leo-s-pitt Reviews

Call Me by Your Name (2017)

Beautiful film with unsympathetic characters

[5/10 · 8 January 2024]

Primarily what I got from this film was an urge to go visit Italy. The locations are beautiful, and the feel of Rustic, sun-dabbled Italy is so vivid you can practically smell and feel it. I don't know it the film was part-funded by the Italian Tourist Board but it certainly feels like it. It generally looks like a Peroni advert.

But I found it hard to emotionally engage with the main characters since they appear to have such an idyllic and privileged life.

Elio is a beautiful teenager who spends his days mooching round beautiful sun-drenched Italy. Domestic servants bring him and his family food to dine al fresco around tables adorned with mouth-watering selections of fruit, cheese, cold meats and wine. He wanders and cycles around the various stunning locations, pausing to take a dip in an idyllic river, walk about the cobbled streets. Beautiful young Italian women stroke his hair and caress his cheek as he lies across them on the sofa looking sulky. Teenage Italian girls look wistfully at him and want to sleep with him.

Poor kid.

He's joined by the older but equally good looking Oliver, who seems to spend very slightly more time working but likewise mostly chills out, sunbathes, mooches around, drinks, eats and enjoys probably fantastic sex with the photogenic locals.

So sad.

You get the idea...

Highlander (1986)

Very funny spoof

[3/10 · 17 December 2023]

A masterclass in parody. The hilariously erratic accents of the cast are so over-the-top that they add an element of comedy to what should be intense scenes. Accompanying this is the po-faced dialogue, delivered with such earnestness that it's hard not to chuckle. The special effects, reminiscent of a B-movie, further contribute to the spoof-like atmosphere. One can't help but feel that the inclusion of an actor like Liam Neeson would have been the cherry on top of this comedic sundae. The blend of these elements creates an experience so far removed from its intended (?) seriousness that it becomes an accidental comedic gem.

The Creator (2023)

Epic visuals and gargantuan plot holes

[5/10 · 18 November 2023]

How much you enjoy this film is going to depend upon how easy you find it to suspend your disbelief.

I'm quite forgiving of plot holes and storytelling inconsistency, but the frequency with which I found my immersion in the film being broken by a "wtf?" was some way beyond anything else I've seen in the cinema in recent years.

From an aesthetic point of view it's very well made. The visual FX and the design are powerful, beautifully realised. It looks and sounds great.

But the motivations and actions of characters, the overall tone, and the logic of major and minor storylines, are very erratic. There are many plot holes, and some of them are gargantuan.

I'm not talking about pedantic questions of realism here: I mean the consistency of the Universe the film is set in and the logic of major plot points. Things which jump out as being obviously problematic as soon as they occur on-screen.

Despite that, it's still possible to enjoy the film as a purely visual spectacle; but lower your expectations accordingly.

This Is England '90 (2015)

Brilliant, best television I have seen in ages

[10/10 · 4 March 2022]

Finally got around to watching all three series of This is England recently, and this is about all of them not just '90: I can't really praise this show enough. Everything about it is just top quality and I find it almost impossible to fault.

It feels totally authentic, it's engrossing, the stories are compelling, it's serious and moving and carries an emotional punch but without being contrived and is also hilarious at times. The performances are brilliant - it's impossible to separate the actors from the characters they play.

I know this probably sounds over the top, but I almost want to shake the hand of everyone involved. This will have to suffice instead ... Thanks to Shane Meadows and everyone else for creating this and putting it on screen. Fantastic.

Mank (2020)

Film-buff catnip but quite boring

[5/10 · 14 December 2020]

I really tried to get into this film, having seen the critical adulation heaped upon it and what with it being by David Fincher, a Director who's work is generally of a very high standard.

The film does look good, and the makers have clearly put a lot of effort into aping the sound and look of Citizen Kane. At least that's what I assume is going on (it's been a few decades since I saw CK) as the aesthetic choice would be quite baffling otherwise.

I personally found the look and sound quite distracting. It didn't add anything to the storytelling and instead came across as an overly self-conscious exercise. "It's a film about the writing of Citizen Kane - and you'll never guess what we've done - we've made it look like Citizen Kane too! Aren't we clever!". Well okay, I get it ... but ... so what?

There were several moments when I found myself pondering how they'd got a particular retro effect to the imagery, rather than listening to the dialogue. Fincher's films always look good but usually it's not to the cost of the story. I didn't feel that was the case here.

And when it comes to the story it's self, the characters, the plot... I don't see that there is anything of interest unless you're particularly interested in the making of Citizen Kane.

Otherwise this is just a film with a bunch of characters talking about stuff that are and nothing much actually happening.

Okay, so that person there is a Mayer of MGM fame. And that's the guy who wrote the greatest film of all time. And that's the guy who's meant to be the main character in the greatest film of all time. Fine. But none of that makes Mank any more interesting or engaging as a film.

It's definitely a well crafted film but unless you're into Citizen Kane and interested in it's background, I doubt you'll find much of interest here.

Force Majeure (2014)

Very accomplished drama about masculinity and family

[7/10 · 19 February 2020]

I can't fault the writing, the acting or the piece as a whole in any way really.

The dynamics and relationships between all the characters, especially of the central family, were done very convincingly. This did feel like a real family and the individuals behaved believably (even the young children).

I felt that the main "subject" of the film was masculinity. The way in which Tomas handles the position he finds himself in; and the way Tomas and his friend Mats try to exorcise his feelings.

I could relate to Tomas, also being a father with two young kids, and that probably helped me to "get into" the film. I do wander how much I'd have got out of it had I been (for example) a 25 year old bachelor.

Zero Dark Thirty (2012)

Overrated, hollow.

[5/10 · 2 February 2020]

Given the various plaudits bestowed on this film around about it's release I was expecting a lot more.

The biggest surprise to me was Jessica Chastain's performance and character. She was guilty at times severe over-acting; e.g. frantic am-dram gurning, snarling, and shaking to telegraph "I AM ANGRY NOW" - in a way that felt quite unnatural.

For a film which sets itself out to be unflinchingly serious, the dialogue was sometimes quite corny. For example, the exchange between Chastain and James Gandolfini; something along the lines of:

"Who's she?" "I'm the m*therf*cker who found the place." "Hey I like the cut of your gib - let's hear what the chick has to say" (groan)

I found it difficult to get emotionally involved in the film, since frankly none of the characters are likeable, sympathetic or particularly interesting. I couldn't care less about any of them.

The end of the film with the Navy SEALs is by far the strongest part.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)

Very good addition to the saga - comfortably the best since the original trilogy.

[8/10 · 27 January 2020]

Coming to this film quite late, only watching it after seeing episode 9 (Rise of Skywalker) at the cinema.

Despite having been told by friends that Rogue One was a decent film, my expectations were low.

But Rogue One starts well, gets better through the running time, and by the end of the film this 40-something year old was starting to feel a little emotional - boy it's been a long wait for a good Star Wars film. Disney, pay attention: This is how it should be done.

The film is not without flaws - the obvious problems are the couple of prominent CGI characters. The CGI on these two is noticeably uncanny. The second of these characters in particular is so jarring in appearance as to really throw you out of the moment. But it's a passing moment towards the end of the film.

Immense respect to Gareth Edwards and the writers for crafting a coherent story in the Star Wars Universe, without falling back on the over-done Star Wars cliches, but still somehow keeping very true to the spirit and feel of the saga.

Highlights for me:

• The final battle; very well shot, genuinely thrilling; brings some menace and exhilaration back to classic Star Wars designs and characters.
• The droid - a genuinely original take on the faithful droid sidekick.
• The main characters - what a pleasure to see heroic characters written with some actual nuance.

Thanks Mr Edwards and co. More of this please Disney.

Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker (2019)

Unoriginal and mechanical exercise in franchise extension elevated by a couple of strong performances and technically impressive set-pieces

[3/10 · 20 January 2020]

It's basically an enjoyable film but that is a very low bar and easily reached simply by stringing together a few epic set-pieces, executed the bombast and CGI power at one would expect of such a production.

But despite all the noise, and seemingly endless narrow escapes, there is very little actual sense of suspense or drama; and most events felt like arbitrary plot devices to set up the next cycle of meaningless quest / jeopardy / narrow-escape.

The exceptions to this are the scenes featuring Adam Driver Kylo Ren, who is charismatic, creepy and somehow pitiable all at once; and Daisy Ridley as Rey, who does bring a bit of steel and charisma to a character who risks coming across as rather boring.

I also do not welcome the Lord-of-the-Rings-ification of the Star Wars Universe. I was half expecting a dragon and couple of Orcs to appear at times.

Saw this with my six year-old son. At one point he said "Ugh, not *another* planet"... Nailing quite well the apparently interminable planet-hopping. From the mouths of babes...

Skyfall (2012)

Disappointing and patchy

[5/10 · 6 November 2012]

It's not as bad as QoS, which I thought was inept and dull. It's nowhere near as good as Casino Royale.

I find it odd that many reviewers, with usually high standards, have apparently become blind to some quite obvious clangers in this film.

The stereotype would be that a Bond film doesn't need to be smart, it can be cheesy. I'd disagree, the best Bond films - Goldfinger, Live and Let Die, Casino Royale, OHMSS - yes, they do have all the usual staple Bond scenes (Casino, Q gadgets, car chase, bond girl) - but they can still put it into a package which is not cheesy.

Some bits which jumped out:

• Bond goes to the casino and is told he won't leave alive. He beats the stuffing out of the 3 baddies and Moneypenny hands him the suitcase of money ... and then just casually strolls out. This is a casino on an Island. There's no other security at the casino to bother him? He just has to dispatch 3 people and then that's it?

• It's revealed to us that Ralph Fiennes' stuffy office-bound M used to server in Ireland up against the IRA. Cue groans when he duly grabs a pistol and starts kicking butt when the MP's committee is assaulted. This reminded me a bit of the Independence Day Vietnam-Vet-President stepping into a fighter plane

• The Disk of agents that is being leaked ... What happened to that?

• Major clunky dialog exposition. Q: I'm not ready to do .. M: "Well seeing as you've just overseen a failure whereby our agents details have been leaked and lots of Nato people are now at risk (insert plot exposition here)... "

• Bond goes back to the estate .. and his old mentor turns up to offer wise words and home-truths, like some kind of Karate Kid mentor. Groan ...

• Did Q really have to point out explicitly that Bond failed the tests. Surely we'd figured that out already? It's another example of clunky exposition that cheapened the experience

• Bond going to Scotland in the old Aston Martin. Huh? He is allowed to keep his old gadgets or something? That's ridiculous. So then this was just crow-barred in as a reference to the old Bonds regardless that it makes no sense in the universe of the film... I know that this is not reality but you need to have some sense of consistency otherwise it's just a theme-park film

• Mentor person could pretty much have been written out of the movie and it'd have made no difference

• Fore-mentioned mentor happily wandering into the brush - forgetting to switch his light off and thereby alerting the baddies of his presence. Come on ...

• The whole Rocky type teaching Bond to shoot again stuff. Groan

• The irrational Villain behavior. He can hack any computer in the World... he's a diabolical genius .. but he attacks Bond at the end with a handful of henchmen

• The London tube has been attacked with bombs, a bad guy has escaped from MI6 leaving a trail of dead bodies in his wake .. nobody thinks to let the security know at the MPs committee where head of MI6 is. Q's sidekick is being told to get Q to safety immediately, but hang on, better not interrupt the MP's questions ...

I could go on... Shame because there were some really promising bits.

• Javier Bardem's villain had lots of potential. His introduction is great, but it's downhill from there and he goes from being quite original and chilling to seeming like a sulky child, albeit one with a lot of firepower at his disposal.

• Very well shot

You get the idea.

The Tree of Life (2011)

Pretty to look at, no story

[3/10 · 31 October 2012]

I should make clear straight away that I'm not averse to slow, thoughtful films and a bit or arty-ness. The reason I didn't like this film is not due to a lack of capacity.

But this film does not have a plot or a story. It's (as far as we got) basically a collection of short and mostly quite abstract fragments, like seeing snippets from a family's home video collection.

Those snippets are artfully presented and use some interesting cinematography - but not interesting enough to keep me engaged for more than about 10 minutes.

I initially thought that the dream-like fragments of imagery were going to form a kind of introduction before the story proper kicks in. After 10 minutes I was thinking "this is going on a bit .. " and after 20 it was dawning on me that perhaps actually, the whole film was like this. After 30 I'd got tired of waiting for something interesting to happen and switched off.

I guess that there is a deep and much-pondered-upon reason for doing the film in this way. Perhaps it's intended to have the feel of reminiscence, and the way in which we recall the past as momentary fragments of time... If that's the case, it works. The film certainly does evoke a hazy dream-like feeling.

That doesn't stop it from also being quite boring. As far as we watched, nothing actually happened. It was like sitting through the haphazardly arranged holiday photos of an anonymous family who have experienced a bit of tragedy at some point.

So story and narrative is important to you, you're unlikely to enjoy this film. If you are adept at finding interest in meandering arty-ness with no obvious point, you may enjoy it and evidently you may even love it for it's difference.

Personally... I think being different is easy, being good is hard!

I did enjoy the "creation of the world" imagery though, it's just that I'd prefer to see that in a 5 minute short-film.