Avoid.

I love Billy Wilder, but this one left me cold, even though it’s supposed to be a classic noir. Disappointing.

Langorous, quirky, gothic western, beautifully shot in black and white, it’s very funny with lots of mysticism and cameo star turns. Worth spending some time with.

Yeah, you have to concentrate. Yeah, you have to actually watch the film rather than do your nails, wait for a pizza or y’know chat on the phone with friends. Sorry about that.

This is a wonderfully rich film that explores the the dynamics of a relationship, alongside the machinations of the International Aid Industry, Pharmaceutical gangsters and the innefectual diplomatic framework in place in Africa. It’s a political film that has no easy answers.

It doesn’t have a craaazy guy falling for a kooky Starbucksy Jennifer Aniston character in an urban setting of privileged banality: it’s a reminder that the world is a rough place and some people make a lot of money out of that fact.

Go see.

Still great after all these years!

Yes, it’s godawful, but at the same time this piece of kitschy military-porn from the 80s is kind of endearing. Gasp at the awful dialogue, jeer at the predictable plot, hiss at the colour saturated MTV edited overload and then contemplate the homoeroticised undercurrents flowing through almost every line and shot of the film.

Why was Tom cruise wearing such big underpants though? The world needs to know…

(Oh, if you get the chance watch the videos included on the DVD, if only for the extraordinary Harold Faltermeyer “piece” featuring a stick thin, gold clad poodle haired guitarist who plays his guitar like he’s making lurve to a beautiful laydee.)

This album keeps making me burst into tears. :’’’(

This series drove me crazy (in a good way) with its continual cliff hanging, conspiracy theorising, will-they/won’t-they escape sub-plotting. I stayed with it though, and now feel like I was one of the inmates attempting to escape!

If you like highly addictive, story arcing prison dramas starring easy on the eye actors, then this is the one for you. Be prepared to lose at least 22 hours of your life though, possibly in one sitting…

A thought provoking documentary about the daily routines and rhythms of ascetic Carthusian Order monks residing in the Grande Chartreuse monastery in the Alps. Over its three hours, there’s barely any dialogue, no music and huge expanses of silence. It’s a hard film to sit through as absolutely nothing happens (in the traditional cinematic sense).

We watch the monks go about their everyday business: sweeping floors, cutting hair, praying, planting vegetables. There’s no real structure except for the psalm like quotations that appear on screen to divide up the various sections of the work. We never learn anything about the monks or the monastery itself, there’s nothing to involve or attach yourself to.

However, as tedious as it is to watch, the film does trigger off questions about the nature of religion, ritual and what it means to dedicate yourself to a way of life that, from the outside, seems archaic and dare I say it psychotic. Into Great Silence is like a piece of video art that you may see in a gallery: it unfolds and unfurls but ultimately fails to engage you in its own process.

It feels like a vital opportunity was lost in this film. Cinematically speaking, I found many of the images drawn upon (snowflakes, icicles, clouds) to be rather banal. There was a real failure to illustrate the internal, transcendent states that these holy practitioners reach.
There’s more info about the film here: http://www.diegrossestille.de/english/ including an interview with the director who explains why he approached the film in the way he did.

Worth seeing if only to make up your own mind about this peculiar and idiosyncratic film, which has won many plaudits and awards wherever it has been shown.

Hannah Arendt’s book stoked a lot of controversy when it came out. She was accused of distorting history, hating herself, betraying her Jewish identity and many other things. The reason(s) for this were connected with the challenging evidence presented at the trial of Adolf Eichmann, a prominent architect of the Holocaust, who claimed he did nothing wrong, and was simply following orders.

Hannah Arendt explores many of the ambiguities and difficulties of presenting the whole ghastly picture to a court of justice. She suggests, quite strongly in my opinion, that nobody comes out of it clean. This, combined with her deft analysis of the way bureaucrats deny their own agency and responsibility, and somehow introject the institutions they serve to justify their own ends, is fascinating.

I really enjoyed (if that’s the right word) reading this book, it raises so many questions, one of which is what would I have done in the same situation…