Reviews

Mixed feelings on this. Howth Head in Ireland was substituted for the Isle of Man, the first let down.

The story dragged in places. The horror of Canning's plastic face was a complete distraction, What has she done to it? And she came across as completely unbelievable - a healer with a face like that?

Suspension of disbelief was my constant, how on earth did the mother get away with all of her vanishings. And the dad was over the top, a sometimes befuddled and sometimes sharp old geezer. The secrets that never felt like secrets at all. Contrivance only.

Suranne was the real disappointment. I hate it when an actor starts to irritate me every time she appears on screen. And I have liked her in her past roles.

The ending was a huge disappointment, all tied up with a bow like a box of chocolates. Very unbelievable.

Romantic scenes felt forced as well and the relationship of animosity between the sisters which was the thread running through it all was never quite believable. Off in fact. And what sister calls the husband of his wife getting drunk and singing in a bar?

Another forced plot point. A shame really. Eve Best stole the show with a limp script.

5/10.

This seems to be a trope of many films depicting some kind of brain damage/injury.

Saul's dementia is all over the place. He remembers Sylvia but the not the waitress of the restaurant he visits all the time or his "favourite".

She accuses him of rape and then backs off when she finds out he was not even at her school when it took place. She mistakes a rapist? Never explained.

I was massively uncomfortable with the consent issue. And thought if the sexes were reversed and it was a woman impacted with dementia would it have been OK for the male to have sex with her? A resounding NO was my response.

I understood his brother being upset as he was the responsible adult and concerned for Saul. And then oddly, Saul remembers he paid for the house, out of the blue. Saul has no backstory to justify this. Whatsoever.

Sylvia's incest by her father is revealed but then again, her brother in law is angry about her talking about incest. What's with him?

An oddly disjointed film, begging more questions than it answers.

For instance how can Sylvia, a single mother treat her job as if it's just a hobby she can waltz in and out of at leisure?

The cast is great doing their level best with the uneven script. Hence the 5/10.

An abrupt ending. As if no one knew what to do when it was time to wrap it up. And two impoverished people (no source of income?) shack up together.

Waste of time.

At the end of this documentary, I wondered why it didn't get the Oscar.

The film making is extraordinary on every level, telling this horrific story of the gang rape of a thirteen year old girl in India woth respect and care.

Misogyny is a way of life in rural India and the condemnation of rape victims is par for the course. In fact rape victims are encouraged and urged to marry their rapists to protect their honour.

Ranjit and his daughter Kiran fight for justice all the way to the courts in spite of threats from the villagers who side with the rapists.

Ranjit's love for his daughter shines through, he supports her every inch of her steadfast and courageous way, the look in his eyes is heart breaking at times, he conveys so much devotion and respect, never doubting her for one minute.

Co-incidentally, the film makers happened to be there at the time of this terrible act and were able to follow the story through from beginning to end over a period of years.

Not to be missed. Uplifting in its final resolution and Kiran was so brave to come forward and reveal her identity to help others in her country who are cowed by the onslaught of further victimization.

10/10.

In the courts. I was appalled watching this series and the further victimization of the children who were traumatized by the horrific abuse and possible manipulation of their abusers.

The whole focus was on the adults - supposedly wrongly convicted - the completely egregious magistrate in charge of the case who went on to great glory - and the mixed bag of adults who were accused.

All of it would be a laughable skit of a series only that the children, the after affects of the horror, their testimony of a murdered little girt, is given short shrift in the efforts to exonerate the perps.

Netflix did a terrible disservice to these children as no follow-ups were instigated and only one child was ever interviewed at length in this whole miserable mess of a 4-parter.

The traumatized children must have suffered terribly in the aftermath. Where was their story?

It would make anyone's blood boil.

0/10.

An appalling treatment - by Sofia Coppola no less -of the pedophile Elvis and his child-prey Priscilla.

Murky images, film jumping timelines like a bunny rabbit, no character development whatsoever and actors looking like they don't know what to do with the appalling script and inadequate direction.

It begs more questions than it answers. Why on earth would two responsible appearing parents pimp out their daughter to a man like creepy Elvis? (And yes, before I knew all this I was a fan of his, being of an age with him). They should have been charged with child neglect.

Not one whit of Elvis music is offered to dispel this absolute drivel.

Just this Svangali Elvis controlling every petty move of Priscilla's while he has multiple liaisons with every woman on set.

A tired Priscilla finally leaves him but nothing is shown as to how she gets to that point or how she secured an exit with adequate wealth for herself and her daughter.

A travesty of a film and one to avoid.

0/10.

The characters are engaging and believable at the outset and funny too. But believability was stretched far too much in the public storming off the set scene as this trope is more overdone than burned toast.

They are both likeable and engaging and the script is good and the scenery itself is breathtaking at times.

The characters are completely at odds in every aspect of their personalities and the overall feeling is they would never make it in real life.

How long can one be amused at the other's foibles (and ignorance) and as the old saying goes, how can one build a relationship on the heartbreak and deceit of another?

Overall they missed the mark of a good romcom.

6/10.

An odd show. Full of non-jokes and lecturey bits. I was surprised, kept thinking it was going to get better.

Didn't like the strip show piece, the jealous husband spying on his own wife and low grade snipes at trans, handicapped, doing drugs with his son. The rare funny bit got a laugh but on the whole there was a nasty edge to the humour and a wandering focus with him smoking on stage and abandoning the audience at one point to change his clothes. If I'd paid for a ticket I'd have been annoyed and some annoyed audience members were quite visible.

He seemed oddly braggy too, as in anyone can be him.

I'd pass.

2/10.

The ending was a bit of an eyebrow raiser, an odd (to us on this side of the Atlantic) way of handling a murder case, even odder the courtroom was so swanky and very non-threatening in its gentle environment.

But aside from that, I found the six-parter very engaging, well written and totally believable in that rapists get away with it 90% of the time as trials can be grueling and the victim is victimized once again with invasive questions and disbelief when she says she was frozen in fear and didn't fight back.

Stella is fantastic, a great actor in a first major role and her parents are believable in their angst and over projection of her after her rape.

The pacing was excellent as was the script in that everyone has secrets which can tumble out in a crisis and investigation.

A satisfying ending in that Stella's motives are completely believable.

But I have question marks around that "court" case.

8/10 overall for how engaging it all is.

Yes, good acting, great music but absolutely no story. At all. Apart from his bisexuality which dominated the script.

Bradley Cooper was too greedy in writing, directing and starring. What did he write? Not much of a story. I'd like to have seen Lenny's childhood explicated, more meat on the bare bones offered here.

Also, why so little on West Side Story - one brief extract and not the huge explosive hit it was at the time. The adulation which followed.

The teasing bits of his Missa were beautiful and far too much of his Mahler, though lovely, had little bearing on the overall story.

Brad's prosthetic nose was distracting in that it gave a nasal whiny tone to his dialogue. And he might have done better with another actor.

Carey Mulligan, as always was amazing in her role but again, underplayed the distress she must have felt at his infidelity/. At one point he left her for a young (male) lover and only returned when she was diagnosed with cancer. (in her breast, from a broken heart? Who knows)

The great man of music was not served well here, far too shallow a treatment of his genius.

5/10.

"Archie" gave short shrift to the supposed star.

The actual "star" was Dyan Cannon, a feast of self--dulation for a woman who spent only 6% of his long life with him but devoted about 95% of this film to herself. Not surprising of course as she was the executive producer. So the film would have been more aptly named "Dyan".

Archie's real life was an interesting one and deserves, at some point a genuine biographical take on it, warts and all.

Many of the well based facts were erased for he was equally charmed and charming to both men and women.

Another was the fact his brother died before Archie was born and not after.

And on, and on, easily checked by biographies written about him by reputable sources and not by Dyan Cannon, one of his five spouses. Short shrift is given to his other marriages, his last appearing to be the most meaningful and long lasting.

The lead doesn't look remotely like him, and to add insult to injury doesn't speak in that uniquely clipped way Cary had and also his height is shrimp-like compared with Cary's real height which gave him that sophisticated limber walk and gravitas.

His genuine friendships with both men and women were tossed aside as well in favour of Cannon ogling and flirting.

Avoid. 0/10.

A complete yawnfest. I persisted because I thought there has to be a pay off, some kind of twist, some kind of perhaps possible redemption. And because Netflix told me it was a 98% match for my film interest. But no. Bomb. Big.

There is a stream of consciousness inner dialogue from the killer which borders on cliched repetitive boredom.

It shows him artfully having hundreds of identities and credit cards in storage units all over the place. But never a clue as to how he acquired all this. He breaks into wherever he chooses, again we don't quite understand the methodology apart from him flashing access cards at everything.

Tilda Swinton has a tiny part so that was a rip off also.

Honestly, I don't know how this was made without some producer rolling on the floor thinking it was a huge joke.

Michael Fassbender is always riveting but here he's an unconvincing robot riding in cars playing loud music, talking to himself and watching his pulse.

Don't waste your time.

1/10.

I have watched the docs on the Sackler Family and their horrendous responsibility of hiring young women to pimp out drugs to doctors and clinics causing the deaths of millions. Still in court I believe with a huge settlement on the horizon.

Emily Blunt and Catherine O'Hara are a feast of good acting and the supporting cast are excellent.

I am familiar with the story line but here it is told from the point of view of one salesperson (they were all attractive, sexy drug pushers) hauled into the marketing by force of her poverty and inability to make ends meet.

The story unwinds well and a story of rags to riches to rags is always entertaining.

8/10.

A very revealing, well made and interesting documentary about one of Britain's worst ever killers, Nilsen. It's so unusual in that much of what's being said is from the voice of the man himself, it's chilling.

Good on Netflix for not dragging this documentary out to breaking point. It's remarkably well constructed, short and concise and hammers home the points from all involved, the press, the police the surviving victims and Nilsin himself via the mutliple tapes he recorded.

Like many serial killers, Nilsin targeted a marginalized group: "rent boys" in the eighties in London. Sadly among the at least 17 boys he strangled to death only eight have been identified. These poor displaced boys and men were never missed by families. Such shame attached to who they were in that discriminatory era.

7/10.

I really can't believe the reviews given this - film is such a high falutin' word in this context - utter twaddle.

For a while I thought I was losing my sight as everything takes places in shadows and inept lighting.

Squinting at the screen gave me a massive headache.

There is no plot, just the pained anxious face of Jake ambling through most scenes along dim murky corridors, purposeless.

Is it a dream? Is it his alter ego?

I decided I didn't care a whit for the outcome or the passionless sex or sad Jake at podiums talking nonsense at an empty lecture hall.

I gave up. Jake? Seriously! This is not art. It's not anything. It's pretence at art house or whatever.

Yikes!

0/10.

This is a doc that could have been over with in an hour. Instead it runs for 3 excruciating episodes.

I had the thought that the producer could have been guilty having received a lashing of cash into his account a few days before? Why? Her generosity? He was never questioned as to his jealousy over her new lover/fiance.

But the suspects who were left off the hook were a mystery. We were never informed of their alibis.

Also a key question was never asked - who stood to gain the most from her death?

The police were text book incompetence all the way.

That so-called intellectually challenged suspect who was first convicted and then released (that wasn't fully explained either) was a violent brutal rapist with convictions as long as your arm. Why was he presented so sympathetically? And not interviewed properly?

I was literally gobsmacked at this going nowhere repetitive pointless doc.

Avoid 1/10.