Les Misérables (2012) - Tom Hooper

Wow. Just wow. Beautiful. Masterpiece. Finally understand the hype.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★

Gangster Squad (2013) - Ruben Fleischer

This film was good. Go and watch it.
Ryan Gosling is awesome in it, and Josh Brolin follows up his good performance in Men In Black 3 (2012) - Barry Sonnenfield, by playing almost the same character in this, but he was pretty good at it. So, why not?
If you like gangster films, plus CGI car chases, then this is the film for you! A film worthy to be in the ranks of other classic mob films.

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆

SPOILERS Texas Chainsaw 3D (2012) - John Luessenhop SPOILERS

Dear Lord, the main actress in this is attractive. Alexandra Daddario, most memorable (to me anyway) for her role in Percy Jackson & the Lightning Thief (2010) - Chris Columbus - the books were awesome too - brought to the role exactly what the original lacked, namely, a rockin' hot bod, that is shown as much as possible without making it graphic, or giving the star some kind of complex.
That out of the way, this film was exactly what it promised: a horror that reboots an already finished franchise. However, I did enjoy the recaps of the original Tobe Hooper version (The Texas Chain Saw Massacre [1974]) in the opening, and the way the story flowed, making this a canon sequel. I won't mention the hundred and odd other sequels. Also nice was the nod, to Hooper's work, in the form of a character named after him, even if the character was one (how the fuck  he made Sheriff, I will never know) of the two weakest characters, the other being obviously, the random dude who knew there was a serial murderer in a basement of some dead lady's house for four months, waiting for a cousin to come for some reason.
Again, all of that shit aside, it was a good movie. I say good, but I mean believable. Partly. Until the end, because that's what anyone would do, yeah: let's let the killer kill someone else, and then let him walk away without so much as giving him a slap on the wrists. The film lost its scariness, its only redeeming factor as soon as all the subplots (obvious though they were) came back into it.
I should probably give it a good point. Ah, here's one: I like the way in which Heather Miller's real character background was foreshadowed without a full reveal, in the way she worked as a cutter of meat in a supermarket, in much the same way her blood relatives had worked at the slaughterhouse. It showed a penchant for meat and blood, particularly when we see her "bringing her work home", creating art using the bones from the cut pieces of meat, in much the same way that Leatherface is shown doing (slightly more extreme, but oh well) in his basement. It's the subtle things that get me, not like the outright killing of your mates, and then befriending the murderer, because family is just that important.
Another point: stop feeling sorry for the murderers, you bastard audience. Damn straight those rednecks did the right thing, killing that fucked up family. Let's not forget they were feasting on people! People! Crazy old man with a fucking hammer! That's a different film. Oh well. Rant over.
But yes, it's watchable. If you're in for a night of horror, it's perfect. If you like this sort of thing.
★ ★ ☆ ☆ ☆
PS The old one is based on Ed Gein's murders and victims. I think it's worth note, that he's dead now. So don't be too scared. Unless he has a cousin.

Inglourious Basterds (2009) - Quentin Tarantino

At first glance, this is just a remake of The Inglorious Bastards (1978) - Enzo Castellari, but after watching it, the only way they are similar is the title, and even that is different enough, so that Tarantino knows his big budget film won't be confused with the Italian director's work. Apparently, Tarantino did buy the rights to the name of the film anyway, just to stop any copyright infringement, unlike what he did with Reservoir Dogs (1993), eh, soundtrack fans?

I spectacularly enjoyed this film, which is what cinema is all about. The problems I had with it, are purely production wise: Brad Pitt's star credit was unnecessary. His screen time was much less than Christoph Waltz (who gave a remarkable performance of eerie authenticity as Colonel Hans Landa), and I'm not sure if his name was there for any other reason than publicity. That being said, Pitt still gave a pretty good go at stealing every scene he was in, and was eclipsed only by the fact that he was not alone amongst the sterling performances.

Both the ending and the (sort of) epilogue with Pitt and Waltz, without giving too much away, were the best pieces of the film, and worth the 2 and a half hours we spent getting there.

A fine film from Tarantino, and a worthy predecessor to what I'm hoping will be a blockbusting phenomenon: Django Unchained (2013).

★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

Frenzy (1972) - Alfred Hitchcock

This film is not Alfred Hitchcock's best. I haven't seen all of them, but I expect it isn't his worst. It's dialogue is good, not realistically British (as I am), but I enjoyed the witty repertoire between Chief Inspector Oxford and his wife in particular. However, those scenes did seem a trifle unnecessary. The subplot of the wife's awful cooking did little to furthur the plot, and whilst I respect Alfred Hitchcock's humour at poking fun at a couple, who are on the verge of a murder enquiry, I do not see the need to (if you'll pardon the pun) murder the point.

Barry Foster as Robert Rusk reminded me so much of another certain British actor around in the 1970s,  so I did some research - checked the Imdb Trivia page for the film - and apparently Michael Caine was offered this part, and turned it down. Sure, he'll do Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002) - Jay Roach but a certified Hitchcock classic, that's a no-no. (I think this is the only review in the world to compare those two films.)

★ ★ ★ ★ ☆

Ireland

Hello.

I haven't seen many films this week, as I have been away. I was actually filming a short (very short) film with my younger brother, Thomas, in Ireland. We took the cameras into the countryside and mountains of Cliffoney, County Sligo, Ireland at great peril - a dog chased us - and got a few good shots of the locations and beauty of the area.

Those I have seen, I shall hopefully post reviews for tonight, whilst I can be bothered, and before university starts in a few days. Most of the time, my reviews will be shorter, but I digress.

Love Matt x

SPOILERS The Impossible (2012) - Juan Bayona SPOILERS

This film was an advert for taking out insurance when going on holiday. Apparently, if you have Zurich health insurance, you will be wheeled past the thousands of Thai people dying on a hospital bed, and live.

All emotion aside, I thought this film was excellent. It reminded me of United 93 (2006) - Paul Greengrass, because it was a film about the triumph of the human spirit, and the way we, as a collective, come together in a crisis.

Putting emotions back on the side (?), I cried. I cried a lot. The robots I went to the cinema with didn't even shed a tear, just tucked into their Cokes and their cinema hot dogs, next to me, like there wasn't an iota of cause for sadness. I am a hetrosexual red blooded male. And boy, did I cry.

I understand why many critics and other viewers have complained about the film, due to it focussing upon the typical white middle class family, who do escape, and not, as they say it should be, on the native inhabitants of the country, who can't just leave once their insurance clears or whatever. They have to stay until the mess is over, and long after that clearing it up, and still are, I believe mending the damage done by the tsunami. Without defending the director, Juan Bayona, and the rest of the film makers, I feel the white family, played well by Naomi Watts and Ewan McGregor, were focussed upon, as it was a true story and the fact that it probably gave a more widespread message to the Hollywood audience.

Also, that kid Lucas, was like Bear "fucking" Grylls in the way he handled that first 20 minutes or so of , for want of a better word, adventure.

★ ★ ★ ☆ ☆