blrnani

Despite some strong cast members, this was not a great film by any means, but it's worth a watch.

I say that particularly for the fact that it throws out a warning that is all too rare in the cinema, of the terrible consequences of allowing agencies free rein and then seeing political expediency take precedence over morality and trust.

In this respect, it was heartbreaking seeing characters responding to the call to duty and patriotism and then being expected to follow orders that go against everything that common decency and the country's values stand for. It creates personal dilemmas and illustrates the systemic breakdown that occurs when people feel they can no longer trust their leaders (an increasingly widespread feeling in the wake of the Covid pandemic.

The theme was much better portrayed in "The Wild Geese" and that film had closure. In contrast, along what seems to be traditional lines nowadays, this one was set up for a sequel. And while I doubt whether audiences - and much less government institutions - will be clamouring for one, I would be curious to know just where they would take such a venture, as it would inevitably have to penetrate higher levels of the system. Personally, I have come to sympathise with the "Beekeeper" approach to such matters ;o)

While the film delivers what you'd expect, and more, from a Jason Statham action movie, what I really liked about this film is the timely warnings not only about internet scammers - who are rightly cast as the No.1 villains - but also the moral hazards of a political system that is dependent on money (so the winners are already bought and paid for before they even take office) and the nepotism of a new aristocracy - the wealthy elite families that dominate power in the USA.

In that context, a major part of the subplot is the divided loyalties of anybody serving the system when they discover the system is corrupt. That is particularly pertinent as we find ourselves being called to defend the country by people who do not represent the best long-term interests of the people. Our governance, in business and politics, has been letting us down for several decades now and people are being forced to look into their hearts and examine their integrity before making up their minds about a whole range of issues.

I suspect a good number would like beekeepers to watch over us, but that would be an abdication of our individual responsibility.

As a final note, it is a pity Verona Parker was so potty mouthed, as it detracted from her critical role in the film. Statham is a perfect example of how people shouldn't use foul language to appear tough, as they end up appearing immature and ridiculous. If you're really tough, you don't need any of that :o)

I came to this film with very low expectations, but it was late, i was tired and wanted some silly laughs before going to bed. And it delivered,, mainly through the sparkling performance, inter-relationship and quips of its three female leads (a spoiler is that the male lead spends much of the film unconscious).

The subject is a familiar one: all a guy's girlfriends decide to pay him a surprise visit at the same time. The upshot is handled with humour, but it wouldn't be enough to sustain the whole film, so we get a subplot related to the delivery of a car for a friend, as one of the protagonists drives to her rendezvous.

She didn't spot the tail all the way from Miami to LA, yet in the heavy LA traffic the girls quickly spotted it. It's one of the details that doesn't bear deep analysis, but like all screwball comedies, it is better just to go with the flow and enjoy the ride, as the dialogue between the girls yields many laughable moments.

I won't reveal how it all pans out, but it's a winner for everybody but the petty gangsters.

So it's a film I can recommend for any occasion when one just wants an easy laugh. And much to my surprise, I'm going to keep it in my collection :o)

Seeing a number of good people (despite their human flaws) have their lives ripped apart by a terrible tragedy, it is impossible not to be deeply moved by the situation and pray that they manage to find ways to come through it all with their characters still intact.

The film is very realistic in showing the roller-coaster nature of recovery, where things can seem to be going well and then a little incident can throw you back into the chasm.

It also shows the danger of seeking solace in drugs - even hypocritically accepted ones like alcohoil and pills.

After years of being horrified at the way Americans behind the wheel take their eyes off the road, to look at their passengers when talking to them or looking at their mobile phones or the scenery, this film shows the consequences of such irresponsibility. It was also nice to see them addressing the irresponsibility of unprotected sex. But none of the valuable life lessons in the film were preached - they simply arose naturally in the course of telling the story.

Morgan Freeman is one of the cinema greats - who has ever portrayed God more convincingly, after all? And I am increasingly impressed by Florence Pugh (who for me was the stand-out in "Black Widow").

The background story was very interesting and with five good actors playing their key roles this could have been a good film. Unfortunately, in the key part the actor lacked any of the intrinsic charm t6hat was essential to being able to carry off the role of the bull-in-a-china-shop son who almost brings the lives of the others crashing down around him. But whilst his immaturity - allied with lack of self-awareness - wreaks havoc, the mature wisdom of the others carries them through, damaged but intact.

The warning came quite early on. Thomas was lamenting his difficulty in engaging full commitment from his girl Mimi and WT asked him what he wanted out of life. He clearly didn't know, which raised the obvious question of how can he expect Mimi to commit to a life alongside somebody who doesn't even know what he wants.

That question was never asked. And yet Mimi did commit to him, only to be rebuffed by confession of a lie that had duped her into thinking he was a much better person. She went ahead with her plans anyway, but the lead didn't show much inclination to follow her even after all his stupidity had been laid bare. So not much chance of a believable sequel showing him rushing off after his 'one true love'. Another missed chance that a lead with a captivating personality, in spite of his faults, would have been able to carry off.

The script could have been cleverer and less pretentious, but most of all it shows the importance of casting the right actors to make the parts convincing and engage the audience.

A film based on a book by the vaunted novelist Elmore Leonard, led by the director of the excellent "Gross Pointe Blank", set in Hawaii and sporting a cast that included Morgan Freeman, Gary Sinise, Owen Wilson, Vinny Jones, Willie Nelson, Harry Dean Stanton and the beautiful debutante Sara Foster. What could go wrong?

The lovely Hawaii (great scenery, locations and surfing shots) and Sara Foster were well worth watching. Morgan freeman exuded authority and Owen Wilson his familiar charm (without extrapolating into the annoying level he sometimes hits).

But the film was morally bankrupt (and not in a clever way that caper/heist films can be), with everybody cheating on everybody else. Vinny Jones, Willie Nelson and Harry Dean Stanton were completely wasted and the story was so confused that Morgan Freeman had to explain the plot near the end for an audience who were wondering what the hell was going on.

This was a terrible missed opportunity and I can only conclude the blame lies with the scriptwriters and a director who failed to realise just how poor it was and take remedial action. Perhaps they were all just enjoying their Hawaiin holiday too much!

I came to this film knowing nothing more than that the critics had adored it and that it was up for awards. Despite that often being a red light, in my experience, I approached the viewing with expectations that were certainly not borne out.

That attention should be drawn to the subject matter is important. But what I saw was a bland wokish presentation of evil every bit as appalling as that portrayed in "Schindler's List" yet, because of the bland wokishness, came across as possibly a portrayal of the more sordid side of the American Dream. Not the freedom, justice, citizenship, kindness and solidarity, but the admiration for the hungry pursuit of wealth at any cost (and the cost is often negligible if you effectively own the officials who could prevent your crimes or are on cordial terms with people who do). After all, Scorcese has made a career of portraying criminal activity as an entertainment vehicle. Consequently, I fear the vital warning at the heart of this subject matter could pass audiences by and be lost.

I don't know if the popularity of the absurdly impervious John Wick has rubbed off here, but after it seemed that Tom Cruise had belatedly realised that what made the Mission Impossible TV series so great was the teamwork, he has reverted to superhero mode.

This film has an excellent cast, including the team that effectively rescued the franchise, and yet it's all about Tom. And as if to emphasize the expendability of the other team members (it's the mission that counts; that and making Ethan appear indispensible and superhuman), the best of the lot gets needlessly killed off in order to make way for a new love interest whose moral values are highly questionable (born of a life spent looking after No.1 - but don't most of us face that challenge and learn to distinguish right from wrong along the way, so no excuse really).

The other annoyance was the reversion to face masks, a Hollywood invention that fails to convince audiences, since we all know how much more it takes to convincingly impersonate another person - especially when one's life is on the line! It spoiled MI2 and takes the edge off this edition also.

Having got my complaints out of the way, this is nevertheless an entertaining film. The key plot element (excuse the pun) is timely, dealing with an AI program that has gone independent and is a threat to the future of humanity. We get our favourites (Rebecca, Simon, Vanessa and Ving) back - though we lose the best one, who transformed the franchise for the better while she was around - plus a couple of new ones (Hayley, Pom and Greg). And although Esai is a thoroughly nasty villain, he is overshadowed by a sentient AI program that can analyse all possible outcomes of every situation and plan for them in advance - a truly scary scenario.

Tom seeks to prove the human element is still a game changer, but his team is relegated into the background, in part due to the difficulty of being able to communicate without being monitored (there is one moment when Tom is directed up a blind alley by the program imitating Simon's voice, with deadly consequences). Hayley is the unpredictable element, which may eventually work in their favour but has dire consequences in this Part I.

So, a recommend, and I look forward to Part II in May, but this film was not as good as the two (maybe 3) previous editions and I will not be sorry to see it end there (I don't think Tom Cruise needs to keep proving his virility to the US public, or himself).

Not a great film, but I found it an enjoyable watch, with the core family actors delivering competent performances. One can add to the interest by spotting all the references to other films, from the opening "Truman" to "Killers" and "True Lies" and even "Baby's Day Out".

The key theme running through the film is family and the way dealing with adversity can heal petty family rifts, especially when individual (and often unexpected) talents are employed and earn merited admiration.

Where Hollywood might benefit from taking a closer look is the way comedy and violence are melded in a way that makes the latter appear normal and even funny. It lacks the gratuitous and even sadistic violence of the John Wick series and Tarrantino films, but the number of dead mount up and within the context appear to be thoroughly justified.

In sum, worth a watch but not a strong recommendation, as tastes on this may vary considerably.

John Cusack and Zoe Ventoura were acting but I'm not sure what the rest of the cast were doing.

The premise offered interesting possibilities for a comedy, but the acting was so weak, not helped by the script, that much of it fell flat. Cusack looked like he was coasting it, but even so stood out like a beacon. And I give credit to Zoe Ventoura for managing to be convincing in her serious role. At the other extreme, the bitterly feuding elderly couple actually provided most of the laughable moments, with their over-the-top performances.

I think that's all that needs to be said about this film, but the overly strict (imho) minimum threshold obliges me to add this final paragraph.

This film gives a direct insight into the paranoid world of international espionage. And people in that field are taught to give very little away about themselves and to mistrust everything they see and hear about or from others. It is not a conducive environment for relationships and when one does surmount the odds the consequences can be tragic.

This helps to explain why James Bond is such a cynical lover. And when he does give his heart, the target of his love is either eliminated or used against him. Police and security agents constantly run this risk in trying to balance a family life with their public duties.

But this film goes beyond this and reveals the amount of damage that governments and their agencies wreak around the world. It's a messy business, where information can be bought by delivering up a reliable servant and friend, with tragic effects for the victim and their family and tragic repercussions when the former friend wants revenge for his losses.

I won't say any more, so as not to give away too much about this intriguing and very well presented plot.

Of course it's a sensitive context - one that I expect will be haunting the American psyche (a la Vietnam) for decades to come - and the film takes some risks with the reputation of its 3 big stars and one up-and-coming one, but the result is hilarious.

An added bonus is a lot of meaningful insight into the ways of our human world. A great many dogmas are enthusiastically punctured (as hypocrisy deserves to be everywhere), but there is a lot of good portrayed also, so it doesn't come across as a cynical 'everything is awful and nobody can be trusted' type of rant, but is actually quite uplifting in the hope it seeks to inspire in people, often in unexpected places, everywhere.

I was going to say 'good' but that would be going too far.

I started off being intrigued by what purported to be a WWII secret mission. But then the 'stowaway' appeared and it just became ever more ridiculous. By the end scene climax I was laughing out loud.

So, I'm not keeping this film in my collection, but I don't have that feeling of having wasted my time, which I get after watching some films. It was actually quite a fun ride.

Well I've said all I wanted to without throwing in spoilers, but this rather high minimum character limit tells me I still need to add another 100+ words, so I'm only signing off now.

Of the audience or a stereotypical portrayal of the American population in general? The opening accident scenes give a very clear warning of the car crash of a movie one is about to endure and the tone is set by the acompanying deranged comments of Don Cheadle's 'eminent academic'.

My own advice would be not to waste any of your time with this film - I've wasted my own on your behalf!

But if you do struggle your way through, as I did, hoping that some good will come of it, then I suppose the widespread adult fear of death and the children's fear for their parents and the state of the world around them are comprehensible and appropriate, because the sheer shallow stupidity of modern American life is apparently leading everybody over the cliff edge and no observers are going to miss them or feel the slightest sympathy.

"Idiocracy" was a clever and funny satire of the dangers of the path the USA is on. This one is just irritating!

This was a surprisingly entertaining low buget movie with some interesting plot twists.

The premise is a brother-sister team of professional assassins. That alone doesn't offer a strong platform for comedy and the whole thing hinges on whether the audience cares about the leads, which I think we start to do with the opening scene's moments of black comedy.

The brother is also about to get married and that context offers up some plot twists and funny moments.

A further plot detail revolves around a rare baseball card, which again enables some plot twists and comedy moments.

I'm not going to pretend it's great - in this genre that would be the hilarious "Killers", with Katherine Heigl and Ashton Kutcher - but for some fun on a rainy weekend it gets the job done.

This is a very clever and well produced propaganda piece designed to convince the world that the American Civil War was all about freeing the slaves.

But while that was an important and on the whole very noble issue (the film does show several less 'noble' aspects), the truth was far more nuanced, involving a power struggle between industry and agriculture and rivalries with European nations (the USA was busy denouncing colonialism while busy building an empire of its own), state vs federal rights and whole lot more.

My fear with a film of this kind - which presents extremely well just one side of an argument - is that it will deter people from investigating the matter more deeply and arriving at a more balanced truth.

But at least this film does very well what it sets out to do, as opposed to some recent fabrications that have sought to rewrite history and/or further modern political ends.

But unfortunately all the plusses were thrown away through sheer stupidity. Although latifah tried to inject some moral standards into the process, this ended up being like watching those people in the Darwin Awards who don't just invite disaster but seem to deliberately steer towards it.

By the time we'd got to the motel where the murder took place, we already knew the uncle was a shiftless character who was likely to engage them in trouble. And he didn't let the script down.

By the time we get to a diner where he puts wads of notes on the table in plain view and they leave them there while they all argue about the rights and wrongs of keeping the lolly I had seen enough to lose most of my sympathy for this family.

It especially bugs me because if it was a film with white people it would be torn apart for its inconsistencies and stupidity, but this is presented almost as if - well you know black people really are that dumb, right. Add to that a constant black victimhood motif, as if - yeah, we're all that dumb because of the white oppression - and I'd say this film does absolutely nothing for race relations in the USA. In fact it's a liability.

And it could've been so much better with a different script!

I liked the actors and the original concept. I didn't like that the critical combat took place in the dark, which I understand the reasoning behind, but it made it hard to follow.

But in the end they're just Predator films and I find these pumped up bullies about as exciting as a so-called hunter with a high powered rifle equipped with telescopic sight downwind of an intended victim. In other words, it's not so much hunting as cold-blooded murder (not least because they can become invisible at will and have all sorts of technological surprises).

Of course i still prefer them to the Alien creatures, which have no redeeming features whatsoever, so any Alien vs Predator will automatically have me rooting for the latter.

The idea was hugely promising and some of the scenes were very funny indeed, but the script basically reduced women to two factors: looks and how they are in bed, while the men are basically obsessed with those two factors. It meant the latter leads came across basically as overgrown high-school kids who have never grown up. What saved the film from sinking was the performance of the former two; one kind and the other showing some character depth.

The basic premise was that the G-Girl with super powers was insecure and had difficulty forming relationships with guys. But that becomes kind of understandable if the ambition of most of the guys she meets would just be to boast they're banging G-Girl. I dare say a lot of actresses in the 'real world' face a similar dilemma.

That's not at all what it's about. It's about people interacting with other people and we barely see any animals. But nevertheless I found it fascinating, particularly the daughter's enthusiastic assimilation within the local Kenyan native culture, the ups and downs of the relationship between her parents (Jews who fled nazism in their home country) and the treatment of the local Germans by the British colonial authorities, once the country finds itself at war.

There is much love, understanding and tolerance shown, within a world that is dealing with fascist intolerance, and I would recommend this film as a healthy treat for all the family.

... who is admittedly gorgeous and lights up the screen every time she smiles at her 'old flame'.

But the story is basically another appeal to (or should that be portrayal of?) American hubris, along the lines of "Independence Day" or Captain America deciding nobody's going to tell him what to do (even if the massive collateral damage has persuaded the other Avengers that there need to be controls). We make the rules and will punish anybody who doesn't obey them! But we don't feel obliged to follow them ourselves, because we have freedom and independence and run the planet!

, but the scenes where the two leads were struggling, with crowds of heavily armed military types all trying to haul them back, to clasp hands and blast their enemies in all directions with the ensuing energy generated, can only be described as comical.

The original Matrix was a great film with some fascinating ideas, but things went rapidly downhill with the sequels (and I haven't wasted my time with any spin-offs, so can't comment on those) and may have been better left buried.

Not that this nostalgic piece isn't entertaining. There's abundant action and there is an upbeat tone to the ending - basically calling on the people to reclaim the world and rebuild society in a much healthier way. And at least it's not as dumb as the John Wick series!

, since I loved Dr. Strange and had high expectations of the sequel. As many have pointed out, this was really a WandaVision sequel and I really didn't like where they went with it. I imagine the intention was complexity, but it just descended into silliness.

The biggest problem is the sheer escalation of every round. First it's saving the city, then the country, then the planet, then saving the universe and now we're into multiverses. They might think they're being clever, opening up the possibility of endless reviving of characters and plots, but it all becomes rather meaningless after a while, since it diminishes the importance of each individual and universe - there are so many others out there!

The upshot is that I am no longer enthused about a prospective Marvel release and couldn't care less if there was never another Spider Man, Batman or even Superman movie. That doesn't mean I cannot be won over - WandaVision was excellent and I enjoyed Hawkeye, but the characters have to be appealing and the plots well structured and intelligent (without having to be complicated - the audience is there to be entertained, not baffled).

In a very simple wildlife adventure that weaves a spy plot into fairly standard Crocodile Hunter TV fare.

It was so nice to see Steve Irwin again after all these years (I've only just watched this film now in 2022). He was a larger than life character who brought a lot of fun to the subject of the environment, ecology, conservation and wildlife protection. For me this was a nice tribute to remember him by!

This was simple fare, portraying three relationships, whereby through their conversations the protagonists were able to address important relationship issues. It's not high philosophy, but it's a great date movie to get couples talking about such matters. Will earn the guy kudos too, unless he turns out to be like Chris.