Clive Jordaan

I personally found the historical inaccuracies in this film a little distracting but I imagine that the story would be entertaining and interesting for any viewer who is not disturbed by such inaccuracies. Certainly it gives one an idea of what life was like in Elizabethan times and in the theatre of the day. It also puts paid to any concept one may have that William Shakespeare was some sort of boring academic, producing boringly intellectual works designed to be appreciated only by boringly intellectual audiences or to be analysed by scholars. The film portrays the great man as he probably was at the time … an aspiring young playwright who left his (much older) wife and young children at home in the village of Stratford to pursue his career (and probably extra-marital romantic liaisons) in the big city of London. However, as interesting as it is, I am not surprised that its being awarded the Oscar for best film ahead of Saving Private Ryan was a controversial decision. The film is not that good.

This is not a film for the lily-livered. It seems to make a comment on the violent nature of life in America where there is a kind of survival-of-the-fittest attitude and where the pursuit of money is more highly valued than human life. As a result it is filled with gratuitous violence and spews blood and guts (quite literally, at one point). If violence is what you enjoy, this film is well-constructed, with very realistic special effects, and has an impressive cast, but it is not my cup of tea.

I am not a fan of horror-type monster films, but this one I enjoyed. The fact that it is set on a remote Irish island with beautifully photographed, panoramic scenery perhaps helps, and when you include the quaint Irish characters and their humour, it becomes really engaging. Add to the mix a plot that involves alien monsters which need to consume blood but are allergic to alcohol, requiring the inhabitants of the island to gather together in the only pub on the island and to consume as much alcohol as they can, and you have the mother of all booze-ups and a thoroughly amusing and entertaining film. Credibility is stretched at times, but it is a monster movie after all. The film apparently did not do well on release but is earning the reputation that it deserves, as a cult movie. More comedy than horror, it is definitely worth a watch.

What is most interesting about this film is that watching it you find that you are constantly baffled. Apart from the fact that it is episodic and, jumping from one setting to another without explanation or warning, is somewhat confusing, one is also constantly aware that there is a depth and meaning to the film but that, in the end, unfortunately, it does not work very well. The answer to the question of why it does not work lies in the fact that it is an adaptation of a very successful stage play, written by award winning playwright, David Hare, which, despite the considerable efforts of a fine cast of actors, including Meryl Steep, John Gielgud, Sam Neill, Charles Dance, a younger Ian McKellen and Sam Neil, does not really translate well into film. The film also features, rather surprisingly, the comedic talents of Tracey Ullman and, most unusually, the singer Sting in a relatively minor role. Despite, or perhaps because of, its unusual nature, the film is, in my opinion, worth a watch if only for the performances of its substantial cast.

Angelina Jolie does her beautiful best, as usual, in this well-intentioned romantic comedy-drama but it is not enough to save the film from being disappointing. It captures one’s interest in the beginning with the attention-grabbing concept of a homeless “prophet” (played by a compelling Tony Shalhoub) predicting that the Jolie character will die within a week, but the plot runs out of steam in the final scenes. It is worth a watch but does not fulfil its promise in the end.

I have never really been a fan of Steve Martin’s comedy style and to watch him attempting to emulate the inimitable Peter Sellers in recreating this iconic character is a little trying. However, having said that, the film is nevertheless a pleasant piece of escapism, featuring as it does interesting performances from Kevin Kline, Jean Reno, Emily Mortimer and amongst others Beyoncé. The latter adds an interesting charm to the film, if little else, and I suppose this might sum up the film in general. It is interesting and charming enough to be worth a watch. It did after all make $165 million at the box office and was successful enough to warrant the making of a sequel. Speaking of the sequel, I have not seen it but am interested enough to want to watch it if only to see what John Cleese makes of the Chief Inspector Dreyfus character.

This is a film you feel should have been better than it is. It is well acted and ably directed and very funny in parts but its zany humour doesn’t always work. It was inspired by (but not a remake of) the very successful French film Le Diner de Cons (Dinner of Idiots) and that, I think, is essentially the problem. The French have a particularly wacky sense of humour which might not necessarily appeal other cultures and this film becomes more and more bizarre as it progresses. It may not be to everyone’s taste, but it is worth a watch.

I have just watched Girl on the Edge and found it quite interesting. Sure it is something of a sentimental tearjerker, but it is a well-made sentimental tearjerker and if one takes into account the fact that it chronicles the true story of an adolescent girl wrestling with the difficulties of living through her parents’ unpleasant divorce, dealing with the reality of her father’s having taken a second wife and the consequences of having been exposed at a young age to an emotionally abusive mother, one may perhaps forgive at least some of its sentimentality. The film, if somewhat predictable, is well-crafted and well-acted, with the likes of the highly respected Peter Coyote and the obviously accomplished young actress, Taylor Spreitler, leading the rest of an altogether competent cast. Peter Coyote, apparently, is himself a practising Zen Buddhist and would no doubt have identified strongly with the role of spiritual advisor to the troubled teen. As such, the script contains some insightful advice for young people in particular and regarding life’s journey in general. I think it is worth a watch, if only for Peter Coyote’s performance.