Monday, 31 May 2010


I have seen a number of films over the last few weeks and I can't decide if I am falling out of love with the genre or just have seen a run of poor films. Theoretically Hurt Locker should have been really good as it contained interesting concepts, featuring people who go out of their way to do a dangerous job. It was filmed in realistic locations and the heat was a real problem for the actors as it would be in real life. The problem I had was that the main character was rash over a long period of time. I can understand one rash action or a series of related actions linked together but where 1 person continues to be rash putting the lives of those around him in danger I feel it would have been clamped down on by Army chiefs not known for their tolerance of the maverick. It win the Oscar put this seems to be for topic matter more than for the film and the fact it was up against the great looking yet plotless Avatar.

I then saw the laughable Robin Hood. It should have been good as it was Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe who did Gladiator, lots of swords and battles and good archery skills. The disappointment comes from the fact that it was called Robin Hood. If they had called it "Random Norman Warrior" (not very catchy) and set it in "Normania" I think it would have been more enjoyable but Robin Hood and King John link the film to a certain place and time period which the rest of the film needs to adhere to. Thus why invade England when invading Normandy or Aquitaine (both controlled by England) would have been afar more sensible tactical option. Other glaring geographical and historical inaccuracies litter the film.

Then to help out with the film course we watched two Alfred Hitchcock films, Vertigo and Rear Window, both all time classics. Reviews were mixed when it was released and I tend to agree with them. Variety said the film showed Hitchcock's "mastery", but was too long and slow for "what is basically only a psychological murder mystery". Similarly, the Los Angeles Times admired the scenery, but found the plot "too long" and felt it "bogs down" in "a maze of detail. When it is re-assessed using the concept of Obsession between both the man with the woman and more subtly the woman with the man then the film becomes better but it still drifts.

The final film is "Rear Window " which I always thought would involve cars but didn't. It was very good although their were times when I wondered if anything was going to happen (the building of suspense). The acting was good, Grace Kelly radiant and a clever denouement.

In conclusion I need to reduce my expectations before the film as if I think the film will be good it won't be.

No comments: