jeffrey-anderson Reviews

A Call to Spy (2019)

Historical Errors.

[5/10 · 6 November 2022]

The plot has become almost commonplace lately, one or two women striking out against the Nazis in WW2. In this case there are many errors regarding historical inaccuracy. No one seems to have done any form of continuity checking or editing. Little things like people smoking King Sized filter cigarettes long before they existed. Cars with radial tyres, men's shoes with moulded rubber soles, bottles of alcohol with screw tops. Women wearing pantyhose rather than stockings (no visible seams on the back of their legs). It really doesn't take much effort to ensure accuracy, to check for such blunders.

Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit (2014)

Pure corn...

[1/10 · 9 March 2015]

This would need work to be classified as mediocre. He has a semi-auto pistol out of ammunition - without the slide being locked back? He manages to tip the bad guy into the world's fasted filling bath, in seconds an empty tub contains enough water to drown the guy? (I wish I had one of those.) He manages to physically overpower a guy more than twice his size and weight? Is this a movie or a badly plotted comic book? This movie is too badly written, developed, directed and acted to be worth watching in preference to a re-run of Friends, or even the late show. Achingly awful. I have no idea how it managed to get so many good ratings.

Defiance (I) (2008)

Illogical - badly plotted

[1/10 · 4 February 2015]

I lost interest as soon as Daniel Craig - using a revolver with only four rounds - killed several armed men and failed to take their weapons and ammunition. I realised that a fool was writing the script and looked for a more realistic movie. There is no way that any sane man in his circumstances would not eagerly collect any weapons available to him. The rest of the movie might have some good plotting, realistic action, accurate historical value, but that glaring error spoiled it, took away my ability to "suspend disbelief", took my focus off the plot and aimed it at a writer who was clearly clueless about both warfare and basic psychology. Big fail.

My Name Is Modesty: A Modesty Blaise Adventure (2004)

Badly miscast.

[3/10 · 29 June 2014]

I had a problem as soon as Alexandra Staden appeared on screen. I feel that whoever cast her in the lead role has never read a Modesty Blaise novel. It spoiled the movie for me - I didn't finish watching it. She is the antithesis of the Modesty Blaise character. If she had a full auto pistol in each hand I still couldn't take her as a serious threat to anyone. The character as developed by Peter O'Donnell was a sexy but very fit, active, and martial arts trained woman. A strong woman, tough and resourceful. A woman who could fight a man on a physical basis. Ms Staden looks weak and scrawny, the type of woman a determined five year old could beat into submission. No muscle tone and no athleticism. Possibly as I read so much, my impression regarding series characters become rather indelible.