Le Boulangere de Moncreau - 1963 ****1/4

A fascinating character study of a man in 1960s Paris who, after declaring his undyling love for one girl, Sylvie, he begins a meaningless flirtation with a local woman working in a Bakery. He begins to visit her everyday under the pretence of buying various pastries, and soon believes her to be interested in him. In his eyes he is angry that she thinks she might stand a chance with him, despite the fact that he has been leading her on with kind words and actions and he soon decides to show her once and for all that he doesn't like her. Very interesting little film (and really makes you crave cookies!)

Chloe in the Afternoon - 1972 ***

I'm really into Rohmer's films at the moment and am taking much delight in watching one after the other, much as I did with Claude Chabrol some years earlier. I am keen to see all his 6 'Moral Tales' - a selection of films with specific morals running through them, and so far I have seen this, and 'My Night at Maud's.' MNAT was superior by far, as although I found his next offering a delight to watch, I couldn't help being put off by the ugliness of the lead female and the disturbingly male behaviour of the lead man. The whole film seems to revolve around the typical arrogance most males seem to exude when they get married, that they are somehow 'missing out' on all the other women who they could be with. This one particular man raves on about how much he loves his wife and how he would never be unfaithful to her, but when an old flame 'Chloe' turns up they begin a weird cat and mouse game of chasing each other and then pulling back when the other becomes interested. As soon as she shows interest in him he gets a sudden attack of conscience over his lovely wife who has at this time just given birth and rushes back to her. Pathetic. A good film, but the two leads repulsed me too much with their behaviour.

Hiroshima Mon Amour - 1959 *

I know this is supposed to be a masterpiece but I found the entire concept of the movie very upsetting. The footage of Hiroshima was too much and made me feel quite distressed. I remember studying Hiroshima at school and the impact it had on me then was tremendous. The actors did their best with what they had and I appreciate it was a tricky idea to execute but I found the film matter a bit much and it left me feeling very unsettled for hours afterwards.

My Night At Maud's - 1969 ****1/2

Strange to see two such different films from the same year (this and 'La Notte') but this was far superior to the other. My first experience of Rohmer was a happy one, and I was riveted throughout the entire movie as I experienced a potential candidate (in my eyes) for best movie of 1969. Another example of New Wave cinema from France.
A catholic man in his thirties with strict morals about fidelity and marriage bumps into an old friend on Christmas Eve who takes him back to a female friend's flat. The woman, Maud, spends the evening talking to the two men about everything from relationships to religion to politics. It then starts to snow, and the man is offered shelter at her flat until morning. With this, his morals fly out the window.
This results in a fascinating movie with some completely natural acting. I was so moved by the woman who played Maud's acting that I took in every single movement and word that she did and said with much gusto.
Another hidden gem in my eyes, a bit like 'The Soft Skin' by Francois Truffaut.

La Notte - 1969 ***

Having been so bowled over by Antonioni's first offering (L'Aventura') I figured the second in the triology would be equally fascinating. Although I think Mastroianni and Moreau are fantastic actors I couldn't quite appreciate their relationship. I was aware that they were a married couple who had both been unfaithful but they didn't appear to have any chemistry between them, even in the few tender moments where they seem like they might be getting closer together. They spent most of the film at a party wandering around individually looking unhappy. Comparing this to the first film of the trilogy left me bitterly disappointed. Such a shame after the intensity of the first one.

Foolish Wives - 1922 ***

If this film had been about half the length I really would have given it higher marks, because I found it a thrilling glimpse into 1920s silent film. However I'll be honest, my mind was drifting by the time I was 3/4 through. Von Stroheim is a master of his art, and the way he directed and starred in this made me desperate to see more of his work. It was incredibly refreshing to see how his characters interacted with each other and to see the passion in their faces as they performed. Interesting film of it's time.

New Best Friend - 2002 ****

This was a peculiar film, because on the surface it comes across as a shallow attempt of Cruel Intentions, when in reality it is just as potent and drips with all the ingredients that make a thriller enjoyable. There is back-stabbing, double-crossing, deceit, drug taking and disturbing revelations afoot after a high-achieving girl stumbles into the 'IT' crowd at college by accident. She becomes friends with blonde, rebellious Hadley and is soon sucked into a scary new world of alcohol and drugs.
Good film with a 'shocking' ending (but you will probably figure it out well before then!)

Ruthless People - 1986 ****

I must say the cover of the film was what put me off watching it for such a long time. It looked so dated and a bit tacky to be honest. But sooner or later I realised that I have seen the majority of 80s comedies and really needed to watch it to 'tick it off the list.' Well all I can say is I'm so glad I finally watched it. It was hilarious. Bette Midler is on top form and Danny DeVito made me chuckle almos constantly throughout the film.
DeVito plays a filthy rich businessman who has decided he wanted to get rid of his wife so that he can move his mistress in instead. However, luck seems to be changing for him when his wife is kidnapped by his ex-employee and girlfriend who then hold her for ransom. However, the kidnappers are meek, mild people who wouldn't hurt a fly and instead of killing her because DeVito refuses to pay the ransom they instead let her stay with them. Then the tables turn...
Hilarious. I've said it before and I'll say it again, this was one of the best comedies from that decade I have seen!

The Smiling Madame Beudet - 1922 ***

A little known silent film from 1922, Madame Beudet's agonising look of despair and rejection speaks through decades of film. Trapped in a marriage with a selfish and stifling man who cares nothing for his wife's pursuits or interests and instead tries to smother her with his own problems she has hallucinations and recurring nightmares that she cannot escape.

An interesting 'feminist' film, and short enough to fit into an hour's break.

(NOIR) Murder My Sweet - 1944 ***

I'm concerned that I didn't find this nearly as good as the critics rave about. In fact except for the occasionally funny one liners that Dick Powell comes out with I think that the rest of the film was quite poor. I'm not sure if I like Powell as Philip Marlowe, because to be honest I feel like Bogart IS Marlowe, so it's strange for another actor to take his place, especially one who is well known for singing and playing rom-com parts. He does make quite a good detective however, and is suitably smarmy into the account, but something about his performance just didn't click for me. Claire Trevor was typically beautiful and sultry as the femme fatale, but there was hardly any chemistry between the characters, except for the friendly 'bro-mance' between Marlowe and Malloy.
One to see, but would recommend 'The Big Sleep' with Bogart instead if you want to see Philip Marlowe at his best.

(HORROR) I'll Always Know What You Did Last Summer - 2006 ***

I was surprised actually how good this was considering the last offering was about 8 years ago. It deals with pretty much the same story as the other 2 did. A group of adults being pursued by a man in a cape with a hook and being killed off one at a time in an array of interesting deaths. The ending is pretty silly, and when you discover the identity of the being it's quite amusing and actually lowers the tone of the film even more. But it wasn't a bad movie when you consider how hideous the 3rd film in a trilogy usually is.

(HORROR) Noriko's Dinner Table - 2005 **

I'm not quite sure why this is called a sequel to 'Suicide Club' because if anything it is a prequel to the events leading up to the mass suicide under the train at the beginning of the latter. It's extremely confusing, but what I got from it was that a young girl named Noriko who doesn't feel like she belongs in her family and her current life, runs away to Tokyo to meet the founder of a teenage chat room whom she has been speaking to. It turns out that every person who committed suicide under the train was also a member. Sort of a place for lost souls to go who 'don't fit in'. However, the girl she meets turns out to be a very peculiar being who, along with her family delights in playing strange mind games with Noriko and telling her lies about how she was brought up. She succeeds in 'brainwashing' Noriko into believing that she has no family and that she lives there with her.
It's all very odd, a bit more in the vein of 'Strange Circus' than 'Suicide Club' but also seems to deal more with Tokyo culture and how teenage girls get sucked into an artificial world of celebrity.

(HORROR) The Suicide Club - 2001 ***

I have wanted to watch this for years and finally got the chance to see this and the sequel this weekend. Absolutely bizarre is all I can say. Japan really has surreal and disturbing horror down to a T. Some parts of the film really stick in your head for hours afterwards, such as the very first scene where 54 female students jump in front of a train set to strange Scottish music. Very weird. From then on the whole film tries to work out why suicides are happening all around Tokyo and what could lead such a large group of girls to commit suicide in happy unison. There isn't really an answer to this film, and it's more about what goes on beneath the surface than the exterior.
I actually quite enjoyed it. (Sick or what?)

The Magnificent Ambersons - 1942 ***

I seem to be going through a spate of disappointing films recently. This was an offering that I was sure would impress me, but actually it didn't, and the only positive thing I got from the film was watching Joseph Cotten prance around for an hour and a half. Nice to see Orson Welles giving the main part to Cotten (they bonded in 'The Third Man') but even the fact that he directed this film didn't mean it was worthwhile. Based on a book of the same name, but don't think I will be reaching for it quite yet.

The Killing of a Chinese Bookie - 1976 *

I have yet to find a John Cassavetes movie that I actually like. I didn't like this. I thought it was a mis-matched jumble of rubbishness and I was thoroughly unimpressed. The film ambles on at a really ridiculous pace with no aim or resolution. Very disappointed.

(NOIR) The Reckless Moment - 1949 ***

I actually thought this was a very mediocre film. It was slow and nothing much seemed to happen until the last few minutes which resulted in a bizarre and slightly over-the-top climax. Joan Bennett was very frumpy and I found her performance to be less than average. James Mason as the blackmailer turned good guy was about the only saving grace of the whole thing. A jumbled mistake that I wish I hadn't watched.

Stuart: A Life Backwards - 2006 ****

The combination of Cumberbatch and Hardy in one gritty and real film is enough to guarantee it's popularity as far as I am concerned. Added to which, parts of it were filmed very close to where I work which made it even more likeable.
Based on a true account, Cumberbatch plays Alexander, a bookish, intelligent man who meets Stuart, an aggressive drunk and thoroughly mixed up human being at a protest for homeless people.
Despite his initial reactions, Alexander soon forms a close bond with Stuart, enough for him to suggest that he writes a book about Stuart's troubled life so that people can understand why he ended up on 'the wrong side of the tracks'. Stuart is in agreement, but says the best way for his story to be told is backwards like a murder mystery, so that people can see who 'murdered the innocent child that he was'.
The acting from both these people, especially Tom Hardy is superb. It is fluid, frightening, calm, uncomfortable and completely natural and just seems like these two are meant for their parts. The story is actually very moving and quite painful in places. It will certainly leave you with a lump in your throat.

(NOIR) He Ran All the Way Home - 1951 ***

An interesting film, but not one of the best noirs in my personal opinion (owing to the weak story and ridiculous co-star of Garfield).
John Garfield is electrifying and completely steals every scene he is in, which makes Shelley Winters pretty pale in comparison.
Garfield plays a thief and down-on-his-luck kind of guy, who plans to steal some money off an acquaintance with the help of his only friend. This however goes horribly wrong when his friend is killed, and Garfield is then on the run. He befriends a gullible spinster at a local swimming pool and then ends up taking her whole family hostage.
I don't think I have ever seen a film with Winters where she didn't annoy me to the point of switiching off and this was no different. Her manner and utterly pathetic demeanor does her no favours when her family become hostages and I found myself having no sympathy for her.
Garfield is the highlight of this film, and could probably have carried the whole thing off himself without any help from any other characters. It's a shame he didn't, but his last film before his death is one that will stick in my mind.