Stuart Ford I speak my mind involuntarily. It's both a blessing and a curse.

Cloverfield

Watched Cloverfield in the cinema last night. A brilliant disaster movie which involves a mysterious monster attacking New York City, the origins nor fate of which are ever revealed. The film is shot entirely from the perspective of a small group of people who are recording events using a camcorder as they attempt to escape and survive the chaos around them.

Although sometimes very difficult to watch due to the jerky camera movements, the constraints that the film makers placed upon themselves by choosing this format have lead to a great deal of consistency with the film. There is no back story, you only get to know what the characters get to know, save perhaps for a few vague news reports from televisions in the background in a few scenes. Most disaster movies are plagued by implausible scientific and/or political back stories, plus equally implausible technology and military strategy, but there's none of this with Cloverfield and it's very refreshing. You're left with many unanswered questions at the end of the film as a result, but that's the point, you know no more than the protagonists.

I suppose you could describe it as Godzilla done right, although in all honesty I've never thought that Godzilla was an entirely terrible film, despite its widespread panning.

The Queen

Watched The Queen this evening, something which I've had in my DVD "inbox" for a few weeks now. I've always heard good things about it, and now I know why. It's a totally brilliant film, describing in great detail the tragedy of Princess Diana's death from the perspective of the royal family and the Blair family through their interactions with each other. There's even a bit of comedy thrown in here and there with Prince Philip and the Queen Mother.

However, what I like most about it is the portrayal of reprehensible Cherie Blair and the equally dreadful Alistair Campbell. The former is made out to be a total bitch whereas the latter is made out to be a sleazy, slimy reprobate; both highly accurate character portrayals in my opinion. Blair himself was portrayed as a "good guy", which he was (at the time at least), as indeed was the Queen herself in the end. I don't envy the position she was put in; all she knew was establishment protocol, even if said protocol didn't quite fit into the modern world. You can't blame her for the actions she initially took, or rather, didn't take. Nothing like this had ever happened in the history of the monarchy.

I've no problem in admitting that the film brought a few tears to my eyes, not only because of the plight of the Queen, whom I've always admired, but also because it reminded me of the event itself. While I didn't think much of Diana, she didn't deserve her fate and the nation's reaction to it was very moving. It certainly had my Mum in floods of tears and she totally hated her.

If you're British then you really have to watch it, whether you're a monarchist or not. I expect the Americans quite like it too.

I Am Legend

Watched I Am Legend in the cinema last night. It's another example of one of my favourite genres (i.e. apocalyptic and/or distopic futures) along the lines of 28 Days Later whereby a devastating plague has wiped out most of the human race and rendered the remainder inhuman in some way. It's set in New York City in 2012 and tells the tale of a scientist who, for some reason, is immune to the plague and is attempting to find a cure.

Because it's Hollywood, and not Danny Boyle with a DV Cam, the budget is quite a lot larger than 28 Days Later and so the sets and locations are more spectacular, creating an extremely eerie New York cityscape which was clearly abandoned very suddenly and in great panic. There are flashbacks to a back story, but they are mostly to do with the protagonist's family rather than the disintegration of society.

As is typical with Hollywood, there's a happy ending, but this does not mean it's a bad film and if you love the genre as much as I do then you must go and see it. Same goes if you're a Will Smith fan, he's a very fine actor and this film is no exception.

Blade Runner

They've finally remastered and re-released Blade Runner on DVD, on which I've spent some of my Christmas HMV vouchers. This is long overdue and the difference between it and the original DVD release is nothing short of remarkable. They've remastered the film, added a full 5.1 surround sound track and recut the film itself into "The Final Cut", adding deleted scenes and reworking some of the special effects.

The result is truly amazing and if you already have Blade Runner on DVD then I promise you that it will be £22 very well spent. The box set also contains the Director's Cut (as seen on the original DVD release) and the abominable United States theatrical release (the one with the narration deemed necessary to spoon-feed stupid Americans through the film), not that anyone would be interested watching that.

The Last King Of Scotland

Watched The Last King Of Scotland in the cinema with Chris tonight (well, eventually at least, after we'd waited for the ticket checking monkey to finish chatting to his entourage of female friends at the expense of actually serving customers). A splendid film about the regime of General Idi Amin in Uganda in 1970s, from his rise to power up until the Entebbe airport hostage crisis in 1976. In particular it dealt with his relationship with Scottish doctor Nicholas Garrigan, who fell in and out of favour as Amin's "closest advisor" up until the Entebbe crisis when he managed to escape the country. Forest Whitaker does a very scary Amin. I knew that the man was mad, but I didn't know he was that mad (as portrayed by Whitaker), but I have it on good authority that this is accurate, and you only need to look as far as his official self-given title for convincing:

His Excellency President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Doctor Idi Amin, VC, DSO, MC, Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Sea, and Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular

Having visited Uganda and heard some first-hand stories from some of the people who lived through these times (including some expelled Asians), this film fascinated me. I am going to seek out other related films, as I believe that there are a few that specifically deal with the expulsion of the Asians and the Entebbe crisis, as although these subjects were touched on in The Last King of Scotland, they weren't explored in any great depth beyond how they affected the relationship between Amin and Garrigan.

Casino Royale

Watched Casino Royale in the cinema this evening. Another excellent Bond, if a bit unusual. I understand the thing about it being a remake and I understand the thing about it being an adaptation of the first every Bond novel, where Bond gets his 00 status, but I question the decision to set it in modern times. It was just a little confusing, especially since Judi Dench played M again; you've already seen her in four previous Bond films in which Bond was a seasoned and experienced 00 agent. They should have either set it in the 60s, or not bothered with the whole newly qualified 00 agent thing.

There was also a notable absence of many of the things that I look forward to in all Bond films, most notably:

• No appearance from Q branch, and subsequently very few implausible gadgets
• No Moneypenny or associated shenanigans
• Hardly any one-liners
• No secret evil lair or sinister world-conquering plan belonging to the villain, and subsequently no gruesome and ironic demise of said villain

The part where he "invents" his famous drink is interesting though, as is his introduction to Felix. Other usual elements such as the Aston Martin, the girls and M are all present and correct though.

Ignoring these little continuity issues (which are issues for me even if they are not issues for you or Bond fandom at large), it is undoubtedly a fantastic addition to the Bond series. It's exciting, clever and tense. You'll definitely enjoy it.

Vehicles spotted:

• Aston Martin DBS
• Aston Martin DB5
• 2007 Ford Mondeo ST
• Jaguar XJS
• Range Rover Sport
• Land Rover LR3 (Discovery)
• Volvo S80
• Ford Crown Victora
• Ford Explorer
• Lincoln Town Car

Each one of those cars and brands are owned by Ford, one of the three main sponsors of the film, the other two being Sony and Virgin, complete with cameo of Richard Branson being searched at Miami airport. There were a couple of other car brands there, notably Montenegran police cars, but it was definitely Ford that got to place its products throughout the film.

Children Of Men

Watched Children of Men in the cinema the other night, which is a splendid film, right up my street with its chaotic, dystopian vision of the near future. Based in 2027 Britain, in a world where the human race has been inexplicably infertile since 2009, it tells the story of a woman who, again inexplicably, has become pregnant, except unfortunately for her she is an illegal immigrant and therefore must be kept safe from the government and other factions. I'll give nothing away, but if you like the genre you'll love this film. It's the sort of film you finish watching and then say "blimey", but not because you were shocked and awed, but because it gets you thinking so much.

It joins a number of films that are based in post-apocalyptic and/or dystopian Britain which are all on my list of favourites, namely:

• Nineteen Eighty Four - the classic that everyone knows and was probably at the very least forced to study at school. Britain is part of one of three superstates in the world and the government, modelled on extreme communism, rules using massive surveillance, propaganda and disinformation, convincing its citizens that they live in bountiful, victorious times, when in fact they live a squalid extistence in a shattered country.

• Brazil - a semi-parody of 1984, in which Britain's government rules using fear of terrorism and massive beaurocracy in a completely dysfunctional world. Terry Gilliam does an excellent job of taking the mick out of 1984 whilst at the same time worrying the audience to death with uncanny similarities to real life.

• Threads - another well known production which deals with nuclear war on Britain in the 1980s, specifically the lead up to a nuclear strike on Sheffield, the strike itself and its aftermath going on for 13 years after the attack. It's very grisly, pulls no punches and the plight of the protagonist and all around her just gets worse and worse as the film goes on. Needless to say that there is no happy ending.

• V for Vendetta - a recent release in which mid-21st Century Britain is ruled by a tyrannical fascist government which rules its citizens using a police state, fear of terrorism and supression of arts, media and other "objectional materials". There are many echoes of Nineteen Eighty Four with a very disturbing preface which does nothing less than smack you around the chops with the present-day "war on terrorism". There's a nice touch where they've used the actor who played the protagonist in Nineteen Eighty Four to play the tyrannical "High Chancellor" in this film.

• 28 Days Later - zombie horror film in which 2002 Britain has been infested with a terrifying virus and has been abandoned. The story follows the attempts of a group of uninfected people to survive. There's a sequel currently in production, but since it's being done by a different director it remains to be seen as to how good it will be. I've heard that it involves Americans saving our sorry asses again, where would we be without them?

• Reign of Fire - early/mid 21st Century Britain is a derelict wasteland after a species of fire breathing dragon takes over the world and burns it to a crisp. The story follows a group of survivors who seek to destroy the only male dragon. Another scary vision of an abandoned, shattered Britain.

There are many other films in the genre, but all based elsewhere, mostly in the United States. Noteworthy examples include Blade Runner, The Day After, Equilibrium, Escape from New York (a bit silly, but reminiscent of the Bexhill refugee camp in Children of Men) and of course the classic Soylent Green.

War Of The Worlds

Saw War Of The Worlds (2005) in the cinema on Sunday night, and I have to say that I was jolly impressed. I was slightly dubious about it because of a number of reasons, most notably:

1. it is a remake
2. of something that was originally not based in the US
3. and written by a famous non-American author
4. that has Tom Cruise in it
5. and is directed by Stephen "Hollywood Ending" Spielberg
6. and had the potential to be rather similar to Independence Day

The last point proved to be very false (save perhaps for the physical appearance of the aliens themselves), and despite the other points it was actually a remarkably good film. It's certified 12A, but it is genuinely very frightening in some parts and probably should be a 15. There's a couple of things I don't like about it, in that there's a glaring goof early on in the film when someone's using a camcorder after an electromagnetic pulse.

There's also the ending scene where everyone's alive and well with the grandparents in their fresh, clean Christmas-present knitwear smiling in a somehow unscathed street in Boston, but to be fair this is actually true to the original, where the journalist returns to his alive and well family in an otherwise completed levelled Leatherhead, so that was very convenient for the Hollywood ending.

I liked the way that you didn't see the big picture. Rather like Signs, you only get to see events from the perspective of the central characters, which are normal working people, rather than presidents and military generals and unsung heros. There was also none of the rubbish like "... and only one ordinary man has the key!", Cruise's character isn't a hero, he's just a normal man trying to protect his family. The events of the aliens' demise simply unfold around him, he has nothing to do with it. It was very gritty and very real in that respect, he remained totally helpless and powerless.

Definitely a DVD purchase, possibly even a second viewing in the cinema.

JFK

Watched JFK on DVD last night. An utterly splendid film with very high information compression, meaning you really have to pay attention to it throughout the whole 3 hours otherwise you WILL miss something. I didn't know very much at all about Kennedy's assassination up until now, I knew the basic story of course, including the fact that there was "a conspiracy theory", but I didn't know much beyond that. Personally I'm with Jim Garrison, and while I may not have been with him at the time (as I, along with the American public, probably wouldn't have believed the US government to be capable of such things), I've had the benefit of seeing another 40 years of history pass by and witnessed numerous further acts of corruption, nest feathering and underhandness.

It was, of course, all about the war industry. Kennedy was a democrat radical, not exactly left wing, but certainly way too left wing for a lot of peoples' liking. Kennedy was going to end the cold war with the Soviet Union and he wasn't going to go to war in Vietnam, and of course this was all very bad news for those in the defence industry. The contemporary anti-communist witch-hunt was incidental, although it did not help Kennedy with his polices at the time. The links cannot be proven of course, but doesn't that sound rather familiar considering what happened in the middle east last year? It's the same thing every time - the economy of the United States more or less depends on there being a war in the world at any one time, whether US forces are actively involved or not. If there isn't a war, they create one, otherwise they go into recession. They're now even recreating the anti-communist witch-hunts, except now it's with the largely unquantifiable foe known as "terrorism" - essentially an unrestricted meal ticket with no expiry date for the defence industry. It's utterly sickening.

So now, 40 years on, what used to be an outrageous slur on the US government is more or less accepted as the way things are by the jaded and cynical publics of the world, and if Garrison thought that it was corrupt then, just think how he would feel if he knew what was to come: Nixon (whose corruption brought the country to the brink of crisis), arming the Taliban, Saddam Hussein and General Pinochet; right through to September 11th. Yes, I'm sorry, but I'm with the conspiracy theorists on that one, so many things just don't make sense or sit right with me, but that's another discussion for another day.

In summary, excellent film. An important part of United States history revealed, whether it can be proven or not. If you're interested in United States history from that sort of time period, the film Nixon pretty much follows on from it as far as the timeline goes, although obviously it covers a different subject. Thirteen Days covers the Cuban Missile Crisis, which of course took place a year before Kennedy was killed. Kevin Costner stars in both JFK and Thirteen Days, but plays different characters in each.

The Lord Of The Rings

Watched The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring on DVD with Dave yesterday. I had no idea what this film was about before, all I knew was that it was "some sort of fantasy", and absolutely nothing more. I didn't even know that it was related to The Hobbit (which I read as a child). So when Dave said "watch this inordinately long film that looks a bit hippah" I eyed him with suspicion. But I watched the film, and I was very very impressed and I enjoyed it immensely. Splendid characters, splendid locations, splendid scenery, splendid acting and splendid music, an absolute ten out of ten.

I was a little surprised by the ending as at that point I didn't realise that all three films were one big long story, I thought they were self contained stories within the same world and with the same characters, so I said "oh" at the end of the film, but no matter, Star Wars is the same and that's in six bloody parts. Talking of Star Wars, there was an amazing amount of similarities between the films. The storyline is generally the same and there are some very obvious equivalent characters. For example, Gandalf is obviously Obi Wan, Saruman is Darth Vader, Sauron is the Emperor, Frodo is Luke Skywalker, the Uruk-Hai army is the Clone army, the Fellowship is the Jedi Council, the tree people are the Ewoks; the list goes on. Lord Of The Rings obviously predates Star Wars, so I reckon some influence from it crept into Star Wars at some point.

So yes, from knowing nothing about Lord Of The Rings to being very impressed within the same 4 hours is a remarkable feat, and while I'm sure a second viewing will benefit my understand greatly, I think I understood the majority of it first time. It's quite verbose (which is probably why it's so bloody long) and this is helpful. Other films like Dune and Bladerunner require 10 viewings before you even start to follow them correctly. However, the best was yet to come ...

Immediately afterwards we watched The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers in the cinema. Now this film really blew me away. The first film was excellent, but this was mind boggling. They obviously poured quite a lot of the profits from the first film into this one because it was truly staggering. The second part of the long trilogy, it picked up exactly where the last film left off, and no doubt ended exactly where the next film will start from. This film was a lot darker than the first one, there were no meadows, or happy clappy hobbits drinking ale and dancing round tables, of children laughing at fireworks, this was the nitty gritty, the "Empire Strikes Back" part of the story.

My favourite bits were the gigantic battle outside that castle in the cliff, and then the attack by the tree people on Saruman's war factory, with the bursting damn and everything, truly amazing, how they filmed these things is beyond me. Actually it's not, I know it's all ILM hocus pocus, but even so, this is going to take some beating. Mostly the same characters were retained, except without Boromir and with the addition of Smeagol, the comedy Jar Jar Binks character but actually done well and is highly relevant to the story, instead of being a gratuitous action figure model designed to make children laugh.

Go and see it. Twice.

By the way, if you think I've misunderstood or missed parts of Lord Of The Rings, it's because I'm an absolute novice. I know there are a lot of people who've been fans for most of their lives, whereas I only discovered it yesterday. Cut me some slack :)