This diamond needs polished

With a Best Actor nomination for Leonardo DiCaprio and a Best Supporting Actor nomination for the only marginally easier to spell Djimon Hounsou, BLOOD DIAMOND was my latest taste of the Oscar hopefuls. That's why you obviously ended up with such a tired and predictable gag as a title for today's effort as well.

The story is that of diamond smuggler DiCaprio, operating out of Sierra Leone in the 90s during their turbulent civil war, and his attempt to get his hands on the titular trinket, the location of which is only known by a poor farmer who will trade the secret in exchange for the return of his family. I almost described the plot as being about DiCaprio's attempt to get his hands on Hounsou's massive jewel, but that would be another sort of film entirely.

Along the way, they bump into nasty diamond dealers, mercenaries, crazy blokes with machetes, etc. and of course the token American character, journalist Jennifer Connolly. As a rousing action adventure, it hits almost all the right buttons. As anything else, it's flawed.

The action sequences and the horrific scenes of the brutal war in the country are hard to flaw, with the latter doing a reasonably effective job of portraying the horrors committed. Not as effective as THE EMPIRE IN AFRICA of course, but let's not make me relive that one. (Click on the link if you want to read about me turning into a wimp)

Unfortunately, on the story front, the film is simply too Hollywood. A promising beginning and gripping midsection are let down by a banal ending that is positively riddled with cliches, to the point where you can almost speak the dialogue before the characters say it. It's a transparent attempt to tug at the heartstrings and makes such a hash of it that you just want to laugh.

The real problem however lies in the film's noble but misguided attempt to shame us all over our action and inaction in Africa. Has the Western world committed horrific atrocities in Africa? Yes. Have we done enough to help the continent? No. There is no argument over these facts from me, and the film is right to point them out. The problem is that the filmmakers have no idea how to do this effectively.

For one thing, there are far too many pretentious lines about how cruel we all are, what horrible things we've done, what we've not done, oh won't humans ever learn, blah blah blah. The point is valid and in moderation may have succeeded; instead, we get bludgeoned over the head with it repeatedly, with as much subtlety as something that isn't very subtle at all. Sorry, I couldn't think of a hilarious metaphor, but I'm sure you can make one up yourself.

The end result? Well, I fancy Jennifer Connolly as much as the next man, but it got to the point where I just wanted to slap her every time she opened her mouth because I knew she was about to chastise me for my species being so horrible. Actually, I've just read that last sentence, and I'd like to clarify that when I say "I fancy Jennifer Connolly as much as the next man", I mean that I fancy her as much as the next man fancies her, not that I fancy her as much as I fancy the next man. Damn the English language and its hilarious double meanings.

Filmmakers really need to learn that it's possible to make a film which makes us feel horrible, guilty and ashamed and it's also possible to make a film which lets us leave the cinema feeling entertained and happy; but it cannot do both in the space of one film, and unfortunately it's BLOOD DIAMOND's attempt to do just that which steers it off course.

And as for the acting? DiCaprio's role is a major one, certainly; but aside from a couple of very, very brief emotional scenes, the cynic in me sees him being rewarded for nothing more than playing an objectionable little turd with a shoddy Zimbabwe accent. The rest of the roles are barely fleshed out enough to leave anyone else with anything much to do - with the exception of Hounsou, who is superb as the desperate father trying to find his family and recover his son, who has fallen in with the child soldiers of Sierra Leone.

In other words, I'd be very surprised if DiCaprio won and while I'd also be surprised if Hounsou won, I do feel that at least the latter deserves it. Mind you, if I had to pick any of the nominations that BLOOD DIAMOND is up for, I'd rather it won for Sound Mixing and Sound Editing, as they really did do a terrific job there. That's not as exciting to write about though.

Some recent movies I've seen

Man, my blog titles are really dull these days, aren't they? Anyway... as long as we're in awards season I guess it's my duty to see as many of the contenders as possible. So here they are. Apologies if you surfed in expecting me to talk about some film you've never heard of - I know, I'm such a populist sell-out. Never mind, I'll go back to obscurities soon - I recently watched a spaghetti western based on Hamlet, how great is that? - but for the meantime, here's some stuff that's currently showing at your local cinema. Or should be, unless your local cinema is as pish as mine.

When director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu first teamed up with screenwriter Guillermo Arriaga, the result was AMORES PERROS. This Mexican film took a bunch of different characters and different stories set around the same few incidents, telling different stories that gradually all folded in on themselves, interconnecting in subtle ways while being told through a chronologically chopped up narrative that all makes sense in the end. The film was a breakthrough triumph and launched Gael Garcia Bernal on the road to stardom.

Their second collaboration, 21 GRAMS, took a bunch of different characters and different stories set around the same few incidents, telling different stories that gradually all folded in on themselves, interconnecting in subtle ways while being told through a chronologically chopped up narrative that all makes sense in the end. There was no shortage of praise for the performances of the cast (including Benicio Del Toro, Sean Penn and Naomi Watts).

Their third collaboration is BABEL - can you guess what format it follows?

Yep, that's correct. This time, the token stars are Brad Pitt and Cate Blanchett and neither of them turns in their best work. When 21 GRAMS was released, opinion was divided over whether the screenplay was a work of genius or just a fairly average story that was told out of sequence for no other reason than to be clever. Unfortunately, BABEL falls into the same trap and begins to point to the Arriaga/Inarritu partnership as a one-trick pony.

I've no qualms about Inarritu picking up nominations for his directing, as he's proven to be very adept at it, including his work on BABEL. I'm a little more cynical however when it comes to the screenplay since, as mentioned above, it once more follows the how-clever-am-I approach employed in both their previous collaborations and I think it's time they got a new gimmick.

I was also pleased that neither Pitt nor Blanchett were nominated for their acting because to be totally honest it just looked like the parts had been engineered for a couple of stars to try their hand at earnest, worthy movies in a bid for Oscar glory. The real acting talent on display comes from the minor characters of varying nationalities (an incident involving Pitt and Blanchett kicks off three related stories in Morocco, Japan and Mexico) so I'm pleased that a couple of them have been nominated.

My cynicism is not meant to suggest it's not a good film. Actually, it is. It's just a bit pretentious in places and feels like it's been made with Academy voters in mind rather than paying audiences. Once more it's a case of taking an average story and chopping it into pieces and scattering them about until it all comes together and the audience declares it a masterpiece. But a masterpiece it certainly isn't, and the main reason is that the story involving the two big-name stars detracts from the other stories, where the real talent shines through.

VENUS on the other hand may be a lesser film but offers up a master class in acting from the legendary Peter O'Toole, securing him a Best Actor nomination (to go with the several others he's received without winning). He is ably supported by the likes of Leslie Phillips, Vanessa Redgrave, Richard Griffiths and newcomer Jodie Whittaker.

The story is a small scale, intimate affair, in which O'Toole and Phillips spend their days going to the theatre, drinking and doing stuff that old people do. When Phillips has his niece's daughter (Whittaker) arrive to look after him, there follows a touching tale of posh old actor falling for a rough northern lass young enough to be his grandchild, each of whom introduces the other one to strange new joys. He takes her to the theatre and to art galleries; she introduces him to nightclubs and Bacardi Breezers. It's chav meets dirty old man, and it's both romantic and funny.

O'Toole steals the show with his performance (though the rest of the cast are all very good) and in my humble opinion truly deserves a win for this. I don't expect him to beat Forest Whitaker, but if there's any justice he will. It's not that I don't think Whitaker's performance is good, but it's very showy and once again panders to the Academy's love of a good impersonation - O'Toole's on the other hand offers far more emotional depth, while still managing the odd bit of physical slapstick in a manner more suited to someone half his age.

BORAT has managed to secure itself a nomination for adapted screenplay. I won't go into the details of the story, such as it is, because you've probably already heard about this movie anyway, but I'm amazed at its nomination. For one thing, the Academy doesn't generally like comedies and for another, it's not as hilarious as I'd been lead to believe.

It's true that there is some hilarious humour in it; but the problem is that with some of it being staged and some of it more natural there are moments where you find yourself wondering which is which. Some scenes would be hilarious if they'd occurred naturally, but don't seem so special if they've been scripted - so how do you know when to laugh?

The other problem is the humour itself. Infamously controversial, the humour has been accused of being in bad taste, while the standard response is that it's not racist or bigoted but makes fun of those who are. That defence stands firm for some moments, as Borat (Sacha Baron Cohen) invites various Americans to air their ridiculous beliefs on screen but one problem with this approach is that you can tell some scenes have been selectively edited to make it look more incriminating, while there are other incidents in the film that are clearly put in for a cheap laugh with no intention of exploiting other people's prejudices - that's fine if like me you laugh at all manner of offensive things, but if you actually have morals then it could be more a problem... unless of course they're saying that if we, the audience, laugh at it then we're all racists and bigots. And accusations like that are not what I go to the cinema for.

Just time to mention a couple that weren't nominated...

INFAMOUS really missed the boat, thanks to last year's CAPOTE beating it to the cinemas. Toby Jones turns in a performance that is the equal of Hoffman's award winner from last year, but the starry cast are mainly given nothing to do, and those who are given more do nothing with it. It also suffers from an uneven tone, with more emphasis on the camp nature of Capote's character and a tired interview format framing the story. What's strangest of all is that the poster, knowing full well that we've all seen the story of "In Cold Blood" already thanks to last year's film, has the tagline "There's more to the story than you know." If that's the case, this film doesn't tell us it.

More impressive is Paul Verhoeven's return to his native Dutch language and his tale of the Dutch resistance in World War II, BLACK BOOK. Carice Van Houten deserves praise for a superb performance that anchors the film (indeed, she appears to be almost permanently on screen) and an Oscar nomination wouldn't have been unmerited. If there was one drawback, it's that once she dyes her hair blonde to disguise her Jewish roots (and I mean all her hair - this is a Paul Verhoeven film after all) she bears an uncanny resemblance to one of Christina Aguilera's recent incarnations.

It's astounding that this film hasn't been nominated in the foreign language category - it's worthy and serious enough to be a contender and yet, at the same time, it's full of the bombastic spectacle we've come to expect from the man who gave us ROBOCOP, STARSHIP TROOPERS and TOTAL RECALL. There's all the blood and nudity, sex and violence, debauchery and gore that you'd expect, while still being a solid thriller and an intriguing look at a dark period of recent history. Maybe not enough of the Academy had seen it; or maybe they were just wary about giving an Oscar to a guy who gave us SHOWGIRLS. Whatever their reasons, they're wrong.

Next week I should be looking at a few more acting nominations as I intend to check out BLOOD DIAMOND and NOTES ON A SCANDAL. Oh yeah, and BOBBY as well, though that one doesn't seem to have impressed the Academy as it has the various other award nominations.

Come back soon!

Oscars 2007 : Predictions

Not a very exciting title for today's blog entry but it does what it promises. The Oscar nominations were announced today so I guess if I'm going to sit here and talk a load of pish about films all the time I really should make some predictions for the biggest event in the movie calendar.

Last year I waited until just before the ceremony to make my predictions (I did pretty well too) but this year I thought I'd be adventurous and make my predictions nice and early. Well, not so early that I didn't wait for the nominations to be announced, but you get my drift. Also, I couldn't really wait until just before the ceremony as I'll be attending a couple of film festivals in the lead up to it, so I probably won't have time. But let's just ignore that and pretend it's because I'm adventurous. Let the predicting commence.

BEST FILM

The first major upset seems to have occurred before the ceremony has even taken place. The bookies made this the odds-on favourite (or at least the bookies I checked with did) before hand to win the Best Film category - and it hasn't even been nominated. That's good news if you're a contrary sod like me and refuse to bet on the favourites. Not so much if you're a sensible and conservative person who doesn't bet at all. (Standard disclaimer: gambling is wrong. Don't do it, kids!)

That paves the way for THE DEPARTED if this is finally to be Scorsese's year, but then again every time Scorsese has a film nominated we say it's going to be his year and as yet it hasn't been. The other favourite here is BABEL, which has the added advantage of having already scooped the Golden Globe award for best film. I haven't actually seen LETTERS FRMO IWO JIMA so I can't comment on it (but I'll be seeing it at one of the aforementioned festivals) but then again I haven't seen THE DEPARTED either. Maybe THE DEPARTED will win just for being a remake that isn't totally crap.

I think we can completely discount THE QUEEN, good though it certainly is (see my recent cinema marathon for details) which just leaves LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE. After last year's last minute rush of popularity for CRASH, I wouldn't completely rule out LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE doing the same again. It's a feelgood film, it's popular, it's an ensemble piece (always popular with actors, who make up a large part of the vote) and it was just named Best Picture by the Producers' Guild of America.

That two quid I stuck on while it was still 16 to 1 is maybe a bit hopeful though. One thing that does count against it is that it's a comedy, and Oscar voters are usually more inclined to go with worthier (aka: miserable) material. How many comedies can you name that have won big awards at the Oscars? Exactly.

Should win: LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE

Will win: THE DEPARTED

DIRECTOR

Will it be Scorsese's year then? See above. The ironic thing is that he's once more up against Clint Eastwood and the last time these two went head to head Mr Eastwood won out with MILLION DOLLAR BABY ahead of Marty's THE AVIATOR. History can repeat itself too; when Eastwood picked up his Oscar for the aforementioned drama, Hilary Swank picked up Best Actress for the same film, beating off competition from Annette Bening, who she'd beaten the first time she'd won an Oscar too.

I reckon Scorsese is more likely out of the two, but I'd say that Alejandro Gonzales Inarritu (for BABEL) probably has about the same chance as Eastwood. His two previous collaborations with the same screenwriter were critically acclaimed too, so perhaps the voters may think he's due some recognition too.

As mentioned above, I've not seen LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA or THE DEPARTED so I can't really comment on them; I've not seen UNITED 93 either, but as critically lauded as it is, I think you still have to see Paul Greengrass as an outsider in the category. Stephen Frears (for THE QUEEN) also did a grand job but I think will be joining his fellow Brit in the outsider stakes. I guess having only seen two of them it's a bit silly me making a prediction, but I guess I have to, so here goes.

Should win: Paul Greengrass (Yeah, I know, but I really liked his BLOODY SUNDAY film though)

Will win: Martin Scorsese

ACTRESS

Helen Mirren is sweeping the boards for her portrayal of THE QUEEN so don't expect any different here. That's especially true since two things the Oscars love are people making themselves uglier and people doing impressions of other people, and Mirren does both. As good as Mirren is though, I'd prefer Penelope Cruz to get it (the award, I mean... snigger) for her terrific performance in Pedro Almodovar's VOLVER.

If anyone can run Mirren close however, it'll be Meryl Streep. I've not seen THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA (it looked too much like a chick-flick) but given that it's her 14th nomination (yes, that is a record) but only won twice she's probably due another. Kate Winslet and Judi Dench are in my opinion outsiders, although not as much as Cruz is, according to the bookies. Then again I've not seen Winslet's or Dench's performances so what good is my opinion?

Should win: Penelope Cruz

Will win: Helen Mirren

ACTOR

As mentioned above, the Oscars love a good impressionist. That, combined with the critical praise and awards already heaped on Forest Whitaker for his portrayal of General Idi Amin, will be enough to see him sweep the competition aside.

The closest competitor he'll have is Peter O'Toole, who is brilliant in VENUS but, as legendary as he is, he did just recently receive a lifetime achievement award so the voters probably don't feel quite so obliged to vote for him this time round, which is a shame.

I've yet to see HALF NELSON (Ryan Gosling) or BLOOD DIAMOND (Leo) so that'll be two more that I won't comment on, but I don't expect either of them to trouble the final placings anyway. I haven't seen Will Smith's turn in THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS yet either, but having seen the trailer for it I'm already convinced that it is a cynical attempt to bag him an Oscar and I'm going to ignore it completely.

Should win: Peter O'Toole

Will win: Forest Whitaker

SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Adriana Barraza and Rinko Kikucki are both nominated for BABEL and both are in with a shout since the former made herself less glamorous and the latter portrayed a character with a disability - both traits are regular Oscar-baiters. Cate Blanchett joins her fellow BABEL cast members, although her nomination has been picked up for NOTES ON A SCANDAL. I haven't seen that one yet but the two BABEL actresses do a good job.

Jennifer Hudson has already been recognised for her role in DREAMGIRLS (another that I've not seen, I'm afraid) so is probably the favourite, but Abigail Breslin is also captivating in her role in LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE. Her age probably counts against her (she'd be the youngest ever winner) but she's appeared in a few high-profile films and the Academy may wish to honour the film in some other way if they're going to snub it in the Best Film category.

I'm going to go out on a limb here.

Should win: Abigail Breslin

Will win: Adriana Barraza

SUPPORTING ACTOR

Since he appeared in the crap pop group Marky Mark and the Funky Bunch, I've never been able to take Mark Wahlberg seriously; since he appeared in the celluloid shower of pish that was the PLANET OF THE APES remake I can't even look at him without wanting to punch him. So I'm going to gloss over his nomination for THE DEPARTED. And I've not seen it.

Nor have I seen BLOOD DIAMOND (Djimon Hounsou), DREAMGIRLS (Eddie Murphy - yes, seriously) or LITTLE CHILDREN (Jackie Earle Haley). In fact, I guess I'm going to be a bit rubbish at predicting this one since LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE is the only one I've seen. Alan Arkin is very good in it though, and everyone likes him.

I'm going to show my support here for Jackie Earle Haley though. It's not that I think he'll win (Oscar win for playing a paedophile? Possibly too edgy for the Academy) but, as a child, he appeared in the wonderful so-bad-it's-great DAMNATION ALLEY and also in my favourite episode of the PLANET OF THE APES television series.

Should win: Jackie Earle Haley

Will win: Alan Arkin

FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM

Big upset here is that neither VOLVER nor Mel Gibson's APOCALYPTO is included. The other upset, though not as surprising, is that I've only seen one of the nominations. However, since that one nomination is PAN'S LABYRINTH, and since it's already been getting critical raves, and since it's an absolute bloody masterpiece, that'll do me.

Should win: PAN'S LABYRINTH

Will win: PAN'S LABYRINTH

ANIMATED FILM

I've not seen any of the nominations - CARS got mediocre reviews but is by Pixar; HAPPY FEET looked pish but seemed to be very popular; MONSTER HOUSE got good reviews but is a genre film and the Academy don't like them.

My rather uneducated opinion?

Should win: MONSTER HOUSE

Will win: HAPPY FEET

ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

The only film in this category I've seen is CHILDREN OF MEN, and frankly it was a puddle of urine. I plan on seeing BORAT this weekend but I refuse to believe that's the kind of film that will receive an Oscar for anything.

Should win: I'm not even going to try.

Will win: THE DEPARTED

ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

I've not seen LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA; BABEL disappears up its own arse on several occasions but is clever enough (or thinks it is) to appeal to the voters; LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE and THE QUEEN both fall into the category of films that are probably going to miss out on the bigger awards so might get honoured with this one; PAN'S LABYRINTH is foreign and fantasy-related so will probably be unfairly ignored.

Should win: PAN'S LABYRINTH

Will win: BABEL

DOCUMENTARY

Of the two I've seen, AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH is the highest profile and a tremendously important movie. Then again, MY COUNTRY, MY COUNTRY is also a powerful piece of filmmaking and may appeal to a few more Bush fans than the former; but only a few.

Should win: AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH

Will win: MY COUNTRY, MY COUNTRY

AND THE REST...

We're down into the categories I've not got a clue about now, or else don't actually care. No idea about the two music categories, or the various short film categories either.

Visual effects? The only one I've seen is SUPERMAN RETURNS but since I really liked it, let's go for that.

Cinematography and art direction, I'd have to go with THE PRESTIGE for both of them, if only because it was my favourite film of the year and these are its only two nominations.

Costume design? Don't really know, don't really care, but since THE CURSE OF THE GOLDEN FLOWER looked pretty colourful from the pictures I've seen (I'll be going to a festival screening just before the Oscars) let's go with that.

Sound mixing and sound editing? Let's go with APOCALYPTO because frankly it deserves to win for something.

Film editing... the action sequences in CHILDREN OF MEN might be enough to swing it but I reckon this will be UNITED 93's token recognition.

All of which brings my predictions to a close. Please feel free to come back here after the event and either abuse me for how far wrong I was or else marvel at how on the money I was. I guess we'll find out which one next month.

Before I go though I have to point out that the most deserved award of the night has already been settled. Yes, the main man Ennio Morricone is to be given a lifetime achievement award and I struggle to think of anyone working in the movie business today who deserves one more. Well done that man.

Freakpit's Faves of 2006 (Top Five)

Here it is, the home stretch, the five best films of 2006 according to me. But wait, there's more - it turns out that this is the 100th post I've made to this blog and, not only that, it's also exactly a year to the day since I started it. How about that? It's almost like a planned it.

So without further ado, let's bring the Freakpit's first year to a close with the very best films from that period, my top five of last year.

5. BLOODY SUNDAY: A DERRY DIARY

This is yet another documentary that I saw at the Stranger Than Fiction documentary festival in Dublin in 2006. It follows the survivors and victims' families throughout the ongoing enquiry into the infamous events of one day in the early 70s when a group of British paras in Northern Ireland opened fire on a civil rights march, giving rise to one of the grimmest periods in the recent history of the troubles.

The film, made by one of the eyewitnesses herself, is not totally biased against the British - there is an acknowledgement that an IRA gunman was present and opened fire, and there is a hint that perhaps her memory of the events is not as clear as she thinks - but on the whole doesn't leave too much doubt as to which side its on, and understandably so. I'm not about to try and start a political argument here, but suffice to say the Brits do not come out of this looking good and probably with good reason.

As yet I don't believe it's had much of an outing outside of festivals and one or two TV appearances (not in this country that I know of) but it really deserves a wider audience. It was stated that when the results of the enquiry are known (expected this year) that further information will be recorded. One only hopes that when it does, someone picks the film up to distribute to the wider audience it deserves.

4. CONGO RIVER

Thierry Michel's documentary charts the history of this bloody area of Africa using the river itself as a metaphorical timeline. Documentaries are rarely made on this scale and are rarely as fascinating - this is no simple history lecture; this is the birth and life of a nation, its people, its conquerors and everything in between. Once more it was a highlight of Stranger Than Fiction - once more, I've yet to see it receive a decent distribution in this country. I hope someone will fix that soon as this stunning historical portrait needs to be seen.

3. THE WIND THAT SHAKES THE BARLEY

2006 was a good year for the Irish in the Freakpit, wasn't it? Ken Loach's drama following the Anglo-Irish war of Independence and two brothers who take up opposite sides in the ensuing civil war picked up the top prize in Cannes but that didn't stop it courting controversy in the British press, some of whom seemed to think it was nothing more than IRA propaganda.

The truth is that it's a gripping historical drama that is as good as anything of Loach's that I've seen, regardless of where your political leanings lie. Yes, it makes the British look like a bloodthirsty bunch of monsters but here's a newsflash for you - the British did commit countless atrocities in Ireland, so why not show them? The detractors seem to have completely missed the point that first of all it's historically accurate and, secondly, that it's not as if Loach makes the Irish out to be all sweetness and innocence.

In truth, most of the conflict arises not from the Irish fighting the English but from the Irish against Irish civil war that followed. This means nothing to some people however, but then the sort of people who would trash this film because of its political nature are probably the same sort of people who refused to watch BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN because it's "totally gay".

2. GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK

George Clooney's second film as director was a triumph, though it was just pipped to most of the Oscars it deserved. It's intelligent, it's relevant today as it ever was, and it's a superbly crafted, well-written, wonderfully acted ensemble piece that tells a gripping tale about a group of people who stood up to a great injustice that overtook many people during a shameful period in America's history. I raved about it accordingly.

For a long time, it was my best film of 2006 - but then, just before the end of the year, there emerged a new choice...

1. THE PRESTIGE

Christopher Nolan's drama about duelling magicians in turn of the century Victorian England models itself on the magic tricks it portrays - it's all about misdirection. Throughout the film Nolan allows the audience to think that they're getting a handle on what is going on and then promptly pulls the rug out from under you. There are twists and turns like nobody's business, the impressive cast are all perfect and, in short, I never wanted it to end.

But end it did, and when it did so, it left me feeling more amazed and more satisfied upon leaving a cinema than I have been in a long, long time.

And that wraps up my round up of my favourites of 2006. If you agreed with any of them, terrific. If you didn't, well, it's my list so tough. But if you think I've been totally wrong about something or overlooked a classic feel free to contact me. I won't change my mind, but at least I'll know you're paying attention.

I will now resume my usual pattern of managing about one post a week about films you've never heard of.

Good night.

Freakpit's Faves of 2006 (10 to 6)

Continuing my countdown of my favourite films of 2006, my next choice is...

10. V FOR VENDETTA

Based on the classic comic strip from the 1980s by Alan Moore and David Lloyd, this intelligent action romp tells the story of a girl who falls in with a rebel modelling himself of Guy Fawkes in a dystopian vision of Britain in the future.

A lot of people, knowing it was being adapted by the guys who made THE MATRIX and that Alan Moore's great comics have been let down by their screen adaptations (FROM HELL, LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN), expected this film to be crap. I know I did. But no, it turned out to be surprisingly good and, even more surprisingly, captured the feel of the original comic strip very well.

There were some changes made (the original strip was a depressing extrapolation of all that was bad about Thatcher's Britain, while the film has been slightly fine-tuned so it's more in line with current events) and there are some minor weaknesses (Natalie Portman, otherwise terrific in the role, does let the English accent lapse into a strange Australian-sounding hybrid occasionally), but overall the film's a triumph.

And in this day and age it's refreshing to see a film in which the hero is essentially a terrorist.

9. THANK YOU FOR SMOKING

This hilarious satire stars Aaron Eckhart as a lobbyist for the tobacco industry, his job being to improve the image of smoking despite the established facts about its danger to your health. There are pops at other death-dealing industries as well, however it's the cigarette makers who are at the centre of the story. How do you sell cancer-sticks to people with a smile on your face then return home and set a good example to your child? Find out by watching this, the funniest movie of 2006.

8. BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN

It's a tale of forbidden love between two people who know that society will not condone that love. The fact that those two people both happen to be men is what grabbed the headlines, but it detracts from the fact that this is just a wonderfully told tale of romance and heartbreak that could just as easily have been told about a man and a woman in other circumstances.

The fact that their society will not accept their love is the issue at the heart at the story; the reason for that (anti-gay sentiment in this case) is completely irrelevant.

It may have ended up missing out on most of the Oscars it was tipped for (though Ang Lee did pick up one for directing it) but it's still one of the highlights of 2006 for me.

7. PAN'S LABYRINTH

I would expect to see this nominated in the foreign language category at this year's Oscars. Guillermo Del Toro's masterpiece is a visually stunning and emotionally charged story of a young girl in Franco-era Spain who escapes the guerrilla warfare into a fantasy world guarded by a strange faun, who gives the girl three tasks to perform to prove that she is the long lost princess who rules over the land.

It's a fairy tale and contains many things that would appeal to kids; but this is no kids' film. The battle scenes are horrific and the girl's stepfather is as nasty as they come. You won't be able to let your kids watch it, but who cares; you should be watching this for yourself. It's mind-blowing, and the Irish premiere was a highlight of the 2006 Horrorthon festival.

6. THE U.S. VS JOHN LENNON

Another film I saw at the London Film Festival, this one didn't do too much business at the cinema, which is a shame. It's a fascinating documentary that shows the human and humorous side of John Lennon like you've never seen him before, while offering a gobsmacking look into the thinking of an American government who saw him and his politics as a threat to national security.

Whether you're a Lennon fan or interested in the crazy antics of Nixon's government, this is a must-see.

The top thirty of 2006 concludes tomorrow!

Freakpit's Faves of 2006 (15 to 11)

And the countdown of 2006's finest movies continues...

15. SYRIANA

Also known as "that one where George Clooney gets fat and grows a beard."

I covered this one in my Oscar hopefuls string of posts, and sure enough it did get Clooney a Supporting Actor award. In the end it was unlucky not to get more (though the competition was strong, I admit) since it's the kind of daring, ambitious film that doesn't get made often enough (or if it does, not enough people see it). It's not quite AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH, but it still has plenty to say about the state of the world today.

14. SHOOTING DOGS

Perhaps it suffered a bit from HOTEL RWANDA having beaten it to the punch, but this tale of the Rwandan genocide was every bit as effective and a bit more downbeat as well. There's still plenty of hope on offer but the true horror of the atrocities is hammered home at the same time, leading me to include it in my post about misery, suffering and nastiness.

13. INSIDE MAN

Spike Lee's heist caper is a terrific thriller with twists and turns that will keep you guessing right up until the end, boosted by an all-star cast where even Clive Owen manages to do a good job (I'm not a fan). Stands up there next to all the classic heist movies from so long ago.

12. VOLVER

Pedro Almodovar's latest tale follows three generations of a Spanish family of women, centring on Penelope Cruz, her daughter and the ghost of her deceased mother. The story is well crafted and Almodovar delivers it to the screen with panache but the real highlight is the performance of the cast, in particular the multi-award-nominated turn by Cruz. It looks like Helen Mirren's the favourite to bag all the acting awards but if there's going to be an upset, this is the woman that will do it.

11. CLERKS II

Love, marriage, friendship, transformers, live adult entertainment featuring donkeys - all of life's important stuff is analysed and ripped apart by the gang of characters returning from Kevin Smith's critically acclaimed low-budget slacker comedy debut.

The humour and situations are more of the same but that's what we loved about the original anyway. What's added is the wistful depression that hangs over proceedings as Dante and Randall realise that so many years have passed and so little has changed. Will they finally make something of their life? Whether they do or don't, you'll have a fun time finding out. Just don't expect the jokes to be too clean.

Continued tomorrow...

Freakpit's Faves of 2006 (20 to 16)

My countdown of the best of 2006 continues. The usual disclaimers about release dates apply...

20. THE HOST

This Korean monster movie was so great that I recommended it three times, and saw it twice - once at the UK premiere and once at the Irish premiere. If you've still not seen it, you're an idiot. Please rectify the situation immediately.

19. DEEP WATER

This incredible documentary tells the tale of amateur sailor Donald Crowhurst and his attempt, back in the sixties, to enter the first solo round the world yacht race. After it becomes obvious early on that he is struggling, he is faced with the choice of continuing on and risking death, or turning back and being declared bankrupt. He was to pick a third option (cheat) but the months at sea gradually take their toll and the boat isn't the only thing falling apart...

While the interviews with surviving friends and family are fascinating the most haunting recollection is the recording of Crowhurst himself made while he was at sea and with the loneliness and desperation eating away at his mind. Scary, fascinating and terribly sad.

18. LES REVENANTS

This French movie played at a French film festival but as far as I can see has not yet been picked up for distribution. Shame really as it's a very intelligent look at a whimsical fantasy notion - what if everyone who had recently died suddenly came back to life. It's not a zombie movie (there's no shuffling about, no decaying corpses, no eating flesh); it's very definitely an arthouse film and a stunning one at that. It also gave me an excuse to talk about zombies and pensions, two subjects I don't think I've ever managed to combine before and probably never will again.

17. THE PROPOSITION

Nick Cave scripted this brutally violent but incredibly realised tale of vengeance and family in the Australian outback. I used it as an excuse to write about musicians on film, but it could equally have been used as an excuse to talk about the rise in popularity of the pseudo-western. By that I mean the string of recent films that are westerns but aren't really westerns. In addition to this movie, there's DOWN IN THE VALLEY, THE THREE BURIALS OF MELQUIADES ESTRADA and BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN. See what I mean?

16. ONCE IN A LIFETIME

Another documentary and this time it's one about the failed attempt to bring soccer to the masses in the USA back in the seventies. Given the obscene amount of money that David Beckham has just bagged to go over there and play, you wonder if they've actually learned anything. One of the few decent football-related movies, which I therefore covered in my World Cup Special.

More tomorrow!

Freakpit's Faves of 2006 (25 to 21)

Today we continue the round-up of the Freakpit's favourite movies of 2006. See yesterday for what actually counts as a 2006 movie. By the way, in case you're wondering why I decided on a top 30, it's because I started off trying a top 20 but came up with closer to 30. That's the only reason. Anyway, on with the countdown...

25. THE GHOSTS OF DUFFY'S CUT

This short documentary (just under an hour if I remember correctly) is an Irish production, shot in luscious HD, telling the story of a bunch of Irish immigrants who flocked to America looking for work during the 19th century and found jobs on a stretch of railroad. Within weeks every one of them was dead, buried somewhere in an unmarked mass grave.

Part ghost story, part mystery, part historical investigation, the men behind the camera play detective in an attempt to find the bodies and work out what happened to the men who died. What they uncover is a horror story of hardship, disease, bigotry and superstition. It's fair to say that some of their findings are speculation rather than fact but they build a compelling case and the film turned out to be one of the highlights of the Stranger Than Fiction 2006 documentary festival in Dublin. I believe it was to be shown on RTE in Ireland in January too, but since January's almost over I guess there's a fair chance I've told you too late. Oh well.

24. LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE

A good old feelgood movie with a wonderful cast, both in terms of the actors involved and the oddball characters they play, from the loser of a father to the silent son to the drug-addict grandfather. Kinnear, Bresling, Collette, Dano, Farrell and Arkin are all superb in a movie that warms the heart and tickles the funny bone. Deservedly it is now picking up a few nods during awards season.

23. THE UNCERTAIN GUEST

This Spanish thriller was a highlight of the Edinburgh International Film Festival this year, a Hitchcock-style tale of obsession and madness that is darkly comic and nerve-janglingly tense in equal measure. It seems to be lurking beneath the radar at the moment but deserves better.

22. SUPERMAN RETURNS

Come on, you know the story. Big blue and red guy, wears a funny costume, flies around, catches planes and beats bad guys. The memory of the utter turds that followed SUPERMAN II have finally been erased. It might not have done the business that Warners were looking for but critically it was a worthy successor to the original movie and a faithful updating of the ultimate iconic hero. Roll on the sequel.

21. THE SQUID AND THE WHALE

Jeff Daniels and Laura Linney head up the cast in a tale that, like LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE, looks at a potentially dark subject matter (in this case the effect a divorce has on the couple and their children) but wrings out all the humour it can by throwing together an insane group of quirky characters and seeing what happens.

It's directed by Noah Baumbach, the guy who previously co-wrote with Wes Anderson, so it's no surprise to see the film showing the same kind of odd humour we expect of Anderson's films. Thankfully, it makes just as good a job of it.

Continued tomorrow!

The Freakpit's Favourites of 2006

Well what do you know, the Golden Globes were last night, not Sunday night as I previously stated. That'll explain why I couldn't find the results yesterday morning then. Guess I could have made some predictions after all.

Anyway, glossing over that act of folly, it's time to begin my long-promised round-up of what warmed the Freakpit in 2006. These are the very best films as voted for by an audience of, well, one. Me. Tell your friends! Tell your family! This is the ONLY critical list of 2006 films that you will ever need!

(That's assuming your taste in films is anything like mine and, since it probably isn't, I guess this isn't the only list you'll need. But you should still read it anyway.)

Before I begin however, I should point out the rules by which these films were picked, just in case there's any argument about whether or not the film was truly a 2006 film.

1. Regardless of when it was released elsewhere, if it was not released in UK cinemas until 2006, it counts as a 2006 movie for my purposes.

2. If it hasn't had a release here yet but I still managed to catch it at a festival, then it also counts. That explains why there might be some movies that aren't out yet or else you've never heard of. But hey, at least it might encourage you to seek them out when they do appear.

Where possible, I've provided links to previous blog entries relating to the films in question so you can go back and see what I said originally if you should feel the need.

Right, on with the countdown...

30. HELL [L'ENFER]

This misery-laden French effort was one that I almost missed because I thought the trailer was really dull. Well, when forced to go and see it because there was nothing more interesting-looking on at the cinemas nearby, I ended up enjoying it immensely. Tight story, great performances by all the lead female characters and a delightfully grim but funny ending. You may remember it as the film that broke my Bristol cinema curse.

29. OFFSIDE

I guess you could say this one was timed to coincide with World Cup fever, but really that would be overstating it somewhat since the football match (the game that saw Iran qualify for the World Cup finals) takes place in the background and is hardly seen. The movie concerns the attempts by a bunch of young girls to get into the match (women are not allowed to attend football matches in Iran).

It's funny and touching, and is leant an extra poignancy by the way it is tied in to a tragic and controversial real-life incident that happened at an Iranian football match just a short time before.

28. RED ROAD

Andrea Arnold's feature debut has already scooped a bunch of awards, not least a prize at Cannes, and is the most critically acclaimed film to come out of Scotland in a long time (if not ever). It's a revenge movie, it's a mystery, it's an emotional drama and it's a look at the CCTV-riddled society that Scots live in. Cast and crew all do an excellent job and deserve all the praise they've received (and will receive). Turned out to be a highlight of my trip to the 2006 London Film Festival.

27. AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH

I said at the time that it might not be the best film of the year but it could be the most important. Al Gore's documentary is as scary as any horror movie could dream of - put simply, we must change and change quickly or our world is facing its demise a lot sooner than any of us would like. Gripping from start to finish and packed with evidence to back up the claims it offers - only time will tell if we have listened.

26. BLESSED BY FIRE

This war movie was unusual in that it tackled the Falklands War from an Argentinean perspective. Focusing on the human cost of fighting in the conflict, the film offered an unflinching view of the horrors faced by the soldiers who fought during the battle and the horrors they experienced on their return.

It damns both British and Argentinean governments in the process and is one of the most powerful and political films of the year. Despite being a highlight of the Spanish-language festival I saw it at and scooping a prize at the Tribeca festival, it's yet to see a theatrical release here. Someone really needs to sort that out.

Continued tomorrow! (I know, I'm such a tease)

My latest movie marathon

Once again, it's not my favourite movies of 2006 (that one's taking longer to put together than I thought) so in the meantime here's the skinny on my latest movie marathon.

Every so often, I like to spend a day in the cinema cramming as many movies as possible into a very short period. Yesterday was that day as I embarked upon another 12-hour cinema session. No, really.

Believe it or not, it's not something that's particularly easy to do even when you're a movie geek like me. It's not that I have trouble sitting through that many films - if you've seen my festival posts you know that's not an issue - but simply that it actually requires a bit of planning and a lot of luck.

You see, if you're as fussy as me, then the first hurdle to get over is just having that many films on at the cinema at one time which firstly you've not seen and secondly you're actually interested in. Sure, it's easy enough during festival time, but it's not so easy on a run of the mill cinema day. Then, assuming you find enough of them, you need a bit of luck in the programming stakes as well, or else you'll find they overlap or leave huge gaps in between.

Well, with it being awards season, there are some decent films out at the moment. Some of them I've seen - APOCALYPTO I've mentioned recently and PAN'S LABYRINTH is still packing them in - but there were a few I'd not. And of course there's always the chance of some old classic playing somewhere too.

So that's the number of films sorted out. As for the timing - well, it seems the gods of cinema schedules were smiling yesterday. A brief stop at the Filmhouse at lunchtime for some veggie soup and my engine was running. Off I popped to the Cameo for this week's European matinee - THE QUEEN.

Helen Mirren plays the titular monarch in this British film about the goings on behind closed doors in the days following the death of Princess Diana, as tabloid-fuelled lunacy saw the crazed public railing against the Royal family for daring to grieve the way they wanted to.

Growing up in the UK, the Queen must surely be the most impersonated person on TV sketch shows so my first reaction upon seeing Mirren in the role (an incredible transformation) was to expect some punch line every time she spoke. I quickly recovered from this though, although the feeling did occur again every time some other actor wandered onto the screen playing someone famous.

It's a finely crafted piece of cinema regardless of your feelings about the Royals, and does a cracking job of portraying the Royal family and its traditions, the workings of government and the gobsmacking tactlessness of the deplorable British tabloids, whose job is not to report the news but to sensationalise everything and tell stupid people what to think.

Mirren does indeed deliver a terrific performance that has seen her nominated for numerous awards (I think we'll see her pick up a Golden Globe tonight, too) although my one reservation is that it's hard to assess how accurate her portrayal of the private Liz actually is, since it's a side of the Queen that we rarely see.

The other stand out performance comes from Michael Sheen who plays Prime Minister Tony Blair, in the days when he was only recently elected and before he turned into a mass murdering war criminal. The bloodthirsty madman's every move and mannerism is captured to perfection by Sheen, right down to that insidious painted-on smile of his, the one that says "look at me, I'm a family man and I stand for modern values, but I'm not afraid to kill thousands of innocents and refuse to answer to you for it."

All in all it's a very good film and while Mirren herself is almost guaranteed of big acting prizes it wouldn't surprise me at all if the film itself picked up a gong or two on this side of the pond.

From there it was back down to the Filmhouse for a screening of CINEMA PARADISO, the classic Italian tale (with wonderful score by that man Morricone) about a man reminiscing about his childhood and the love he had for a girl and the local movie house. It's a wonderfully touching movie that was being shown as a tribute to the recently departed master Philippe Noiret. He doesn't actually appear for too long in the film but when he does he leaves every woman in the cinema in tears and every man pretending they've got something in their eye. A definite hankie effort.

Time to replenish vital energies, so a quick stop off at Subway was required for a large toasted sub. I've no idea what the hell kind of red onions they use in there but damn, they're strong. At one point I did get a mouthful of little else but onions which, combined with the fact that I ate far too much of my friend Grant's homemade salsa the night before, means that even now I can taste nothing but onions. Actually, if you lean close enough to your monitor, you can probably smell me.

But I digress.

Back to the Cameo it was, where I then witnessed the late Robert Altman's final film, the just-released A PRAIRIE HOME COMPANION. The movie is based around the final night's performance of a country and western radio show that has somehow survived long after its contemporaries have disappeared. The film boasts some great music and a stellar cast from seasoned pros like Meryl Streep and LQ Jones, through quality actors such as John C Reilly and right down to the latest generation with teen queen turned booze hound Lindsay Lohan. It's a heart-warming film that touches on the shadow of death without becoming morbid.

While to date the only Altman film I actually like is the one everyone else thinks is a turd (QUINTET) I'll add this one to the list of positives. It's certainly a swansong worthy of the man.

Then it was quickly back down to the Filmhouse again for I SAW BEN BARKA GET KILLED, a French drama based around the disappearance of a major figure in French-African politics. Based on a real event but crafting an entirely fictional story involving crooks, a documentary film and the French director Georges Franju (EYES WITHOUT A FACE, FANTOMAS), this film was a dull, plodding affair that might have delivered a reasonable punch if the ending had arrived a lot sooner.

If you want a fiction film that uses real events to anchor its story, then a far better option would be the next film I saw. After killing half an hour with a Peanut KitKat, a can of Red Bull and the latest issue of Video Watchdog (best magazine ever), I returned to the Cameo for my final screening of the evening. Expecting the crowds outside (unusual for a late night screening) to be for this movie, I was surprised when only five people turned up inside. I'd hate to think that many people were turning up for this week's special late show ART SCHOOL CONFIDENTIAL. It's really not that good. Anyway, back to my choice...

If I had to list my favourite ever head-refrigerating African cannibal madman, I guess I'd pick Idi Amin. I've read about him, and I've watched a couple of films about him - the trashy film THE RISE AND FALL OF IDI AMIN, which I already featured in my Gobsmacking Cinema series (gobsmacking for many reasons, not least of which was just how much of the film's lunacy was based on real events) and the documentary IDI AMIN DADA: A SELF PORTRAIT, which I've also mentioned here briefly while talking about documentaries.

Naturally then, particularly having recently read the novel, I was enthusiastically awaiting the release of THE LAST KING OF SCOTLAND. Adapted for the screen from the novel by Giles Foden, the film is the drama feature debut of accomplished Scottish documentary filmmaker Kevin Macdonald (who gave us TOUCHING THE VOID and the Oscar-winning ONE DAY IN SEPTEMBER) and stars James McAvoy as a young Scottish doctor who finds himself acting as personal advisor to the crazed tyrant Idi Amin (a powerhouse performance by Forest Whitaker).

When a director makes his feature debut they can often end up overusing their bag of tricks to the point where the film becomes over-directed. Macdonald however has already proven himself with his documentaries however, and ends up striking the perfect balance between stylish presentation and offering a story free of artistic intrusion.

There is plenty of style on offer, to be sure - there are some documentary style touches and the most wonderfully effective use of quick zooms since the glory days of kung fu and spaghetti westerns. Macdonald manages to give the film a highly polished and distinct look while at the same time keeping it entirely separate in style from his documentaries.

As I've admitted above, I was excited about seeing this film and right from the off it grabbed me. In fact, it grabbed me even before the titles rolled, thanks to a fondness for the Fox fanfare at the start of the films. I can't help it - having spent my childhood growing up with STAR WARS and its sequels and then becoming obsessed with PLANET OF THE APES (greatest film ever made) I still get filled with child-like glee every time I sit in the cinema and that Fox fanfare comes on.

Anyway, the film itself... It's a stunner. It'll come as no surprise that large parts of the book are missing from the film - it always happens - and some of the supporting characters feature a lot less as a result. However, what is preserved on screen is certainly faithful to the book and the support characters are just that - the movie is all about Amin and Dr Garrigan, and how the latter becomes seduced by the charm and power of an evil man, to the point where he can hardly see that evil being committed (and when he does he's already in too deep).

The film has one or two moments that will make for uneasy viewing for more sensitive viewers (including one nasty scene that is alarmingly reminiscent of an infamous scene from CANNIBAL FEROX involving some metal hooks). However, it's worth it even if such things aren't your cup of tea as it's a captivating look at a fascinating man, it's a terrific thriller and it's a showcase for some great performances both in front of and behind the camera. It's a marvellous film and deserves all the accolades it gets.

Whitaker is certainly a stick-on for the Best Actor Oscar as far as I can tell, and I fully expect him to get a Golden Globe tonight too. That is, if he hasn't already. I don't know what time they're on and I don't know what the time difference is between here and America. It's just after 10pm here, so let's see... sod it, I'm off to look and see if they've started yet. Probably not, but there's not much point in me making predictions if they've already happened. Bye for now.

Coming soon (seriously, I speak the truth this time)... The Freakpit's favourite movies of 2006!

This is the voice of the Mysterians

Mysterians. Mysterons. Do you see what I did there? No, probably not, if you're a normal person.

I didn't quite get round to my promised "favourites of 2006" blog entry (you're all really surprised, I know) and probably won't get round to it until the weekend now. But just to keep things ticking over, I thought I'd make another brief posting just to give you more pointless movie nonsense to read over in the meantime.

Do you remember my enthusiastic ranting about how great the original GODZILLA movie is? Well, if you don't, you could probably just click on that link to remind yourself. Then come back here and read this post, since I decided to take a look at THE MYSTERIANS, another old Japanese sci-fi classic from the same folks who brought us the aforementioned big guy in the rubber suit.

THE MYSTERIANS tells the tale of a technologically superior alien invasion force (yep, the guys in the title of the movie) who travel to Earth on a sinister mission.

While GODZILLA seemed to be inspired by specific events (Japan's fate in the second world war and a particular incident involving bomb tests and the crew of a Japanese fishing vessel), THE MYSTERIANS is painted in broader strokes. This movie is more of a lesson on the nuclear arms race and the dangers of science being used to wage ever more threatening levels warfare.

The aliens, being so many years ahead of us poor Earthlings, have (naturally enough) destroyed their own planet thanks to those good old nukes and have come here to get what they need to replenish their race (as well as affording the filmmakers, through the aliens themselves, to lecture us on the dangers of our atomic folly).

Unfortunately for a few of the locals, what the Mysterians need are a bunch of Earth women with which to breed, since their own women keep giving birth to deformed children as a result of the radioactive atmosphere on their own planet.

Okay, so I lied, it looks like the movie probably is partly inspired by real events. Aside from being an allegorical look at the cold war arms race and the rivalry of America and Japan, the shadows of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are also visible across the movie. There are numerous references to radiation and H-bombs and once again, like GODZILLA, there are scenes such as the evacuation of Japanese cities that closely resemble the scenes that were appearing on the news not so very long before this movie was made.

As the humans put up more and more of a fight with bigger and bigger weapons, the arms race allegory is hammered home and the moralising is laid on thickly (the old guy who provided the conscience of the GODZILLA movie is present again, playing a very similar role here - sorry, I forget his name and I'm too lazy to look it up). For all the lessons the movie seeks to impart however, the ending is a touch ambiguous, leaving you to wonder whether there is a happy ending to this story or not - and perhaps that's exactly what many people wondered about the nuclear arms race too.

While THE MYSTERIANS obviously covers very similar thematic ground to GODZILLA (and yes, there's even a giant monster attack - rejoice!) the appearance is quite different. Gone is the grim black and white foreboding of GODZILLA, giving way to a technicolour marvel of multicoloured monsters and silver-suited aliens. Think GODZILLA, but more disco.

It's fair to say that the special effects have not aged well, though they were surely very impressive at the time. However, when you look at many Japanese sci-fi films a couple of decades later (mainly the GODZILLA sequels, upon which THE MYSTERIANS clearly had a huge influence) the effects haven't really improved by any great margin. Sure, the GODZILLA sequels didn't have huge budgets but I'd still like to think that it's a reflection of the impressive job Honda and his crew did on THE MYSTERIANS.

Both THE MYSTERIANS and GODZILLA are available on DVD in their original form now, thankfully, so I advise you to pop down your nearest DVD shop or rental store and check them both out. Well, unless you're one of my friends who happens to be reading this, in which case just ask and you can borrow them from me. Whatever. Just make sure you see them - especially GODZILLA.

Coming soon (again) - The Freakpit's favourite movies of 2006!

Blood and guts at your local multiplex

In the last week I have caught, among other things, FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS and APOCALYPTO at the cinema, both of which are films by megastar actors who have gone on to establish themselves as talented directors. That's not the only connection though - there's also the fact that both are probably expected to appear on critics' 2006 lists and in various categories come Oscar time (the end of February if you're interested).

FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS is Clint Eastwood's latest effort, the first film he's directed since picking up his Oscar for MILLION DOLLAR BABY. Based on James Bradley's novel, it's the tale of the six soldiers who appeared in the iconic flag-raising photo at the WW2 battlefield on Iwo Jima.

I certainly don't see anyone winning any Oscars for their acting in this movie. That's not to say that they're bad, because they're not - but there isn't one character in the whole film that stands out as a true Oscar-worthy performance. That's not really a complaint I guess, since they all do well enough - but there's nobody with real presence. What the cast really lacks is someone like, well, Clint Eastwood.

In fact, the most interesting aspect of the casting for me was seeing a very brief appearance by David Patrick Kelly as President Harry Truman. To me, he'll always be Luther, the guy that shoots Cyrus at the start of action classic THE WARRIORS. For the rest of the movie, I couldn't shake the desire to have President Truman skulking across the screen banging some bottles together while shouting "Japanese warriors, come out to plaay-aay." (That makes sense if you've seen THE WARRIORS, honest.)

The battle sequences are all impressively staged - this is Eastwood's SAVING PRIVATE RYAN - although some of the shots of the navy fleet look a little too CG-aided at times, and some viewers may find the realism all a bit too harrowing. But the film isn't about the battle, or even about the famous photo - it's about what makes a hero, how people perceive them and how they perceive themselves. It's about how these men react to the status thrust upon them as a result of their part in one almost insignificant incident, and how they and their families coped with events afterwards.

It's a grand film, epic in scope and achievement, but my one complaint (and this probably me being cynical) is that it feels too much like it's been engineered for awards season. Obviously the film's release has been timed to coincide with awards season, but that's expected; more than that though, the entire film just feels to me like it's been created with Oscars in mind. I said the same thing about MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA last year and while Eastwood's movie is still superior to that one, it's not Eastwood's best and it certainly isn't the best of the year. Expect a few nominations but not too many wins.

APOCALYPTO is Mel Gibson's latest effort behind the camera. It's an action adventure movie for sure, but it's vastly different from most that you'll have seen. It's set hundreds of years ago for a start, and takes place against the backdrop of the fall of a Mayan civilisation (shortly before the Europeans came and changed the face of America forever). Not content with filming THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST in Aramaic, this time he's gone for authenticity again by filming his latest in the Mayan language. His movie might not be the most historically accurate (are they ever?) but you can't fault his dedication to the craft.

If the blood and guts during the battle scenes in FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS are likely to shake up your average cinema-goer, then get the sickbags ready for APOCALYPTO as once more, like THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST before it, Gibson goes for some truly gruesome violence throughout. Again, it's probably authentic but it's really going to turn the stomach of people not used to watching such things.

In fact, in many places throughout the movie, I couldn't help but be reminded of Ruggero Deodato's CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST. I know that comparing a work like APOCALYPTO to a notorious video nasty probably seems a little fasetious but, apart from the fact that I do actually think Deodato's movie has some merit, it's a fair comparison in places.

There's the spectacularly-photographed jungle setting; the tribal peoples; the animal killing (though thankfully, unlike Deodato's, Gibson's is faked); a scene in which a tribal village is ransacked and burned; and of course the attention to detail during several scenes of stomach-churning realistic violence (the only reason I've never covered CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST in my Gobsmacking Cinema series is that you'd probably be disgusted just reading about it).

I don't want to tell you much about the plot because I think it's best if, like I did, you go and see it without knowing what to expect. Suffice to say it's a story built around just a handful of characters and yet covers an entire civilisation - a truly ambitious and epic story that is just brimming with the magic of cinema. It takes a little while to get going (early scenes establishing the relationship between the tribesmen are rather dull compared to the rest of the movie) but once it all kicks off you'll be glued to your seat.

While Gibson again manages to remind you why films should seen on the big screen, there are a couple of problems. For one thing, some of the special effects look cheap and unconvincing - not too many scenes are affected, but certainly a couple of effects are noticably CGI.

Secondly, while THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST did a wonderful job of looking a whole lot more expensive than it was due to the top-notch cinematography, APOCALYPTO is occasionally let down during the action sequences when some light blurring reveals that, unlike previous efforts shot in by more traditional means, this movie was obviously shot on HD rather than film. For the most part the film looks incredible but these moments let it down (if you notice such things, and I accept that some people probably don't - what can I say, I'm a geek).

Overall though it's a hell of an experience. Gibson has once again proven himself an accomplished director with great ambition and integrity - in fact, if you recall my praise of George Clooney around Oscar time last year (or my "George Clooney lovefest" as one colleague branded it), I'd have to say that I admire Gibson for much the same reasons (regardless of whatever other problems he might have).

This isn't like anything you're likely to see in the cinema and I urge you to rush out and catch it now before it disappears - it might well remind you why you love movies but I don't expect it to be setting the box office on fire.

One hopes, however, that such artistry will be rewarded come Oscar time. I wouldn't expect this one to appear in any of the big categories but who knows, it might achieve the unusual feat that many expected THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST to manage, and get a nomination in the foreign language category (though it would be doing well to beat Spain's entry, which I assume will surely be VOLVER or PAN'S LABYRINTH).

Whether it's recognised by award nominations or not, APOCALYPTO is definitely something all movie enthusiasts should see. Films like this are why cinema was invented.

Coming soon... The Freakpit's favourite movies of 2006!