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