Pearl Harbor (5 Stars)

Pearl Harbor (2001) frames Japan's attack on Hawaii with a melodramatic love triangle that drives much of the film's emotional weight.

The story centres on two lifelong friends, Rafe McCawley and Danny Walker, both pilots raised together in rural America and bound by loyalty and shared ambition. When they arrive at Pearl Harbor in 1941, Rafe quickly falls in love with Evelyn Johnson, a naval nurse. Their romance is intense and idealised, presented as a brief moment of happiness before the war intrudes. Rafe volunteers to fight with the RAF in England and is soon reported killed in action. Evelyn, devastated but trying to carry on with her life, gradually grows closer to Danny, who has remained at Pearl Harbor.

Danny and Evelyn's relationship develops slowly and uneasily, shaped by grief and guilt. Both feel they are betraying Rafe's memory, yet they also find comfort and genuine affection in one another. By the time they fully commit, Evelyn is pregnant, and the pair begin to imagine a future together, still shadowed by the absent third presence in their relationship.

The triangle is violently reopened when Rafe unexpectedly returns, having survived his mission. His reunion with Evelyn turns bitter when he realises she has moved on with Danny. The friendship between the two men fractures into anger and resentment, and Evelyn is caught between her past love and her present reality. Their personal conflict comes to a head just as the Japanese attack Pearl Harbor, forcing Rafe and Danny to put aside their rivalry in order to survive and fight back.

After the attack, the triangle briefly gives way to duty. Rafe and Danny volunteer for the Doolittle Raid, where Danny is killed, effectively resolving the triangle through tragedy rather than choice. In the aftermath, Evelyn mourns Danny while reconciling with Rafe, who accepts responsibility for the future, including Danny's child. The film ultimately treats the love triangle as a symbol of innocence lost, using romance and rivalry to personalise the larger catastrophe of Pearl Harbor and the emotional costs of war.

Success Rate:  + 1.2

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

Deadpool & Wolverine (5 Stars)

I've finally bought "Deadpool & Wolverine" on Blu-Ray. It took a while. I had to wait until the price dropped to something I was willing to pay. Yes, I know it's on Disney Plus, but that's not good enough for me. I need to hold the shiny metal disc in my hand. It was the best film of 2024, so it deserves a special place in my collection.

This is what we've been waiting for since 2000. The real Wolverine!

The film features the return of Wunmi Mosaku as Hunter B-15. She needs a better name. Can I call her B for short? But whatever her name is, she gets my vote for Miss Multiverse 2025.

That's all I'm writing today. What? Are you complaining? Be honest... what would you rather have? A thousand dull words from me or a sexy action photo of Hunter B-15?

My case rests.

Success Rate:  + 4.7

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

Deadpool & Wolverine (5 Stars)

Disney Wednesday #25

I was surprised to find out that "Deadpool & Wolverine" is already streaming on Disney Plus. I would have known if I'd occasionally logged in. As my readers know, I'm not much of a streaming fan. That doesn't mean I'm against streaming in principle. I have friends who boycott the streaming services. I wouldn't go that far. I need Netflix and the others to watch films that haven't been released on disc yet; or worse still, films like "Veneciafrenia" that will never be released on disc. Streaming services are also useful for me to watch films out of curiosity that I'm not sure I like.

I'm getting off topic. Concerning "Deadpool & Wolverine", I'm surprised that it's gone to streaming so soon. It's less than three months since it left the cinemas. Usually that's the sign that a film had performed badly at the box office, but that's hardly the case with "Deadpool & Wolverine". It's the second highest grossing film of the year so far, second only to "Inside Out 2".

It's a good film, though not up to the quality of the first two films. On the other hand, it's hilarious. There are non-stop in-jokes about the politics of the film studios behind the scenes. Not secret politics, of course. All Marvel fans have been reading what's going on with one company being bought by another.

I shan't write any more for now. I'll wait until I buy the film on Blu-ray, although I suspect that it'll only be a brief plot summary. The film isn't about the plot, it's about the jokes.

Success Rate:  + 4.7

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

Pearl Harbor (5 Stars)

Disney Wednesday #24

I'm actually watching a Disney Plus film on a Wednesday. That's new! It's only a Wednesday film on a technicality. I started to watch it with my grandson Oliver last Friday, but we interrupted it because he had to go to bed. Today we finally finished it.

I actually wanted to watch "X-Men First Class" on Friday, and we could have finished it, because it's a shorter film. I already had the disc in my Blu-ray player when Oliver said he wanted to watch "Pearl Harbor". Evidently he'd already seen it on television with his parents, but he wanted to watch it again. I'm always happy when he says something like that. Watching a film more than once is a sign that you're a true film fan. My personal definition is that a film is a good film if I want to watch it at least three times. As you can see in my alphabetical list of posts, there are several films that I've watched a lot more often. I admit that there's a certain excitement watching a film for the first time, but most films have subtleties that can only be picked up on repeated viewing.

I'm surprised that Oliver likes the film so much. I can understand that he likes the action scenes, but it's also a love story. It's a sign of maturity that he can also enjoy romantic scenes. He's eight years old now. Two years ago he would have been bored and told me to fast forward.

Critics have slammed "Pearl Harbor" because of the love story. They say the film should have concentrated on the attack itself. I disagree. In fact, I strongly disagree. The love story gives the viewer an emotional connection. When Japan attacks, we don't just know the main characters, we feel their suffering and we cry with them in the face of adversity. This is how to make a good film. Sometimes the critics just don't know what they're talking about.

But "Harbor" is spelt wrong. Or maybe it isn't. "Pearl Harbor" is a place name, so it has to be spelt the way it's written on maps and street signs. But as a common noun, "harbour" is the only correct spelling.

I only found out today that there's a director's cut of the film. Unfortunately, it was only released on DVD, and it's long out of print. I'm not willing to pay a high price for a second hand DVD on Ebay. I wouldn't even pay a high price for a brand new DVD.

Success Rate:  + 1.2

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

Deadpool & Wolverine (5 Stars)

It's good to be back in the cinema again, and what better film to watch than the new Deadpool film, "Deadpool & Wolverine"? I went to see the film with trepidation after reading that Ryan Reynolds had disagreements about the refilming of the film's third act. I feared the worst. Was it going to be another "Marvels"? I needn't have worried. I enjoyed the film from beginning to end.

It's a multiverse saga. That's another thing that made me groan when I read about the film in its early production days. Again, I was pleasantly surprised that the story succeeded. The multiverse was used as as a method of bringing back characters from old "forgotten" films. I shan't name them, because I don't want to rob you of the wow effect that I felt when they appeared on screen.

After watching the film I read reviews by critics who couldn't decide whether it's a good film or a bad film. The story is weak, which is obvious to me, but it's not about the story. The film jumps from one joke to the next, with only short pauses for action. The audience was laughing from beginning to end.

And Wunmi Mosaku is back! That's enough of a reason to watch the film!

"Deadpool & Wolverine" is my favourite film of the year so far.

Catch me if you can (4½ Stars)

True Stories #19

Name: Frank Abagnale

Lived: 27 April 1948 – still alive

Film dates: 1963 to 1974

Film made in 2002

From one con man to another. Steve Russell was a master con man, but Frank Abagnale was possibly the greatest con man who ever lived. His expertise was forgery, which he mastered at a young age. By the time he was 17 he'd gained $1.3 million by fraud, and by the time he was 19 it was $4 million. That was the 1960's. Allowing for inflation, you need to multiply those figures by nine.

Maybe he was too greedy. If he'd stopped stealing after his first million he would have had enough money to last the rest of his life, and he probably wouldn't have been caught. That's the trouble with money. If you love money, you can never have enough.

Frank Abagnale left home when he was 16, because he was traumatised by his parents' divorce. He paid for his rent by writing cheques, but he could never stay in one place long, because the cheques bounced and he was evicted. He had the idea to forge cheques issued by banks the other side of the country. In the pre-Internet days this meant that it took weeks for the cheques to be recognised as fakes. In order to cash cheques he needed credibility. He did this by wearing a pilot's uniform. Everyone trusts an airline pilot.

He forged university certificates to become a doctor, and then a lawyer. All the time he was writing cheques. The FBI detected him. Agent Carl Hanratty pursued Frank from one side of the country to the other. A bizarre relationship developed between the two. They had respect for one another, as if they were boxers duelling in the ring. Frank rang Carl every year on 24th December to wish him a Merry Christmas. Wasn't he afraid of having his call traced?

Eventually Frank was arrested in France and imprisoned in very unsanitary conditions. The film doesn't tell the whole story. According to Wikipedia, "At Perpignan he was held nude in a tiny, filthy, lightless cell that he was never allowed to leave. The cell lacked toilet facilities, a mattress, or a blanket, and food and water were strictly limited". Carl had Frank extradited to America so he would be treated better. While in prison in America Carl frequently consulted Frank for help catching other cheque forgers. Frank's assistance was so invaluable that after four years he was released and hired by the FBI. He became the FBI's top expert on cheque forgery.

This is an excellent film directed by Steven Spielberg. As I've said before, Steven Spielberg never makes a bad film. Tom Hanks is a phenomenal actor, and Leonardo DiCaprio also has great talent. They bounce off one another by their contrast between a humourless, uptight FBI agent and a flamboyant young man.

Success Rate:  + 4.8

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

Peppermint (4 Stars)

Today I went with a few other members of the Stuttgart Film Group to see "Unfriended: Dark Web", a film I've been anticipating for a long time. When I arrived at the cinema (EM in Stuttgart) I found that the film wasn't being shown today. My first reaction was to blame myself for reading the film schedule wrong, but I asked a member of staff about it. He told me that the film had been cancelled at short notice, about two hours earlier. Another film, "Anderswo: Allein in Afrika", had sold out, so an extra showing had been scheduled which replaced "Dark Web". If I'd been by myself I would have walked out and gone back home, but I had two other group members with me, so we looked for an alternative film. I rejected "Allein in Afrika", a documentary about a solo bicycle trip through Africa, out of principle. "Peppermint" seemed like a reasonable choice.

Riley North is a happily married woman with a young daughter. Her husband is asked by a friend to help him rob Diego Garcia, a Los Angeles drug lord. He refuses to do it, but the drug lord finds out about his possible involvement and sends men to kill him in a drive-by shooting, in which the daughter is also killed. Riley sees the killers clearly and takes them to court, but the case is thrown out. After she attacks the men in court the judge orders that she should be sent to a psychiatric ward, but she escapes.

For five years nothing is heard of her. Then she returns to Los Angeles as a different woman. She's armed with military weapons, and she's a skilled fighter. She attacks and kills the three men who murdered her husband and daughter. She kills the judge, whom she correctly suspects of having been bribed. She kills the state prosecutor and her defence attorney. But it doesn't stop there. It will take a lot more than that to still her thirst for revenge.

I went into the film without high expectations. Jennifer Garner isn't one of my favourite actresses, as I'm sure I've said before. I was pleasantly surprised. It's a hard-hitting action thriller, in which Jennifer Garner proves she can do everything Liam Neeson can do and she can do it better. I like tough women, and she's certainly tough. The film has been criticised for being predictable and having no plot twists, but in my opinion plot twists are overrated. Plot twists have become so fashionable that audiences sit in the cinema expecting something unexpected to happen. That's ridiculous. A good story can move from A to B without taking a detour via C, D and E. I enjoyed "Peppermint". Now I just have to arrange another date to see "Dark Web".

Daredevil (5 Stars)

Stan Lee's cameo in the 2003 film "Daredevil" is the opposite of his cameos in the first two Spider-Man films. Instead of rescuing others from danger, his life is saved when the teenage Matt Murdock prevents him walking into the road. It's a medium length cameo. The scene lasts nine seconds, of which his face is visible for four.

While the character Daredevil was created by Stan Lee in 1964, the person we see in the film isn't Stan Lee's Daredevil. What I mean is, in the late 1970's and early 1980's the authors Roger McKenzie and Frank Miller developed Daredevil's character in new ways not envisioned by Stan Lee. They didn't actually deny the canon status of the early comics, but they added new characters into Daredevil's youth that had never been shown before, effectively re-inventing Daredevil. The light-hearted character created by Stan Lee became dark and brooding, with similarities to DC's Batman.

In my posts on Marvel comics, my "Marvel Years" posts, I differentiate between what I call the canon and the post-canon years. This isn't a fixed point where I can say that from a certain month onwards Marvel's comics were no longer canon. Some of the ongoing Marvel series ceased to be canon earlier than others. If I continue with my Marvel Years posts into the 1980's I'll make a decision where to draw the line with Daredevil when I get to it.

The film is usually mentioned in the same breath as "Spider-Man", made in the previous year. It's useful to compare the two.

Peter Parker is a teenager (probably about 18 in the film), whereas Matt Murdock is an adult, presumably in his early 30's.

Peter Parker is awkward in dealing with girls, whereas Matt Murdock is experienced and has slept with many women.

Peter Parker shows no interest in religion, whereas Matt Murdock is a believing Catholic.

As Spider-Man Peter Parker is light-hearted, always cracking jokes, whereas Daredevil remains serious.

Spider-Man is a hero who values human life, whereas Daredevil kills those who deserve to die.

The differences between the characters are most visible in the film's cinematography. "Spider-Man" looks mostly bright and cheerful, whereas "Daredevil" looks dark and gloomy.

There has been a lot of criticism of Ben Affleck's performance in the film's title role. He was even awarded a Golden Raspberry for "Daredevil". That's just ridiculous. Was he really the world's worst actor, or even America's worst actor in 2003? I suspect he has a few enemies on the panel of the nominations board. I can't think of anyone who could have played the part better. It's not just his appearance with the prominent chin dimple, his acting is also appropriate throughout. Imagine the difficulty of the role. He has to play a man who is blind but nevertheless aware of his surroundings due to his other heightened senses. He fully succeeds in portraying this dichotomy.

Jon Favreau is also perfect in the role of Foggy Nelson. He's awkward in the knowledge that as a lawyer his skills only a fraction of his legal partner's. He blusters his way through life, trying to pretend he's more than he is. Jon Favreau returned to play a similar character, Happy Hogan, in the Iron Man films.

I'm also very impressed by the performance of Colin Farrell as the hired assassin Bullseye. His representation of the character seems to come directly from the comics, so realistically that we hardly notice he isn't wearing a costume.

As for Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin, I have mixed feelings. To put it bluntly, he has the wrong skin colour. This was a big problem for me when I first saw the film in the cinema, but after watching the film many times over the years I've come to accept him. He might not have the right skin colour, but in all other respects he personifies the comic book villain.

The film's only big casting mistake was Jennifer Garner as Elektra. Neither her appearance nor her mannerisms are suitable for the role. So many other actresses could have played the role better. I suspect she was chosen because of her popularity in the action series "Alias". Yes, she can fight, with the assistance of invisible wires, but she's missing the sleek sexuality of the comic book character. In her subsequent solo film, "Elektra", she attempts to be sexier, but she still doesn't succeed in capturing the essence of the comic book character. A sequel to "Daredevil" was planned, but it was cancelled after "Elektra" flopped at the box office (a success rate of -0.7). That's unfair.

But all's well that ends well. There's now a Daredevil series on Netflix that has run for three seasons so far. The stories and the action are worth watching, if you haven't seen it already. All I wrote about it so far was to point out a sloppy newspaper shown on camera. Is the film better in that respect? Check out this screenshot:

This page from the New York Post has three articles. They're quite well written, but if you click on the image to enlarge it you'll see that all three articles are identical. That's sloppy. But it doesn't end there. If you look at the last two paragraphs of the first article you'll see that it's written in Latin. That's even sloppier. Didn't the director think anyone would notice?

Success Rate:  + 0.3

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

Pearl Harbor (5 Stars)

This is a film which fills me with awe every time I watch it. The romance between Rafe McCawley (Ben Affleck) and Evelyn Johnson (Kate Beckinsale) in the foreboding years before America joined the war bring tears to my eyes. The friendship between Rafe and Danny Walker (Josh Hartnett) is poignant. The action scenes are breathtaking. The contrast with the quiet scenes makes the action stand out even more. This is a perfect film in many ways.

Danny and Rafe are two boys who grow up on neighbouring farms. They both learn to fly young for crop dusting. They both join the US Air Force. Rafe is dyslexic, which almost prevents him from becoming a pilot, but sweet talking the examining nurse gets him through.

The boys drink together, party together and fly together. That changes in 1940 when Rafe volunteers to join the Royal Air Force in England. Danny remains in Pearl Harbor. Before leaving a romantic attachment develops between Rafe and Evelyn, the nurse who examined him. They remain in contact, writing every day until Rafe is shot down in an air battle over the English Channel.

I shan't give away any spoilers, even though I suspect most of my readers have already seen the film. It was a box office success when it was released, and it's often shown on television. It's a good example of a film that weaves fictional characters into real events.

"Pearl Harbor" might have been a commercial success, but it's hated by the critics. They praise the action sequences, but they ridicule the romance. Why? What's wrong with the critics? Don't they understand films? I'm glad I'm not a real critic. I know how to enjoy films.

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

Catch me if you can (4½ Stars)

This is the true story of Frank Abagnale, one of the most successful con men ever. His criminal career began when he ran away from home at the age of 15. He forged cheques worth more than four million dollars before he was 19. The film is supposedly accurate as far as his crimes are concerned, but fictionalises the relationship with his father.

The film is directed by Steven Spelberg and stars Leonardo DiCaprio as Frank Abagnale. To get the fictional aspects out of the way first, it was important to present Frank's love for his father as his motivation for his crimes. This makes his character more sympathetic to the audience than if he had been shown as a selfish cold-hearted criminal. In 1963 (when Frank was 15) his father had lost money in his business and was facing bankruptcy due to IRS payment claims. I think this is something that could only happen in America. In England (and most other western countries), if a company loses money no tax is due. In America the Inland Revenue levies taxes on a company's profits, even if the profits are subsequently lost later in the year. This leads to the absurd situation that people with no money are expected to pay high tax bills. Young Frank felt that the government was robbing his father -- which is true, if it really happened the way the film portrays it -- so he swore to steal the money back from the government and give it to his father.

When his parents divorced Frank ran away from home rather than decide which parent to live with. His first attempts to cash cheques failed, until he had the idea of pretending to be a pilot. In a pilot's uniform he had no problems cashing forged cheques, because everyone trusts a pilot. Pilots have a reputation as being something special, even more than judges or doctors. It's a mixture of the responsibility and the uniform. Last year I visited a night club and met a group of American navy pilots who were stationed in Cosford, near Wolverhampton. They were in full uniform. They told me that it wasn't compulsory for them to wear their uniforms when off duty, but they did so "because English girls go crazy about the uniforms". It was true. Girls were practically fighting to get near the pilots. Maybe I should buy myself a pilot's uniform.

Of course, it wasn't just the uniform. Frank Abagnale was a skilled forger. As well as cheques he forged certificates, enabling him to work as a doctor and a lawyer. Throughout his short but highly successful criminal career Frank was pursued by the FBI agent Carl Hanratty (played by Tom Hanks), and the two developed a respect for one another.

After his arrest in 1969 he was given short prison sentences in France and Sweden. He was then extradited to America and sentenced to 12 years in prison. This sentence was cut short when he was offered a job in the bank fraud development of the FBI, where he worked for 26 years. No criminals were a match for his skills of fraud detection.

The real Frank Abagnale.

It's been a long time since I last watched this film. Maybe 10 years. I'm not sure why I waited so long. I have a great respect for Steven Spielberg as a director, but there are only a few of his films that really grip me. His films are too smooth, too perfect. "Catch me if you can" has enough of a rough edge to make it a thrilling film. I also consider it to be Leonardo DiCaprio's second best film, second only to "Titanic".

Frank's escape from police custody when being extradited to America seems so ridiculous that it couldn't possibly be true, but I've found out that it really did happen as shown. He jumped out of a moving plane while it was taxiing on the runway at JFK Airport. He managed to break through a fence and flee across country before finally being apprehended.

The prison in France was even worse than how it's shown in the film. According to Wikipedia, "At Perpignan he was held nude in a tiny, filthy, lightless cell that he was never allowed to leave. The cell lacked toilet facilities, a mattress, or a blanket, and food and water were strictly limited". That sounds disgusting. Were things really so bad in France in 1970?

Elektra (4 Stars)

When I first saw this film in the cinema I didn't like it. I was disappointed. It didn't live up to what I expected of it after seeing her first appearance as a supporting character in "Daredevil". Nevertheless, I bought the DVD soon after it was released. I still had mixed feelings about it, but I watched it a few times. I'm finally starting to warm up to it, even though I still think it could have been a lot better.

In the film Elektra is working as an assassin-for-hire. When she's sent to a remote island to kill a father and his teenage daughter she develops sympathies for them and refuses to carry out her mission. She even protects them when replacement assassins are sent in her place.

Now what are my problems with the film? Partly it's a problem with the casting of Jennifer Garner as Elektra. I didn't mind her as a supporting character in "Daredevil", but she's too weak to carry a film as the main character. This could have been balanced out with her looks, but in my opinion she just wasn't sexy enough. In the comics Elektra's costume covers her midriff completely. The costume's top was shortened in the film, with my approval, but I think it should have been a few inches shorter to expose Jennifer's well toned belly throughout the film. That would have made up for the (wrong) decision to cover her legs. Compare this cover art with the photo above.

Elektra's enemies in the film are just thrown at us, without any explanation who they are. Marvel comics fans will recognise them, of course, but they must look confusing for new fans. For instance, the actress Natassia Malthe is listed in the credits as Typhoid, but during the film itself she isn't named. Stick (Terence Stamp) is presented as Elektra's former teacher, but no more is said about him. There was no need for the rush to get the action going. The film could have been made 30 minutes longer to give us more background about the characters.

The contrast between light and dark is exaggerated in the film. I'm sure this is deliberate and meant to give a stylish impression, but I don't like it. However bright the surroundings are, the characters in the foreground are dark, like silhouettes. In close up scenes the front of the face is visible, but the hair and ears disappear into the shadows.

Elektra is a character that deserves another chance. Maybe she'll get it after the Daredevil reboot. Let's make her look sexier next time round. Sexier, more seductive and more deadly.

Daredevil (5 Stars)

There are some films that I keep coming back to. This is one of them. Although it was one of the most successful box office films of 2003, it seems to have faded into obscurity fast. I'm surprised how many people I talk to who haven't seen it. It doesn't seem to have become a favourite for television repeats, which is the main factor in a film remaining popular over the long term.

It was made a year after "Spider-Man" and in many ways stands in its shadows. This is a case of history repeating itself. When Marvel Comics published the first issue of "Daredevil" in 1964 the cover openly compared the new hero with Spider-Man. Despite Daredevil being an adult, presumably 30-ish, his character and mannerisms in the early comics were very similar to those of Spider-Man, a hero half his age. They were both fighters who constantly used wisecracks and jokes during their fights. Daredevil was a very jovial character in the early days when his stories were written by Stan Lee. Artist Gene Colan played a large part in writing the stories, as was typical in the early days of Marvel. In my opinion Gene Colan's artwork was the best in Marvel comics in the mid 60's.

The man behind Daredevil's mask is the blind lawyer Matt Murdock. He was blinded at the age of 12 when a barrel of radioactive waste broke open and sprayed on his eyes. This removed his eyesight, but it also sharpened his remaining four senses to superhuman levels. His hearing is so acute that he can use sounds as a radar. He has no supernatural body strength or speed, but extensive martial arts training combined with his heightened senses give him remarkable agility.

In the 1960's and 1970's Daredevil was a light-hearted Spider-Man clone. This changed in 1980 when Frank Miller took over as the comic's writer. He turned Daredevil into a darker brooding character, in many ways like Batman. This is the basis for the film. The film also adds a gothic element not present in the comics.

The film shows how Daredevil gained his powers, then fast forwards to 20 years later when he has already become a hero. Although maybe "hero" is the wrong word. He is more of an avenging demon. If anyone is lucky enough to be found innocent in court after committing a crime, Matt Murdock puts on his Daredevil costume to become the criminal's executioner. Matt meets and falls in love with Elektra Nachios, daughter of a billionaire working for New York's crime boss, the Kingpin. She's also a trained fighter in her own right. When her father tries to leave the Kingpin's employment he's murdered by a hired killer called Bullseye. Elektra blames Daredevil for his death, not realising that it's Matt Murdock. This sets the scene for multiple high action battles.

The casting is perfect. After seeing the film I can't think of anyone more suitable than Ben Affleck to play Daredevil. Jennifer Garner, though not one of my favourite actresses, slots well into the role of Elektra. Jon Favreau is just the right person to play Franklin "Foggy" Nelson. Michael Clarke Duncan is surprisingly good as the Kingpin, despite having the wrong skin colour. And Colin Farrell is more Bullseye than Bullseye. I consider this film to be the peak of his acting career.

The director's cut is superior to the theatrical version, even though it slows down the second quarter of the film. In particular, it shows how reporter Ben Urich first gets to meet Matt Murdock. In many cases "director's cuts" are just ripoffs to get fans buy more than one copy of a film; they're bloated by stuffing in deleted scenes that the director had originally had good reasons to cut out. Not in this case. The director's cut is just perfect.

Click here to view the trailer.

Pearl Harbor (5 Stars)

Forget all the bad reviews this film got for its supposed triteness and superficiality. It's a gripping story from beginning to end. It has everything: romance, action, tragedy, hope in the face of defeat. If I remember correctly, today was the third time I watched this film, and it had me sitting on the edge of my seat as much as it did the first time. I grew up hating war films because my father sat watching them for years on television. But I recognise quality when I see it. This film is a classic.

"Pearl Harbor" has been compared with "Titanic", as if that were a bad thing. Both films follow the same format. A love triangle evolves against the background of a big catastrophe. Contrasting large scale events with the personal interest of a few individuals is good story-telling.