DVD and Blu-ray, so I need to organise them. I keep the films I've just watched or intend to watch soon in my bedroom, but my main collection is in the cellar, neatly organised in alphabetical order. I boast that I can walk into the cellar and grab any film I want to watch within 10 seconds, usually much faster. But in October I had a problem. I wanted to watch "Annette", and I couldn't find it anywhere. It wasn't in the cellar, so I hunted for it everywhere. First I looked in all the logical places where I might have mislaid it. Then I looked in all the stupid places. I hunted for weeks. It really annoyed me. Finally I gave up and re-ordered it in Amazon's Black Friday sale. It was cheap, much cheaper than the price I'd originally paid for it, so I was happy, even though it wasn't in stock and I had to wait three weeks to get it.

Then, on the same day the replacement disc arrived, I found the old disc. The trouble with ordering my films alphabetically is that I rely on the system. If I make a mistake in placing the films in my shelves I'm in a mess. That's what happened. I was taking another film from my shelf, and there was "Annette" staring at me, neatly placed between "Aaaaaaaah" and "Abominable Doctor Phibes". I could have kicked myself for my stupidity. It was only five places out of order, but I never noticed it when I was looking for it.

There might be other films out of order, but the problem is that I only discover that a film is misplaced when I want to watch it. There are films that I only watch once in five years or even less. I only discover a mistake when I fail to find a film within 10 seconds. By then it's too late.

I'm really glad that I could watch "Annette" again today. I only gave it an average rating the last two times I watched it. I didn't enjoy the music, and I found the main character (Annette's father) unpleasant. And yet the film stuck in my mind. I was sure I would like it more if I watched it again. And I did. Yes, Annette's father is unpleasant, but that's the whole point of the film. An elegant opera singer falls in love with an obscene, provocative comedian. Opposites attract, we all know that, but can such relationships survive? In "Annette" we see that the relationship is doomed to failure from the beginning.

It's a brilliant film.

Success Rate:  - 5.0

Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Wednesday, 31 January 2024

Annette (3 Stars)


Despite only giving this film a three star rating when I watched it in 2021, I decided to buy it on Blu-ray. I can't really explain why. Something about it fascinated me. Adam Driver is the wrong choice for a musical. He's excellent in the spoken scenes as the offensive stand-up comedian Henry McHenry, but when he sings I have to cringe. Marion Cotillard is a better singer.

The songs aren't particularly well written. "We love each other so much" is an important song for the plot – no spoilers! – but it's so trite that I can't enjoy it.

I still find the film average after second viewing, but I can't help feeling I'm missing something. I'm sure that I'll watch it again. Preferably I want to watch it with a friend so that we can exchange thoughts.

Success Rate:  - 5.0

Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Wednesday, 2 March 2022

Tracks (5 Stars)



Name: Robyn Davidson
Lived: 5 September 1950 – still alive
Film dates: 1975 to 1978
Film made in 2013

This is a film that touches me on different levels. The scenery is bleak but beautiful, and it's about a woman I admire immensely. Robyn Davidson did something that no man before or after her has been able to do: she walked from Alice Springs (the centre of Australia) to the west coast, a distance of 1700 miles (2700 kilometers). The quickest route, according to Google Maps, is 150 miles shorter, but she had to take some diversions, for instance to avoid sacred aborigine land.
 

Why did she do it? The simple answer is "Why not?" She just wanted to prove it could be done. If no man had ever attempted this feat, why shouldn't a woman do it?

She made the journey with four camels and her pet dog Diggity. The camels were used for carrying her tent and other equipment. No, she didn't ride on the camels. That would have been cheating. Diggity died a month before the end of the trip, which almost made her give up.

Her hindrances on the journey were sometimes by well-wishers. The journey was sponsored by National Geographic, on condition that she would let herself be photographed along the way. A photographer called Rick Smolan was assigned to meet her several times on the way. This annoyed her, but she had to put up with it to get the money she needed. Rick wanted to see her once a month, but she insisted that it couldn't be more than once every three months. He was attracted to her and wanted to travel with her for a few days, which would have turned into weeks, but she refused.

As she travelled on, her fame increased. She was called the Camel Lady. People came from far and wide looking for the Camel Lady, to talk to her and take photos. This was most unwelcome.


After 195 days in the desert Robyn and her four camels reached the ocean. Was Robyn Davidson crazy? Maybe, but this is the sort of crazy we need more of in our world. Not the sort of crazy that starts wars.


Mia Wasikowska puts on an excellent performance as Robyn Davidson. She looks similar enough to carry the role, not to mention her detached acting, as if she's living in a different world to those about her. I've read that Julia Roberts was originally chosen for the role. I'm sorry, Julia might be a good actress, but she would have been wrong for the role. Totally wrong.

Why did this film fail at the box office? I don't know. Wasn't it exciting enough? Was it was too Australian? I have no idea. It hasn't even been released on DVD in America. I hosted it for the Birmingham Film Group, and only one person went with me to see it. That's sad.

Success Rate:  - 2.4

Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Sunday, 7 November 2021

The Last Duel (4 Stars)


I have very wide-ranging tastes in films. I watch and enjoy films from any genre, as long as they're good. The word good is subjective, I know. What I may consider good might be awful for others. And yet, there are certain films I shy away from. The description of this film on my cinema's website put me off. I don't like period films set between the Middle Ages and the 19th Century. I wouldn't have gone to see it if the director hadn't been Ridley Scott. I trust him to make good films. And I wasn't disappointed.

The film is about two squires who become friends in the 1370's. Both serve Count Pierre d'Alencon. Jacques Le Gri (Adam Driver) is a highly educated scholar who's in Pierre's good favour. Jean de Carrouges (Matt Damon) is a simple illiterate man who repeatedly angers Pierre with his blunt manner.

In 1386 Jean returns home from Paris, and his wife Marguerite tells him that she's been raped by Jacques. He complains to Pierre, who laughingly dismisses the case. Jean appeals to the king for the right to avenge his wife's honour in trial by combat. Simply put, the winner of a battle to the death decides Marguerite's fate. If Jean wins, Jacques is posthumously declared a rapist. If Jacques wins, Marguerite is declared a liar and will be burnt at the stake.

The film is made up of three chapters before the fight begins. In each of the chapters the story is told from a different perspective: "The truth according to Jean de Carrouges", "The truth according to Jacques Le Gri" and "The truth according to Marguerite de Carrouges". It's fascinating to see how the accounts differ. My only complaint is that they're too similar. A little more deviation would have helped the plot more.

It's an epic film, and the final battle is brutal. Women in the audience cried out as the duel took place.

Trial by combat was seldom in 14th Century France, but this was the last time it was carried out before it was outlawed. It really was the last duel.

Thursday, 7 October 2021

The Sparks Brothers (5 Stars)


Quite simply, this is the best documentary I've ever seen. It manages to be informative and entertaining at the same time. This is a mixture that most documentaries, even good documentaries, fail to achieve.

Prior to watching the film I had only limited knowledge of the Sparks brothers, Russell and Ron Mael. That means I belong to the film's target audience. Like most people from the UK, I considered Sparks to be a one hit wonder. For many years I only knew them from their hit single "This town ain't big enough for both of us", which reached number two in the British pop charts in 1974. I first saw them performing this song on Top Of The Pops, after which it became a hit.

An aside note about Top Of The Pops, the British pop music programme that was broadcast from 1964 to 2006. I watched it every week throughout my youth, from my early teens until I left England at 22. I didn't like most of the songs, but I considered it essential viewing to keep up with British music culture. It was broadcast on Thursday evening on BBC. At school the next day my friends discussed the programme, and sometimes I threw in my own opinions, which were shouted down. My friends were into pop music, I wasn't. When I was 18 and went to university I still watched Top Of The Pops, and I discussed it with my best friend, Christopher Burton. Sometimes we even watched it together. We had similar tastes in music, so we usually agreed that most of the songs were bad.

But getting back to Sparks. I saw them perform "This town ain't big enough for both of us" on a Thursday evening in 1974. It was a song that I liked. The next day in school all the children were enthusiastic about it. It was one of the rare times that I belonged to the in crowd. I was in the sixth form at the time, and my school had a sixth form lounge. Radio One ran all day, when there were no lessons. Nobody ever changed the channel. I remember Terry Wogan talking about the Sparks performance the next day. He said, "Did you see the man with those eyes?"

After that, Sparks disappeared, as far as I was concerned. The only other song that I ever heard was "Something for the girl with everything", a 1975 single which didn't become a hit. Wikipedia lists a song called "Never turn your back on Mother Earth" as a minor hit in late 1974, but I don't remember it. Maybe they never played it on Top Of The Pops.

I lived in Germany from 1978 to 1997. Then I moved to America. That's where I rediscovered Sparks. Several of my friends were Sparks fans. Huh? So they weren't a one hit wonder after all? I listened to the album "Kimono My House", and I loved it. I borrowed other Sparks albums. I also listened to their early albums. I was surprised to find out that their first album, "Halfnelson", was produced by Todd Rundgren. I was (and still am) a big fan of Todd Rundgren's early music (1968 to 1976). He wasn't a typical record producer. Whenever he produced a record, he took control. He became a non-playing member of the group. I can recognise his style in "Halfnelson".

P.S. I'm convinced that Todd Rundgren plays guitar on "Electrick Gypsies" on Steve Hillage's album "L", even though he isn't credited.

I bought a few of Sparks' albums. In 2000 they were stolen, along with the rest of my CD collection, by Thomas Kuzilla of Dearborn Heights, Michigan. I'm not a believer in Karma, but I'm happy to say that he's now dead. The world is a better place without him. I rebought some of my favourite CDs, but I didn't have enough money to replace all 1800 of them, so I had to make a selection. I didn't rebuy any of Sparks' albums. In retrospect, that was a mistake.

So I forgot Sparks again. This lasted until 2010. At that time I was able to download most albums from the Internet. It was illegal, technically speaking, but I didn't care. I retrieved MP3 versions of at least half of my stolen music collection. I added some new albums. Among others, I downloaded the complete collection of Sparks up to 2010. I enjoyed most of the albums, but not all of them. "Plagiarism" stood out as an album that particularly annoyed me. It didn't remain on my hard drive for long.

Over the next years I've occasionally listened to Sparks, especially their 1970's albums. Now it's become legal. I listen to their albums on Amazon Music, so I don't have to clutter up my hard disc with thousands of MP3s.

Incidentally, from 2010 to 2015 I owned two computers. One of them was used solely for collecting MP3s. I had both computers in the same room. I used to write and chat on one computer while the other was playing music.


Last month I was reminded of Sparks again by the release of "Annette", a musical written by the Sparks brothers, featuring their music. While reading reviews of the film I found out that Edgar Wright had made a documentary about the group. Edgar Wright? Then I had to see it! He's one of my favourite directors. He'd never made documentaries before this, but if he makes a documentary it has to be good.

I wasn't disappointed.

The film filled in my almost non-existent knowledge of the band's history. There was (probably) nothing new for hardcore Sparks fans, of which there was at least one in the cinema audience, based on her Sparks outfit. For me it was new, and there were a few surprises. I never knew that they were lived in England for two periods in their career. From 1973 to 1976 they formed a group that only had British musicians, apart from the two brothers themselves. This sometimes led to the misconception that Russell and Ron Mael were British as well, but No, they're from California. There's a curious anecdote about their first appearance on Top Of The Pops. They were signed up to appear on the show, but when they turned up to make a recording the producer realised they were American, and he told them they couldn't appear because of the rules of the musicians' union. Their slot on the show was given to the Rubettes at short notice. They finally appeared on Top Of The Pops three weeks later after signing the appropriate papers (which probably included joining the British musicians' union, although it wasn't stated).

I was also told that Sparks were popular in Germany in the 1980's. That surprised me. On the other hand, I lost track of the pop music scene while I lived in Germany. There was no German equivalent of Top Of The Pops for me to watch every week.

Sparks isn't the biggest band of the 1970's, or any other era. What makes them stand out is that they've retained their energy for 50 years. Think of any other rock groups of the 1970's. They had big success for a few years, after which they fizzled out. Maybe their albums became samey. Maybe they stopped making albums. Maybe they just spent their years as tired old men on stage performing their greatest hits for older fans. Not Sparks. Russell and Ron Mael, with changing support musicians, have managed to change styles and remain fresh over the decades.

The film's tag line is "Your favourite band's favourite band". That's interesting, and it's a theme that crops up repeatedly when famous musicians (i.e. more famous than Sparks) are interviewed in the documentary. Sparks are a group that's more popular with musicians than with the general public. They were also influential as the first Anglo-American electropop group in the late 1970's, paving the way for groups like the Pet Shop Boys and Human League. Most fans don't even realise that Sparks were the main influence of their favourite bands.

The documentary progresses through Sparks' 25 albums and the stylistic changes over the years. What fascinated me is that they had a six year enforced hiatus from 1988 to 1994. Due to low sales of their previous albums, they couldn't find a company that would give them a recording contract. That would make any other group give up. Any other group would turn to drugs, or simply get new jobs. Not Sparks. For six years they worked hard, writing and recording new songs. They were in their studio every day. I wonder how many albums can be made from this music archive.

How many more years of music can we expect from Sparks? That depends on their health. Ron Mael is 76, Russell Mael is 73. They both seem to be healthy, but it's a critical age. I hope they continue for years while their creativity is at a high point.

One thing that I didn't entirely agree with is the claim that Sparks, unlike most bands, include humour in their music. I don't see that. There's nothing in their songs that makes me laugh. What I see in their music is a subtle irony. Maybe that's what Edgar Wright means.


Where do I go from here? The documentary overwhelmed me. I've decided to listen to all the Sparks albums again, the more recent ones for the first time. I'll listen to each album chronologically, even "Plagiarism". but not just in quick succession. I'll listen to each album several times in order to fully appreciate it.

Friday, 10 September 2021

Annette (3 Stars)



This is a film that's a casualty of the Coronavirus. It should have been released in cinemas this summer, but cinemas were still closed in most countries. Even in the countries where cinemas were re-opening, it wasn't a big priority. There were more important films that had to be shown first, if you understand what I mean. After a limited cinema release in America in August it was added to Amazon Prime. Its future in other countries is still unclear.


Adam Driver plays Henry McHenry, a very offensive stand up comedian. When asked why he became a comedian he says that it's the only way that he can tell the truth without being killed. He marries Ann Defrasnoux, a successful opera singer, played by Marion Cotillard. It's an attraction of opposites. While he lives to offend, she's a highly respectable singer.

After the birth of their first child, Annette, Henry's career spirals downwards. He's not telling jokes any more, he's just offending the audience. He's crossed the line. For instance, while performing in Las Vegas he tells the audience he's killed his wife, and he goes into detail about how he did it. The audience yells at him, "That's not funny".

The family goes sailing on their yacht. The yacht capsizes in a storm. Only Henry and Annette survive. In the afterlife, Ann blames Henry for her death and says she'll haunt him. Annette, now two years old, begins to sing with her mother's voice. Henry doesn't recognise this as a haunting; he thinks Annette is a musical prodigy, and he takes her on tour.


This is a difficult film for me to rate. I delayed writing my review so I could think about it. I eventually decided to rate it as average. The film starts off brilliantly, but as it continues there are more and more things that bother me. I can't name them without giving away spoilers. One thing I can say is that the film's a musical, but Adam Driver doesn't have a good voice. He's not as bad as Pierce Brosnan, but I still think a better singer should have been hired.

Overall, I don't know what the director is trying to say. If there's a deeper message in the film, I don't get it. I'd like to read an interview with him about the film before watching it again.

Friday, 14 June 2019

The Dead Don't Die (4 Stars)


Jim Jarmusch is never predictable. Every new film is a surprise for the audiences. We never know what to predict. "The Dead Don't Die" isn't a surprise because it's a zombie film, but because it's so funny. It's a zombie comedy with the emphasis on the comedy. I honestly thought Jim Jarmusch was too serious to make a film like this.

The setting is Centerville, a small American town presumably in the centre of the USA. It only has 738 inhabitants, but it has a diner, a motel, a hardware store, a funeral parlour, a cemetery, a police station, a juvenile detention centre, an old people's home and a gas station. That's all any town needs, isn't it? The only thing I can think of that's missing is a church, but there must have been one. It wasn't shown because it wasn't important to the plot. What about a school? In a town that small the children are probably sent by bus to the next large town.

Polar fracking has tipped the Earth off its axis and changed the speed of rotation. This has caused the dead to rise from the graves as zombies. The main characters are the policemen Cliff Robertson and Ronnie Peterson, played by Bill Murray and Adam Driver. (I wonder if the similarity of the the name Peterson to Adam Driver's character in Jim Jarmusch's last film, "Paterson", is deliberate).

Ronnie repeatedly breaks the fourth wall by referring to things outside of the film. He knows that things will end badly because he's read the script. This adds to the film's hilarity.


I can imagine that this isn't a film that everyone will like. Jim Jarmusch's films are always a matter of taste. I didn't even like "Only Lovers Left Alive" until the second time I saw it. The cinema audience today seemed to enjoy it, judging by the laughter throughout the room. I can recommend it to my readers. If you don't like it, watch it a second time. Then tell me what you think. That's what my comments box is for.

The film's theme song, "The Dead Don't Die" by Sturgill Simpson, is the most blood curdling thing about the film. I shuddered every time it played. It will give me nightmares when I close my eyes tonight.

Monday, 8 October 2018

The Man who killed Don Quixote (3 Stars)


When he was at film school the young director Toby shot a film with amateur actors about Don Quixote. Ten years later he's making commercials. That's not the career he expected. His latest commercial, being filmed in Spain with the backing of a Russian vodka company, needs someone to play the part of Don Quixote, so he looks up the actor who played Don Quixote in his student film, the shoemaker Javier. Times have changed. Javier is now demented and thinks he really is Don Quixote. He thinks Toby is his squire and demands that they ride out on adventures together.

As Toby accompanies Javier he doesn't realise that he's being drawn into Javier's madness.

With Terry Gilliam as director and screenwriter I expected a comedy, but the film is more of a tragedy. That's not bad in itself. What disappointed me about the film is that it wasn't always clear what was happening. Portions of the film seemed to be taking place in the 17th Century. Some scenes were called dreams. Others were play-acting by Javier's friends. Others were the filming of the advertisement. Added to this, we see the film through the eyes of Toby as he slowly slips into madness. It's possible that I didn't interpret all the scenes correctly, and I shan't properly understand them until I see the film again. But I don't want to watch it again. It didn't excite me enough.

Wednesday, 5 September 2018

BlacKKKlansman (4½ Stars)


This is a thought-provoking film that's based on true events. The events portrayed actually took place in 1979, but the film has been set in 1972 for purposes of dramatisation.

Ron Stallworth becomes the first black police officer in Colorado Springs. After doing boring work in the records department he's given an undercover assignment. He's sent to listen to the speech of a former Black Panther leader hosted by the Black Student Union of Colorado High. Despite the extreme rhetoric about killing policemen he reports back that he doesn't find the speaker dangerous. It's all talk.

Shortly afterwards he makes a plan to infiltrate the local chapter of the Ku Klux Klan under his own initiative. He speaks to the local president on the phone, but he can't visit him in person, obviously. The infiltration becomes a two-man job. Ron makes the phone contact, while his colleague Phil Zimmerman – a Jew – takes his place in the personal meetings.

That's all I'll say about the story itself. What remains with me after seeing the film is the ugly nature of the racism expressed by the KKK members. I've seen films about racism before, but never one like this. The most disgusting racist statements are said in the most natural of ways, as if it's obvious that Jews and Negroes are inferior. I found it difficult to talk about the film with my friends afterwards. I was overwhelmed.

I only have one small criticism. "Birth of a Nation", of which excerpts are shown, isn't as bad as it's made out to be. Watch it for yourself and make up your own mind.

This is a film I really need to see again. I'll probably discuss it in more detail in my next review.

Saturday, 25 November 2017

Tracks (5 Stars)


I've mentioned a few times that I bought my first DVD player in 2003, and this was what turned me into a film fan. I don't remember the exact month, but I know it was a warm day, so I'm guessing it was June. What I haven't told my readers is that the last time I went on holiday was in April 2003. Since then I've been on occasional day trips and I've visited relatives, but that doesn't count. Is it a coincidence that these two dates lie so close together? April 2003 and June 2003? I think not.

Over the years, from my early childhood to April 2003, I often went on holidays. As a child my parents went on holiday every summer, either to Wales or to an English coastal town. As far as I remember they never skipped a year. My parents worked hard, and an annual holiday was something they looked forward to all year. When I was 20 we went to Scotland. This was the only time we ever went to Scotland, and it was also the last holiday we took together as a family. Later in the year my parents split up.

I lived with my father for the next two years. He didn't want to go on holiday any more. For the rest of his life he spent his annual vacation at home. He called it "holiday in the garden". I never asked him why he didn't want to go away any more. Maybe it would have reminded him of his married life. I don't know.

When I was 22 I left home to work in Germany. From then on I got into the habit of going on holiday every year, just like my parents had done. For the next four years I went to Scotland. I alternated between the west coast (the Highlands) and the east coast (the whisky triangle). After getting married at 26 I still went on holiday almost every year, usually to Scotland, but sometimes we visited France or Switzerland. After leaving my wife at 41 I stopped going on holiday. In 2002, when I was living in England again, I went to Brighton for a week. It was glorious weather, I loved it. In 2003 I went back to Brighton, and it rained every day. Awful!

That was April. Two months later I bought a DVD player. That changed my life. Until then I'd occasionally borrowed films from a video rental store, maybe once a week, and I watched random films on television. But I was amazed at the leap in quality from videotapes to DVD. The new technology fascinated me so much that I was buying about two films a week. In addition I bought the box sets of my favourite television series, "Highlander", "The Avengers" and "La Femme Nikita" (in that order), so I was using my DVD player every day.

No more holidays.

Why not?

My readers might guess that I was spending so much money on DVDs (and later Blu-rays) that I didn't have enough money left for holidays. No, that's not it. The reason is that I immersed myself into my films so deeply that I didn't need a holiday any more. When I watch my films I see foreign countries and I feel like I'm in the country with the actors.


That's why I'm writing this today. I just watched "Tracks". Look at the dazzlingly beautiful Australian scenery. Look at the strange people in the strange towns. I feel like I'm walking in the dusty streets and the sandy deserts. Why should I spend thousands of dollars on a plane journey to Australia when I can see everything for ten dollars -- the price of a Blu-ray -- without leaving my sofa?

Maybe I'm lazy. Robyn Davidson spent 195 days walking across the desert with the sun beating down on her head, while I'm sitting in front of the TV screen with a glass of Coke in my hand. She was crazy, I'm not. She could have died, I'm safe. I travel the world faster. This month I've been to Canada, Spain, China, America, Iran, France, Russia, Peru and Australia. Where shall I go next month? I lead an exciting life.

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Monday, 6 March 2017

Silence (4 Stars)


This film offers a glimpse into a forgotten part of history: the persecution of Christians in Japan. Although the story is fictional it references places and events in the 17th Century. The Roman Catholic Church first sent missionaries to Japan in 1540, along with Portugese traders. Christianity flourished, in particular in Nagasaki and the surrounding districts. It's claimed that by the end of the 16th Century almost everyone in Nagasaki was a Christian. The Japanese government outlawed Christianity in 1587, but this wasn't enforced at first due to local governors being Christian. In February 1597 persecution began with the crucifixion of 26 Christians, a mixture of foreign missionaries and local preachers. The initial murder of Christians made the church flourish, and by the early 17th Century the Japanese government preferred to ask Christians to publicly give up their faith rather than kill them. Any Christians who didn't immediately recant were tortured until they changed their minds, for instance by being covered with boiling water or by being hung upside down while their blood was drained from small cuts.

The film begins in 1640. Two Jesuit priests, Father Rodrigues (Andrew Garfield) and Father Garupe (Adam Driver) travel to Japan to search for their former teacher, Father Ferreira (Liam Neeson), who has disappeared for 15 years. When they arrive in Goto, near Nagasaki, they're astonished to find a large Christian community. At first the priests are hidden by the villagers, but eventually they're captured by samurai led by the inquisitor Inoue. The inquisitor offers freedom to anyone who publicly renounces Christianity by standing on a picture of Jesus, but those who refuse are beheaded.

After Rodrigues is forced to watch Garupe being killed by drowning, he's entertained in comfort by Inoue. He's fed well and the two engage in daily theological debates. Inoue doesn't believe that Christianity is wrong, he just believes that it's "wrong for Japan". He says that the people of Europe need Christianity, but Buddhism is better for Japan. He goes on to explain that even the Japanese Christians realise this by adapting Christianity to their previous beliefs. When Japanese missionaries arrived in Japan they called their God Deus, because the Japanese language contained no word for a supreme God. The Japanese were confused by this foreign word, so they translated Deus into their own language as Dainichi, the word for the Sun. To Inoue this means that the Japanese Christians are really praying to the Sun.


Inoue has no intention of killing Rodriques. He wants him to publicly renounce his faith as an example for the Japanese Christians. When he's unable to persuade Rodrigues by friendly discussions he resorts to pressure. Inoue no longer frees the Japanese Christians who renounce their faith. They have to be tortured until Rodrigues gives up his faith. Inoue tells Rodrigues that his stubbornness is causing hundreds of death.

The silence in the film's title is God's silence. How can God remain silent when his followers are suffering so much?

Christianity is the religion of a silent God. Its believers are called on to have faith, believing in someone that they can't see or hear. This leads non-believers to mock them. because they say the reason that they can't see or hear God is because he doesn't exist.

Let's just assume for a moment that God does exist. Let's assume that God is sitting observing his followers and isn't answering them. Why not? The official answer of Christianity is that it's a test of their faith. That's a weak answer. For me the answer is that God is weak and foolish. God's silence has led to thousands of years of war and suffering. God's silence (assuming that he's the Christian God) has led to his religion being corrupted by superstition and hate. God's silence has allowed new, even more corrupt religions to rise up.

Maybe God is unable to answer. That's forgivable. Maybe he's dead, as Friedrich Nietzsche claimed. Maybe God got bored of the Earth and wandered off to create another planet somewhere else. Maybe God isn't omnipresent, and he's currently sitting in Alaska chatting to an Eskimo. That's a lucky Eskimo. If God travels round the world talking to one person at a time I can tell you that he hasn't got round to me yet.

I'm not an atheist. Far from it. All the evidence points to the fact that one or more Gods walked the Earth at some time in the past. So where is God now? I sincerely hope God isn't watching the world at the moment, because if he is watching us in silence he's an evil being who has to take full responsibility for the world's suffering.

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Saturday, 29 October 2016

Tracks (5 Stars)


There's very little I can say about this film that I didn't say in my last review. It's a miraculous film about a miraculous achievement by a powerful woman. Robyn Davidson would probably disagree with that description. She claims to be an ordinary person, but I can guarantee you that she is far from ordinary. Here are three photographs of her taken in 1977 by Rick Smolan for National Geographic.




In the film Adam Driver annoys me in his role as Rick Smolan. I'm sure this was deliberate. Robyn Davidson was a woman carrying out a mission and Rick was merely her photographer, but he felt that he ought to accompany her and support her as a man. That's a typical male way of thinking. Robyn needed no support. As a woman she was capable of doing everything my herself.


Mia Wasikowska was the perfect actress to play Robyn. Compare the photos above, Robyn on the left and Mia on the right.

Order from Amazon.com
Order from Amazon.co.uk
Order from Amazon.de

Monday, 18 April 2016

Midnight Special (3 Stars)


This is a good example of the differences between the judgements of critics and the viewing public. The critics love it. They call "Midnight Special" a new science fiction classic. After watching it I have to say that the ideas behind the story are promising, but they're under-developed, and the film's pacing is much too slow. I briefly fell asleep in the cinema, and my friends from the film group also complained that they had been having difficulties staying awake.

Alton Meyer is an eight-year-old boy with unusual abilities. He speaks in foreign languages that he's never heard before, which gains the attention of the religious cult to which his parents belong. Alton is considered to be a prophet, and his utterances are quoted in the sermons. The FBI pay attention when they find out that some of Alton's words contain classified military information. Before Alton can be arrested his father runs away with him.

One of Alton's strange characteristics is that he can't be in the sunlight. The windows have to be blacked out during the day, and he also has to wear goggles to shield his eyes from ambient light. Other things happen in Alton's vicinity, such as earth tremors and satellites falling from the sky.

Despite occasional car chases and crashing satellites, the film is painfully slow. Alton's powers are only partially explained, which I found frustrating. This isn't a film I can recommend.


This is the 2000th post on my blog. I've been busy over the last five and a half years. I'd like to thank my regular readers, the ones I know and the ones I don't, for sticking with me all this time. If you've been reading this blog for a long time and I don't know you personally, please leave a comment and introduce yourself. I'd like to get to know all my readers.

Friday, 15 April 2016

Inside Llewyn Davis (4 Stars)


A man, a guitar, a cat, nowhere to live. Actually it's two cats. Maybe three. Llewyn Davis catches his friend's cat after it runs away when he opens the door. He brings it back, but when he gives it back to his friends they say it's the wrong cat, so he adopts it. He carries the cat with him when he hitch-hikes from New York to Chicago, but he abandons the cat half way. When he's driving back to New York he runs over a cat. It looks like the cat he abandoned, but that would be too much of a coincidence, wouldn't it?

Llewyn Davis is an unsuccessful folk singer in New York in 1961. His songs are quite good, but he doesn't have much of a stage presence and earns badly. He engages in couchsurfing. That's a word that I only learnt after watching this film. It refers to someone who has nowhere to live, so he does a round of his friends, sleeping on their couch for a few days, then moving to the next friend as soon as they get tired of him. It's a good way to live if you're a poor musician in an expensive city.

I don't like folk music much, but I enjoy the feeling of the folk era in New York City (mostly Greenwich Village) in the 1960's. It was a time of rebellion. The young were protesting against the old, and especially against being forced to fight in the Vietnam War. Young people sat in dingy cafes and hung on every word from the mouths of the new breed of folk singers. I might have been sitting with them if I'd been alive in that era. After all, the rock music that I love so much didn't exist then, it only emerged in the early 1970's.

I don't know if this film has a message. Probably not. But it's enjoyable as a snapshot of the folk music scene in 1961.

Thursday, 4 February 2016

Tracks (5 Stars)


I've said repeatedly that I want to be cautious with my ratings. Look at the monthly film magazine Empire, which also rates films from one to five stars. Unlike me, Empire rarely gives a film five stars. It's usually only one film a month, sometimes none at all. I keep telling myself that I should reserve five star ratings for truly exceptional films. Maybe there are too many films that I find truly exceptional. This is one of them. I gave it a four star rating when I saw it in the cinema in April 2014, but after watching it again on Blu-ray its brilliance overwhelmed me. If I define a five star film as a film that must be watched, "Tracks" deserves a five star rating. Everything is perfect about it. The imagery, the acting, the story, everything.


The film tells the story or Robyn Davidson, the first person to walk across Australia from the east to the west coast on foot. This is a 1700 mile trip on foot through the desert, which she accomplished in 195 days. She was accompanied by four camels, which carried her food and supplies, and her dog Diggity. When asked why she was attempting this walk, considered by most people to be suicide, she answered, "I'd like to think that an ordinary person is capable of anything". I personally would modify her statement, saying "I'd like to think that an ordinary woman is capable of anything". Robyn's walk across Australia took place in 1977, and since then her feat has never been repeated. No man has been able to follow in Robyn's footsteps. It's true that men are blessed with greater physical strength, but women have more endurance under extreme conditions like these.

Robyn met some people on the way, settlers in isolated outposts in the few habitable areas in central Australia. She accepted their food and hospitality, but never stayed more than a single night. Her walk was sponsored by National Geographic, so a photographer drove to meet her once every four weeks to take pictures and report her progress back to the magazine. He was also checking that she was still alive. For a few weeks she had to be accompanied across sacred land by a tribal elder, because women were forbidden to enter the area unless accompanied by a man. Typical! Every since time began men have been inventing religions that say women are inferior. Maybe some religions are worse than others, depending on how depraved their creators were, but they are all prejudiced against women in one way or another.

I have never been a believer in women's equality. The only way a woman can be equal to a man is by lowering herself to his level. For thousands of years men have feared the power of women and have done whatever they can to suppress them, by giving them less education and less opportunity to earn money. So-called women's liberation is only 100 years old and aims to win an equal standing for women in society. Even this goal has only partially been achieved. Women are setting their sights too low. Instead of shouting "Votes for women" the battle cry should have been "No votes for men". Only a global gynarchy can abolish all political and religious injustice and create peace on Earth.


Friday, 10 April 2015

While we're young (3 Stars)


This is a film that I knew I had to see. It features three of my favourite actors, Adam Driver, Naomi Watts and Amanda Seyfried. I have respect for Ben Stiller's acting abilities as well.

Josh is a man in his mid 40's who films documentaries. In the past he was successful, but he's been working on his last documentary for 10 years, and there is no sign of it reaching a conclusion. We see him interviewing an old man who rambles on about subjects that are interesting in themselves, but have no connection to one another. His wife Cornelia is the son of a famous documentary filmmaker. All their friends have children, but Josh and Cornelia have been trying unsuccessfully for years to have a baby. All the magic has gone out of their life. They never do anything together because Josh is too busy with his film.

While giving a lecture Josh meets Jamie, a documentary filmmaker in his early 20's, and his wife Darby. Josh is fascinated by their spontaneity and introduces them to his wife. The two families become friends, while Josh and Jamie begin to work together on one another's documentaries.

First, let me say that the film is nothing like what I expected. The trailer makes it look like a comedy. It's true, the film does have a few jokes, most of which are included in the trailer, but it's not a funny film. The film is actually very serious, dealing with some serious issues. The main issue is the ethics of making documentaries. Is it necessary for a documentary to tell the absolute truth, if slight changes through dramatisation can make it more entertaining? It seems like the comedy elements were just woven into the film to lighten it up, so the comedy is only incidental.

I walked out of the cinema feeling confused. I was trying to remember all the arguments for and against the dramatisation of documentaries, but too much had been thrown at me in concentrated bursts. I would have preferred the film without the comedy.

Monday, 1 September 2014

What if? (4 Stars)


This film was released in America as "The F Word". I prefer the English film title, because the smirks raised by the American title are unnecessary. Yes, the F word that the title refers to is "friends", but the fewest people would draw that connection before seeing the film. On the other hand, "What if?" says absolutely nothing as a title to someone who doesn't already know what the film is about, so both titles seem somehow wrong. How about "Let's be friends" or "Just friends"?

The film takes place in Toronto. A young man called Wallace (Daniel Radcliffe) has moved to Canada to study medicine, but after breaking up with his girlfriend he dropped out and is now doing a boring job writing technical manuals. At a party he meets Chantry (Zoe Kazan), a young woman who works in film animation, a job that she greatly enjoys. The two immediately hit it off, due to a multitude of common interests, but there's a problem: she has a boyfriend that she's been living with for five years. The two agree to be "just friends", even though Wallace wants more. Wallace confesses his feelings to his best friend Alan (Adam Driver), who happens to be Chantry's cousin. At first Alan tries to dissuade Wallace from making a move, but as time goes by he attempts to push the two together, much to Wallace's dismay.

Chantry's boyfriend, Ben, has a highly important job at the United Nations, mediating for international agreements. The job takes him to Dublin for six months. During this time Wallace and Chantry see even more of one another. Will they remain friends or shift into a relationship? I think that everyone who has ever seen a romantic comedy knows the answer from the beginning of the film, but the predictability doesn't spoil it at all. When the expected finally happened I had tears in my eyes, it was so moving.

As a romantic comedy the film doesn't keep exactly to the rules of the genre, but it remains close to them. For those who don't know how romantic comedies work, they have the tightest, most repetitive rules of any film genre:
  1. Girl meets boy.
  2. The girl doesn't like the boy, but as time goes on she grows to like him.
  3. Girl and boy go different ways. (Sometimes geographically, sometimes she returns to an ex-lover).
  4. Girl realises she can't live without the boy and returns to him.
The film is carried by the high quality of the acting. Daniel Radcliffe never ceases to surprise me. I expected him to fade away after the Harry Potter films, but he has considerable acting talents. Zoe Kazan, an actress that I hardly know, puts on an impressive performance. It's amazing how young she looks. She's 30, but doesn't look a day over 16. After seeing Adam Driver in "Tracks" I knew immediately that he has a big career ahead of him. Watch out for him in the future. Jemima Rooper is also noteworthy in her small role as Wallace's sister. With a cast like this the film couldn't possibly go wrong.

If you go to see this in the cinema, please don't leave when the credits start. During the credits the story is continued in an animated sequence. Don't walk out too soon or you'll miss it.

Tuesday, 29 April 2014

Tracks (4 Stars)


This is the incredible true story of Robyn Davidson's trek across Australia in 1977, based on her book about the journey. She decided to walk on foot from the east to the west coast of Australia, a distance of 1700 miles (2700 kilometres). While the distance itself set no records, it has to be remembered that the majority of the journey was across a desert where there was little or no water. Robyn used three camels to carry her load, which consisted of a tent, food and water. A fourth camel was the calf of one of the other camels that she didn't want to separate from his mother. She also took her dog with her for company.

Robyn carried out the trip with financial support from National Geographic. They sent a photographer, Rick Smolan, to rendezvous with her at intervals on her journey. The brief romance with him, little more than a one-night stand, seems out of place in the film, but assuming that it really happened it needs to be documented. Rick thought that it meant something and wanted to travel with her for a few days, but it was only the fulfilment of a temporary need that Robyn had, so she insisted on continuing alone. The only man who accompanied her was a tribal elder who had to walk with her across sacred land for religious reasons.

The film has stunning visual beauty. Mia Wasikowska does an amazing job portraying Robyn's determination in the face of adversity. Even though I've seen her twice in recent films, "Only lovers left alive" and "The Double", I've never paid much attention to her as an actress. Maybe because she played less prominent roles in both films. Originally Julia Roberts was scheduled to play Robyn Davidson, but I'm sure she wouldn't have been as convincing in the role.