Mubi Monday: Lamb (2021)

Genre labels are all well and good, and they can greatly help a movie reach an intended audience, but there are also times when genre labels work against whatever is being labelled. Take Lamb, for example. It has been touted by some as an impressive horror. I don't like to tell people what they can and cannot label a movie. I wouldn't try to sell Lamb to anyone as a horror though. Dark fantasy, yes. A drama with one strange element at the heart of it, yes. A horror? Not for me, no.

Maria (Noomi Rapace) and her husband, Ingvar (Hilmir Snær Guðnason), spend their days working away on their isolated farm in Iceland. Things get very odd when one of their sheep gives birth to a creature that Maria and Ingvar decide to raise as their own child, named Ada. It has the head of a lamb, but the body of a human child. They see it as a chance at happiness, but a visit from Ingvar's brother (Pétur, played by Björn Hlynur Haraldsson) underlines how others will view Ada.

Directed by Vladimar Jóhannsson, who also co-wrote the script with Sjón (aka Sigurjón Birgir Sigurðsson), Lamb is an enjoyable oddity that uses fascinating imagery to liven up a tale of grief and finding happiness after a major loss. It becomes clear from very early on that Maria and Ingvar have struggled to move on from the loss of a child, with the script and performances initially showing us characters who are questioning how they keep on simply moving forward, and that makes the strange central idea an easier one to buy into.

Rapace and Guðnason are both very good in the lead roles, brimming with a complicated mix of depression, a sense of inevitability, and some love trying to battle upwards for fleeting moments in the sun. Haraldsson is also very good, entering the movie at just the right time to disturb any potential idyll. He has the easier role, but does well showing his fluctuating feelings for those around him, especially Maria and Ada.

Bleak scenery is representative of the mood throughout, and this is very much a mood piece, but it also manages to look strangely picturesque. The location helps, while placing Ada in the middle of various scenes, looking so strange, but dressed and acting like any young child, transforms a dreary environment into something weird and temporarily, incongruously, lively.

Well worth checking out, just be prepared to accept some very strange moments while you are shown the lengths that people will go to in order to grab a lifeline potentially pulling them up from a sea of grief.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Netflix And Chill: Good Time (2017)

Love or hate the Safdie brothers, and I definitely lean more towards the former, an interesting thing about them is seeing their natural and unrelenting growth as they have moved from short films to small features, eventually getting themselves to a position where they can work with people such as Robert Pattinson and Adam Sandler. There's a connective tissue running through their filmography, it's there in the types of characters that they are most interested and in the way they can build massive amounts of tension from a chain of bad decisions and misfortune, but each work is a building block to create what has ultimately become a very impressive little filmography. Daddy Long Legs is good. Heaven Knows What is better. Good Time and Uncut Gems are tied as their best yet, although both have elements that lose them a couple of points, in my view.

Connie Nikas (Pattinson) embarks on an ill-advised robbery with his intellectually disabled brother, Nick (played by Benny Safdie). Things inevitably don't go too well, leading to Nick being put in prison, and eventually in hospital. Determined to free his brother, Connie comes up with another poor plan. It goes as well as you'd expect. To turn the situation to his advantage, hopefully, Connie starts working with a man named Ray (Buddy Duress) to retrieve a valuable bottle of liquid acid (as in LSD, not the flesh-burning kind) and some stolen money.

Although he has, much like his female co-star, built up an impressive and diverse selection of performances away from the Twilight series, Pattinson does what I think is his very best work here. He's a dangerously dumb guy, taking any small bit of knowledge and figuring out how he can use it to his advantage. Manipulative, weak-willed, and growing increasingly desperate with every wrong turn, he's an unsavoury character who Pattinson manages to keep you rooting for, mainly thanks to his performance and the fact that a lot of his actions are motivated by the need to save his brother. Safdie is equally excellent in his role, a child in a man's body, dangerously unable to change his behaviour even when a threat starts growing around him. Duress is a different energy level, a crook who hopes to make the most of some unexpected good luck, and he helps the film start to gather momentum towards a riveting finale. Jennifer Jason Leigh is wonderful in her small role, a woman that overlooks the worst in Connie because she believes they're both in love with one another, and Taliah Webster excels in her first feature role, playing a young woman named Crystal who ends up helping Connie and Ray.

As well as the spot-on directorial work, Josh Safdie has once again crafted a cracking little script with regular co-writer Ronald Bronstein, but that structure was put in place to allow the actors to improvise their way through numerous scenes. What the film does best is sketch out a kind of criminal underworld that we don't see too often on film. These main characters aren't smooth gangsters or determined professionals. They are people trying to make the most of small, sometimes out-of-the-blue, opportunities. They know enough people connected to others in positions of power, but they will always be very near the bottom of that particular social strata.

There's also another great score by Daniel Lopatin (credited as Oneohtrix Point Never) and the cinematography from Sean Price Williams gives the Safdie brothers the perfect atmosphere throughout their movie. They seem to inspire everyone to have faith in their vision, and that faith hasn't been misplaced yet. It may have taken me too long to get to this one, although I didn't wait when I had the chance to see, and enjoy Uncut Gems, but I'll be trying to prioritise whatever they give us next.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Shudder Saturday: Hellbender (2021)

I ALMOST didn't review Hellbender. I'd picked it to view and review after hearing good things about it and then, at the end of my first viewing, I couldn't figure out how I felt about it. That happens sometimes. So I figured I would choose something else to review instead. Then I managed to fit in a second viewing, hoping that things might click for me. Things clicked.

Directed by, written by, and starring Zelda Adams, Toby Poser, and John Adams, with a supporting role for Lulu Adams, this is very much a DIY movie, and very much a family affair. I can understand why the idea of that may scare some people off. Those kinds of movies often end up as little more than barely-competent vanity projects, but Hellbender just feels like the right people gave themselves the right jobs (almost all of them) for the material.

A phrase that has been bandied around often in recent years is "we are the granddaughters of the witches you could not burn", and Hellbender takes this slogan quite literally. Because it starts with a witch who refuses to die. Things then move to the present day, where Izzy (Zelda Adams) lives a sheltered life with her mother (Toby Poser). Izzy and her mother also play together in a band, rocking out some great tunes, but that is probably the very limit of her allowed excitement. Which all changes when Izzy starts to yearn for the wider world outside, makes friends with a young woman named Amber (Lulu Adams), and is soon given a history lesson about her powerful family tree.

Although obviously made with a low budget and limited resources, Hellbender shows how that isn't an excuse for an unimaginative and lazy final product. It all depends on whether or not you want to buy into the central concept, but at least it's one that feels interesting enough and ripe with potential for material that easily fills this runtime, and could (hopefully) lead to a sequel, or at least another film that could complement this one.

Adams and Poser are both excellent in the lead roles, carrying almost every scene between them, with the focus being on one or the other, or both together. Lulu Adams is also very good in her supporting role, and John Adams gets himself onscreen as a character who has a memorable encounter with the leading ladies.

As for their work in the directing and writing departments, well, let's just say that the family prove themselves to be sickeningly talented. I'm really looking forward to whatever they do next, and I am also excited to go back and check out The Deeper You Dig (their 2019 film that got some praise when released, but just didn't ever become a high priority on my ever-expanding "to watch" list).

Witty, consistently interesting, nicely blending some fleeting scares with some artistic imagery, and focused very much on the power within women that so easily scares off men who mistakenly equate femininity with weakness, Hellbender is a film I will easily recommend to anyone looking out for a new horror movie to watch. Even if, like me, you only fully appreciate it after giving it a second viewing.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Black Friday (2021)

If ever there was a time for zombie(ish) creatures to cause mayhem and clash with crowds of raging humans, it is Black Friday. That term already summons up images of mass hordes, zombiefied consumers, and violent tussles. So this movie, throwing the two elements together, should be an easy success. Sadly, that is not the case.

A group of unhappy staff members are not looking forward to their shift on what is usually the busiest retail sales day of the year. Things get a lot worse when people start being more violent and dangerous than usual.  

Let’s get straight to the point here. This feels very much like what it is, a horror comedy with a few decent gags couched in a solid premise that is never as good as it could be, potentially due to the relative inexperience of the writer and director. It also wastes some of the better cast members, something I will get back to soon enough.

Writer Andy Greskoviak must have been delighted to get his script turned into a feature, but he seems to be oblivious to the fact that he didn’t think things through thoroughly. Because if he had, he would make so much more of his main idea. The standard zombie movie threat occurring in the midst of Black Friday sales is a strong concept, and that is apparent from the first third of the movie, which builds the threat while clarifying how fed up many of the store staff are, but Greskoviak fumbles things when trying to strengthen the horror elements.

Director Casey Tebo cannot help to cover over the cracks. Despite this not being his first feature, most of his work being in music videos and non-fiction fare means that he doesn’t seem best suited to this. The script issues (gags falling flat after the decent opening, awkward character moments, inconsistent threat levels) feel worse when Tebo fails to find a way to keep the energy levels high and the presentation interesting enough.

And then we have the wasted cast. A couple of the younger cast members do okay, mainly Ivana Baquero and Ryan Lee, but Stephen Peck is made just a bit too annoying, Bruce Campbell doesn’t get enough great moments, Michael Jai White doesn’t get anywhere close to enough screentime, and Devon Sawa, a potential lead here, ends up sidelined in a plot thread that feels completely adrift from the rest of the film.

Put this on, enjoy the first 20-25 minutes, and then turn it off. That’s my recommendation. There’s a fantastic short film here, and it is spoiled by being stretched out to feature length. The longer it goes on, the less funny and enjoyable it gets. Much like footage of warring Black Friday crowds, ironically.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Deadly Games (1982)

Sometimes your instincts steer you right and sometimes they steer you wrong. And sometimes you aren’t quite sure about the end result. That happened to me with Deadly Games, a film released onto shiny disc format that, much like my says of browsing in the video stores, drew me in with an intriguing cover design.

The plot is very simple. A masked killer is picking off women in a small town. He also seems to spend a lot of his time playing a home-made board game that can help direct his urges (I guess). Can Roger (a police officer, played by Sam Groom) and Keegan (Jo Ann Harris) catch the killer before it is too late, and before Keegan suffers the same fate as her sister? And is it anything to do with the strange Billy Owens (Steve Railsback)?

With some gratuitous nudity early on, and a couple of impressive and deadly set-pieces interspersed throughout the runtime, Deadly Games is certainly a film that most slasher movie fans will want to check out at least once. Whether it is worth a repeat viewing, however, is a different matter entirely. There’s something worthwhile here, an attempt to play by the rules while also toying with viewers, but there are also numerous scenes that have characters chatting to one another in a way that feels like it is just being done to pad out the runtime.

Writer-director Scott Mansfield doesn’t have much in his filmography at all, and this was his first film, but he shows a certain degree of competence when it comes to a few of the more memorable moments. There’s a swimming pool scene here that ranks up there alongside the best in the genre, for my money, and it is clear that Mansfield tries to make the most out of what he has available to him. If only Mansfield the writer was as good as Mansfield the director, this could have been a minor classic of the sub-genre.

Harris is a fine leading lady, although she’s weighed down by the weaker performance from Groom. Railsback does just fine, despite the limitations of his role, and certainly adds value to genre fans. Elsewhere, the cast is eclectic enough to include Colleen Camp, Dick Butkus, Denise Galik, Saul Sindell, and many others. Very few people are doing their best work, but most of them are just fine for what the movie is.

A mixed bag of good and bad, with most of the bad coming from the script, what you have here is a lesser slasher movie that has enough curiosity value, and strangeness, to make it worth your time.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Prime Time: I Want You Back (2022)

Writers Isaac Aptaker and Elizabeth Berger have an extensive body of work already, most of it in the realm of television, and it's clear that they know the same rom-com rules that the rest of us are all too aware of. I Want You Back is, despite some of the more twisted moments, a fairly traditional rom-com. Fortunately, it's a very enjoyable one.

Charlie Day is Peter, a man heartbroken when his partner, Anne (Gina Rodriguez), tells him that they shouldn't be together any more. Jenny Slate is Emma, a woman thrown into the same level of emotional pain when her partner, Noah (Scott Eastwood), delivers the same message. As Noah is developing a relationship with a woman named Ginny (Clark Backo), and Anne is cosying up to a colleague, Logan (Manny Jacinto), Peter and Emma come together in their grief, discover the mutual cause of their pain, and team up to get their exes back. Peter aims to befriend Noah, getting close enough to start having conversations with him that will make him doubt the strength of his relationship with Ginny, while Emma thinks she can seduce Logan, therefore separating him and Anne. Things soon get a bit messy.

Director Jason Orley hasn't been at the helm of too many projects so far. His first feature was Big Time Adolescence, which was then followed by a Pete Davidson TV special. As Davidson also makes a cameo appearance here, that's three for three. Perhaps Orley thinks that he is his lucky charm. He might be right. I recall enjoying what I saw of Big Time Adolescence (I need to revisit it though, my viewing was interrupted and I forgot to pick up again where I left off) and this film is an easy viewing choice for those who like the leads, those who want a few laughs, and those who will watch anything that comes under the umbrella of "rom-com".

Day and Slate are great in the lead roles. Both manage to balance their personas just right, showing how they have been hurt and want to hit back without making themselves seem like truly horrible people (even though their plan is absolutely horrible). Day gets to deliver the easier laughs, but Slate has a lot of the subtle and smarter lines throughout. Eastwood isn't bad here either, if he keeps this up then I may stop dreading his appearance in every movie, and Backo is very sweet as the new woman that he has fallen in love with. Rodriguez has a lot less to do, often at the edge of certain scenes until she serves as the final punctuation, but Jacinto is hilariously narcissistic and egotistical. There's also a great turn from Luke David Blumm, playing a young boy named Trevor who ends up being helped by Slate's character.

The situations get gradually more ridiculous, and amusing, there’s a wonderful sub-plot revolving around a stage production of Little Shop Of Horrors, and the last few scenes are sweet and predictable. This is very solid rom-com territory, and Day and Slate show how well they work with this kind of material. They soften their personas slightly, but not in a way that will upset people who have been fans of them for a long time already.

An easy watch, and I hope both Day and Slate have many more upcoming projects to make good use of their talents.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Val (2021)

With a premise that will be very familiar to most horror fans, Val is a low-budget comedy thriller that tries hard to make up for some obvious limitations with a healthy dose of wit. It doesn’t quite manage, but the spirited performance from Misha Reeves, in the title role, almost makes up for some of the weaknesses.

Zachary Mooren plays Finn, a young man hiding from the law after a criminal escapade leaves him with blood on his hands. He ends up in the home of Val, a woman who is about to have a client joining her for an evening of adult company and sexy time. Although he thinks he can control the situation and get his own way, Finn is soon incapable of keeping his grip on reality. His mind is spinning in a number of different directions at once, and Val really won’t help him. She also won’t help the two officers (played by Kyle Howard and Sufe Bradshaw) who are looking for Finn.

Directed by Aaron Fradkin, who also co-wrote the script with Victoria Fratz (who also appears onscreen in a small, fun, role), Val is an amusing idea that needs more packed into it. There aren’t enough memorable characters, there aren’t enough side-trips into more madness, and there just isn’t enough done to make the most of what they have in Misha Reeves.

The supporting cast do well, with Erik Griffin especially fun in the role of Freddy, Val’s main client for the evening, but they aren’t really given enough to do. The film-makers seem unsure of what tone they want, and unsure of how far to take things. Or maybe they were unable to film scenes exactly as they wanted to. These things are easy to forget about when Reeves is onscreen though. Clearly having an absolute blast, her portrayal of Val gives viewers a devious and witty entity that I think should be given at least one more movie outing. This film is okay. Reeves is unforgettable and brilliant.

Very few people will be surprised by the third act, with a point being made that has already been put out there in a wide variety of horror movies, but it isn’t badly handled. Again, nothing stands out, aside from Reeves.

A bit more work here and there, to improve everything from the score to the effects, from the staging of certain moments to the amount of amusing lines throughout the script, and this would have been one to highly recommend to everyone. Maybe Fradkin and Fratz can use this as a template, refining and developing their craft in a remake of their own doing. It wouldn’t be the first time it had happened, and I would be happy to see their progress.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Mubi Monday: Boarding Gate (2007)

I tend to, overall, enjoy the films of Olivier Assayas, but I know that he creates interesting and challenging art. If I dislike something that he makes then I may end up REALLY disliking it. Boarding Gate is one of his films that I really disliked, yet there's still enough here to have made me feel it was worthwhile. It's just a shame that he made such a major mistake in casting the central figure here. Asia Argento, probably not through any fault of her own, is generally not a very good actress. She can be fine in the right roles, but I think that being praised for years by her father, who would often place her in a variety of twisted and disturbing scenarios, has given her a false impression of her own level of talent, which is sadly very low.

Argento plays a woman named Sandra here, and Sandra has spent years helping out various people by using her sexuality to gain information, confidence, and time. Her main "employer" was a man named Miles Rennberg (Michael Madsen), but she now seems to be focused on developing relationships with Lester (Carl Ng) and Sue Wang (Kelly Lin). What unfolds is a tale of treachery, attempted shady business deals, and Sandra moving further and further into dangerous waters.

Although it's sometimes an interesting study of people using one another in different ways, and Assayas also uses the main premise to show business conducted by people who are happy to see others literally fucked over, Boarding Gate just doesn't make anything interesting enough in the scenes that fall in between moments of Argento being sexy (for those who find her sexy . . . I'm not in that group, unfortunately). The low-key approach to the material keeps the characters, and the potential divide between their words and actions, in front of anything else, which would be fine if those characters were as interesting as Assayas seems to think they are.

Aside from the weak Argento in the main role, you also get disappointment from Madsen, apparent disinterest from Ng, and nobody else to watch with interest. Almost nobody. Thankfully, Lin is excellent in her role, and it's a shame that her character wasn't developed to figure much more prominently in the way that events play out. She gets more to do in the second half, but I would have preferred the movie to be about her life, what information she has and what she chooses to do with it, rather than all about Argento's character.

Look, if you like Argento (and I know many people do) then you may enjoy this film a fair bit more than I did. You might also enjoy the performance from Madsen more than I did. So you should give this a watch, especially if you're a fan of other Assayas movies. I find it to be one of his worst, and I'd warn most people to stay far away from it.

3/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Netflix And Chill: Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2022)

I can't think of any BIG horror movie franchise that isn't a bit of a mess right now. The biggest problem seems to be that film-makers are trying to come up with ways to reinvigorate and rework concepts that outstayed their welcome many years ago. But we horror fans don't want to leave anything "dead" for too long, which is why we secretly enjoy seeing a main character not shoot a masked killer in the head.

It would be wrong to single out The Texas Chainsaw Massacre series ahead of many others. The original will always be an absolute classic, the remake was a film I thought was pretty damn great, and the wildly varying quality of the other films has allowed fans to argue over which instalment they prefer over others. I don’t know many people who would stand up for the last two movies in the series though, films that tried their best to reach new lows.

This film is not a low point in the series. Despite a troubled production, as well as a messy number of attempts at social commentary that are picked up and dropped with abandon, it’s a silly bit of gory fun. 

The plot is quite simple. There’s a Texas town that has gone to seed over the years, almost fully abandoned by now. It was once, and maybe still is, home to the infamous Leatherface. A group of youngsters arrive in the town, due to be followed by a bank rep and various investors. The town properties have been snapped up at auction and are due to be sold on at a healthy profit, but this leads to a confrontation that sets the chainsaw buzzing again.

Directed by David Blue Garcia, who took over after the initial directors left the project, and working with a script written by Chris Thomas Devlin, this is a film full of impressive moments. The first big kill is an absolute doozy, to use the technical term, while a third act set-piece stands out as a real highlight, and I mean a highlight of the whole series from the last couple of decades. The plot does what it has to do, but the focus often turns to real physical damage and limb removal. It's not even that bad when utilising a returning character from the first movie (Sally Hardesty, played this time around by Olwen Fouéré). Yes, we've seen this dynamic before, but it just feels a bit better here, perhaps due to the speed of the whole thing unfolding. Or perhaps it is just because a film can have someone basically saying "evil dies tonight" without making fifty different characters chant "evil dies tonight". The mis-steps aren't massive, they're just puzzling. A moment to skewer social media is casually crammed in to a huge gore scene, as is a moment in which someone pathetically tries to threaten Leatherface with cancellation. There's a strange anti-gun sentiment running through things, tied to one of the main characters being the survivor of a school shooting. These are interesting morsels, certainly more interesting than anything I expected to get from a TCM movie nowadays, but they're not made into anything more substantial. Maybe Garcia and co. decided, quite rightly, that it wouldn't do to stay away from any nasty kills for too long, or maybe it just shows what chaos could have been going on behind the scenes.

The cast is a decent mix, with most of the young leads doing solid work. Elsie Fisher and Sarah Yarkin play Lila and Melody, respectively, and I was especially pleased to see Fisher in a role that felt like such a departure from any previous movie work. Jacob Latimore is the charismatic leader of the group, and does well, and Nell Hudson is Ruth, the partner of Latimore's character and the person given the least to do in the movie. Fouéré keeps a straight face while heading towards her face-off against Leatherface, Moe Dunford is a local man who may be able to help save the lives of some interlopers, Alice Krige has a small, but crucial, role, and Jessica Allain is the main representative of the bank, which means every minute she survives is a pleasant surprise. Mark Burnham takes on the iconic, chainsaw-wielding, central role, and he's a strong performer, whether getting that chainsaw to start up, adjusting his latest extra layer of skin, or just manhandling people as if they were small dolls about to have their arms ripped off.

Some may dislike this, and some may hate it. I've already seen debate online about it, and a lot of fans have replied to others asking "what do you expect from a TCM movie that is the ninth in the series?" I think film fans can always expect a minimum of decent work, from script to camerawork and special effects, no matter where in the timeline a series instalment drops. And I think this delivers that. It's a fun mess, but at least it's fun. Which is more than I can say about Texas Chainsaw or Leatherface. The contrived final scene is terrible though, so be warned.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Shudder Saturday: They Live In The Grey (2022)

Michelle Krusiec plays Claire, a social worker who is also clairvoyant, a "gift" that has her constantly on edge. She is plagued by visions in her own home, where she lives alone after separating from her husband (Ken Kirby), and also feels very much weighed down by the grief of losing her only child. When tasked with evaluating the home life of a young girl (Sophie, played by Madelyn Grace) who has been developing lots of bruises and scratches, Claire soon sees a woman (Mercedes Manning) who may well be a spirit causing the problems. Despite Sophie's parents (played by Ellen Wroe and Bernard Bullen) being aware of their problem, it's not the kind of thing that most people can accept, or believe, which means that they may still see their child taken away by the Child Protection Service.

Written and directed by Abel and Burlee Vang (who were last behind the camera for the silly, and fairly average, Bedeviled), They Live In The Grey is quite a step up for the film-making duo. It's well put together, the acting is excellent throughout, and it tries to mix some standard jump scares with a sense of melancholy throughout, especially when we see flashbacks to Claire's happiness before tragedy strikes.

Sadly, this is also a bit too derivative, and the runtime (just a shade over two hours) doesn't help. I am sure you can already figure out the modern cinematic works that this calls to mind, which saves me from naming a couple of them, but that wouldn't be so bad if the third act felt stronger. Knowing what the movie is aiming for, however, makes things a bit predictable and disappointingly neat and tidy.

Krusiec is very good in the main role, able to convey the sense that she is struggling to help people while constantly having to evaluate her surroundings and keep track of what is real and what isn't. Grace puts in another decent performance, already impressing me with her range displayed in this and Don't Breathe 2. Wroe and Bullen do well to avoid going too big with their performances, especially considering one or two of the main scenes that they're involved in. Kirby delivers a decent supporting turn, Manning is an enjoyable spirit, and there are some more good moments that feature the likes of Kevin Indio Copeland and Krystle Martin.

There are more positives worth mentioning. The music by David Williams is a very appropriate accompaniment to the visuals. There's some crisp and lovely cinematography from Jimmy Jung Lu (although some moments are deliberately "murky" as characters struggle to stay away from potential frights). Nothing feels mishandled when it comes to the technical side of things.

I'd definitely recommend this to horror movie fans. Just be warned that you need to have a bit of patience with it, and you might not be happy at how familiar it feels at times. It's definitely well done though, and I think the main storyline and the well-staged scares outweigh the negatives.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

The King's Man (2021)

I am very well aware that I am in the minority for the fact that I enjoyed Kingsman: The Golden Circle a bit more than Kingsman: The Secret Service. But I think I was pretty much in agreement with everyone else when I was seriously underwhelmed by the trailer for The King's Man, a prequel to the other movies that didn't have any of the charismatic leads we'd already enjoyed accompanying on two adventures. It did still have Matthew Vaughn in the director's chair though, and roles for Ralph Fiennes, Djimon Hounsou, Gemma Arterton, Rhys Ifans, Charles Dance, and Matthew Goode, so maybe it would be alright.

It wasn't.

Set during the first half of the 20th century, The King's Man shows events that lead up to the creation of a new kind of British agent. A soldier that can help win wars without all of the bloodshed and death of a full war. In theory. Fiennes plays Orlando Oxford, a man who wants to help the world avoid further conflict while he also keeps his son (Conrad, played by Harris Dickinson) as safe as possible. This proves very difficult. There's a shadowy super-villain moving pawns into place, including a certain individual named Rasputin (Rhys Ifans), and the stormclouds of war start to gather apace.

Co-written by Vaughn and Karl Gajdusek, based once again on the comic books by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons, The King's Man feels like a step back in a film series that should have continued to stride onwards and upwards. What would you rather see, Ralph Fiennes being as good as ever while also being allowed to kick ass, or Eggsy on another ridiculous plot that inevitably leads him into space a la Moonraker? I know which I would prefer.

The cast is too much of a mixed bag to really help. Fiennes plays his part well, but also brings to mind his steely cool and gentlemanly approach to his starring role in The Avengers (which I don’t think anyone really wants brought to mind). Ifans is a real highlight, attacking his larger-than-life character with relish. Artery on and Hounsou are both good, but sadly underused, as is Dance, and the younger cast members are a bit too bland, whether it’s Goode being completely unsubtle or Dickinson being a bit of a wet blanket. I didn’t even mind the dodgy accent from Aaron Taylor-Johnson, considering it was a very small role, because he was a slightly more interesting character than the young man being played by Dickinson.

There are a couple of set-pieces here that are moderately enjoyable, with the best being an lengthy fight with the famously-difficult-to-kill Rasputin, but this is often as disappointing and weak as the trailer implied. The action is rarely impressive, the tone veers all over the place, and the sense of something cool and fun is completely lost.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Don't Breathe 2 (2021)

Stephen Lang returns in the role of “The Blind Man” in what may be, despite strong competition, one of the most unnecessary and unpalatable sequels in recent years. Because the last time we saw The Blind Man, he had been up to all kinds of nastiness.

Lang’s character is now the guardian of a little girl, Phoenix (Madelyn Grace). He saved her from the burnt shell of a house some time ago, and has been raising her ever since. He has also been teaching her some survival skills. Those skills come in handy when Raylan (Brendan Sexton III) and his gang break in to kidnap Phoenix. Raylan claims to be her real father, and he is offering to correct the lies that she has been told by her blind parental figure. Does Raylan have his own agenda though?

Director Rodo Sayagues makes his debut here, moving up from his successful producer role, but keeping himself safely in the company of Fede Alvarez, who helmed/co-wrote the first film and helped co-write this one. Sayagues tries to keep things in line with the first film, but he cannot overcome the major hurdle that most people thought about when this was first announced. How do you get people rooting for such a bad guy? Okay, you make his potential enemies worse, but that’s not enough to erase the memory of just how depraved our new “anti-hero” is, or once was. 

Lang is as good as he usually is here, and his performance is on par with his performance in the first film, but he is fighting against weaker material here. Taking the character out of his own home, as it does just before the halfway point, makes it harder to just accept his apparent super-powers. The fact that it is Lang manages to just about keep it believable though, as I know he could still kick my ass without needing to have full use of his eyes. Grace is good as the plucky young girl in jeopardy, and Sexton III is a decent baddie, supported by Adam Young (in a role that may as well be named “main henchman”). There’s also a small role for Fiona O’Shaugnessy, who makes a strong impression with the limited screentime given to her sinister and cruel character.

There are a number of individual moments here that work well, most of them involving Lang delivering some serious pain to people who sorely underestimate him, but this never feels like it has enough going for it to work for an entire film. Even the visual style, although cool and fitting at times, becomes stale and repetitive before the end credits roll.

Some people still managed to enjoy this. Personally, I don’t see the appeal.

5/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Prime Time: Encounter (2021)

I think it's fair to start this review by saying that Encounter isn't a bad film. It really isn't. There are two things that affected my opinion of this. The first is a feeling of deja vu. Encounter feels so close to another movie, one from just over 15 years ago, that to discuss that film would spoil this. The second is to do with expectations. A film defying, or subverting, expectations can always be a good thing. It's just a shame when things turn into what feels like something much weaker than it could have been. 

Riz Ahmed plays Malik Khan, an ex-military man who turns up unexpectedly to take his sons away on a road trip. He's convinced that the planet is being invaded by aliens, but not your standard "greys" or Independence Day invaders. These aliens are bugs, parasites that get inside people and make them act out of character. The best way to stay safe is to keep spraying yourself with bug spray. Determined to keep himself and his kids safe, Malik turns to increasingly desperate measures. The threat is growing, and there are a number of people trying to track Malik's movements.

Although directed and co-written by Michael Pearce, Encounter feels strongly influenced by co-writer Joe Barton (who has written films as diverse as iBoy and The Ritual). Pearce definitely has a good eye, and he certainly creates some impressive atmosphere and tension throughout, but the underlying theme, that becomes much more clear in the second half of the film, is something that Barton has explored in a fair bit of his previous work.

Anyone who has watched any performance from Riz Ahmed over the past 10+ years will not need any convincing of his status as one of the best young actors around. His performance here does nothing to affect that status. What could have been overdone and irritating is, thankfully, believably intense and agitated by circumstances. It also helps that the two child actors (Lucian-River Chauhan and Aditya Geddada) do very good work in their strong supporting roles, and there is some limited screentime for the great Octavia Spencer, Rory Cochrane, and other people who fit well in their roles.

Having thought more on the film as a whole, there IS a third factor that affected my opinion. The first half feels as if it is cheating slightly in what is shown to viewers, the second half feels disappointing in how simple and unambiguous everything is. I may have found this a more satisfying viewing experience if Pearce had chosen one way to let things play out, but he seems unsure of himself. 

The technical side of things is decent, and scenes making use of insect imagery or potential parasitic threats are impressive, but this is a film that just isn't quite deserving enough of the lead performance at the centre of it. The main idea isn't supported as well as it could be, and the end result falls between two stools. It's not a bad film though. It just falls short of being very good.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Nightmare Alley (2021)

When I finally got around to watching the 1947 film version of Nightmare Alley, it became a firm favourite. It's not a film easily forgotten by those who have seen it, a noir that skirts very close to horror as we watch a man on a journey that eventually takes him to . . . well, that would be telling.

I am not automatically averse to remakes, and Nightmare Alley has a story that you can see being attractive to others. It's also very much of a time and a place though, and it's already good enough that you have to wonder what others think they can do to improve upon, or just equal, it. At least you can start to feel optimistic when one of the people involved is director Guillermo del Toro. If there's one thing that Del Toro can do it's craft an onscreen love with style, beauty, and a wonderful attention to detail. He can also assemble a great cast.

Bradley Cooper is Stanton Carlisle, a shady character who ends up joining a travelling carnival. Once there, he starts to learn some of the tricks of the trade. He is especially interested in the feats of mentalism performed by Pete (David Strathairn), a fragile man cared for by Zeena (Toni Collette). Learning enough to believe he can make a name for himself, Stanton heads off with Molly (Rooney Mara) and performs for bigger and bigger crowds. This eventually leads to him crossing paths with Dr. Lilith Ritter (Cate Blanchett), and Dr. Ritter might be able to provide information that could lead to a huge payday.

If you like the selection of names just mentioned then you may be pleased to hear that this film also features roles for Willem Dafoe, Richard Jenkins, Ron Perlman, Mary Steenburgen, Holt McCallany, and Tim Blake Nelson. Don't get too excited though, a number of the cast members are either miscast or disappointingly underused. Cooper, likeable leading man that he is, doesn't feel right for the central role. Blanchett feels like the most wasted in her supporting role, and wasting Blanchett in your film should be a crime. It's the smaller roles that provide more of the treats, with highlights being Dafoe, Jenkins, and any scenes involving Strathairn and/or Collette.

Adapting the same source material as the original movie, a novel by William Lindsay Gresham, the screenplay by Del Toro and Kim Morgan seems to lose sight of what made the story so mesmerising and powerful. You still have a good story here, and it's supported by a smattering of very good performances, but the power is diluted by a) too many moments dwelling on the pretty visuals, and b) an ending that I feel lacks the full bittersweet resonance of the 1947 adaptation.

As good as a director as he can be, and as fired up about his chance to helm this remake, Del Toro feels as miscast in his role as Cooper. He aims for some style and grace that actively pulls the material away from that "down 'n' dirty" feel that the material has running through it. These characters are allowed to create wings and fly close to the sun, but it would be more appropriate to see them simply being allowed to bathe in warm water in between constant trips back to the sewer.

Undeniably enjoyable in places, and a visual treat throughout, it's a real shame that there's such a disconnect between the content and the form. It's a divide that I couldn't easily overlook, despite the many positives (such as the cinematography by Dan Laustsen or the wonderfully old-fashioned music from Nathan Johnson). I know a lot of people enjoyed it a lot more than I did. See it for yourself and let me know if you agree or disagree with me.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Mubi Monday: Galveston (2018)

Mélanie Laurent has been acting in feature films for the past couple of decades. Unbeknownst to me, however, she has also turned her hand to directing. I need to check out some of her other directorial work, because this is a very good crime drama. In fact, I'm surprised to have not really heard this mentioned before, either in conversations about films in general or conversations about modern crime dramas.

Ben Foster plays Roy, a hitman who is told that he only has a short amount of time to live. It's a problem with his lungs. Despite his impending death, Roy fights back, successfully, when his latest job turns out to be a trap. He then flees, accompanied by a young woman named Rocky (Elle Fanning). Rocky also wants to rescue her younger sister, Tiffany, and Roy eventually finds himself making some tough decisions in order to keep both girls safe.

Written by Nic Pizzolatto, Galveston is nothing very new or unique. It is a film made better by the cast, and the straightforward and unfussy direction from Laurent (although there is one lovely bit of work that allows a scene to play out in an extended single shot, yet without feeling overly precious about the technique). But the strength of these things together - script, direction, cast - creates a film that shows how important every individual element is. Take enough care with the basics and you can easily end up with something that is more than the sum of its parts, like this.

Foster is very good in his role, playing the kind of pained and relatively tight-lipped character he has played in some other movies. Fanning is equally good, allowing her character to show the mix of optimism, slight naivete, and determination that is written in. Beau Bridges also does well, in a small, pivotal, role, but the film constantly revolves around the central trio of Roy, Rocky, and Tiffany (played by Anniston and Tinsley Price).

For a film that has a sense of foreboding from the very first scenes, Galveston is most surprising in the moments when viewers can contemplate a happy ending for some of the characters. The pacing, the characters, the journey, they all allow space for some big highs and lows. Laurent shows how good her instincts are, having faith in the script and the performances, and the finished product shows that you don’t need to reinvent the wheel to deliver something familiar that also manages not to feel tired and lazy.

 

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.

It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA

Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Netflix And Chill: The Power Of The Dog (2021)

I often think that I dislike the films of director Jane Campion, but that's not true. I really disliked In The Cut, and I have yet to watch The Piano (despite owning it for a number of years), but I always forget that I saw, and really liked, The Portrait Of A Lady. Campion has, according to many, been creating superb art for a number of years now and it is up to me to see more of her filmography.

The year is 1925. The place is a ranch in Montana. Phil Burbank (Benedict Cumberbatch) is a difficult and unfriendly owner of the ranch, alongside his much more pleasant brother, George (Jesse Plemons). When George marries Rose (Kirsten Dunst), bringing both her and her son (Peter, played by Kodi Smit-McPhee) to live at the ranch, things take a major turn for the worse. Phil becomes more and more nasty to those around him, Rose starts to assuage her pain with alcohol, and Peter looks like he may not do well in an environment full of men quick to point and laugh at his perceived weak character. But things take an unexpected turn, which means some characters may be saved from their impending fates.

Based on a novel by Thomas Savage, this is a film that you would think of as, well, typical Oscar fare (which was proven by the love it received in the shape of Oscar nominations). It moves at quite a slow pace, it's beautifully crafted, and the central performances are uniformly superb. There's also a dark and intriguing third act that will make some viewers have to think back to details that were interspersed throughout the rest of the movie. I would, for some reason, see this pairing up nicely with Phantom Thread, and I hope others who see both movies can see why I would make a connection between the two.

Campion puts everything in place, from character details to important, but small, plot details, and trusts viewers to put things together as things play out. It's subtle throughout, in many ways, but also not subtle if you know what Campion is trying to make you notice. Even the start of the potential friendship between Phil and Peter, as the unpleasant man starts to make an effort to bond with a boy he realises maybe shouldn't be faulted for the choices made by his mother, feels entirely plausible, despite seeming highly unlikely during the earlier scenes.

Nobody in the cast disappoints, and Cumberbatch deserves extra praise for not fully mangling the accent that his character has. He also seems to enjoy playing someone who initially seems irredeemably bad. Plemons is a much calmer presence, but also ends up not getting as much screentime. Dunst has to act out some angst and emotional histrionics, but she feels right for her role. Then there's Smit-McPhee, playing the character who arguably goes through the biggest change in the movie. Smit-McPhee is excellent, and he's entrusted with carrying viewers through from start to finish, clarifying the main theme of the film, a thought-provoking and complex conundrum that will leave you weighing up your own moral stance on things long after the credits have rolled.

It feels like too long since I sat down to enjoy some full-on "worthy"drama, the kind of films I do normally try to check out in the run up to the Oscars. I'm glad I set aside some time for this one. I may have inadvertently started with one of the best from 2021.

9/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Shudder Saturday: Come True (2020)

Like so many other films that have failed to live up to their potential, Come True is a horror movie tinged with sci-fi that has a good idea at the heart of it. That good idea just becomes harder to stay focused on as it becomes buried by more and more unsatisfying moments. 

Julia Sarah Stone plays Sarah, a young woman who looks to be having a difficult time in her life. She is also having strange dreams, dreams involving watchful figures that visit while she sleeps. Deciding to participate in a sleep study experiment, Sarah soon suspects that those around her, while she is awake as well as asleep, have a plan that she is vital, but not privy, to.

Written and directed by Anthony Scott Burns, with a foundation laid by Daniel Weissenberger, this is a movie that suffers from an identity crisis. It starts off being strange and rooted in a feeling of familiar horror, takes a turn into standard thriller with some futuristic tech being used to take everything in a direction that becomes increasingly difficult to find at all plausible. Although things do lead up to a decent ending, there's not enough throughout the film to keep viewers invested, which means the final scenes feel like too little too late.

As for the cast, Stone is okay, but she's unable to make her character any more layered than the script makes her. Viewers get the sense that there is much more to learn about her, but we end up being given nothing more than hints and fleeting glimpses of potentially interesting aspects of her life. Landon Liboiron is Jeremy, AKA Riff, and he somehow feels paradoxically completely redundant while also being the one to deliver most of the exposition. Carlee Ryski is given even less to do, as Anita, but she isn't bad in her role. There are others populating the screen as the plot unfolds, but Burns stays focused on the lead character, whether she is accompanied by someone else or diving into her own mental landscape (literally, or in the form of dream recordings).

The main thing worth praising here is the music, also by Burns (as Pilotpriest) and Electric Youth. A couple of main scenes feel completely unnecessary and indulgent, but the music accompanying them is so good that I almost welcomed the brief respite from a plot that I had stopped caring about within the first quarter of the movie.

I am sure there are people who will enjoy the slow burn of Come True, and they may find it easier to overlook the obvious shortcomings that seem heightened whenever you're watching something that you aren't really enjoying, but it didn't work for me, despite my sense of begrudged admiration for the final scenes.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Scream (2022)

Is anyone else getting as tired as I am of the formulaic way so many franchises have been "reinvigorated" over the past few years? Find some way to ensure the film connects to the original. Have at least one character from the first movie to help push those nostalgia/familiarity buttons. Make up for any weak plotting and poor scripting with some extra FX work. Oh, and have one big surprise, or death, that doesn't really feel all that surprising. Horror movies get a bonus for allowing a central character from the original to face their fear while showing how the trauma of being stalked by a crazed killer has affected their life. From the Star Wars movies to the Halloween movies, and now Scream, this is the way it works. I WAS looking forward to the next instalment in the wildly uneven The Texas Chainsaw Massacre franchise, but now I am not so optimistic. 

Scream starts, funnily enough, with a phone ringing. A young girl, Tara (Jenna Ortega), is attacked in her home. That attack brings her sister, Sam (Melissa Barrera), back home to Woodsboro. Sam is with her boyfriend, Richie (Jack Quaid), and she introduces him to a group of sort-of-friends that includes Amber (Mikey Madison), Wes (Dylan Minnette), twins Mindy Meeks-Martin (Jasmin Savoy Brown) and Chad Meeks-Martin (Mason Gooding), and Liv (Sonia Ammar). Everyone wants to survive the latest potential ghostface killings, but everyone is also a suspect. That's why Sam gets in touch with Dewey Riley (David Arquette), who subsequently warns Sidney Prescott (Neve Campbell) and Gale Weathers (Courteney Cox) to stay far away. 

The first film in the Scream movie series to be directed by anyone other than Wes Craven, and the second script not written by Kevin Williamson, this is a film that very much highlights the lack of both of these talents behind the camera. Not that directors Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett are bad. I've enjoyed most of their work before this, to varying degrees, and they stay firmly in control of the mechanics of the film, as it were, with the actual visuals and editing here being the least of the problems with the film. The overall feel of the film still lacks something though, that confidence and playfulness that Craven could wind through all of his better works. That is never more apparent than in a sequence that should be playful and fun, with the frame being blocked in ways that leads viewers to expect a jump scare at any moment, but instead ends up irritating and tiresome as it plays the same trick in a couple of different ways.

Never mind the directors though, especially when the writers, James Vanderbilt and Guy Busick, have to shoulder almost all of the blame for how bad this is. It's probably easier for me to list my criticisms of the script here in a series of bullet points.

* A distinct lack of tension. In attempting to feel fun and unpredictable, the writers made this arguably the most predictable, and therefore boring, entry in the series. So far.

* A killer so obvious that I really hoped my gut feeling was wrong. It wasn't. I saw the end of this thing coming a mile away. That's down to sloppy writing, whether it's to do with just dismissing characters until they start to become more prominent when you know the final reveal is due or interactions between characters that feel like they're pointing a neon-lit arrow at someone.

* The meta commentary here is awful, and I mean AWFUL. This is, in certain ways, very similar to The Matrix Resurrections, but that film showed how you could do super-smart commentary on events that also discuss the very film you are watching without feeling like a lecture delivered by idiots misunderstanding the appeal of their own source material.

* As subjective as it is, a lot of the humour doesn't work. I would also argue that a lot of the new characters don't work, but I'd say it's about a 50/50 with who I liked and who I didn't (although not liking the new lead is a big stumbling block).

* There's one character depicted in "visions" here, and it's a very bad move. It's usually best to leave that trope to Stephen King, who has used it so often that it's part of his comforting appeal when I read his stories.

* Putting even more emphasis on the Stab films, but without the wit or fun cameos that have been there in previous excerpts from the film-within-the-film series.

* As difficult as it is to confirm the feeling in my gut, the characters generally feel dumber in this film. Being so easily separated, being fooled by tech that should surely be avoided, and turning up somewhere after being specifically warned to stay away. These things have always happened in the Scream movies, and many other horror movies, but characters used to end up reluctantly "breaking the rules" as dangerous situations forced them to make difficult decisions in the heat of the moment.

Do the writers get anything right, in between silly moments like showcasing the "Randy Meeks Memorial Home Theater"? Yes. It's a shame that they can only deal with the characters of Sidney Prescott and Gale Weathers by merging them into some kind of symbiotic Laurie Strode-alike, but they do a lot better by Dewey Riley, giving Arquette some of the best scenes that he's had in the series. I also liked Quaid's character, the easy interplay between Brown and Gooding, and the fact that we had a bit more time with Sheriff Judy Hicks (played by Marley Shelton, reprising her character that I enjoyed in Scream 4).

Arquette is the heart of the film, which leads to the presence of Campbell and Cox feeling much more forced (despite it being obvious that they need to come into the picture at some point). Barrera and Ortega are disappointing, considering that viewers spend so much time with them. The former has to handle some of the more ludicrous moments, not really her fault, and the latter just doesn't feel like an important part of the cast once that opening sequence has finished. Quaid has enough charm and likability to make the most of his role, and I've just mentioned the enjoyability of Brown and Gooding in the last paragraph. Madison, Ammar and Minnette are there to make up the numbers, and there are a couple of enjoyable cameos to watch out for, as well as one awful one.

I won't deny that I enjoyed sitting in a cinema and hearing "Red Right Hand" accompanying some Woodsboro scenery, and there are a few bits of fairly graphic brutality that at least make Ghostface seem even more driven and vicious this time around, but I was very unhappy by the time the end credits rolled. Some have already been celebrating the fact that a sequel to this has already been greenlit. I would prefer if the series provided one last big twist, and just left an iconic killer to stay dead and buried now that the film-makers seem to have nowhere else to take the story.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Last Night In Soho (2021)

Edgar Wright is such a good film-maker that it sometimes makes me sad that he doesn't get more recognition. Oh, he has plenty of fans, and most people love at least one of "the Cornetto trilogy" movies, but he has noticeably grown over the past decade or so into someone who can do more than cram a film full of jokes and references. Not that there is anything wrong with his films that are crammed full of jokes and references (indeed, both Shaun Of The Dead and Hot Fuzz will remain very near the top of any list I make of my favourite films for a long time to come). Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World was a move away from what he had done before, although it was equally overstuffed with details and gags in every scenes. Baby Driver was a fantastic surprise, a melding of visuals with soundtrack choices that also made time for some superb car stunt work. And you should all really check out his wonderful documentary on Sparks. But Last Night In Soho . . . well, it may just be in contention for his best work yet.

Thomasin McKenzie plays Eloise, a country girl who moves to London for the chance to study fashion design. Having been in love with the London that so many people picture from the "swinging '60s", Eloise soon discovers that the modern city is a different entity from what it once was. Thankfully, she also discovers a nocturnal window into the London of the past, a world in which she connects to the confident and lovely Sandie (Anya Taylor-Joy), a wannabe singer who seems absolutely certain that she will one day be a star. As things start to take a dark turn for Sandie, Eloise finds her nerves becoming increasingly frayed. Considering that Eloise still occasionally has visions of her deceased mother, who committed suicide when she was a little girl, having her nerves frayed is not good for her, or for those around her.

Co-written by Wright and Krysty Wilson-Cairns, Last Night In Soho is, in a lot of ways, a case of style over substance, but a) it's hard to complain when the style is so gorgeous, and b) the substance that IS here is well worth your time. People have tried to say this is Wright emulating a giallo film, but his touchstones here seem to be the likes of Vertigo, The Tenant, the films of Hammer and Pete Walker (to name a few main influences), and a pinch of Lucio Fulci. And it's worth noting that the horror develops throughout the runtime. This isn't a film to watch for jump scares and gory deaths, it's one to watch and enjoy for ratcheting tension and insanity.

Visually stunning, mirrors are used often, and used brilliantly, an era of London is recreated here that draws viewers in as easily as it draws in Eloise. It's all bright lights, groovy fashions, cool people, and ear-tickling music. The editing is flawless, complementing the two central performances as the leads reflect one another, and grow more in sync, and the whole film is an immersive, at times dizzying, experience.

Wright and co. arguably saved themselves a lot of trouble by casting so cannily though. I cannot say enough good things about McKenzie and Taylor-Joy, the former all awkward shyness and wide-eyed innocence while the latter acts as a white rabbit leading everyone to a wonderland that soon starts to crack and fall apart. Matt Smith is also very good, playing a man named Jack who soon reveals his true colours while acting as if he can do great things for Sandie. Then you have Diana Rigg, excelling in a final film role, a landlady named Ms Collins, that uses her brilliantly and allows her to do much more than just play someone available to reminisce about "the good old days". Michael Ajao, playing a nice young lad named John, and Synnove Karlsen, playing a not-so-nice fellow student named Jocasta, are both good, but the added pleasure comes from the supporting turns from Terence Stamp, still able to exude cool, menace, and a general swagger that reminds you of everything he has done before, and Rita Tushingham, an actress strongly associated with '60s British cinema (and who starred in a strangely similar cinematic fairytale-gone-awry entitled Straight On Till Morning). It's also good to see Pauline McLynn, who will forever be Mrs. Doyle to me, in any film role, however small, and she just adds to the quality of the performances on display here with her turn as a pub landlady named Carol.

So many people will take so many different things from this, and I have seen complaints about the writing and the third act developments, but all I can do is give it the highest recommendation possible. It feels, to me, like a long way of exploring that classic "you can never go home again" idea, albeit for a character attached to somewhere that was never her home in the first place. It also seems to underline a point so many people seem to miss nowadays, about accepting a time/place/source of art while being able to acknowledge that there were massive problems. You can wear rose-tinted glasses if you want to, but it's impossible to constantly ignore the problematic elements, to put it mildly, that have accompanied so many main chapters in our history, but being aware of them doesn't mean we have to then throw things we love into a social dustbin.

The more I watch this, the more I love it. That happens with most Edgar Wright movies I watch, to be fair, but this one has something that gives it a slight edge over a lot of his other work. It has a bit more going on below the surface, despite that perhaps being harder to notice with the overdose of style throughout. I hope others end up enjoying it almost as much as I did. 

10/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Prime Time: The Map Of Tiny Perfect Things (2021)

I do enjoy a good time-loop movie, and it's a film sub-genre that tends to have many more great examples than poor ones. In fact, at this exact moment I cannot think of one time-loop movie that I haven't enjoyed.

Oh, The Map Of Tiny Perfect Things is a time-loop movie. That's only a spoiler if you knew nothing about this film other than the title. The very first moments make clear that this is a time-loop movie, showing Mark (Kyle Allen) going about his day with the confidence and skill of someone who has been through the familiar motions many times before. He doesn't know why he is reliving the same day over and over again, he just knows that he's the only person aware of the situation. Until he realises that he isn't. Yes, there is one other. That person is Margaret (Kathryn Newton). Once they realise that they are both anomalies stuck in an . . . anomaly, well, they start to think up ways to pass the time. And that is when they come up with the idea of a map of tiny perfect things.

The second feature film from director Ian Samuels, this is a big step up from his previous feature, Sierra Burgess Is A Loser. I am willing to say that the difference in quality stems from the script, written by Lev Grossman, adapting his own short story. It's fun without striving to be too funny, emotional and complex without bringing everything grinding to a halt, and somehow easy to believe without having to give a full explanation for things (not until one or two main reveals anyway). It’s a better mix of something for everyone, and Samuels handles everything well.

It also helps that both leads are fantastic. Allen has the charm of someone who knows how to improve any situation, or his character does anyway, and that emanates from the screen whenever he is around. Newton follows up her fun performance in Freaky with something that allows her to be effortlessly cool and likeable. Her character is going through a lot that she tries to hide, but her downswings offset the attempt to be constantly positive from Allen’s character. There are other people involved here, and a couple of the “minor” characters really grow throughout the movie, in terms of how our leads view them anyway, but this generally rests on the shoulders of Allen and Newton, and both are more than up to the task.

It may be more of a teen movie than many other time-loop flicks, but that doesn’t stop it from being almost as good as any others you could choose from. There’s a pleasant score from Tom Bromley running alongside the clean visuals, and the editing is as sharp as it needs to be for this particular sub-genre.

I am not sure how many times I could end up watching this, but I am definitely glad I decided to check it out. It may not be a perfect tiny thing, but it comes close at times.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

My Stepmother Is An Alien (1988)

Directed by Richard Benjamin, who also happened to act in a number of movies that I have enjoyed over the years, My Stepmother Is An Alien is one of those movies that I always wanted to check out one day. It was never a top priority though, because I assumed it wouldn't be very good. My assumption was correct. This isn't a very good film.

Dan Aykroyd plays Steven Mills, a physicist who manages to send a signal so far into space that it actually, unbeknownst to him, hits and disrupts a distant planet. Believing that this was a deliberate attack, the planet sends Celeste (Kim Basinger) to find Steven, steal his research, and eventually order the destruction of Earth. Celeste ends up becoming romantically involved with Steven, mistakenly thinking that is a good way to achieve her main objective. Steven's young daughter, Jessie (Alyson Hannigan), soon realises that there's something not right, especially when Celeste keeps talking to her bag (voiced by Ann Prentiss), and it looks like there won't be any happy ending for the main characters.

Written by Jerico Stone, Herschel Weingrod, and Timothy Harris, you'd be forgiven for expecting something decent here. Stone would later help to write Matinee, one of many superb Joe Dante movies, and Weingrod and Harris worked together on hits like Trading Places, Brewster's Millions, Twins, and Kindergarten Cop (although they also gave us the less enjoyable Pure Luck). This is not up there with their best work. Although there are a few small chuckles here and there, it is a poor comedy that makes the big mistake of trying to utilise Kim Basinger for both her looks and her comedic skills, the latter of which she simply doesn’t possess.

Benjamin directs with a strangely slapdash approach, hoping that the main premise will be enough to make viewers forget about anything else. Set-pieces are clumsily put together, occasional zingers are thrown into a laugh-sucking vacuum, and, perhaps strangest of all, nobody involved is really allowed to play to their strengths.

Basinger obviously looks beautiful here, and I do enjoy some of her acting work, but she is awful when it comes to trying to play up the comedy. Aykroyd fares better, but his character is so strangely oblivious to madness going on around him that it feels as if he is the punchline to an ongoing joke. The real joy comes from a fun turn from a young Hannigan, who has always been great, and a decent attempt  to keep delivering laughs from Jon Lovitz, playing the brother of the character played by Aykroyd. There is also some fun to had from Joseph Maher, as well as a teeny tiny Seth Green, only onscreen for a minute or so, but downright adorable.

It’s quite easy to see why this was given the green light, considering the concept and the people involved, and it is a shame to see very few people trying to do their best. From the cinematography to the Alan Silvestri score, everything around the central performances feels disappointingly lacklustre. Maybe it’s one to consider for a remake option, considering the massive room for improvement.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews