Change Your Image
chrisc2116
Reviews
Flags of Our Fathers (2006)
All the ingredients but it just doesn't work.
I eagerly awaited the opportunity to see this film. Perhaps I should have worried a little more when my local cinema reduced it to one late night showing with some swiftness. Having just escaped the cinema I understand exactly what others have said about 'Flags'. It must have been exceptionally difficult to assemble the excellent cast, CG graphics experts, WW2 equipment and locations and present such a wayward, disappointing and disjointed offering such as Mr Eastwood does here. Some of the CG was breath-taking. As a WW2 devotee I found little to criticise in the weapons and uniforms on display. The action sequences were very good, if not a little disjointed at times. But for the first time since 'Bean: The Movie' I found myself looking at my watch calculating how much time was left for me to endure. Nothing salvaged this movie in my eyes and I feel it will be condemned to my DVD top shelf along with 'The Thin Red Line', if I buy it at all. War films do not have to be end to end action in my book. 'Flags' inserted occasional bouts of action (in a disjointed fashion) into the long and often painful reflection on the subsequent bonds drive. What disappoints most is that all the ingredients were there for something special. Failure to deliver anything near that will blemish Eastwood's record permanently.
We Were Soldiers (2002)
the best of its kind?
the Vietnam War is one of those least understood in my home country of UK I think. This film will not assist us to greater understanding of the politics but you will not come away from watching it without a greater understanding of the men who fought it. When I first knew of its release I viewed Mel Gibson's employment as nothing but a ploy to rake in viewer's, fearing he would be a little john wayne-ish in the part of Hal Moore. I actually feel this is his finest performance to date. Films like platoon, hamburger hill and the boys from company c all have their own merits, whereas maybe green berets lacks any at all. We were soldiers stands head and shoulders above any of them in its representation of combat, its brutality, the comradeship it brings about and the effects upon those back home. I am not known for my moist eyes during films but I certainly felt myself weep for those wives left behind and what they had to endure. Hal Moore was a superb combat leader, of that there can be no doubt. This film is a fitting and excellent testimonial to them and all the boys who went there for reasons they little understood
Troy (2004)
wrong actors, wrong story, opportunity missed.
Troy was, to me, a film that never quiet made it. If it hadst been for the superb presence and acting of he who played Hector and the excellent portrayal of Priam then it might have totally floundered. the fighting sequences were often too hurried and chopped around too swiftly for some to establish who was doing what to whom. Casting for this movie seems to have been done more on who is 'in' at the moment, rather than who could best portray the character. Certainly I found Pitt's display as Achilles somewhat painful. But my main beef is with the tampering with the story. I cant say history obviously, but things which I expected to come to pass simply didn't and some things portrayed were totally unexpected. This could have been a great movie. It will languish in the corner of my DVD collection for those days when I fancy some light entertainment and don't care too much about what I watch.
Saving Private Ryan (1998)
the closest thing to combat from your armchair
I have seen a lot of war films and I seriously doubt that any will ever show combat better than this Speilberg offering. I dont subscribe to the view that it ignores us brits, as clearly we were not involved in that area. The aside about Montgomery is not particularly fair, even though I do not rate him as a general, he was playing the part dictated by overall strategy. The first time I saw SPR I rather think I held my breath for the entire landing sequence. Certainly, I remember heaving a huge sigh of relief when it was over. If there is a more intense 20 odd minutes of film anywhere in existence I have never seen it. The film loses many points for some really stupid continuity errors but makes it up hands down for the action sequences. The technique used to film on the beach has had its critics in my circle of friends but I really do think it lent great realism to the action. Many parts of the film were a little twee, some tactics used considerably less than competent. I have never been one to let such things stand in the way of good entertainment. Overall, SPR sits on my pedestal of 'best war film' on the basis of its action sequences. Better war films are out there if you want a really good story, historical representation or total accuracy. If you want to see what it was like to be a soldier in WW2 when the lead flew, then see it on the big screen and be prepared to duck. What a shame that Steven Speilberg did not make 'Enemy at the gates'.
Hannibal Brooks (1969)
daft, original and fun
As war films go, this one stands alone as the daftest concept I have come across. However, as light entertainment, it has all the mix of goodies and baddies, superheroes, tragedy and comedy. The 'we're here' line never fails to bring a smile to my face. One can excuse the acting [which is a tad wooden and stilted at times] and settle back to enjoy a traditional good yarn. The music, I believe by Francis Lai, remains one of my favourite film scores and superbly compliments the film throughout. To summarise, take time out to watch this film and I'm sure you wont feel time was wasted.
Anzacs (1985)
where are the repeats when you want them?
I remember seeing this movie on UK tv many years ago. From what I can recall it was an excellent portrayal of the events of that time. Whilst not always historically depicted and not always well acted I do remember eagerly consuming each episode as it was shown. A more sophisticated audience from nowadays might be less satisfied with the offering. All I can say is my family have it as top of my most wanted for either video or dvd. Alas, its available on neither. Roll on the BBC's repeat of this well worth watching film.
Enemy at the Gates (2001)
an opportunity missed
I needed to see this film twice before I felt that I could comment. In my view this was definitely an opportunity missed. Setting aside the historical inaccuracies thrust upon us by the film industry and the strange need for the story to have a love-interest, I still enjoyed the presentation. Uniforms and equipment were excellent, even a purist like myself would excuse the T34/85's used. The action sequences were, for the most part, excellent if not foreshortened. Having built that superb set and with all the necessary in place, I find it so hard to believe that action sequences properly reflecting the harshness and bestial nature of Stalingrad could not have been on view. I must confess to being less than impressed with the digital effects used to show the bombing raids. On my first viewing I felt the film had been greatly miscast. Of all the main actors on view only the german major seemed right. Second and subsequent viewings mellowed my views but I still feel that there were others out there better suited to the characters portrayed. Certainly Bob Hoskins seemed to be out of place. The thing that , in my view, confines this film to the also-ran pile rather than placed it as one of the all-time great action films was the final showdown between the snipers. During the actual battle a political officer did indeed expose himself to draw the snipers fire [a finger, no more] and the thought that Danilov would do so without any warning to Zaitsev, to allow him to profit properly from teh revelation of position, was stupid to say the least. That the German Major would conduct himself with total professionalism throughout and then finally walk through an open area, failing to spot a man stood exposed at the front of a railway engine beggared belief. In short, the ingredients for one of the greatest war films ever made were undoubtedly available. The opportunity to do so was lost for avoidable reasons.
Gladiator (2000)
first rate film with a schoolboy error
overall a really enjoyable film which kept me on the edge of my seat for the full showing. excellent acting by all involved, which makes me quite sad that i had failed to appreciate oliver reeds qualities until his point. however, one moment early on rather made me feel uncomfortable. why, having spent all this cash on wonderful sets, costumes and special effects did the film makers have to ruin my concentration with using the zulu chorus from the stanley baker / michael caine film of the same name and try to convince me the germanic tribes were singing it. i am by no means a purist or difficult to entertain but i do know my film music and i am afraid that this stupid use of old soundtrack rather devalued the early stages of an excellent film.