THE MOST UNDERRATED FILMS FROM THE 00s

The start of the 21st century saw a rise in popularity of foreign language and adventure/fantasy films. Such films that back up this notion is the release of the Harry Potter franchise and The Lord of the Rings trilogy (2001, 2002, 2003). Probably the most successful foreign language film to grace Western screens was Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon (2000). However, whilst these films were greatly popular, there were in fact films that fell under the radar. So I have complied a small list of films that were massively underrated and unfortunately forgotten. 

#5 - The Cell (2000)
Dir: Tarsem Singh

Directed by Tarsem Singh, "The Cell" is a cross between "Manhunter" (1986) and "The Matrix" (1999). It is a brave film for its time because it went that little step further than films of the 'catching a killer' genre. It is unique piece of cinematography through its story line, which is that its main character Catherine Deane (Jennifer Lopez) has to literally place her conscious into the mind of the film's main villain Carl Stargher (Vincent D'Onofrio). She does this in order to find the whereabouts of his next victim before it's too late. The film is incredibly beautiful at times with its florid visual imagery and disturbed tones, which mixes effortlessly with the visual styles of slow to fast moving frames in a single shot. The inexperienced acting style of Lopez is evened out by the deranged presence of D'Onofrio whose frame is frightening to say the least. His intimidating form is never more present as the audience watches Catherine Deane walk through his demented mind and it is soon apparent that this serial killer is capable of anything.

#4 - Children of Men (2006)
Dir: Alfonso Cuarón

London, 2027. The human race has become infertile and the last child to be born was 18 years ago. Many of the world's countries have fallen into disarray. Chaos is rife because, "What is the point in tomorrow, if we know it's all coming to an end?" This is a concept similar to a slow death and is a question that has arguably never been asked before in any film. The themes of "Children of Men" are acceptance of the end, hope and the individual's ability to cope with a situation completely out of their control. This is all a reality for Theo Faron (Clive Owen) until he comes across a young woman who is both pregnant and the best chance for the continuation of the human race. "Children of Men" posses a journey of religious melodies and an impressive slice of mid-apocalyptic science fiction that is set in a very gloomy Britain.

#3 - In Bruges (2008)
Dir: Martin McDonagh

"In Bruges" is a film about two Dublin hit-men who find themselves in one of the most unlikely places, Bruges (in Belgium...). There current location is a result of a 'hit' that went terribly wrong. It's a hilariously dark comedy with a peculiar script, which makes it a marmite film (you'll either love it or hate it). The film is driven by its characters' abnormal behaviour and engaging reactions to the quiet Belgian surroundings. "In Bruges" is perfectly depicted in one scene of which Ray (Colin Farrell) is hell-bent on being moody, until he discusses a certain painting with Ken (Brendan Gleeson) that results to them discussing about purgatory, which Ray describes as, "The inbetweeny one. You weren't really shit, but you weren't all that great either, like Tottenham". Again this joke isn't to everyone's taste (especially people who don't care for football), but these clever pieces of script are littered right throughout "In Bruges", which gives it a Tarantino-esque feel. Couple this with its filming location and the entire film is just one big ironic and cleverly constructed piece of dark art.

#2 - American Gangster (2007)
Dir: Ridley Scott

"American Gangster" tells the temporary success story of Frank Lucas (Denzel Washington), who admirably introduced capitalist strategies to the early 1970's New York drug trade. Lucas would ingeniously transport his drugs from Southeast Asia and then use the US army as a drug mule, who were fighting the Vietnam war. He then sold his product at a price that beat all other suppliers. This high risk and aggressive strategy gave him a net worth of $150 million. He would eventually be sentenced to 70 years imprisonment, but cut a deal to expose corruption in the NYPD, which would eventually cut his sentence to 15 years. Frank Lucas' main antagonist is the law-abiding Richie Roberts (Russell Crowe) who stays stern even when threatened by the corrupt Detective Trupo (Josh Brolin). The real greatness behind "American Gangster is the paradox behind Washington's portrayal of Frank Lucas. He is a soft spoken, wise, cool, calm and collected loving husband who doesn't feel the need to wear gold chains or overly-large rings on his fingers. Eventually though, Lucas' parallel life of being both a drug lord and family man clash and with Crowe's Richie Roberts on his tail, well, the party can't last forever...

#1 - Almost Famous (2000)
Dir: Cameron Crowe

William Miller's life is turned upside down when he goes from being a high school student who writes rock articles in his spare time to going on a 1973 tour with Still Water, an up-and-coming rock band, who live life in the fast lane. The band, especially lead guitarist, Russell (Billy Crudup) take William (Patrick Fugit) under their wing, in order to show him the real life of a rockstar. Unsurprisingly, William's life spirals out of control and he experiences things that a 15 year old shouldn't be exposed to yet. His overprotective mother, Elaine (Frances McDermand), who is seen as a buzzkill, is eventually the only person keeping young William from being taken on a dark path of sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll. The film is not just about William though, it is about the time it is set, the 1970's, when youthful thinking clashed with big business. The soundtrack is great, the writing and screenplay is Academy Award winning and the journey it takes you on is one which makes you want to live in that time and just be a part of the true meaning of freedom.

If you've got a favourite film from the 2000's, comment below...

EARTHLINGS DOCUMENTARY - THE IMPACT OF FILM

*Warning extremely graphic imagery* 

There are many hard-hitting documentary films that have either persuaded people to change their views on life or radically make people change their life altogether. Arguably, no other documentary has or will have this affect more than Earthlings (2005).

Earthlings is narrated throughout by Academy Award nominee, Joaquin Phoenix who gives a voice to animals around the planet who cannot tell humankind of the horrors they face day-in-day-out. The main task that faced director Shaun Monson was to make the viewer authentically think about who and what the human race is. The answer.. 'cruel and inhumane creatures who feel it is our right to do what we want when we want, with no consideration of the consequences'.

A defenseless cow lies riving in agony with its throat slit after receiving an electric bolt to the brain

The ideology behind Earthlings is that it disturbingly reminds us that we show no compassion and empathy towards these ill-treated animals, because we refuse to change the way we live and as a result subconsciously deny that we are at fault. I myself used to actually work in an abattoir and have seen so called, "humane" killings of cows and pigs. At the time I just dismissed the actions of the people killing the animals as a necessity. However, being a little more wiser about what went on, my opinion has changed and there is nothing humane about it. Linda McCartney once said, "If all slaughter houses had glass walls, everyone would be a vegetarian". These animals are sometimes beaten and almost always hung from their feet and their throat slit.

As seen on the documentary, it isn't just the way in which these animals are killed that is highlighted. It shows how the constant 'milking' of cows results in exhaustion and how this decreases their life span of 20 years to a measly 4, at which point their meat is used for fast food restaurants. Other examples of graphic imagery that hit hard is the life of "food pigs" who spend their entire life cooped up in small, vile, disease infested areas where they develop blood soaked sores and always resort to cannibalism.

The documentary touches on other aspects of cruelty such as the treatment of stray animals in certain countries such as Greece and Turkey. In one scene a stray and seriously injured dog is literally flung into a garbage disposal truck (imaged left), which then gets crushed upon the weight. Earthlings also delves deep into how we humans use the sea, which is home to billions of depleting fish. We use it as a convenient place to dump our inconvenient waste and drain its plentiful fish for our own greed and prophet.

I believe I cannot give justice to Earthlings with a few paragraphs by discussing all its aspects individually and in depth. So anyone who feels that the well being of others should be above their own (especially those without a voice), I implore you to watch Earthlings and then show it to others who you feel may benefit from its tones of suffering, lack of empathy and how it speaks to our own selfish concerns of our own welfare! 

It is a meticulously crafted piece of work, which makes it hard for anyone to deny that we as humans have created an ignorant, prejudicial, narrow-mindedness as being above all other species in the world, which is the mode of thinking of Nazi-Germany... 

In short, Earthlings is a documentary which is designed to awaken an innate sense of compassion, which is within us all. Henry Betson perfectly depicts how humans have created this mode of betterment and above status: 

"We need another and a wiser and perhaps a more mystical concept of animals. Remote from universal nature and living by complicated artifice, man in civilisation surveys the creature through the glass of his knowledge and sees thereby a feather magnified and the whole image in distortion. We patronise them for their incompleteness, for their tragic fate for having taken form so far below ourselves. And therein do we err. For the animal shall not be measured by man. In a world older and more complete than ours, they move finished and complete, gifted with the extension of the senses we have lost or never attained, living by voices we shall never hear. They are not brethren, they are not underlings: they are other nations, caught with ourselves in the net of life and time, fellow prisoners of the splendour and travail of the earth.”

We truly are living in a worldwide genocide, which is happening under our very noses. Earthlings truly is beautifully thought-provoking and a painful watch all in one.

WHY THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN IS THE BEST HARRY POTTER FILM

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)

Dir: Alfonso Cuarón

It's hard to disagree that the Harry Potter series is full of consistently great films, each memorable in their own way. We all have our favourite and Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004) is mine. Here's why...

The first two films, Harry Potter and the Philosophers Stone (2001) and the Chamber of Secrets (2002) (probably my least favourite, respectively), were in a sense, very 'kiddy' regarding the story telling, the screenplay and probably because the main actors were about 11 - 13 in age. But in stepped the third installment of the HP franchise. I distinctly remember watching the trailer way back when thinking, 'this film is going to go down a more darker path' and I wasn't disappointed.

Directed by future Oscar-winner Alfonso Cuarón (Gravity, 2013), was actually largely credited for energising the series. Prisoner of Azkaban is the best looking film out of all the Harry Potter's and possesses a gloomier style of directing that would later define the final five film. The film is interesting because it is the most lauded film from the franchise, and is the only one which doesn't feature an appearance from the main villain Lord Voldemort. Instead, the story focuses on Sirius Black (Gary Oldman) as the main protagonist for the majority of the film. Black escapes the Azkaban prison, a feat thought to be impossible, which gives the audience the impression his character is one that is cunning and to be one of the dark Lord Voldemort's followers, but he's actually more than meets the eye...

As Sirius Black is seen to be a raving lunatic hell-bent on avenging Voldemort, Harry also has to deal with a new threat in the form of 'Dementors' , who are known to be vile, unearthly creatures who usually guard Azkaban and are on the lookout for Black. The Dementors are ever present in a particular scene. During the film's stunning sequence of "Quidditch in the rain", where they swarm round Harry like locust. As Dementors feed on sadness and pain, they seem to have a greater effect on no one more than Harry. Cuarón directed this scene so well, that the audience finally got a glimpse of how dangerous the game of Quidditch actually is. 

As well as the fantastically placed theme of gloom, this film actually seems to be more colourful and unique than the first two films and arguably the following five! After a small indiscretion on Privet Drive that involved the inflation of his aunt Marge, Harry finds himself aboard a purple triple-decker knight bus that blazes through the streets of Muggle London.

The visual and emotional depth of the Prisoner of Azkaban is stunning. We see a new geography of Hogwarts through its scenery and background happenings, and there is a new location for Hagrid's hut, which is important to the story. In terms of the emotional side, Rupert Grint (Ron) and Emma Watson (Hermione) have gradually matured as performers and Harry (Radcliffe) finally finds solace in the form of Professor Lupin (David Thewlis), an old school friend of his mother and father. The connection between Harry and Lupin really is the heart of the film. 

The scenes sway brilliantly from each other through well placed interstitial passages of time. For example, it shows what the Whomping Willow does each new season. 

Whilst non of the Harry Potter films are perfect, Prisoner of Azkaban is definitely closest. Its themes and story development as well as its notions of mischief truly give it the rightful place as the closest to matching the tone of the early books. Cuarón had apparently spoken to Warner Bros before production started on why the franchise needed to take more risks and visually reinvent itself. And because of his brave new approach, Cuarón was definitely the pioneer why the Harry Potter series became even more profitable and consistent in quality.

A brave new approach, which pull-off immensely 7.9/10  

DIRECTORS - THE NEXT GENERATION

Legendary film director Alfred Hitchcock

Everyone has a favourite actor whether it's Robert Downey, Jr, Johnny Depp, Meryl Streep, Angelina Jolie, Marilyn Monroe, blah blah blah, the list is endless! And everyone has a favourite film or films if you can't pick one. But most of the time we don't even look into who produced, screen-wrote or even directed those films! However now and again, we acknowledge the screenwriter or the producer. But one role within a film stands out for everyone to either grab the attention of the viewer and that role is, the director.

From 1970 onward, names like Steven Spielberg, George Lucas, James Cameron, Ridley Scott, Martin Scorsese and Stanley Kubrick would have great appeal. Even before the plot of the film was released, people would have already decided whether they wanted to see it. The reason is because anything with these names attached would be seen to be a success and the public weren't wrong! This generation of directors released magnificent and splendorous classics such as the Star Wars (Lucas) and Terminator (Cameron) franchises, but to name a few. These directors have even created films that have inspired the next chapter in film making. They could even be described as pioneers of modern blockbuster films.

Martin Scorsese (left) Steven Spielberg (middle) and George Lucas (right)

Unfortunately though, nothing lasts forever. In 1999, Stanley Kubrick, a true visionary and director of greats such as 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), A Clockwork Orange (1971) and The Shining (1980) died. Kubrick's films broke new ground in cinematography and was even said to be of mass importance and great influence for Spielberg. The reason why Kubrick is in the category of greatest directors is simply because he has left his mark on film-making and has influenced others and will continue to do so even after his death.

However, in the early 90's a new set of directors or the 'next generation' had come to fruition. Enter Quentin Tarantino with his fresh new, yet controversial approach to film making. His films Reservoir Dogs (1992), Pulp Fiction (1994) and Jackie Brown (1997) are filled with conversations of trivial things that relate to the audience, which hooks them into the story, a ploy arguably invented by Tarantino. Other noticeable 90's directors include David Fincher (Se7en & Fight Club) and Peter Jackson (The Frighteners, 1996) who would later director The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit trilogies. Fincher's Fight Club (1999) is probably one of the most important ideological films and the 1990's. Obviously there are many other 1990's directors that are amazing at their craft, but these particular three influenced myself greatly and it would be hard to disagree on them being in anyone's top 10. 

Fast forward to the 21st Century and we have a clean slab for any director to make their mark on film making. So far the most notable success has come from Christopher Nolan who has had great success with The Dark Knight Trilogy (2005, 2008, 2012), The Prestige (2006) and Inception (2010), but to name a few. But other directors are starting to make their mark on the film making business in their own particular way. In my opinion, I believe the greatest influence that has captured the essence of the 21st century is James Gunn (pictured left). His big screen directorial debut came with Slither (2006), which didn't do too badly at the box office, but is arguably an underrated horror with well placed humour. Recently he directed Guardians of the Galaxy (2014), which possessed a blend of  ironic current pop-culture (something I hope he keeps putting in his films) and was a great sci-fi box office hit.

Another name that is increasingly spoken about is Zack Snyder (pictured below). Snyder may fill his films with CGI, but you can't doubt his ability to entertain. He's already directed great films such as the Dawn of the Dead (2004) remake, 300 (2006), the massively underrated and unique film on superhero culture Watchmen (2009), Sucker Punch (2011), Man of Steel (2013) and is set to release the eagerly anticipated Batman vs Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016).

From time to time we are given a film by Steven Spielberg and we automatically assume it's going to be another one of his hits, but we have to face the ever-impending truth, these directors will have to hang up their 'action boards' and call it a day sooner or later. I hope directors like Martin Scorsese keep surprising me with fantastically funny and greatly written films such as his recent hit The Wolf of Wall Street (2013), I really do! But what's certain is the proverbial-film-directing-torch will have to be passed on eventually. Not to worry though, with directors like Zack Snyder, James Gunn and the odd box office hit from Tarantino, I'm sure we'll be fine! 

We are truly in a new era of film making and this era does have it's critics, but like Bob Dylan said, "Times, they are a changing".