nick suess

Movie making at its absolute brilliant best, using all the elements that were central to the art in the period in which it is predominantly set, the early 30s. This was only 5 years into the era of the 'talkies' and the acting was emphatic, the dialogue crisp. No special effects, but cute little models depicting the scene, even the gorgeous wedding-cake facade of the hotel itself. And it was eastern Europe epitomised to perfection. My ancestral roots are in that region, and I saw so many of the quirky mannerisms that populated my distant childhood, those of relatives now long gone who were young adults there in the 30s. I loved Mendl's - pure Viennese Konditorei, with their little pink boxes that so much 'belonged' that I could taste the chocolate, cream and marzipan.

The plot screamed "suspend disbelief", and it's sad that the 'hated it' brigade on here couldn't figure this - obviously they find 'Avatar' more realistic! The acting - well Ralph Fiennes overwhelmingly carried the scene, and if he (and also the movie and director) don't walk off with little statuettes there's something very wrong with the system. But Zero both young and old were terrific, and I see a 'best supporting' for the boy with the pencil-thin moustache.

Some movies, despite their brilliance, are ones you see just a single time. This one I could watch over and over, and I am sure each time I would spot delightful little things I missed before. It is such an exquisite confection - a Mendl's pastry wrapped up in a cubic pink box and tied with a bright blue ribbon. Yum-yum!!!!

I travelled in Iran during the era of the Shah. I knew his was a puppet regime set up by the UK and USA to protect their access to Iranian oil. I knew that he was horrifically repressive and his secret police (SAVAK) were brutal beyond belief. The movie states all of this quite unequivocally at the start.

I also know that what followed him was every bit as oppressive and brutal, and the movie depicts the reality of this. It is not anti-Islamic to show the truth, the summary executions, gun-happy revolutionary guards and many people strung up in the street from mobile cranes, a barbaric practice that continues to this day.

I remember when the Ayatollah flew back in from France, and I really do remember the high hopes all around the world that a new dawn of freedom had arrived for Iran, but unfortunately it never happened. The movie is not inaccurate in its portrayal of those troubled times. The streets were indeed full of angry mobs day after day, usually chanting slogans demanding death to all Americans.

But this is a movie review, not a political analysis, nor a fine examination of the factual details. Ben Affleck has taken the bare bones of a true story and used artistic licence to direct a brilliant thriller, absolutely gripping.

It's top movie-making, and for that I award 10 marks.

Those mean spirits who dispute this - Ar, Go f-ck yerself!

I saw this piece of extended trash on an aeroplane. Its most exciting moment was when the hostie came with my meal, and the second most exciting was when she came to take away my tray. In between, I endured three hours of dross. My wife quit after one hour but I foolishly stuck with it in the vain hope that something meaningful might eventually be revealed. The most meaningful revelation was in the closing titles, when I realised I had failed to spot that Nurse Noakes was Hugo W. OK, it was late at night.

Anyone making oxymoronic use of the word 'masterpiece' in relation to this pretentious piece of self indulgence must have been living under a damp rock. World cinema is full of truly great movies, and I was lucky enough to watch two of them on the long trip from London to Australia. Unfortunately this stood out as the exception.

The use of interlocking themes is not new, and there are numerous excellent examples, but in these the links make sense, and go beyond recycling a set of big name actors with elaborate make-up and prosthetics, or speaking silly invented languages. Such movies need to be tight, engaging, compelling, and not a weary yawnfest.

Ultimately, making this rambling assembly of disjointed half-baked ideas at this huge length was a total indulgence by its directors. Why did it receive zero Oscar nominations? Because the Academy is not composed of complete idiots, that's why, OK?