And Starring Pancho Villa as Himself

Dir: Bruce Beresford

2003

****

Josua D. Maurer's film (and I call it Josua D. Maurer's as he conceived and meticulously researched the story) is the amazing true story behind the first ever feature film, how it came about and why it is one of the biggest shams ever committed to film. D.W. Griffith was originally asked to shoot 1914's The Life of General Villa but instead it was given to the nephew of one of the heads of studio. The Mexican revolutionary Pancho Villa realised the power of film and the propaganda potential it had and once he promised real action in what would be a real war, both he and Hollywood knew they could use the film to their advantage. History was made, although it's fair to say it was the financial rewards both parties were more excited by. Pancho Villa was seen as a Mexican hero, however the truth was a little more complicated than that. The truth behind the legend isn't anywhere to be seen in the film that was shown in cinemas, the disturbing reality having been discarded and left on the cutting room floor. Frank N. Thayer directed the original film himself but took a producer role in the finished release. He struck up a friendship with Villa after they spent much time together. The truth behind Villa was film and revealed to Thayer in the latter days of filming, he returned to Hollywood with the film he thought needed to be shown but was vetoed. The first feature length film (over 60 minutes) is a lie. It's a brilliant lesson in truth, politics, editing and context. The praise 'The camera never lies' was coined in 1895, it took just twenty years to be proved untrue. The production, considering it was a made for TV film, is impressive. The sets, costume and look of the film is as authentic as any big studio movie. The performances are also good, Antonio Banderas stealing the show effortlessly in the lead role. However, the film lacks a certain spark. For such an important and fascinating story, I think it could have been punchier. Maybe that would be missing the point given the subject matter but the overall direction is adequate, when it should have been exciting.

Her Alibi
Dir: Bruce Beresford
1989
**
A cheesy 1980's classic but not that good. I remember watching this when I was younger and hoping that I would one day have a moustache as wonderful as Tom Selleck's. An impossible dream. I also remember wishing my barber was Paulina Porizkova as I remember finding the scene with her cutting Tom Selleck's hair to be quite erotic. I think I've been far too open in this review so I will stop here. Read the stars.

Double Jeopardy
Dir: Bruce Beresford
1999
**
The idea behind Double Jeopardy is great. The Double Jeopardy law in America used to state that you cannot be charged for the same crime twice. So when a women is charged for the murder of her husband who actually framed her, changed his name and left town, there is no stopping her from killing him, in broad daylight if she wishes, once she is released from prison. The premise for the ultimate revenge movie no? Well, no as it turns out. She just wants her kids back, which is fair enough but doesn't lead to much excitement. The acting is awful and the script is even worse. The courtroom scenes are toe-curlingly bad, the bachelor auction scenes are even worse! Many of the scenes are absolutely pointless, mindless action generally replaces clever writing. The logic goes straight out of the window, with pretty much every scenario stinking to high heaven. A great idea executed in the worst possible way. It's also really dated considering it was only made in 1999, it feels like a bad 80's movie rather than a bad late 90's movie. Bad movies are ten a penny but when the idea is so strong it makes the experience of watching that little more frustrating.