An epic old movie, an absolute must watch. Even now, I can’t resist running my hands over tall plants whenever I pass by them

"Gladiator," directed by Ridley Scott and released in 2000, is undeniably one of the best movies ever made. A cinematic masterpiece that effortlessly blends action, drama, and history, this film leaves an indelible mark on all who watch it.
At the heart of "Gladiator" are the remarkable performances by Russell Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix. Crowe's portrayal of Maximus Decimus Meridius is nothing short of breathtaking. His stoic determination, unwavering loyalty, and charismatic presence make him the perfect embodiment of a hero. Joaquin Phoenix, on the other hand, delivers a chillingly convincing performance as the treacherous Commodus. His portrayal of the power-hungry and morally bankrupt emperor is both mesmerizing and repulsive, showcasing his exceptional acting prowess.
What sets "Gladiator" apart from other films is its ability to evoke genuine emotions. The story of Maximus, a loyal general who seeks revenge for the murder of his family and the betrayal of his emperor, touches the very core of our humanity. The film explores themes of honor, justice, and the indomitable spirit of the human soul, making it a truly timeless narrative.
I would rewatch it anytime and recommend it to anyone. It's a solid 10/10, truly an amazing masterpiece.

This has got just about everything from "Spartacus" (1960) to "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" (1964) via a bit of "Quo Vadis" (1951) to it - and Ridley Scott has managed to create a magnificent spectacle of a film. Russell Crowe is the eponymous soldier "Maximus". Commander of the Armies of the Rhine for Emperor Marcus Aurelius (Richard Harris) and his designated successor - until, that is, the emperor's son "Commodus" (Joaquin Phoenix) and his sister "Lucilla" (an efficient Connie Nielsen) arrive and suddenly it's all change at the top. Betrayed and left for dead, our hero must now make other shifts if he is to survive in his new world - controlled by slave-owning "Proximo" (Oliver Reed) and deliver him of vengeance on his new Imperial nemesis. The film looks great, the cast - including some some strong supporting efforts from Sir Derek Jacobi, John Shrapnel, Djimon Hounsou and Tomas Arana all contribute well to this grandeur of this historical saga. The high politics, betrayal and duplicity are matched with a sense of integrity and camaraderie as "Maximus" begins to galvanise his colleagues and his political allies into something more than a disparate band fighting just to survive each day. Reed and Harris both feature only sparingly, but both add a richness to the characterisations that are dominated by two on-form performances from Crowe and Phoenix that epitomise a struggle of good versus evil and ultimate power in an empire where corruption and brutality trade human life as if it were a watermelon. Add to this some superb visual effects and a rousing score from Hans Zimmer (and Lisa Gerrard) and we have a compelling watch on a big screen that shows there is still a glimmer of the Cecil B. De Mille spirit left in Hollywood.

Ridley Scott's Gladiator is a real masterpiece of its genre. With its unique battle scenes, cinematography, acting and directing. It's a real must-watch. Shame on you if you haven't watched this movie!

They said you were a giant. They said you can crush a man's skull with one hand.
Ridley Scott's Gladiator is not a perfect film, I would think that the hardiest of fans, of which I'm firmly one, know this deep down. Yet just like Commodus in the film is keen to point out that he himself has other virtues that are worthy, so does Gladiator the film. Enough in fact to make it an everlasting favourite of genre fans and worthy of the Academy Award acknowledgements it received.
In narrative terms the plot and story arc is simplicity supreme, something Scott and Russell Crowe have never shied away from. There has to my knowledge as well, never been a denial of the debt Gladiator owes to Anthony Mann's 1964 Epic, The Fall of the Roman Empire. Some folk seem very irritated by this, which is strange because the makers of Gladiator were not standing up bold as brass to proclaim they were unique with their movie, what they did do was reinvigorate a stagnant genre of film for a new generational audience. And it bloody worked, the influence and interest in all things Roman or historically swashbuckling of film that followed post Gladiator's success is there for all to see.
What we do in life echoes in eternity.
So no originality in story, then. While some of the CGI is hardly "Grade A" stuff, and there's a little over - mugging acting in support ranks as some of the cast struggle to grasp the period setting required, yet the way Gladiator can make the emotionally committed feel, actually overrides film making irks. Crowe's Maximus is the man men want to be and the man women want to be with. As he runs through the gamut of life's pains and emotionally fortified trials and tribulations, we are with him every step of the way, urging him towards his day of revenge splattered destiny - with Crowe superb in every pained frame, winning the Academy Award for Best Actor that he should have won for The Insider the previous year.
Backing Crowe up is Joaquin Phoenix giving Commodus preening villainy and Connie Nielsen graceful as Lucilla (pitch Nielsen's turn here against that of Diane Kruger's in Troy to see the class difference for historical period playing). Oliver Reed, leaving the mortal coil but leaving behind a spicy two fold performance as Proximo the Gladiator task master. Olly superb in both body and CGI soul. Richard Harris tugging the heart strings, Derek Jacobi classy, David Hemmings also, while Djimon Hounso gives Juba - Maximus right hand man and confidante - a level of character gravitas that's inspiring.
I didn't know man could build such things.
Dialogue is literate and poetic, resplendent with iconic speeches. Action is never far away, but never at the expense of wrought human characterisations. The flaming arrows and blood letting of the Germania conflict kicks things off with pulse raising clarity, and Scott and his team never sag from this standard. The gladiator arena fights are edge of the seat inducing, the recreation for the Battle of Carthage a stunning piece of action sequence construction. And then the finale, the culmination of two men's destinies, no soft soaping from Scott and Crowe, it lands in the heart with a resounding thunderclap. A great swords and sandals movie that tipped its helmet to past masters whilst simultaneously bringing the genre alive again. Bravo Maximus Decimus Meridius. 10/10

Gladiator has been my most favorite film of all time. It is an epic masterpiece in many ways and it really explains why despite the numerous viewings, Gladiator still amuses me with its powerful imageries and many other crucial aspects so that it won five Academy Awards. This film is very well written, the well-ensemble casts, the A-class acting (especially Russell Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix), the stunning cinematography and definitely a strong character of Maximus (magnificently portrayed by Russell Crowe) whose life, struggle, disappointment and anger really move the audience, as if the world attention centers on him. Gladiator is not a historical film, because it only used the history of the ancient Roman Empire merely as the time setting.
All other aspects namely those gorgeous shots, the great storyline/plot, the fantastic cinematography, the vividly lavish colors, detailed production design and digital imaging (that successfully rebuilt the stunning beauty of the ancient Roman Empire) and all sell really well, making the 170 minute-long running time definitely worthwhile. The visual of great battle in the first 15 minutes really stole my heart. The gruesome pictures, the blood and violence just to beautiful to abandon. Everything in this movie seems perfectly balanced, Ridley Scott as the film director really did his homework well in redefining and revitalizing the big battle sequence once considered masterpiece from Spartacus and Ben Hur. In the end, once again, I would say that Gladiator perfectly combines some crucial elements such as good, moving story, dazzling visual, beautiful scenery, filming techniques, direction and touching music score into one harmonious, action-packed film about heroism and its true meaning.

Talk about renewable energy! An entire city can be powered by the racket make by children when they scream... To that end an whole industry exists providing scary monsters to get the youngsters to bellow. A security breach sees their factory overrun by toddlers and boss "Waternoose" is terrified it will ruin the business. They all have to be rounded up by the pest controllers and returned home. Well, of course one "Boo" manages to avoid capture and she is soon befriended by the big wooly "Sully". His roar is terrifying, but his bark is certainly worse than his bite and together with his green cyclops pal "Mike" they have loads of fun adventures trying to keep the child safe from the hands of the nasty "Randall" and get her back to her own bed! This is a very simple story and it works really well. The animation is enjoyable to watch, the writing is quickly-paced and quite wittily observational at times and the characters - especially "Sully", are creatively personified and engaging. Luckily, the yelling brats are kept to a minimum and what we end up with is a sort of, well, love story. It has all the usual Pixar/Disney messages of loyalty and teamwork - only this is depicted with much more playfulness and we've even got a yeti with a never-ending supply of snow-cones!

Always a pleasure to revisit this. 'Monsters, Inc.' is one of my favourite Disney animated films.
The cast and characters are what sets this above the majority of the studio's other work, with so many memorable ones involved. John Goodman (Sully) and Billy Crystal (Mike) make for an outstanding duo in the lead roles, they are truly perfect for their respective roles.
Elsewhere, you have the excellent Steve Buscemi portraying Randall to terrific effect. There are also memorable roles for James Coburn (Waternoose), Jennifer Tilly (Celia) and Bob Peterson (Roz). You, of course, also have Boo (Mary Gibbs) who is simply adorable.
Everything else from the plot to the animation is fantastic, too - I have no faults with this film. Funny, wholesome, entertaining and touching. I see they're creating a television series, 'Monsters at Work', which could be good given it will have the same cast.
A must-watch!

"Nick" (Ben Affleck) is seemingly happily married to the gorgeous and witty "Amy" (Rosamund Pike) until he comes home one evening and finds a smashed table and no wife. The cops turn up with "Boney" (Kim Dickens) and "Gilpin" (Patrick Fugit) soon smelling a rat. Together with her parents, they do all the usual publicity stuff but to no avail. Then the police start to wonder if he's telling the truth, and that suspicion is only heightened when they discover some deliberately left breadcrumbs that begin to suggest that he is a bit of a cheating brute and that she was terrified he was going to kill her. As evidence mounts, you wouldn't put your money on "Nick" so with the support of his no-nonsense sister "Margo" (Carrie Coon) he engages acclaimed lawyer "Bolt" (Tyler Perry) and they start digging. They are ill-prepared for the truth that they actually do discover, though not as ill-prepared as "Collings" (Neil Patrick Harris). As we learn more about who did or didn't do what to whom, we find ourselves immersed in quite an complex web of lies, deceit and downright evil. For my money, this is Affleck's best film as his character has more skin in the game and as the tension mounts he sweats the story for all it's worth. Pike is also on great form as the fiendish "Amy" who is perfectly capable of manipulation on a fairly grand scale. There are also quite a revealing series of cameos from Reece Witherspoon's television chat show host who's motto ought to be "never let the truth get in the way..." The self-adaptation of her novel allows both Gillian Flynn and David Fincher to squeeze the juice from an ensemble cast that play to just about every toxic form of sexist stereotype the media can concoct and peddle. To be honest, I didn't love the denouement. Somehow I felt it let this whole carefully plotted and crafted exercise down a bit, but for the preceding 2½ hours it really does hold your attention.

**An excellent film, which never leaves us comfortable and where nothing is as it seems.**
This is one of those films that can unnerve and exasperate us, but that we love to watch. In fact, I don't remember seeing many films where the main character deserved my hatred. I don't want to, and I won't reveal what happens in this film, but it's one of those where appearances can be deceiving and where things aren't what they seem. The action focuses on the disappearance of a woman and her husband's efforts to find her. To our eyes, it's obvious that he really wants to find her, perhaps more than her parents, who seem to be just taking the opportunity to publicize the children's books they've published. However, little by little, he becomes a suspect in a hypothetical murder case.
David Fincher is a director who has already shown what he's worth: I loved “Se7en”, “Game”, “Fight Club” and “Zodiac”, but I didn't really like “Social Network”, or “Benjamin Button”. In this film, he directs skillfully, but not without debatable choices: for me, the story's most important twist all comes too soon, and the ending is lazy, overly sudden, and makes it feel like the film was cut short before the end. The rest is incredibly well done and works wonderfully, and the film is a gradual construction where the details are fundamental and very well-thought-out.
I really liked Ben Affleck's work. For me, it is one of the best films the actor has made to date. We feel his commitment, the way he develops the character and allows himself to appear increasingly distressed, submissive, without a will of his own, like someone who is living a nightmare and just wants it all to end. Alongside this renowned actor is Rosamund Pike, an authentic ice maiden accustomed to the most frigid roles we can imagine. She is not one of my favorite actresses, she is one of those that I consider not very versatile, but she gave everything that her character asked for: coldness, an intelligent and sharp mind, extreme physical and emotional self-control, a calculating spirit and a sweet and angelic face. Among the supporting cast, we have well-selected names, such as the friendly Tyler Perry, a very focused and rational Carrie Coon and a sinister Neil Patrick Harris.
Technically, I believe it is fair to highlight the intelligent use of cinematography, which is almost never warm and pleasant. There are scenes where we see this, right at the beginning, where things were going well for Affleck's character, but the essence of the film is made with a cold, uncomfortable color palette and scarce, hazy or artificial light. The film never makes us comfortable and creates its dramatic tension solidly. The sets and costumes also contribute, with that huge house for just one couple, with few signs of human warmth and joy. Finally, the soundtrack adds a sinister and deeply atmospheric touch that cannot be ignored.

If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog @
https://www.msbreviews.com
This is it. The last David Fincher's film I'll be able to review before Mank, his next masterpiece… I hope. I've been through Se7en, Fight Club, Zodiac, The Social Network, and now it's time for Fincher's latest installment, Gone Girl. Clearly, Fincher loves to work with people he knows. Jeff Cronenweth has been his director of photography in half of his movies, same for Kirk Baxter as part of the editing team, and Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross in the musical score. Even his production designer, Donald Graham Burt, has been around since Zodiac. However, Fincher always works with a different writer, and this time, he partners up with a debutant screenwriter, Gillian Flynn, author of the original novel that originates this adaptation.
Usually, when it comes to writers, I take this change of media with a grain of salt since writing a book isn't exactly the same as writing a screenplay (it's completely different, I was being generous). With that said, Flynn absolutely destroys my self-doubts, delivering one of the best scripts of 2014. From the exceptionally captivating, perplexing disappearance of Amy to the underlying theme about how press and media treat this type of news, Flynn's screenplay is impressively able to develop each and every narrative in the most perfect way possible. With a remarkable use of time/date stamps, the viewer follows in a detailed manner the events that build up to the tragic day through different perspectives, mainly Amy's and Nick's.
This story's greatest accomplishment is how it makes the press influence what the viewer thinks about the characters, just like in real life. Nowadays, people don't even click to read the full article and understand its context. A single headline, as far from the truth as it might be, is enough to start a worldwide online debate. The same goes for television networks, and their news shows: if it's on the national news program, then it must be true, people think. I may be wrong when I wrote the whole "change of media" matter before, but of this, I'm sure: take every news article you read with a grain of salt because most of the time, the full, true story isn't entirely revealed.
This takes me to Ben Affleck (Justice League, The Way Back) and what I consider one of the best casting choices of the respective decade. In case you don't know, Affleck has been pursued throughout his whole life by journalists who try their hardest to expose his personal life, no matter how disrespectful it may turn out to be. Nick goes through the exact same obstacle. There's non-stop news about Amy, and it only becomes a matter of time until Nick starts being accused of being a terrible husband, and ultimately the obvious killer, even though the press can't find a single proof. Affleck doesn't even need to incorporate a new character since he has the necessary life experience to offer an utterly brilliant performance. Definitely, one of my favorite actors working today.
Since I'm in the realm of performances, I might as well continue with Rosamund Pike (Radioactive). Her interpretation of Amy is almost the opposite of Affleck's, in the sense that the latter gives a seemingly simple yet powerful display, while Pike has a much more complex, layered role. She can be menacing and scary but also loving and kind. The puzzle surrounding her disappearance is mostly based on a perspective enigma, as the viewer is told the same story through different lenses throughout the first half of the film. Honestly, this is probably a career-best performance for Pike, who portrays a character of extremes, allowing her to demonstrate her jaw-dropping emotional range.
Carrie Coon (Margo Dunne) is another actress I've grown to deeply enjoy watching, and she's terrific as Nick's sister. Her chemistry with Affleck is spot-on, and I sincerely hope that one day she becomes one of the most coveted actresses in Hollywood. Tyler Perry (Tanner Bolt) is also pretty great as Nick's lawyer, but Kim Dickens is even greater as Detective Rhonda Boney, who partially plays the same role as the viewer by trusting that what she sees and hears is undoubtedly the ultimate truth. Flynn's screenplay is packed with twists and turns, some of them more surprising than others, but the third act saves an unexpected, shocking turn of events, leading to a powerful ending that will leave most audiences speechless, myself included.
Two minor issues. One of them, you probably have already figured it out since I left Neil Patrick Harris (Desi Collings) out of the cast compliments above. Harris is fine as the character he portrays, but I can't help but feel that he wasn't the right actor for the role. This is a classic Fincher movie: dark, somber, depressing, tragic, and with its own share of violence and blood. In fact, it possesses one of the most disgusting, disturbing uses of blood in a single scene I've ever seen. Harris is an excellent actor, but he stands out from the rest of the cast, and not in a positive way. Again, fine performance, just not the right role for him. The other problem is admittedly an irrelevant nitpick regarding a few details story-wise that stretch the believability of everything just a bit.
Nevertheless, this is still a phenomenal film, and it's another evidence of David Fincher's masterful visual filmmaking. Once again, Fincher works with his known crew members to create a sumptuous look and feel. With seamless editing, a memorable score, and fantastic camera work, Gone Girl is technically magnificent, but it's Gillian Flynn's debut screenplay that steals the spotlight. Boasting jaw-dropping twists, including an utterly shocking third act and respective ending, Flynn's narrative is incredibly engaging due to its remarkable structure and puzzling mystery, never losing an inch of excitement or interest. Ben Affleck is one of the best casting choices of the decade by interpreting a man whose life is deeply affected by the press and media, which should never be fully trusted (a clear and powerful message to the audience), while Rosamund Pike delivers her career-best performance with an emotionally devastating display. Despite the misstep of casting Neil Patrick Harris in such a dark movie and a couple of nitpicks regarding the investigation, everything and everyone else turn this into one of the best films of the 2010s.
Rating: A

"This man might honestly kill me".
The story is about Nick Dunne, as he finds out his wife has gone missing. As increasing police and media pressure mount, the facade of a loving and blissful union crumbles and amidst the lies and behavior of Nick, the question remains - did he kill her?
David Fincher is a true master class when it comes to directing, because Gone girl is one of the best films of this year.
Ben Affleck was perfect for this role, because Ben Affleck through out he's career had a lot of hate from the media and the critics that mostly slammed him in every role that he was in. And that's why he was outstanding in this movie.
Rosamund Pike acting in this film was pure brilliant and spectacular. She was so good in this role she might get a Oscar nomination for this. Tyler Perry in this movie was actually pretty damn good, and am so surprise saying that because Mr. Perry was in such awful films like: MADEA trilogy, Alex cross and the list goes on. But in this movie he did good.
What this movie does so brilliantly well is how we view media today, because most of the stories you hear on the news might not be true and how the media can spread lies about people and ruining their lives. Everybody always believes what the media says even if it's true or not, because we don't know what that person on the news is going through, and this movie got that message out they so perfectly.
My only problem with this movie is Neil Patrick Harris character. Now let me just say that Neil Patrick Harris wasn't terrible in the movie, but his character to me slowed the film down.
Overall Gone Girl is a fantastic film.

Rosamund Pike is outstanding as the wronged wife and Ben Affleck is very good as the husband. It is convoluted, and you do start to think is this just going over the top, but the end just shows Pike's character to be a damaged high-functioning psychopath. So at the final sequence, even if it's a tad far fetched even if you feel that Affleck deserves everything coming to him, the look she gives to the camera is that of an pure evil. As my youngest daughter used to say when she was a kid, she's got scary eyes.

Good cast and decent story, although the end is not very convincing.
The cut of the movie is really good and Rosamund Pike is genuinely scary.
Not a master piece but quite good given the lack of passable movies lately.

I can only marvel at the imagination of JK Rowling as this final instalment of our 10 year journey with Harry, Ron and Hermione reaches a fitting climax. Still continuing on their search for the remaining horcruxes, they must use all of their skills and intrepidity before "Voldemort" finally returns to wreak havoc on their (and our) world. Radcliffe, Grint and Watson are very much comfortable in the parts now and that shows - their confidence and assuredness adds bundles to the cracking script and well paced direction from David Yates. Not just the three stars, but others we have seen for many of the series come into their own - Dame Maggie Smith ("Prof. McGonagall") gets some wand action, as does Julie Walters with a cracking duel with Helena Bonham-Carter's "Bellatrix Lestrange"; the magical effects are superb and the multiple threads all tie together well. Did it need to be two films? I suspect that the audience probably benefited from this in two instalments, but a director's cut of the whole thing in one fell swoop could make for an epic piece of cinema. Great stories, characters and a vivid imagination - a most enjoyable ride!

It is the quality of one's convictions that determines success, not the number of followers.
So here it is, the 8th and final instalment of a film franchise that has lasted 10 years and runs at just under 20 hours in total. Following straight on from the frustratingly incomplete scene setter that was Deathly Hallows Part 1, we continue to track Harry, Hermione and Ron as they search for the remaining Horcruxes that will render the evil Lord Voldermort as a mere mortal. This narrative thread is run concurrently with the Voldermort movements, where he now has in his possession The Elder Wand (the wand to rule them all) and has gathered a vast army to descend upon Hogwarts and achieve his ultimate goal of killing Harry. Meanwhile vital character story arcs are filled in and secrets will out...
David Yates directs and Steve Kloves adapts to the screen, both of whom were perfect choices given their considerable input to the series. Smartly the pic has been kept to a 2 hour and 10 minute run time, and thankfully it flows nicely and the pace never stalls. Being one of those who has never read the books I can't say what has been left out or if anything has been tampered with for dramatic licence? What I know for sure is that the emotional investment garnered from being with this story for so long, to be part of these characters lives, watching them grow, ensures that this closure piece pounds the senses. Sitting down to watch it you realise that we are going to lose people we care for, and Hogwarts, the wonderful place we fist glimpsed across the night time water, is going to be attacked and reduced to a battle scarred place of war.
As the effects work dazzles and the one time child actors come shining through as mature actors who have casted off previous wooden traits, the story filling strands show just what wonderful work Rowling achieved on the page. Some of the characters never stood a chance in life, some carried deep emotional scars, and others held secrets so crucial to the whole Potter universe. For a series of such fantastical genre sparkle, the Harry Potter world eventually reveals itself to be a deep and fortified humanist drama, and engaging it most certainly is. That this is achieved as battlefield carnage is raised, with wand wars booming up on the screen, it means credit is due to all involved the making of such a cherished and intensely followed Octalogy.
Is it the earth shattering finale one hoped for? Well not quite. Story wise for sure that is the case, but with the whole story driving towards the final battle between Harry and Voldermort, it's disappointing to find it's rather brief and in truth anti climatic. Harry the boy now burgeoning into a man versus the snake faced despot surely should have been a crowning glory, but sadly not so. To compound this irritating disappointment, we then get the epilogue that is bogged down by aging make-up design that is almost laughable. But these are just annoyances, not film killers, for this has been a magical ride for 10 years. Fans will feel a gap in the heart now it's over, maybe even shed a Snape like tear as well? Yet ultimately it has been a triumph and the rewatchable factor for the whole series will always remain high. 8/10

Having been deposed by his crew, "Capt. Jack Sparrow" (Johnny Depp) arrives in Port Royal with little but the clothes he stands up in. He turns up just as the governor's daughter "Elizabeth" (Keira Knightley) is having to fend off the rather unwanted matrimonial intentions of "Norrington" (Jack Davenport). She has designs on the blacksmith's apprentice - "Turner" (a handsome but insipid, sorry, Orlando Bloom) whom she rescued from a pirate raid many years earlier. "Sparrow" would prove an excellent catch for "Norrington" but thanks to an hot poker, a donkey and some legerdemain at sea, he and "Turner" are soon abroad on the trail of his old crew and of the legendary pirates who sail the seas in the "Black Pearl" seeking an odd sort of salvation! What now ensues are some pacily directed escapades with loads of attitude, swash and buckle. Some pithy dialogue and a rousing (if slightly repetitive) score from Klaus Badelt take us criss-crossing the Caribbean constantly jumping from frying pan to fire. The star for me here is certainly Geoffrey Rush. A man who rarely disappoints, and on this occasion brings a comically potent degree of menace as his "Barbossa" character ensures that the plot thickens and the story gathers momentum. It's a bit on the long side - there are a few sagging moments now and again, but a solid supporting cast led by Kevin McNally provide some borderline slapstick humour, occasionally tempered by the dignified persona of an underused Jonathan Pryce's "Gov. Swann" and an whole suite of powdered wigs. The visual effects are top drawer and the story well worth a watch on a big screen to do justice to the imagery and the best traditions of seafaring yarns.

My favorite out of the series. In my opinion none of them has been as good as the first. Him just trying to get his ship back the Black Pearl.

Ah, but you have heard of me.
The crew of the Black Pearl are cursed by something most unimaginable, the only way to lift the curse is to return a lost Aztec coin to its treasure chest home. In the way of them achieving their goal is the British Governor's daughter, the son of Bootstrap Turner, oh and a former comrade by the name of Captain Jack Sparrow who the crew had left to die on an island some time ago.
It's now common knowledge that Pirates Of The Caribbean is a film based upon a theme park ride of the same name, thoughg that ride is not actually a roller-coaster, it's fair to say that this film most assuredly is. A swashbuckling ripper of an adventure yarn cramming in every pirate film staple it can and pouring on layers of charm at every turn. Into the broth goes romance, comedy and striking adventure, and director Gore Verbinski even manages to give the children watching little slices of horror, not enough to keep them up at night, but enough to bring on an uneasy grin.
It's unashamedly commercial, produced by that purveyor of OTT entertainment values, Jerry Bruckheimer, it was to be expected, but few blockbusting movies of the new age can lay claim to being such an out and out reason for having fun. This is the reason why Pirates had few peers at the time of its release, for it knows its reason for being, it's not taking itself seriously. The audience is not being hoodwinked in any way, they are having fun because so is the film and so is, crucially, the impressive cast. Johnny Depp as Sparrow is having the time of his life, basing the character around the dubious mannerisms of Rolling Stone icon, Keith Richards, it works to its highest potential and Depp is simply wonderful in the role. Keira Knightley (perfectly cast), Orlando Bloom, Geoffrey Rush, Jack Davenport, Jonathan Pryce and Mackenzie Crook all do what was asked, which is essentially say your lines right and have a blast with it, it really is that sort of picture.
The subsequent sequels would forget what made this first offering so enjoyable, foregoing the outrageous sense of fun for a dark sheen and character development. That is a shame, but at the very least we still have this wonderful picture to go back to time and time again, to lift you up when one is down or to keep one happy when one is already in that happy place. The Curse Of The Black Pearl is a joy from start to finish. 9/10

Thinking back to the films that define my generation; I recall queuing round the cinema as an excited 10 year old for two hours waiting to see this film. I wonder how many people could say that they have done that in the last 20 years? This film is a truly groundbreaking piece of formative cinema. Leaving aside the magnificent special effects; this is a film about good and evil; empire, freedom and democracy and of their true characterisations. It has a slightly stilted script (particularly from Sir Alec Guinness) but that is more than offset by a fabulous John Williams' score and the hugely engaging performances of Hamill, Fisher and Ford with undoubtedly the best baddie cinema has ever seen in "Darth Vader". Truly a wonderful watch.

Everyone and their mother is going to write reviews about the Star Wars movies...and this one, this one actually came out before I was born.
It breaks the heart. I had to wait until the re-release before I got to see this one on the big screen. This is the one that ruined my Star Wars opening night streak...
...Well The Force Awakens ALMOST ruined it further. I had to drive out to my parents house just to see it, for the sake of tradition, and when I got there they had already gone without me...twice.
Some angry words later and I guilted my mom, pointing out the drive, to force her into a third go.
But that is neither here nor there.
This was the movie that started it all. And the first time I saw it, it was on Beta. Once upon a time my family had the movie in Beta. And then I had the trilogy in VHS. And then I had it on DVD. And it is going to repeat like that as the mediums change.
Its one of those movies that you have to own, even as technology changes. It is actually one of those movies you want to buy right away when the technology changes, just to see it in better and better quality.
That should be saying something right there. But for a lot of you its not.
For the rest of you, it is a fairy tale in space, complete with knights and old wizards and a princess. Only its a fairy tale in space made for, well, made for nerds like me.
It is a legend and the type of legend that stays with people and makes old Gen-Xers like me, cynical and grumpy, feel like little kids again.
It, along with the Godfather, is the type of movie that breeds mental spousal abuse as generations of men force their wives at gunpoint to watch them...and then get confused and a little depressed when most of them don't see the fascination with them.
Unlike the Godfather, however, its the movie that fathers force their children to watch and, then, their children carry the love for it into the next generation.
Star Wars is an endless cycle, even the bad ones are good. And the fans create endless theories about them. They buy the t-shirts, the buy the toys, they do everything they can to preserve that love and pass it on.
A New Hope, this is the film that started all of that, and though there are better installments, this will always be the first.

A quality start to the franchise.
I say start, I guess that depends on the (seemingly) controversial way of watching these films - I've decided on release order, so it's the beginning for me anyway. I've heard a lot about 'Star Wars' so I am expecting big things, this didn't disappoint whatsoever.
I unquestionably enjoyed this! If I didn't know this was released in 1977 I would never have guessed, it still holds up astonishingly well. The special effects are spectacular for the vast, vast majority; even the stuff that perhaps hasn't aged as supremely still looks superb.
The cast are a joy. I actually wouldn't say any performance sensationally stood out, but all the actors and all the characters are so much fun to watch together. Mark Hamill is impressive as Luke, Harrison Ford is entertaining as Han and Carrie Fisher is super as Leia. Credit also to James Earl Jones and Alec Guinness, among others. Despite not watching until now, I literally already knew all of the character names - shows how timeless these are.
The plot makes for top notch viewing, I found the pacing to be particularly spot on. And how about that score? Stupendous! I really have no negatives for this, I'm sure it isn't perfect but I had a very fun time with it.

Star Wars (1977) is a true masterpiece of cinema, and is
definitely one of the best films ever made.
For me Star Wars (1977) is the best movie of all time,tied with The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Star Wars (1977) it is for sure the most iconic film of all time everything in it is iconic. The direction, the script, the performances in this film are brilliant, all the characters are captivating and well developed.
Anyway, this is a totally perfect film, I only have praise for it, it is certainly a masterpiece of cinema, and my grade for it is 10\10.

A long time ago in a childhood not too far away...
Princess Leia is captured and held hostage by the Imperial Army as it seeks to rule the Galactic Empire. An old Jedi Knight by the name of Ben "Obi-Wan" Kenobi may just be hers, and the rebels only hope. Teaming up with farm boy Luke Skywalker, scoundrel Captain Han Solo, and a couple of quirky droids, Kenobi sets off on a mission that could well shape the destiny of the Galaxy, and all who dwell within it.
Back in 1977 I was but a wee 11 year old boy, weened on films from all genres by my movie loving parents, I had no idea that Star Wars was to have the same impact on me as Jaws had two summers previously, where yet again I found myself queueing around the block for two whole hours to see a film in a one screen theatre. My love of cinema firmly cemented, Star Wars was the start of a love affair that lasts to this very day.
As the years have rolled by and my love of cinema has taken on more in-depth and serious tones, I have come to realise that Star Wars proves to be a far from flawless picture. Certainly its detractors do point to some frayed acting and call the plot structure a jazzed up good versus evil axis, while the charge of George Lucas referencing many prior pictures most assuredly stands, but really do those things matter? No they do not, because Star Wars opened up a new world of cinema, something of a portal to youngsters such as I, it got people talking and debating about the merits of model work in films (which is of an extraordinary high standard here), it nudged film makers to explore being bigger and bolder in their approach, and crucially, above all else, it got film goers hungry again, a hankering for more please if you may. Now it has to be said that all that followed 20th Century Fox's historic blockbuster didn't run with the baton, in fact most pale into comparison on impact value, but for better or worse (depending on the discerning viewers peccadilloes), Star Wars stands as a bastion of adventure laden entertainment.
It is by definition one of the most successful films in history, George Lucas perhaps didn't know it at the time, but in what was to become an almost operatic anthology, he didn't just make a movie, he created a whole new world seeping with style and rich texture. Almost as amazing as the success of the series, is how it has become part of modern day pop culture, anything from religion to everyday speak has at some time or another referenced Lucas' baby. Ultimately, though, it's one single thing that made (and still does make) Star Wars so great, it's that it has the ability to lift the audience into a rousing united feel good cheer; and that is something that few films can ever lay claim too. In 1977 it was an awe inspiring event to watch in the theatre, now here in my middle age it's an event that is like hugging a dear old friend, a friend that I know will never ever let me down no matter how many times I turn to it. 10/10

(As I'm writing this review, Darth Vader's theme music begins to build in my mind...)
Well, it actually has a title, what the Darth Vader theme. And that title is "The Imperial March", composed by the great John Williams, whom, as many of you may already know, also composed the theme music for "Jaws" - that legendary score simply titled, "Main Title (Theme From Jaws)".
Now, with that lil' bit of trivia aside, let us procede with the fabled film currently under review: Star Wars. It had been at a drive-in theater in some small Illinois town or other where my mother, my older brother, and I had spent our weekly "Movie Date Night" watching this George Lucas directed cult masterpiece from our car in the parking lot. On the huge outdoor screen, the film appeared to be a silent one, but thanks to an old wire-attached speaker, we were able to hear both the character dialogue and soundtrack loud and clear. We even had ourselves a carful of vittles and snacks - walked back to our vehicle, of course, from the wide-opened cinema's briefly distant concession stand. Indeed, it had been a lovely summer evening that July.
From the time the film started, with my brother and I following along as our mother sped-read the opening crawl, I began to feel rather antsy, thinking that this movie, the first in a franchise that would soon be world-renowned, was going to be boring, due to its genre being Science Fiction: A respectably likable, but not a passionately lovable genre of mine DURING THAT TIME. I just didn't believe I was going to like Star Wars all that much ... But I soon found myself intrigued ... And awed.
George Lucas is a man with a phenomenal, and I do mean phenomenal imagination. Apart from his human characters (Han, Luke, Leia, and Obi-Wan Kenobi, among others), the droids: C-3P0, R2-D2, R2-series, and IG-88, not to mention those unusual characters like Jabba the Hutt, Yoda, and Chewbacca, just to name a few, are all creations of Lucas's phenomenal imagination. And I was completely in awe of each one of these strange beings. Then there was Vader ... And the evil Emperor ... And the Stormtroopers ... And the Spacecraft ... And the galaxies (I'll admit that I am a huge lover of the Universe in all its Celestial glory) ... And the magnificent planets ... The Lightsabers ... And so on. Star Wars is a gorgeously shot space opera; it is truly an epic masterpiece. We enjoyed this film tremendously. And my brother was a die-hard fan from that night onward. He, my brother, had even received for Christmas that year, nearly every Star Wars action figure that my mother could find, including two of the spacecraft: The Millennium Falcon and Star Destroyer. The Death Star space station had too been wrapped beneath our Christmas tree - tagged with his name. It was totally crazy, what the new Star Wars era. Frenzied! But it was great ... Even still, to this day.
I don't personally know anyone whom has yet to see Star Wars, but that certainly doesn't suggest there are still a few people out there who haven't. And if you're one of the latter, then you should know that this classic space opera comes highly recommended. The entire series is told backwards, so you'll definitely want to see Star Wars first, followed by its two sequels: The Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi ... In that order. I trust that you'll too discover yourself to be a lifelong cult fan in the wake. 😊

Possibly the weakest of the series, this one, for me. Our trio start by visiting the Quidditch World Cup which is invaded by the evil "Death Eaters" who reduce everything to ashes in their search for "Harry". Shortly afterwards, the "Tri-Wizard Cup" comes to Hogwarts - a good excuse to introduce some new characters amongst them Frances de la Tour as the enormous "Madame Maxime" and Roger Lloyd-Pack as "Barty Crouch" as each school chooses their champion to take part in the potentially lethal games. "Hogwarts" chooses "Cedric Diggory" (Robert Pattinson) but the goblet also chooses our "Harry" and so four go into the competition. As this description, so far, probably indicates - there is an hell of a lot going on here and not surprisingly the adaptation to the screenplay starts to leave out detail and characterisation. To do the story justice, it ought to have been two films - we spend way too long establishing and when we get to the climax, it all seems a bit too rushed. Mike Newell simply has to squeeze too many, important, interweaving themes into 2½ hours and it doesn't quite work. It is still a great fantasy adventure building well on the now well-established characters and putting more meat on the bones of the "Harry Potter" character.

_Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire_ is an absolute spectacle. I am a huge sucker for tournaments in films and this hit every single note for me; intensity, stakes, creativity, it is all there.
Our main cast is doing some of the best acting of the series, Daniel Radcliffe really raises his performance up a notch and establishes himself as the lead of the franchise. His acting is refined and mature and he does an excellent job portraying his emotions with not only his line delivery but his facial expressions and body language. He really broke through here and it was a joy to see. Rupert Grint and Emma Watson were great, but they had a slight decrease in screentime and really were sidelined during this film. The introduction of Robert Pattinson as Cedric Diggory brings an interesting dynamic to the story, as Harry Potter has somewhat of an older brother figure to contend with. The relationship and chemistry between the two builds and brings some emotionally heavy scenes throughout.
There is constant action in this film; from the opening scenes of the Quidditch World Cup to the multiple rounds of the Tri-Wizard Tournament, there is always something happening, and it helps create a very steady pace throughout. Not only is there action, but there is also fantastic character development. All of our characters really start to come into their own through the struggles they all face throughout the film. Harry is the best he's ever been, and the new faces are great on screen. Alastor Moody is mysterious and quirky and is a great mentor to Harry.
But the greatest thing about this film is the sinster introduction of Lord Voldemort. His presence was lurking in the background of the entire series, but here he is reborn in a horrifying way. Ralph Feinnes is superb in his only 6 minutes of screen time, but it is enough to leave a lasting impression. The ending is perfect and sets the tone of the franchise going forward.
While the cinematography and tone might be better in Prisoner of Azkaban, I cannot deny that this movie is better in almost every other aspect, which is why it gets a slight nod.
**Score:** _89%_ |
**Verdict:** _Excellent_

Do not do so lightly! If chosen, there's no turning back. As from this moment, The Triwizard Tournament has begun!
Year four at Hogwarts for Harry Potter and his chums, and it's a time of change, chance and danger. The prestigious Triwizard Tournament is being hosted and the applecart is turned upside down when Harry, unqualified and underage, is selected by the Goblet of Fire to be one of Hogwarts' competitors. If the thought of competing in such a dangerous tournament wasn't scary enough, Harry also has the worry of finding a date for the Yule Ball to contend with!
The Prisoner of Azkaban set the marker for a darker, more grown up Potter picture, a high standard that Goblet of Fire, and new director Mike Newell, arguably had no hope of attaining. But it's not for lack of trying, and in fairness Newell and the team have managed well enough to blend the blackness that comes with the impending arrival of Lord Voldermort (Ralph Fiennes), with the burgeoning ping of teenager hormones. There's an awful lot going on here. With the Triwizard Tournament comes two groups of exchange students to Hogwarts in the form of the glamorous girls of Beauxbatons Academy, and the hunky boys of Durmstrang Institute. The arrival of which sends Ron, Hermione and co into blushy flustered awakenings. The tournament itself (rightly) dominates much of the film, the lead up to it and the three challenges that the competitors have to face, with Harry's dragon face off a bona fide excellent piece of film. Then on to the fall out of the tournament where it gets real dark and the film and series lurch on to another level and set up the next installment a treat.
As is customary for a Potter film, there's also a number of new characters and replaced characters in the mix, while major story developments flit in and out of the narrative to the point you really have to pay attention completely. Of the new arrivals it's Alastor "Mad-Eye" Moody (Brendan Gleeson terrific) who is most telling and enjoyable, but tabloid scribe Rita Skeeter (Miranda Richardson) is something the film could have survived without. Yes it's a nice pop at the gutter press, but watching it now, would the time spent wasted on Skeeter not have been better served on the sadly under filmed Quidditch World Cup? Especially considering the build up to it is magnificent. Or at the very least some more Malfoy Senior, Sirius or Snape! But the disappointment felt there is offset some by the wonderful Yule Ball, where Newell is in his element gleefully dangling his charges through the joys and sorrows of awkward awakenings. It's a series highlight that's not to be missed.
A film of variable pace due to the makers trying to juggle so much, it's ultimately something of an up and down viewing experience. That said, Newell is able to dazzle the pre-teens with his set pieces, because the kiddies sure as hell will not understand the angst and hormonal issues present, while the rest plays out on adult terms. So something for everyone, then. It may not be successful as a whole, and newcomers dipping in for the first time get no guidance at all, but it's still a ripper of a ride for those who are into the films having not read the books. It's set up nicely for part 5, but pity poor David Yates in the directing chair for Order of the Phoenix, though, for that is one hell of a door stopper novel to try and condense down into an entertaining Potter movie! 7/10

The Godfather (1972), directed by the legendary Francis Ford Coppola, is nothing short of a cinematic masterpiece that redefined storytelling in film. Based on Mario Puzo’s bestselling novel, the movie seamlessly blends crime drama with an epic exploration of power, loyalty, and family. Every frame is a testament to Coppola’s brilliance, as he transforms a gripping tale into a timeless work of art.
At the center of this monumental film is Marlon Brando’s unforgettable performance as Vito Corleone. Brando masterfully embodies the aging patriarch with an aura of quiet menace and profound wisdom, earning him a well-deserved Academy Award for Best Actor. Al Pacino delivers a career-defining performance as Michael Corleone, evolving from a reluctant outsider to a ruthless leader in a chilling, yet utterly believable transformation. James Caan as the fiery Sonny Corleone and Robert Duvall as the cool-headed consigliere Tom Hagen also shine, each adding complexity and depth to their roles.
Coppola’s direction is nothing short of visionary. His ability to craft an intricate narrative while maintaining a deliberate pace allows the characters and themes to breathe. The cinematography by Gordon Willis, often referred to as the “Prince of Darkness,” enhances the film’s iconic look, using shadows and warm tones to convey a sense of both intimacy and foreboding. Nino Rota’s haunting score, particularly the famous Godfather Waltz, further elevates the film into legend.
A fun fact: The studio initially resisted casting Marlon Brando, who was considered difficult to work with at the time. Coppola had to fight for him and famously convinced the studio by showing a test reel of Brando stuffing his cheeks with cotton balls to transform into the iconic Don Vito Corleone. The rest, as they say, is history.
The Godfather isn’t just a movie—it’s an experience. It’s a study of power and morality, a family saga, and a crime thriller all rolled into one. Its influence on filmmaking is immeasurable, and its performances, direction, and storytelling remain unparalleled. This is a film that stands the test of time, and for good reason: it’s a masterpiece in every sense of the word.

Great Movie **Ever**