Reviews by PvtCaboose91

The Maltese Falcon is a classic, enthralling thriller and the definitive film version of Dashiell Hammett's unforgettable novel. Adapted by John Huston (who also directed), the film marks the big break of actor Humphrey Bogart who went on to star in such beloved classics as Casablanca and The African Queen.

John Huston's The Maltese Falcon is a film that has become an all-time classic, and is still considered one of the greatest movies at all time.

Humphrey Bogart plays a private detective named Sam Spade. When his partner is killed under mysterious circumstances, Sam soon becomes mixed up in a murderous hunt for a valuable statuette that has been described as "the stuff dreams are made of". The fabled treasure, known as The Maltese Falcon, is one of its kind and its current whereabouts is unknown.

This sizzling thriller moves at an invigorating pace and is carried by an abundance of magnificent performances. Aside from Bogart, whose performance was outstanding, there is a host of remarkable supporting players including Mary Astor, Peter Lorre and Sydney Greenstreet.

For a crime thriller, the script was surprisingly excellent. The dialogue was fascinating, with plot twists established exceptionally well. Due to the film's plot twists and unexpected turns, it improves with each new screening. But the film is strictly for those who are looking for intelligent dialogue as opposed to no-brainer crime films we see far too much of in this day and age.

At just about every level, The Maltese Falcon has memorable things to offer. Bogart is frequently charismatic and is able to engage the audience who hang off every word that comes out of his mouth. His character is extremely well conceived, and executed with style by one of the most loved actors of all time.

And who could forget Peter Lorre? Lorre is undoubtedly among the best actors in the film. He creates a great atmosphere and a memorable character.

The Maltese Falcon is a film that has been regarded as being one the greatest films of all time. So what makes the film so great? An unbelievably fascinating story, great performances, an inspirational directorial debut by John Huston and the lightening pace that makes the film remarkable entertainment. My only complaint rests in the lack of chemistry between Mary Astor and Bogart, and the complex story that is a little hard to comprehend at times. But of course, even despite these flaws the film is still a far superior to any crime films we see in the recent contemporary age of cinema. No-one will ever be able to match the sheer genius of this classic masterpiece.

The Maltese Falcon may not be in the league of Casablanca or many other Bogart movies, but it still stands the test of time. Recommended.

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is a riveting classic adventure tale that made a huge impression on global cinema. Even though it's over 60 years old the film holds a major influence on the way adventure films have been made to this day.

Many will wonder what makes the film so special. For me it was a great way to spend two hours because it was highly entertaining, fascinating and has a high sense of excitement. Then underneath the surface we have a great underlying message about human nature and the lust for greed.

The Treasure of the Sierra Madre is a tale set in 1920s Mexico. Two poor men named Dobbs (Bogart) and Curtin (Holt) are desperate for a pay check and will do anything to strike wealth. Lucky for them they run into an old codger named Howard (played by director John Huston's dad Walter) who endlessly drones on about mining for gold and knowing the spot where one can find gold worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

And so the three men set out into the mountains for a spot of gold prospering after pooling together their funds to purchase all necessary equipment. During their adventure they encounter bandits and Indians but none of these threaten them as much as something they never anticipated - human nature and greed.

This classic tale is one high adventure film that you won't want to miss. It delivers a sense of true adventure; making the experience exhilarating and a whole heap of fun. But what really makes this one unlike all other adventure films is its subconscious message about how easily mankind can be corrupted and manipulated by the thought of money.

Some of the scenes throughout the movie during which characters quarrel over the gold is spellbinding. Because of the fantastic characters we can easily find ourselves engaged in what's going on for the film's two hour period.

And what was imperative for this to work? It's simple - the extraordinary performances from everyone in the cast. Humphrey Bogart was already an established star and was raking in lots of money. Especially after The Maltese Falcon and Casablanca this man was extremely distinguished amongst the thousands of other actors working at the time. Bogey's portrayal was captivating and brilliant. He got his role perfected in no time. He seemed like a gruff, poor beggar at the beginning of the movie. And by the end we get the sense of what occurred after he got his hands on such a large amount of gold. His lust for wealth got the better of him, and Bogart gets his character across in a stunning way.

Walter Huston, father to director John Huston, finally received an Oscar as the aging gold prospector. Clearly there are little flaws to find in his character. Tim Holt was only known for trashy B-Grade flicks up until he got his big break here. He is always so focused, and so dissimilar to the other two protagonists. With this in mind, each of the three title characters are so divergent.

John Huston both wrote and directed the film himself. He was without question the perfect man for the job. He excelled himself, and I liked this film better than The Maltese Falcon which is also among the screen greats.

Above all this, the cinematography is what sold the film for me. Each location was brilliant and looked completely gorgeous on the big screen. The use of such dense bush and the sense of isolation totally blew me away.

But wait - there's more. Just when you think things couldn't get any better, I also found the invigorating score by Max Steiner to be the perfect way to top it all off. I don't think there are any flaws to be pointed out in this classic production. Quotable lines, great messages about humanity and just all round inspiring filmmaking.

The Treasure of Sierra Madre is a phenomenal achievement and will forever be a movie that stands the test of time. It's groundbreaking, exciting and adventurous. Quite simply if you've never seen this classic cinematic gem then you have no idea what you're missing out on.

Aeon Flux is really quite dreadful; nothing more than a no-brainer sci-fi live-action flick based on the animated TV series.

First of all, the style and atmosphere are terribly artificial. There's far too much CGI and digitally expanded sets that detract highly from the overall film value. As a result of this heavy reliance on CGI we can't get engaged in the film at all. The characters are all horribly conceived but executed worse. The actors are all terribly wooden not to mention lifeless and unexciting. And for the final nail in the coffin, the film is so awfully predictable beyond belief!

Aeon Flux is a sci-fi film set 400 years into the future subsequent to 99% of the world's population being wiped out by a virus. The only survivors live in a society with a corrupt government. A group of rebels called 'The Monicans' attempt to overthrow the government and put an end to this corruption of the highest level that has gone on too long. Then when one of their soldiers named Aeon Flux (Theron) is sent to assassinate the chairmen named Trevor Goodchild (Csokas) she discovers a whole new mystery.

The only thing that holds this rubbish together would be the action scenes that are tame but mildly entertaining. There are guns aplenty as well as many characters that do nothing more than showcase their acrobatic skills in front of the camera.

Charlize Theron is an actress I usually admire, but unfortunately here she's emotionless, dull, lifeless and just plain terrible. It would take a long time to mention all the members of the cast I was disappointed with, but I think it goes without saying that even the extras couldn't bring anything good to the table. The direction was very empty, and the atmosphere filled with CGI only made it increasingly hollow. The music didn't add anything more to the movie.

Aeon Flux had the potential to be the decade's The Fifth Element but unfortunately it screwed up every opportunity it had. There is no wonder that it took me so long to finally finish watching this film. It's even more two dimensional than the cartoon! And hence, I kept getting increasingly embarrassed to watch the movie and it continued watching it another day. Boy, I wish I never decided to give this film a shot. My advice, and I suggest you take it: Avoid!

Stand by Me is a timeless screen gem based on a Stephen King novella called 'The Body'. The film marks one of the best Stephen King translations to the big screen; this poignant, touching classic is quite simply a masterpiece.

Stand by Me is a film that follows three young boys about to enter their teen years; Gordie (Wheaton), Chris (Phoenix), Teddy (Feldman) and Vern (O'Connell). The plot is quite simple; Vern is underneath his house digging furiously for his pennies when he overhears a conversation regarding the final resting place of a missing boy who is presumed dead. The boy was hit by a train but has not been found by authorities. The four young boys decide that they want to be heroes and head off on a journey to find the corpse. They figure that if they report the location of the body to the authorities they'll get their 15 minutes of fame in the local newspapers. With this goal in mind they set out on a journey to the location of the body. This journey is filled with bonding and arguing that you'd come to expect from 12-year-old boys.

Not only is this a tender narrative but also a coming-of-age tale of young boys ascending into manhood. The film's story is told in flashback to narration by Richard Dreyfuss. The opening introduces us to Dreyfuss' character, which is followed by the aforementioned flashbacks that accurately display pre-pubescent males of the 1950s.

Dreyfuss' character amusingly uses a complex vocabulary while the title characters on screen speak so immaturely; cheaply throwing insults at each other and each other's mothers.

The problem with most child actors is that they usually fail to engage the audiences during complex situations. Stand by Me contains performances prominently by a group of boys between the ages of 11 and 12. Understandably, I was reluctant about this idea at first. Maybe it was Reiner's skilled directing, or maybe it was the acting talent of the four principal children; either way I found the acting to be stellar. I was astounded at the brilliant results achieved by the young actors. There's also a very recognisable Kiefer Sutherland who pops up as a typical teenager bully. Because I had seen so much of Sutherland's recent work I was shocked at how youthful he looks.

Thankfully the whole cast were given a remarkable script to feast on. The dialogue is realistic, as are the members of the cast. Some scenes called for sublime acting, especially when the boys were meant to be in tears. The young cast pull it off with wonderful results.

Stand by Me can't be missed because of how moving, touching and emotive the whole experience is. Stand by Me is a simple story but contains a powerful message about the ascension in adulthood. Memorable, riveting and brilliant. I can't believe it took me so long to finally watch this one. Funniest moment: the gross (but amusing) story about a young fat boy getting revenge on his enemies by initiating a barf-fest in a tent during a pie-eating contest.

John Rambo has always gotten a bad rap, as he's perpetually misconstrued by both the supporting characters in his films as well as the cynical movie-goers of the outside world who dismiss him as a joke. This is, of course, because the iconic action hero is best remembered as the cartoonish, buff instrument of Regan-era American vengeance from 1985's Rambo: First Blood Part II and 1988's Rambo III. Due to this, people forget that Rambo's introductory film, 1982's First Blood, is a superb action-drama dealing with America's post-Vietnam disillusionment and one man's failed fight to reincorporate himself into society. For 2008's Rambo (a.k.a. Rambo IV), Sylvester Stallone (co-writing and directing in addition to starring) returns the character to his roots, emulating the tone and emotion of First Blood to craft a gritty, poignant war picture that doesn't skimp on the action. What's truly daring about Rambo - and what a lot of critics have missed - is Stallone's decision to resurrect the ironic warrior to lament his soul rather than simply celebrate his strength.

The story, expectedly, is simple and direct. Twenty years have passed since John Rambo (Stallone) saved Colonel Trautman from Soviet forces in Afghanistan, and he now lives the life of a recluse in Thailand, working as a snake catcher while desperately trying to evade his personal demons. As the film opens, a group of ideological Christian missionaries - including Michael (Paul Schulze) and Sarah (Julie Benz) - approach Rambo seeking passage into the heart of Burma, wishing to bring medical supplies and prayer books to the war-torn country. Rambo reluctantly accepts the offer, but is wary of the dangerous terrain. Weeks later, Rambo learns that the missionaries were captured by the Burmese military. Choosing to assume his psychologically tattered soldier mentality and launch into battle once again, Rambo joins a group of mercenaries as they head into Burma on a rescue mission.

Stallone prefaces Rambo with authentic documentary footage depicting the actual situation in Burma, which has endured what is described as the longest-running civil war in history. This horrific footage effectively places the story in a real-world context, emphasising that the atrocities taking place in Burma are real, rather than a part of the screenwriter's imagination. In this sense, Stallone and co-writer Art Monterastelli utilise Burma as a framework within which they constructed a typical but effective action/war movie. Yet, layers of appreciable complexity exist within the simplistic framework which may be easily missed. For instance, the Burmese soldiers appear to be the epitome of one-dimensional evil since they slaughter villagers and gang-rape women, but the opening documentary footage reveals that these soldiers are kidnapped boys who are forced into the army and dehumanised into soulless killing machines.

Ultra-high body counts are a staple of the series, and Rambo does not disappoint in this sense. The levels of gore push the R-rating to the very brink, yet the unremitting violence is not as joyously self-indulgent as previous Rambo adventures. See, there's more to Rambo than just carnage. The film builds with a palpable intensity, and the first half depicts Rambo reluctantly working his way back to his former self to confront the life he tried to leave behind. By depicting the Burma atrocities in explicit detail, the film additionally offers social commentary and sheds light on the realities of life in the country (the film has done more for Burma awareness than the UN). Thus, this entry to the series is more about authenticity and gritty realism, mirroring the tone of First Blood. Rambo is not perfect, of course - it's largely generic (at times painfully so), and the dialogue is derisive on occasion - but the positives outweigh the negatives. There is sufficient character development to create a palpable sense of humanity amid the carnage.

Yet, all of this is probably looking too deeply into what is a taut, expertly crafted shoot-'em-up of pure awesomeness. You attend Rambo movies to watch the titular badass lay waste to hundreds of bad guys, and this fourth instalment offers precisely that. In prior Rambo sequels, Rambo was dropped in some hellhole to rescue a bunch of people before he breaks them out, kills the bad guys and escapes. Rambo '08 stays true to the formula, except - as previously stated - there's more grit: Stallone is never shirtless at any point, and Jerry Goldsmith's exciting yet cheesy music is replaced with Brian Tyler's harrowing, exceptional original score. Rambo even works as a member of a team, as opposed to taking down hundreds of soldiers single-handedly. Up until Rambo, Sly had never directed an action film (outside of allegedly ghost-directing some of his classics), but the actor-director's excellent handling of the material here belies his inexperience. Sly may utilise a shaky-cam approach, yet the style benefits the picture and is at no point distracting. And my word, the picture delivers in terms of action - the final battle is a celluloid tribute to the blood-soaked mayhem of the '80s. For all the criticisms Rambo endured, the violence is deserved: it characterises the villains, and provides the audience with a sweet sense of vengeance. It's a superb, insanely effective macho fantasy, and it will appeal to its target market.

Returning to his iconic role, Stallone is cold as ice, and brings a sense of menace that is lacking in previous entries. John Rambo is truly scary here; he's a powder keg waiting to explode, and he certainly does explode once the action shifts to the camp where the missionaries are held captive. It's not an Oscar-worthy performance, but it is more nuanced than most will admit. Julie Benz is also effective as one of the missionaries, ably playing alongside Stallone. Rambo jumps through hoops for Sarah, but she is not a love interest - although she is Rambo's prime motivation for battling the Burmese army, it's because she profoundly touched his soul. In the supporting cast there's also the likes of Matthew Marsden and Graham McTavish, both of whom are standouts as mercenaries. Suffice it to say, every actor hits their mark.

Infused with a poignant social commentary to provide sufficient context for the action, Rambo exists to call attention to the atrocities in Burma in addition to providing a fitting end for John J. Rambo. In First Blood, Rambo's breakdown in the film's final minutes left us with the sense that he wanted to discover who he is and put the past behind him. This theme was never brought full circle in the following two sequels, but Rambo '08 does exactly that, providing the ending that fans have yearned for since the commencement of the franchise. One could argue I've read too much into Rambo, but I believe critics are not reading enough. It would be a shame for a viewer's preconceptions to overwhelm Stallone's achievements, which goes for both the cynical critics looking to be critical as well as the action fans seeking a fix. There is a beating heart at the core of Rambo, whether you wish to notice it or not.

Interesting to note, Stallone's extended director's cut of Rambo is the superior edit. It fleshes out the characters more effectively, and the film as a whole feels more cohesive and complete. [Link removed - login to see].

8.3/10