Review #231: 'D.A.R.Y.L.' (1985)

When a car crashes off the edge of a cliff, an elderly couple pick up a smartly-dressed young boy named Daryl (Barret Oliver). When no-one claims him, he is left in the care of cutesy, middle-class suburban couple Joyce (Mary Beth Hurt) and Andy Richardson (Michael McKean), who foster him and look after him as if he were their own. Daryl also befriends the obligatory smart-mouthed ginger kid Turtle (Danny Corkill), who realises just how smart Daryl is. Daryl exceeds in everything, including baseball and video games, much to the confusion of his new family. But when he is claimed by his real 'parents', he is taken back to a research lab where his true identity is revealed.

This was another one of those films that somehow made it onto my video shelf when I was young. I don't recall how it got there or who bought it for me, but it was there, and therefore earns its place in the Childhood Memories Project. It came flooding back to me when I re-watched it. But I also remember that, as a child, I could only make it through the first hour, and that I always got too bored to watch the entire film. Well maybe I was a silly child with the attention span of an ant, but in all honesty, this film is a bit of a bore. And a sickening one at that.

D.A.R.Y.L. is so American and so suburban, I felt like I was being wrapped up in blankets and fed ice-cream until I was vomiting in all directions. Everything is just so idyllic and perfect - the eternal brown autumn leaves, the large multi-bedroomed white houses, the perfect best-friend couple, the father who trained Little League - I couldn't believe it when Steve Martin didn't pop out wearing a checked shirt neatly tucked into his jeans. It looks like a wonderful place to live, but the fact that it doesn't fucking exist just got on my nerves. It's escapist cinema at its most subliminal - American family films do it so matter-of-factly that we just accept it.

Anywho, the film itself isn't actually that bad. American family drama of the 80's seemed very much fascinated with science-fiction elements (a la Flight of the Navigator (1986)). It's actually quite nice to see what is really a children's film put so much emphasis on drama. Maybe it's because I see so much wank vomited up for the young 'uns these days that can't go two minutes without having a CGI spunk stain (to quote Marc) spattered across the screen, or having some vile, X-Factor inspired 'song' blurted out by some mop-haired, talentless twat such as Justin Bieber. I'm getting off the film again, sorry.

It's not as boring as I remember, nor is it all that good. And although it all goes a little Flight of the Navigator at the end, it remains entertaining throughout. It's like a superior TV movie with a slightly better budget than normal. It is sentimental, soppy, and full of middle-class bullshit, but it's also funny, and quite involving.


Directed by: Simon Wincer
Starring: Barret Oliver, Mary Beth Hurt, Michael McKean
Country: UK/USA

Rating: ***

Tom Gillespie

Review #230: 'Nashville' (1975)

Films with multiple storylines and an ensemble cast are commonplace nowadays, but it all stems, really, from this film - Robert Altman's formidable Nashville. Sure, there were films before that handled large casts before, but never before had a film so successfully told an overlying story using so many characters, and have their lives so delicately intertwined. These characters have full histories and complex natures, yet they are only glimpsed and suggested in short scenes that say more in two or three minutes than most films can manage in a feature length running time.

The film takes place over the course of five days in Nashville, Tennessee, and focuses around the minor and major players in the music business, and the hangers on that seem to always be around. The key characters are Haven Hamilton (Henry Gibson), a spangly-suited veteran singer with political ambitions, Barbara Jean (Ronee Blakley), a mentally unstable country music darling returning to her home town, Tom Frank (Keith Carradine), a member of a folk group trio who is trying to make it on his own and having as many woman as he can along the way, Linnea Reese (Lily Tomlin), a white gospel singer who is being pursued by Tom, and Del Reese (Ned Beatty), Linnea's manager husband, who seems to be oblivious to the strain on his marriage. All their lives are interconnected and are usually linked by an incident or a set-piece.

The first scene of the film sees the campaign van for Presidential candidate Hal Phillip Walker setting off for a tour around Nashville, and appears throughout the film. The film even climaxes at a political rally for Walker, with Hamilton and Barbara Jean both appearing on stage, and the scene brings together nearly all of the films' characters. Although I didn't get from the film that it is necessarily making any kind of political statement, it was made soon after the Watergate scandal, and was released to an America that was looking for answers. I think Nashville is making both a warm and cynical statement about the optimism and the arrogance of America, and also the confusion and the uncertainty that came with the 1970's.

Such is the beauty of Nashville. I couldn't sum up what it was about in one sentence, and couldn't describe a clear aim or message it was trying to deliver. It is a number of things, and touches a number of emotions. The real greatness is in its small moments, such as talentless and desperate aspiring country singer Sueleen Gay (Gwen Welles) singing to a room full of men, and then being told that she was brought there to strip; the cold detachment that Tom deals with Linnea when she reveals she can't stay any longer; the various characters who all think that Tom is singing to them in a crowded bar, as he gazes over them all to the back of the room; or the uncomfortable scene in which Barbara Jean keeps talking to an uneasy crowd rather than singing a song, as it becomes clear that she is truly losing her mind.

Nashville is one of the key films of the 1970's, and one of the finest examples of the American New Wave that emerged in that time, and produced some of the finest films to ever come out of the country. Although Altman had been around for a while at that time (he had already done the brilliant MASH (1970) and the thoroughly underrated revisionist western classic McCabe & Mrs. Miller (1971)), this is the film where he truly found his forte. It's been imitated endlessly, but never has a film managed to do so much with so many different stories. An absolute great, and one of the finest American films ever made.


Directed by: Robert Altman
Starring: Ned Beatty, Henry Gibson, Ronee Blakley, Lily Tomlin, Keith Carradine, Geraldine Chaplin, Michael Murphy, Gwen Welles, Scott Glenn
Country: USA

Rating: *****

Tom Gillespie

Review #229: 'The Tree of Life' (2011)

Terrence Malick's 5th film since his brilliant debut, Badlands (1973), The Tree of Life is seemingly a semi-autobiographical familial story of the O'Brien flock. The film begins with a brief look at the family in 1950's Texas. Headed by Brad Pitt's authoritarian Mr O'Brien, his wife Jessica Chastain, and their three boys, Jack (Hunter McCraken), R. L. (Laramie Eppler) and Steve (Tye Sheridan). This is often juxtaposed with an adult Jack (Sean Penn), who seems to be struggling with the memories of his childhood. The end of these first sequences are occupied by the death of one of the boys.

This is followed by a grandiose, visually stunning opus of the creation of worlds and life. A heavily orchestrated sequence with a scientific outlook for the big bang and what follows. We even see some CGI dinosaurs, occupying the beautiful, serene landscape. A tree, like life has wild branches, vein-like, splitting off on tangents, moving into different directions. Humbled by the complexity of this, we are back with the O'Brien clan, as we see birth in all it's joy. A family drama ensues, with Pitt's father, authoritarian, sometimes coldly tender to his boys. He does love his boys, but is stern, particularly with the eldest, Jack. Jack's feelings of hate towards his father becomes increasingly apparent. As Jack progresses, he begins to see the world, the relationships, in a more mature manner. In one sequence he states to his father, "This is your home, you can make me leave any time you want." His thoughts are whispered, as he thinks after "You want to kill me". Jack is also seen praying for God to kill his father.

The films major theme is reflective of both religion and hard science. Philosophy is fundamental to the process involved in the nature of life. Mrs O'Brien tells her sons in voice-over "There are two ways through life: the way of nature and the way of grace". This perfectly encapsulates the meaning behind the film. All actors involved are wonderful. Pitt's Mr O'Brien is stern, and effective, we feel almost threatened by his coldness. And all three boys are seemingly natural in their performances.

For the visual effects, Malick had Douglas Trumball pulled out of retirement, and (except for the dinosaurs), began experimental with natural substances to create the beautifully realised creation sequences. The use of Trumball seems to be reflective of the nature of the films themes. The Tree of Life often feels like a religious reworking of Stanley Kubricks 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) - that Trumball also worked on - and Malick, like Kubrick, uses music wonderfully, evoking creations beauty. It is simply the elliptical nature of the film that gives it a fantastical, grandiose quality. Creation of life is juxtaposed with it's inevitable partner, death, and in turn how this effects life.

Winner of the Palme D'Or at 2011's Cannes film festival, The Tree of Life has been met with polar-opposite reactions. In its first showing at Cannes it was booed. Pretentious has been bandied round a lot in reaction to the film. Yeah, it has pretensions (of course it does - it's a huge subject to tackle). I watched the film with awe, its beauty utterly beguiling and surprising me. Many of the shots in the film are so stunning, I would be very happy to frame them to adorn my walls. And, due to its complexities, it is certainly one of those films that requires more viewings.


Directed by: Terrence Malick
Starring: Brad Pitt, Sean Penn, Jessica Chastain, Hunter McCracken
Country: USA

Rating: *****

Marc Ivamy

Review #228: 'Transformers: Dark of the Moon' (2011)

Big, loud, with various incomprehensible objects gesticulating in front of the screen; must be a Michael Bay film. The first Transformers (2007) film surprised me. A film based on childhood toys, and their 20 minute narrative adverts, about robots that can change into vehicles and other such objects, should not have worked. And to boot, directed by a well known pyrotechnics obsessive, and general hack of bullshit. But the first film had a certain charm, which was elevated by the Shia LeBeouf performance, which pretty much catapulted him, and encouraged Steven Spielberg (also executive producer of all the films) to take him as a new toy. After the debacle of the second in the series, 2009's Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, the fans and general audience wanted a Tranformers film that was as thrilling, funny, and silly as the first. Well, the idea is quite neat.

Turns out that the 1969 moon landing was not carried out just cause we could. No, it happens that there was something "alien" on the dark side of said moon. So Buzz Aldrin et al had the top secret mission of taking a peek at the craft that crash landed. And that craft was, of course, one that was occupied by some dead Autobots. Back to the present day and Sam Whitwicky (LeBeouf) has been shunned by the government that works with the Decepticons, and has to get a regular job. As Megan Fox was essentially sacked from the franchise for suggesting that Bay was like Hitler, we are led to believe that Sam has got himself a new stunner of a girlfriend (as Sam's mum states in a later scene, he must have a big cock!). So we are introduced to Carley (Rosie Huntington-Whiteley's lips on legs), in a simple, tracking shot that follows her legs and arse: nice! She has a nice body, but her face is dominated by over-sized lips, and is about as charismatic as a transformer that can't transform: i.e. a van.

What transpires is a series of battles, instigated by some objects that have the potential of bringing the robot world through space and time to occupy planet Earth. Humans have been working with the Decepticons for years, which has helped them get information from various companies. When this action begins, the main setting is Chicago. An alien invasion-style visual style takes over, many scenes looking very similar to 2005's War of the Worlds.

The film does have some effective action sequences, but doesn't really deliver anything different that the previous sequel. Basically, it's rubbish. What always amazes me about these kind of films, is that we have developed our English language, that apparently also developed in a civilisation of robots, that existed in parallel in a distant galaxy. Well done Mr Bay, you have released yet another film littered with CGI spunk stains. Plus, the toy company, Hasbro, has a new film to sell their new line of transformers toys!! I have discovered recently that the new toys are not easy to transform, not like the ease of their 80's counterparts.


Directed by: Michael Bay
Starring: Shia LaBeouf, Josh Duhamel, John Turturro, Tyrese Gibson, Rosie Huntington-Whiteley, Patrick Dempsey, Frances McDormand, Kevin Dunn, John Malkovich
Country: USA

Rating: **

Marc Ivamy

Review #227: 'Axe' (1974)

It's quite often difficult to ascertain the reasons that many of the films on the video nasties list are there. We all just assume that they are there due to graphic violence, and explicit gore. We also largely assume that they are mostly, intrinsically rubbish. Whilst I have not seen all of the films on the list, the handful that I have, are varying in quality. It's always a surprise when the film is interesting, or has some kind of purpose, or layering of meaning. Axe, or the more ethereal original title, Lisa, Lisa, is one of the ones that at once, looks cheaply made (some sequences had the strange mise-en-scene of a H G Lewis movie), but also has an idea - simplistic but well thought-out - that gives the film a subtle gravitas.

The first part of the film follows three criminals, Steele (Jack Canon), Lomax (Ray Green), and the moral voice to the violence, Billy (played by the writer/director Frederick R. Friedel). On the journey with these characters, we are introduced to their brand of criminal activity. In a convenience store, Steele and Lomax mock and taunt the female clerk, throwing fruit at her, then forcing her to take off her blouse, humiliating her before going further. This shows overtly the misogynistic attitude of the main two. Billy, as throughout the film, is the person against the murdering, and acts as the moral arbiter to the horrific acts.

After this the trio drive up to a large house that is occupied by Lisa (Leslie Lee), who looks after her completely paralysed grandfather. Lisa is a strange, seemingly internal character, who is forced to take the criminals in for the night, and feed them etc. After one Lomax attempts to rape her, she takes it upon herself to kill him, then proceeds to act this out to the rest of the criminals.

There are some very effective scenes, and some that are genuinely disturbing. The first killing of Lomax, Lisa takes a razor blade to the back of his neck. After he has clearly lost consciousness, she continues to saw at the neck. It's making me wince writing about it. So there are some very effective kills, and this is partly where I see the reason for it's contentiousness for the DPP. But I think fundamentally the reasons for the banning was more to do with the contempt for women. This is something that even the BBFC has many issues with.

In conclusion, the film is disturbing at times, and it's moral fibre a little on the side of misogyny. However, the film is quite interesting, and certainly has more going for it in narrative terms than much of the video nasties on offer.


Directed by: Frederick R. Friedel
Starring: Leslie Lee, Jack Canon, Ray Green, Frederick R. Friedel
Country: USA

Rating: **

Marc Ivamy

Review #226: 'The Naked Island' (1960)

On a tiny island in the Seto Inland Sea, a small family consisting of husband, wife, and two sons, struggle to get by. They are the island's sole inhabitants, and spend their days fetching water from the mainland and carrying up the steep hill in order to water their crops. One day when the mother and father are away from the island, one of the sons falls ill, and the father races to get help. Their lives are all portrayed in painstaking detail, and the film contains no dialogue whatsoever. The film is directed by Kaneto Shindo, who directed the two brilliant Japanese New Wave horror films, Kuroneko (1968) and Onibaba (1964), the only two other films of his I've seen.

This is a break in style and subject that I'm used to from Shindo. The two aforementioned horror films were similarly slow and detailed, but The Naked Island contains no action or atmosphere, but certainly shares their beauty. This is a film that shows how far humanity can be pushed in order to merely get by. The climax of the film (and I don't feel I'm ruining anything by revealing it, the story is not important) has their ill son dying, as his father and the doctor arrive too late. After the funeral, they are forced back to work. The mother, needing to grieve, throws down the water and screams into the ground, as the father watches helpless. Afterwards, she gets up, and methodically resumes watering.

Shindo tackles a universal subject with the neglect of the working class. Filmed with no dialogue, it emphasises their facial expressions and body movements in a way the silent era did, and forces the audience to live through the work they do, every step at a time. The director said he wanted to "capture the life of human beings struggling like ants against the forces of nature," and he certainly does that. The film is slow, and focuses a lot of time on the struggle of carrying the water up the hillside. Yet it's filmed with such elegance, it only hammers their struggle home. This is a beautiful and moving film, that is almost brutal in its relentlessness.


Directed by: Kaneto Shindô
Starring: Nobuko Otawa, Taiji Tonoyama, Shinji Tanaka
Country: Japan

Rating: ****

Tom Gillespie

Review #225: 'Lucker the Necrophagous' (1986)

John Lucker (Nick Van Suyt) is a notorious serial killer who awakens from his long coma. He escapes from the hospital, but not without taking a few victims with him. His notoriety comes from the fact that he not only kills his victims in various horrific ways, he likes to (surprise, surprise, given the film's title) shag their corpses. We find out through a few flashbacks that he is on the hunt for a woman who escaped his clutches. But after picking up a prostitute in a bar, he goes back to her apartment building, in which, coincidentally, is empty apart from one couple ("no-one can hear a thing"). We know this as she explains it in detail to Lucker, something that we all would do to a strange man we have just met and are taking back to our home.

Well, where to start? I have my wonderful brother to thank for this monstrosity of 'film-making', as after he read a DVD review of it, claimed it sounded 'right up my street'. Perhaps I need to change people's outlook of me, as it is concerning that a family member would consider a film where a greasy Belgian leaves a corpse for a month to rot, smears his hands over her slimy body and then hungrily licks his hands, to be something I would like. I'd never actually vomited bile into my mouth before whilst watching a film, and although I welcome a film that can make me feel queasy and uneasy, I can only describe Lucker the Necrophagous as the cinematic equivalent of Two Girls One Cup.

This is genuinely the worst film I have ever seen. And I've seen all three August Underground (2001-2007) films. Every second, every frame, every soundbite of it's slender 70 minute running time drained a little bit more life out of me. This film life-raped me. And while I'm no prude when it comes to nudity, the sight of a middle-aged, doughy skinned, double-chinned man's flabby arse is not something I want to see repeatedly, especially when it is wobbling on top of a corpse. Shock horror, this would be the last feature both director Johan Vandewoestijne would direct, and 'star' Van Suyt would appear. Lucker is the finest example as to why when something is labelled as 'notorious', it doesn't mean I should watch it. It does for notorious films what Gary Glitter does for notorious musicians. Avoid at all costs, and my dear brother, next time you want to recommend something, please watch it yourself first. Damn you!


Directed by: Johan Vandewoestijne
Starring: Nick Van Suyt, Helga Vandevelde, Let Jotts
Country: Belgium

Rating: *

Tom Gillespie

Review #224: 'Monster High' (1989)

Two bald aliens arrive on Earth with the Doomsday Device, something they have stolen from their own alien planet, much to the behest of the Monster-in-Charge. They unwittingly unleash Mr. Armageddon (David Marriott) upon an all-American high school, and soon this long-fingernailed-bringer-of-doom is busy a-rapin', a-killin', and basically a-fuckin' with every kid in the school. Dorky loner Norm (Dean Iandoli) is too busy lusting after foreign exchange student Candice Cane (get it? - played by Diana Frank) to notice the arrival of horny gargoyle statues, the living dead, and deadly giant marijuana plants. But when he does, he strikes a deal with Armageddon to have a basketball game to end all games, and possibly the world.

I'm sure you can gather from the description that this isn't a film to take too seriously. It's a very 80's high school horror/sex flick that is very aware of what it's target audience wants - blood, tits, and goofy humour. And it delivers all that in abundance. It has everything a shlock hound could want. Where else can you find a monster with a computer for a head? Or a teen that gets eaten by his shoes? Or alien twins that were failed rappers on their own planet? Probably nowhere. This is of course an awful film. But where it lacks in subtlety and intelligence, it makes up for in sheer volume and creativity.

The edits come thick and fast. The film cuts back and forth between different characters and locations as if it were filmed by a giddy teenager. This approach certainly keeps the film fun and interesting, which is undoubtedly the sole aim of the film. Fans of Troma will love it, as will fans of 80's teen sex flicks such as Porky's (1982) and zero-taste gross-out comedies a la Animal House (1978). Special mention must go to the creation of Mr. Armageddon, who dons a crap cape and a long pinky fingernail, and has a voice which is deeper than Barry White. Clearly actor David Marriott, who had a short career starring in B-movie action films, is having a great time, as did I watching him. I feel guilty that I liked this film, as it is indeed awful.


Directed by: Rudy Poe
Starring: Dean Iandoli, Diana Frank, David Marriott
Country: USA

Rating: ***

Tom Gillespie

Review #223: 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy' (2011)

Retired British Intelligence officer George Smiley (Gary Oldman) is forced out of retirement to investigate a possible mole in the system. Ricky Tarr (Tom Hardy), a spy returning from overseas, confirms the suspicions after having a brief affair with a Soviet Agent, who revealed that an insider was passing information to the Russians. Assisted by Peter Guillam (Benedict Cumberbatch), Smiley must investigate his former colleagues, dubbed by his former boss Control (John Hurt), as 'Tinker' (Toby Jones), 'Tailor' (Colin Firth), 'Sailor' (Ciaran Hinds), and 'Poorman' (David Dencik). Also on his list of interviewees is school teacher Jim Prideaux (Mark Strong), who is a former agent that was shot and captured by the Russians in a previous bungled operation, and has now been cast out by the agency nicknamed the 'Circus'.

After the Harry Potter series ended earlier this year, it's great to see that a stellar British cast can still be assembled. And what a cast it is. The danger, obviously, is that with such talent on display, some people can get left behind or the film can feel over-populated. But, with the exception of Ciaran Hinds, each actor gets their chance to shine. The notable stand-out in my opinion is Hardy, who with his recent back catalogue, can only be described as the best young British actor around. He's a world away from psychopathic jailbird Charles Bronson in, er, Bronson (2008), which is his greatest performance to date. Here, he's a damaged and emotionally-torn grunt who is dealing with the fact that the woman he's possibly fallen in love with has disappeared and most likely dead.

With Alec Guinness making the role of Smiley his own in the BBC adaptation of John le Carre's book, Oldman faced a challenge. But of course, this being Oldman, he makes his turn as the bespectacled, brooding and miserable super-spy into one of his best performances. He's not the over-the-top bad guy or the larger-than-life personality that we're used to from the likes of Leon (1994), Sid And Nancy (1986) or The Fifth Element (1997), but he is quiet, dutiful, and ponderous. I believe in the years to come he will be remembered as one of the finest actors this country has ever produced. The whole film is a tour de force of acting, and mention must go to Firth also, who demonstrates once again why, at the age of 51, he's getting more work than ever.

The film itself is sensational. Every frame, sound, and line of dialogue looks carefully considered. Just like the collection of grumpy spies, the film is slow-moving. It's a film of tone and mood, of greys and browns. This is portraying 1970's Britain, and from the looks of it, it was a miserable and paranoid place to live. The Cold War was in full flow, and Britain was in danger of being left in the wake of it's American allies. The characters reflect the mood of the country, it would seem. The spies are the people that must risk torture, murder, or arrest, all for the apparent safety of Britain, and they must do it all in the shadows. They are unhappy, and have every right to be.

It can be confusing, but when the credits roll after an exceptional closing and lively montage, and all the pieces come together, it's apparent that it's a relatively straightforward plot that has been arranged in a complex manner. It doesn't feel like this was done to make the film seem more intelligent than it is, but a way to keep the narrative interesting, and allowing us to learn things as our protagonist does. It jumps back and forward in time as the various players tell their story, or Smiley finds another piece to the puzzle, and credit must go to director Tomas Alfredson, who directed Swedish vampire masterpiece Let The Right One In (2008), for keeping a firm grip on everything. Just a wonderful film, and one that will surely get plenty of recognition come next years Academy Awards.


Directed by: Tomas Alfredson
Starring: Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, Tom Hardy, Benedict Cumberbatch, Mark Strong, Toby Jones, David Dencik, John Hurt, Ciarán Hinds, Kathy Burke
Country: France/UK/Germany

Rating: *****

Tom Gillespie

Review #222: 'Return of the Street Fighter' (1974)

In this sequel to The Streetfighter (1974), released the same year, it's much more of the same for bad-ass martial-artist-for-hire Tsurugi (Sonny Chiba), only much less plot. Of what there is, the film focuses on a fake charity organisation used to embezzle money for the mob and see good folks out of their hard-earned money. Tsurugi is still pissed at the mob from the first film, so he doesn't take too kindly to this revelation. The mob sends waves of bad guys after him, and he kicks their arses. Also returning is Masashi Ishibashi as the presumed-dead Tateki, only minus a throat and plus an artificial voice-box.

I must admit I remember very little of this film apart from a lot of thoroughly enjoyable action sequences in which Chiba is never under any threat. I thought this was because I'd drank quite a lot of brandy, but it is because the film genuinely contains little else. Saying that, I still enjoyed the 70 minutes of carnage. It doesn't come near to the original, in which Tsurugi is much more despicable character, but I suppose they were aiming at a wider audience with this sequel. Which is probably why the gore factor, something that was so loveable about the first film, is noticeably toned down. It still has a scene where Tsurugi knocks someone's eyes out with a blow to the back of the head, so not all is lost. An easy 70 minutes, and mixes very well with spirits.


Directed by: Shigehiro Ozawa
Starring: Sonny Chiba, Yôko Ichiji, Masashi Ishibashi
Country: Japan

Rating: ***

Tom Gillespie

Review #221: 'Game Over: Kasparov and the Machine' (2003)

When James Cameron released The Terminator back in 1984 with its mythology of a future robot-human war that would lead to the planet's possible destruction, I doubt he would have envisaged a similar battle taking place thirteen years later. But there would be no time-travelling cyborg, no unborn future saviour, no battle-scarred landscapes full of human skulls, and certainly no Michael Biehn. This one was much more low-key. It consisted of one genius chess player, one super-computer, and a small band of smug computer nerds.

After beating IBM's Deep Blue computer in a chess match in 1996, world champion chess master Garry Kasparov, widely regarded as the best player in history, agreed to take up a re-match a year later. This time, IBM believed it had something up his sleeve, recruiting former chess champions to 'teach' Deep Blue how to play like a human. It was to be a fun experiment, pitting man against machine. After demolishing Deep Blue in the first round, IBM came back in the second to beat Kasparov. Sending Kasparov into a paranoid decline as Deep Blue's power became apparent, he starts to wonder about the legitimacy of IBM's claims, the goings-on behind closed doors, and why the IBM corporation are refusing to show the computer match logs.

First of all, for a documentary about chess, this is purely riveting stuff. The psychological torment that can be experienced by chess players engulfs Kasparov. As the experts say, chess is a game where you must be expectant and suspicious of your opponent, making it an ultimately paranoid game. The mind games that Kasparov accuses IBM of playing on him just destroys him, and his deterioration is played out in the fantastic stock footage of the match. The film eventually becomes not only a study of what it means to be human, but also a commentary on the corruption of corporations - I must say, although nothing is proven, it is clear where director Vikram Jayanti's beliefs lie.

The film begins with title cards explaining how an 18th-century chess-playing machine called 'The Turk' managed to beat a number of players, including Napoleon Bonaparte. It was apparently a well-constructed machine, but was in fact a hoax, and tricks and construction allowed for a person to fit inside it, but create the illusion that only cogs and mechanics lay inside. It is used as an obvious metaphor for the accusation faced by IBM of cheating and playing the man in the machine. In fairness, the film offers the men behind Deep Blue the chance to have their say, and they do themselves no favours. They come across as arrogant and smarmy. Yet the film's obvious siding with Kasparov seems unfair given that the accusations made against IBM are unproven, and no evidence is offered in the film.

That flaw aside, this is undoubtedly a gripping documentary, and Kasparov makes for a warm host and narrator. The match seemed to have its effect on Kasparov, as he soon lost his world title afterwards, and the mental strain and bitterness is still there to see. It did actually make me want to play chess too, although I'm crap.


Directed by: Vikram Jayanti
Starring: Garry Kasparov
Country: Canada/UK

Rating: ****

Tom Gillespie

Review #220: 'The Coast Guard' (2002)

Kang (Dong-Gun Jang) is a soldier assigned to patrol the border of the North-South Korea divide. His sole job is to shoot anyone that crosses the border, as they are to be considered North Korean spies. As it holds many rewards, Kang is eager to kill someone. One night on duty in town, he gets into an argument with a gang of youths having drinks, including Mi-Yeong (Ji-A Park). As a means of defying the soldiers who they believe are just living easy off the tax payers' money, Mi-Yeong crosses the border with a young man and the two have sex. Kang spots the man's head and opens fire, killing him, and throws a grenade that blows him apart. Mi-Yeong descends into madness, stalking the army camp and having sex with various soldiers. Kang also goes mad with guilt, and is eventually dismissed from the coast guard, only return with vengeance on his mind.

As good as the premise for this film sounds, I really did find it disappointingly amateurish. The interesting themes lying throughout the film are drowned out by bad plotting, and simply unbelievable incidents. How Kang, a relatively green soldier with no real combat experience, turns into a super-slick Jason Bourne-alike who can deceive a whole patrol overnight is just ridiculous. It's clear that director Ki-Duk Kim is trying to portray the soldiers as useless, but the amount of times they are disarmed by having their weapons simply grabbed out of their hands is unrealistic. And some scenes are just repeated over and over again, notably Kang appearing, ravaged by madness, not realising he has been dismissed, only to be told he is mad by his ex-fellow servicemen and punched and kicked away. It gets tiresome quickly, and appears that the director just ran out of ideas.

It's not to say that some parts of the film aren't effective. The tragic Mi-Yeong, having slept with many of the soldiers believing them to be her dead ex-lover, finds herself pregnant. Her brother, enraged, demands that the soldiers responsible come forward. Mi-Yeong kisses the guilty men one by one on the cheek, gleefully unaware of the gravity of the situation, only for her brother to stare horrified as one after the other step forward. The scene where she crawls into her brother's fish tank, bloody from a forced abortion, is truly brilliant. The water fills up with blood as she sits there, unable to grasp what is happening. It's a powerful scene in a disappointingly poor film.


Directed by: Ki-Duk Kim
Starring: Dong-Gun Jang, Ji-A Park, Jeong-Hak Kim
Country: South Korea

Rating: **

Tom Gillespie

Review #219: 'Spirits of the Dead' (1968)

Also known as Histoires Extraordinaires, this film combines three short stories by Edgar Allen Poe, and has each segment directed by a different European director. The first, entitled Metzengerstein, is directed by the man that helmed Barbarella (1968), Roger Vadim. It tells the story of a beautiful yet debauched countess Federica (Jane Fonda) who falls in love with her family rival, Baron Wilhelm (Peter Fonda - bit weird, them being real-life brother and sister), who frees her leg from a trap in the woods. After he rejects her, she orders the burning of one of his villages, and the Baron is killed when attempting a rescue of one of his horses. The horse is taken in by Federica, who becomes obsessed with it once she notices its resemblance to the one painted on a damaged tapestry.

The second story, William Wilson, is directed by French film-maker Louis Malle. It tells a familiar doppelgänger story of the wicked William Wilson (Alain Delon) who is also interrupted by his 'better half' who shares his name and his appearance, but none of his evil ways. After winning a card game against Giuseppina (Brigitte Bardot) through repeatedly cheating, his other half exposes him, and the two face a duel. The third, directed by Federico Fellini and entitled Toby Dammit, follows alcoholic Shakesperean actor Toby Dammit (Terence Stamp) who is brought to Rome to star in an adaptation of the story of Christ, re-imagined as a western. Haunted by visions of a blonde girl who has lost her ball, he goes on a drunken ride through Rome in a Ferrari.

The biggest problem with this film is the variations of quality in the different episodes. Vadim's opener is a pretty poor effort, with a strange storyline focusing on a woman's obsession with a horse. It seems to be nothing more than an excuse to get Jane Fonda into some skimpy medieval outfits. That is all well and good (it was one of the key reasons why I loved Barbarella!) but it's a silly story and a waste of some beautiful cinematography. Malle's second story is a big improvement, but it is clear that his heart is not really in it. Apparently he agreed to take on the job in order to raise money for Murmur of the Heart (1971), and compromised to make the film more accessible to mainstream audiences. But the eroticism of the card game, and the strange atmosphere that is evident throughout make it an enjoyable 40 minutes.

Fellini's final segment is very much the director's own vision. It is so far gone from anything resembling Poe's original vision, it could be easily called Fellini's own. Thematically similar to most of his key works, Terence Stamp's crumbling lead character is the main focus, and his disintegrating sanity is laid out on the screen with a collection of flashing images, bizarre characters, and unconventional camerawork. It is also an attack on celebrity, as the characters that Dammit comes across don't react or flinch at his increasingly strange and unpredictable behaviour. It's a shame that Fellini is restricted to a 40 minute portion of a 2-hour film, as I would have quite happily watched Toby Dammit as a full-length feature. An enjoyable, if unspectacular overall film, with the stories getting notably better as the film goes on.


Directed by: Federico Fellini, Louis Malle, Roger Vadim
Starring: Jane Fonda, Alain Delon, Terence Stamp, Brigitte Bardot, Peter Fonda
Country: France/Italy

Rating: ***

Tom Gillespie

Review #218: 'Night Warning' (1982)

Jimmy Lynch (Billy McNichol) is a promising high school basketball player. When he was a child, his parents were both killed in a freak road accident, and has since then been looked after by his loving, but slightly overbearing aunt Cheryl (Susan Tyrrell). He returns home one night to find his aunt holding a knife after killing a maintenance man. She had desperately groped him, shouting that she needs a man, only for him to reject her. Det. Carlson (Bo Svenson) is assigned to investigate, and when the bigoted detective finds out that the maintenance man was gay, he suspects Jimmy of also being a homosexual. He then discovers that Jimmy's basketball coach is also gay, and suspects the murder is a result of a big gay love triangle.

When I was deciding which Video Nasty to watch next by reading up about them on Wikipedia, this film, also known as Butcher, Baker, Nightmare Maker, certainly caught my eye and sounded more interesting than the likes of Faces of Death (1978). A Video Nasty exploring homophobia and incest, whilst mixed with a bit of gruesome violence? I was sold! As usual though, I was left disappointed. While the film certainly raises itself above tedium every now and then, it is no more than a standard psycho-biddy film, and those aforementioned themes left relatively unexplored. However Tyrrell turns in an effective performance, and Bo Svenson is certainly very funny (although I doubt that was the intention) as his rather dated gay-bashing cop. Not the worst Nasty by a long, long way, but certainly a missed opportunity. And watch out for a young Bill (listed here as William) Paxton.


Directed by: William Asher
Starring: Jimmy McNichol, Susan Tyrrell, Bo Svenson, Marcia Lewis, Bill Paxton
Country: USA

Rating: **

Tom Gillespie

Review #217: 'The Beaches of Agnès' (2008)

French New Wave film-maker and photographer Agnes Varda takes a look back at her life, her career, and her loves. She tells her story mostly to camera, now 80 years old - "a little old lady, pleasantly plump" - and is still full of life and wonder. She starts with her time studying art in Ecole du Louvre, the charms of the small town near Paris where she made her first film, her relationship with and love of fellow film-maker Jacques Demy, and the beginning of the French New Wave movement, and moves on to her re-location to and seduction by Hollywood, the hippy movement, her neo-Feminist views that influenced her films, and her move into photography. Most of all though, she reminisces about the eccentrics she encountered, and the photographs that immortalise her memories.

Varda seems extremely keen to cement these memories either by recording them on her ever-present video-camera, or by taking pictures. It is important to remember, it seems. She uses a number of different artistic techniques in the film. Her wonder and love of the beaches are evident at the beginning as she lays out a number of old photographs in the sand that blow in the wind, as she reminisces. She also lays out a number of mirrors facing all angles and directions, creating some fascinating images. Varda has a clear love for art, and sees it in everything she does. As she watches a man gaze out to sea, she describes him as being like Ulysses. It is clear that it is Varda herself who is like Ulysses - life has been an epic journey for her, in which she has encountered many friends and characters, and the sea is like her life, vast and beautiful, but fading into the distance.

What is so joyous about the film is how wonderfully sentimental it is. It is not patronising or forceful by overplaying sad music or having Varda cry into the camera, but instead the beauty and the melancholy are in her words, and how she describes the first time she met Demy, or how she turned a run down alley full of empty picture frames and overhanging trees into a beautiful gateway. It is so beautifully sad yet ultimately uplifting. Varda is a wonderful and intelligent lady who's love of art and creativity shines through what appears to be a short woman with a strange haircut. Less a documentary, and more of an exploration of art, love and life seen through the eyes of a woman who has lived through the very heart of it. Lyrical, beautiful, and reminds you of the true joys to be found in cinema.


Directed by: Agnès Varda
Starring: Agnès Varda
Country: France

Rating: ****

Tom Gillespie

Review #216: 'Farewell My Lovely' (1944)

Philip Marlowe (Dick Powell) is a private investigator who, at the start of the film, is hired by the hulking Moose Malloy (Mike Mazurki) to track down his old girlfriend who he has lost touch with during his stint in jail. After his leads go sour, Marlowe turns his attention to another case when he is approached to act as an escort for a Mr. Marriott (Douglas Walton). Marlowe is knocked out cold and wakes up to find Marriott murdered, and Marlowe finds murder and femme fatales at every turn. The two cases may be linked, and Marlowe finds himself unwittingly caught in the middle of it all, with the cops hot on his tail.

I've read a couple of Raymond Chandler's breathtaking Philip Marlowe novels, and although Farewell My Lovely (called Murder, My Sweet in the U.S.) is not the best Marlowe adaptation, it can only be described as pure. It's the most confidently directed of the Marlowe films, and seems more than comfortable in its noir tones of whiskey, gangsters, and fast-talking dames. My favourite is undoubtedly The Big Sleep (1946), which came two years later, but the two are just as confusing as each other. I could just about keep up with this one, but I'm still lost on The Big Sleep, although it doesn't ruin what I believe is one of the best of the film noirs.

Dick Powell, most recognisable from musicals and comedies such as the Gold Diggers (1933-1937) films and 42nd Street (1933), seems an odd choice to play the deadbeat Marlowe. He divided fans of the books down the middle, with some feeling he combined a sense of humour with Marlowe's street wise behaviour, but some felt him too fresh-faced to convince as a hard-drinking loner. I feel he performs admirably, although he's no Bogart. The rest of the cast are solid too, but if anyone comes out on top, it is director Edward Dmytryk, who drenches the film with atmosphere and style. It is certainly confusing, but this is top notch film noir from the genre's heyday.


Directed by: Edward Dmytryk
Starring: Dick Powell, Claire Trevor, Anne Shirley, Otto Kruger, Mike Mazurki
Country: USA

Rating: ****

Tom Gillespie

Review #215: 'Leptirica' (1973)

This Serbian, made for TV movie, tells the folkloric tale of a 19th century rural village, seeped in superstitious paranoia. There are tales of Sava Savanovic who died at least a century ago; his myth embroiled with vampiric tendencies. In the opening scene the village miller, Vule (Toma Kuruzovic), sleeps in the isolated mill. through a montage of close-ups we see staring eyes, surrounded by dirty skin; an ash-blackened hand, adorned with long, sharp finger nails, dip in the flour; sharp teeth are exposed, not in the traditional fang image of western vampire lore, but a full front row of stalactite-like gnasher's. Vule has his throat ripped out. With the discovery of the body, we are informed that this is the fourth miller to die within a year, and the speculation of a vampire murderer is brought forward.

Strahinja (Petar Bozovic) is a very poor local, who is in love with the very beautiful Radojka (Mirjana Nikolic), daughter of the ill-tempered farmer, Zivan (Slobodan Perovic). Strahinja has asked permission of the farmer for her hand in marriage, which he bitterly denies. After this severe knock-back, Straninja decides his only option is to leave the village for good. On his way out, he is stopped by the locals, who convince him to take the miller job. He stays the night there, and is visited by the vampire, only he is not killed. The villagers gather to try to hunt down the monster.

Vampire films are so incredibly prevalent at this moment in time, but most do not hold any form of atmosphere. Leptirica has it in spades. The rural setting offers an eerie sense of doom, with sound created with the sounds of screeching owls. The eccentricities of the villagers reminded me of some of the comedy characters in a Kurosawa film. The sense of isolation in the remote village is palpable also, lending the film an aura of horror. As the film was made for TV, it only runs for a little over an hour, and I felt that it would have benefited from a slightly longer running time. But this aside, I was surprised with the entire narrative, and its simplicity makes it an enjoyable experience. The films title translates into English as Butterfly, which has its meaning exposed in the last moments. Whilst it is clear who the vampire is early on in the film, it does not diminish the climax, which is gaudy, but strangely haunting.


Directed by: Djordje Kadijevic
Starring: Mirjana Nikolic, Petar Bozovic, Slobodan Perovic
Country: Yugoslavia

Rating: ***

Marc Ivamy