Reviews

I saw this documentary at the Film Critic screenings prior to the opening of the London Film Festival. "The Spectre of Boko Haram" covers the impact of violence on young children's' lives.

The documentary follows three young children in a refugee town in Cameroon: Falta, a studious and hardworking young girl, and her classmates, eight-year old Ibrahim and his 11-year-old brother Mohamad.

Positives:

• The director, Cyrielle Raingou, herself a Cameroon native, adopts an 'observational' view with their camera. Apart from some introductory and final captions, there is no overlay commentary. We just sit and observe what's going on. This makes the documentary feel highly intimate and engaging.

• The documentary packs several emotional gut punches, starting with an initial description by Falta of her father, and several other members of her family, being blown-up by a suicide bomber while selling a chicken. It is also gut-wrenching to see the children's school drawings and model-making reflecting the horrors of war they've witnessed. As they paint and model, heavily armed soldiers patrol the school perimeter in case of trouble.

• We get very engaged in the story of Mohamed and Ibrahim, who appeared to have been members of the terror group and witnessed atrocities themselves. But how much have they seen, and how much are they fabricating for effect? At one pont Mohamed describes seeing 'witches' transform into cats and then back into witches! Notwithstanding this, the pair are clearly damaged, unable to engage at school, threatening other children with knives and being constantly truant. They story takes a sinister turn half way through the film.

• Above all, you can't help but be struck by how 'normal' life is against this backdrop. Life just goes on: parents trying to do their best for their kids; the extraordinary dedication of teachers trying to give the kids a better life through learning, albeit with limited resources; doctors fighting both malaria and the "anti-witchcraft remedies" pushed by the locals; and the kids, desperately trying to make sense of it all.

Negatives:

• In physics, there is an effect called the "observer effect", which basically says you can't observe any system without changing it. You can sense that at work here. The armed soldiers seem to be sucking in their guts and being hyper-vigilant given that the camera is on them. And both Falta and young Ibrahim both start asking questions about their parents. Unprompted? I doubt it! You can't help feel some prompting by the director going on.

Summary Thoughts: I love documentaries that give us an insight into an alien world. "Electric Malady" was one such documentary from earlier in the year that did that. And this was another. You can't easily imagine what effect war has on young minds. But this does a good job at showing you. It's sad, moving but not without a quiet drumbeat of hope for the future in Falta's diligent school work.

Not an easy watch, but a recommended watch.

What an entertaining short film! Perfectly acted by Sigrid Kandal Husjord, who I would love to see in more stuff.

It nicely straddles the genres of comedy (particularly at the start - - the random pressing of those buttons!) and drama, with some realistic and unsettling scenes of discrimination adding a bit of unexpected grit to the piece. The finale as well - even though you can gleefully see it coming - is gloriously satisfying.

It is unusual for me to enjoy a short film (just 15 minutes) so much. But I really did! Carve out 15 minutes to watch this one.

(My ful review will be part of my review called "Best Short Film (Live Action)" Nominees, 2023." at onemannsmovies dot com.)

I saw this as a preview and it is due for release on March 3rd.

Positives:

• A good documentary should shine a spotlight on a topic that you have no idea about, and "Electric Malady" did just that. Although I vaguely remember a lot of concern about holding mobile phones up to your head, way back when they first became mainstream, I was not aware of this as a 'condition'.

• William seems to be an extreme case, but you can't help but me moved by his plight: shuffling around his little remote cabin, blankets over his head looking like E. T. at Halloween; his poor parents trying to help in whatever way they can; his obvious despair that his once girlfriend Marie now has a new life, with a husband and kids. It's heartbreaking. And Marie Lidén catches all of that perfectly.

• The opening is cleverly done: the father showing a 'cage' he has built for his own son. Without knowledge of the background, you wonder if you are going to be watching "The Elephant Man" or something!

• At just 84 minutes - a novelty for most of the 'award films' this year! - the film doesn't outstay its welcome.

• It's artfully shot, with nice shots of the Swedish countryside and interesting uses of colour flashing on some of the edits. This is a talented female filmmaker, taking good subject matter and making it great through well-thought-through editing.

• A quote from the WHO in the closing moments is a jaw-dropper and well done.

• Loved the score by John Lemke, especially the quietly persistent piece over the end-titles.

Negatives:

• This is a factual representation of William's life, but it only goes that far. It left me with a lot more questions than answers. Above all, was this "real" in a physical sense? Or were his symptoms purely psychological? As a former scientist, it left me longing for some of the scientific background behind the claims - some talking science heads might have added more to the background. Or even some practical guinea-pig (or perhaps canary) research. I longed for one of the visitors to quietly turn on a wi-fi router inside his Faraday Cage to see if that really did make him feel pain. (By the way, post-watching I was doing some googling and papers seem to certainly suggest this is a real thing, affecting possibly millions of people around the world to a greater or lesser extent).

• Often when I watch a documentary like this, I think of Heisenberg's theory of observation. That is, where research involving measurement or observation directly alters the phenomenon under investigation. There are a few moments in the film - a car reversing out of a drive; the father walking up to the hut and then in through the door, etc. - where (assuming there was only one camera) you saw the filmmaker's camera set-ups. "OK sir - I'll film you coming up to the dooe. Then let me go in and I'll film you coming into the hut". (Echoes of William Hurt's single-camera teary interview in "Broadcast News"!).

Summary Thoughts on "Electric Malady": This is a cracking debut feature from Marie Lidén, and a well deserved BAFTA nomination. The film is unsettling and thought-provoking and makes you suddenly appreciate your health and freedom and fear for how quickly both can get ripped away from you.

(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies at onemannsmovies dot com. Thanks. )

"The Sound of 007 - Live From the Royal Albert Hall", available on Amazon Prime Video, is a live concert from the famous London venue featuring a selection of music from the Bond series.

It's a bit of a mixed bag: there are some standout performances and a few painful duds.... you can tell those from the more muted levels of applause from the Bond fans present! And at only 59 minutes long, there is a frustrating amount of concert footage that never made the final cut!

Positives: Some of the highlights of the concert are:

• Shirley Bassey, at 85 years old and still able to bash out almost perfect renditions of "Diamonds are Forever" (one of my favourite Bond songs) and "Goldfinger". (She was first on... clearly she had to dash off for her cocoa!)
• Lulu, again looking spectacularly good for 73 years old, belting out "The Man With The Golden Gun".

• Hans Zimmer and David Arnold with an orchestral piece from "No Time To Die". The arrangement is probably closest to the track "Cuba Chase", which is my absolute favourite on the soundtrack album.

• David Arnold gave an emotional tribute to his friend Chris Cornell before announcing that he was going to sing the track "You Know My Name" (from "Casino Royale"). "Uh-oh" I thought! But he actually did a knock-out job with it.

• It's not my favourite Bond song by a long chalk, but Paloma Faith was born to sing a Bond title track... and she brought "Goldeneye" to life for sure.

• David Arnold rounding off the evening with his lively arrangement of the Bond theme from the end titles of "Casino Royale", playing the famous guitar riff (as indeed he did on the original recording - see "The Sound of 007" documentary).

Neutrals - Performances that I thought were "so-so":

• Jamie Cullum did a reasonable job with "From Russia With Love", although he seemed to rush through some elements of the song... at times the orchestra seemed to be struggling to catch up. He also, sadly, demonstrated just what an immaculate talent the late Matt Monro had when singing the original.

• Emma Lindars... she wasn't Adele (who is, other than Adele), but she made a pretty good stab at "Skyfall".

• Similarly Ella Eyre had a good crack at "Licence to Kill".

• The Garbage performance of "The World is Not Enough" felt underpowered and had some tuning issues. It was great to get another original artist on the stage, but unlike Bassey and Lulu, it wasn't a great rendition of her original.

• Skin's rendition of "Live and Let Die" was more like B. J. Arnau's version from the "Fillet of Soul": it was "OK" without being spectacular.

Negatives - The low points for me:

• Celeste managed to completely murder (imho) "You Only Live Twice". She's clearly a great singer, but this song just didn't suit her at all. #Uncomfortable.

• John Grant had all sorts of tuning issues with "We Have All The Time In the World" (from OHMSS). Painful.

• I'll also add in here that given Amazon is a streaming platform, it's a huge disappointment that the whole concert couldn't have been aired. (I have a list of the missing performances in my full review on One Mann's Movies).

Summary Thoughts: I saw the tickets for this concert and baulked at the price. And I rather wish I had been there, just to catch Shirley Bassey and Lulu belting out their classic songs. But overall I think I would have been a bit disappointed that the high quality shown in some of the performances couldn't have been maintained throughout.

This film gets a full UK release on March 18th. And let me tell you, you should really put a note - "Go to Cinema" - in your diary right now! What a wonderful feelgood film this really is.

Positives:

• What a treat March has delivered in terms of quirky feelgood British comedies! There are marked similarities between this movie and "The Duke" released a few weeks ago. 1) Both are based on totally bonkers true stories; 2) Both feature totally lovable and charismatic actors. Broadbent was kindly and twinkly in "The Duke". Here Mark Rylance sends the twinkleometer right off the chart! He's proved that he can do brilliant dead-pan comedy in "Don't Look Up". But after this one there is nothing much left in the world's charisma bank. 3) Both have stonking performances from the lady playing "'er indoors". The roles of Helen Mirren and Sally Hawkins are similar but differently performed. And both are tone perfect. You can feel the utter love between Mr and Mrs Flitcroft: soulmates for life.

• The script is by Simon Farnaby, who I know best as an actor (he pops up in a cameo as a pro golfer in the movie). But he also has a range of great film scripts in his CV, most notably the beloved "Paddington 2". This shares some of the quirky humour of that movie, while also leaning on the fantasy elements of films like "Moulin Rouge" and (particularly) "Eddie the Eagle". It works brilliantly. The British love a trier, especially a trier who is a complete loser. I found parallels between Maurice's battle against the snooty Open Championship officials, here led by Keith Mackenzie (Rhys Ifans), and Eddie's battle against the Olympic snob Dustin Target, played by Tim McInnerny.

• The score by the wonderful Isobel Waller-Bridge fits just perfectly and is an utter delight. I hope the soundtrack gets released.

Negatives:

• Man.... a proper critic should surely come up with something here! But I really found nothing not to love about this movie. I can't wait to watch it again.

Summary Thoughts on "The Phantom of the Open": Anyone who follows my One Mann's Movies blog will know that I don't chuck out 5* ratings willy-nilly. But I really think that this one might build to the lofty status of "feelgood British classic" with relative ease, joining the likes of "Four Weddings and a Funeral"; "Notting Hill" and "Paddington 2" as a movie you can reach for when life is getting you down and you need a morale boost.

With all the terrible footage from Ukraine continuing to flood our news, I'd strongly suggest you take advantage of 100 minutes of mental relief when this one opens on March 18th.

(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web or Facebook. Thanks).

Roger Michell, the great director of - amongst others - "Notting Hill", "Enduring Love" and "My Cousin Rachel" died in September of last year. "The Duke" was his last feature film (a documentary on Queen Elizabeth's reign is in post-production). And what a lovely epitaph of a movie this is.

Positives:

• What a wonderful sense of 'place' this movie has. Set in 1961 (the year of my birth!), real footage of London is interweaved cleverly with Broadbent to create an illusion of the character in the time. And the production design is also spot on for the filmed scenes.

• Jim Broadbent is wonderful as the quirky pensioner: when is he ever not brilliant in a movie? But the real surprise for me was Helen Mirran who really 'does a Dame Judi' here. We don't often see Mirran in these - ahem - more age-appropriate roles. At 76 years old, she is often 'dolled-up' (and very attractively too) to play someone looking much younger: for example as Queenie in "Hobbs and Shaw" and "F9". But here she dresses down and really delivers a wonderfully heartfelt performance, her best in many years in my view.

• The script crackles along with great wit, moments of sadness and the odd twist. The movie's only 96 minutes long but, as the illustrious Mrs Movie Man commented, not a minute of the running time is wasted.

• There's a lovely score by George Fenton. If you're not sashaying out of your aisle to the end title jazz music, then there's something wrong with your feet!

• A cracking reference is made to the the appearance of the painting in the Bond film "Doctor No". "Doctor No" started shooting just after Bunton stole the painting in real life. Apparantly, production designer Ken Adam had contacted the National Gallery in London to obtain a slide of the picture, painting the copy over the course of the weekend prior to filming commencing on the Monday.

Negatives:

• One minor irritation that took me out of the film for a moment was that the film-makers seem to have Newcastle located slightly south of Watford, in terms of the ease of getting from 'The Toon' to the Old Bailey. A whole bunch of characters turn up as supporters in court - including Anna Maxwell Martin's social-divide-crossing socialite and Javid Akram's baker of Pakistani heritage. That's a hell of a journey to make in 1961!

Summary Thoughts on "The Duke": A delightfully quirky and entertaining British movie that should be a "must-see" for older audiences (who made up the majority of the audience at my showing). Very much recommended.

(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web and/or Facebook. Thanks.)

Positives:

• Ali as portrayed by Adeel Akhtar is an unusual screen character. Bursting with charisma, his positive outlook on everything and his willingness to step in and help whenever help is needed is quite uplifting. I wasn't keen on his role as the scheming mayor in the recent "Save the Cinema": I found the character plain irritating. But here, Akhtar delivers a wholly believable and touching turn. Both he and Rushbrook deliver a lot of energy onto the screen.

• The script follows a nice "show don't tell" approach, allowing you as the viewer to unpeel the background to the story as you go along.

• Harry Escott coordinated the music and, although not always to my personal taste, it delivers an upbeat vibrancy to the movie. I was reminded of the vibe created by the wonderful "Good Vibrations".

• The cinematography by Ole Bratt Birkeland manages to get interesting angles on Bradford's rather bleak autumnal face, and the editing by Maya Maffioli is also very neat.

Negatives:

• In terms of ages, Claire Rushbrook (Ava) is now 50; Adeel Akhtar (Ali) is 41 and Ellora Torchia (Runa) is 25. I could envisage the friendship between Ava and Ali turning into something more, despite the age difference. But it stretched my credibility that the beautiful young Runa would be attracted to Ali. (At the start of the film, I thought Runa was Ali's daughter!) I wondered if there was an "arranged marriage" aspect to the story that was going to come into play. But no. The script makes it clear that the pair met at a nightclub where Runa was a "fantastic dancer". I just didn't see it.

• While I loved the first half of the film, I thought the themes introduced around domestic abuse a bit heavy-handed and the way it played out with Callum a bit simplistic. (Note: potential triggers here for some viewers, although no marital violence is actually seen)
• Although it may be very accurate, it's not a great advert for the Crime Commissioner who looks after Bradford. A low-point is the casual stoning of passing cars by school-age and pre-school kids. I noted in the closing credits that there was a marketing team focused on "International Distribution". I hope for the sake of the country's reputation that they are poor at their job!

Summary Thoughts on "Ali & Ava": The world depicted in this movie is a world away from my experiences, and I find it difficult to relate to. Many of those featured are locked in a cycle of poverty and lack of opportunity that I found depressing. As such, despite Ali's charisma and ambition as an entrepreneur and the touching love story that runs through this movie, both myself and the illustrious Mrs Movie Man came out of this one in a very downbeat mood. Is "Ali & Ava" a well-made and interestingly shot drama? Yes, I thought it was, and the two central performances by Akhtar and Rushbrook are both strong. Is it one that I would rush to watch again? Nope, can't say it is.

(For the full graphical review please check out "One Mann's Movies" on the web or Facebook. Thanks.)

Positives:

• As a 'road movie' featuring a man and a dog, this one has genuine heart. It's not gooey and gelatinous like a "Marley and Me" dog story: it actually has a moderately hard edge to it. This is helped along by Channing Tatum who delivers a really nice and believable performance as the injured vet.

• Given this is the directorial debut of writer Reid Carolin and Channing Tatum (sharing the seat), it has a really nice pace to it. At 100 minutes long it doesn't outstay its welcome. And any time that the pace does slacken off, it's for meaningful relationship-building between Briggs and Lulu. (A stormy interlude in a barn is particularly engaging).

• The cinematography by Newton Thomas Sigel is gorgeous, making full use of California's wonderful golden light and with some impressive drone footage along Highway 1.

• Given the low-budget cast (Tatum is the only big name), they've wisely invested in a scoring master (Thomas Newman) to write the music. And its lovely: understated, but when it does come through it adds considerably to the pictures.

Negatives:

• There's a lot of "thank you for your service" type messaging in here, which might cloy a bit with non-American audiences.

• It's also worth saying that this is a 12A for a reason, and parents thinking to take little ones along to see this in half term as a 'happy clappy dog movie' might want to check the BBFC comments on their web site. I attended an afternoon showing, with a number of parents and kids in the 8 to 10 sort of age-range. The parental squirming evident during the "threesome scene" (nothing actually proceeds) was self-evident, as a portent for those questions in the car home!

Summary Thoughts on "Dog": A solid and enjoyable tale that - and there is no one more surprised at this than me - I would recommend.

(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web or Facebook. Thanks.)

"My Best Part" (French title: "Garcon Chiffon") is a French comedy-drama, first released for the Cannes Film Festival in 2020 but having a limited release in the US on February 25th 2022. It will also be available on a range of streaming platforms including Amazon and Apple+.

Jérémie is a gay Parisien actor consumed with jealousy. Depressed and mistrustful of everyone and everything, his love-life and work-life are in freefall as a result. After the suicide of his father, a memorial service is planned. Perhaps a visit to his mother in their family home in the countryside can reset his mental state?

At the time of writing the movie was not yet rated. If I was rating this for the BBFC it would be a 15 in the UK and an R in the US, due to full-frontal male nudity and themes of suicide.

Positives:

• I never found this less than engrossing. As a study of mental decline, I was never quite sure what the struggling and impassioned Jérémie might do next. His 'everlasting' love for veterinarian Albert (Arnaud Valois) seems genuine and heartfelt, but that doesn't stop him flirting with the Adonis that is his mum's handyman Kévin (Théo Christine).

• Within all the dramatic angst are dropped moments of extreme farce;
• - Jérémie attends a meeting of 'Jealousy Anonymous' where the participants declare "It's been xx days since I wised up"!

• - The dotty grandmother (Florence Giorgetti) jokingly accuses her grandson of groping her... mistaking him for his dead father!

• - And after Jérémie's father has blown his head off with a shotgun, the honour guard fires four shotguns into the air, making Bernadette and Jérémie both wince!

• Nicolas Maury, familiar to British viewers from "Call My Agent!", delivers a gripping performance as the soulful actor. Also impressive, in a memorable cameo, is Laure Calamy as Sylvie, a neurotic and dementedly hyperactive film director. Terrifying!

• The quirky music score by Olivier Marguerit is very appealing.

• For pet lovers, the movie features the cutest puppy ever. We would already have a winner if Oscars were given for "Best Animal"!

Negatives:

• This would make a fabulous 90 minute movie. At 108 minutes, it feels like it overstays its welcome a tad. This was Nicholas Maury directorial feature debut and the movie needed some harsher decisions in the editing room.

• I suspect the enigmatic ending might frustrate a lot of people (although I rather liked it).

Summary Thoughts on "My Best Part": Some arthouse French films tend to leave me cold. But this one is suitably quirky and I thoroughly enjoyed it. Both intelligent and moving, its black humour maintains interest throughout. Recommended. This deserves to get a UK cinema release, through a chain such as Picturehouse. (@picturehouses).

(For the full graphical review, please check out #onemannsmovies on the web. Thanks.)

This new Sky Movies offering, "Save the Cinema", is short on finesse but strong on Welsh charm. It's also based on a true story that I only fully dredged from the deep recesses of my brain as the film was running.

Positives:

• Notwithstanding my reservations about this one (as below), this was a heart-warming tale of Welsh grit and determination. It really has a lot in common with last year's "Dream Horse" in this regard. It's also (bizarrely) based on a true story.

• Note: I have deliberately NOT described the "bizarre" aspect of the story here, since I hadn't had that spoiled and it made the film far better for me. Although the facts hovered on the edge of my memory, I only progressively recalled them as the film went on!

• Aside from the leads, a wide array of Welsh acting talent is given the chance to perform including comedian Rhod Gilbert, Owain Yeoman, Owen Teale and the very attractive Erin Richards, as the mayor's assistant and love interest Susan. It also pins its Britishness to its sleeve (probably making it a tough sell outside the UK) by featuring Wynne Evans, the "Go Compare" man. It emerges that he has a genuinely interesting link to the film.

• It's also great to see Tom Felton on the big screen and NOT playing a villain for once! After roles as Draco Malfoy and the zookeeper in "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" (a brilliant and under-rated performance in my book) I thought he might end up as the dodgy property developer. But no!

Negatives:

• I thought the script was really pretty ropey:
• - The film clunks along with many lines that you really wouldn't imagine anyone saying in reality. At times Liz muses to herself out-loud as a device to move the plot along, when a "show-don't-tell" approach would have been perfectly sufficient.

-- There's a conflict injected between Liz and her husband David that seems false and purely added for dramatic effect.

-- At times the film overly signposts where its heading, killing any sort of suspense in the story (a 'goodnight' scene with Jonathan Pryce being a prime example).

Summary Thoughts on "Save The Cinema": This movie was clunking along, in my opinion, at around the 5/10 level for most of its running time. As Douglas Adams would have put it, it was "mostly harmless". Its ace-in-the-hole was the bizarre historical event that comprises the finale of the movie: an event that caused something irritating to get in my eye and an unexplained lump develop in my throat. For this reason alone, I added on the extra point.

"Save the Cinema" is available on Sky / NowTV Cinema (at least, it is in the UK)

(For the full graphical review, please check out #onemannsmovies online. Thanks).

As I'm on holiday at the moment in Portugal, this was seen as "Casa de Gucci". But the soundtrack was English with Portuguese subtitles. At least, I *think* it was English!

Positives:

• Other than the bare outlines, it's a story I knew nothing about, so it made for interesting viewing. And who doesn't want to see some escapist high-fashion, flashy cars and Italian high-living on the big screen?

• Adam Driver delivers another stonking performance. He delivers the best of the accents on show and is a delight to watch whenever he's on screen. His performance is deliciously subtle and under-played. A model for acting lessons.

• Al Pacino, in full-on Pacino mode, is also great as Maurizio's uncle: owner of the other half of the empire.

Negatives:

• The accents! Where do I begin? I felt a desperate need mid-film to order a Cornetto and go compare my car insurance online. While Driver and Pacino tend to rein it in, most of the rest of the cast assume accents approaching a bad parody of Italians. Jared Leto and Gaga are particularly guilty.

• I appreciate that the part of the "idiot" Paolo Gucci was meant to be comedic, but Jared Leto seems to almost be in a different film entirely. There's 'over-the-top' and 'waaaaay over-the-top'.

• I've seen some other reviews praising Lady Gaga... saying that it proves her performance in "A Star is Born" wasn't just a "flash in the pan". Personally, I didn't feel it. I appreciate that the character of Patrizia is a larger-than-life one. But, although she did have some impressive scenes, for most of her performance I felt like she was obviously acting, and sometimes over-acting. The accent didn't help.

• The film has a banging set of tunes, no argument. But for a sprawling drama told over a few decades (the film is nearly 160 minutes long!), music should be used to anchor the movie as to which year you are currently in. Donna Summer "I Feel Love": so it must be 1977. But the movie doesn't consistently follow that rule. It's the early 70's, but suddenly George Michael's "Faith" blares out. #Unsettling.

• This may be my lack of concentration, but there seems to be an assertion in the film (presumably completely false) that Aldo Gucci was supporting/producing knockoff Gucci products for the mass-market: a "lucrative product line" that was later canned by Maurizio. I was personally confused by this bit of the story.

Summary Thoughts on "House of Gucci": This was not the <2* bust that I thought it might be from early word I saw from other reviews. The fact that it turns out to be a 158 minute film surprised me, since it felt long... but not that long. So that's a good thing. And it has its moments for sure. But this is not a movie that I will be in a hurry to revisit, since the accents and some of the performances (Jared Leto - take one step forwards) are not ones that I thought worthy of the potential that the movie had. For me, Ridley, I'll take "The Last Duel" any day.

(For the full graphical review, check out #onemannsmovies online. Thanks.)

OK, so it wasn't a complete bust (which I feared from watching the trailer, which smacked of "We tried it with women and that didn't work... now let's try it with kids"!).

It sure gets 10/10 on the nostalgia scale, especially with the finale which was a "cinema moment" for sure. I think fans of the original films (which I am) will appreciate this effort, although it did a pretty comprehensive retread at times of the original film.

The humour for me generated smiles without outright belly laughs. I thought Mckenna Grace did a great job as the young science nerd Phoebe. (Although somebody REALLY should tell Paul Rudd that he should NEVER be in any movie featuring a character called Phoebe. It's like crossing the streams man.)

I think the target mid-teen audience for this will love it, and rate it higher.

By the way, don't rush off at the end (as 90% of my screening did. There is a "WHA...WHAT??" credit, followed by a splendid mid-credits scene.

(Full graphical review will be posted shortly on #onemannsmovies.)

The title "Mothering Sunday" might suggest that this would be a good one to take your ol' mum to see as 'a nice treat'. Which indeed you might like to do, as long as you set the expectations first! For this is a beautifully crafted, if flawed, story of life after the First World War. A movie that has less focus on those killed in battle and more on those left behind.

Positives:

• This movie looks stunning (cinematography by Jamie Ramsay), from the opening close-up shots of Odessa Young, through bucolic bike-riding in England's leafy lanes to the luscious love-making scenes. All perfectly staged and beautifully lit. You could take many of the stills from this movie and grace the walls of an art exhibition with them.

• Where has Odessa Young come from? The Sydney-born actress is just fabulous here, commanding a real presence for the camera. It's a brave performance too with sex and extensive full-frontal nudity. This includes a naked wander through the old house that might feel exploitative if the writer or director had been a man. (The ladies also get full-frontal views of Josh O'Connor which adds balance to the film. This is, frankly, so often lacking in films of this type).

• The rest of the acting from the ensemble cast is also top-notch. Colin Firth is just squirm-inducingly awful (in a great way) as Mr Niven, always tiptoeing around the tension in a very English way with platitudes about the weather. Olivia Colman is also magnificent: when is she not? I saw one user review on here saying that she "dialled in her performance" which I couldn't disagree with more. She's a living portrait of grief and anger. "You're so lucky", she says to Jane at one point, "to be so comprehensively bereaved at birth". The fact that she does virtually nothing with her face until a single dramatic explosion is the epitome of perfect acting, where 'less is more'.

• I liked the way that the film properly reflected the social damage of the war. We've been here before, with episodes of "Downton Abbey" for example, but the fact that this is set so many years after the conflict but that it was still so invasive gave me room for much thought.

• Complementing a strong female team behind the camera is composer Morgan Kibby with an interesting and engaging score.

Negatives:

• The events shown have a wraparound story showing Jane's later writing life, both in a mid-life relationship with philosopher Donald (Sope Dirisu) and her elderly life (where Jane is portrayed by Glenda Jackson). It is a genuine delight to see Ms Jackson on the screen again: astonishingly, according to IMDB, her last big-screen appearance was back in 1990! However, these structural elements of the story didn't work for me. Although I might be accused of 'not understanding what the writer was trying to do' (incorrect, I do), there is a case here, at least in the movie version, for a 'simple is good' approach. I think the underlying story set in 1924 was gripping and engaging enough not to require the complexity introduced by these later scenes. I'd have preferred a simpler 90-minute film focused on that story. (I've not read Graham Swift's book: perhaps this all works better as a novel?)
• Typecasting is a terrible thing, but Josh O'Connor has such a striking resemblance to Prince Charles that it's sometimes difficult not to think "Ooh, I've just seen the future king's bits"!

Summary Thoughts on "Mothering Sunday": It's the acting and the cinematography that sets this apart for me. Although it had its irritations, I found this to be a beautiful and engaging watch. The story is perhaps a tad predictable. But overall this is a nicely crafted and thought-provoking film that gets a thumbs up from me.

(For the full graphical review, check out #onemannsmovies online. Thanks.)

I've referred to this as a Tarantino-esque western, but arguably this breed has its origins well before "Django Unchained" and "The Hateful 8". As an oldie, many of the slow-mo violent blood-spattering gun-battles in "The Harder They Fall" were reminiscent to me of Sam Peckinpah's "The Wild Bunch" from 1969.

Positives:

• This is certainly a revisionist Western, featuring as it does a cast composed almost exclusively of people of colour. And what a cast it is. Idris Elba (here truly imposing in the movie, a force of evil and genuinely threatening); Delroy Lindo (familiar to me from his regular role in TV's "The Good FIght"); LaKeith Stanfield (so good in "Judas and the Black Messiah"); Regina King (flipping back in front of the camera again after the brilliant "One Night in Miami") and Zazie Beets (she of "Deadpool 2" fame who here again makes a striking and memorable impression as a female lead). I wasn't familiar with Jonathan Majors' work, but he makes a strong impression here in the lead.

• As the opening title says "While the events in this story are fictional. These. People. Existed.", and having this focus on the people of colour - often ex-slaves - who seem to have been whitewashed out of most movie Westerns in the past is an eye-opener. Of course, having ALL of these black characters condensed into one plot feels very strange and unnatural. But - hey - it makes for an interesting statement.

• The cinematography (by Mihai Malaimare Jr.) is impressive, with many tight shots of people (and horses!) from strange angles. There's a spectacular zoom, from Buck out of a saloon window all the way up the dusty street to where Love is sitting on a horse, that feels like showing off! But it's memorable nevertheless!

• A quirky score (selected by director Jeymes Samuel) and amusing graphics ("A White Town" - LOL) were entertaining, but again felt like they were aping Tarantino. Not necessarily a bad thing!

• There's a great twist in the tale that I didn't see coming.

Negatives:

• The action sequences have a surfeit of "stormtrooper syndrome": all of the 'good guys' have perfect aim, yet the 'bad guys' pepper the street with lead and seldom hit anyone. There are also times when a lot of speechifying goes on when you just think they should be reacting to that old Scott Evil prompt of "JUST SHOOT HIM!".

• A number of the actors muttered their lines, which often suited the mood. But what with that and the sound balance sometimes being a bit off, I was sometimes struggling to understand the dialogue.

• The callousness and violence of the piece I found to be a bit numbing overall. It's a great western, but I can't say I found it uplifting and speed to rewatch it.

Summary Thoughts on "The Harder They Fall": Westerns have been out of fashion for many years, but each year tends to see cinema testing the waters again with a few offerings. 2021 has now seen two good ones... with this and "News of the World". I really wasn't expecting much from this, but I was pleasantly surprised. It's a movie that has some memorable moments. At nearly 140 minutes I felt it outstayed its welcome by about 20 minutes. But otherwise I'd recommend you give it a try.

(For the full graphical review, please check out #onemannsmovies online. Thanks).

I really wanted to see "The Green Knight" on the big screen, but the movie's very restricted distribution (ridiculously so) meant that I couldn't get to it. So it was a small screen watch on Amazon Prime for me. But even here, the film had the capacity to impress me with stunning visuals and a moving and memorable story.

Positives:

• There are certain films that will stick in the memory long after you've watched them. This is one of them. Full of truly memorable visuals and surreal events, David Lowery has created a fantastical piece of storytelling loosely based on the epic-poem of "Gawain and the Green Knight". It's dramatic. Intellectually challenging (to appreciate what's going on) and darkly comic in places. It enthralled me.

• Dev Patel delivers a first rate performance. But when does he not? Still only 31, he really is one of our most versatile and talented young actors. His Gawain makes for an interesting anti-hero, in turns brave, cowardly and full of self-doubt and loathing.

• Alicia Vikander is also spectacular here, playing the dual roles of Essel and "The Lady". She's just so versatile: delivering a dowdily pretty girl-next-door as Essel and then being gorgeously sexy and seductive as the mystical Lady of the North. Another stunning performance.

• The cinematography by Andrew Droz Palermo is spectacular, with interesting framing choices and dramatic vistas of open forest and wilderness (which I took to be Scotland but which is actually Ireland). This is supported by great Special Effects by Weta Digital.

• The music by Daniel Hart is hauntingly fitting to the medieval storyline, full of plaintive choral voices.

Negatives:

• The movie is dark in so many ways. But visually, it could be subtitled "50 Shades of Black", given some of the scenes. It was certainly a challenge for the contrast on my LCD Smart TV. As such this is still a movie I would like to see again on the big screen, with a high quality projector bulb employed!

• I loved its slow-burn build of mood and atmosphere, but many I'm sure will think it just plain slow and boring.

• I'll add the UK film distributors (Entertainment Film Distributors) to this list of negatives for doing such a poor job of getting the film into mainstream UK cinemas.

Summary Thoughts on "The Green Knight": I'm 100% positive that this is a "Marmite" movie, with some loving it, some hating it and with not many people sitting on the fence. I thought it was fabulous. Thought-provoking and a memorable movie experience. Well recommended, if you're willing to be challenged by a film.

(For the full graphical and video reviews, please check out #onemannsmovies online. Thanks).

A young 21st-century teen walks in her nightclothes down a darkened alley emerging into a bustling 60's Soho street across from a theatre showing "Thunderball". She enters the Cafe de Paris with a reflection mimicking her actions but showing a very different girl. So it was that the trailer for Edgar Wright's "Last Night in Soho" hit earlier this year.

The trailer grabbed me by the gut and firmly cemented it as a "must see" in my movie-watching schedule. Frustratingly, Covid got in my way. But now free of the wretched virus, this had just HAD be my first outing.

Positives:

• This is SUCH a tour de force of filmmaking. Honestly, there were moments in here, particularly in the first half of the movie, where I was beaming from ear to ear at the audacity of it all. That 'time travel' reveal is even better in 'the flesh' than it was in the trailer, enhanced by the vibrant cinematography of Chung-hoon Chung.

• Thomasin McKensie again impressed me immensely. She was of course the 'girl in the attic' from "Jojo Rabbit" and the best thing in the lacklustre M. Night Shyamalan feature "Old". Anya Taylor-Joy is as spectacular as you would expect and Matt Smith also delivers, although I wasn't completely convinced by Smith's cockney accent. And what a wonderful thing to watch veteran actors Terence Stamp and Diana RIgg strut their stuff on the big screen. (This was Rigg's final screen performance, and the film is dedicated to her: "For Diana". RIP Ms Rigg.)

The combination of 'in camera' and special effects here are gob-smackingly effective. Some of the 'mirror' effects involving Eloise, Sandie and Jack in the club are gleeful. And I'm not sure how they were all done. And a dance sequence where Eloise switches to Sandie and back again is just so clever.

• The Production Design is just brilliant. It oozes a combination of 60's style and sleaze. Surely an Oscar nomination is due here.

• As with other Edgar Wright movies (like "Baby Driver") the choice of music is superb. The score is by Oscar winning composer Steven Price, but you can be sure that Wright was heavily involved in the track selections. These prominently feature a Cilla Black track - heralded by 15 string beats of total perfection - that is in my top 5 songs from the 60's. And Anya Taylor-Joy's haunting version of "Downtown" is just superb.

Negatives:

• The second half of the film just doesn't *quite* live up to the promise of the first half (which was running as a clear 5*s).

• While the inevitable twist in the tale is clever (and unexpected), I thought it was rather clumsily introduced. (I can't go into details without introducing spoilers, but an envelope is involved). Something more subliminal would have been my preference; something that you would have had to watch the film again to catch.

Summary Thoughts on "Last Night in Soho": I loved this one. It lived up to my expectations, and came close to "classic status". I need to give this careful consideration as to where this sits in my "Top 10 Films of the Year", but it is undoubtedly up there in the list.

Highly recommended, if you are content to stomach some violent (and quite disturbing) horror imagery.

(For the full graphical review, please check out the full review at onemannsmovies on the web. Thanks).

I have Covid-19, and am confined to quarters. So with the big screen out of reach, time to catch up on some streaming films. New on Netflix is "Army of Thieves", a quirky prequel, of sorts, to Zac Snyder's "Army of the Dead".

Positives:

• I really wasn't expecting much from this offering. For me, the character of Dieter in "Army of the Dead" was an annoyingly quirky comedy character in a zombie-actioner that you just wanted to punch in the face.... repeatedly. But in contrast, this Dieter-centric film is deliberately quirky throughout and it just all worked for me. Under his own direction, Schweighöfer's Sebastian/Dieter becomes a genuinely quirky, lovelorn and loveable loser that you want to root for.

• The look and feel of the film is utterly glorious. The wonderful cinematography by Bernhard Jasper makes the introduction to the European locations feel Bond-like and the combination of Production Design and Special Effects make the safe-cracking scenes tense, dynamic and beautiful to watch. It's all nicely rounded off by a quirky Steve Mazzaro / Hans Zimmer score.

• Shay Hatten's script delivers a nice balance of action and exposition. It actually - shock horror - takes time to flesh out some character behind the generic heist-movie stereotypes. Setting the movie in the same timeline as the emerging Nevada zombie-apocalypse as "Army of the Dead" is neat: (although those expecting extensive zombie-action will feel short-changed). And having the Las Vegas safe as the mythical Götterdämmerung is a nice touch. Above all - "SURPRISE!!!" - the script surpassed the essential six-laughs test.

• The acting is above par, with Schweighöfer putting in a fabulous turn and the stunningly beautiful Nathalie Emmanuel (best known for being Ramsey in the Fast and Furious series) gets to be a lot more than mere window-dressing here. Stuart Martin is notable here for looking astonishingly like Hugh Jackman.... I mean, really, they could be twins.

Negatives:

• I mean, honestly, there are more holes in this story than a St Moritz swiss-cheese. Why would all of the safes, owned by different private institutions, be being "decommissioned" due to a Zombie outbreak on the other side of the world? Can the Interpol team really be that incompetent? And however clever he is, I don't buy that you can open safes like that!

• Although I liked the balance of the script overall, the story is pretty simplistic and linear.

Summary Thoughts on "Army of Thieves": Sometimes a little movie appears that surprises and delights you, and this was one of those for me. It's not big and it's not clever. But it is very nicely made, thoroughly entertained me and was - for me - way better than its source movie. A recommended watch on Netflix.

(For the full graphical review, check out the #onemannsmovies written/video reviews online. Thanks.)

Certain works of fiction have been labelled with the tag of "unfilmable", and Frank Herbert's 1965 novel "Dune" is one of those. It's full of exposition done as internal monologues - which screams "movie voiceover". And regular readers will know my hatred of those!

Amazingly, Denis Villeneuve manages to pull off the impossible with his version of Dune (part 1), which I saw last night as part of a Cineworld Unlimited preview event. It's close to being a movie masterpiece.

Positives:

• My 10*'s for this one goes for the overall vision, which is grandiose with scenes that stick in the brain. As he demonstrated in "Arrival", Villeneuve likes to go for huge spacecraft that hang "in the sky in much the same way that bricks don't"*. And the ships in this vision are just HUGE.

• The ensemble cast does a great job, with Chalamet, Isaac and Ferguson being particularly impressive. Stellan Skarsgård (looking like he is about to tell "a very amusing story about a goat", if you get that movie reference!) looks to have the most gruelling acting job, having to emerge from, and descend into, a bath of black goo!

• Much like Villeneuve's "Blade Runner 2049", this movie has cinematography that is worthy of framing and sticking on your wall. (Greig Fraser is the man behind the camera here).

• Hans Zimmer's music is phenomenal. I'm not sure it's a good 'sit down and listen to' sort of soundtrack, but it fits the movie beautifully.

Negatives:

• It wasn't a problem for me, but I expect some will consider the movie to be too much mood and not enough action. I've seen some comment that the film was "emotionally empty": but I really didn't feel that, and am well-invested in the story ready for "Part 2".

• This is probably faithful to the books, but given all of the advanced spacecraft technology on show, and laser/blaster technology, it seems bonkers that when we get to hand-to-hand combat between the armies that we get into "swords and sandals" territory.

Deja vu?: There's nothing new under the Tatooine suns. And so much of this film has you linking the concepts back to "Star Wars":

• "The Force" is now "The Way"
• The Jedi are the 'Ben and Jerry Set'. (Well, that's what it sounded like to me... and I don't even like Ice Cream! 🙂 )
• Both films centre on a Messiah-like "chosen one", foretold by legend

"Spice" also features in "Star Wars" with "spice runners" (as in the Millenium Falcon doing the 'Kessel Run')

• There's even a 'pit of sarlaac' moment in "Dune".

Of course, since Frank Herbert wrote "Dune" in 1965, there's a significant question as to who is plagiarising who here!

Summary Thoughts on "Dune": At 2 hours 35 minutes, it's YET ANOTHER long movie: cementing October 2021 as the month of long movies. But this is a movie that MUST be seen on the big screen. It's a memorable movie experience and highly recommended. I can't wait for Villeneuve's "Part 2", currently in pre-production.

(For the full graphical review and video version, please search for #onemannsmovies online. Thanks.)

I was not a great fan of the original Venom, although I did find aspects of it to like. Unfortunately, for me, the sequel - "Venom: Let There Be Carnage" - delivered even less. And I found aspects of it positively distasteful.

Positives:

• While most of the cast seem to be doing sequel-paint-by-numbers, I thought Naomie Harris was superb as the shrieking 'X-woman-style' villain. (I'm embarrassed to say that it took me until the end titles to realise she WAS Naomie Harris!)
• Some of the comedy lines between Brock and Venom made me chuckle.

Negatives:

• My main beef was with the script and that came down to two primary issues:

-- Firstly, virtually nothing happens. It's not too much of an understatement to say that the whole plot can be summarized as a) a villain is introduced; b) the villain teams with another villain and c) Venom defeats them. It's just all so bland and linear, without any sort of discernible story arc.

-- For a movie pitched more at the comedy end of the Marvel spectrum, the script is unpleasantly violent. (And, yes, before Marvel fan-boys attack me with comments, I know that this Sony/Marvel offering is NOT part of the official universe). There are numerous points at which I thought "Ugh!" and a nasty taste entered my mouth: the butchering of a 'Family man' prison guard, pleading for his life; the brains of a very polite young grocery store boy being senselessly smashed in; and the massacre of a priest in his own cathedral. (Actually, I have no idea what happened with the priest during the "power-up" scene - - a cut by the censors perhaps?) My issue is that, tonally speaking, there is a horrible mismatch between these unnecessarily violent scenes and the lighthearted and flippant nature of the rest. It's like putting a vicious gang-bang rape in the middle of "Ant Man".

• Sorry. I know he has a lot of fans, but I'm not a great fan of Tom Hardy's acting style here. "Legend" proved what class he could deliver. But this performance seems to be streets away from that. An acting colleague last week commented that he was looking forward to the interactions between Hardy and Harrelson. But I found both to be underwhelming.

• I found the visual effects for the emerged Venom to be utterly unconvincing. There were times when it looked like nothing more than a puppet on strings.

• I'm normally a fan of Marco Beltrami's scores. But I found the music in here to be intrusive and distracting. And that's before some (to my ears) pretty awful rap-based tracks over the closing titles.

Summary Thoughts on "Venom: Let There Be Carnage": You'll already judge from my balance of comments that this one just didn't work for me. Even as a "park your brain at the door" action movie, I thought it felt lazy and lacklustre. My advice? Save your money and go and watch "The Last Duel" instead.

By the way, there is a mid-credit monkey (end-credits scene in onemannsmovies speak), worth staying for, which ties this Marvel offshoot to another sector of the Marvel catalogue. However, note that there is NO post-credits monkey!!! Like a whole bunch of us in the cinema, you'll feel pretty foolish if you sit through the interminable titles just for the film to end and the lights to come up! (One Mann's Movies is pleased to bring you this public service announcement!)

For the full graphical and video versions of my reviews, please check out #onemannsmovies online. Thanks.)

In Ridley Scott's new movie "The Last Duel" we are in the late 14th century in France. And - apart from in one scene - it appears to be perpetual winter!

Positives:

• It's an intriguing script - the first collaboration between Damon and Affleck since their Oscar-winning "Good Will Hunting" from 25 years ago. It presents 3 different versions of "the truth" from three different perspectives. (One of these - Marguerite's version - is suggested as being the 'actual' truth through a clever delayed fade of the chapter title). Many of the same scenes are repeated in each variant: sometimes with obvious differences in fact; sometimes with the slightest nuance of tone or expression; and sometimes with no change to the visuals, but with the benefit of hearing the dialogue being spoken. Very clever.

• "Killing Eve"'s Jodie Comer is just brilliant here. She is the master of nuanced expression, and she genuinely deserves an Oscar nomination for this work. Combined with her great and fun role in the surprise summer hit "Free Guy", Comer is surely on a path to movie acting greatness.

• Damon, Driver and Affleck also have great fun with their roles: they are all eminently watchable and this is a study in acting greatness. But I particularly loved Alex Lawther's turn as the king: all excitable childish power in the body of a young adult.

• Battle scenes and the final duel are delivered in visceral nature reminiscent of Ridley Scott's famous battle and arena scenes in "Gladiator".

• Excellent production design and special effects on show here. Another Oscar nomination perhaps? The movie was filmed in the Dordogne region of France and also - after a 2020 Covid lockdown - in Ireland.

Negatives:

• At two and a half hours it's another long film (is October 2021 designated long film month??). And although the nuances between the different versions of reality are fascinating, there's a degree of tedium involved in rehashing the same scenes (in some cases) for the third time. Arguably I think a few of these re-versions could have been omitted to reduce the bladder-testing run time.

Summary Thoughts on "The Last Duel": This is Ridley Scott back on top form again. I found this a gripping watch. As the film opens, we are teased with the start of the 'boss level' duel between Damon and Driver. But these final dramatic scenes are the emotional lynchpin of the movie since only then do you understand the background and the ramifications of the fight. Evidently, 14th Century France was NOT a great time for sexual equality. Women were merely chattels, denied not only fair play and self-determination, but also the bedroom niceties of foreplay and, in most cases, orgasms. As the story was based on real events, the courage and determination of Marguerite of Carrouges were extraordinary. And Jodie Comer's portrayal of her wonderfully demonstrates, yet again, why she is the UK's most exciting acting export for many years.

(For the full graphical review and video version, please search for #onemannsmovies on the web.)

Positives:

• The script has all the trappings of Bond: exotic locations; great stunts; thrilling action sequences; and more gadgets on show than in recent times. Yet it's a real character piece too, delving far more into Bond's emotions. The story running through it with Madeleine is both deep and emotional: something we haven't seen since the Bond and Tracy romance in OHMSS. (And with Craig's acting, he manages to pull this off far better than George Lazenby ever could!).

• I found the finale to be magnificent, bold and surprising. We're back to the megalomaniac owning an island lair, à la Dr No. It even has its own submarine pen (a nod to Austin Power's "Goldmember" perhaps!?). For me, the production design harks back to the superbly over-the-top Ken Adams creations of the Connery years. There are no sharks with frickin' laser beams... but there could have been. (The set is a rather obvious redressing of the 007 stage at Pinewood, created of course for the tanker scenes in "The Spy Who Loved Me". It even re-uses of the gantry level control room.)
• Craig is magnificent in his swan-song performance. There's a scene, during the extended pre-credits sequence, where he's sat in his bullet-ridden Aston just glowering for an extended period. I thought this was Craig's acting at its best. I thought this again in a dramatic showdown scene with Rami Malek. Malek is not given a huge amount to do in the film, But what he does he does wonderfully, particularly in that electrifying scene with Craig.

• The film has a great deal more female empowerment than any previous Bond, with the tell-tale signs (although this might be a sexist presumption) of Phoebe Waller-Bridge on the script. Newcomer Lashana Lynch acquits herself well as the first female 00-agent, getting not just kick-ass action sequences but also her fair share of quips. But stealing the show is Ana de Armas (reunited with Craig of course from "Knives Out"). Her scenes in Cuba are brief but memorable, delivering a delicious mixture of action and comedy that makes you think "cast HER as the next Bond"!

• The music by Hans Zimmer! It's a glorious soundtrack that pays deference not only to the action style of recent composers, like David Arnold and Thomas Newman, but particularly to the classic scores of John Barry. It actually incorporates not one but two classic themes from "On Her Majesty's Secret Service", directly into the film. I'm even starting to warm to the Billie Eilish theme song, although I think it's too similar in style to the Sam Smith offering from "Spectre".

• The cinematography from Linus Sandgren (who did "La La Land") is gorgeous: in turns colourful and vibrant for the Italian and Cuban scenes and cool and blue for the tense Norwegian action sequences.

Negatives:

• My main criticism is not of the film, but of the trailer(s). There are so many of the money shots from the film (particularly from the Matera-based action of the pre-title sequence) included in the trailers that I had an "OK, move on, seen this" attitude. Why did they have to spoil the movie so much? IT'S A NEW BOND... OF COURSE WE'RE GOING TO SEE IT. All you EVER needed for this is a 20-second teaser trailer. Just put white "Bond is Back" text on a black background and the Craig tunnel shot to the camera. Job done. It really infuriates me. B arbara Broccoli and Michael Wilson, PLEASE take note!

• At 163 minutes it's the longest Bond ever and a bit of a bladder tester. But, having said that, there are no more than a few minutes here and there that I would want to trim. To do more you'd need to cut out whole episodes, and leaving Ana de Armas on the cutting room floor would have been criminal. As the illustrious Mrs Movie Man commented, "I wish they'd bring in the half time Intermission card like they used to do in the old days". I agree. Everyone would have been a whole lot more comfortable and less fidgety.

Summary Thoughts on "No Time to Die": Reading the comments on IMDB for the movie, I'm perplexed at the diatribe coming from supposed 'Bond fans' on this one. One-star review after one-star review (despite, I note, the overall film getting an overall 7.8/10 at the time of writing). In this regard, I class myself as very much a Bond fan. (My first film at the cinema was the release of "Live and Let Die" in 1973, but I then binge-watched all the other Bond films at the cinema: they used to do repeated double-features in those days). And I thought this was a fabulous Bond film. Full of drama, action, humour and deep-seated emotion. Couldn't be better for me, and certainly on a par with "Casino Royale" and "Skyfall" for me as my favourite Craig outings.

As the end of the end credits said - "James Bond Will Return". Who will they cast as the next Bond? And where will they take the story from here? Two of the most intriguing movie questions to take into 2022.

(For the full graphical review and video review, check out @onemannsmovies online. Thanks).

Positives:

• Jennifer Hudson gives a tremendous performance as Franklin, delivering both the vocals and the acting admirably. (Apparently, the lady herself, before she died in August 2018, named Hudson as the best person to play her.)
• Coming out of this movie, you have to admire Aretha Franklin's legacy. Although there are moments when her 'demons' got the better of her (and the movie is unafraid to paint her in a negative light for these) she led a tumultuous life and yet was still a strong force for both feminism and equality. I think the movie highlights that admirably. "Have you lost your mind?" her father (Forest Whitaker) asks. "Maybe.... maybe I've found it." she replies.

• I loved the clip during the end titles (at a Carole King concert and in front of the Obamas) of Franklin well into her 70's belting out "Natural Woman". Classy stuff.

Negatives:

• It's long. Very long. Approaching Bond long.

• There's a curious 'cookie-cutter-ness' to these biopics of classic female singers (controlling and abusive men; alcohol/drug abuse; prejudice through sex/race; etc). (Would they even have emanated the same level of soul without all the grief? Perhaps not.) The similarities lead you to naturally compare this movie with "The US vs Billie Holiday". The Billie Holiday story felt like it had a lot more grit and angst in it, making it, for me at least, more memorable. The script for "Respect" - although still rather episodic - flows better. Whilst still great, Hudson's performance (an Oscar nomination perhaps?) doesn't come close to the Oscar-nominated stellar job done by Andra Day.

• I didn't like how the script introduced us to its characters. For example, Ted White (Marlon Wayans) is introduced at a church barbeque. He's painted as a disreputable character, but why? And you have no idea if he is supposed to be a famous singer, a songwriter, a promoter, or a producer (as in fact he is). As another example, Kelvin Hair plays Sam Cooke in the movie, but - unless I missed it - this doesn't seem to be highlighted in the script.

Summary Thoughts on "Respect": "Respect" is the feature debut for female director Liesl Tommy. And it's certainly an ambitious target for a first-timer to shoot at, so 'Respect' for that! And it comes across as a solid and enjoyable biopic, not least to remind yourself of some of the classic tunes that Aretha Franklin belted out. At 145 minutes though, it takes its time telling its story, and I think a tighter, shorter film would have worked better. Did I enjoy it though? Yes, I did. But it's worth pointing out that the illustrious Mrs Movie Man - who normally begrudges every minute over 90 minutes in a movie - really loved this one.

(Check out the full web review and video review by searching for @onemannsmovies).

With Bond showing on virtually every screen of my local Cineworld, there were few other choices for movies to go see this week. So even though I've never seen "The Sopranos" TV series, I decided to give this movie prequel a shot.

Positives:

• Like any good mafia story, there's a nicely developed sense of place for the action. The film is set in the late 60's / early 70's, and the score and the production design nicely portray the period. The rise of black factions to challenge the white status quo, even in the crime world, make this a nice companion piece to "Judas and the Black Messiah" .

• Although he's been in films like "American Hustle" and "Selma", I wouldn't have been able to pick Alessandro Nivola out of a line-up. But he did a great job portraying the different sides of Dickie: both caring uncle and psychopathic gangster. And Odom Jnr is again impressive: I've not yet seen him deliver any role that's been sub-par.

• It's also impressive that they had Michael Gandolfini to play the younger self of his late father's role. Although I kept being distracted by how much he looks and acts like a young John Cusack!

Negatives:

• The story is told over many years and the script came across as quite uneven. There are regular cut-aways to Dickie visiting his uncle "Hollywood Dick" (Ray Liotta) in prison, which a lot of the time, to me, felt disconnected from the main plot.

• Whilst most of the ensemble cast do a good job, some of the portrayals felt like forced caricatures of "Goodfellas" characters.

• As a "Sopranos" virgin, I could tell that there were lots of Easter Eggs and in-jokes in the movie (e.g. The baby Christopher crying whenever Anthony talked to him). WIth "Sopranos" regulars Alan Taylor and David Chase in charge, that's not surprising. But I'm afraid all of these went right over my head.

Summary Thoughts on "The Many Saints of Newark": This wasn't a complete bust for me, which it might have been if it had been a sequel rather than a prequel. Indeed there are the occasional flashes of brilliance with certain scenes. But neither did I find it so engrossing that it's going to trouble my top 20 for the year.

I guess is that if you are a "Sopranos" fan, then you would get a lot more out of this than I did. But it's still an interesting way to spend a couple of hours.

(For the full graphical review, please check out #oemannsmovies on the web, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks.)

When I was in my late teen's, Bill Forsyth's "Gregory's Girl" perfectly epitomised the angst of the school years' emotions I'd left behind me. And I was very much heterosexual. With "Sweetheart", Marley Morrison in an astonishing feature debut delivers a "Gregory's Girl" for today's much more sexually fluid times.

Positives:

• What a great ensemble cast! It's all headed up by Nell Barlow, amazingly in her feature debut. Nell manages to perfectly deliver the hair-pullingly frustrating unpredictability of a teenage girl: always planning to go off doing something worthy like "knitting jumpers for elephants in Indonesia". But she manages to keep the portrayal just the right side of parody, not straying into 'Kevin and Perry' territory. "What's wrong with you?" asks her mother. "I'm 17. Everything's wrong with me" she replies. It's an immaculate performance for someone so young.

• Jo Hartley is also fabulous as A. J.'s mum, a lost soul struggling with her own worries, without having those of AJ to add to them. It's not portrayed as a typical 'Mum v Teen' battle, but beautifully nuanced. "Just because you're a lesbian now, it doesn't mean you have to dress like a boy" she pleads with A. J.
• If you're trying to place her, Ella Rae-Smith was the striking girl in the baseball cap in Netflix's "The Stranger". She is also wonderful here, as the 'hot girl' who you think has it all but is underneath deeply troubled and conflicted. A sex scene (beautifully lit and filmed - by either Emily Almond Barr or Matthew Wicks - manages to show absolutely nothing but is deliciously erotic as a result.

• The writing by Marley Morrison feels very autobiographical. And, as I found through reading this Guardian article about Morrison's gender-journey, there is a lot of personal experience in here. It's clever that the film is claustrophobically set in the remote holiday park (actually the real Freshwater Beach Holiday Park near Bridport on the Dorset coast). If it had been set in a big city like London, AJ could have constantly fled from her feelings, never resolving them. Here, she is constantly running into Isla.... there is no escape.

• I also very much liked the relationship written between A. J. and Steve. Steve is almost the safety valve on the pressure cooker, always helpfully allowing some steam to escape. It adds warmth to the story.

• For such an indie picture, there's a range of great tunes on the soundtrack: mostly from bands I have never heard of (probably making it affordable). I'm not sure if there's to be a soundtrack album released, but it's worth a listen if so.

Negatives:

• I wasn't fond of the sound mix on the film. Some of the dialogue was indistinct.

• A. J. gives us an occasional running commentary of her thoughts as a voiceover. Regular readers of my blog will know my thoughts on this subject! I'm not sure if it added much to the story: a 'show-not-tell' approach would have been my preference.

Summary Thoughts on "Sweetheart": I likened this film to 1980's "Gregory's Girl", and that's a great compliment. That movie made stars out of John Gordon Sinclair and Clare Grogan. I'd predict similar great things for Nell Barlow, Ella Rae-Smith and particularly for writer/director Marley Morrison. I'll very much look forward to Marley's future projects. It's a cracking little British film. It deserves a major cinema release, but I suspect this is one that you might need to hunt out at your less mainstream cinemas. But please do so - it's well worth it. Very much recommended.

(For the full graphical review and video, check out #onemannsmovies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thank-you!)

Positives:

• This is Marvel at its best. A script (with Shakespearean undertones) that melds action with good character development and laugh-out-loud feelgood dialogue. The great thing is that you don't need to be a Marvel nerd to enjoy this one. Yes, there are some fabulous Easter Eggs for Marvel fans (and a wonderful return of a character from one of the early films). But its almost a standalone feature in its own right.

• The action sequences are top-notch, particularly an early fight on a careering an Francisco "bendy-bus". Some great martial arts reminiscent of "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon", made more exciting by the fact that the impressive Simu Liu did all his own stunts.

• The relationship built between Shaun and Katy is wonderful, and the actors deliver on it brilliantly: no wonder when you have the exceptional Awkwafina on the other end of it. Similarly, the relationship built between Shang-Chi and his father is powerful, thanks to some wonderful acting from Tony Chiu-Wai Leung. So good in the gripping (and erotic) 'Lust, Caution', I believe this is his first English-speaking film.

• With the odd exception (see below), the special effects are top-notch.

Negatives:

• I thought this was 5* all the way until the final reel, when we descended into a CGI-driven "Godzilla vs Kong" finale. I hate CGI that's just a blur of action across the screen where you're struggling to understand what's going on. Less would be more here for me.

• The movie makes extensive use of 'flashbacks' and, for me, there was a bit too much heavy-handedness in their use. I muttered "enough already" to a few of them, since they were taking us out of the movie's current narrative.

• There were a couple of effects that looked like the intern at the special effects company had put them together during a coffee break. An early plunge of a jeep into a forest and some rather obvious green-screen stuff in the finale. Surprised that these weren't caught and redone.

Timeline?: So, it took more of a Marvel nerd than I am (my wonderful daughter-in-law Bronwyn) to point out that although this film is set (largely) in the "Present Day", the events of "Avengers: Endgame" actually happen in 2023. So in the Marvel timeline, this is set in between Thanos's "blip" and "the return". This is the reason why Wong is present but not Doctor Strange, for example.

Summary Thoughts: Marvel goes East! This is a really entertaining addition to the franchise, mixing Marvel action with Eastern mysticism and martial arts. It's an impressive job by director and co-writer Destin Daniel Cretton, in only his second feature (he did "Just Mercy" in 2019).

As a Marvel film, there are of course end-credit scenes ("monkeys" in onemannsmovies speak). A mid-title one is the best, bringing some additional Marvel characters into the mix. And there's a post-credits one which sets up for further sequels but which I found rather irritating.

It's ironic that a Marvel movie so right for the Chinese market - the first to be headlined by an Asian actor and with substantial Mandarin dialogue - might not get a release in China. According to this report, this appears to be for two reasons: firstly that the actor Simu Liu made some derogatory remarks about China in the past, and secondly that in the comics Shang Chi's father is Fu Manchu - a Western-derived character with racial overtones.

This doesn't seem to have hurt it so far. After less than two weeks of opening, it has made $262 million on a budget estimated to be $150-200 million.

(For the full graphical review and video check out #onemannsmovies on the web, Facebook and Tiktok. Thanks).