Reviews

This StudioCanal film tells the true story of the attempt to break into the vault of the Hatton Garden Safe Deposit Company. It was intended to be the last big job, the crown jewels, for a bunch of old career criminals. It is not a gangster movie, nor a comedy crime caper, rather, it is a heist movie. A dramatic reconstruction that is surprisingly factual.

The 1934 Rubel Ice Corp armoured car heist of $427,950 in Bath Beach Brooklyn was hugely popular culturally. The majority of the money from the1950 Brinks Robbery in Boston was never recovered. Likewise, when Albert Spaggiari tunnelled from a Nice sewer, into a bank vault, the 30-60m francs stolen was never recovered. Spaggiari left behind his message that no violence was used.

However, it is the British, who have become known for their spectacular feats of thieving, be that as breaking and entering in peaceful burglaries, or be it robbery by violence, or the threat thereof.

In 1962, the London Airport Robbery was merely used as a fundraiser, to get money together, for the big one; The Great Train Robbery of 1963. £2.6m was stolen. Most was never recovered. A long sprawling story ensued. The Train Robbers themselves, mostly from South London, achieved cult status, thus creating a discernable criminal trend.

The Train Robbers themselves, got back together again, to tell their true story to Piers Paul Read for his 1978 book. It was only when Read was well into the writing of his book, that he discovered to his horror, that the gang were doing what all career criminals did, which was to try to do another job, this time with Read as the victim. Despite all that, the book is good, as is the more factual 1988 film 'Buster'.

The Train Robbers were born in the 1920s and 1930s, though mostly in the late twenties and early thirties. A Brian Reader, born around 1939 in South London, was thus already a young man by the time of The Great Train Robbery. The Great Train Robbers did not make Reader a career criminal, but perhaps they helped inspire this career criminal of a slightly younger generation.

A bank holiday is when most businesses, including banks, are shut. Many people are on holiday, including bank workers. However, not all workers are on holiday. Some are hard at work. A Bank Holiday is in fact an excellent time for a bit of thieving. The Train Robbers struck after a Bank Holiday. So too, the Nice sewer heist was done during the long-weekend after Bastille Day.

In 1983, there were two spectacular robberies. At Easter, the Security Express robbery netted £6m in cash. Then, in November, £26m worth of gold bullion was stolen from Brinks-Mat. The two robberies were done by two different firms or gangs. Terry Perkins went to prison for the Security Express job. Brian Reeder went to prison for handling the Brinks-Mat gold. Linked to these two men, and these two robberies, were some of the most notorious criminals, and all the top firms, or gangs, from the Train Robbers right through to the present day.

The Ealing Comedy film 'The Lavender Hill Mob' (1951) opens with Alec Guinness planning his own gold robbery, then recruiting his gang and then stealing, and transporting his gold. The 'The Italian Job' (1969) has a young Michael Caine playing Charlie Croker, breaking into prison, to talk to gang-boss Mr Bridger played by Noel Coward.

'King Of Thieves' opens, not with a robbery, but with Michael Caine working diligently at his smelter. A few other scenes then draw a poignant picture of an older man. This is Brian Reader, as played by Michael Caine. He is joined by Terry Perkins played by Jim Broadbent. In real-life, Perkins is about ten years younger than Reader. Very quickly, we then move into the heart of the film, when they start discussing that ultimate fantasy score, of taking down the Hatton Garden Safe Deposit Company. For it is in their vault, that Hatton Garden jewellers, and others, keep their safe-deposit boxes.

Charlie Cox, plays a younger man called Basil, who thinks he can help them get access to the vault. Others are recruited, as they think they can turn their dream into a reality. In the film, Ray Winstone plays Danny Jones, who seems to have been recruited for his physical abilities. In reality, it was Jones who in 2012 first had the idea for the heist, and started to plan the Hatton Garden heist. Winstone gives a tremendous performance as Jones. Winstone himself was a very useful boxer in his youth and is not doubt able to draw on that abilty a boxer is required to draw on to commit. This is not a violent film, but it is about older men who are not unfamiliar with violence in the past. Winstone gives a performance, particularly in one scary scene, that reminds you of Bob Hoskins in 'The Long Good Friday' (1980). It is of course the ability to work yourself into a rage, and to let the rage loose, which separates the violent from the peaceful. In reality too, Winstone is merely about two years younger than his character Jones. The two went to the same school. What are missing from the portrayal of Jones, are some of extremely bizarre elements in his life-style. Perhaps they were just considered too bizarre to be believable for the film.

Tom Courtney, Michael Gambon, and Paul Whitehouse, play the parts of others involved in the plot. The actions and dialogues of the plotters in the film, actually duplicate the known facts of the case. The gang-dynamics, based on the reality, are fascinating, particularly between Terry Perkins and Brian Reeder. The relationship of the two is fascinating, however, something there, in this film, is not explored. We know that it is there, but it is not revealed. It is the only flaw in the film, apart from the relationships of Basil, which probably of necessity could not be explored either. We are left with knowing what Basil's relationship isn't, just as we were perhaps thinking he was, but what the basis of his relationships was in the film, or in real-life, remains unexplored.

Film critics have either ignored this film, or condemned it because the characters are nasty. The film is about career criminals, thus they are not nice people. Their morality is explored somewhat in the film. Criminals are despised, feared, and hated, because like pirates and Vikings of old, they have no respect for the law. They have a concept of private property, but it is based on the concept of 'theft is property', and that 'whatever a man can take, and hold onto, that is his'. These are not men who wish to be paid a pittance by others to go down the mine. Rather, they wish to be self-employed as they seek to mine precious metals and minerals. The working-man working for a pittance, and respecting, or fearing, the law, admires those with the bottle to do the big jobs. If nothing else, the story is an interesting story to brighten the day. Those with the money, fear the criminal. For the middle-classes, there lives are much removed from the criminal, a distance that they wish to maintain. For the working man, and those who like him struggle to survive, the temptation to commit petty crime, to survive, is a reality of life. For those who are criminals, those who do the big scores, are looked up to. However, these criminals are no Robin Hoods giving money to the poor, but rather, they want to steal and keep it for themselves. They have no class-consciousness, thus they are hated by the communists. No such thing as society, except what you make for yourself. It is the law of the jungle, and they are the big beasts, the kings of the jungle.

The time of the old-style burglars and robbers may be passing. This seems a theme of this film. It is now harder to do the jobs, as this film shows. However, our old career criminals, in this film, decide that they will attempt this last big job. To do so, they will use all their old knowledge and skills. They were, and are, the best at what they do.

The acting, story, and filming, of this movie, are all first class. Iconic London scenes are well filmed. Bus journeys from South London do cross the Thames, and in the right direction too. Brief flashbacks pay homage to an earlier age of robbery. Homage is also played to the actors too. Perhaps some fear homage is paid to the thieves too, though they are not glamourized. 'The Italian Job' ended with scenes of gang-boss Mr Bridger being feted as the gold is driven through the Alps to the tune of 'The Self-Preservation Society'. Now Michael Caine, who played that young villain in 'The Italian Job' is now playing the older villain.

The film does not explicitly state who is the King Of Thieves, it leaves the question open, for others to decide.

Almost totally flawless! 9/10.

Sleeping passengers are startled to be woken up on their journey to their destination. However, being in a space-ship in space, this story is out of this world, rather than just being another everyday commuter horror story.

The film opens, travelling through space, and Chris Pratt being woken from his induced hibernation sleep. Those familiar with the trailer will enjoy seeing Mr Pratt preening himself before he goes off to meet the other passengers, as we know what he does not. There is comedy here, as well as some satire, that will be familiar to mere earthlings experiencing different classes of travel, and trying to work through computer options. As the full reality of his situation dawns on Mr Pratt the film becomes more serious.

Chris Pratt in Jurassic World (2015) played a likable action figure, whilst also giving us a comic touch too. Mr Pratt played the role well, though to be fair, it was his character who was responsible for the dinosaurs running amok. Here, in 'Passengers', he again has a role that combines elements of action and comedy. However, there is also much more depth to his character in this film, and Mr Pratt demonstrates this well in some superb acting as he faces his future choices.

This reviewer was excited to see this film, but was sadly put off by a critic who revealed a plot twist. However, going to see the film, I was happy to see that the plot twist, which is a major one, and which I believe is best not revealed, is central to the plot of the film, and is rightly dealt with, and explored, in depth. There are one or two other plot twists too, which again are best left to be discovered.

Louisville Kentucky gave us 'The Greatest', the three-times World Heavy-weight Boxing Champion Muhammad Ali, (who sadly died in 2016). In 1990 it also gave us another world champion, and star actress, Jennifer Lawrence.

Her appearance in 'Silver Linings Playbook' (2012) as a sulky and mad date for the equally mad and sulky Bradley Cooper, who then won his heart with her running and dancing, (as well as Robert De Niro's), was merely one of several tremendous performances in recent years. The three stars, followed that up with 'American Hustle' (2013), and 'Joy' (2015). In 'Hustle' Miss Lawrence again played a border-line mad, and this time, not too smart, but very manipulative wife of Christian Bale. This time last year, she starred in 'Joy' (2016), playing the eponymous real-life inventor of the Miracle-Mop, who was necessarily made of much sterner stuff.

Miss Lawrence must be considered amongst the best, if not the best, actress of her generation, and this era. She seems to be able to be truly authentic in her portrayal of her characters, exhibiting true and believable emotions in all of her character dramas. In this film 'Passengers', she again shows us her talent and is rightly billed with the first credit as the star of this film.

Miss Lawrence's character, (the appropriately named Aurora), like that of Mr Pratt, wakes up alone, before she meets him. These two humans are alone. It cannot really be said that this film has a cast of thousands, as all the rest are tucked up asleep for the duration of the trip. Our two woken humans face an awful future alone, with only an android barman as company. Barman Arthur, played well by Michael Sheen, will be easily recognized as being like all human barman on planet Earth.

'Passengers' thus does have a very small cast, though it does seem a spot bigger than that of 'Gravity' (2013) starring Sandra Bullock and George Clooney. The two films are similar, with both being dramas set in space with a small cast. Having seen both films in 3D, I can say they share excellent production values too. In 'Passengers' the interiors and exteriors of the space-ship are excellent, as too are all the shots of the rest of the universe. Music was excellent. It heightened tension and drama at the appropriate moments, whilst never intruding either.

'Passengers', and 'Gravity', have good plots and stories. Sadly, at the end of last year, 'Arrival' (2016), went nowhere, and could be best described by old Mrs Soprano as "just all a big nothing". 'Interstellar' (2014), did at least go somewhere initially, however both films were really ruined by silly time-loop stuff.

By contrast, 'Passengers' is recommended as a seriously well-made film, with a good story-line, that also raises some thoughtful questions that will need to be addressed before we move from our everyday commuter problems here on Earth to those involved in space-travel.

Miss Lawrence, sadly, only teases us with a dance in this film, but the silver-lining is more running, and some swimming too.

Whilst the film deals with some adult issues and themes, it's UK rating of 12A, means that it is suitable for a wide range of audiences.

Good stuff! 10/10.

After experiencing the clumsy dead-hand of unoriginality, that was 'Star Trek Into Darkness' (2013), this reviewer had resolved not see the new Star Trek film, but was persuaded by a fan to go and see it. A decision that turned out to be a very satisfying one.

Paramount Pictures 'Star Trek Beyond' opens with the iconic mountain. Thereafter, from the opening scenes, and those that followed, we were presented with a lightness of touch that also paid homage to TOS of TV and the later films with that original cast. Credit for this must go to writer Simon Pegg.

Unlike the dusted-down script of 'Darkness', Simon Pegg's script is original, whilst at the same time true to the characters and their universe. TOS fans will find their characters maintain their integrity, though with a few slight tweaks, and the film contains that humour of TOS, both with the interplay of the characters, as well as a playful handling of situations too. The big themes that Gene Roddenberry had from the beginning are also there for some of the more serious parts of the story. All are shown with a familiarity that is pleasing to the eye.

The opening scene, starts rather like one in the old 'VI'. Kirk is using his diplomatic skills as he faces a fearsome crowd of aliens. The said aliens are unimpressed by Kirk's diplomatic skills, viewing his explanations in the worst light possible, and working themselves up into a rage. This first scene is handled in such a way as to make the viewer immediately comfortable with the film and what is to follow.

Kirk however, is not comfortable. He is a little introspective, as are other members of the crew. There are some little scenes that show us a life on board ship that we have never seen before. This film, like the other ones in this new series, looks at relationships much more than TOS did.

There has been much talk about the character Sulu. George Takei who played Sulu in TOS, has been critical of his character's development, and the contact with him has clearly been clumsy. However, the said development was handled in a subtle way in the film, so subtle in fact, that it may not even have been noticed by some. George Takei complains that the character development was not envisioned as such by Gene Roddenberry, however it should be said that Gene Roddenberry always pushed for futuristic scenarios that were meant to pose a question to present day audiences. Thus this Sulu, must be seen as fitting in to that Roddenberry universe.

The film is rated 12A in the UK, it is rather dark in places. The style of filming was found to be far too fast and furious by this reviewer. Many action scenes were made up of far too many fast short takes in which it was unclear what was happening. This was made worse by many scenes shot in dark locations, like dark corridors. This may have been done to give a realistic look, but sadly meant little could be made out much of the time.

There were some very impressive scenes in space. Here the Director excelled. Some of the very best scenes, were not only visually impressive, but emotionally too. There are similar themes to the old 'III', we also see some, as already said, that are familiar from 'VI'. All handled well.

The blurring and unclear action scenes also included some hand-to-hand combat. However, some of the very best hand-to-hand combat involved Algerian-born Sofia Boutella. She was one of the top-trending actresses at Comic-Con, and it's easy to see why. With her good looks and fighting abilities, she must be a dream-girl for many comic-reading teenage boys. Miss Boutella was in a lot of scenes and gave a commanding performance. She was also able to portray much emotion in her performance, despite being so heavily made up. Miss Boutella had an accent that this reviewer thought was vaguely eastern-European. It was light and attractive, as well as throaty and guttural too. Perhaps it is Arabic. The accents used throughout the film helped fill out the characters in the film. They were well used.

As is usual in the Star Trek universe, the main characters are Kirk, Spock and McCoy, and the interplay of their characters was in the classic mould. They were well played by Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto and Karl Urban. There was good support also from Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, John Cho and Anton Yelchin as characters Uhuru, Scott, Sulu and Chekov.

TOS fans will enjoy this film. On the whole they will find it true to the original, one particular scene they will find very poignant. This new Star Trek incarnation pays homage to the TOS characters in it's newly written script, as such therefore it is on a par with the very best of the old. A roller-coaster ride through space during the end- credits is well worth seeing in it's entirety.

Warp Factor: 9

In 2013 a film came out called 'Now You See Me'. this was an exciting and funny film about magic. Four street magicians came together as 'The Four Horsemen' and used their magic to rob a bank. Mark Ruffalo played the role of an FBI Agent hunting them down. Michael Caine played a wealthy man robbed by the magicians, and Morgan Freeman, played a magic-debunker, blamed for the death of a magician, who ended up framed and imprisoned by the magicians. A final reveal showed that the FBI Agent was also really a magician, and the final scene was a sweetly romantic one set on a Paris bridge.

As this reviewer has only recently returned from Paris, after walking across the said bridge several times, the arrival of the sequel to this magic film was highly anticipated. Sadly, it must be reported that this sequel makes the romantic scene now totally redundant. We cling to the romantic hope that there was at least a brief encounter, but sadly, in this film there is not even that.

Jesse Eisenberg must have really enjoyed acting in the original fun film because he went on to star with Kristen Stewart in 'American Ultra' (2015), a silly Bourne-like spy-spoof comedy. Jesse Eisenberg as a magician, is joined once again by fellow magicians Dave Franco and Woody Harrelson.

This film is set a year after the events of the first film. The Four Horsemen are in hiding, and Mark Ruffalo is still in the FBI pretending to track them down. In reality they are preparing for their next coup. There are some nice early scenes that introduce Lizzy Caplan to the story, as well as a flashback scene of the magician Lionel Shrike dying in front of his son. Richard Laing and William Henderson played their small parts well.

It should be said that although the UK rating of the film is 12A, the subject of this film is magic in all of it's forms, thus bloody illusions are performed, and death is always a possibility.

Some of the early scenes are frankly boring, and there is little tension as the coup unfolds. The original movie was cleverly filmed so that action scenes were clearly seen, and were also funny and exciting at the same time. There was not a need for too much of a suspension of belief. Sadly, the sequel, directed this time by Jon M. Chu, lacks that same fine touch most of the time. The action takes are so fast that we cannot see what is happening, and they are neither exciting or funny either. Of course, what this film is about, is a major twist, in which the magicians are undone in their coup, and are themselves played by a Mr Big. Director Chu does however reveal the Mr Big in a very impressive scene with an accompanying classic rock track.

There is some impressive acting, especially by Woody Harrelson. Mark Ruffalo once again shows a fine touch, fans should check out the 2013 musical drama 'Begin Again'. In a smaller role, Sanaa Lathan makes a very convincing FBI Agent, and Jay Chou and Tsai Chin entertain us in their small roles too.

The film opens with our magicians about to perform their coup, but as Mr Big ensnares them, it looks like they will need some magic of their own to escape his clutches.

The Prestige, (there is a 2006 film of that name starring Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman), is the final reveal, where the magic trick is revealed in all of it's glory. Those who enjoyed 'Now You See Me' (2013), will enjoy this sequel, which, whilst it certainly does not surpass the original, does contain it's own magical flourishes as rabbits are pulled out of the hat. 8/10.

'Spotlight' has just won the 2016 Oscar for Best Picture, and deservedly so. However, 'Concussion' and 'Trumbo' did not even get nominated, though Bryan Cranston was nominated for his role in 'Trumbo' playing the eponymous communist screen-writer blacklisted by Hollywood. Will Smith playing the doctor who exposed the concussion scandal in American Football, like his film, is sorely neglected, but that is another story. What all three films have in common, is a story of powerful groups exerting their power at the expense of individuals. This seems a common theme and all three films are worthy products telling true stories.

'Sleepers' (1996) told a tale of child sexual abuse. The authenticity of that film is much disputed. 'Spotlight', by contrast, is a factually true story, but one that reminded this reviewer of the earlier film because they both deal with the same subject matter. It is interesting to note that Billy Crudup appears in both films.

A brief opening sequence, informs the viewer that the subject matter of the film is child sexual abuse committed by Boston priests, as is also quite clear from the trailers. The film then has a pleasant party scene at the Boston Globe newspaper marking the retirement of the newspaper editor. The film moves quickly into gear as the new editor, an outsider from Florida, played by Liev Schrieber, arrives. He meets Michael Keaton who plays the head of the Spotlight team. The editor is informed that Spotlight do long-term investigations, though at the moment they are trolling for work. The editor then tasks them with exploring and expanding on a smaller story of a priest guilty of child sexual abuse.

The film that follows is almost totally concentrated on the ensuing investigation. We viewers see the team investigate the matter and realize, through the paper-trail, that this is not just about one priest, and that it is also about a cover-up too. Of the Spotlight team, Michael Keaton plays the cool-headed and practical manager, Mark Ruffalo plays a passionate and obsessed character, and Brian d'Arcy James's role is somewhat similar. Both are concerned with how close the issue is to them. We see this also in Rachel McAdams role too, though she is used more to show the drudgery of the investigation; firstly, as she knock doors, later, as she conducts interviews. All thespians convince in their authentic playing of newspaper investigators, appalled at the story that unfurled, committed to exposing the truth. John Slattery and Liev Schrieber, in smaller parts, play well their roles as overseers.

Neal Huff and Michael Cyril Creighton are very impressive in their scenes as they explain grooming and child sexual abuse. It should be said that it is these references, and this subject matter, that gives this film a rating of 15 in the UK. It should also be said that these issues are discussed, but not shown.

Mark Ruffalo and Liev Schrieber seem to have gone to some trouble to adopt distinctive accents that surprised this reviewer when first hearing them. Thankfully, the distinctive voice of Stanley Tucci was easily spotted, as he himself was not. He plays a campaigning lawyer who looks a little worn-down and unkempt, perhaps even in need of a haircut, which is why he is a little difficult to spot. Billy Crudup and Jamey Sheridan also play lawyers and Paul Guilfoyle also has a small role.

Since the birth of Jesus Christ two thousand years ago, for the first one and a half thousand years there was only one Christian religion. In the last five hundred years the Catholic, or Roman Catholic, Church has still been the premier Christian religion. The church proclaims itself a church of sinners, but it's adherents were shocked to discover that so many, had sinned so much. For many, discovering the extent of sin within, to be precise; the extent of child sexual abuse by priests, and the cover-up by the hierarchy, has sickened them to their stomachs, and produced a crisis of faith. This is shown well in this film.

Although a solid film about a newspaper investigation, this is also a sombre film, but one with a spot or two of moments of black humour, surprisingly. It tells the tale of the exposure of the cover-up of child sexual abuse in Boston by priests, a story that the powerful church tried to keep the lid on, but that lid was lifted, and the story went around the world.

The story of powerful institutions using their powers at the expense of individuals, and then that power being broken by brave individuals, is one that often makes good material for a movie. This is certainly the case with regard to 'Spotlight'. The same themes are also at play in the excellent 'Concussion' and 'Trumbo', both of which deal with a single individual against a powerful institution, and both of which are worth seeing too. Those who like a good gangster film should know that the recent 'Black Mass' tells the story of the gangster Whitey Bulger, who was exposed as a protected FBI informer by the Spotlight investigation team of the Boston Globe.

'Spotlight', which also won an Oscar for Best Original Screenplay, tells an important and true story, that is one that is well worth seeing. 10/10.

Competing Bolivian Presidential candidates hire competing campaign teams and spin-doctors from the USA. This was the true scenario for a 2005 documentary made by Rachel Boynton. The documentary entitled 'Our Brand Is Crisis' has now inspired the making of this film of the same name. This reviewer has not seen that documentary and therefore will review this film solely on it's own merits. However, if the events in the documentary were similar to the fictional events in the film, then it was clear that this film deserved to get made.

The film opens with sound only and we quickly realize that someone is getting miked up for an interview. Then the vision comes on to reveal a very beautiful Sandra Bullock. She is asked to look back to earlier days, thus this film starts out like 'Up Close & Personal' (1996). However, rather than focusing on the media, this film concentrates on politics, but not so much the politicians, but rather the spin-doctors who operate the dark arts.

Two political campaigners, in reality public-relations people, want to recruit an expendable spin-doctor. Thus they approach Sandra Bullock's character, known as Calamity Jane because of her past failures. She is now retired, and has now gone hippie, and spends her time making pots. They attempt to recruit her to save the failing campaign of a faded and uninspiring candidate. More impressed with his good-looking opponent, she only agrees to help when it is revealed that her spin-doctor arch- enemy, played by Billy Bob Thornton, is working for the opponent.

The early Bolivian scenes are played mainly for laughs, as are some other scenes in the film. A chase is a standout hilarious scene. Some of the interplay between Miss Bullock and Mr Thornton is also very funny as well as clever and witty. Peter Straughan should be applauded for his screenplay.

However, the film is not all laughs by any means. Rather it is a drama, with some comedy, some of it black. Calamity Jane is really like a fish out of water in the early political scenes. However, an event, which will be immediately recognizable to many British viewers, as it mirrors a real-life event, brings the campaign to life, and Calamity Jane, as she chooses fear over love, thus takes the film down a different road than the UK reality. The reference to Niccolo Machiavelli, is not the only one in the film. Sun Tzu quotes are also thrown around as the political spin-doctors wage war in this intelligent and serious political drama.

Calamity Jane's candidate for President is played by Joaquim de Almeida. He plays an uninspiring, distrusted, and even despised, former President, attempting to get back into power. At the very least he seems to lack the common touch. Mr Almeida, in 'Only You' (1994), played a suave and sophisticated love interest. Here, Mr Almeida, as the presidential candidate, slowly starts to show some of that same charisma. However, his opponent, played by Louis Arcella, seems much more charismatic, (and looks rather like the footballer Maradonna btw). Both actors in their roles as presidential hopefuls seem authentic, so too the scenes of debates and meetings.

Bolivian-born actor Reynaldo Pacheco gives a breathtakingly good performance as a campaign worker. Zoe Kazan who played the title role in 'Ruby Sparks' (2012), Ann Dowd, and Anthony Mackie, all also give good support as members of the campaign team.

Sandra Bullock, renowned for her comedy and romantic roles, in 2013 starred in the space-drama 'Gravity'. Here her fans will love and hate in equal measures the character she plays in this entertaining and funny, but serious, political drama. It is said that politics is show- business for ugly people. Some politicians are acclaimed like rock- stars. However, the very best spin-doctors from half-way round the world, are sought after, like world-class footballers who are transferred between clubs and across continents for large sums of money.

Director David Gordon Green did not put a foot wrong in this very impressive film. The cast all gave tremendous performances. Sandra Bullock and George Clooney produced this film, but it is no vanity project, but rather a very serious political drama that builds to a very powerful and tense climax. The film thus entertains, informs, and educates, rather like the recent 'The Big Short' (2016), and all involved should be rightly proud of their work. 10/10.

This Paramount film tells the story of how the sub-prime crisis lead to a banking crisis and collapse in 2008, followed by a world-wide recession. As the trailers show, the tale is told by following a few odd-ball characters connected to the financial markets, who do not accept the orthodox perceived wisdom.

The story starts with Michael Burry a physically and socially handicapped fund manager who obsessively investigates the figures and numbers in the property market. We viewers are given explanations, via the fourth wall, that help us to understand the subject, whilst also being entertaining. We discover bankers have bundled up mortgages, called securitization, and then sold them, the derivatives, as assets. However these are bundled, and re-bundled, and include mortgages known as sub-prime. These assets were sold as AAA (triple A) but in reality were not. The sub-prime tranches (parts) diluted the AAA tranches. Michael Burry realizes this and invests (basically by betting against this) to earn money if there is a default. Others also discover this and also invest likewise.

Michael Burry, the odd-ball financial-whiz is played by Christian Bale. His character is not a normal Wall Street guy, physical deformity has made him socially awkward, so he spends all of his time in his office, crunching numbers, as he listens to loud rock music.

Sadly, the loud music, we also get some unnecessary rap music later too, detracts from the enjoyment of the film.

Another flaw of this film, and it is a massive one, is the appalling camera work. The use of the fourth wall, so characters can give viewers explanations, is essential for this film, and was done very well. No criticism of that. Or for some real-life stock-footage. It is everything else that is dire. The camera swoops and swings wildly and out of focus. The filming is at times very poor, often fairly poor, and thus this also makes for some very uncomfortable viewing. This film is interesting because of it's subject matter, but not for film quality. To see great filming, go and see 'The Revenant', also out in 2016. the comparison between the two films is night and day.

Christian Bale is very good in his role, losing himself in it, as he did in 'The Prestige' (2006), and also in 'American Hustle' (2013) in which he was unrecognizable. In the recent 'Black Mass' (2015) gangster film, Johnny Depp used fake contact lenses to portray Whitey Bulger's piercing light blue eyes. Christian Bale is not made up to show his physical handicap, which is a shame, as it thus makes less of it to us viewers. Certainly a rich fund manager could pay for top quality, and no doubt he did, but for us to see, and feel, his pain, a more physically obvious handicap would have been better. This is not to slight Christian Bale who acts well to show his physical handicap, and his resultant Dr Sheldon Cooper-like social awkwardness.

Steve Carell, who was excellent in 'Seeking a Friend for the End of the World' (2012), here plays another uptight banking figure who also becomes aware of the financial situation. In this film, Steve Carell actually has a much bigger role than Christian Bale. It is Mark Baum, played by Steve Carell, and his firm, who take us on the field-trips to Florida and Las Vegas, standout scenes btw, where we see the reality of the situation. Marisa Tomei, in a small role, plays well the part of the wife Cynthia Baum. Miss Tomei, so very recently in 'Christmas with the Coopers' (2015), here in a very different role, does some very moving scenes with Mr Carell.

Ryan Gosling, previously in 'The Place Beyond the Pines' (2012), plays Jared Vennett, who is also in banking. Although not the biggest of parts, his character is also one of the main players in the story, and it is through him that we are also told the story.

Brad Pitt too, has a small, but decent role, in this film. He is also a Producer too through his Plan B Entertainment. John Magaro and Finn Wittrock, in minor roles, play small-time fund-managers also involved in the story. Byron Mann shines in his one scene, as do Max Greenfield from 'New Girl' and Al Sapienza (Mikey Palmice from The Sopranos) in theirs.

This film tells a true and sorry story. Banks over-lent and over- borrowed, then they churned their assets. When the sub-prime market collapsed because of fraudulent over-lending, the contagion spread around the world. Sadly, there is no mention of the contribution President Bill Clinton and President George Bush made towards this.

Viewers should not be deterred from viewing by lack of financial knowledge. The film does it's best to explain matters in as simple a way as possible. This it does well, sometimes with some very visual examples. Thus we can grasp the general ideas fairly well and so understand the financial crash of 2008, the effects of which we are still feeling today. So this educational film is well worth seeing. It does have some humour too. Those who like comedy, and also desire a primer on the capitalist system, should dig out an old DVD of the classic 'Trading Places' (1983) which gives some explanation as to how markets trade in concentrated orange juice and pork bellies. Others may also enjoy the more recent 'Margin Call' (2011), which is a serious film that also deals with the same 2008 bank crash. 8/10.

An exciting trailer made 'The Revenant' a must-see film. The title required a search to understand it's meaning. Neither is required though before seeing this film. In fact viewers are best advised to avoid both. The trailer does in fact show too much, thus diminishing the level of suspense.

The film opens with the familiar icon and music of 20th Century Fox. The film itself is a Western, who's opening scenes shows a very wet and heavily-forested landscape that seems primeval and virtually unpopulated. White trappers are attacked by American Natives (formerly known as Red Indians, though that is geographically incorrect), and in attempting to escape, take a decision, that has momentous consequences. There follows a struggle to survive in the harsh and grim environment, which centres on one of the trappers.

The star of the film is Leonardo DiCaprio who plays the role of Hugh Glass. He is not just a trapper, but also appears to be a guide and hunter too. He is accompanied by his son, Hawk, played by Native American Forrest Goodluck, in a good debut performance. The son of white man Glass and a Red Indian mother, his character is thus a half- caste, and as such, viewed as alien by others. This harsh racist view of 'the savage' is shown well throughout the film, but American Natives themselves play several important roles within the film itself. One in particular, plays a role that will be easily recognized by those familiar with classic Westerns.

Some clever use of dreams and memories give some back-story, but not enough. Interjected, like scenes from the Sopranos, they are surreal and thus take you out of the picture somewhat. More sadly, they never give the back-story as to the circumstances of Hugh Glass meeting an Indian woman and them then having a child. Trapper Glass has a story of wanting to escape civilization and enjoy the silence of the wilderness. Sadly we do not experience it, because the other flaw in the film is the constant insertion of background music. Some, seems to fit in with the time-period appropriately, but there is far too much of lots of other music. More silence, as people trudged through the snow or trees split in the cold, and thus those sounds being caught, would have been better.

However, these two drawbacks, should not detract from what is a masterful piece of film-making by Director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu. From the earliest scenes we have innovative camera shots that pull us into the movie. The camera is used to present some great POV for us in some early fighting scenes, that really give us the effect of being there during the fight. This also continues in later parts of the film. Likewise, we can have the camera turning to show a character isolated in the wilderness, though never blurring as happens in so many other films, nor making us giddy either. There are also some very long tracking scenes, as well as some innovative filming from ground-level too. All-in-all, Director Alejandro Inarritu gives us a master-class in filming.

It should be said that the cast and crew of the movie were filming in very inhospitable locations for months. Conditions must have been very harsh, and all concerned should be very proud of the commitment and dedication required to do this. Leonardo DiCaprio, in particular should be applauded. He is in virtually every scene, thus his workload, and suffering, must have been more than that of the other thespians.

Playing opposite Leonardo DiCaprio, after he persuaded him to read the screenplay, is British actor Tom Hardy. Fresh from showing his acting talents playing both of the Kray Twins in 'Legend' (2015), here in 'The Revenant', he plays a rough tough experienced trapper. His 2012 outing as a hillbilly moonshiner in 'Lawless' showed his ability to authentically convince as an American, which he does again here in this film.

Captain Henry, the nominal leader of the trappers, is played by Domhnall Gleeson. His accent was good and he convinced in his role. In 2015 he had another serious role in 'Ex Machina', much different from his role in the rom-com 'About Time' made in 2013. British actor Will Poulter also did a comedy in 2013, 'We're the Millers', here in 'The Revenant' he too plays his part with distinction. A supporting-part that is a spot bigger and meatier than Domhnall Gleeson's, though both are good.

There is a clear intent to portray Native Americans authentically as well as sympathetically, thus we have use of subtitles for Pawnee as well as French, although the majority of the film is in English.

We are perhaps now seeing a revival of the 'Western' genre, after a long gap. 2014 saw a good and also gritty cowboy film called 'The Salvation'. 'The Revenant' is interesting because it shows an era, the era of the fur-trapper, that is an earlier era, and one that is rarely dealt with in the Western genre.

'The Revenant' has to be considered one of the finest pieces of film- making yet, both for cast and crew. The dedication required for filming in the harsh conditions, as well as the resultant piece of work, make it unrivaled. 8/10.

Over many years, small boys have ran away to sea seeking adventure, great books like RL Stevenson's 'Treasure Island' have been written, and in more recent times, great sea-faring movies have been made too. 'In the Heart of the Sea' is a new film that follows well in that great tradition.

This Warner Bros. film tells the true story upon which the famous novel 'Moby-Dick' was based. However, there is much more to this than just a story about a whale. We see, in grim detail in fact, the whaling- industry of the 19th century, both at port, and at sea. It should be clearly stated, that this film is not for the faint-hearted. Despite it's UK rating of 12A, this film shows in great detail, and gory detail, the bloody business of whale hunting. It is not unbearable watching. It can be watched, but it is not an easy watch at times. There is very little background music, but what there is, adds poignancy, perfectly, when needed.

The film is directed by Ron Howard who has made a bit of a speciality of filming true stories. His 1995 'Apollo 13' is rightly applauded as a masterpiece. He also did 'A Beautiful Mind' in 2001. More recently he directed 'Rush' (2013), a true story of car racing, that starred Chris Hemsworth. They have reunited for this sea-faring story. Mr Hemsworth, who was in 'Blackhat' (2015), once again gets to play an action hero. His character is an experienced sea-farer and whaler. He himself looks the part, and convinces as a physically strong, skilled, and tough seaman.

The film actually opens with a writer played by Ben Wishhaw trying to buy a story from an old sailor played by Brendan Gleeson. Incidentally, both appeared in another costume drama, 'Suffragette' (2015). Mr Wishhaw plays writer Herman Mellville, destined to write the famous book, Mr Gleeson is thus the narrator throughout the film. Ben Wishhaw has also appeared with Daniel Craig's James Bond in 'Skyfall' (2012) and 'Spectre' (2015), and pre-Bond, both appeared in an excellent gangster film 'Layer Cake' (2004). Benjamin Walker and Cillian Murphy also appear in our sea-faring story and both give strong performances as does young Tom Holland.

In the Ancient World, the cities of Rome and Greece needed olive oil as one of the essentials in their life. It was thus an important and core industry. Nowadays, we are concerned about the depredations caused by our own use of raw materials. However, that is nothing compared to the wholesale slaughter of whales that occurred in the 19th century. For men grew rich, as their businesses flourished, in the trading of whale oil. "To hunt a species to extinction is illogical" is stated in the anti-whaling 'Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home' (1986), a much lighter whaling story. At least, in this new whaling film, the men at sea are much less technologically advanced in their hunt. We see the hunting techniques, but also the dangers too, for the men were also facing life-threatening situations. At least in those days the two sides were more evenly matched.

This film is a true story of an oil industry that is now thankfully a thing of the past, but it is also more than that too, telling an exciting sea-faring adventure yarn too. As such therefore, it is suitable viewing for teenage boys, and their parents, can these days, rest assured, that they are unlikely to run off to sea. 10/10.

The team that brought us the 'Silver Linings Playbook' (2012) and 'American Hustle' (2013), have once again given us a solid film. This time they tell the true story of Joy Mangano, the inventor of the Miracle Mop, and her Italian-American family.

The film opens with the traditional icon and music of the '20th Century Fox' studio, but that is cut short as we embark on a weird and whimsical start to the film. The bizarre opening is a spot slow and at first appears irrelevant. We soon come to realize the significance of the opening.

Jennifer Lawrence plays the eponymous Joy. She lives in what seems a big house with her big family. These early family scenes show a modern, but chaotic, family. This reviewer found these scenes to be some of the most authentic filmed. I saw those scenes in the film, and I have seen almost exactly the same ones in real-life too. The real-life Joy Mangano is an executive producer of this film, thus we should conclude that the early part of the film, as well as the rest of the film, is sufficiently close enough to the truth for her satisfaction.

Joy was encouraged from her youngest days, but in her adult life, the early promise seemed to fail to materialize. Adult Joy seemed to be leading a hum-drum ordinary existence. Miss Lawrence, who previously, in 'American Hustle', played the dumb-blond bravely tackling the 'science-oven', here plays a sharp-minded innovator. Following a spillage, she has an epiphany, and invents the 'Miracle Mop'. Incidentally, it must be said what a pleasure it was, to see an actress wearing such authentically-looking soiled-clothing as Miss Lawrence does throughout this film. A good eye for detail was displayed there as well as in other parts of the film. Period-detail was good, both in the scenes, and as the characters aged. Family home-movies, and the TV, also gave authenticity. As did the well chosen music.

David O. Russell who previously brought us Silver Linings and American Hustle, once again brings together Jennifer Lawrence, Robert De Niro and Bradley Cooper as cast, as he directs, writes, and produces, 'Joy'. We have to assume that they are all happy working together as a team. They certainly work well together. There is a natural authenticity and believability about their performances. They are joined by a good supporting cast. For me, a stand-out supporting actor, was Edgar Ramirez. Miss Lawrence has to develop a many-sided complex character. But this is also somewhat true for Mr Ramirez too. He too has different sides to his character, which are pleasantly revealed throughout the film. Finally, young Isabella Crovetti-Cramp was perfect in her small part.

This film is not a drama about a couple of mentally-disturbed people just having a dance. This real-life story is a much more complex affair. It is a drama, with some humour and romance. There are interesting scenes as Joy first gives birth to her idea, then tries to develop it, and then make it a reality. The scenes where the idea is pitched, then the studio scenes, are nail-biting and poignant. Incidentally, the 20th Century Fox studio has it's very own small part to play in the story. The cut-throat business world is also shown well. As are the romantic scenes. Whilst not central to the story, the romance and family scenes, are rich and authentic, and round out the characters.

Despite a start and finish that were both a spot slow, 'Joy' is an excellent and solid film from the team that gave us the 'Silver Linings Playbook' and 'American Hustle'. Miss Lawrence is a joy as 'Joy', as is the film itself. For we audience members, the silver lining is that there is still much joy to come from this play-book. 8/10.

Previous Bond films have been recently screened on British TV, no doubt to coincide with the cinema release of the latest Bond film; 'Spectre'. So it is then that this reviewer has once again recently seen 'Quantum of Solace' (2008), and 'Skyfall' (2012).

'Quantum' had Mathieu Amalric playing a bad guy controlling a powerful organization, which amongst other things, had seized control of all of the water in a desert. The film was classic Bond, Mathieu himself was very good in his role. As he was in the Hitchcockian-like 'Love is the Perfect Crime' 2013.

'Skyfall' also had a powerful organization, this time headed-up by Javier Bardem. However, this organization was merely used by the camp rogue-agent Bardem, with his Mummy-issues, as his own private vehicle to exact his revenge. It had an excellent opening song by Adele, an interesting 'first-time' confrontation, and also some interesting origin back-stories. Despite this however, there was a distasteful 'spilt whisky' scene, that was alien to the Bond universe, and the recent TV showing, made me notice, what I had not picked up at the cinema showing; namely that the analysis of the Moneypenny bullet seemed illogical.

Thus fully prepped in the Bond universe, this reviewer was looking forward to a cinema visit to see the latest recorded exploits of Agent Bond, James Bond, in the newly released 'Spectre'.

The film is rated 12A in the UK, thus is suitable viewing for teenagers and older persons. It opens with the familiar MGM and Columbia icons but they are somewhat dark, perhaps to suggest the dark plot that will unfold. Most of the film is actually shot in a golden hue that no doubt is meant to suggest a classic Bond-era look and theme. Which it does, though for me that hue was just a spot too golden at times.

After the studio icons the film opens proper with a scene set in Mexico. Trailers have shown parts of this scene but they are not able to show the full majesty of the scene. It is set in Mexico, as it celebrates 'The Day of the Dead'. However it is not the colour or the garishness that catch the eye but rather the opening tracking-shot itself. Noticing it may take you out of the picture a bit, but it is perhaps one of the most impressive tracking shots ever filmed and you can only gawp at it in all it's majesty. It is a bravura piece of work by Director Sam Ramis, (who previously directed 'Skyfall'), comparable to the very best by Alfred Hitchcock or Martin Scorsese.

As the trailers show, Agent Bond claims that he was on holiday but it seems that rather he has gone rogue. He then proceeds through the rest of the film looking for people and finding them, going into buildings and then coming out of them. He travels the world doing this and much of the filming of this is very good. London and Rome in particular are two cities where many great iconic scenes and key locations are shown. The overall effect being of watching a glossy travel ad. Then there are the buildings. There seems to be almost a fetish about the buildings in the film. Buildings are approached, we seem them in all of their grandeur, they are entered, and we have a scene with tension building. However these scenes just go on far too long, there is no real tension, after which the building is easily and quickly exited. The entire film seems little more than a collection of set-pieces of entering buildings that are stunning for various reasons.

Why Bond looks for someone is never logically explained. How this leads to the next scene is also tenuous too. The action of James Bond's fellow agency members is not believable, realistic, or make sense. This also applies to members of other agencies, as well as to the members of the evil organization too.

Why Bond should look for these people he searches for, and why others should care if he finds them, is just unbelievable nonsense. This just went on and on, and was incomprehensible. After about a good half of this film, a couple of people walked out. I cannot blame them. This was such a stupidly written plot. There were some interesting plot twists but most could have been predicted before they happened. The chase scenes were rather unrealistic and as there was no real sense of a threat of danger, they were thus unexciting and uninteresting. By contrast, the fight scenes were brutal and good. There was a little humour, but like the action and the plot, these all seemed a little forced as if they were trying too hard, thus the overall effect was a little silly.

Of the actors, Daniel Craig was excellent as Bond. This Bond is now experienced and mature, with a hint of greying hair. He is also a spot cynical. It was a fine performance. Rory Kinnear, son of Roy, continues in the role he previously played in 'Quantum' and 'Skyfall'. Ralph Feinnes, Naomie Harris and Ben Whishaw also return to their 'Skyfall' roles. Andrew Scott is good in his role too. We get a very solid performance from Dave Bautista, and also from Lea Seydoux too.

The trailer for 'Spectre' suggested a spot too much action for my taste, in reality some of the talky scenes reminded me of 'Wacky Races' and 'Sons and Daughters', ( I will leave you dear reader, to try to spot which ones those were), and aching for more action instead of all of the exposition. The film opened and closed well, those scenes could not be bettered and as such are a fine tribute to all involved. However, sadly, most of the central core of the film was illogical and unbelievable, and confusing, thus frankly, ending up as boring.

OK. 5/10.

This film 'Suffragette' tells a fictionalized story that covers the main British events that occurred a century ago. Uk-born Writer Abi Morgan, has penned a work that introduces us at the start of the film to the fictional Maud Watts, a young working-class married woman living in east London. This is cleverly done. Young Maud works hard in a laundry and by a quirk of fate she encounters the suffragettes who are involved in a militant campaign for votes for women. Thus in this film Maud is our POV. As she encounters the issues, so do we in the audience.

The film is directed by Sarah Gavron and is mostly set in London and it's period detail is spot on. The real-life events cover the period of 1910-1914, in a fictionalized form.

The philosopher John Stuart Mill, as early as 1865, had spoken out in favour of womens suffrage. In reality in those days the state could not really be described as democratic. The great Reform Act of 1832, and other changes, had gradually increased the suffrage. More and more men were getting the vote, but women were not. In 1897 the National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies was set up and under it's leader Millicent Fawcett engaged in traditional methods of political campaigning. However, Emmeline Pankhurst believed a more militant and radical campaign was required and in 1903 set up the Women's Social and Political Union. Chaining themselves to railings for publicity, they also engaged in acts of violence against property, though not against people.

The response of the state was heavy-handed. Some of the actions of the state may appear exaggerated in this film, rated 12A in the UK. Viewers however, should be aware that in real-life women died in some of the events portrayed in the film. Law enforcement is seen through the eyes too of Inspector Arthur Steed. An Irishman enforcing the law, he sees parallels with Ireland. His exchanges with Maud Watts are rich with philosophical points. They both argue well and with some right on both their sides. Though with the policeman it is unclear if his positions are sincerely held, or merely made to serve his purpose. Whatever. These exchanges are intellectually interesting. However, this film is not about a debating society, but rather about the state suppressing law-breakers. How far the state can, or should, enforce it's will, is of course a matter of debate, and one that continues today. In the early 1980s, Bobby Sands was the first of a number of IRA prisoners, who died on hunger-strike, as part of a struggle for political prisoner status. A direct echo, of the same issue of the suffragettes.

The film shows clearly the lack of rights of women in that era. No votes for women, no equal pay too. The film shows the drudgery of working women, not just the lack of votes. At home and at work, they were ruled by men, and used by men. The film shows women's lack of rights within the family as well as their vulnerability to sexual exploitation and violence.

The acting of the cast is uniformly excellent. Young Maud is played by Carey Milligan. She is joined by Helena Bonham Carter (the great- granddaughter of Prime Minister Herbert Asquith) playing a middle-class role, and Anne-Marie Duff playing a working-class role. These three are the mainstay of the film, reflecting the issues and tensions well. The other central character of Inspector Steed is played by Brendan Gleeson, and as said earlier, he too is used to explore the complexities.

Smaller parts are also acted well by the supporting cast. There were good debut performances from Alan Michael Dodd and Grace Stotter. The famous Emmeline Pankhurst is played by the famous Meryl Streep. Characters who also contribute to the story are played by Annabelle Dowler, Finbar Lynch, Natalie Press, Adrian Schiller, and Ben Whishaw.

Whilst the suffragette story is told through the eyes of the fictional Maud, this does not detract from the story. As Maud encounters the suffragettes, then so do we. This fictional narrative device, is a very useful tool, for taking us on a journey through the story, that covers the main historical events. Thus whilst Maud and some of the other characters are fictional, in essence, the historical characters are true, and their story is true. As such therefore, this film is a worthy tribute to those who dedicated their lives to this struggle. Some also gave their lives for the struggle.

The film would have been better, and the film-makers would have been braver, and more honest, if Prime Minister Herbert Asquith had featured in the film rather than David Lloyd George. That aside, this film seems a genuine attempt to portray the story in all of it's complexities, and exploring all of the issues, in an even-handed way.

An educational film that informs us of what now seems like a completely different world. Not an easy view, but one that deserved to be made, and to be viewed.9/10.

As a small boy, this reviewer read with excitement about the exploits of the great French 19th century tight-rope walker Charles Blondin who crossed the 1,100ft Niagara Gorge, many times in fact. Growing up, I followed the exploits of the eponymous Lt. Theo Kojak patrolling the mean streets of Manhattan South in the 1970's TV cop series. In the late-1990s I was able to visit New York City.

There is much romance surrounding the Empire State building. In 1957 it was the setting for the romantic film 'An Affair to Remember' starring Cary Grant and Deborah Kerr. The 1993 film 'Sleepless in Seattle' starring Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan, is in truth, really little more than a reworking of that older film. Getting to the top of the building is hard work and takes a long time, and that is with using the series of lifts to get you there. At the top you discover that even a famous horse was there too.

By contrast the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center seemed a let down. Sure, they were an iconic sight, briefly seen in many movies such as 'Working Girl' (1988), and even functioning as a prop in 'Escape from New York' (1981). But the large, fast, and functional lifts, shot you up to the top of the building in no time at all. This all changed for me on Tuesday 11th September 2001. Watching live on the TV, I found the scenes almost impossible to believe. For many months it was difficult to accept the reality of what had happened. Now I am always happy to see a shot of the towers, such as in the opening sequence of HBO's TV series 'The Sopranos' (1999-2007), and would have preferred it to have been retained.

In this new film, 'The Walk' (2015), Director Robert Zemeckis, has penned a screenplay from the book 'To Reach the Clouds', that tells a true story of the early days of the Twin Towers. The story could be considered unbelievable, but this film is in fact a true representation of this astonishing story.

The film is narrated, thus giving us the audience the needed exposition. The early part of the film is set in Paris, France, and is cleverly filmed in a distinctive French-style. Innovative use is made of black-and white photography, subtitles and French-mime to help tell the story of a young street performer working the streets of Paris who uses mime and his juggling skills. His name is Philippe Petit, and in this film he is played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt. The era is the late-sixties, and this is shown well. Philippe himself is a self-proclaimed anarchist. He also has an ambitious dream which is accurately and authentically captured in this film. In 1968, at the age of 17, he reads about the building of the Twin Towers and resolves to walk from one tower to another on a tightrope stretched across the top of the towers.

Before that though we have a nice romance between Philippe and Annie, played by Charlotte Le Bon. We have too, in this film, Ben Kingsley playing the role of an old high-wire performer, teaching his protégé the ropes. We get believable and thoughtful performances from the star and the supporting actors. Philippe, in 1971, walks between the towers of the cathedral of Notre Dame, shown in this film, and in 1973, did a walk at the Sydney Harbour Bridge in Australia, though this is not in the film.

Now Philippe resolves to carry out his ambition at the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City in the USA. This is where the rest of the film is located. Philippe recruits his supporters and they plan their coup. There is a time-element here, as the Towers are nearing completion. Detailed planning is also required and equipment is needed too. It is determined that a 450LB cable will be required as well as a specially made 55LB 26ft balancing pole. The gap between the towers was 200ft, the height above ground 1,368ft. The coup was planned for 7th of August 1974, one week before Philippe's 25th birthday.

While the acting is good, and the contrast between Paris and New York is shown authentically, and cleverly, by the different styles of filming, it is the special-effects that make this film. This reviewer saw the 3D version of this film. It was one of the main draws of the film and it must be doubted that this film could have been made as authentically before now. The camera shoots up and down the Twin Towers as well as across the wire. It looks down at the wire, and then swoops down to the ground. The effect is truly breathtaking. The tension is there throughout the latter part of the film. There too, are you, on the wire, looking up, and down.

It is clear how dangerous and foolhardy was this coup that Philippe Petit attempted. Nowadays, he would be declared an adrenalin junkie. No doubt he was that. This attempt can now never be replicated. I had thought that the WTC should not have been built on. I was wrong. It is right that something bigger and better should be built. The human spirit should always strive to go onwards and upwards.

The Twin Towers of the World Trade Center remain, always, an iconic vision of New York City, as well as the indomitable symbol of soaring ambition, vision, and the spirit of humanity throughout the world. Now Philippe Petit and Robert Zemeckis have given it it's own magic and romance too.

Breathtaking! 10/10.

An FBI Agent played by British actress Emily Blunt takes part in a raid that exposes drug-cartel activity. She then volunteers to join a joint task-force planning to disrupt the cartel by 'shaking the tree'. Other members of the task-force include Josh Brolin and Benicio Del Toro.

The trailer for the film looked promising, and the trailer is an accurate representation of the early scenes in the film. However, this action film is unbelievable as an accurate portrayal of the 'war on drugs'. Having said that, when assessing how the 'war on terror' was conducted, perhaps the film scenario cannot be completely ruled out. This would certainly have been a more accurate film if the cartel and the drugs were not in the film and it had just been a straight war film based on the 'war on terror'. If this is a true representation of the 'war on drugs', it is clear why that war is being lost. Those fighting the 'war on drugs', in this film, are plain stupid. The 'shaking of the tree' tactic, adopted at the start of the film, is bad enough. However, when the 'grand strategy' is finally revealed, it is laughable in it's simplicity and stupidity.

The film itself consists of a number of scenes, each of which, whilst engaging enough in themselves, do not logically link up in any real way. The original scene is merely a McGuffin that is used to get the characters together and bears no relation to the following scene which is in the trailer. Then there is the bus scene, which again seems to have no connection with anything else. The bar-scene is unnecessary and the following scene is unbelievable. Most of the following scenes also seem unbelievable too.

One saving grace for this film is that while this year's (2015) recent 'Solace' was a good story that was very badly filmed. 'Sicario' is a bad story, that at least is very well filmed. There is an authentically filmed night scene, however I have to admit that I just found it boring. On the other hand, one standout scene is the aerial film- shoot of the border. This was clearly a labour of love for Cinematographer Roger Deakins and interestingly shows that 'Donald Trump's Wall' is already partially built. There are also many vivid scenes of majestic mountains and run-down towns.

The actors do their best. Miss Blunt acts her part well, showing much believable emotion. However, sadly her character is not believable. Her joining the task-force and going on the first mission is not believable. It takes her character an hour to realize what I realized at the start of this film. The film is shot from her POV, but the plot is so obvious that there are few, if any, surprises.

Benicio Del Toro is a quiet brooding presence. Apparently, he requested, and got, a lot of his dialogue deleted. Good job too. Sadly though, again we have a completely unbelievable character. His back-story is meant to explain how he got to where he is. It merely contradicts. His actions in this film totally contradict the back- story. I was always expecting so much more from his character, but I got zilch. Nothing. There was just nothing to his character. However, when Mr Del Toro has some decent material to work with, he can give a very fine performance, such as his so well-rounded character in the drama 'Things We Lost in the Fire' (2007).

2007 is also the year that Josh Brolin appeared in two drug-themed films, 'No Country for Old Men' and 'American Gangster' so this is familiar territory for Mr Brolin. In 'American Gangster', Josh played an abrasive cop with an easily discernible character. Here though, in 'Sicario' his character is much more laid-back and subdued, reminding me of John Malkovitch in 'Ripley's Game' (2002). Josh Brolin's career can be said to have peaked, and he reached the summit, in his fine performance in the recent 'Everest' (2015).

British actor Daniel Kaluuya plays well his small part as an FBI Agent. However, Maximiliano Hernandez and Kim Larricho played two minor characters that we saw far too little of. What little they did, they did well. However, I am left thinking how much better this film would have been if their character-roles were much more central to the plot.

Director Denis Villeneuve and Writer Taylor Sheridan have delivered up an unbelievable film and story. If it were true to life it would be a massive indictment of the 'war on drugs'. However, it is rather a massive indictment of poor and unbelievable story-telling. Action after action, and scene after scene, are just not believable. These things just would not happen. As improbability piles on top of improbability, perhaps people should just accept this as a silly action film.

To see a much better film about drug-cartels, with real rounded three-dimensional characters, go and get a DVD of Arnold Schwarzenegger in 'Collateral Damage' (2002), or the more recent 'End of Watch' (2012) starring Jake Gyllenhaal and Michael Pina.

I thought 'Sicario' might have been a decent action film. Sadly, it just turned out to be unbelievable rubbish.

Avoid! 5/10.

Elizabethan play-write William Shakespeare staged plays of great historical events. Necessarily limited by the stage-setting, these were the masterpieces of carefully crafted words and speeches that we now consider as Shakespearian English. Thus this reviewer considered the film version of Shakespeare's Scottish play as perhaps being too wordy and stagey to go and see. However, I was beguiled by the trailer, that seemed to suggest lots of action and battles. Alas, this was not to be. However, this dull, but worthy product, is a fine showcase for Shakespeare, Scotland, and the performing thespians of the film.

This Scottish-themed film does open up on the battlefield. There are some interesting scenes as the warriors prepare for battle and the battle itself is shown well. (A later battle also has some interesting two-sworded battle scenes). During the battle, witches appear, and make a prophecy about the King of Scotland. The film tells the story of an attempt to fulfil the prophecy and of the aftermath of that attempt.

The male lead is played by Michael Fassbender and the female lead playing opposite him is Marion Cottilard. They are superb in their roles and must have actually suffered hard for their craft. Location shooting for the film was in the Isle of Skye in Scotland. This reviewer has paddled in water there, and can assure readers that even in the height of summer, it is like putting your feet into buckets of ice. Yet, we have Mr Fassbender in water in a scene, and Miss Cottilard, far from her native France, is seen scampering about barefoot and lightly dressed. Bravo! it should be said that there is little sight of the summer in this story. There are many, many, scenes of bleak mountains and bogs and moorland. The climate is cold and wet, with swirling fogs often covering the rough terrain. The scenes are in fact very bleak and compare with those in the Viking film 'Valhalla Rising' (2009).

Elizabeth Debicki, who also appeared in this year of 2015 in 'Everest', here does a standout scene, as relevant to us now as it was in the era it was set in. Sean Harris, who like Michael Fassbender, also appeared in Prometheus (2012), here delivers a brilliant and powerful performance. There is a scene in the 1995 Scottish film 'Braveheart' where William Wallace is floored in shock when he encounters the English champion. Here, in this film, Sean Harris, similarly has his emotions plunged to the depths, more than once. His acting is superb throughout the film.

David Thewlis seems to have an ability to really inhabit his roles. The source material, (book), for the film 'Seven Years in Tibet' (1997) seems to show he got the part just right. So too, for his OTT role in the 2010 film 'Mr Nice' which again matched the source material in the book of the same name. In this year of 2015 though, his performances have seemed more subdued but still true to the source material. I found his portrayal in 'Legend' to be fascinating. Here, in this film, he takes a part and makes it very believable. The part he plays is very like one today and he seems to play it like that too. There are some obvious differences too in that role of course, but that is the essence of the plot of this Scottish film.

We also get good supporting roles from Paddy Considine, David Hayman and Jack Reynor.

Much of the location shooting is on the Isle of Skye in Scotland, though I did spot Bamburgh Castle too. Ely Cathedral is also featured. The cathedral scenes are spectacular as are the castle interiors, however the bulk of the film is shot in realistically grim surroundings. Our thespians spend most of their time wallowing in blood and mud, and the climate and terrain are both as gloomy and grim as the storyline. The use of hand-held cameras does detract though. As do some of the special-effects that take us out of the moment.

This film is a good introduction to Shakespeare and his Scottish play. Political students can learn lessons from this story today, just as they can from 'I Claudius'. For those interested in the subjects of assassination, conspiracy, politics and statecraft, then the writings of the Renaissance Florentine statesman and writer Niccolo Machiavelli may also be of interest.

This film of the Scottish play serves as a good way to engage a modern audience and as such has been a worthwhile project. 9/10.

This Twentieth Century Fox film opens on the planet Mars. A crew is working there but they have to leave in a hurry and thus accidentally leave behind one of the crew, the eponymous 'Martian' played by Matt Damon.

A major storm forced the rapid departure but Matt Damon's astronaut suffers an accident and his life-support systems show he is dead, thus the reason he is left behind. If he were dead, this would be a very short film. However, the film, 'The Martian', is 141 minutes long, (2hrs and 21mins), and as the trailers show, Astronaut Damon is alive and thus destined to be 'The Martian'. Alive, through a quirk of fate, Astronaut Damon realizes that he will soon die from starvation except if he can utilize fully his botany skills and Earth mounts a rescue mission.

On Earth, Astronaut Damon is declared a hero, and a funeral is held. Things though quickly change when a lowly tech worker, played by Mackenzie Davis, discovers the reality. The scenes with Miss Davis on the floor of Mission Control are well done. The excellent Chiwetel Ejiofor is brought in as the story develops, as are Jeff Daniels, playing NASA head Teddy Sanders, and Sean Bean. Donald Glover too, gives an authentic performance as a bright computer geek and mathematician.

Jeff Daniels has the hard role of playing the boss who has to play politics, play the long game, all the while playing the numbers, and most importantly playing safety first always. He does this well enough to arouse empathy and understanding in his position. Sean Bean's character is perhaps easier to play. He is compassionate, honourable and noble. The two instruct a rescue-mission. Benedict Wong plays well the engineer asked to meet impossible 'Scotty-style' deadlines. There is a little humour here in this, as there is in much of the rest of the film too.

Unaware of any of this, are the crew of the Martian expedition, who are now sailing home back to Earth. Aksel Hennie, Kate Mara and Sebastian Stan are good in their roles as crew members. The pilot who had to blast off from Mars is played with great humanity by Michael Pina. Those who fell in love with his character in 'End of Watch' (2012), will be happy to know that once again he plays a really warm and human character. Jessica Chastain plays the Captain who had to order take-off. Her character is responsible for the Seventies disco-music used throughout the film to such great effect, especially in the scene which uses the song that started an era.

It is good to see both Miss Chastain and Mr Damon in this film. They have both also appeared in 'Interstellar' (2014). The appearance of Mr Damon in that film was actually one of the highlights. 'Interstellar' actually, was a disappointment. An interesting dystopian start, and perhaps too brief sojourn to the planets, was marred, ruined in fact, by a dreadful last third of the film. However, here, in 'The Martian', we have the film that 'Interstellar' could have been, and should have been.

While praise is due to all the cast, in reality they play small roles in this film. Matt Damon has to shoulder a lot of the burden in this film. His performance is in fact a tour-de-force. Facing death, he records his thoughts for posterity, using cameras, thus also supplying us, the audience, with explanation and exposition.

As said, this is not Matt Damon's first trip into space. As well as the aforementioned 'Interstellar' in 2014, in the previous year of 2013, Mr Damon also appeared in another exciting SF story, 'Elysium', which also had some hard social comment in it too. Nothing new for Mr Damon, 'Promised Land' (2012), was a serious film that tackled a serious issue. However, the talented Mr Damon can also deliver a performance that balances romance and comedy, as in his role as a suave but bad-French-speaking character, in the true story 'The Monuments Men', a film that perfectly balanced humour and seriousness.

'The Martian' is directed well by Ridley Scott. The 3D version shows well the Martian scenery, basically massive mountains and wide sandy valleys. The scenes in space are perhaps some of the most breathtaking and gripping. Drew Goddard's screenplay comes from Andy Weir's book.

Those of you who enjoyed seeing Tom Hanks have a problem in 'Apollo 13' (1995), will recognize a similar NASA and similar themes. So too, those Sandra Bullock fans, who were wowed by her performance in 'Gravity', will also find familiarity. If you liked those films, you will enjoy 'The Martian' too. Perhaps not the most action-packed film, it is after all basically about one man alone on a big planet, the film does build up the excitement and the tension as it heads to it's climax. The last couple of scenes could be described as an unnecessary anti-climax, however as they play out, you realize why they are there.

Top marks for a top film! 10/10.

After a dreadful Summer, this reviewer is willing to watch any half- decent film, if the trailer appeals. Sadly, the trailer for this film showed too much. As did the film. The camera was constantly spinning and swinging, thus spoiling viewing. The movie was filmed like a cheap horror movie that viewers may see on late-night cable channels. It is without doubt the worst-filmed movie that I have ever seen in a cinema.

As story opens, we realize a killer is loose. As the trailer shows, the gimmick of this film is that Anthony Hopkins, who played Dr Hannibal Lecter, (Hannibal the Cannibal), in 'The Silence of the Lambs' (1991), here is playing a good guy. The other gimmick, is that both he, and the killer, have ESP. This was a good premise, but the film played out as a rather predictable, and derivative, by the numbers story.

'Solace' has a UK rating of 15, and the horror-style of filming, had the audience gasping at some of the more gory scenes. Further gasps were caused by a couple of clever twists. Sadly, much more was rather predictable. One highlight of the film was the choice of music. The choice of music early on in the film is sublime. Firstly, when Anthony Hopkins, in the country, starts taking an interest in the case, and secondly, when he is walking along the street after arriving in the city. Other music also adds to the excitement in scenes throughout the film.

Jeffrey Dean Morgan and Abbie Cornish play FBI Agents trying to track down the killer. Mr Morgan recently played a horrible and memorable villain in the Western 'The Salvation' (2014). Both Mr Morgan and Miss Cornish have emotional scenes, which they play well. Kenny Johnson, familiar from 'The Shield' TV series, (2002-2006), is also good in a small part.

Director Afonso Poyart must take the blame for this badly filmed movie. There are car-chases with takes so fast that they are like a blur, and the viewer has no real idea what is happening. Overall, the movie is filmed like a cheap horror movie. There are one or two clever flourishes, but on the whole, it is just uncomfortable viewing.

The film does raise an interesting moral question but it never answers it. The subject-matter actually leaves a bit of a sour taste in the mouth. The story was written by Ted Griffin and the screenplay by Sean Bailey. Both Mr Bailey and Sir Anthony Hopkins were Executive Producers. As said, the interesting opening premise, sadly does not live up to it's promise.

No doubt, there may be some who have taken drugs, who will enjoy the spinning camera work. For others though, they may wish the drugs they took were travel-sickness pills, or maybe just took a sick-bag. Those familiar with Director Paul Greengrass's 'Captain Phillips' (2013), and Director Anton Corbijn's 'A Most Wanted Man' (2014), are warned that this film 'Solace' is a much more badly filmed movie. 6/10.

As a small boy I remember seeing Spencer Tracy and Robert Wagner in the film 'The Mountain' (1956). Perhaps inspired, I enjoyed climbing trees and walls, and hanging off them, but not falling off them. I later graduated to do some hill-walking but nothing more adventurous than that. Thus, I have always had an interest in climbing films, but have avoided any recent films about chopping off ones own arm. My first thought about this new film 'Everest' was to avoid it as I had thought it set in 2014. However, the trailer looked exciting and good, and when I discovered that the film was not set in 2014, I decided to give it a go. The film is in fact set in 1996 and is a true story.

Named after Sir George Everest, Mount Everest is the highest mountain in the world, at 8,844m or 29,017ft of rock, with varying levels of ice upon that. The peak is actually in the stratosphere, thus exposing it to the jet-stream, and air-pressure is a third that of sea-level thus reducing the availability of oxygen. Winds can also reduce the oxygen by a further 14%. Above 8,000m or 26,000ft, is known as the death zone. In that zone you are actually dying all the time, sometimes slowly, sometimes quickly. Most deaths occur after summiting. There are 150 dead bodies lying on the mountain.

Thus climbing Everest is hard. Each Spring and Autumn there is a 7- 10 day window of lighter winds due to the start or end of the monsoon. Winter is cold and windy, and Autumn has the fresh snow from the Summer, thus Spring is the best time for climbing.

'Everest', a Universal Pictures film, is set in the Spring of 1996, and tells the true story of rival adventure companies trying to summit Everest. Adventure Consultants was led by Rob Hall and Mountain Madness was led by Scott Fischer. Both guides ran commercial companies that organized fee-paying climbing trips for clients.

Director Baltasar Kormakur had previously directed '2 Guns' a standard action-buddy-comedy film. Here though, he takes this true story and directs and shoots it magnificently. Some scenes were shot in Italy but others were shot in Nepal, including those shot at the South Base Camp of Everest. We see the clients arrive at the airport in Nepal, then travel from the hustle-and-bustle of the city up into the hills. An aerial shot up a valley gorge with bridges crossing it, is merely the first of many great shots. There were many others too. Watching the 3D version, you can see down crevasses, and round, and down, the sides of the mountains. The overall effect is of one huge landscape of rock carved by nature, and covered by rocks, snow, and ice.

John Clarke, who earlier this year played the legendary John Connor in 'Terminator Genisys', here takes on the role of Rob Hall. Curiously in both films he was a replacement for Christian Bale. Christian's loss is John's gain, and ours too, as he convinces in his role as the mountain guide.

Rival guide Scott Fischer is played by Jake Gyllenhaal, now highly regarded following such films as 'Source Code' (2011), 'End of Watch' (2012), and 'Nightcrawler' (2014). Here too, Jake makes his part a fully-rounded character.

Ingvar Eggert Sigurdsson plays guide Anatoli Boukreev and Michael Kelly plays client Jon Krakauer. Of other clients; Josh Brolin, son of James Brolin, first caught my eye for his strong performance in 'American Gangster' of 2007, he also did 'No Country for Old Men' in that same year. Here Josh plays Beck Weathers, an outstanding performance, as too was that of John Hawkes playing Doug Hansen.

Elizabeth Debicki, Emily Watson and Sam Worthington, play characters at base camp. Keira Knightley and Robin Wright play wives. Miss Wright is Peach Weathers and Miss Knightley plays Jan Arnold the wife of Rob Hall. Jan and Rob met and climbed a mountain for their first date, and in 1993, three years before this film was set, they had both summited Everest. Miss Knighley, who was recently in 'Begin Again' (2013), and in 2014 also appeared in 'Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit' and 'The Imitation Game', here in 'Everest', once more delivers a strong and emotional performance.

The dangers faced by the climbers is best exemplified by a short night-scene at base-camp. There is a hedonistic party with much camaraderie. However the next day these same people could be walking past one another, one surviving, and one dying. This atmosphere of life on the edge is caught well in the film. As too, are the issues regarding commercialization, competition, and other controversial issues. For those interested in further examining these issues, there are three different books that have been written about this Everest story.

An emotional rendering of a true story. 10/10.

There have been major criminals in London over the years. However, only two groups of criminals have ever become iconic, legendary and mythic. One lot were 'The Great Train Robbers' whose one big crime and long, long, aftermath, gave them immortality. The other lot were 'The Krays', a gangster family who were the closest British thing to the Mafia, and who comported themselves throughout their lives in such a way, that they created their own legend. Hence the title of this film. The Krays and the Trainrobbers have influenced crime in London ever since, be it culturally, or in the actuality, in other gangs such as the blaggers of the 1980's.

'The Krays' (1990), was a decent gangster film that starred real- life pop-star brothers Gary Kemp and Martin Kemp. Fairly accurate, it suffered from being shown from the POV of Violet Kray, the mother, and thus had women making speeches about swans and other nonsense.

Therefore this reviewer looked forward to this new version of the story, especially as it was said to be based on John Pearson's book 'The Profession of Violence, The Rise and Fall of the Kray Twins'. An added attraction was the actor Tom Hardy being in the film. The earlier film had used twins to play the twins, an obvious move, now in retrospect an even more obvious idea was used. In this film Tom Hardy plays Reginald Kray, and Ronald Kray is played by Tom Hardy.

Director Brian Helgeland who also wrote the script based on the book, had attempted to recruit Mr Hardy to play Reggie. However he was much more interested in playing Ronnie. The obvious solution was found!

What was of concern, was the information put out, that the film was to be narrated in the voice of Frances Shea, the wife of Reggie. And so, sadly, it turned out to be. From the opening scene, we have an awful narration. It is so inappropriate! It turns the film into a hagiography. We even have some cod-Marxist class analysis as well as lots of pathetic loved-up philosophical meanderings. Thus the film is transformed from what could have been a good gangster film into a love story. If Frances Shea had declared that there were three people in her marriage, it would have fitted in well with the overall tone.

Film is set accurately in the London of the Swinging Sixties in which the Krays were an integral part. This is shown well. Sadly lacking from this film, is a Scorsese- like soundtrack, that captures the music of the era. Location shooting was generally good as were the period details. However, the real-life Blind Beggar pub exterior, is much grander, and more prominently located on a main street. The stand-in is stuffed down a street so little, it looks like an alley.

Tom Hardy is superb in his two roles. Ronnie is truly terrifying. Reggie too, carries menace. Mr Hardy's appearance as both brothers is very good. Those familiar with the iconic photos will be amazed at the likeness. Scenes with both brothers was part of the attraction of the film. These scenes are all shot superbly. Mr Hardy convinces in each role and is the embodiment of each twin. Recollection of a short interview long ago of the twins, suggests that Mr Hardy has captured their voices well too.

If the narration of Frances Shea is bad, her portrayal by Emily Browning is superb. A brilliant and moving performance. Most of the film deals with the relationship of Frances and Reggie. Frances, so fragile, is stifled by the gangster life. Reggie is torn between his love for Frances and for his brother Ron too. Frances wants Reggie to go straight. Ronnie models himself on Al Capone. Reggie is torn between the two.

As this film concentrates on the love angle, it is not really much of a gangster film. Rated as 18 in the UK, it actually has less bloody violence than the recent 'American Ultra' which has a UK 15 rating. 'Legend' does have three violent and bloody fight scenes. About half of the events in the Kray story are in this film, though often needlessly fictionalized, and chronology is not good. As film progresses you wonder what is going to be left out. As you finally assume something is left out, it's popped in. The fictionalization is often so unnecessary. For example, the early scene leaving the hospital is just so less interesting than what happened in real- life.

This should have been an ultra violent gangster film that showed the violent world of the Krays. The violence in the film is downplayed thus making it nicer and more entertaining. A major flaw!

It was an interesting idea to make this a film about Frances Shea. However this follows the earlier film about Violet Kray. Sure, both women played an important part in the lives of the twins. However this is not the most interesting aspect of the lives of the twins. In this film the differences between the twins is emphasized. However, their similarities is another aspect that deserves attention. Most of all, we are still in need of a definitive Kray gangster film.

There is not enough use made of the John Pearson source material. In fact, much has been fictionalized and rewritten. A shame! The Pearson book is considered the definitive work. He was hired to write an authorized biography which morphed later into it's more revealing shape. Charlie Kray's second edition of his own book is more revealing than the untruthful first edition. Leonard Reed has also collaborated with James Morton on a book.

However, for a final comment about the violent and feared Kray Twins, the book by Frank Cater, tells the story of a terrified girl trying to escape a car and screaming "You're not from Scotland Yard! You're from THEM!

A diabolical liberty! 7/10.

Kristen Stewart made her name in the 'Twilight' saga, Twilight (2008), in which she played Bella, a sad emo or goth girl, who was rather socially excluded until she met her boyfriend. However her romance was complicated by her boyfriend being a vampire, a competing boy being a shape-shifting wolf, and their respective tribes of vampires and wolves also adding to the mix.

Miss Stewart has now escaped all that nonsense and now in 'American Ultra' she plays Phoebe, the girlfriend of an ordinary boy, played by Jesse Eisenberg. After an unnecessary brief opening scene, we find that boy and girl are somewhat socially withdrawn, drugged-up and loved- up, druggie stoners. These early scenes seem rather sad, as do the scenes when Mr Eisenberg's character is struggling to cope with his life. We also see his work-life. He has a rather dead-end job, working in a general store, but he is a conscientious worker, who knows his product range, and takes pride in his stock-control and stock-rotation.

However all is not as it seems. The CIA are lurking in the background too. It soon transpires that we are in fact in the 'Bourne' universe of 'The Bourne Identity' (2002), and that ensuing saga, of a super-spy with no memory, and competing and rogue spy groups. However, 'American Ultra' is a spy-spoof, a spy comedy on this 'Bourne' theme.

As such 'American Ultra' compares well with the similarly themed 'Spy' of earlier this year. However whilst 'Spy' may be described as being aimed at an adult audience, 'American Ultra' is much more suited to young adults. The young couple, Miss Stewart and Mr Eisenberg, give good performances, acting well, particularly in the more emotional and poignant scenes. The earlier romantic scenes seemed irritating, although also rather realistic, and sad. However the audience, certainly this reviewer, found a growing attachment to them and their relationship. A sad slow start, too, soon gave way to an entertaining and funny film.

There were also some good supporting roles too. Connie Britton gives a solid performance as a spy operative. Walton Goggins plays well his over the top character. Familiar, for his great performance as Shane in the TV series 'The Shield' (2002), it should also be noted, that appropriately enough, he also appeared in 'The Bourne Identity' (2002). There is also a small appearance by John Leguizamo, always worth seeing, ever since his explosive appearance as Benny Blanco (from d'Bronx) in 'Carlito's Way' (1993).

'American Ultra' is rated as 15 in the UK. An action-comedy, it is light on the comedy, but heavy on the violence. There are some entertaining fight scenes, one reminded me of Jason Statham, as well as a lot of bloody violence too. Some scenes were reminiscent of the bloody violence shown in 'The Wild Bunch' (1969) and 'Killing Them Softly (2012).

Whilst being a play on the 'Bourne' theme, 'American Ultra' also has a plot that reminds you somewhat of 'Three Days of the Condor' (1975) and 'The Crazies' (1973). Plus there are also a couple of shots, one of which reminded me of 'Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit' (2014), and another which is an iconic, and now also clichéd and oft-repeated, scene from '48 Hrs.' (1982).

Film ends with a final scene, that like the first one, I thought at first was unnecessary. However the scene ends well and fittingly, as did the entertaining end-credits.

Not many laughs, but is entertaining. 9/10.

'The Legend Of Barney Thomson' is the feature film debut of Robert Carlyle as Director. Bobby was born in Maryhill Glasgow and thus was able to give an authentic touch to this Glaswegian crime-comedy. He has also gathered a great cast of fellow actors, many of whom he has worked with previously.

Ever since he exploded onto the screen, in the TV series 'Cracker', Bobby has been an acting legend! Thus it is appropriate, that as well as directing 'TLOBT', he also plays the eponymous legend. However, as the film opens, the 'legend' is really a most unimpressive figure. In fact, he is rather pathetic! He is an ageing single man, with no friends, and no patter. Thus, life is passing him by as he plys his trade as a barber. Even in the work, he is unpopular, thus the wimpish Barney faces an uncertain future. His destiny victim to any twist of fate that may befall him.

This film is essentially a comic version of a cop show. Glasgow was the setting for many years of a TV cop show called 'Taggart'. Bobby's first acting credit was on that show. So it is entertaining then, that the format of Glaswegian cops hunting down murderers, is here played for laughs.

Real-life hard-man Ray Winstone, (well real-life hard-boy, he did box with the famous Repton Boxing Club), has acted with Bobby Carlyle before in the cops-and-robbers crime film 'Face' (1997). Ray has gone on to play some memorable villains such as in 'Ripley's Game' (2002) and 'The Departed' (2006). In 2012 he played the famous Detective Inspector Jack Regan in 'The Sweeney'. Here in 'TLOBT' he essentially plays the same character, though this time for laughs. A cockney marooned in Glasgow, he methodically conducts his sterling Regan- like police-work, all the while offering pleasantries and home-spun philosophy.

Emma Thompson got her first big break in the 1987 TV series 'Tutti Frutti', where she played along side star Robbie Coltrane (who also starred in the 'Cracker' TV series), and Maurice Roeves and Richard Wilson. 'TF' was a comedy set and filmed in Glasgow. Here, in 'TLOBT', Miss Thompson once again returns to Glasgow for a comic role. She plays Barney Thomson's mother and does so authentically. Never before, has she looked more horrible, or acted so well or so convincingly. It would be wrong to say that many of the women in Glasgow are like Barney's mum. However, many Glaswegians will find her character authentically familiar. She looks and sounds the part!

Casting for 'TLOBT' is universally good. There is authenticity here with accents that was sadly lacking in the recent serious Glasgow gangster film 'The Wee Man'. However, the two stars of that film; Martin Compston (a rising star), and Stephen McCole, both gave outstandingly tremendous performances. Here, in 'TLOBT', they both have small roles as two of Barney's fellow barbers. Incidentally, Mr Carlyle and Mr McCole, were both in 'Stone of Destiny' (2008). The great veteran actor James Cosmo also has a small part as another barber.

Other parts are also acted well, however Brian Pettifer, perfectly playing a wee wideo, and Matt Costello in the smallest of parts, were both outstanding, both in gritty realism, and for entertainment value.

This film is a crime-comedy and as such is very entertaining. The Q&A sessions between Bobby's Barney and Ray's cop were extremely funny. Bobby also did some funny physical comedy too. Because this is a crime-comedy it is of course cliché-ridden. In a straight crime drama, there are of course clichés of the genre, too many clichés though may spoil the drama. However, in comedy, the clichés can be used for entertainment and laughs and thus we can never get enough of them. In this film, there are one or two very clichéd scenes. Seeing them coming, means that they can be savoured to their full extent as they play out. However do be warned, although this is a comedy, it is a black comedy about murder. Some of the violence is both bloody and realistic. Hence why the UK certificate is 15.

Robert Carlyle as Director has a good eye for detail. Film appears to be set in about the seventies. Period detail seems good. There are lots of beiges. To give an authenticity to the filming, it seems to have been done with a brown tinge, rather like the recent 'Mr Holmes'. Thus like that film, I found the lighting a spot dark for my liking at times. Filming is good, with a good eye for detail. I particularly liked the scene where Barney is seen moving away as the lights go on. Fine attention to detail there! In playing the wimp- like Barney, Robert Carlyle gets some close-ups of his face. This may be a comedy, but we also see some tortured looks of Barney in a more serious mode, reminiscent of the iconic close-up shots of Bob Hoskins in the 1980 'The Long Good Friday' gangster film.

There were iconic scenes of Glasgow in the location shooting. The metal lifts, all so familiar! The Red Road Flats, The Barrowland Ballroom, Bridgeton Cross! Much of the filming seems to have taken place in the area around Glasgow Cross and the Gallowgate. This is of course highly appropriate as this film is a celebration of the gallus Glaswegian character.

Pure gallus! Pure dead brilliant! 9/10.

In 1984 a former Austrian body-builder appeared naked on the streets of Los Angeles and became a world-wide sensation. He had a magnificent physique and the Guinness Book of World Records described him as "the most perfectly developed man in the history of the world".

The reason for his nakedness was that he was acting in a film called 'The Terminator' (1984). His character was a robot, to be precise, cyborg, from a future where machines had been waging a war (of extinction) against humans. Robots, called Terminators, had been killing humans. The humans were fighting back, and were led by a great leader called John Connor. The machines developed a cunning plan to send a Terminator robot back in time to kill Sarah Connor before she gave birth to her son. Realizing the danger, John Connor decided to send a human back in time. Kyle Reese volunteered. The precise reason for all these people turning up naked on the streets of LA was that time-travel can only be accomplished naked.

This highly popular and successful film was followed by an equally well-received sequel 'Terminator 2: Judgement Day' (1991). That film was a little different and had the plot-line of killing John Connor, whilst he was still a boy. There is also a 'Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines' (2003).

Trailers for the new film 'Terminator Genisys' seemed to show that it was similar, to be precise, it had been tweaked enough to appear to be the same, but also different. It was on that basis that this reviewer decided to go and see the film, and so it turned out in practise. The trailer though, does commit a major blunder with a quite unnecessary plot-spoiler.

This film, in the 3D format opens with the Paramount icon. The plot is the same, The Terminator has gone back to 1984 to kill Sarah Connor and the mission of Kyle Reese is to go back to save her. He is warned that she is merely a timid waitress.

We are therefore in familiar territory as the naked bodies head off to be plopped onto the streets of 1984 LA. The filming here is very good because we have the old story combined with the new. It is not clear what is old and what is new. Filming is good throughout the movie. The 3D effects are good, I was once startled enough to actually sit up/jump up in my seat. All other special-effects were good too.

Once again Arnold Schwarzenegger, for it is he, plays the role of the robot. It may be wondered if he is too old for the role, but that is clearly not so. He is older now, yes, but this has meant that he can, and does, exhibit pathos, in some emotional and poignant scenes.

British actress Emilia Clarke plays the role of Sarah Connor. She shows great emotion, is fearful, and feisty. She convinces that she is just as tough as Sarah Connor, as Linda Hamilton was in the first film. She looks the part. It is not a plot-spoiler, so I am happy to reveal, that the 'Big Hair' of the 1984 original film is, thankfully, not on show in the new film.

Jai Courtney plays the role of Kyle Reese in the new film. Again he is played a little differently than in the original.

Of other actors, Byung-hun Lee plays a robot every bit as menacing as that played by Robert Patrick in 'Terminator 2'. JK Simmons, in a small part, plays the role of a character who seems to know a little bit more than some others. JK Simmons is a veteran of the Law & Order TV series, as is Courtney B Vance, who also has a small role.

'Terminator Genisys' has a somewhat complex plot, as well as lots of science to confuse and dazzle us with. There are exciting scenes, I thought the bridge and helicopter scenes were especially so. Like previous films, there are many scenes of bodies flying through walls. There also some familiar one-liners, though some perhaps said in a somewhat different context than previously. There are some new lines that may become equally as iconic.

This time-travel film, is a film that enhances the original and enriches it. Certainly, those familiar with the older films will find their viewing enhanced and enriched but previous knowledge is not required to enjoy this film.

This film, clearly pays tribute to the original, and rightly so. After three decades, the original is still an iconic film, about an iconic character, played by an iconic actor. This new film is the same as the original, but also different. Some iconic lines are repeated, some scenes changed.

It is curious to note that James Cameron, who wrote and directed the first two Terminator films had originally wanted Big Arnie to play the human Kyle Reese. Wisely, Arnie asked to play the robot 'The Terminator' and thus a legend was born. To think about it now, it is laughable and ludicrous to imagine the roles reversed. If we look at their bodies, it is obvious that Arnie was born to play the robot/cyborg, it is the only way that this film would have worked. The alternative version: A super-human takes on a midget robot! LOL!

An exciting film, with great actors, and old familiar characters.

Once again Big Arnie delivers in his iconic role as 'The Terminator'.

Not bad for a retired Californian politician! Well worth seeing. 9/10.

This BBC film has an aged Sherlock Holmes, in failing health, living in retirement in the country, and trying to remember his last case.

Shakespearian thespian and British Knight, Sir Ian McKellen, plays well, and convincingly, the eponymous detective, both in his later years, and in flashbacks to his last case. The veteran actor had to prepare for the role by learning bee-keeping.

Mr. Holmes lives with a house-keeper and her son. New Yorker Laura Linney plays the house-keeper, fitting in well with the British thespians, and easily, and believably, conveys the circumstances of her character's situation as she interacts with both Mr. Holmes and her son.

The son is played by Milo Parker. His performance is just so breathtakingly superb that it is difficult to sum this up in words. Truly astonishing! Truly great!

Hattie Morahan shows great emotion in her small role, whilst Frances de la Tour's foreigner-role is so brief, but so good! There is a foreign element to the plot, apart from Miss de la Tour that is, that seems superfluous, however it turns out to be a nice sub-plot. The period-detail throughout the film is very good. Sadly, the film is marred by bad lighting and also blurry camera shots as the camera moves. This detracts, and distracts, but not greatly.

Despite it's UK rating of PG, this is not a film for children, but rather is more suitable for adults. There are moving and poignant scenes, and the film deals with matters of life and death. It is also necessarily slow, as the subject matter is the great detective in the Autumn of his years. 8/10.

A Universal film, the 3D version delights from the first appearance of the studio icon, right through to the end of the film.

'Jurassic World' is a film about a dinosaur theme-park set on an island. The 'Jurassic Park' (1993), of two decades earlier, is hinted at in 'Jurassic World'.

Film opens with an emotional and harassed mother played by Judy Greer. She is packing her boys off to go on holiday to the dinosaur theme-park. Miss Greer had a small part in the 2013 'Carrie' remake, though my favourite role of hers was in 'The Big Bang Theory' TV series.

Nick Robinson (not the BBC Political Editor) plays well the role of the elder brother. He is a surly teenager, uninterested and unreliable. His younger brother is played to perfection by Ty Simpkins. He is in fact a show-business veteran who has been performing since he was a baby, and it shows! He plays a small boy, who like all small boys, has bags of energy, and this is shown well. There are also emotional scenes which are done very well. The two boys feature heavily in the film.

The boys arrive at the island as the guests of their aunt (the sister of their mother). However, as she is the chief administrator on the island, and thus very busy, she places them in the care of a surly baby-sitter. Auntie Clare is played by Bryce Dallas Howard, daughter of Ron Howard. Her character is humourless and work-obsessed. She may not be the best auntie in the world, or the best boss, however her destiny is not that ridiculous dereliction of duty Dwayne Johnson acted out in the recent 'San Andreas'.

It is when the boys arrive at the hotel that we see some great scenes. John Ford's 'The Searchers', has that iconic scene of John Wayne inside the door-frame, as the door shuts. Here we have the opposite, as the hotel window opens, and we fly out of the window, to take in the park scenery. What a shot!

Jurassic World's Director is Colin Trevorrow. This is only the second film he has directed. The first, which I am very fond of, is a time-travel rom-com called 'Safety Not Guaranteed' (2012). It was written by Derek Connolly. The two also were producers. Here, they have collaborated with the screenplay. Also here from 'Safety,' is Jake Johnson, who is also familiar for his role in the 'New Girl' TV series. Here he plays a cynical and thoughtful technician.

The film itself is also cynical. There are a couple of clumsy product-placements. However this is balanced by what can only be described as a not too subtle indictment of capitalism. The best since 'Nightcrawler' (2014). This is seen in many scenes, but 'ride-boy' encapsulates this perfectly.

The theme-park wants to make money, thus to keep visitor numbers up, newer dinosaurs need to be introduced. Thus we have DB Wong, from 'Law & Order: Special Victims Unit' TV series, playing a scientist who is working on that. Earlier this year, Mr Wong played a manic gambler in the con-rom-com 'Focus'. Here he once again plays the role of a serious doctor.

Another Law & Order veteran, is also one of my favourite actors, Vincent D'Onofrio. Knowledge of his appearance, was decisive in choosing to see this film. Unlike the small part he played in last year's 'The Judge', here he gets a bigger and more meaty role. His character has a military background. He is cold and ruthless, as well as very persuasive in his forward planning and thinking.

Casting must be rated highly. I was particularly happy to see many of my acting favourites in this film.

Chris Pratt plays an animal-behaviourist, who understands and empathises with the dinosaurs. This puts him into conflict with the others administering the park. Irrfan Khan, plays a boss, and Lauren Lapkus an underling. Both small parts are played well and believably.

The 3D-effects and the special-effects are all done well, and are also enjoyably viewed. The dinosaur scenes are exciting and thrilling. There is a fight sequence reminiscent of 'King Kong'.

Much of the film is shot from the POV of the two brothers, who feature heavily in this film, just as much as the adult stars, thus this film will appeal to boys. However UK rating is 12A. Parents should be aware that the eating habits of the dinosaurs may be upsetting for young children. Though boys aged 12+ will lap it up.

This film is a concrete lesson on the dangers of putting the pound (£) before principles, or the dollar ($) for that matter too. Scientists play god at their peril, and ours too. As they reverse history and plunge us back into the Jurassic World, we can only once again shout out the old battle-cry of 70 million years ago;

"Death to the dinosaurs!, long live the mammals!"

Film has a much better ending than 'San Andreas'.

An enjoyable and exciting film. 10/10.