Reviews by Lexi

''I guess Rosebud is just a piece in a jigsaw puzzle...a missing piece.''

Following the death of a publishing tycoon, news reporters scramble to discover the meaning of his final utterance.

Orson Welles: Charles Foster Kane

Citizen Kane from 1941, has been lauded as the greatest motion picture to come out of America during the black-and-white era (or any era, for that matter). It also represents the pinnacle of Orson Welles' film making career. For, although Welles lived for more than forty years following the release of Kane, he never succeeded in recapturing the brilliance or fulfilling the promise of his first feature.



Some perhaps boast that his effort The Magnificent Ambersons was powerful, but the studio took the film away from him, slashing more than 40 minutes of footage. Thus, while Welles' Shakespeare movies and A Touch of Evil contain elements of brilliance, they are not on the same level as Kane aspires. It has been argued, most forcefully in Thomas Lennon and Michael Epstein's 1996 documentary, The Battle Over Citizen Kane, that Kane not only started Welles' directorial career, but nearly ended it.
The movie opens with an unforgettable image of a distant, fog-shrouded castle on a hill. It's a classic Gothic shot, and goes a long way towards establishing Citizen Kane's mood. We quickly learn that this place, called Xanadu, is the dwelling of America's Kubla Khan, Charles Foster Kane (Welles), a one-time newspaper magnate who could have become President if not for an ill-advised extramarital affair. Xanadu, in the words of the faux newsreel that gives a brief history of Kane's life, is the "costliest monument of a man to himself." Any resemblance to The Ranch, William Randolph Hearst's real-life San Simeon abode, is not coincidental.

''I can remember everything. That's my curse, young man. It's the greatest curse that's ever been inflicted on the human race: memory.''

Within moments of the film's eerie, visually-stunning opening, Kane is dead, uttering the word "Rosebud" as he hunches over. His death, like his life, is a big news event, and the paper he owned, the New York Inquirer, is desperate to unearth the meaning regarding his cryptic last word. Is it a woman he bedded? A horse he bet on? A beloved pet? Some long-lost, unrequited love? The truth, which isn't revealed until the closing scene, represents one of the all-time greatest motion picture ironies, and leads us to believe that, on some level, Kane regretted not having led a simple, quiet life. It is easily one of the simplest yet cleverest twists divulged by film and a complexly written story.

The script for Citizen Kane, written by Herman J. Mankiewicz (with an assist from Welles), is a thinly-disguised fictional biography of publishing king William Randolph Hearst, who was 76 years old when the movie came out in 1941. And, while Hearst was offended by Welles' characterization of him, he was supposedly more angered by Kane's unflattering portrayal of his beloved mistress, Marion Davies (who is represented in the film by Susan Alexander). To add insult to injury, "Rosebud" was allegedly Hearst's pet name for Marion's private parts.
Kane is not, however, all Hearst. There's more than a little Welles in the character, and, when one examines the direction the film maker's life took after Kane, the similarities become more obvious. After peaking with Kane, Welles began an slow-but-inevitable descent into isolation, eventually dying of a heart attack in 1985. Like Kane, he was a vital, passionate figure in youth, but a sad, pathetic one at the end. (Who can forget the Paul Masson commercials?) In retrospect, Kane can be viewed as being as much a representation of Welles as of Hearst.

Back in 1941, Hearst exerted his considerable power and influence to destroy Citizen Kane before it opened. He failed, but, even though Kane saw the light of day, Welles' young career (he was only 25 at the time) did not escape unscathed. A smear campaign in Hearts' papers branded him as a communist. Kane, nominated for nine Oscars, emerged with only one (best screenplay), and "boos" could be heard whenever the film was mentioned during the ceremony. And, before Welles had completed post-production, RKO wrested control of his next picture, The Magnificent Ambersons, from him.
As a film, Citizen Kane is a powerful dramatic tale about the uses and abuses of wealth and power. It's a classic American tragedy about a man of great passion, vision, and greed, who pushes himself until he brings ruins to himself and all around him. Of course, the production aspect that makes Citizen Kane so memorable is Greg Toland's landmark cinematography. In fact, it's impossible to have a serious discussion about this film without mentioning this element.

The movie is a visual masterpiece, a kaleidoscope of daring angles and breathtaking images that had never been attempted before, and has never been equaled since. Toland perfected a deep-focus technique that allowed him to photograph backgrounds with as much clarity as foregrounds (note the scene where Kane's parents discuss his future while, as seen through the window, the child plays outside in the snow). There's also an extremely effective low-angle shot late in the film where Kane trashes Susan's room. The cinematography documentary, Visions of Light, devoted an entire section to Citizen Kane. If any other film has come close to the nearly-perfect artistry of this one, I haven't seen it. Anyone foolishly wondering how black-and-white images could be superior to colour needs only to watch the first few frames of Citizen Kane to understand. Not only is it impossible to envision this picture in colour, the very thought is blasphemous.

There's no doubt that Citizen Kane was far ahead of its time. Uncompromising, unsentimental drama of this sort was not in vogue during an era that was better known for titles like The Wizard of Oz, Gone with the Wind, and How Green Was My Valley(which beat out Kane for best picture). In challenging Hearst, Welles forced a clash of egos that had wide-ranging repercussions. Yet, out of the conflict, Citizen Kane emerged stronger than ever. Would the film be as compelling if we didn't know how close it came to never being released? Or if we didn't recognize the parallels between the life of the main character and that of the director?
Is Citizen Kane the best movie ever made? Many critics would argue "yes" without pause, but my enthusiasm is more restrained. While I acknowledge that Kane is a seminal masterpiece, it is perhaps not the Best Motion Picture but definitely to be considered among them. There is no denying the debt that the movie industry owes to Welles and his debut feature. Motion picture archives and collections across the world would be poorer without copies of this film, which will forever be recognized as a defining example of American cinema.

''I don't think there's one word that can describe a mans life.''

''I must know everything. I must penetrate the heart of his secret! I must become Caligari!''

A horror film that surpasses all others. Alan relates the story of traveling magician Dr Caligari and Cesare. Their arrival in a town coincides with savage killings.

Werner Krauss: Dr. Caligari

A 1920 silent film, directed by Robert Wiene from a screenplay by Hans Janowitz and Carl Mayer. Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari is one of the most influential German Expressionist films, thus often considered one of the greatest psychological horror movies of all time. The film introduces and birthed the twist ending in cinema history.



The beauty of Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari. is the puzzle, the art and the silent medium the piece follows.
When anything is displayed delicately upon each frame it is not without reason. The storytelling transcends art and becomes a combination of genres that border upon thrilling, horror, art and dramatic acting using ones gestures and movements alone.
Narration nicely knits together sequences and draws audiences in, with it's whimsical tide of tremendous marvelling.
Werner Krauss as Dr. Caligari, embodies the part down to the last drop of Methodism acting.
Famed Conrad Veidt, Friedrich Feher, Lil Dagover, Jane Olsen, Hans Heinrich von Twardowski, and Rudolf Lettinger gather together to make an impressive cast which compliments the stylish locations and black and white uniqueness.

''Spirits surround us on every side... they have driven me from hearth and home, from wife and child.''

The Cabinet of Dr Caligari impresses upon every note it plays. Whether it's the accompanying music provided by Alfredo Antonini and Giuseppe Becce, or whether it's the expressionist visuals birthing twisting paths, contorted shapes, eerie darkly formed architecture or the spooky macabre characters, it's fairly obvious The Cabinet of Dr Caligari is a timeless classic equalling mystery and suspense. In fact, it rivals and is mirrored in practically every, in many films and stories which followed the 1920s and even today in modern cinema, so much is borrowed and recycled from this origin of originality.
As for German Expressionism featured, it is meant to use its bizarre forms, dramatic lines and strange angles to give physical shape to the artists' emotions.
The Expressionist style in The Cabinet of Dr Caligari creates a world of madness and disorder. However, its effectiveness doesn’t make it any less strange and trying to watch, especially for those not familiar with the movement. The world is disorienting, at times distracting and impossible for the scientific mind to reconcile. And then comes the framework. Suddenly the irrational, visceral Expressionist world is explained in a rational, logical way, making the film more versatile and accessible to most anyone, regardless of the political, scientific and spiritual movements of the era.

At 71 minutes, Caligari’s story is perhaps considered straightforward, almost mundane by today’s standards. The story opens with our hero, Francis (Friedrich Feher) speaking to a stranger in a garden. As the tale begins, the garden scene fades out, and we enter what appears to be a flashback. As events unfold, we discover that a stranger has come to town, a man by the name of Dr. Caligari (Werner Krauss) and with him Cesare (Conrad Veidt), a somnambulist (for these purposes, a person whom is in a death-like trance). Shortly after their arrival, people around the village begin to die, including Francis’s close friend. As Francis, suspecting Caligari, begins to investigate the strange somnambulist, the danger only grows. When Francis's love interest, Jane (Lil Dagover) is threatened, the film rushes towards a haunting climactic conclusion.

Overall, the plot seems almost enigmatic, as if it has nothing new to offer yet has everything to hide. It seems obvious from early stages in the film that Caligari is controlling Cesare in order to commit these murders. It’s hardly a surprise when Cesare attacks Jane, the only pretty woman on the screen available for damsel-in-distress duty, and the shocking twist ending is so predictable you’re almost surprised they actually follow through with it. However, while Caligari may seem mundane, it’s imperative that we remember this was made in 1919. Every cliché has to start somewhere, and this one? It started right here. This is the real deal, and it would do any film aficionado a favour to concentrate when viewing. Caligari is invaluably educational and untouchable. How can you expect to appreciate modern film if you cannot understand where it came from?
Caligari is indeed one of the parents responsible for paving the way forward for future projects.

It should be noted that this framework, was ground-breaking at the time. It laid the foundation for later films, such as Psycho, in which the reality we see is, in fact, nothing more than a madman’s delirium. The whole psychoanalyst explanation segment at the end, also, was a first, and something that would be used by later films across genres. However, while the implementation complimenting this twist, itself, is responsible for great things in cinema, it was a decision that was both detrimental and beneficial to Caligari’s long-term success.

''How long shall I live?''

''Evil is everywhere. Someone will always sell you for thirty pieces of silver. New misfortunes constantly befall the peasant... either Tatars, or famine, or plague... and he still keeps on working... meekly bearing his cross. He does not despair. He is silent and patient. He only prays to God for enough strength. How could God not forgive him his ignorance?''

Andreiv Rublev charts the life of the great icon painter through a turbulent period of 15th Century Russian history...

Anatoli Solonitsyn: Andrei Rublyov

Putting Andrei Rublev into words, is no mere feat. This is a film that goes above and beyond anything any film-maker future, present or past has ever achieved. Andrei Rublev is a film that loses it's conventionality and transcends into pure, asphyxiated art.
Andrei Rublev offers what every film-maker strives for: A look at why art exists?
A story told in a medium that the majority will fail to comprehend, even some artists will be confused or fail to grasp the answers it delivers, but to those whom understand reap the rewards thus becoming moved by the unimaginable. The film captures not only the essence regarding the artist's purpose, but it captures truth regarding our personal existence.



The film begins with a short scene thus showing us a man attempting flight, failing and crashing back to Earth witnessed only by a horse.
This scene alone shows us symbolism immediately if we choose to see it, the man representing the fall of all men or our need to become above other creatures, the horse representing life or loneliness and the barren countryside representing a world that is unfriendly to all men. This scene alone is up for multiple interpretations, many upon which, would be equally or essentially right. The film never tells you how to look at it, but allows you to bring your own philosophy, your own thoughts and of course your own justifications. Ultimately its basic themes are vivid, but many meanings remain as ambiguous as ever, countless viewings will bring more and more to the film's richness, and in truth it is perhaps impossible to fully fathom the meaning driving proceedings. As with all great art it must be experienced and made to relate to one personally to find its meaning, it cannot just be simply viewed and admired.

Rublev's personal artistic development is at best a secondary concern at times; the main concern is dealing with a world in which the exercise of power, whether by God or man, is unjust and arbitrary. Again and again, Tarkovsky presents the viewer with scenes of people being punished. Sometimes we know why: a jester is arrested for singing an obscene song about a boyar (and dropping his pants). Sometimes, we have no idea: the second act opens with a monk walking across a city square as a man in the background is tied to a rack. He protests his innocence, but we never know what he's innocent of.
Tarkovsky has an eye for the way cruelty and power are exercised. You can see it in the bored faces of the guards in the first act as they smash the jester's face into a tree, or the false bonhomie a Tartar warlord maintains as he marches toward a city he will utterly destroy. Tarkovsky is also keenly aware of the ways the powerless console themselves, from Theophanes the Greek's nihilistic wish for apocalypse ("We'll burn like candles") to Rublev's withdrawal into asceticism. But then, growing up under Stalin would give anyone an unusually strong grasp of the way the powerful use cruelty, terror, and pain.

''In much wisdom, there is much sorrow.''

The vivid themes of the film blossom forth from ideas surrounding art, man's need for art and the artists scattered upon the pages of history.
Andrei Rublev is a film that deals with both the futility of being a Christian artist in a Godless world, and with the impact art can have to bring God to a more personal level. These themes are developed in seven stages, each one differing immensely from the other, with the core ideas and the artist Rublev being shared in every one. Though these themes seem to centre around and deal exclusively with suffering, violence, religion, and routine, they are very implicit to every human being's lifestyle. Expressing Art can be used as an allegory for our gifts, the idea that we should not hide what we can offer the world, just as the artist should not hide his gift. Our gifts and talents can be used to glorify God and bring hope, even if the world shies away, despite the often felt futility of doing what we are gifted in, we bring goodness into the world simply by existing and our actions.

Ultimately the film offers this at its underlying core, however there are many more ideas, meanings and political paths the viewer may make.
Through patience and connections the viewer can make the film into a personal venture and in doing so may become moved deeper than ever before. After all isn't this every artists wish? To capture the World, as well as being captured and enthralled by its beauty.

''...Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it. "Vanity of vanities," saith the preacher; "All is vanity."''

''You gotta be more careful, cause I can't lose you again. Not like that.''

An accidental cross-time radio link connects father and son across 30 years. The son tries to save his father's life, but then must fix the consequences.

Dennis Quaid: Frank Sullivan

James Caviezel: John Sullivan

Gregory Hoblit directs a thrilling time travel puzzler in what could be one of the surprises and under-rated hits in film from 2000.
Frequency tunes into a tried and tested formula, utilizing storytelling mixed with twists, equalling roller coaster entertainment using suspense and excitement.
Toby Emmerich whom was behind the writing succeeds in delivering a compelling tale along with Hoblit's humble dosage of directing and bringing everything together in the film's making.



My love for the film extends a hand and eye due to the time travel element and the fact Frequency opens up possibilities regarding changing events and memories through cause and effect.
The cast doesn't hinder the experience yet elevates the professional gloss of quality which hovers elegantly over the proceedings, reminiscent to the Aurora Borealis painted upon the sky above the town.
Dennis Quaid and James Caviezel play father and son, Frank Sullivan and John Sullivan, they play the parts so well you nearly shed a tear for them a few times due to the emotional scenes they end up owning. Exceptional performances help the story reach a peak perhaps untouchable to anything outside it's walls.
We have Shawn Doyle playing the cop Jack Shepard, whom is a serial killer villain who gets another chance to fulfil his killing spree. Just a thought, Jack Shepard was a character from Lost yet is it coincidence he appears in another carnation in 2000? What's more mysterious is the fact another member from the series is present.
Yes, Elizabeth Mitchell as Julia 'Jules' Sullivan, is the character which connects the time travel series again. The character Julia is a formula abiding cross junction for certain plot contrivances, in which twists happen prior to present factors.
Andre Braugher(The Mist), Noah Emmerich, and Melissa Errico also make fine additions to the casting, in turn giving support and fine brush strokes to the story with graceful acting and poise.

''We all have skeletons in the closet, we just don't know when they're gonna pop up and bite us in the ass. Huh, Jack? You changed your MO, 'cause if they knew your mother was the Nightingale, they would have looked at the family. They would have looked at you.''

What's also compelling about Frequency is the music by Michael Kamen combining simple cinematography by Alar Kivilo, causing a rather sensuous effect deserving praise and attention in equal measures.
Frequency is a straight forward story yet not a straight forward story. The film and story is something of a paradox regarding changing time, bordering upon the questions relating to parallel time-lines and dimensions.
So why such a high rating from me? Well, Frequency always leaves me satisfied and pondering, while gives audiences something to debate about. The whimsical way it sets about achieving it's goal isn't one of self glorification but one where love and family feature as top priorities, and where helping an individual, even an unknown stranger can set about a negative ripple.
The rain and beauty are captured well, the relationship regarding friends and family is achieved, while the bad guy of a story can sometimes be a cop.

It plays out very much like a thriller but with a Sci-Fi edge sharpened upon it's tip. Frequency illuminates itself and the audiences it captivates with an endearing boldness and daring, a creative writing and combination of genres coming together for the best possible results.
Frequency isn't the best film in the World,nor is it one garnering numerous Awards, yet it is a film which entertains and causes debate, it has an addictive streak which keeps audiences coming back for seconds, if not thirds.
This is definitely a little surprise from 2000 and one which deserves to be watched and enjoyed.

''I want you to remember this word, okay? It's kind of like a code word: Yahoo. Can you remember that?''

''Ever feel like you're living in an airport?''

An eastern immigrant finds himself stranded in JFK airport, and must take up temporary residence there.

Tom Hanks: Viktor Navorski

One of the wonders of Steven Spielberg is that he can take a story, in this case written by Andrew Niccol and Sacha Gervasi. Combined with a wittily conceived Screenplay from Sacha Gervasi and Jeff Nathanson, inspired by a true story, and set in a unique place with whimsical circumstances, surrounding a likeable character. Spielberg gives us his offering for 2004; The simple yet sweet The Terminal with Tom Hanks reprising an isolated role not seen since Zemeckis's Cast Away in 2000. The Terminal is distantly similar and loveable in it's own right courtesy movie magic provided by Steven Spielberg.



The Terminal boasts a talented yet humbling array of characters thanks to it's clever casting and aspiring choices.
Tom Hanks plays the protagonist and hero Viktor Navorski, a man from Krakozhia, a country with war brewing and newly acquired social problems, yet thanks to unlucky circumstances Viktor becomes trapped at a terminal as he tries to enter New York for a personal venture concerning a family motive.
Thus he meets an assemble of characters as what turns into a simple waiting procedure becomes a sixth month slog stuck in isolation...
Stanley Tucci plays the newly promoted dick Commissioner Frank Dixon, the guy whom audiences love to hate, and Tucci pulls it off effortlessly. Sometimes following the rules isn't the way you help people, or make friends.
Catherine Zeta-Jones also appears to give us a love interest for Hanks, yet what turns out to be a potential love proves to be a 39 year old gorgeous woman with no brain regarding the right man for her. She waits for a married man to come to her in a deluded sense, something which isn't going to happen. Quite honestly and many may agree, Victor is just too good for her. Amelia Warren whom Zeta-Jones plays is a character who has a choice but fails to make the right one, which is sad in it's own personal way.
Chi McBride, Diego Luna, Zoe Saldana, Barry Shabaka Henley, Kumar Pallana...All prove to be invaluable cast additions and really provide the support Hanks needs. Tom Hanks doesn't necessarily need support but his character in his lonely sort of prison does. Viktor, is a man whom is friendly, skilful, and invaluable in terms of honesty and being resolutely good. He is inspiring and that is what everyone is drawn to as they realise his predicament.

''Eat to bite... bite to eat, bite to eat, bite to eat, bitetoeat bitetoeat bitetoeatbitetoeatbitetoeatbitetoeat...''

The Terminal sometimes feels like John Williams, behind most Spielberg projects, has been watching Chocolat all day. It's quirky and addictive in it's own simple way, where people skip and re-choice in it's gentle melody.
In fact it has a sort of Jewish aura surrounding it's vibrant conception which helps warm audiences and indeed warm their hearts with joyful vibrance.
Another aspect The Terminal overjoys us film-lovers with and indeed shows Spielberg's homages in little offerings, is the references he makes to other classic cult films and TV series. When you see a swordfish prop hanging up in Mulray's office, Spielberg is making a sly nod towards Polanski's Chinatown. Saldana's INS agent is a "trekkie", and claims to go to conventions dressed as Yeoman Rand, which ironically later she appears in the reboot Star Trek. Friends, The Outer Limits, and The Twilight Zone also get brief nods.

Overall, The Terminal is a loving story portraying a man's struggle towards something so simple. His right to visit a place and fulfil a father's last wish and promise concerning a signature and a certain Jazz player.
It's wonderful to watch a film which shows humanity and creative shining through rather than stereotypical meanderings. Nothing portrayed is squandered, some scenes, focus upon humour while others border on serious but for never too long. This is a realistic film yet it's also a feel good venture for audiences and us to warm to.
In fact, The Terminal is one you can watch upon numerous occasions and never tire from it's straight forward story and glimmering message regarding hope. The meticulous constraint and relentless parody of a man never losing sight of overcoming another man whom is out of touch with anything outside the rulebook. Human nature, numbers, paper-work, and moral obligations do not always mix. In fact slight echoes of our World becoming reminiscent of Gilliam's Brazil come to mind, obviously not in an extreme sense but one where paper becomes more important than the individual.

The Terminal may not be Spielberg's best, or Tom Hanks best although he does a very convincing accent, but it sure is a worth-while watch that will keep you enthralled start till finish, with characters whom are memorable and lovable in equal measures.

''I am going home.''

''Even when someone has the strength to discard me, my power is not diminished...Someone always finds me.''

A glowing orb terrorizes a young girl with a collection of stories of dark fantasy, eroticism and horror.

John Candy: (Voice)

Heavy Metal is a boldly created animated film, upon its release in 1981, it featured daring content. Unlike most animated films at the time, Heavy Metal combined heavy metal music, blood-n-guts and nudity in an animated feature. The result was a somewhat daring film. While adult animation had been done before, Heavy Metal took the ball game alot further.



Based on the magazine of the same name, Heavy Metal results in being an anthology. It has six different segments, all threaded together with a singular plot. A green orb from a dimension named Loc-Nar tells the stories in which it had a part.
The first of these stories, Harry Canyon, is an original story not from the magazine. However, it does draw inspiration from some other stories featured in the adapted content. The Harry Canyon segment is well-told and has a touch of detective intuition layered with futurism. The portrayal of New York in 2031 was rather grim yet necessary.
Den, based on Richard Corben's character, is the story of a 14-year-old kid who becomes a muscular man in a place called Neverwhere, due to an experiment he conducted one night. This segment was pure fantasy, with fight scenes and fantastic artwork throughout. In this story, the Loc-Nar is worshipped.
Captain Sternn is a superlative comedic segment in the film. Captain Sternn's pleads "not guilty" during his trial. His angle, Hanover Fiste, is there to praise him, as he will be paid to do this. However, with the Loc-Nar in his hands, he begins to reveal the truth about Sternn and becomes a giant and chases Sternn throughout the space station.

''I'm just scared I'll come home one day and find you screwing the toaster.''

B-17 is my favourite segment in the film, based on the story by Dan O'Bannon. During WWII, the Loc-Nar hunts down a severely damaged B-17 bomber and turns the dead crew into zombies. This sequence truly borders upon the psychological horror, and unlike most of today's horror films, it gets to the point and ends in a twisting, enigmatic conclusion.
So Beautiful, So Dangerous is not a strong segment story-wise, but it's one of the funniest segments in the film. Some of the best songs on the soundtrack are listed upon this part, and the animation is very colourful and detailed here. The two stoner aliens are essential comedic elemtsts for the middle of a multi-storied film.
The film concludes with the last story, the epic Taarna segment, an original story that is somewhat lengthy in it's ominous structure. With its epic fight scenes, amazing backgrounds and its grand scope, Taarna is a great finale and an epic closing point to wrap up the whole affair.

Heavy Metal has nearly twenty different songs from many different artists, ranging from Black Sabbath to Sammy Hagar to even bands like Grand Funk Railroad and Journey. It's a very diverse mix and the songs on here are all very good. Black Sabbath's "The Mob Rules" goes great with the barbarians' invasion of the peaceful village in Taarna, and Don Felder's Heavy Metal(Takin' A Ride)" makes the beginning of the B-17 segment pure excitement.
The weakness of Heavy Metal has to be the animation, although having some great effects (particularly on the Taarna segment), some of the character animation is disappointing. There was a lot of roto-scoping used in the film, which makes me wonder why character development lacks subtlety in their creation? Perhaps the makers rushed some parts as opposed to others.

Aside from a few flaws in the animation and then at times lurid, erotic obsessed story, beside all that, Heavy Metal is still an enjoyable experience. Even though some critics look back on it and called it dated and juvenile, it doesn't seem to effect the quality, art and fun it still instils. Some say it hasn't aged well, and it's true to a certain degree. It is juvenile, yes, and drenched with nudity, big breasted women worshipped as sexual lionesses, and there is a geeky animosity residing over the whole affair.
However, Heavy Metal did show what the animation medium was capable of doing. This film proves that animation can do anything. It also shows it can be adult and redefine storytelling.

''...Very few escape my grasp...''

''Magic is the bloodstream of the universe. Forget all you know, or think you know. All that you require is your intuition.''

Willow, a small farmer/apprentice magician, meets Madmartigan, a great swordsman, and together they journey through a war-torn land of magic and monsters, to save a baby princess from death at the hands of an evil queen.

Val Kilmer: Madmartigan

If you want a film which invokes memories of childhood, the late 80s, and magical fantastical escapism on a personal level, then Willow is one I remember quite easily. Ron Howard directs a piece which takes lengths in equal measure to charm and tantalise in a way that's special, yet blends a story by George Lucas with a charismatic Screenplay from Bob Dolman. The script and characters speak for themselves, with all that Willow equals, the charm and likeability lies with imaginative material.



Willow may be the loveliest film to ever be conceived by Director Ron Howard, because it has characters and creatures we can all relate to and love, even on the hundredth viewing.
The cast which was assembled were pretty fresh and unknown back in 1988, Willow equals memorable characters galore thanks to some iconic ways it divulges.
Who can forget a young unknown Val Kilmer as Madmartigan? The loveable warrior hero whom falls for Joanne Whalley's beautiful yet conflicted Sorsha, daughter of the evil Queen. Warwick Davis as Willow Ufgood plays the unlikeliest of heroes, in a decade pre-ring era, putting Warwick first for playing some varied characters, Willow joins the ranks. Jean Marsh playing the main villain excels as Queen Bavmorda, whom actually makes evil look so good. She embodies the part thus being a character whom you
love to hate.
Kevin Pollak and Rick Overton add humour and comedy with the duo, Rool and Franjean.

''I am the greatest swordsman that ever lived. Say, um, can I have some of that water?''

The magical quality Willow exudes doesn't just come from it's wondrous characters, magical creatures, fantasy bonified locations...But also from it's score and music from James Horner. The music and sounds compliment the Cinematography by Adrian Biddle in everyway. It's pragmatically awesome and magnificent reminiscent of a marriage and union between lovers.
Filmed in UK, Wales, and New Zealand it makes the most of showing beauty in it's humble little way. When we have a chase scene we feel the vibe and excitement through the turbulent music and luscious environments used.
In fact, Willow makes you feel the romance, when Sorsha and Madmartigan share a flicker of love, it doesn't just melt their hearts, it melts ours too.
When Willow is sliding down a snowy mountain, we are exhilarated, similarly to the fight involving a monster birthed from a watery moat.

Overall, Willow may not be regarded as a perfect story or film but it's simplicity and fun nature regarding escapism, seems perfect to me.
Nature, fantasy and a simple story of good and evil is all that is needed to be known prior to watching Willow. Over-complicating a mirrored parody isn't always a case for prioritising necessity, when in fact the magic comes truly from the experience and enjoyment the adventure brings with it's magical journey, it's romantic entanglement, and fantastical nature.
A true must for imaginative fantasy fans whom love escapism and art brought to life, in their films. Willow satisfies fans and garners new ones whom experience it's simple magic.

''All creatures of good heart need your help, Willow. The choice is yours.''

''Unfortunately, no one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.''

A computer hacker learns from mysterious rebels about the true nature of his reality and his role in the war against the controllers of it.

Keanu Reeves: Neo

If you wind back the clock to 1999, the closing point for decades of film, you would not have expected the defining part in film would not come from a prequel trilogy regarding Star Wars titled The Phantom Menace, which actually resulted in disappointing an entire generation of fans.
If you wanted the biggest surprise and revelation, that covered a range of deep thought, sci-fi, effects and choreography, then you would have to turn towards Andy Wachowski and Lana Wachowski, The Wachowski Brothers. Yes, my friends, it is indeed the biblical The Matrix I'm referring to.



The Matrix along with Fight Club instantly became a cult classic because anyone and everyone could relate to it if they so chose. We have a hacker leading a mundane existence in a job and World that is confined to a system regarding control and boundaries, rules and confinement. When his dreams and thoughts start to eclipse his limitations, Mr Anderson, known as Neo to his revolutionary friends, begins to wake up.
He meets characters that will change his life forever...Morpheus, Trinity and the villainous Agent Smith become iconic representations in themselves.
''How far does the rabbit hole go?'', you ask yourself, then when Neo chooses between the red and blue pills, you subconsciously choose with him. Essentially Morpheus is not just teaching Neo, he is teaching us. We are an entire generation, like Neo, that needs to wake up to a soulless system disguised as a convenient prison.

''...It is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself...''

I mentioned a handful of the characters, which entails a further mention of the cast. Keanu Reeves playing Neo, truly ends up being the Jesus defining figure in terms regarding becoming a prophet and hero from his former life in the office.
Laurence Fishburne as Morpheus, fully embodies the role of tutor and mentor towards the cause of good versus evil, mechanical imprisonment regarding humanity turned into batteries, is truly a character who shows us how we inevitably ended up chaining ourselves to technology.
Carrie-Anne Moss as the love interest Trinity, is the third part regarding the disciple principle, the one, is essentially three, thus one and unity, is in fact two coming together.
Hugo Weaving really perhaps eclipses all others as Agent Smith, thus becoming one of the most iconic and best villains to grace film for a long time. The beauty of his Agent character and his resolve comes from the fact that he speaks truth at times regarding humanity and their destructive natures. ''Mr Anderson!'', along with echoes...''There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus.'' We are not mammals but an exception, because our volatile natures and intellect result in us spreading and sucking the Planet dry. In this regard Agent Smith is correct.
Gloria Foster plays the Oracle, the being and program that knows what will happen and the pieces upon the chess set.
Joe Pantoliano is Cypher, the Judas of the story, who wants the easy option, ''Ignorance is bliss...'', he flaggingly retorts as he betrays his friends. The betrayer is later betrayed, Carrie and Joe would later echo this in Nolan's piece Memento with a similar psychological analysis.

''You hear that Mr. Anderson?... That is the sound of inevitability...''

In fact, The Matrix, has so much in it that it's hard to grasp all concepts in the first or even fifth viewings, no matter what individuals might say, the beauty comes from the journey and message it spurs forth from it's revolutionary way regarding depth.
The Wachowski Brothers have made something special, they have made a defining point of imagination, capturing greens and the dullness that is this Matrix concept. This confinement that is trapping all souls within it, in an endless cloudy array, is the victory of the machine. It is essentially us becoming God and creating technology that can think for itself, similar to whatever created us being preceded by us.

The Spoon Boy explains it is not spoon's that bends, it's only you, the pills show blue sets us free, and Agent Smith is an Agent whom hates humanity because he hates his job which in turn has imprisoned him, as well as the people he presides over.
The Matrix has bullet-time, it has fancy kung-Fu fight scenes, it has philosophy and mindful insights, it has everything yet it sombrely effects audiences subconsciously with it's colourless shades and grains.
Perhaps, most rewarding of all, is that The Matrix, received the attention and Awards it deserved, as well as spawning two unnecessary sequels intent on capitalising it into a franchise, it birthed it's own Anime and a whole new generation from it's ideology and beauty. Having also won 4 Oscars for Best Editing, Best Effects/Sound Effects Editing, Best Effects/Visual Effects and Best Sound. Amen.

It's Original Music by Don Davis is in a word or two, fucking epic and Cinematography vast courtesy of Bill Pope.
Overall, The Matrix is another revolution of the mind and a beautiful stately message echoed forth from a creative medium.
Of course, it owes alot from Asian cinema, and Woo-ping Yuen's inspiring Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon-styled choreography, it owes much to James Cameron's Terminator legacy, and perhaps it is the greatest tribute to East meets West in a Global Economy, needful of breaking the mould and going against corporation entanglement.
The Matrix will free your mind...It is a rabbit hole that goes as deep as you want it to.

''I know you're out there. I can feel you now. I know that you're afraid... you're afraid of us. You're afraid of change. I don't know the future. I didn't come here to tell you how this is going to end. I came here to tell you how it's going to begin.''

''You are a Prince of Persia...Chosen from amongst the people.''

Based on the video game, which follows an adventurous prince who teams up with a rival princess to stop an angry ruler from unleashing a sandstorm that could destroy the world.

Jake Gyllenhaal: Dastan

Being a fan of the Prince Of Persia game series by Jordan Mechner, which dates back to the 2D original in the 80s, I was eagerly awaiting the film version.
Directed by Mike Newell, with a colourful screenplay devised from Boaz Yakin, Doug Miro, and Carlo Bernard, including a story written by the Games creator, and a merging with Disney and Jerry Bruckheimer amongst the producers.
So how does Prince Of Persia: The sands of time fair upon the big screen? Well, sit quietly and I will explain via storytelling/reviewing mode.



A breath-taking prelude begins the affair, Mike Newel lights the fuse, by giving us luscious visuals, epic beginnings, and explaining the Empire of Persia in typical Hollywood fashion. A boy from the streets is shown jumping across rooftops, swinging like a monkey and showing great courage towards a child in need of help. The king, with his brother, sees the child and he takes him as his child.
Whilst this is in effect, Original Music by Harry Gregson-Williams blasts upon our ears while the Cinematography by John Seale teasingly tempts us with it's blatant unsubtly approach honouring the adventure roots that hails Prince.

Regarding the cast of Prince Of Persia, it's easy to say they have chosen well known faces and undoubtedly rising stars from additional sources.
Jake Gyllenhaal as Dastan, results in being a witty, handsome, humourous protagonist, while also a fitting choice for being transfomed into the somersaulting prince himself.
Throw in a beauty such as Gemma Arterton as Tamina, the love interest and guardian of the dagger time device, and you have a heroine whom embodies the voice and style of Oscar Winner Rachel Weisz. There is simply something very fun here, not seen since the daftness The Mummy invoked years ago.
Ben Kingsley as Nizam would appear to be one of the most impressive cast choices, as the nefarious Uncle figure, is he a villain? Or a friend? Kingsley clearly had fun in the role...And it shows. Just watch for instance, that sly, rat-like smile as he walks through a dark soldiery training room. What does this show us? It shows he's comfortable here. Ben Kinglsey can play a Jew, he can play an Indian, he can play a Doctor...Hell, he can even transform into a nefarious gangster without batting an eye lid.
It must also be said where would Prince Of Persia be without more injections of humour? Well, if the banter between Jake Gemma isn't enough, the film-makers throw in the talented Alfred Molina playing Sheik Amar, the Ostrich racer merchant, whom talks when he really shouldn't and many of us laugh when we shouldn't in equal doses.

It's frankly quite easy to say Prince Of Persia humbles itself by being alot of things, what it lacks in originality it makes up for with pure adrenaline, and charisma.
Granted, it does sometimes feel more English than Persian, it feels drenched with effects and an epic vibe that transcends that long ago period but... It does one important thing that eclipses all others. The aspect and success regarding the fruits and labours divulged? Of course, it is indeed keeping audiences entertained and enthralled with what it shows us.
I could say, a few more circumstances and sequences involving gymnastic jumping and scaling could have been served for fans in later scenes but that's me being a perfectionist. The dialogue and time travel plot regarding the plot always seems to be the focus that the makers strive solidify.

In all conclusion and fairness, my instincts and ultimate feelings upon reflection after experiencing Prince Of Persia were positive. I came out of the theatrical viewing feeling good and entertained while also in a romantic state of reminiscence. It's harmless fluff and dazzling fun, consistent in elaborately showing vast locations, costumes that are inspiring, and perhaps going a little crazy with it's usage concerning effects. What is indeed important is that it never loses sight of it's most important goal. Which is to bring to life the figure we know and love named by the people The Prince Of Persia.

''I understand. You found paradise in America. You had a good trade, you made a good living. The police protected you and there were courts of law. So you didn't need a friend like me. Now you come and say "Don Corleone, give me justice." But you don't ask with respect. You don't offer friendship. You don't even think to call me "Godfather." You come into my house on the day my daughter is to be married and you ask me to do murder - for money.''

The aging patriarch of an organized crime dynasty transfers control of his clandestine empire to his reluctant son.

Marlon Brando: Don Vito Corleone

When it comes to naming the greatest and most influential motion pictures of all time, Francis Ford Coppola's 1972 masterpiece The Godfather is a title that is practically guaranteed to be among the many listed. Famed director Stanley Kubrick called The Godfather a candidate for the best film ever made and "without a doubt, the best cast." He's not wrong.



Based on a superbly written novel by Italian American novelist Mario Puzo, the film revolves around a fictional 1940s Sicilian crime family based in New York. The family is run by a wispy-voiced, puffy-cheeked man named Vito Corleone (Marlon Brando) whom has, for the most part, moved away from the days of violence in favour of peace and prosperity without blood-shed and above all things, lectures on the topics of friendship and loyalty.
When an attempt is made on Vito's life, his two sons (James Caan, Al Pacino) and his adoptive son (Robert Duvall) take control of his dynasty and fight to keep him alive and what unfolds is a repeat of days gone by and the world regarding the Mafia is exposed to a enthralled, gratuitous audience.

The Godfather runs at being nearly three hours in length and part of this is due to the fact that it follows Mario Puzo's novel almost to the letter, every scene bring the book to life.
Coppola's film will without a doubt satisfy the purists, and even to those who have not had the privilege of reading Puzo's fantastic book, this is still a more than enjoyable way to spend three hours. Even at such a length, The Godfather never fails to keep our eyes focused upon the screen.

''I'll make him an offer he can't refuse...''

We have great characters in what is possibly the greatest cast ever assembled for a film. Marlon Brando was great; that was an automatic victory. Although what really impressed the audiences of 1972, and what still impresses people, are the performances of the combined supporting cast. Names such as Al Pacino, Robert Duvall, and James Caan, whom are at icon status today, were unknown before the release of this Picture. Al Pacino, in particular, gives a noteworthy performance that garnered him an Academy Award nomination and made the producers whom initially wanted to ban him from the role feel slightly embarrassed by their wrongly stormed assumptions. Al Pacino is undoubtedly the character in the film whom is shrouded by the curtain of irony.
When we first see him, he's not implicated or involved in the family/Mafia business. He's passive, quiet, reflective, shy, with a clean record, and a returned home war hero. Then, when he has to assume a Family role to defend his father, he slowly turns into the image of his predecessor and by the time the film ends, Pacino is the exact opposite of how we first saw him.
The people surrounding him all deserve mentions as they all excel in their respective roles; Diane Keaton as Pacino's love interest, who watches him change before her eyes, James Caan as the fiery-tempered brother, Robert Duvall as the Family consiligere, and one of my favorites, Al Lettieri as the villainous, steely-eyed Virgil Sollozzo, whom fits the exact image of how I pictured the character from the novel.

There is the fantastic element that the whole realm of the story takes place in the world of the Mafia. There is none of the tired old elements of, shall we say, detectives trying to uncover the Mafia and take them down or civilians whom become victims of the organized crime families. With this method, we successfully connect with and understand the motivations of the characters while the outside world, law and otherwise, simply lie in the background. The outside world meant little to the Mafia, and thus it means little to us as well.

What's beautiful about the film is in the regard The Godfather does not make attempts to glorify the Mafia. Yes, we do identify and sometimes feel for the characters in this brutal setting, but never do we justify their consequences or actions with humanistic pardoning. When director Francis Ford Coppola tries to give us horrifying violence, he delivers effortlessly. As he noted in his commentary on the film, Coppola worked hard with his pyrotechnics crew to make all shootings and killings in The Godfather look authentic and realistic as opposed to making them obvious simulated fakery. He uses blood, but not so much to the point where it becomes over the top, but just enough to make it convincing and fool audiences into believing this is the real deal.

The Godfather obviously was an enormous hit when it was first released. It garnered 3 Academy Award wins included Best Picture of the Year and broke box office records that would not be topped until Jaws(1975) was released three years later. Al Pacino, James Caan, and Robert Duvall were all secured nominations in the Best Supporting Actor category but surprisingly none of them won. It also spawned two successful sequels, one of which I feel is actually superior to the original. Thus now Francis Ford Coppola has worked with Robert A. Harris to restore his famous trilogy and give it the pristine print that he always wanted audiences to see it in. Among other films such as Lawrence of Arabia(1962), Vertigo(1958), and Spartacus(1960), The Godfather is certainly a film that deserves a beautiful restoration so that it may live on and be remembered, in our collective minds for generations to come.

''It's an old habit. I spent my whole life trying not to be careless. Women and children can afford to be careless, but not men.''