Hot Fuzz 2007

It took me a while to adjust to the directing and editing of this film, but I really appreciate it now.
Great performances, well drawn characters, love the location (immediately seperates itself from Hollywood blockbusters because of the location), the action’s pretty well handled (quick cutting done right) and extremely funny.
The third act of this thing is so good; just about every minor piece of dialogue turns out to be a set up.
There’s also this Agatha Christie element woven into the first two acts that adds some nice subtext. I read the theme of the film as being about the conflict of the values of city life and country life, with the film criticizing the city side as being too stern and driven by rules, and the country community trying to maintain their idyllic facade by upholding these regressive, ridiculous ideas . I think it’s really cool that Edgar Wright found a way to integrate that idea into his big, silly action movie. It elevates the picture as a whole, I think it’s the kind of action film Scorsese would dare to label as ‘cinema’.
Maybe it isn’t objectively the best action comedy ever made, it certainly doesn’t have the biggest, most impressively filmed explosions. However, it’s the most well rounded and rewatchable one if you ask me.
Truly one of those rare films that improves when you get a better grasp of its rhythm.

9.5/10

"I'm a slasher and I must be stopped."

With this film, being British is required, pretty much. Otherwise, it's barely going to be remotely funny, let alone hilarious. Based on how the majority of people seemed to have loved this film/think it was unfathomably funny, the powers that be, the powers of deduction, can be brought forth, concluding that most of the majority are British people. Then again, some people aren't: who still loved this film and think it's hilarious. As much as the difference of opinion is the apparent perpetrator here, I still don't get it.

I also don't get how I thought this film was super funny in the past when I watched it for the first time, whenever that was: I don't have it logged anywhere, so I'm clueless. Or so I seem to think I did. Maybe my present idea of how much I liked it is a bit more than it was back then, but I'm pretty sure the overall result was the same, in that I liked it and thought it was funny. That's mind-boggling to the 'me now.'

Unless I'm off the mark, most people found the comedy to be to the point where almost every instance got them laughing their asses off, and I'm left here baffled. Understanding that different opinions and tastes exist can only go so far, surely. Not to sound too crass, but I'm almost disgusted that I was somewhat looking forward to watching this because I seemed to recall having liked it before.

Aside from my more than personal feelings, the biggest thing that stood out to me regarding this film was the camerawork/editing. It was undoubtedly extremely efficient and well-done. That's Edgar Wright's film's for you. Of course, the actual editor(s) deserve some significant credit, too. In this film's case: Chris Dickens. Props to him.

But all of that grew repetitive quickly with the action sequences. It wasn't poorly done or anything like that. I think it was the complete opposite. You were able to tell what was happening and all that. Just like in The Bourne Identity. It's just that it can get annoying to watch.

The most entertaining aspect for me was by far Simon Skinner. Timothy Dalton's performance was stellar, and I took too long to remember where I know him from, and that's Doom Patrol. All of his lines were great and delivered great. At least this film had that going for it.

And as far as doing its job is concerned, this film only made me laugh once. I laughed when Danny groaned due to brain freeze. In the whole film, that's the only time I laughed. But everyone else seemed to have laughed at everything, pretty much. Weird. And I couldn't care less.

Overall, this film had some entertainment to it. But I don't think that was enough for me. And, of course, based on everything I've written thus far, most of the comedy was more miss than hit. So, yeah. I know most people will greatly disagree with that. But the majority-held opinion of a film doesn't mean I'll have that same opinion.

Other thoughts, or rather, 'thought':

• David Threlfall's performance, down to the way he delivered some of his lines; how he sounded, at times, was a lot like Roger Rees in Robin Hood: Men in Tights.

Simon Pegg, Nick Frost and Edgar Wright get together to continue the work they started with 2004's Shaun of the Dead, this time dropping a parody of cheesy police action flicks. Like its predecessor, it works on a satirical level, but also as a standalone - albeit one with far less heart than we saw in Shaun.

Pegg plays Nicholas Angel, a straight-laced London constable who's so fanatical about his job, the top brass worry they'll look bad by comparison and ship him off to the minor leagues. There he partners with Frost, a slobbish underachiever, and swiftly uncovers a vast criminal conspiracy.

Fuzz relies heavily on one-liners and sight gags, which are generally pretty effective, but lacks a real emotional hook. That makes for an entertaining two hours, if not for endless re-screenings. The best work comes from the supporting cast, with Timothy Dalton leading the pack as the town's squinting, scheming, mustachioed mastermind grocer. And, of course, Paddy Considine and Rafe Spall are downright show-stealing as the two Andys, resident detectives more concerned with needling newbies than cracking cases. I could've done with a lot more of those guys.

A good film, with some big laughs, but no more than that. It's tough to avoid constant comparisons to the team’s preceding effort, which isn't a fair match.