Woyzeck (1979)

Herzog showed great courage in composing a film almost entirely of lingering static shots where the main players and action frequently moves off camera or into the camera. I have spoken before about Herzog's manipulation of the viewer, how he uses the camera to assimilate the viewer into the crowd in Aguirre: Wrath of God for example, and here he is foregoing the possibility of doing this. Herzog is reliant upon the abilities of the players to provide sustained and forceful performances (most of the scenes are single-shot takes of four minutes or more) which compensate for the lack of movement or cutting to which the 1979 film audience would have become accustomed. And the performances he required were provided for him in reciprocation for his trust- Eva Mattes as the sultry, conflicted wife and Josef Bierbichler as the unfeeling, solipsistic drum major especially provide solid support for Klaus Kinski (in the title role) to show again the extraordinary depths of torment and emotional angst he is able to convey on-screen.

Friedrich Woyzeck is a simple, well-intentioned soldier of the lowest rank who is bullied, insulted, threatened and pressurised in every aspect of his life. He is weak and preyed upon. In the title sequence, we see him subjected to brutal punishment by a superior officer and- in the context of what follows- this is clearly both unwarranted and habitual. That Herzog chooses to accelerate the footage gives the action a comic edge, we are not to pity Woyzeck too deeply or too soon. Throughout what follows Kinski portrays Woyzeck as a restless bundle of nervous energy, the inner turmoil he suffers from is reflected in his outward uneasiness and lack of control- his inarticulate utterances are empty and profound in equal measure and the sometimes tortuous delivery of them speaks loudly of a man struggling manfully to retain his sanity. There is a proud stoicism played off against a pathetic submissiveness and the contradiction therein echoes the conflict between a man and his nature or is destiny. Watching this is an exhausting and challenging experience as we Kinski draws from within himself a pain which strains every sinew and seems to risk implosion. In the film's undoubted high-point, the slow-motion murder scene, I genuinely began to fear that the bulging veins in his forehead would fail him, such is the choking intensity with which Kinski responds to the act.

But for all of that, the film still fails to satisfy. I have praised the decision to restrict the action to a single view, but as well as brave it was a self-defeating decision. The film fails to arrest the viewer in a way that Herzog would never have allowed in his more tightly directed pieces. The drab but authentic settings drain the life from the scene with the amount of unbroken screen exposure they receive- to a lesser degree in the outdoor shots and most specifically in the field scene where Woyzeck's sanity is finally broken.

The other reason may be the script itself. Woyzeck is a famous and traditional German play which addresses many things culturally which do not cross borders easily. Indeed Herzog himself said, I believe, that the film was almost impossible to translate into English. What I read as clunky, unsatisfactory and unrealistic dialogue is, I hope and believe, more intensely profound and poetic in the original form.

And so, for me, this is a bold, but doomed experiment. Herzog has handicapped himself unnecessarily and the result is a sometimes dull and surprisingly unaffecting movie featuring some heavily emotional performances and an excellent score. 6/10

Let The Right One In / Låt den rätte komma in (2009)

It is pretty rare for me to watch a horror film, so watching two vampire films in succession is almost unheard of (almost because I once watched the Hammer Dracula movies on consecutive nights). But the two films are special cases, haunting works of art. As I said last night, I'm a bit reticent to bang on about yet another great movie I've seen- in my head I sound like one of those tabloid reviewers who call every other film 'the best action/comedy/drama/love/war/horror film of the year' just to get their name on the billboards' (don't get me wrong, I don't want any fucker quoting me, but I'm wary of sounding trite). But this is one of the great film experiences of the decade- I'm convinced of that after a single viewing. Seriously, this is a film which is so good that I'm terrified of giving anything away and causing even the slightest hint of spoiling the film. I'm very reverent about this film.

What I can say is that Kåre Hedebrant as Oskar (looking like a twelve-year old Danny Torrance from 'The Shining' in a great haircut) and Lina Leandersson as Eli perform wonderfully at the centre of the movie and they are surrounded by magnificent support actors who bring life and individuality to small parts which would be nondescript in a lesser movie. The film looks wonderful, the soundtrack is superb (even the song by the bloke from Roxette is impressive) and the script never fails to intrigue or engage. Tomas Alfredson as Director must take the plaudits for a film which says more in under two hours about the human condition, love, responsibility, pain, confusion, expectation, devotion and death than you have any right to expect from a horror film. And this truly is so much more than that- it is a coming of age film, a genuinely life-affirming romance, a dark commentary on childhood and an exploration of the morality of revenge. Shit, it has everything except belly-laughs.

I'm not saying any more, I can't. As soon as you get the chance, see it. If this film isn't the best of the year, then I may not live through the one that beats it. 10/10- easily.

Che: Part One (2009)

I was looking forward to this a lot. I have a lot of time for Del Toro and I respect a lot of what Soderbergh tries to do, even if his films usually leave me cold (not just the popcorn-sellers like Ocean's Thirteen either, I can't get on with Sex, Lies and Videotape or Erin Brockovich at all). Most importantly of all, though, the subject matter is compelling. But the film left me flat.

It's well made, it looks great, Del Toro does a great job, the grainy black and white post-revolution interviews contrasted with the vivid jungle warfare were excellent- but it's just dull. Other than the first half-hour which drags, the film isn't flabby- just a bit repetitive. It's not that nothing happens, it is simply that the film didn't engage me when things did happen. Certainly not when they appeared to repeat themselves (it must be hard to differentiate between repeated ambushes in the same type of jungle, I'm sure). If the second part is like this too, then I'd say we're looking at a three-hour movie experience extended into a four-hour-get-the-punters-in-twice cash cow. I call that the Grindhouse effect.

Perhaps I'm being harsh because I've been treated to such genuinely magnificent film-making recently, but I don't think so. I just think Soderbergh got a bit carried away with himself and needed someone making him step back and be objective about what really enhanced the film and what didn't. 5/10. Imagine if there's an extended Director's cut- fuck me!

Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht (1979)

I am on such a run of great films that it's in danger of getting a little tiresome to record my thoughts on here. Another wonderful film, how predictable!

But this IS a wonderful film. Being a retelling of F.W. Murnau's 1922 classic, this film has to be special simply to avoid being a failure and is. Herzog brings to the film a visual intelligence and a mastery of atmosphere which never wavers. From the bright and airy opening in the Harkers' home to the run down, austere isolation of Dracula's castle, Herzog controls the viewer experience down to the nearest detail. These are not images which are obvious or border upon self-parody, they are real and ground the viewing experience. For stretches of the film, there is an almost dreamy mysticism about what we are seeing (at one point Harker states that he feels as though he was in a nightmare from which he cannot awake) but this is never achieved through simplistic, surreal imagery. The film is built upon the atmosphere which Herzog creates through simple visual storytelling, with minimal but timely support from the soundtrack. The meeting between Renfield and Harker is unsettling visually and disturbs all the more as a result, the scenes within the castle are claustrophobic and oppressive, the handheld footage of Harker's journey takes us with him through breathtaking but ominous scenery and when finally we arrive at the castle the introduction of the vampire is sudden when film-watching conditioning prepares us for a tension-building, drawn-out wait.

When Harker (Bruno Ganz, a fine actor) first encounters Dracula (Klaus Kinski) the viewer is thus taken aback. Suddenly, from trepidation we are confronted with the stark, cold presence of Count Dracula. There is a chilliness which emanates from the screen and- though he looks very similar to Max Schreck in the original- Kinski's appearance at the door retains the power to shock.

A word about Kinski at this point. Having recently seen his seething, unhinged portrayal Aguirre it would not have been a stretch to imagine his Dracula being equally malevolent in tone. It is not. Neither does he settle for Christopher Lee and Bela Lugosi's more urbane and charming depiction of the vampire. Kinski's Dracula is racked with remorse at his condition, he is soft-voiced and almost effeminate but racked with self-loathing- his stealthy movements and bat-like countenance are at odds with his awkward stance and almost pitiful reluctance to act like the monster that he is. His inner torment is present in every anguished movement, every syllable is tormented- when he is rejected by Lucy Harker (an impressive, and almost vampiric-looking Isabelle Adjani) he responds not with fury or force but with the anguished whimper of a whipped cur and a sorrowful retreat into the night. To portray a grotesque fantasy figure of such widespread fame as real and believable, is both courageous and unexpected. Kinski, again, proves himself to be a preconception-shattering actor of depth and resourcefulness.

Every scene here is shot through with a thorough attention to detail, the work that has been done to achieve this has been painstaking, there are scenes which would today be achieved through CGI and would look impotent but here are authentic and hard-hitting (most notably the rat-infested feast of the plagued). Every aspect of the film has been tightly controlled, it is shot through with a purposefulness and an intent of supporting the whole which is monumental. Herzog intended every second of footage to have precisely the effect that it does. This is masterful scrupulous direction.

And it is in this way that Herzog is able to frame his film as a faithful but nevertheless non-derivative retelling of Murnau's tale. Kinski's almost feral movements allow the key scenes featuring him to work in near-silence, his ghostly pallor allows the footage to become almost monochrome. A tremendous achievement - 9/10.

Black Narcissus (1947)

An amazing film. This is a true horror film. It is a haunted house story, with the place of the ghosts taken by human fallibility.

Sister Clodagh (Deborah Kerr) is placed in charge of a newly-opened convent high in the Himalayas and the repsonsibility is clearly too great to bear from the outset. Her responses are confused and well-meaning but desperate. Once we begin to learn of her life before taking up her vows, it becomes clear that her faith is not as strong as might have been presumed. Indeed of all of the Nuns, only Sister Briony (Judith Furse) appears to have the same faith and devotion at the end of the film that she did at the start.

The stand-out acting performance, though, is given by Kathleen Byron as Sister Ruth- cracking under the pressure of her orders, the isolation and suppressed lust. She is magnificent and, in a flash of her eyes at Sister Clodagh, registers so much hatred and jealousy that it speaks more than mere words could.

I specified that hers was the stand-out acting performance, as the stand-out performance here must surely go to cinematographer Jack Cardiff. Using (well-designed) sets, he frames an epic film beautifully.

Powell and Pressburger have created here a dramatic, engrossing and thoroughly believable psychological thriller that is years ahead of contemporary standards of daring and innovation. As the film progresses, each layer of intrigue builds relentlessly. This is an absolute masterclass in film-making.

Like many great films, I've little doubt that this would improve with repeated viewings (even if some of the casually racist sentiments expressed by the characters are distasteful). 10/10.