TimMeade

TL;DR A fascinating story, moderately well told 3.5*

There's an old adage that World War II was won by American steel, British Intelligence, and Russian blood. Simplistic and trite, but like so many clichés there's an element of truth to it.

Operation Mincemeat was the name given to the British ruse of attempting to fool the Nazis into believing the assault on southern Europe would not come through the obvious stepping stone of Sicily but through Sardinia and Greece. A dead body, supposedly of a Royal Marines major, was placed to wash up on the shore of the Gulf of Cadiz carrying documents to support this scheme. The subterfuge and planning to make this seem believable was incredible. It was one of a multitude of such deceptions from British Intelligence but is arguably the best known and one of the most effective.

The story has previously been told in a very decent film, The Man Who Never Was, made in 1956 when many details pertaining to the operation were still firewalled. The full facts, now known, are so amazing they don't need any embellishment. Sadly, director John Madden and screenwriter Michelle Ashford can't resist adding a few contrivances which are as obvious as they are unnecessary, their resolutions implausibly weak - exactly the same issue that blighted the otherwise good film Hacksaw Ridge a few years ago.

I accept it's not a documentary and adding a few fripperies can be effective from an entertainment point of view. This is well shown in Bond creator Ian Fleming's very peripheral role being greatly increased; this allows for a couple of James Bond meta jokes, which raise a smile, and a wonderful small supporting role from James Fleet as Charles Fraser-Smith, the real-life inspiration for Q. Most of the acting is first rate, especially Penelope Wilton doing what she always does best, although Simon Russell Beale is unconvincing as Churchill.

The film is at its strongest in the first half as the scheme is hatched and planned, but it loses focus after the body is placed and recovered when the contrivances come to the fore and a gratuitous love sub-plot distracts. But at least it's better than John Madden's previous attempt at a WW2 story, his deeply disappointing adaptation of Captain Corelli's Mandolin.

It's an absolute pity that what could, and should, have been a classic film, a tribute to the men and women who did so much to defeat the Nazis, should ultimately be a bit of a let-down, albeit still always watchable.

TL;DR Corny. Clichéd. Totally exhilarating. 4.5*

It's a Tom Cruise Top Gun film and it delivers exactly what you expect, and exactly what you want.

Reprising his role as Maverick, Tom Cruise is ordered back to the Top Gun School by Admiral 'Iceman' (a short cameo from an ailing Val Kilmer) to train the current generation of super pilots for a near mission impossible. Dramatic tension is inevitable with one of the pilots, Rooster Bradshaw being son of Goose, Maverick's wing man in the iconic 1986 film of which this is the sequel.

The plot is completely derivative and predictable, the characters two dimensional. But you know that before the film begins. Don't whinge about it.

The flight photography is constantly stupendous and never confusing; the story rips along, very well paced by director Joseph Kosinski. There's a few meta jokes pertaining to the first film, again as you'd expect, and the soundtrack is superb.

The film's main flaw, such as it is, is its casting imbalance. Tom Cruise dominates throughout; with one notable exception toward the end, none of the supporting cast ever really get a chance to shine. I guess this is near inevitable, however, when you're one of the greatest film stars of all time and also the film's producer. No different to Hamlet though.

This is a beltingly good action movie which will disappoint very few who enjoy this genre of film. And who doesn't?

Directed by Armando Iannucci who co-wrote the screenplay with Simon Blackwell, The Personal History of David Copperfield was never likely to resemble a BBC Sunday tea time serial that some of us remember from childhood days.

Messrs Iannucci and Blackwell have previously collaborated on such satirical comedic work as The Thick of It, The Loop and Time Trumpet - Armando Iannucci also wrote and directed The Death of Stalin, a superb piece of satire, in 2017.

So hopes for this first film adaptation of Dickens' classic in over 50 years were exceptionally high. They were met in full.

From the little I've read of Dickens (Great Expectations, A Christmas Carol) I'm aware that he enjoys creating ridiculously comic characters with bizarre behaviours and physical oddities. And in this tale of the little loved, little wanted boy maturing into a young gentleman, the ensemble cast is given free rein to indulgently over-act to their hearts' content; it works brilliantly. There's not a weak link, every actor seems to be thoroughly enjoying themselves and this fun emanates from the screen. This is complimented by set, production and costume design all of which is flawless and adds to the sense of enjoyment. Cinematography from Zac Nicholson is also to be commended.

The script is sharp and there are many laugh out loud scenes, with jokes both visual and verbal, especially in the film's first half. Social commentary is almost entirely visual. And it's moving; when the older David Copperfield speaks to his younger self at the film's end, I'm sure I wasn't the only one to well up.

Mr Iannucci directs with energy and has a few tricks up his sleeve to keep the audience engaged.

My only question is why Mr Micawber is not given his famous line: 'Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.' I can only guess the filmmakers are exponents of Modern Monetary Theory so decided to give this principle a swerve.

The Personal History of David Copperfield is an unfettered delight from start to finish. I think this is going to become an annual Christmas treat for me.