Reviews by SJMJ91

For the second year in a row, there has been an Oscar film about a leading middle-aged homosexual who struggles personally with life (other being Milk). I really like the fact that they cast heterosexual actors and actresses to portray homosexuals because straight people demonstrate that there is just nothing wrong with it hence why pretty much all heterosexual actors get Oscar nominations and wins for portraying their opposite sexuality. It is quite an inspiring thing, really, because we all deserve equal rights.


A Single Man is set all in one day and I think one gets the best experience in a film that way. Set in Los Angeles on November 30th 1962 of a middle-aged English professor who is really struggling in his life after his sudden death of his partner Jim after being together for 16 years. He just doesn't know how to deal with it and doesn't know what the meaning of life is anymore. Colin Firth turned down the role in the film at first but then reconsidered and look what he got out of it: an Oscar nomination, Golden Globe nomination and BAFTA win. Despite that I didn't think he would've deserved the Oscar having not seen the film and not being an Oscar-winning performance, I take all that back and he should have won it! He deserved it a lot more than Sean Penn did for Milk. Julianne Moore is sometimes good but sometimes she can be just awful! However, in A Single Man she was absolutely brilliant as Charley (nickname for Charlotte) despite she wasn't in it that long. I mean, she may be an extremely unattractive actress but she did suit the character pretty well. Nicholas Hoult and Matthew Goode did pretty well too.


A Single Man became the first film for Tom Ford as a director and I thought that it was filmed absolutely brilliantly! The filming was so short: 21 days!! I mean, I have never heard any film be completely shot in that short amount of time when the average time usually is about 3-4 months. I guess it depends on the film and what is involved like technically. I mean, if he can film the whole thing that quickly and still make it a successful Oscar film then that is great talent especially for first time! I'll be keeping an eye out for a future Tom Ford film and see whether that'll be as good as A Single Man. The extraordinary thing is that Tom Ford is a fashion designer as well as a film director now. Oh and he is openly gay and made a film about one. I really admire the guy already!


Overall, A Single Man is a beautifully tragic film that I think all would be caught almost weeping at. Despite that The Blind Side and An Education were both good films, I just feel that A Single Man and Invictus deserved those Best Picture nominations instead. One of the best films of 2009.

I was almost instantly attracted to this one because I just love films like this! This was like a combination between modern suburban life and modern war that features the current war that is going on right now so what we see in Brothers is an event that occurs and makes one storyline become two. Yeah, this is a remake of the 2004 Danish version but I think that this one could be better. Not only because of the performances from the actors but also the way it was filmed and the fact that the war over there is getting even worse now than it was back in 2004.


The film is based on Susanne Bier's 2004 Danish film Brødre which takes place in Afghanistan and Denmark. Both films take inspiration from Homer's epic poem The Odyssey. Tells the story of a young married couple Sam (Tobey Maguire) and Grace Cahill (Natalie Portman) who live with their two daughters but Sam is a trooper in the war and goes out to fight. After the aircraft crashes, he is presumed dead but he is really captured by terrorists and his family have no idea. On the other side of the story is of Tommy Cahill (Jake Gyllenhaal) who is Sam's younger brother who has just been released from prison. When Sam goes to war, Tommy comforts Grace and the children but a romance comes between Tommy and Grace and events start changing around. The cast was another reason why I was attracted to this one so quickly. Natalie Portman is the most gorgeous actress ever and one of the best living actresses, Jake Gyllenhaal is an underrated actor who has made a big name for himself over the years and... Well we all know Tobey Maguire played Peter Parker in the Spider-Man trilogy. All of their performances are brilliant! Tobey Maguire was nominated for a Golden Globe for his performance (which he happened to be really surprised about) and I think Natalie Portman should have earned one too. Jake Gyllenhaal was pretty awesome too.


I'd not watched a Jim Sheridan film until now. He is perhaps better known for In The Name Of The Father and My Left Foot and his work on Brothers thought was like Joe Wright and Atonement in terms of chemistry between characters but technical production was different.


To be honest, I would say that this is just another demonstration of what life is like for the troops and also for the families of the troops and how they feel about the war. Not that it's a bad thing; just that there are a lot like it and this happens to be another. As far as what the film tries to bring out and give to the audience is that it is a film of self-discovery like when Tommy is released from prison, he becomes a new man and more noble towards his family. Only problem is that the trailer of the film gives too much away. There are certain boundaries where a film would be ruined by the trailer but this just happens to be another.


Overall, Brothers is a very underrated 2009 film that should have been taken into consideration by the Academy such as the performances, cinematography and art direction. Solid underrated performances from the three leads and found really entertaining as well as heartbreaking and inspiring. It is like a tribute to the troops and their families.

Well, I got the instant impression after watching the trailer at the cinema watching another film; this just seemed like another romantic comedy that would end in the same way like most of them do. I surprisingly enjoyed the film but it was obvious how the film was going to end because some of the shots we see in the trailer spoils what is going to happen and makes the audience almost automatically guess correct. I was thinking that this is a take-on of an Audrey Hepburn romantic comedy.


Anna Brady who has an elaborate scheme to propose to her boyfriend on Leap Day, an Irish tradition which occurs every time the date February 29 rolls around, faces a major setback when bad weather threatens to derail her planned trip to Dublin. With the help of an innkeeper, however, her cross-country odyssey just might result in her getting engaged. Amy Adams is a great actress and I thought her performance in Leap Year was average. She was funny in some moments but I think that she could have perhaps been a lot better than she was. The one thing that was bad with her performance was that her Irish accent was pretty crap. To be honest, where I didn't like Anna's character was she felt like a greedy slag. I mean, there was no drama or love regarding the love triangle, it just felt like it was the young woman being greedy. Matthew Goode and Adam Scott were very plain and didn't really have any personalities. They were both just two idiots who were after a greedy slag of a character.


I must admit that the filming was quite good. Obviously, not many critics take into consideration the making in romantic comedies and it was beautifully filmed in Ireland with all of the fields, cliffs etc. For starters, if they're going to say that the characters are in Wales throughout most of the film, at least FILM IT IN WALES! Despite it was beautiful background and sites in Ireland, that didn't really save the film because the film just fell apart.


I can somehow see Leap Year earning a few Razzie awards this year such as Worst Actor (Matthew Goode), Worst Actress (Amy Adams), Worst Supporting Actor (Adam Scott) and Worst Screenplay but perhaps can't see it being nominated for Worst Picture because there are some that deserve it more.


Overall, Leap Year is just another romantic comedy that is as predictable as anything. I mean, yeah as I said the trailer automatically ruined it but even if it didn't, it was obvious that the events that occurred in the film was going to happen. Amy Adams, you can do so much better! Couldn't believe it was the same actress in Enchanted, Doubt and Julie & Julia where she delivered great performances! Maybe a Razzie win would wake her up a bit and make her realise what she was thinking about. I have many films that are worse than this but I have seen ten times more that are better!

Seeing as The Seventh Seal became the first film from Ingmar Bergman that I had in my possession and perhaps is his most famous film, I just had absolutely no idea what to expect. I thought it was absolutely brilliant and it kept a firm hold on me from start to finish and I have got to admit that it is an underrated film from an underrated director. It is a very artistic film that reminded me a lot of Nosferatu regarding production. Also, there was surprisingly moments where there would be ornaments used that are told in stories from the Bible such as the crosses.


It is a story set in Sweden of a knight with the name of Antonius Block who returns to Sweden with his squire Jöns, from a Crusade and finds that his home country of Sweden is being ravaged by the plague. To his dismay, Death has come for him, as well. He challenges Death to a chess match. Death agrees to the terms: as long as Block resists, he lives. If he wins, he shall go free. I mean, just by looking at the cover and some of the still pictures and perhaps the dialogue itself, it sort of did look a bit like a horror film but there was nothing horror about it at all. In fact, I wouldn't even call it a thriller either. I mean, surprisingly despite that it involves conflict and death; it manages to get a PG rating and not be completely terrifying. I mean, no it obviously isn't a family-type film but I would say that a kid up to at least 8 years olds could watch this.


If there is anything that The Seventh Seal sends to the audience, it questions us what the meaning of life is, the existence of God, what death is like and whether there is another life after death. Also, regarding the chess game that Death and the knight play, it shows in a dark way that life can be like a game and you have to win to survive so to speak. Obviously, Death bound in human form doesn't exist but in this one, Death isn't just taking lives because he must. He does it because he wants to. I mean, he takes lives of almost every person he sees all in different ways. Max Von Sydow was awesome as the knight Antonius Block but Bengt Ekerot did an ever better job as Death. Despite that Death is a very fictional character; Ekerot makes him quite a terrifying character.


Ingmar Bergman makes The Seventh Seal a bit like a surreal artistic film and he deserves a lot of credit for that. I mean, Bergman made 50+ films in his career and even he has revealed himself that The Seventh Seal is one of his personal favourite films despite its his own. The inspiration for the film was apparently from the period films of Akira Kurosawa. Bergman was a big fan at the time and now a legend is created from another legend.


I loved how the ending climax questioned the audience but it kind of shook them too because I think we all know what happened especially in the scene before and the opening of the film where the knight ends up on the beach and then meets Death is a classic scene and is very artistic despite being in black and white. I think the only problem that I had with this film was that the chess game between the knight and Death wasn't in the film as much as I was expecting hence why I haven't rated it 5-stars.


Overall, The Seventh Seal is a beautifully crafted artistic film that I loved. My first viewing of a Bergman film went off to a flying start and now I intend to watch more of his films! One of the most underrated films and thought-provoking films you'll see and it is perhaps the most famous Swedish film of all time. Bergman, you were a genius!!

Spartacus was released at a time where epic costume dramas began to take shape and become very popular. I mean, nowadays we see these history costume dramas time and time again but they really don't feel the same or even as realistic as the classic ones do. Obviously, this was in Kubrick's early days of his career and because pretty much all of the films that were released after Spartacus turned out more successful, it became an underrated film.


I must say that the cast is absolutely amazing that has a group of amazing actors of that generation. Kirk Douglas portrays the historical hero Spartacus who is a Thracian slave working in Libya, who is purchased by the lanista Lentulus Batiatus, and trained as a gladiator. He later leads the revolt at the gladiatorial school, which spreads throughout the countryside. Douglas shows us once again in Spartacus like he did in Paths Of Glory that he is a great actor playing a heroic character like this. I wouldn't have been entirely satisfied if Charlton Heston was cast as Spartacus because he's already been in enough historic costume dramas like The Ten Commandments as Moses and Ben-Hur as Judah Ben-Hur.


Laurence Olivier is another legendary Hollywood actor in the film! He portrays Crassus, a patrician with an obsessive love of the city of Rome and its old tradition of patrician rule. As the wealthiest man in Rome, he vies for power in the Roman Senate and thinks little of Spartacus's rebellion. Originally, Olivier wanted Douglas's role of Spartacus much to Douglas's dismay but in the end, Olivier accepted the role of Crassus in a supporting role. I mean, its not really like Olivier playing a character in a supporting role but I think he did a pretty awesome job! Now, before I go onto what Jean Simmons was like in terms of acting, I must admit that she was striking in the film and was absolutely gorgeous! She appeared in Hamlet with Laurence Olivier so she worked pretty well with him as well as Douglas. Her performance as Varinia was brilliant! In pretty much every costume dramas, there's always the fighting, brave and heroic man and then there's the wife who cooks, cleans and looks after the children. Varinia is a slave girl who meets and falls in love with Spartacus. Peter Ustinov, John Gavin (who starred in Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho in the same year) and Tony Curtis delivered awesome performances too.


Stanley Kubrick and Kirk Douglas reunite for a second time in a row after their previous classic World War I film Paths Of Glory and despite that some of Kubrick's films earned Academy Award Best Picture and Director nominations and didn't win, I must say that Spartacus is another one that should have earned that right. I mean, Kubrick wasn't the original director for Spartacus; original director was Anthony Mann. The intimate scenes were filmed in Hollywood, but Kubrick insisted that all battle scenes be filmed on a vast plain outside Madrid. Eight thousand trained soldiers from the Spanish infantry were used to double as the Roman army. Kubrick directed the armies from the top of specially constructed towers. However, he eventually had to cut all but one of the gory battle scenes, due to negative audience reactions at preview screenings.


Spartacus won 4 Academy Awards out of 6 nominations it received. It won Best Supporting Actor (Peter Ustinov), Best Art Direction (Colour), Best Cinematography (Colour) and Best Costume Design (Colour). It was nominated for Best Music Score and Best Film Editing.


Overall, Spartacus is an epic classic that deserves to be one of the best action films and biography/history films ever! I think if you have watched this as well as Ridley Scott's Gladiator, you can easily tell how similar both films really are. I do like Gladiator more but Spartacus had the spirit to feel bit more real. Kubrick, you are a legend and you will never die as one of the best filmmakers of all time!

Before the release of Dr. Strangelove, 2001: A Space Odyssey, A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket and Eyes Wide Shut, Kubrick gives us Lolita: a disturbing psychological romantic-drama involving a middle-aged professor called Humbert Humbert who meets Charlotte Haze. They get married but the real reason for that is so Humbert uses her by trying to get closer to her teenage daughter Dolores "Lolita" Haze and becomes obsessed and sexually involved with her.


The film has received criticism for its disturbing dialogue regarding the relationship between Lolita and Humbert because of child and sexual abuse. I mean, I did find the message in that very important; not only for children but also for the parents/guardians of the children too. This kind of disturbing sexual dialogue isn't the first time we have seen this in a Stanley Kubrick film. He returns to this 37 years later in Eyes Wide Shut. I mean, despite it is about a paedophile, that makes it an awesome film because he is a very gripping character and it makes the audience aware of what the consequences could be if he tries anything with Lolita.


The cast in Lolita is an absolutely awesome. All of the performances in Lolita were absolutely awesome! James Mason as Professor Humbert Humbert is one of those performances that I feel demonstrates almost perfectly how scheming and psychologically disturbed those kinds of people really can be. Peter Sellers perhaps stole the show so to speak with his excellent performance as Clare Quilty. He is also a conceited, avant-garde TV writer with a superior manner. In later scenes, he becomes the overbearing 'bad cop' on the porch of the motel where Humbert and Lolita are staying. The character’s role was greatly expanded from that in the novel and Kubrick allowed Sellers to adopt a variety of disguises throughout the film. Shelley Winters playing Charlotte Haze automatically revealed to the audience that Charlotte has major psychological issues especially towards her daughter Lolita and because she's a widow too. Sue Lyon was terrific as Lolita! Lyon was only 14 years old at the time of filming so I would say it was a pretty brave character to play when one is at that age and I have got to give good credit to Sue for that. Another bit of credit I've got to give her was part of the reason why she was chosen to play Sue was because of the size of her breasts.


Kubrick has always been a director, not only of creating different kinds of films in different genres but also a director that wants to always bring something new. I mean, before Lolita's release, we see the three Kubrick evil grins in three of his films (Malcolm McDowell in A Clockwork Orange, Jack Nicholson in The Shining and Vincent D'Onofrio in Full Metal Jacket). The screenplay was brilliant from Kubrick and co-writer Vladimir Nabokov (who wrote the novel). I mean, Kubrick wrote the script for pretty much every single film he made and he never fails at it! Lolita also became the first film where Kubrick began filming in England despite he was really American.


Overall, Lolita is another amazing, sophisticating Kubrick film that deserves its place as one of the best romantic dramas of all time. Pretty much every Kubrick film is disturbing in the slightest but Lolita obviously tells a story of a pedophile and Kubrick manages not to make it like ''disturbing so turn it off'' kind of disturbing but he made very gripping and grabs the audience by the throat for 150 minutes. Amazing film!

Well, at first before I saw it, I wasn't entirely sure of what to expect going into this but Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World shocked me as it shocked critics and the public all around because it is indeed a film of absolute genius! It is a film adaptation of the comic book series Scott Pilgrim by Bryan Lee O'Malley. To be honest, I could see it going two ways: either going to be an epic disaster or an epic surprise and it obviously turned out the latter. It has its original side like the humour between boys and girls and teenage hormones and feelings but now there is something new that Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World has come out with. Everyone who was in the cinema with me laughed their heads off at this so that seems pretty convincing that its a funny film as well as a film of top-notch entertainment.


Scott Pilgrim plays in a band which aspires to success. He dates Knives Chau, a high-school girl five years his junior, and he hasn't recovered from being dumped by his former girlfriend, now a success with her own band. When Scott falls for Ramona Flowers, he has trouble breaking up with Knives and tries to romance Ramona. As if juggling two women wasn't enough, Ramona comes with baggage: seven ex-lovers, with each of whom Scott must do battle to the death in order to win Ramona.


The plot is very simple at first but when you read about it on the internet or in a magazine but as you watch it, it gets deeper and deeper and really surprises you! So the basic way of describing the plot is ''Scott Pilgrim must defeat his new girlfriend's ''seven exes'' to win her heart.'' I mean, Michael Cera in another teen comedy was another reason why I wasn't sure of what to expect but even though this is no ordinary teen-comedy, Cera has FINALLY shown that he is no ordinary actor in just teen comedies. I mean, yeah he plays that kind of character but Scott Pilgrim is a guy with a big heart and is very brave so that is what we see out of Michael Cera that we've not seen before. His best performance so far, I think. Mary Elizabeth Winstead was pretty damn hot in this film but she was pretty damn awesome too! Ramona was (perhaps to most of those around her) a pretty dodgy and odd girl to be friends with at first but when she meets Scott, we see a side to her that changes. We also see a big change in Scott as well when he almost instantly falls in love with her. Good performances from Kieran Culkin, Anna Kendrick, Ellen Wong and the rest of the cast.


Edgar Wright goes somewhere a tad bit different from his previous and notable works Hot Fuzz and Shaun Of The Dead and makes something that is perfect towards its target audience and was just absolute genius all around! In some scenes, Edgar still filmed scenes which'd be like his traditional style such as very fast shots and sharp music. He has always been a director of entertainment obviously but he has always tried to takes things a little step further to make his films blow away the audiences and creates something new every time. I loved it with the original video game key sequences such as the coins/credit when you defeat an opponent, earning an extra life and earning weapons. The script was, admittedly, at times pretty silly but I mean, in a film like this it was bound to be a little. That didn't jeopardise my liking for the film.


Overall, Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World is a film that I absolutely adored and has deserved its rightful place as one of the best films of 2010. It is like a video game merged with a film and it is a teen comedy that doesn't just overload us with sex innuendos and kinky soppy stuff but we actually have emotion and a soul in this film which makes it a fantastic success to me and probably to most critics out there. It also goes to a whole new level that none of us had seen before. Edgar Wright is a genius!

Since its release, this film has received huge criticism from reviewers that keep saying that this is 'just another romantic comedy' and, to be honest, I have to agree with them. There were some brilliant moments but there were some others that I just didn't like. For example, the film unfortunately shows that the sex between the two aging people is more important with their personal lives as in like how they feel about the situations they've got themselves into. Also, seeing Alec Baldwin almost completely naked really put me off it as well! (haha). Good qualities, however, were that I think the characters (well of what we knew of them anyway) were good.


When attending their son's college graduation, a couple reignites the spark in their relationship...but the complicated fact is they're divorced and he's remarried and she has another man in her life who wants her. Over the years, Meryl Streep keeps on starring in romantic-comedies and it is always good to see her in one. Where I appreciate her in this genre is that she plays different kinds of characters so brilliantly in different life situations and that is something that you can hardly get with romantic-comedies. I have thought this for a very long time but Meryl Streep really is a very striking woman for her age and I guess Jane's character was made for Streep to portray. I wouldn't really call myself a fan of Alec Baldwin but I wouldn't call him a bad actor either. However, in It's Complicated he plays a character that I hadn't really seen him in before and I don't think it suited him that well because its like he was playing that really charming and seductive kind of character so I just don't think that suited Alec Baldwin at all. Steve Martin plays a serious character? Wow! He actually did a great job. I must admit that the characters do demonstrate quite well of some real-life situations with living separately from someone after being married to them for over a decade. I mean, it is mad to go back with someone after being divorced for 10 years especially when one is already remarried to someone younger!


Nancy Meyers is a director who just sticks to romantic-comedies. I think that most directors of romantic-comedies are like these too seeing as they pretty much always connect. As I said earlier in the review, that Nancy this time focuses on the sex between the couple than how they are feeling and their normal lives. The script is almost like almost the same as every script in romantic-comedy: soppy, sometimes quite cheesy and sometimes very original.


Overall, It's Complicated is just another romantic-comedy that ultimately focuses on the sex rather than the development of the characters and the message it tries to send. It is more for middle-aged people and girls than for men, to be honest.

The main attraction of this film for me was the cast! Well, I obviously knew that this wasn't going to be a tradition ultimate laugh-out-loud comedy so was going into The Men Who Stare At Goats with an open mind. I am afraid to say that it was a pretty chaotic film that would confuse its audiences. However, there were some moments of chuckles but none at all where you would laugh your head off. I would hardly call The Men Who Stare At Goats a war film as it has been called. There are scenes that feature platoons; drill sergeants etc but the story didn't really make it like a war film. In fact, I would say that this is one of the very rare films that doesn't really have one specific genre.


The story follows a broken-hearted journalist (McGregor) who goes on the job to Iraq to prove to his ex-wife he isn't weak or frail. There, he meets Lyn Cassidy (Clooney) who is a "psychic" soldier for the US government, trained by his hippie instructor Billy (Bridges) to use his mind, peace and love to overcome hairy military situations. The story is the two men's adventure together. The main attraction of this film for me was the cast! Out of the four Hollywood actors, I would say that George Clooney was the best despite all four did pretty well. Despite it has nothing to do with the acting or characters, I could not help but notice how much Kevin Spacey and George Clooney really look like each other especially when they're both in the army.


I mean, there were moments that made me keep thinking whether Grant Heslov was entirely sure what kind of film he was making. I mean, I would say that The Men Who Stare At Goats is a slight miss-fire towards reaching the level of Stanley Kubrick's Dr. Strangelove. Now as far as the script, I think that it bites the bullet at trying to make a Coen-like screenplay but fails at it.


Overall, The Men Who Stared At Goats is a film that I would say is about average seeing as the acting was really good but story was an absolute chaos! It was like it got lost with what it was trying to show. I do think that there could have been a lot more to have been done to make it a lot better.

I was actually pretty shocked when I found out that a sequel was being planned because I did think at the end of the first film that it didn't really need another film. Nanny McPhee And The Big Bang/Nanny McPhee Returns was as expected entertaining for kids and never seemed to lose it's charm. The one main flaw that this film had like the first one did was that it really didn't seem completely suitable for adults. There was one thing that I feel that this film had but the first film lacked and that was that its realism. I mean, yeah it is obviously a very fictional film that is clearly a Mary Poppins-like attempt of this generation but because the film was set in World War II, there was more drama in it.


Nanny McPhee arrives to help a harried young mother who is trying to run the family farm while her husband is away at war, though she uses her magic to teach the woman's children and their two spoiled cousins five new lessons. Emma Thompson pens the screenplay and stars as the eccentric and unique Nanny McPhee. Her performance is good as Nanny McPhee but I do think that she is perhaps a bit too creepy around the children to be an appealing nanny. I mean, there aren't really that many changes to the Nanny McPhee character in the sequel as there was in the first film. Hmmm... I didn't really know what to make of Maggie Gyllenhaal's character and performance. I don't think we really knew her character THAT well and I don't think Maggie suited the film very much unfortunately. Yeah, she is a good actress but I am afraid to say that she was miscast in this film. There were good appearances from Ewan McGregor, Ralph Fiennes and Maggie Smith too.


After having no experience making feature films at all, Susanna White surprisingly did a good job as director. There was its charm and beauty with the children and the settings but I couldn't help but noticed that they involved animals a lot more in this one. Its like they copied a bit off Babe but with good intentions. Emma Thompson has been a screenwriter for over 15 years and hasn't written that many films but she did well in Sense And Sensiblity but she does need a breakthrough script where she'll win another Oscar. Her script in the sequel of Nanny McPhee And The Big Bang was witty and fun so it was almost pretty much the same as the first one. You could easily tell that this is a very British film.


Overall, Nanny McPhee And The Big Bang is perhaps like a sequel to the first one like Home Alone 2: Lost In New York is to Home Alone with pretty much the same dialogue, the same bits of fun and entertainment and similar characters. Decent entertainment but nothing special.