THE RAILWAY MAN

Basically…

A war veteran is haunted by his past, where he was held as a prisoner of war and forced to work with the Japanese. Using flashbacks we see the young Eric Lomax (Jeremy Irvine) enduring the gut wrenching job of helping to build Death Railway, the 258 mile railway from Bangkok to Burma. This is linked with the older Eric (Colin Firth) still struggling to come to terms with the ordeal, especially when he learns that one of his torturers is still alive, and working as a tour guide at the Kempeitai War Museum.

In other words…

A flashback into the horrors of the World War II and how one man has the opportunity to exact revenge and gain closure.

The main men and leading ladies…

Star of War Horse, Irvine’s latest performance as the brave and honest Lomax during his darkest days is the highlight of the film. An exceptional depiction of pain and suffering makes it easy for the viewer to support the movie’s hero and feel some of his unjust anguish.

Firth plays the inevitable shy and troubled older Lomax, but unlike his character in The King’s Speech who also lacked confidence and was determined to overcome a long lasting problem, this was a timid and unfulfilling contribution on this occasion.

Nicole Kidman’s role as Patricia was one of her less dominating performances. She plays the worried wife but made so little impact she should either have been used as a bigger role in supporting Lomax, or not included at all. Interestingly, she’s barely mentioned in the novel.

In the chair…

A story about a man struggling from a traumatic experience isn’t something new for Australian filmmaker, Jonathan Teplitzky. His 2011 film Burning Man stems from his own loss, when his wife died of cancer, and has stayed on a similar track with The Railway Man. Teplitzky worked with the real Lomax during the making, until his death in 2013, and his wife Pattie continued to promote the film after her loss.

So…?

Sometimes, for the sake of cinema, drifting away from the true story can be the best option. Without asking for drastic alterations, it has to be remembered that the viewer grows and shares a sense of anger along with Lomax. So when he comes face to face with his nemesis, he camp’s translator Nagase (Hiroyuki Sanada), an initial release of this tension is needed. But without even a slap across the face the audience is left feeling frustrated, and considering the build up of violence in the flashbacks, the final act whimpers away leaving you feeling unsatisfied.

Worth the money?

Check it out when it’s on television so you can go and put the dinner on during the present-day scenes.

THE WOLF OF WALL STREET

Basically…
This story documents the life of Jordan Belfort, a stockbroker who goes from shy hard worker to wolf of his own business. It follows the ups and downs of his world, with more hookers, models, drugs and cash you could even dream about.

In other words…

A three hour orgy of everything you'll never have.

The main men and leading ladies…

We've seen Leonardo DiCaprio in many roles, but whether he's autistic, undercover…or dying far too many times for the woman in his life, the chances are if this man is the name on the poster, you're in for a pretty damn good time. But for the living legend, who has remarkably yet to win an Oscar, or even receive a star on Hollywood Boulevard, this is arguably his greatest masterpiece to date. The scene where he struggles to get to his flash Ferrari because of the Lemmons should be enough to seal this year's prize on its own though. 

In the chair…

Some have called this Martin Scorsese's greatest work of art since Casino. There have been a lot of links to Goodfellas too, and with the character development plot it's easy to see why. The Departed still remains the Scorsese pedestal for me, but while this one didn’t quite reach those dizzy heights, it can be proud of sitting pretty in second place. At 71-years old he's still as sharp as a pin…and as filthy as a 15-year old boy.

So…?

A three hour film looking at one man's drug-filled path through life from rags to riches could understandably leave you apprehensive about a giving a full evening to the cinema. But this is three hours you won't be left searching for, in fact, it didn’t feel much longer than your average 100 odd minute experience in front of the big screen. This flows and links together beautifully, keeps even the poorest of attentions on the ball and is as charming and gritty as it is hideously crass.

Worth the money?

Go and pay for your overpriced cinema ticket without a second though because the only thing coming to your mind afterwards will be when can you afford to spare another £9 to see it again. And maybe even again after that.