Big Fish '2003' - Tim Burton

I have never been a big fan of Tim Burton after having seen his reincarnation of ‘Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’ and ‘Edward Scissor hands’ however this film has completely changed my point of view when it comes to Tim Burton.

The film follows a father and son relationship. Ed Bloom has falling out with his son after his son claims that all the stories in which he told are myths and are not precisely true. However, the stories in which Ed tells of himself are ore inspiring and magical. Ed is now old and narrates his story in the form of flashbacks, his younger self played not by Johnny Depp but Ewan McGregor.

The film is extremely motivational as its message is one which depicts the meaning of life. One great thing about the character of Ed Bloom is that he deliberately makes himself scared or puts himself in dangerous situations. His motivation behind this is that he has seen the way he dies, something that is kept a mystery from the audience but then revealed at the end; therefore he knows he will not come to harm. He even says something along the lines of ‘the more difficult something became, the more rewarding it became at the end’. This I felt was extremely motivational but also strengthens the character. Not only this, but Ed seeks to find his destiny for himself at the age of 18, not that this can be done in this modern age,  almost becoming a coming of age film of such. The best way to experience life.

Ed’s stories are extremely magical with the meeting up of giants, mermaids, a two headed lady and a weird little town where the habitants were more than happy. This almost leads us to believe that Ed is an unreliable narrator as these things can’t possibly be real. However, by creating this fictional world allows us as the audience to interpret the fact that a fictional world created in our mind is better than any real life world.  We end up wanting this story to be true whereas his son does not. It is only at the end, where all these mythical creatures actually appear at Ed’s funeral begging the question, was his story actually true? One way which I believe suggests the story is true is by using real life ‘freaks’. Matthew McGrory is a real life giant and he plays Karl the giant in the film, Deep Roy is a real life dwarf and plays a midget in the film. The fact that these characters are like this in real life takes away the mythological context suggesting that Ed’s story is in fact one of truth. It is a great ending as we are In denial that Ed can be such a great character and that these characters don’t actually exist however the revelation at end suddenly hits us that it is all true and Ed is in fact a great man, we just didn’t appreciate it. He comes across as a great man and the phrase ‘Big Fish’ is repeated throughout, he is a very big fish trying to find his big pond.  Reasons why a spectator may have found it hard to believe Ed’s story is that some scenes suspend our disbelief. Ed seems to get through too easily at times with some comical moments such his invasion of a Japanese camp during the war and even the bank robbery scene.

Ed’s death must go down as one of the saddest moments in cinema history. After his stroke we see his son become the new story teller and tells us Ed’s final story.  He saw his death in an old woman’s eye. He turns into a fish; however his imagination stays with him to the end. On his death bed he has to imagine himself being taken to the river by his son and dropped in the river. The parallel between the real world and the fictional world is just amazing. At the river, all of his old encounters have come to see him off, a great compelling and emotional scene.

With this amazing story it is easy to forget about the cinematography and acting. The film contains some amazing visual images like the one above. Some great colour like we see in the small town where people wear no shoes, instead the shoes are thrown up high.

McGregor is a great casting choice, his happy, cheerful way gives the film a much or magical and positive feel to it.

A great motivational and magical movie with one of the greatest endings of all time 10/10

The Wrestler '2008' - Darren Aronofsky

Randy is an old time has been wrestler who has grown old but still finds pleasure in the sport. He has now found himself at the bottom of the tree, the people of whom he wrestles with are amateurs and usually fights in shows held in a dirty run down town hall. He is skint and finds it hard to pay rent as well as spending time with his daughter and finding love. Although wrestling is a hobby of his you can also suggest that Randy is wrestling against life. Wrestling is his life and he finds it impossible to push it aside.
Throughout the film we see how Randy doesn’t fit into the normal person’s life. His look and size is completely different to everyone else, he is extremely lackadaisical when it comes to work and has no structure in his life. He does things when he wants to and doesn’t think of the consequences, when he forgets to take his daughter out for example. He never seems to understand his own daughter. He either tries too much or too little to try and impress her. This downfall is shown later on when he makes an old lady a potato salad, he cant get it right without the old woman commenting ‘a little more’ or ‘a little less’.
We see examples of how important wrestling is to Randy from start to finish. We are allowed behind the scenes. Although big in size and rather scary looking, the wrestlers come across as nice people. They are close to each other and are Randy’s family. The organiser of the first wrestling fight is a small feller. He demands the role of each wrestler which they accept with gratitude, this just gives them a vibe of kindness and compassion which results in us warming towards them. Before his heart attack no-one refers to Randy as Randy, but they refer to him as ‘Ram’. He is always living in his act even when he isn’t wrestling; it is only until he decides to give wrestling up that people start calling him Randy instead of the Ram.   He seems to be well known and loved by everyone. Randy’s love of wrestling results in him going back for a final fight even though he has had a heart attack and his body giving up on him. His costume consists of a hearing aid and glasses and he coughs repeatedly throughout.  All signs of ageing.
Many may know that as well as ‘The Wrestler’, Aronofsky’s other productions include some critically acclaimed films such as ‘Black Swan’ and ‘Pi’. Some people say that ‘The Wrestler’ and ‘Black Swan’ are the same movie. This supports the idea of the auteur theory. A film director makes the same movie over and over again due to the significant conventions used. In some cases, musicians make the same music over and over again. They use the same guitar sound, the same chord progression, the same rhythm, the same song topic in every one of their songs. The reasons why people say these two films are the same is due to the auteur theory. Both protagonists in both films are performers and inflict pain on themselves to be the best as well as having an abnormal relationship with family, both protagonists are limited sexually, both films contain very graphic scenes of pain, both are set in a crappy area and both result in a death at the end. There are many more comparisons to name them results in extensive reading.
The theme of ‘pain is pleasure’ is included throughout. Randy only gets pleasure from inflicting pain on himself, we see this in the form of cutting himself with razor blades etc.
The setting of the film can be described as dystopia; we see similar settings in films such as ‘Gran Torino’ and ‘Black Swan’ which convey the world to be a dark and dirty place. Other than this we do see some great set designs from the location of the first wrestling match, a damp old community hall with chandeliers which gives it an old fashioned theatre look to the surrounding woods of Randy’s home. An apocalyptic forest full of dead trees is a great way to visual Randy’s death from the world of wrestling.
Aronofsky presents us with some epic scenes. When Randy takes a new shift at his job which involves talking to customers it shows the parallel of the two life’s in which Randy leads. The scene is a non edited continuous shot which is set out as though Randy is going out for a wrestling match, this is made more obvious due to the inclusion of the non- diagetic sound recording of a cheering crowd played over the top. Another great scene comes when Randy is cutting cheese for a customer and a great amount of tension comes when we await his fingers to be sliced off. However he stops so all tension and suspense is gone, but Randy decides to punch the blade resulting in claret being splattered everywhere. This break in genre convention leaves us surprised and shocked, also suggesting Randy to be a bit odd.  
The role of Cassidy is extremely important in the film. She is someone Randy can relate to, in fact, she is the only person he can relate to. The only proper conversation Randy has in the whole film is with her as she performs a lap dance. It is suggested that Randy likes Cassidy not for her body but her conversation. The two are very similar and can be suggested to be the same person. They are both performers trying to get out of their jobs and they don’t seem to be able to mix in with the real world. Both jobs are similar in the sense that they perform naked, wearing a similar costume to one another. Pants and boots. Cassidy is almost a mirror image of Randy however in the end Cassidy manages to get out of her job, Randy doesn’t and ends up dead.
Some might go as far to say that Cassidy is masculine and Randy is feminine which results in her achievement and his failing. This can be supported by the fact that Cassidy wears no make up outside of work, she is a beer drinker and has a muscular physique with extremely small breasts, and even Randy’s breasts are bigger than hers.
Randy comes across as being someone who loves themselves. Not only this but some criticisms suggest that the film comes across gay. Randy has long blonde hair, takes steroids to become bigger in size to please people that come and see him wrestle, and all seem to be male. One great example of this is when his buying steroids of a big muscle filled bloke in the changing rooms. We as the audience become intrigued by how big this feller is and take pleasure in him tensing his muscles.
The gay connotations come during the wrestling matches. Big blokes rolling on the floor with one another, their body’s sweating as they shout in pain. Some wrestlers are even seen wearing bondage outfits like leather pants, leather masks which isn’t too far off mirroring a naughty porn film. The wrestlers seem to gain pleasure by being tortured by other men. GAY! A weird conception seeing as more males seem to enjoy this film than a female does.
Randy’s hobbies include getting his hair dyed and getting fake tanned, all things that a woman would do and Aronofsky insists of showing shots of Randy’s bum cheeks throughout the film, maybe some people might like this. A clip which supports this idea of Randy having a major crush on himself is when he meets a blonde girl in a bar. She has long blonde hair similar to Randy. The next scene we are produced with a sex scene of Randy giving the girl (himself) anal sex in front of a mirror. As Randy is performing this act he looks at one thing. Himself. The only reason people go to the gym, have fake tan etc is to get more gratification out of looking at their own image, therefore this film explores the belief that everyone has a major love for their own image and they change it for their own benefit. The next morning Randy wakes up to pull a cover from a cage to reveal a rat.
You can’t help watching the film without realising some religious aspects.
One way in which can link the bible in with ‘The Wrestler’ is the fight in which results in Randy’s heart attack. The fighter he is up against very much looks likes a Jew, the religion of Jesus Christ. He has a bald head with long black curly sideburns and beard. It is the use of the props which suggests the match is the act of crucifying the Jewish looking man (Jesus Christ). The first prop used is a nail gun, nails of which were used to hang Christ up on the cross. Then we see barbed wire involved symbolising that of the thorns Christ wore on his head. The bloodied body of Randy’s opponent is a mirror image of that of Christ.
It can be however, be suggested that Randy takes on the role of Christ. We are shown a visual image of Christ throughout the film as Randy has him tattooed on his back. However, his long hair and white costumes that keep appearing it is no wonder why Randy dies and is reborn after his heart attack. Cassdiy can be suggested to play the role of Mary Madeline or the Virgin Mary. She is a stripper, which blasphemies suggest Mary was, however, we never see her have sex even though she has her own children.  
Randy’s last fight begins with a speech, like Jesus, everyone has come to see him in which Randy shares with them his meaning of life. The last final scene is an image of Randy with his arms spread out ready to jump. The shape of his body resembles a cross. This can be suggested to symbolise Jesus’ death and therefore Randy’s. The Jewish looking fighter may have just been used as a foreshadowing element.
The film is very graphic in some scenes of violence however one of the best self annihilation films out to date.

Raging Bull '1980' - Martin Scorsese

Watched this ages ago so memory of it is a bit faded.
'Raging Bull' follows the Boxer Jack La Motta through his boxing career from start to finish. It has a very evident and emotional take on his journey through life. Some might say that the narrative structure is very much like a boxing match, Jack gets knocked down but gets up again and so on.
It can also be suggested to be an allegory of growing up. Jack starts off as a cocky young boxer who believes he can take on anyone and beat them, he believes/ is a ladys man and pulls all the lovely looking ladys. However later in life, he figures out that its not all that its cracked up to be, athletic wise. The older he gets the more difficult it is to keep weight off, harder to control his temper with his family and alchohol becomes much more appealing. He goes on a downhill spiral.
The cinematography is some of the best ive seen amongst the films ive seen. The use of lighting, in my opinion is the best in film history. Shot in black and white, the charascuro lighting empaphises elements such as the boxers. The light seems to bounce right off and the contrast between black and white is amazing. My cinephillic moment is the fight scene between La Motta and Sugar Ray (Pictured Above). The cinematography used within this scene is amazing. The convergence between deep and shallow focus, the colour, the lighting, the mute in sound, the point of view shot from La Motta. We as the audience really get the feeling what it must be like to have been punched a few times and suddenly become all disorientated.
Another great scene in which i remember greatly is when Jack La Motta has a moment of weakness in his prison cell after being arrested. He breaks down and crys like a baby. However we are presented with a biblical and heavenly image of a light shining on him like a laser beam when darkness surrounds. This has connatations to Jack repenting against his scenes. Owning up to God. As we know Jack was a religous man due to the amount of crosses in his house.
Some interpretations may suggest that Jack La Motta plays the role of Jesus Christ. He deliberatley inflicts pain on himself, especially when fighting Sugar Ray, he refuses to fight back. However, this may be reading too much into it.
Jack is an extremely strange character. We as the audience are placed alongside him for the whole film. The things he does are terribly. Domestic violence towards his family, cheating on his wife and beating up his brother it is no wonder why he becomes the loveable villain. We want him to succeed in his fights but be a nice man outside, we are meerely positioned as his wife or brother or the extra member of his family.
It is foreshadowed at the start that Jack will end up a fat stand up comedian as he is shown drinking in such clubs, however he seems happy and satisfied at this realisation. The end scene is Jack sitting in front of a mirror preparing his material. Looking at himself, he is all he has left and he is the only person that he can relate to. Looking at himself, he can see all his life in that image, so can the audience.
His wife is fit aswell, Cathy Moriarty.
The pace of the film is very slow which results in easy viewing almost giving a biographical sub genre feeling to it, making it more real.
A cult movie and a cinematic experience to say the least 9/10

Dial M For Murder '1954' - Alfred Hitchcock

First thing that hit me when watching this. 'Fargo'. Whether Coen was influenced by this i do not know however both films have a very smiliar narrative.
The camera work is good and the lighting and colour are extremely vibrant.
The Hitchcock conventions in the movie are the role of a blonde woman (Grace Kelly) which Hitchcock seemed to like doing, we sympathesise with the villain (Tony) who comes across as a bit of a Phsycopath, like Norman Bates in Phsyco, the use of the love triangle and the fact that he chucks a load of policemen in.
The film is very quiet in the sense that everyone speaks quietly and the diagetic sound is quiet. Its only when the dramatic scenes occur when the music becomes so loud it blows your head off.
The narrative is similar to that of 'Vertigo' and 'Rear Window' as in both films we see a man who aims or does kill their wife. Could Tony be the same person as Gavin Elster from Vertigo or Lars Thorward from Rear Window? Hitchcock is an autuer and has been suggested by Roland Bart to make the same films over and over again.
There is a moment which suspends our disbelief as a viewer. Tony burns the potential so called murder weapon which is a scarf, how his wife Mary didnt smell burning is anybodys guess, maybe she was too in shock. Fuck knows.
Proleptic irony leaves us with a thought from start to finsih when that Mark bloke explains to Tony that 'there is nothing like a perfect a murder'. This foreshadows to the end scene where Mark is proved right in his theory when Tony is found out and soon gets arrested. Another great example of foreshadowing in which i picked is this. Before Mary picks up the phone during the attack scene we are presented with a mid shot of the door with her standing behind it, the bedroom door that is. As she turns the light on we see her shadow underneath the doorway. Later on in the film where the Detective bloke, Mary and Mark (<-- Names with 'M') are waiting for Tony in his appartment we are presented with an extact same sequence. In both cases, whoever is behind the door has soemthing coming, Mary is attacked and Tony is caught.
The short courtroom sequence of which is portrayed to come from Mary's mind is probably the best element of the film. The point of view shot of the judge, the ever changing colour of the background, the blurry and swirling image almost makes it seem like a nightmare. A horrible place and an effective sequence to show Marys fright and phobia of the realisation that she may go to prison.
The motif of the key is key throughout, excuse the pun LOL!. I wouldnt go as far as to call it the Maguffin but it is the most important prop in solving the murder. Chief Inspector Hubbard gets closer to the crime by unlocking the door, the key can also symbolise the unlocking of the mystery, the unlocking of Tony's secrets, the unlocking of the truth, essentially.
Like in Vertigo the mystery is told to us and presented to us on the plate. Hitchcock had to do this to appeal to the idiots who know nothing and have no imagination or idea of interpretation whatsoever, panheads. Although in 'Dial M for Murder', it would be hard and not much of a film is the mystery wasnt explained however in Vertigo Hithcock shouldnt have done it.
The genre shift comes when the Detective has figured out the crime. One can suggest that the film turns into a comedy from the scene when a police officer walks off with a handbag and the detective mugs him off.
The thing that interested me most about the film is the vouyeristic camera. The camera is always in Tonys flat. We as the audience are never placed with just one character. The camera stays in the room and characters come and go as they wish. We as the audience know whats happening, we are the onlookers and are just casually observing. It almost reminds of an interrogation room where you can see them but they cant see you therefore placing us as a detective in a sense.
A great film for the casual film viewer as it leaves nothing for the imagination. However, characterisation and cinematography make up for this. 8/10

Notorious '1946' - Alfred Hitchcock

In a lot of ways 'Notorious' can be seen to be different to other Hitchcock films. Although we see the inclusion of many Hitchcock conventions within the film the thing that strikes me most about the film being different to other Hitchcock pictures is the cinematography and the camera movement.
The picture contains a lot of charascuro lighting throughout which gives it a film noir kind of effect. We can see many similiarites to such films as 'Double Indemnity'. The juxtoposition between black and white, the obsessive smoking by charcters and the fast talking high trousered detectives as well. Alicia can also be suggested to play the femme fatale role, the deadly woman, in Alex's case anyway.
The cinematography can be classed as some of Hitchcocks best work. The shot of Devlin from a hung over Alicia's point of view. The camera turning clockwise as the dark figured Devlin walks towards her. It shows how mysterious and strange Devlin actually is in the eyes of a hazed Alicia. Hitchcock presents us with another drunken Alicia point of view shot later on in the filom where the realisation that she is being poisoned finally hits her. Alex and his mother turn into black figures standing side by side looking like grim reapers, a very scary image.
We do see many Hitchcock traits in the film. Alex's mother for example. Throughout Hitchcocks collection we see a controlling mother charcter who have a rather odd relationship with their son. In this case, Alex's mother dislikes the idea of him having a lover. Although she comes across rather sceptical about Alicia to start with we see her form a tag team with her son and plot to poison Alicia slowly to her death. Alex's mother is the only person he can turn to.
The narrative device of der liebestod is also used within the films narrative. This device has been used in other Hitchcock movies such as 'Vertigo' and supports the idea that love essentially leads to death. This can be supported by the fact that Alex falls in with Alicia whom is an American spy. However, this relationship soons results in Alex's collegues asking him for a word when she is driven off at the end and it is suggested that Alex soon gets killed. The three main characters, that is Devlin, Alicia and Alex are caught up in a live traingle, some might prefer to call it a jelousy triangle, which is also a theme used in a lot of Hitchcock movies. Hitchcock does a great thing of including props of three in every scene at the party to subliminaly show this three way relationship, however when Devlins and Alicia's relationship reaches a low the prop numbers turn to two.
Another Hitchcock convention used in 'Notorious' is the sympathetic villain. Alex is the villain due to his nasty background and nazi routes however in the end we feel sorry for him and in some cases Devlin becomes the person who we dislike most as he leaves Alex for death and takes away all of his happiness.
There are many moments with great suspense, one thing Hitchcock is famous for, such as the wine running out and waiting to find out what Alex will do to Alicia. We are hooked. The scene in which Devlin and Alicia are looking through the wine cellar and Devlin accidently smashes a bottle. The juxtoposition between the two characters moods creates massive suspense. Devlin being calm wherase Alicia is shitting bricks.
The theme of trust is studied throughout the film. Devlin and Alicia have massive trust in eachother which leads to their success, wherase, on the other hand, Alex has little trust in Alicia to start with, his love for her is overpowering, this leads to his downfall.
Devlins and Alicia's relationship are one we would expect from children. We, as the audience, know they love eachother but for some reason they keep on denying it. Devlin goes into a sulk at one point when Alicia starts to become succesful. He reveals he is going to leave.
Patriotism also plays a massive part in the movie. Devlin allows Alicia to marry Alex. This only suggests that doing a job for his country is much more important than love. Not only this but Alicia's sudden interest in the job at hand was created by her listening to a tape recording of her talking about how much she loves America.
Visually outstanding and great characterisation. 8/10

Last Orders '2001' - Fred Schepisi

A cinematic event to say the least. It is hard to say how much of a budget was given for the films production as one can see all the money was spent on the flashback war scenes. The war scenes in which were very effective and satisfying to watch. One cannot ignore the green screen used throughout the car journey.
Michael Caine plays a character called Jack, who on his death bed requested his ashes to be buried at sea with the help from 3 of his closest friends and his son. Throughout the film, we learn of the characters realtionship with Jack throughout the years they have known him.
The film does get emotional at times, which i wasnt expecting, this is helped by the flashbacks of such scenes as Jack with his son Vince telling him his adopted and Jacks death scene, where he dies watching his horse win, smiling. The greatest sadness of all is seeing how appealing Jacks life looked back before the war. He was handsome, a war hero, met his wife amy and was part of a succesful butchers shop. However, when he gets old, his butchers business isnt doing so well, he is in debt and his son has let down the family. Its representative of the life cycle. As we get older, the world becomes a harder place to live in.
The characters are a bit hard to understand. Bob Hoskins character Ray is shown to be Jacks best friend, however as the film develops we learn that he has a perverted crush on Jacks wife, they start seeing eachtoher behind Jacks back. I was expecting this relationship to go somewhere, as the film is all about narrative and thought provoking, however, this relationship between Ray and Amy doesnt progress, we never do find out if they go to Australia together. However, one can argue that this was never told to us as it relates to the context of the film. A mark of respect for Jack, as it were. Throughout the film the four men keep referencing to Jack being there and watching them. Maybe if the audience knew how Ray and Amys relationship ended then it would be disrespectful to Jack.
Jacks character is hard to understand, he is the main character, yet the nastiest one. He puts his disabled daughter in a home and never goes to see her, he cheats on his wife during the war and his younger self comes across demanding and a bit too confident. However, this is what makes the film, although a nasty character, these 4 men have been affected by him massively, all seem to be linked with his wife Amy. Vince was adpoted but taken by Amy, and Ray seems to have only kept friends with Jack because of Amy. Aside from this, each character finds a emotional and remarkable moment in their lives in which Jack was responsable for.
The only problem in the movie is when they disposed of the ashes. Considering they travelled all the way to Maregate you'd think they would take more care when disposing the ashes, made a right old mess of it.
 A good moving and touching movie with some of the greatest british actors of our time. 6/10

The Long Good Friday '1980' - John Mackenzie

Geeeeeeezzzer. Proper old school English gangster film. The narrative is a bit hard to follow at the beginning as loads of random cockney's get killed by a very young and chinese looking Piers Brosnon and i didnt have a clue who they were supposed to be, however, it slowly becomes clear what is happening. Bob Hoskin is the Al Capone of London town and a rival bunch of gangsters want to stop him making a deal with some rich Americans by trying to blow him up.
The ending can only suggest that Harold (Bob Hoskin) killed the wrong people who were targeting him as he gets taken away at the end by a bunch of other gangsters and Piers Brosnon. I have no idea who's side the sniper was on during the speedway scene.
Sometimes Bob Hoskin's voice becomes a bit annoying, in some cases you can tell when the actors add their own dialogue to the script. 'wicked mate'
The scene has some good cinematography, as you can see from the screenshot above. There are also some great symmetrical shots. The swimming pool scene, is full of vibrance created by the bright blue glow from the water.
A lot of the classic british gangster actors keep on appearing such as P.H Moriarty who appears in Lock Stock and another bloke who i dont know the name of but appears in films such as McVicar and Porridge. Not forgetting the role of Vicotria played by a young Helen Mirren. 'I'd like to lick every part of that body'.
Bob Hoskin's had massive influence on how the alpha male type top gangster role was supposed to be played, as already stated, he is almost like the Al Capone of London, he even looks like him. Punching Police officers, slapping women at graveyards, having a fit bird and not taking any shit from no-one. Out of all Birtish Gangster movies, Bob Hoskin is the one and only.
Just your average gangster film, nasty murders and graphic blood filled scenes, but one of the first ever made. 5/10

O Lucky Man! '1973' - Lindsay Anderson

What an absolute brilliant film. Im a big fan of Malcom Mcdowell and Lindsay Anderson so i may start to sound a bit big headed.
'O Lucky Man!' is the second film in the trilogy following the adventures of Mick Travis (Malcom Mcdowell) as he is growing up. The first film is of course 'If...' and the final in the trilogy is 'Britannia Hospital', all directed by Anderson and Mcdowell always playing the main role. All films contain the same actors who play multiple roles, giving the film a sort of production/play feel about it. In 'O Lucky Man!' we see the very early Helen Mirren in on of her first movie roles.
Some might say that the film is a comedy, however i feel it is much more than that. It is an allegory of capitalism. Mick always tries to be the best at his job but always seems to loose out in rather odd circumstances. The music, conducted and played by Alan Price is just amazing and gets the point of this capitalism allegory across extremely well. With lyrics such as 'Sell Sell Sell, Sell everything you stand for' and 'If you've found the meaning of the truth in this whole world then your a lucky man'. The lyrics are just amazing and are worthy of a number one. We often see small snippets of Alan Price and his band performing their songs. This just adds a much more laid back feeling and in some cases gives the film a documental aspect. We see later on Mick run into the band of whom he spends a short period with.
What i like about the film is how random the narrative is. Mick starts off as a coffee salesman then finds himself in a live porn show shouting 'chocolate sandwich, choclate sandwich' as a black bloke and two white women are suggested to have a three-some as he looks on. He stays in a hotel where he spends the night with a 50 odd year old woman, then gets given a golden suit which he wears for the rest of the film. There are a dozen more things which happen but i cant be asked to say them.
I believe the film falls under a coming of age film. Mick, as a young man, experiences what all young men expereince when growing up. The feeling of failure, the first girlfriend, the fact that all society seems to be against you. Mick's idealism of humanity is frowned upon every different kind of class going, from the rich, the working class and the homeless, who either end up killing themselves or somehow beat Mick up due to his idealology.
The interesting thing about this movie is it's almost a documentation of Malcom Macdowells life when he was young. Mcdowell explained that all the things that Mick experienced in the film actually happened to him in real life. At the end we see Anderson actually casting Mick Travis to play the role as Mick Travis in a film called 'O Lucky Man!'. Amazing.
The film has some classic quotes and some memorable scenes. Quotes such as 'don't die like a dog' and the lyrics from Alan Price's songs. Scenes which include a man casually walking out of a ten storey window to his death and a Mcdowell sucking milk from a womans breast, which always provoke many interpretations and seem to stay with you. One memorable scene, which could have been used in a horror film, is when Mick volunteers for a medical experiment. He decides to have a nose round to hospital and finds a young boy shaking and shivering. Pulling back the covers Mick reveals the young boys body to be that of a pig. Its shocking when we see it as the the film is a satire, not a horror. Its a great way to suddenly shock the audience and gain their interest again as the film is a whole 3 hours long.
I think the reason why i enjoyed the film so much is because Mick is independant, he always goes about his business on his own. We get to know Mick and he almost becomes a friend to us.
A fucking great 3 hours of my life well spent. 10/10

Rear Window '1954' - Alfred Hitchcock

I think the main point of this film is to convey the fact that human beings are naturally nosey and Hitchcock gets this point across incredibly well.
It's just human nature to be nosey, it is why we watch television programmes where celebrity's are being interviewed or why we enjoy reading about them in magazines or read their biographys. We are interested in the secret aspect of their life.
The first thing that struck me about the film is its cinematography in the form of the set. The estate or 'courtroom' as Jeff (James Stewart) refers to it is just magnificent and it has a significant ressemblemce to a stage design. Its almost as if Jefferies is watching a play, and were watching it with him. The whole film is set in this one location which is simple and effective at the same time. The windows are used to narrow the spectators vision in order for them to see all the action. Its almost like a screen within a screen.
From viewing other Hitchcock pictures, it is clear that in all his films, the spectators interpretation is one of the key aspects when enjoying them. One that i got supports the idea that if we are locked away long enough, we begin to go crazy. We learn that Jefferies has been in that room for seven weeks and has still got one more to go until his cast comes off. This therefore means that Jefferies becomes an unreliable narrator as he potentialy starts to become mad. It becomes hard to believe if his theories have any truth to them at all. We are left with little knowledge of the direction the plot is going to take. I believe this was Hitchcocks intention as he is the master of suspense, so they say, and obviously didnt want the ending to be figured out by no-one. This is why he included the detective, for the more casual viewer. The detectives role was to prove Jefferies theory wrong, and therefore completely ruin the casual viewers train of thought.  The fact that we never see the world outside 'the courtroom' also positions the audience in the same boat as Jefferies. We are cut off from the world like Jefferies and therefore we have to ask ourselves. Are we becoming mad? We as the audience are always thinking, what could be happening? I probably produced more than 10 different possibilities. We may be becoming mad and therefore unreliable to ourselves.
The film mirrors many other Hitchcock classics. One topic that keeps on appearing in Hitchcock pictures is voyuerism. We already know that Jefferies has to be voyueristic for a living as he is a proffesional photographer. We are placed in a position where we are looking in on people without them realising. We see it used in 'Psycho' and in 'Vertigo'. One way in which Hitchcock makes it obvious in 'Rear Window' is by using the microscope shots/ point of view from Jefferies. We are secretly observing people sleeping, which at the time was a really perverted thing to do, and also a young blonde woman dancing around in her bra. We as the audience, recieve satisfaction from secretly watching these characters and our fustration comes when they disapear behind walls and we can no longer see them. One interesting thing to consider about this idea of voyuerism is that it is a kind of triangle. Jefferies spy's on his neighbours yet we are spying on Jefferies most of the time, so we as the audience are the worst sinners. Well done Hitchcock.
On the same topic as mirroring, we see many narrative symmetrys from other films. The widow on the bottom floor, for example, is symmetrical to Scottie in 'Vertigo', who is potentialy left widowed when he believes the love of his life is dead. In 'Vertigo' also, Scottie is a detective who fails to solve his assignment, similar to the detective in 'Rear Window'. Also not forgetting the end scene where Jefferies falls out the window, an uncanny ressemblence to 'Vertigo'. And you can't have a Hitchcock film without a pretty young woman in it, in 'Rear Window' we are produced with two. The better looking one living across the courtroom.  From people who interpret scenes in this way, it is very difficult to guess whats going to happen, we are as confused as every character Jefferies tells about the murder. The fact that Jefferies refers to the estate as a 'courtroom' suggests that we are the ones who should judge.
One interesting aspect of the film is how it deals with our fascination towards the topic of death. Everytime Stella visits Jefferies she tells him to stop looking out the window, this is the same with Lisa (Grace Kelly), however, when the realisation that someone could have been killed in the apartment opposite, they are just as enthralled as Jefferies is. Jefferies, of course, would much rather look out the window than make love to Lisa. The interesting bit comes when Stella see's the widow taking tablets in the hope to kill herself, however, the man upsatirs seems to be much more important and all is forgotten about the widow. The main reason why they are 'stalking' Lars is to get him done for murder yet they dont seem to bother about someone killing themselves. Do people only care about their own sense of well being?
What supports the fact that people like to be nosey is when Lars confronts Jefferies at the end and asks 'What do you want?' in which Jefferies cant answer because he doesnt want anything. He's just nosey like the rest of us.
One of the great things about the film is the use of sound. The fact that it is 80% of the time played by the man with the piano. It's just great at creating atmosphere. We know what is happening outside when we cant see whats out there. The noise coming from the musician's apartment is just great and you can sense that your there, in the film.
One of the great things Hitchcock does is to completely turn the story upside down. Jefferies watches everybody, woman, man, dog, throughout the film until the end. It is only until Lars catches Jefferies watching him that it all goes wrong and the last scene is not Jefferies watching them, it's everyone watching him. 9/10

Top Gun '1986' - Tony Scott

One of the most pony films i've ever seen in my life. From the soundtrack to the costumes, to the random jet fight at the end. Where the fuck to those jets come from and what the heck are they doing? If Scott wanted to include a massive jet fight ending then he should have done it over a city or done a massive free for all. Not over an ocean where the only bit of explosion looks like a firework or a location where no-one can see whats going on. From my point of view, they're flying over the sea doing nothing, miles from land, and are painted black, your average film student will suggest that black is the colour of evil and death. Oh No!. The film also contains some very gay scenes which i, as a male viewer felt uncomfortable watching. The beach volleyball scene showing the pilots with their ripped torsos, glistening white teeth, sweat dripping off them as they roll about in the sand, and its supposed to a film about fucking aeroplanes. Ive always liked watching half naked men who have just come out the shower and bitching at eachother like women do, and Tom Cruise is supposed to be this 'alpha-male' character. One thing i dont get about this film is the fact that Tom Cruise (Maverick -great name) hugs his nemesis at the end in the form of 'Iceman' when he's the reason why his best mate died. The sunglasses are an absolute joke and are not needed at all.
Tom Cruise, you just want to put a pint glass in his head, thinking his the dogs bollocks and always laying back in his chair and riding his motorbike, the motorbike that none of us knew he had until he rides it under the sunset, with his glasses on. When he sings to the woman in the bar, probably the most famous scene in the film, he cant sing and looks like a nobhead, you just want someone to pick up a stool and wack it over his nose.  The Iceman bloke is also a panhead and obviously takes flying too seriously and comes up with the worse cuss' ive ever heard. The woman could have been much fitter than in the form of Kelly Mcgillis. She should of never worn that cap, didnt compiment her looks at all. As for the soundtrack, (Take My Breath Awayyyyyyy), Great up-beat song. The film is more of a romance than an action film, i think the jet flying is just a Maguffin for the poncy romance.
The only good thing about this movie is that it is a cult film in a way, in other words, a good idea, Scott shouldnt have made it gay and should have taken the women and romance out of it all together. As well as this it has produced one of the most popular fancy dress costumes ever. 2/10 -shit

Momma Don't Allow (Short Film) '1955' - Karel Reisz

One of the first examples of 'free cinema', a concept/ genre created by Lindsay Anderson and Karel Reisz. The film is set at the Wood Green Jazz Club and it's very close to a documentation of what happens during a night there and the life’s of people who visit it. It seems that Reisz has made the film on a cheap budget as the picture quality is a little dreary and all in all, has a proper old school feel about it. The film is shot in black and white. One can call this chiaroscuro lighting which i believe is the direction Reisz took when shooting the film as some great images are created. For example, the cigarette smoke drifting amongst the band. There is not much of a plot, however there is a short period of the film where we see characterization take place for about a minute. The typical, girl has no-one to dance with and then she finds someone. Reisz does an excellent job in provoking feelings for the audience; she likes to shoot people, more importantly their expressions. One shot can make everyone seem tired, when another can make everyone exited and ready for a dance which can be reflective of the actual club itself. In some parts of the film, it’s almost as if the club erupts with energy. The film is more like a half hour jazz music video than a film and there seems to be a much larger number of boys than there are girls in the film, usually standing there in a group, gauping and smiling as they watch a girl dance. If you want a history lesson, watch this film as you will hear the music of the 50's, the way people danced, the fashion, and there is even a wind up car. It focus' on the working class as any other example of 'free cinema' also does. A nice little watch. 4/10