Licorice Pizza (4 Stars)

This is a film that's difficult to pin down to one genre. The advertising for the film call it a coming-of-age drama, but that's obviously not the case. It has more in common with romantic comedies, although there's a lot more stuffed into it.

The film takes place in Los Angeles in 1973. Gary Valentine is a 15-year-old child actor who's appeared in several prime time television programmes. He falls in love with Alana, a 25-year-old photographer's assistant who visits his school to take photos. She thinks he's too young, but he doesn't give up, and he has enough money to invite her to fine restaurants.

Gary is very precocious, not just in romance but also in business. He forms a company, Fat Bernie's, to sell water beds, a new invention at the time. He goes on to open a pinball arcade, also wildly successful, because it's the first pinball arcade to open after pinball machines are legalised in California.

Gary romps through a string of comical situations as the film progresses. Alana is put off by Gary because she wants to do good in the world, while Gary's only interest is in making money.

What's the director's intention? That's difficult to say. Maybe he's already given an interview somewhere. It seems like a nostalgia trip to the 1970's, but why has he made such an unpleasant young boy the lead character? If I were his father I'd want to slap him.

Strangely, the film doesn't treat the age difference in the relationship as a scandal. Nobody wags a finger at Alana and accuses her of cradle snatching. That surprises me, because Americans are usually very critical of adults dating someone who's underage. It isn't actually dating, because Alana is resisting his advances, but they still go everywhere together, which certainly looks like datingto everyone around them.

This is one of the favourites to win the Best Film Oscar at this year's Academy Awards. It's certainly a very good film, but I've already made my own top 10 list for 2021, and my vote for best film would be "The Suicide Squad".

The Professor and the Madman (4 Stars)

This is the 24th film in the Stuttgart Fantasy Film Festival.

It could be argued that the film doesn't fit the festival's theme. It's not a fantasy, horror or science fiction film, it's a true story about the creation of the Oxford English Dictionary.

The linguist James Murray (Mel Gibson) approached Oxford University with the wish to create a complete dictionary of every word in the English language, based on its usage from the 14th to the 19th Century. The work was too much for one man, so he asked for volunteers from the whole of the British Empire to read books and submit quotes. The main contributor was Dr. William Minor (Sean Penn).

Dr. Minor was a former army surgeon who fled from America to England because he thought he was being pursued by an army deserter. He shot an innocent man, thinking he was the deserter. He was considered insane and interred in Broadmoor Mental Hospital. He was given relative luxury within the hospital, two adjoining cells and a large library.

The two men became friends as the work progressed.

For the first 30 minutes of the film I felt bored. Then I slowly warmed up as I finally began to understand what the film was about. Maybe I'm biased. What impressed me most was the way the two men had a passionate love for the English language, like me.

Bad Boys (4 Stars)

Will Smith is one of a small number of actors that I avoid. There's something about his street level talk that gets on my nerves. However, I recently sat down and thought to myself that he was good in "Suicide Squad". And he was fantastic as the Devil in "A New York Winter's Tale". He was pretty good in "Collateral Beauty" as well. Oh yes, I also liked the three "Men in Black" films. That's six films. So what films have I seen him in that I didn't like? There's "Independence Day", which is a pretty cruddy film overall. And then there's... nothing!

That means I've liked him in six films and disliked him in one, yet I say I don't like him and routinely avoid his films? There's something wrong with me. If I were sitting opposite him I'd have to apologise to his face.

So I watched "Bad Boys" this evening, and surprise surprise... I liked it a lot. Will Smith does a remarkable job in his portrayal of the unorthodox Miami policeman Mike Lowrey.

Mike Lowrey is unorthodox because he's rich. He's inherited a large sum of money from his parents, which we see in his lifestyle when he's off duty. He has a luxurious apartment and he drives a Porsche. He doesn't need to work, but he says that all his life he's wanted to be a cop. Fair play to him. He also enjoys a wild life as a single, having a string of girlfriends. This leads to some amusing repartee with his partner, Marcus Burnett. Marcus is a happily married man with three children, except for one gap in his happiness: his marriage has become sexless. He warns Mike against marriage, telling him that it's normal that after you marry a hot woman the sex stops. My own experience confirms that. When you're single you have sex for fun. When you're married you have sex to have children. When you no longer want children, what's the point of sex? It doesn't have to be that way, but it happens a lot, and usually it's the women who lose interest in sex.

But I'm getting off the subject. Thieves break into the Miami police station and steal over $100 million worth of heroin from the police evidence room. Internal Affairs claims (quite rightly) that the thieves must have had help on the inside, and if the heroin isn't returned within a week the police station will be closed down. So Mike and Marcus go to work, and they have to work fast.

The rest of the film is characterised by fast action and occasional comic moments. I'll just point out one small subplot that runs through the film. Mike asks his ex-girlfriend, a call girl called Maxine, to watch out for any suspicious activity in the underworld. Together with another call girl, her best friend Julie, they visit the ex-policeman Eddie Dominguez for business. Eddie's associates burst in and execute him for throwing his money around. Maxine is shot, but Julie escapes. Julie tells the police she will only speak to Mike Lowrey, who she's never met, because Maxine has highly praised him as a policeman she can trust. Mike is out on a job, so Marcus impersonates him. He shelters Julie in Mike's apartment, and Mike has to pretend to be Marcus when he returns, moving in with Marcus' family.

This is a very good buddy cop film, and the only weakness is in the character development. The criminals especially are too anonymous. I would have liked to know more about them, rather than seeing them as random bad guys running around with guns.

I shan't be avoiding Will Smith's films in future. That's a promise.

Success Rate:  + 5.4

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

Secret Life of Walter Mitty (4½ Stars)

To see the world, things dangerous to come to,

To see behind walls, to draw closer,

To find each other and to feel.

That is the purpose of life.

This is the story of a man who likes to live in his dreams, then one day decides to actually do something. When he does he finds that reality is much better than imagination. He should have realised this from the motto of Life magazine, where he worked for 16 years as a negative asset manager. On the other hand, when I was a teenager I wrote a lot of poetry, and in one of my poems I wrote:

"Life is a bore, it's better to dream".

That's interesting. It's so long ago when I wrote these words that I can't remember what was going through my head at the time. I was never as timid as Walter Mitty is in the film. I did do things. I went places, I met people, I dated girls. And yet I was still dissatisfied with life. I expressed my alienation from the world in my poetry. Maybe my life has turned full circle. After I left university I spent many years concentrating on real life. Now that I'm older I've turned back to dreams.

In 2006 I began to play Second Life. That was a very intense experience for me. It was a role-playing experience into which I totally immersed myself. I probably played Second Life intensely for about four years, until the end of 2010. After that the role-playing aspect died down, and Second Life was nothing more than a platform for me to chat with my friends. At first I had a lot of friends, but one by one they left, and there was less incentive for me to log on. I still have an active Second Life account, but I've hardly used it since 2013. It's not that I've given up completely. I might return one day, but I need a reason to do so.

Most Second Life users make a fantasy avatar to express themselves. Men make themselves excessively tall and muscular, while women make themselves look like busty Barbie dolls. Not me. For me Second Life was an attempt for me to hold onto my youth. My SL avatar was as close as possible to my real life appearance when I was 20. Average height, thin, not very muscular, long blond hair.

That's me as I look in Second Life. It's a pretty accurate copy of my appearance when I was younger, the body and the hair at least. I never wore jeans when I was younger. Practically all of my friends wore jeans, and I didn't want to conform, so I wore colourful trousers, red or green. As I got older jeans were no longer in fashion, so I started wearing them more often, and today I wear jeans all the time. I didn't start wearing sandals until I was in my thirties. Only the t-shirt is typical of what I wore at 20.

As you can see, in Second Life I wear a collar to identify me as a slave. But that's a story for another day.....

Being John Malkovich (4½ Stars)

I have been to the dark side, I have seen a world that no man should see.

Craig Schwartz (John Cusack) is an unemployed puppeteer in New York. He lives in a basement apartment with his wife Lotte (Cameron Diaz) and her many exotic pets, which include parrots, iguanas and chimpanzees. He takes a temporary job as a filing clerk. One evening, while working late, he finds a secret door hidden behind a filing cabinet. This door leads into John Malkovich's head. Anyone who enters can see through John Malkovich's eyes for 15 minutes, after which he's thrown out onto the grass at the side of the New Jersey Turnpike.

This seemingly absurd film throws up so many philosophical questions. The first time you watch it you have to laugh. You could mistakenly think you're watching a Woody Allen film. After you see it the second time you begin to see the bigger issues. It's a film about reality, identity, gender roles and control.

When I first saw this film I gave all the credit to the writer, Charlie Kaufman. He's written several amazing films, including "Adaptation" and "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind". I paid no attention to the director Spike Jonze, who has made his career directing music videos. After seeing "Her" earlier this year, which Spike Jonze both wrote and directed, I can look back and see his influence on this film.

This message appeared at the end of the credits. All the characters portrayed in the film are fictitious? That's strange. I thought that John Malkovich really existed. Wikipedia says he does, but sometimes Wikipedia lies.

What is this strange power that John Malkovich exudes?

Secret Life of Walter Mitty (4 Stars)

This film is loosely based on a short story written by James Thurber in 1939. It was filmed in 1947, and this is a "remake", very generally speaking. Actually, the new film just borrows the name and the concepts from the old film and the story, so it can be considered a completely new film. It's a matter of definition.

The expression "Walter Mitty" has entered popular culture. It signifies a person who daydreams about doing great heroic deeds instead of facing the challenges of real life. This may or may not involve telling other people that he has done them (lies) or telling others he would do them (empty boasting). Especially in the army, this expression is used to describe a person who claims to have performed heroic deeds which were actually carried out by others who may now be dead and unable to tell the true story. But let's be honest: there's a bit of Walter Mitty in all of us. When we read in the newspaper that someone robbed a shop and beat up the shopkeeper we say, "If I'd been there I would have stopped it"; but if we're ever present at a robbery we see how big the robbers are we freeze in fear. That's human nature.

In this film Ben Stiller plays Walter Mitty. He's the negative asset manager at Life Magazine in New York. If you're wondering what that is, it's the person who looks after photo negatives. The film is set today, in 2013, and as we all know film cameras are a thing of the past. The digital age has made Walter's job obsolete, and he's hanging onto it by the skin of his teeth. Walter feels attracted to Cheryl Melhoff, a new employee in his company, but he's unable to ask her out on a date; instead of speaking to her he dreams of impressing her by doing things like rescuing her dog from a burning building so that she'll fall into his arms.

Life Magazine is bought by another company and has to close down. From next month it will be an online publication only. Walter is entrusted with processing the photo for the final cover, provided by Life's top photographer, Sean O'Connell, one of the few purists who refuses to use digital cameras. Walter is sent the negatives, but one is missing, and he suspects that Sean never sent it. For the first time in his life Walter feels inspired to do something. On a whim he catches a plane to Sean's last known address in Greenland. Sean, the great adventurer, everything that Walter isn't, is always a few steps ahead of him. Walter pursues him through Greenland to Iceland and Afghanistan.

In the trailers the film is touted as a comedy. That's not quite true. It does have its humorous moments, but it's really a story about overcoming all odds and learning to become a real person. It's a very moving performance by Ben Stiller. The scenery in Greenland especially is breathtaking, in stark contrast to the cities of New York. If anything, it awakes the Walter Mitty in me. It's the place I want to be, not continuing in my dull life.

The film won't be on general release until December 26th in England. I was lucky to be able to watch an advance screening at Cineworld for their Unlimited Card holders only. It's certainly worth the money, only £15.90 a month, if there's a Cineworld cinema near where you live. If you are considering becoming a member, I advise you to apply online and use the promotional code RAF-42SM-64EG-76US-46SD in the last page of the application process. This will give you a free month's membership at the end of your first 12 months.

Judgement in Berlin (4 Stars)

I'm glad I discovered this film. I only found out it existed after I watched "Westflug" earlier this week. The film is enjoyable in itself, but more than anything else it's fascinating how two films can be made based on the same true story and turn out so different.

The differences are caused by the different goals of the two films. "Westflug" is about the three people involved in the hijacking. "Judgement in Berlin" is about the judge who presided over the trial. The first 10 minutes of "Judgement in Berlin" cover everything that happened in the first 90 minutes of "Westflug". It's just presented as a brief background so that we know what the trial is about.

I won't go into details about the events of August 30th 1978 again, you can find them in my review of "Westflug". If you haven't read it already, check it now before continuing.

Strangely, in this film the names of the main characters are changed once more. The West German lover is Hans Schuster, the waitress is Sigrid Radke, and her friend who carries out the hijacking is Helmut Thiele. Their real names were Horst Fischer, Ingrid Ruske and Detlef Tiede. In "Westflug" they are called Michael Franjek, Anja Rautenberg and Jürgen Treske.

The legal and political problems surrounding the trial are expounded in much greater detail in this film. Judge Herbert Stern was flown in from America with the guarantee that it was a simple case that would be over in a few hours. After all, Helmut had hijacked a plane in front of 70 witnesses, and he had confessed to the hijacking. But as soon as he arrives the case is bogged down by legal and constitutional arguments. In America criminals are tried by a jury, in Germany there is no jury. Helmut was being tried in Germany by an American court. The defence lawyers requested a jury, the prosecution didn't want a jury. When the judge said he would allow a jury the prosecution lawyers -- who worked for the US state department -- claimed that the decision whether a jury should be allowed was a political, not a legal decision, so the judge had no authority to decide. Effectively, as representatives of the American government they were telling the judge that they outranked him. The prosecution lawyers only backed down when the judge threatened to dismiss the case.

Even after the appointment of the jury things didn't run smoothly. The streets were full of anti-American protesters. Russian soldiers stood in front of the courthouse intimidating the jurors. The Polish cabin crew lied in court because they were scared of high ranking Polish ministers sitting in the audience. Overall, this was a very unique trial in American history. And a very good film. It's a shame "Westflug" has never been released in English, or at least subtitled, because I would recommend watching the two films together.