For It Is Man's Number: July 2024

Wednesday, 31 July 2024

Prime Time: The Ministry Of Ungentlemanly Warfare (2024)

I believe I have said this before, and probably quite recently, but Guy Ritchie has moved into a phase of his career where he seems quite accomplished at delivering what can be commonly referred to as "dad films". There's often a central mission at the heart of things, a band of talented individuals are thrown together, and The Ministry Of Gentlemanly Warfare also presents things in the setting of WWII, which immediately calls to mind films like The Dirty Dozen and The Wild Geese, two titles it is definitely happy to sit alongside.

Things are tough, with the German forces looking set to retain the upper hand in the war due to their dominance of the sea, thanks to their many U-boats. It would be good if the U-boats could be taken out of the equation, or at least minimalized, but that's unlikely. The big ship that supplies the U-boats, however, could be a viable target, although it's docked in a harbour that cannot be the target of an officially-sanctioned military mission. But if a team could be assembled and convinced to do something that wasn't official . . . that could be a good chance to strike a blow against the Nazis. Which is why we end up spending a lot of time in the company of Henry Cavill, Alan Ritchson, Alex Pettyfer, Eiza González, Babs Olusanmokun, Hero Fiennes Tiffin, and Henry Golding.

Working this time with writers Paul Tamasy, Eric Johnson, and Arash Amel, and helping to adapt the book by Damien Lewis, Ritchie cannot really be faulted here for taking the bones of a true story and using it as a frame upon which to hang some enjoyable tension and violence. While it's another Ritchie movie that doesn't really feel like it's full of his style, the argument can be made nowadays that he's simply showing one or more strings that he's added to his bow. Not that any of this is a radical departure, especially in the scenes that have the characters engaging in witty banter with one another as bullets and shells fly around them, but the period setting and the tally-ho spirit of the whole thing helps it to feel a step removed from many other Ritchie films.

Cavill is having a whale of a time, portraying the fearless leader of this merry band of killers with a fine swagger and a readiness to often let out a hearty laugh. Ritchson is savage, killing off people with knives, arrows, and, in one memorable sequence, a fire-axe, and he is also always ready to grin and chuckle while turning his foes into corpses. Eiza González and Babs Olusanmokun are eminently watchable as they work on the ongoing intelligence side of the operation, keeping themselves close to the open jaws of the lion (personified by Heinrich Luhr, played brilliantly by Til Schweiger) in a way that nicely builds the tension in between the scenes of fighting and Nazi bloodshed. While Tiffin, Pettyfer, and Golding are slightly sidelined, they each get at least one moment to make a solid impression, and that also leaves room for enjoyable supporting turns from Danny Sapani, Cary Elwes, Freddie Fox, and Rory Kinnear (the latter two portraying Ian Fleming and Winston Churchill, respectively).

The performances are all good, the music by Christopher Benstead has some key pieces that are fantastic, and the overall look and design of the film makes it feel as if a decent budget has been well-used by everyone involved. This aims to entertain, and it succeeds. It's a bit uneven, especially when the third act fully kicks in, and the action becomes less interesting as it grows in scale, but there are enough great individual moments to satisfy viewers who are prepared for a standard "men on a mission" adventure

Considering that we live in a world where you can now get your social media content flagged for being "inappropriate" or "hatespeech" when you remind people that it's always moral and justifiable to punch a Nazi, The Ministry Of Ungentlemanly Warfare gains a lot of goodwill for unapologetically keeping us onside with characters who want to do just that. Sometimes you may sigh as you watch the news headlines recently, and this might be just what you need to remind you that good people are still out there, willing to get their hands dirty in any battles they need to win to keep themselves on the right side of history. Of course, I know that "the right side of history" is a very subjective thing, but not so much when you're talking about those who helped defeat Hitler and co. in WWII.

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
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Tuesday, 30 July 2024

Deadpool & Wolverine (2024)

You've got to hand it to Ryan Reynolds. He always knew he could portray the definitive movie version of Deadpool, and he managed to make it happen after some major setbacks (not least of which was his portrayal of a very mishandled Deadpool in X-Men Origins: Wolverine). And now we all get to enjoy the benefits of that long and bumpy journey, finally seeing a feature film that allows Deadpool and Wolverine to appear alongside one another.

Deadpool has been struggling. He has, in fact, hung up the suit, unable to find a way to actually matter. There is a way though. He is called to the Time Variance Authority, aka the TVA, by Mr. Paradox (Matthew Macfayden). Deadpool can be part of something bigger, he can matter, or he can stay alongside the people he cares about until his universe is soon destroyed, a necessary measure due to it beginning to die after the loss of Wolverine. Deadpool thinks that jumping into various timelines to find any other Wolverine to bring back into his world may stop the pending destruction of his own universe, but things become even more complicated when our (anti-)heroes end up in The Void, a place full of discarded personalities, basically ruled over by the powerful Cassandra Nova (Emma Corrin).

While writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick return to work on the screenplay with Reynolds, they are also joined this time around by Zeb Wells and director Shawn Levy. Levy has worked with Reynolds on a few different projects I have thoroughly enjoyed (although I know that some others have not enjoyed any non-Deadpool content from Reynolds in years), but his relatively tame and safe style makes him an unusual choice for this. It ultimately doesn't matter much though, because it's still Reynolds seemingly driving this iconoclast-mobile right through the middle of Marvel Main Street. A better director might have improved this, which would have helped, but the many jokes and cameos, the many Deadpool one-liners, and the simple joy of seeing our merc with the mouth finally sharing the screen with Hugh Jackman's Wolverine will keep most comic-book fans very happy. It's still difficult to argue against the Deadpool movies being a series of diminishing returns though. I loved the first, really enjoyed the second, and enjoyed this extra-silly final adventure (well, I assume this is a final adventure . . . because I struggle to think of how you do a better send-off for the character).

That is how this film works best, a send-off to some beloved characters. Aside from our titular leads, there are many others who get some time in the limelight (some arguably more deserved than others). Both Reynolds and Jackman remain perfect in their main roles, particularly when doing what they do best, but it's only the latter who can really work with the fleeting moments of real pathos. Not that Reynolds is incapable, but he's hampered by the nature of the character as showcased in the previous two movies built to fit him. Corrin does well with what they're given, and holds their own in one or two great moments with Jackman, but the film only needs them as a supporting villain in between scenes that point the finger at selfish and inconsiderate suits, headed up by Macfadyen, who bugger things up by meddling with timelines and discarding elements no longer deemed profitable. As for everyone else, Rob Delaney is as enjoyable as he has been in almost everything he's done, but I won't mention anyone else in case that ruins the fun and surprises for other viewers. Rest assured, however, there are some fantastic little turns from some very familiar faces, and a scene-stealing dog.

Deadpool & Wolverine will be a smash hit (it already is, judging from the figures for the opening weekend), and I will certainly revisit it as much as I revisit the other films in the series, or maybe I'll just revisit favourite sequences, but it's an adorable mess. The opening sequence is fantastic, there's a great fight in the middle, and a fairly satisfying . . . climax (*insert wink at reader here*). I'm just not sure how much fun the cameos will be once you know who is due to appear though, and some of the gags start to feel a bit tiresome after they have been repeated so often.

Does this clean things up for Marvel, or does it ultimately make things even messier? Does it really matter at all? I don't think so, and that has always been part of the appeal of the Deadpool movies. It's about enjoying the company of people who relish playing in the particular sandbox that they've been allocated. And, whatever you think of the end result, Reynolds has always put in maximum effort.

6/10

Monday, 29 July 2024

Mubi Monday: The Beast (2023)

I'll start this review by admitting that it took me a while to get a firm hold of what was being explored here. It's a sci-fi drama that explores humanity and human connection, and it helps that the two leads are played by the excellent Léa Seydoux and the solid George MacKay, but the structure of the narrative is more convoluted and complicated than it needs to be, as far as I'm concerned.

Seydoux plays Gabrielle, a young woman who signs herself up for a process that will purify her DNA. This is done by regressing her to past lives and scrubbing away strong emotions, but that becomes a bit tougher, and Gabrielle may regret her decision, when she keeps meeting a man named Louis (George MacKay). Gabrielle and Louis seem destined to dance around one another in various lives, not entirely unlike two strands winding around one another to form a DNA helix, but the chances of the two of them having a happy ending is drastically reduced by the very process that keeps reminding them of their times together.

Based loosely on a novella, "The Beast In The Jungle", by Henry James, director Bertrand Bonello was clearly drawn to the heart of the material, so much so that he also worked on the screenplay with Guillaume Bréaud and Benjamin Charbit. That makes it easier to hold Bonello accountable for the mishandling of the main ideas, which may leave some other viewers as disappointed as I was.

Seydoux is as good as she always is, but she also has the benefit of playing someone who acts quite consistently throughout the various time persiods shown. MacKay suffers slightly from the fact that the script requires him to play at least one of his personas in a way that is very different to other incarnations, but he does well enough to often hold his own opposite Seydoux. There are a number of supporting characters, but most of them fade into the background like so much wallpaper. The main exception is Guslagie Malanda, quite brilliant as the "caretaker" who looks after Gabrielle in between her purification sessions.

I've seen a lot of love for this elsewhere already, and I have loved the other four films (three features, one short) I have seen from Bonello, but this didn't work for me. I never really felt the strength of the connection between the characters, nor did I feel the weight of what they could be adding or removing from their lives, despite always rooting for Seydoux and MacKay to somehow overcome the material. I'll just have to wait patiently for whatever comes next for any of these three individuals - Bonello, Seydoux, MacKay - but it's a major disappointment that the three of them couldn't work together on something that could stand out as a highlight for all of them.

And don't even get me started on an "end credit sequence" that asks you to scan a QR code. I couldn't have rolled my eyes any further back into my head if I was able to remove them from their optic nerves.

4/10

Sunday, 28 July 2024

Netflix And Chill: The Circle (2017)

I didn't mind The Circle, but I didn't really enjoy it either, and I am going to say that the fault here needs to be shared between the pair of us. The film doesn't quite do enough with the main ideas it is working with, but I may have enjoyed it a bit more if I'd watched it back when it was first made available in 2017. The intervening years have simply shown us more and more reasons to distrust tech-bros and offensively rich and powerful individuals, which makes The Circle much less tense and more predictable than it would have been in a world before people like Bezos and Musk started to act increasingly like parodies of James Bond villains.

Emma Watson plays Mae, a young woman who is helped in to a dream job by her friend, Annie (Karen Gillan). She ends up in the Circle, a tech company that has seemingly unlimited power and resources. It's a bit odd though, considering how people are encouraged to interact online and fully commit to the Circle way of life. The pill is sugar-coated by the big boss, Bailey (Tom Hanks), who can acknowledge how silly some of their practices appear, but continues to present his vision of a tech-reliant utopia in a way that is convincingly benign. Some start to worry about the implications, however, as the Circle starts to reach further and further into the lives people all around the world.

Based on a novel by Dave Eggers, this was adapted from page to screen by a pairing of the writer and director, James Ponsoldt. Eggers has worked on other movies, and Ponsoldt has a mixture of projects in his filmography (with his best work being made for the small screen), but none of them manage to find the best way to handle this material. What should be a standard dream-turns-sour scenario, with the added threat of super-charged tech to make things more complicated, is turned into a disappointingly dull drama in which things go quite well for many of the characters . . . until they stop being so blissfully naïve. The biggest problems stem from the way things are plotted, but it doesn't help that the cast is relatively weak.

As much as I enjoy Emma Watson, she hasn't quite managed to convince in any of her post-Potter main roles, despite trying her hand in an interesting variety of projects. She's not bad here, but she's also not a strong enough screen presence, and is outshone by almost every supporting cast member (including Gillan, Hanks, Patton Oswalt, John Boyega, and Glenne Headly and Bill Paxton, who do wonderful work in the role of her parents). Mind you, few of those people I just mentioned are the best people for their roles either. Gillan has to overdo a heap of nervy paranoia throughout the second half, Hanks seems far too nice to have reached his position in life, and Oswalt isn't given enough screentime to make his character anything more than an obvious schemer who does some hand-wringing and metaphorical wiping of his damp brow as the plot heads toward the final scenes. Boyega does well, but his relatively small role here feels as if it doesn't deserve his talents.

It's ironic that I'll be sharing this review around in the usual places, ensuring that it ends up in certain social media spots, linking to it on IMDb, and potentially making some money from clicks that are generated via Google. Considering what the film posits, maybe I am part of the problem. Okay, I admit it, I am definitely a part of the problem. We all are, but many of us are savvy enough to shape our own corner of the internet to exactly how we want it to be, with the help of ad-blockers, data usage options, and ongoing attempts to balance out the negatives with more positives. There are very few legitimately good options nowadays when it comes to conscientiously maintaining an online presence. But at least I can use this platform to belatedly warn you against wasting your time with The Circle. It's not terrible, but it never manages to become more than harmlessly dull and average.

4/10

Saturday, 27 July 2024

Shudder Saturday: The Devil's Bath (2024)

I wasn't that big a fan of Goodnight Mommy. I thought The Lodge was slightly better, but still nothing special. So my level of enthusiasm for The Devil's Bath, the latest film to be co-directed and co-written by Severin Fiala and Veronika Franz, was not exactly high. If I could have found any other option that looked slightly better then I wouldn't have chosen to watch it. That would have been my loss. It turns out that The Devil's Bath is the best film yet from Fiala and Franz, and I might now start being very interested in whatever they decide to do next.

Set in Austria in the 18th century, this period drama focuses on a troubled young woman named Agnes (Anja Plaschg), but it's actually a troubling reminder of how woman have been disproportionately mistreated and turned into pariahs when needing help with their mental health. Anja gets married, but the union doesn't seem to be a very happy one. That doesn't bother Anja's new husband, Wolf (David Scheid), but it bothers Anja. And it also seems to bother Anja's mother-in-law (Maria Hofstätter), who blames Anja for a situation that she isn't well-equipped to handle. Maybe turning to religion can help her.

While it's pretty bleak throughout, with the visuals matching the content, there's something engrossing about the material that stops The Devil's Bath from becoming unbearable or dull. Viewers will have to be patient though, especially when it becomes clear which way things are heading, but the various details of the situation that Anja finds herself in build up in a way that is fascinatingly horrible and still resonant throughout modern relationships and ingrained societal misogyny. Being made aware of the situation as an ongoing problem may not change things, but it's a damn sight better than pretending that we've become a progressive utopia for women throughout the intervening decades.

Both Hofstätter and Scheid do well with what they're asked to do, and both act in a casually heartless way that somehow doesn't feel over the top in the context of the time and place, but Plaschg is the broken heart and soul of the film, convincingly showing viewers a character who becomes more and more lost as she finds no proper help and support during her darkest days. While I was unfamiliar with Plaschg before this, I definitely want to see more of her work (as an actress, as a director, and even the music she has created under the name of Soap&Skin). She's so good here that I am currently battling against an urge to throw around some comparisons that could seem far too hyperbolic in the cold light of day, so to speak.

If telling this one story was the only reason for making this film then I would have still appreciated what Fiala and Franz did here, but it's not. This is a film that touches on much more than just the one story, even if the behaviours displayed here are nowadays often hidden behind closed curtains and mobile phone messages, as opposed to being open secrets in close-knit communities, and it's another reminder that we seem doomed to keep repeating dark parts of our history, whether we remember them or not.

8/10

Friday, 26 July 2024

King Kong Escapes (1967)

This film is ridiculous, but if you think that's a bad thing then you're someone who hasn't ever watched anything like King Kong Escapes. The winning combination of writer Takeshi Kimura and director Ishirô Honda should be enough to get people excited about this, but there's also the fact that the plot involves both King Kong and a robot duplicate (Mechani-Kong). What more could you want?

This is where I'd usually put a plot summary, but King Kong and Mechani-Kong is really all you need to know. There's a villain named Doctor Who (Hideyo Amamoto), a secondary villain named Madame Piranha (Mie Hama), and something about valuable radioactive material being excavated. Basically . . . the clock just keeps ticking until we get to a finale that promises some worthwhile Kong vs. Kong action.

Although many of these movies look a bit silly and tame nowadays, King Kong Escapes was designed that way to appeal to younger viewers. It's a children's film co-produced by Toho and Rankin/Bass Productions, and you could easily imagine this working even better in traditional animation. The crudity feels even more endearing than it does in other kaiju movies I have watched recently, giving the whole film a feeling of playtime where the imagination is just as important as the actual visuals. Someone watched this at a very young age and thought it was the most magnificent thing they would ever see, which is the best thing about movies (in my view anyway).

Kimura's script is weak, but it at least tries to pace things well enough to keep younger viewers interested. Honda does well enough with the creatures, but there's nothing truly devastating or threatening here, considering the overall tone of the thing. People and places are put in jeopardy, as expected, but not in the full-on way we've seen elsewhere.

Amamoto and Hama are both great fun, and they're enjoyably obvious in their villainy in a way that keeps children able to know who they should be rooting for and against. The main goodies are played by Rhodes Reason and Linda Miller, but the real hero is King Kong, of course, and he is showcased like the star he is.

This pales in comparison to films like King Kong and Mighty Joe Young, it also pales in comparison to most of the other kaiju movies from this period, but it's a cute and entertaining bit of monkey melee madness for younger audiences (and those who can watch films while recapturing that feeling of being young at heart).

6/10

Thursday, 25 July 2024

Twisters (2024)

Despite the recent wave of nostalgic affection for it, Twister was never a movie that I considered great. It wasn't bad, and I have some amount of goodwill for any blockbuster that gives a lead role to Bill Paxton, but it wasn't up there alongside the many other disaster movies that came along after it. So I wasn't very keen to see this sorta-sequel (there's a bit of machinery used that was in the first film, and there are twisters, of course, but that covers all of the main connections). Thankfully, I had a partner very keen to see this, which is how I can now be glad that I saw it on the big screen, because this is blockbuster fun.

Daisy Edgar-Jones plays Kate, a young woman who retired from the tornado-chasing game after an incident that left her scarred and traumatised while trying to come up with a way to "kill" tornadoes. She now works in meteorology, in an environment that makes use of her intelligence and intuitive ability to read the weather, and hopes to stay far away from lively and huge tornadoes. That plan changes when she is approached by an old friend, Javi (Anthony Ramos), who wants Kate to help him capture some vital tornado data with the help of her natural talent and some cutting-edge technology. That puts them in competition with Tyler (Glen Powell) though. Tyler is a YouTube sensation, a cowboy daredevil, and a minor celebrity with a major ego. He might have a bit more to him though, hidden behind the cowboy hat and super-charged grin. He might even help Kate to finally realise her tornado-killing dream.

Written by Mark L. Smith, a decent enough talent working here to flesh out a story by Joseph Kosinski, Twisters is actually very smart and well-constructed, considering the type of movie it is. It delivers the required exposition via character moments, instead of in one unexciting info-dump, and it makes some interesting points about the need to stop being so passive in a world that has become increasingly hostile to many of the people living in it. It also nicely inverts the formula of the first film in a few different ways, but does so while absolutely sticking to the blockbuster movie formula you expect when you buy your ticket.

Director Lee Isaac Chung may not seem like the obvious fit for the material, considering the previous features he has helmed, but he goes all out here to deliver a slice of undiluted Americana. The scenery, the soundtrack full of lively Country music, the way in which Powell's character continues to deal with the tornadoes as beasts to be wrangled, this is a laid-back Western, in many ways, with a tornado set to be the main villain due in town for a shoot-out scheduled for High Noon. That undersells the film though, because it's also very funny. This is a fun and funny film, one that keeps entertainment front and centre. Like many modern day blockbusters, the runtime clocks in at just over two hours. Unlike many other films, however, this doesn't feel overlong. The pacing is perfect, and part of the reason for that is the timing of Glen Powell's entrance, about 20-30 minutes into the runtime.

There's no need to go on and on about Powell trying to become a star. Powell is a star. He has moments here that solidly underline that fact, and when he does his shimmy swagger at one point I coudln't help thinking of him as a demin-clad, stetson-wearing, male version of Jessica Rabbit. Powell feels like the lead here, to a degree, but it helps that Edgar-Jones is equal to him in their scenes together. She's smart, sassy, and continues to deal with trauma from her past that feels like something anyone would struggle to reconcile with. Ramos is fine as Javi, but neither he nor his main colleague, Scott (David Corensweet), are half as watchable as those who make up Tyler's troupe:Brandon Perea, Sasha Lane, Tunde Adebimpe, Katy O'Brian, and Harry Hadden-Paton (as Ben, a British journalist writing a piece on the star "tornado-wrangler"). Others appearing onscreen include Maura Tierney, David Born, Paul Scheer, Daryl McCormack, Nik Dodani, and Kiernan Shipka, but I won't tell you who gets a decent amount of screentime and who gets to cameo. Is the cast comparable to the group of actors we got in the original movie? No, but it's not too far off.

If you have seen or heard anything about Twisters and already suspect that you will hate it then you may well end up hating it. I would heartily recommend this to anyone after some full-blooded blockbuster fun though. It has human leads sparring with one another to be the brighter star, it has some great special effects also muscling in to be the star of the show, and it has a real eagerness to be absolutely entertaining from start to finish. I think it succeeds . . . brilliantly.

8/10

Wednesday, 24 July 2024

Prime Time: Ghost Crew (2022)

I like to support independent film-makers whenever, and however, I can. But it has to be a two-way relationship. I have to see something there, even if it's hard to see because of limited resources and a very small budget. Ghost Crew is a recent feature flm from Lawrie Brewster, another from his company, Hex Studios (a company co-created with Sarah Daly). Both Hex Studios and Brewster seem to do well when it comes to getting their films actually made, having used crowdfunding platforms on numerous occasions, and building on goodwill afforded to them because of their Owlman creation, featured in films such as Lord Of Tears and The Unkindness Of Ravens. I have an Owlman action figure that was part of one crowdfunding reward, and I own over half of the films released by Hex Studios, but this is the first time I have sat down to watch one of them. I don't own this one, but I was intrigued by the premise. Sadly, I should have started with something else, possibly anything else, from their catalogue.

Ghost Crew is the tale of an amateur TV presenter (Tom Hughes, played by Tom Staunton) who tries to keep viewers intrigued and entertained with his investigations into supernatural incidents. One day, while reporting from near the Harbourmaster's House in the fine kingdom of Fife, Tom meets a young woman named Sandy (Megan Tremethick). Sandy brings an extra mystery to Tom and his cameraman, Michael (Michael Brewster), which is obvious from her first scenes of vague utterances and strange looks. What follows is a disappointingly predictable and lazy chain of events leading to a final act that admittedly does just about enough to gain a bonus point or two.

Ghost Crew is memorable, but for all the wrong reasons. The script, by Staunton, isn't good. Everything is far too clearly signposted, humourous interactions miss the mark, and there's no attempt to pin down the format or style of the film. Rightly or wrongly, I figured this would be some kind of "found footage" film. It is not, but it seems to want to keep trying to work in that way, perhaps as an easy way to lower costs and explain away the lack of any decent visuals (although anyone who has worked hard on a decent "found footage" film will be able to tell you how tough it can be to get things right).

It's hard to really judge the direction from Brewster, the film often feels as amateurish as intended, but I think there were many ways to improve things here. One early scene, for example, has our presenter being hassled by a pesky bystander out to cause mischief and ruin the shot. Even the most amateur cameraman knows to try and zoom in and block out the nuisance on those occasions, as can be seen during many live outdoor news reports, but Michael instead seems intent on moving around to keep this rogue element in frame. Why? Because it's moderately amusing. Brewster should have known to either reframe that sequence, or replace it with something else entirely, but he doesn't, and it's one of many bad decisions that he makes throughout.

I'm not going to spend too much time talking about the cast because I don't want to seem unduly harsh. They're just not very good. Michael fares best, mainly because he only has to jump into frame in one or two scenes, but Staunton has written himself a role that is beyond his acting capabilities, sadly. His performance needs to be full of incompetence, but with something buried beneath the clumsiness that makes him a good person to get involved in the mystery presented. It doesn't have that mix, which leaves us stuck with incompetence upon incompetence. Tremethick over-emotes in a way that makes me think she's spent a long time in drama groups, and maybe in the odd stage play or two, but did't think about the huge difference between stage acting and film acting. There are others who turn up to play supporting characters, but most of them feel as if they've either been roped in to do a favour or won the chance to act in a film for a day.

Ghost Crew isn't good. It's relatively short, which is one plus, but it doesn't feel it. Everything drags, although that may have been more of a problem for a viewer like myself, familiar with some of the filming locations that Brewster and co. decided would make a good background for a horror movie. They're right in that regard, but this is the wrong movie to make use of them. Ah well, next time I'll review one of the Owlman movies and hope to have much kinder words for all of the people who work hard, and often with great passion, to maintain Hex Studios as a viable movie production company based in Scotland.

3/10

Tuesday, 23 July 2024

The Watched (2024)

AKA The Watchers.

Here is a film in which Dakota Fanning plays someone who spends a large portion of the runtime being watched, hence the title, and it must be said that she's a very watchable presence onscreen.

That doesn't mean that The Watched is one to watch though, sadly. This is a bad, messy, film that starts off weak and then just gets worse and worse, en route to a thoroughly disappointing ending.

Fanning plays Mina, a young woman obviously struggling to get through everyday life while dealing with her emotional/mental health baggage. She ends up in a mysterious forest in Ireland where she encounters a group of trapped individuals, subsequently becoming trapped alongside them. There are rules, there are entities watching them, and Mina might not really mind being caught in such a limbo state that keeps her focused on the here and now.

The feature debut of Ishana Shyamalan, who adapted the story from the novel by A. M. Shine and directed this, that's the most obvious explanation for The Watched feeling like one of the weaker stories presented to audiences by her father, M. Night Shyamalan. That may seem harsh, but it's impossible to spot the familiar surname, watch this film unfold, and not come to the conclusion that this is the work of a child trying, and failing, to emulate/impress a parent. It's a stick figure drawing passed across for the approval of someone who is responsible for some superb oil-on-canvas portraits.

None of the cast are treated very well by the requirements of the script. Fanning languishes, her character fully defined by her unhappiness. Olwen Fouéré plays the nominal leader of the group, Madeline, and she has to deliver exposition and rules that ultimately make no sense. Georgina Campbell, Oliver Finnegan, and Alistair Brammer play the less important characters, and John Lynch appears just in time to test the patience and observation skills of exasperated viewers.

While there are a few nice visual flourishes here and there, nothing is impressive enough to make you forgive the lack of skill in the writing and directing department, which you could also describe as the lack of skill from Shyamalan. Perhaps this would all be more enjoyable if it was a TV episode (maybe one of The X-Files or a 2-part Grimm special), but it's not. It's a full feature film that some people thought would work well enough to enable audiences to suspend their disbelief and enjoy themselves for 102 minutes.

The attempts to create tension don't work, the attempts to make the lead character sympathetic don't work, the backstory being used to feed into the narrative doesn't work. The Watched just doesn't work. Maybe we'll see Ishana Shyamalan do better with whatever she does next. At least she'll get the luxury of having another bite at the cherry, unlike a number of female film-makers who don't have the same good fortune.

3/10

Monday, 22 July 2024

Mubi Monday: Second Coming (2014)

While it's not the first thing that she ever did, Second Coming is a theatrical feature debut from writer-director Debbie Tucker Green that shows her to be, quite rightly, confident in her ability to translate her material on to the screen. She gets a hand from a great cast, but there are lots of choices made here that come directly from the person in charge behind the camera.

Nadine Marshall plays Jackie, AKA 'Jax', a woman who discovers that she is pregnant. That should come as good news to herself and her partner, Mark (Idris Elba), except for the fact that the two of them have not been intimate for some time. They don't seem to be at the end of the lifespan of their relationship, but there's something that keeps coming between them, even if it's just a curtain made up of their own worries and overthinking. Meanwhile, their son, JJ (Kai Francis Lewis), tries to get through his school days by ignoring some of the more problematic people around him, both students and teachers. He is happier when thinking of birds, and has a knack for befriending them, even if he can't necessarily heal any that are wounded. Can the family unit survive the revelation of the pregnancy, and will Jax be able to convince people that she isn't losing her mind as she becomes more and more convinced that it's a bit of a modern miracle?

Both Marshall and Elba are fantastic in this, both feeling like very real individuals who are trying to stay content and loving in their own little bubble after spending so many hours of each day being worn down by the struggles and weight of the everyday outside world. I'm not very familiar with Marshall, sadly, but I see now that she has quite an extensive filmography I can explore, and I look forward to doing just that. Elba IS someone I am familiar with, but he's rarely given roles that feel they are quite right for his considerable talent and charm. This still leaves him slightly underserved, but only slightly, but it also reminds you of how fantastic he can be with material that is grounded and not preoccupied with showing him off as a blockbuster star. Young Lewis is a brilliant third side of this triangle at the heart of the film, but I also have to mention the flawless supporting turns from Sharlene Whyte (a friend/colleague/confidant), Seroca Davis (Jax's sister), and Nicola Walker (a counselor who is seemingly unable to offer much help to Jax).

Green is happy to leave viewers without any easy answers, filling her movie with moments of magical realism that may or may not be experienced by the characters involved. Her impressive theatre background feeds in to her cinematic work. Many sequences are put on the shoulders of the characters talking to one another, but there's always the chance that something unnatural will suddenly interrupt a scene, and both the main dialogue and the "background noise" are made sharper by the authenticity and honesty underpinning them. These are recognisable people going through recognisable situations, despite the elements that come along to probe and push against the thin barrier separating the real and the unreal.

Not an easy watch, even if (especially if?) you just end up picking it to get a bit of Elba in your day, Second Coming is a strange and delicate exploration of relationships, the weight of every decision we make, and mental health. It weaves a spell that viewers won't even be fully aware of until the end credits have rolled and you're left to think over every implication, and what your own preferred interpretation of events says about . . . well, I'll leave you to decide that.

8/10

Sunday, 21 July 2024

Netflix And Chill: Ticket To Paradise (2022)

George Clooney and Julia Roberts play two people who were once married, but are now happily divorced, in this easygoing rom-com that coasts along on the star power of the leads. They have character names, but it’s easier to just call them Clooney and Roberts, considering that should be the draw for most people.

The pair can barely stand to be in the same room together, but they have to put aside their differences when their daughter (Kaitlyn Dever) has a holiday romance with a young man (Maxime Bouttier) that could lead to her completely changing her life plans for the chance of blissful happiness on what seems very much like a paradise island. There’s a wedding looming, a wedding that blindsides her parents. While Roberts and Clooney DO want their daughter to be happy, they think they know better. The only way to keep her from ruining her entire life is to ensure that the wedding is called off.

While director Ol Parker has played around in this sandbox before, most successfully with his last film before this one (a certain musical sequel making use of some huge ABBA hits), and he’s a very safe pair of hands. Having co-written the screenplay with first-timer Daniel Pipski, he keeps the focus on either the interplay between our charismatic leads or the natural beauty of the island setting, and that is enough to help this play out as a perfectly enjoyable rom-com.

I would feel a bit too sycophantic if I spent much more time praising Roberts and Clooney, so take that as a given, but there’s also fun to be had with a number of the supporting cast members. Dever has to be believably exasperated by parents she also still loves very much, and she plays that well, while Bouttier manages to portray his loving husband-to-be without seeming too bland or naïve. Billie Lourd has fun as the bestie who is making the most of the sun, sand, and selection of cocktails on the island, and Lucas Bravo steals a few scenes whenever he appears as the man currently in a relationship with Roberts.

There are few surprises (okay, there are none), but this has some decent laughs throughout, enough sweetness developing within the central characters to make you eventually root for them to sort things out, and even a drinking game montage that allows older viewers to enjoy some ‘90s tunes on the soundtrack. There are also some bloopers over some of the end credits that help to guarantee you are still smiling once it’s all over (an easy enough “cheat code” for movies, but these clips are more fun than most).

It’s insubstantial and forgettable, and would not be worth your time at all if it wasn’t for the casting, but it’s good fun for the duration of the runtime. I doubt anyone will rush to rewatch it, aside from those who are seriously dedicated fans of either lead, but it’s cute and amusing enough for those wanting to add a new rom-com to their viewing schedule.

6/10

Saturday, 20 July 2024

Shudder Saturday: Witchery (1988)

AKA Witchcraft AKA La Casa 4.

I had to rely on the internet for some information here, and I cannot guarantee that information is all as correct as it should be, so please proceed with caution. Not that I am too worried. A lot of the information was verifiable from multiple sources, and the cast is easy enough to confirm, but, like many Italian-helmed horror movies from this era, it's never too clear who should be credited for the authorship of the film, in both the direction and writing.

The plot is enjoyable tosh, but I'll try to write a decent summary. Leslie (Leslie Cumming) and her photographer boyfriend, Gary (David Hasselhoff), are spending some time together on a small island, exploring a derelict hotel with a spooky reputation. Rose Brooks (Annie Ross) wants to buy the hotel, to renovate it and turn it into a profitable club, and is also visiting the island, with some of her family in tow (played by Robert Champagne, Michael Manchester, and Linda Blair), as well as an architect (Catherine Hickland) and an estate agent (Rick Farnsworth). With everyone in place, it's soon time for a mysterious lady in black (Hildegard Knef) to start killing off our cast members in a ritualistic manner that will help her to achieve her main aim.

Witchery is bonkers, but it's a good kind of bonkers. As slapdash as it often feels, particularly in the more random scenes that show people interacting oddly with one another, it actually circles back to the central narrative strand more often than you would think. The opening made me think I would be in for something that would make no sense at all, but it does. It's silly, and there is a lot of nonsense in every main sequence, but it comes together in a way that is unexpectedly cohesive and straightforward by the end. Others may disagree, especially if they want things neat and tidy (and if that's the case . . . Italian horrors of the 1980s are not for you).

The cast are a lot of fun, with both Hasselhoff and Cumming arguably the least interesting people onscreen. Hasselhoff does what Hasselhoff does, whereas Cumming has to spend her time being extremely timid and virginal while her pure aura draws demonic forces towards her. Ross is great fun, as is Champagne (playing her slightly icky husband), and Hickland adds the required dollop of extra sexiness to the proceedings. As for Blair, she's given the role with the most unintentional comedy, required to mill around at the edge of the action until she's required to put on a growling voice and glare at the camera with a harsh hairstyle summing up the darkness trying to keep hold of her soul.

Written by Daniele Stroppa, with Harry Spalding also credited in some places (as well as Claudio Lattanzi claiming that he worked on the story before it ended up in the hands of director Luigi Cozzi, who lasted a couple of weeks before leaving, to be replaced by Fabrizio Laurenti), this might not be any kind of forgotten classic, but it's entertaining enough throughout. The script isn't very strong, Laurenti doesn't have an abundance of skill or style, but the cast and the pacing help to make it an easy viewing choice for those who occasionally appreciate some cinematic junk food in their diet.

6/10

Friday, 19 July 2024

Kingdom Of The Planet Of The Apes (2024)

Let's start this review with a reminder that no film is strictly necessary. When people say that a film is completely unnecessary then they are usually referring to some remake or sequel, but films are made by a bunch of people who just want to make films. And often those behind the scenes who just want to make money. Now that we've established that premise, Kingdom Of The Planet Of The Apes certainly feels less necessary than almost any other film I can think of in recent years. We've had the original movie series, we've had animated and live-action TV shows, we've had a Tim Burton interpretation, and we've had the hugely successful blockbuster trilogy that started with Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes and ended back in 2017 with War For The Planet Of The Apes.

This film takes place a few generations after the last time we joined the apes. Caesar is long gone, but his legacy lives on, although different apes have very different ideas about the way forward. Noa (Owen Teague) is part of a peaceful group, but his whole life is upended when he is targeted by an ape, Proximus Caesar (Kevin Durand), aiming to be a new ruler over all. Noa is smart, Proximus Caesar is strong, and a young girl named Nova (Freya Allan) ends up trying to survive in between their negotiations.

Writer Josh Friedman has a very mixed filmography, but I'm not sure that he can be fully blamed for the screenplay here. It feels as if he was restricted within certain parameters, and one or two scenes are there just to showcase the apparent realism of the computer-generated apes. Still, having agreed to take on the job, he could at least have tried to give us a more interesting lead and some supporting characters who make a strong impression. William H. Macy aside, who is here in human form, this has neither.

Director Wes Ball is best known for his work helming the enjoyable The Maze Runner trilogy (note to self - I STILL need to watch the third one), but his apparent step up the Hollywood ladder here looks to have turned him into someone far too cautious to deliver anything other than bland medicority with occasionally pretty visuals. As with Friedman, he's arguably hampered by what needs to be done to launch a whole new chapter in this modern incarnation of Apes movies, but there's no excuse for it all feeling so lifeless and limp. There's no real tension here, partly because it all feels so familiar and partly because there aren't any characters you really care about, and the most fun to be had comes from enjoying moments that harken back to some of the lesser-appreciated instalments of the original movie series . . . and then belatedly admiring that film even more for taking the kind of risks that this film so adamantly avoids.

Durand is an excellent presence, and the star ape here, but Teague sadly isn't. Peter Macon, Lydia Peckham, and Travis Jeffery are perfectly fine, but it's really only Macon, playing a wise orangutan, who gets to deliver a performance that comes close to being memorable. Sadly, the only other performances worth mentioning are those from Allan and Macy, the former playing the typical spirited human who wants to upset the status quo, the latter stealing a number of scenes as an educated man aiming for self-preservation ahead of anything else. It's a real shame that the two main humans visible onscreen are the ones you may remember most when the end credits roll. Previous entries in this franchise, whether good or bad, at least left you wirh a strong impression of the simian characters, first and foremost.

I'll rewatch this one day, and maybe I'll be kinder to it then, but I'm not in any rush. Nothing stands out, and the 145-minute runtime is a hell of an investment for something that offers so little reward. I would put it at, or very close to, the very bottom of any ranked list of the Apes movies, but the apparent box office success of it seems to put me firmly in the minority. I'll be very interested to see what happens with any plans for future instalments though, because I suspect people will have at least cottoned on to the idea that each prospective new feature could offer sadly diminishing returns.

5/10

Thursday, 18 July 2024

Loop Track (2023)

I had Loop Track recommended to me a week or two ago, and actually managed to make some time for it already (unlike the hundred other recommendations from people that have been added to my ever-growing "to watch" list over the years). I'm glad I did, but I am also pleasantly surprised that this worked for me as well as it did. There's a twist here that will absolutely divide viewers, but I ended up being someone who loved it.

Ian is on a hike through some New Zealand woodlands. He wants to avoid other people, needing some time to himself, but that isn't going to happen. Despite his obvious reluctance, the permanently upbeat Nicky (Hayden J. Weal) decides to join him for a while, subsequently introducing them both to Danielle (Noa Campbell) and Austin (Tawanda Manyimo). The more time he spends with these people, the more paranoid and anxious Ian gets. Is there some real reason for him to be so worried, or is he just on the edge of a full mental breakdown?

Written and directed by Thomas Sainsbury, who also stars as Ian, this is an enjoyable psychological thriller, for the most part, that constantly moves between moments of dark comedy and cringe-inducing social awkwardness. It's not a film for those who are impatient, and that applies to pacing and characters who aren't able to work on what others will see as major issues. It's a well-made oddity though, and one that keeps building a great atmosphere of unease and ambiguity until the third act.

Sainsbury is perhaps best known to people for his writing work on Wellington Paranormal, but he shows here that he has been developing his craft and confidence throughout the past decade. Loop Track isn't the kind of film that can accommodate any weaknesses, either behind or in front of the camera, and Sainsbury fully backs himself, for better or worse.

The performances are particularly good, with our lead being a sweaty and anxious mess for most of the runtime in a way that will have viewers constantly on the verge of giving up on him. It's the sympathetic and kind treatment that he receives from other characters that keeps you onside, right up until the point when things take a sudden lurch sideways. Campbell and Manyimo are both very good, but Weal gets to have the most fun, playing the kind of person who would see the silver lining in every cloud-filled situation, and his unbridled cheeriness manages to make up for the dour and nervy Ian.

While not exactly spectacular when it comes to the sound and visuals, everything is clean and clear, and there's great use of the contrast between areas of nature that are bathed in sunlight and those that are hidden away in the shadows. There are also some wonderful practical effects, designed and shot in a way that almost feels 3D at times, and those who are happy to go with the flow should find themselves as pleasantly surprised and impressed as I was.

8/10

Wednesday, 17 July 2024

Prime Time: Gamera vs. Viras (1968)

I had some trepidation when I picked this film for my latest "kaiju-watch", having not been a big fan of one or two of the films preceding it, but I'll be damned if I allow myself to be beaten before I've even managed to get about halfway through this journey through the world of giant Japanese monster movies. Thankfully, Gamera vs. Viras is a lot of fun.

A couple of boy scouts, Masao (Tôru Takatsuka) and Jim (Carl Craig), get themselves aborad a small submarine and spend some time getting up to mischief underwater. Gamera appears, spending some time racing them and generally playing around, which is only a precursor to a potential alien plan to cause havoc on Earth. The aliens find out about Gamera's weakness, how he will always try to protect children, and they end up capturing Masao and Jim until they can get Gamera in their clutched, placing a controlling device on the back of his head, and then using him to start destroying cities. This eventually leads to a battle between Gamera and the aliens, who merge together to form the giant Viras.

It's hard to sound intelligent and critical when discussing this film, as it can be with a lot of the kaiju movies, but the main thing to convey to other people is just how goofy and endearing this film is. Director Noriaki Yuasa and writer Niisan Takahashi make great use of what makes Gamera stand out from other well-known kaiju figures, and it helps that there's a sense of real joy and playfulness throughout, even as things start to get a bit tricky for "our hero' as we move fully into the third act.

Takatsuka and Craig are enjoyable in their roles, the design of the aliens makes them an interesting onscreen presence, and Gamera is allowed to keep busy doing Gamera things, which is what you want to see in any Gamera movie.

This won't please anyone looking for scenes of mass destruction, those are just a very small part of the runtime, but it should please Gamera fans. It's in line with the films that have come before, it stays true to the character, and it's a highly enjoyable and brisk 75 minutes. Best described as knockabout fun, with the emphasis on the second word in that descriptor.

7/10

Tuesday, 16 July 2024

In A Violent Nature (2024)

Remember the joke in Clerks II when a character dismisses The Lord Of The Rings trilogy by boiling it down to various scenes of people walking? That same dismissive criticism could be levelled at In A Violent Nature, the new horror film that has made a name for itself by aligning viewers more closely with the slasher villain at the heart of it.

Written and directed by Chris Nash, who has a number of shorts to his credit already (as well as make up credits in other features), this is the simple tale of a man walking through the woods and picking off some unsuspecting victims. The deadly events are triggered by a locket being moved, which motivates Johnny (Ry Barrett) to kill and kill again, at least until he can regain possession of the locket and go back to a temporary state of peaceful death again.

There's not too much to discuss here, in many ways. The cinematography is fine, the sound mix allows viewers to hear ongoing conversations that help to contextualise things while Johnny continues on his plodding journey (giving you snippets of moments that you'd expect to see from a different angle in any standard slasher movie), and the cast are all very disposable.

I know to credit Barrett as Johnny, and he deserves to be singled out for a physical performance that allows Johnny to feel deserving of being alongside the classic masked killers of the sub-genre (in terms of the presentation of him, if nothing else). Elsewhere, however, I had to be reminded of the other cast members, and cannot say that many of them stand out from the crowd. Andrea Pavlovic, Cameron Love, Reece Presley, Liam Leone, Charlotte Creaghan, Lea Rose Sebastianis, and everyone else involved do what they're asked to do, although that isn't much. They are fodder, and I will be very surprised if anyone watches this film with their eye on any one character they hope to see make it to the end credits.

A slasher movie is often rated based on how well the kills are executed though, no pun intended, and this is where In A Violent Nature wins some big bonus points. There are some great kills in this, and one of them is quite possibly the best I've ever seen. They're brutal and nasty, but shown in a way that showcases the special effects without feeling as lascivious and troublesome as the kind of extended sequences we recently saw in the Terrifier movies, to grab for the first example that springs to mind. If Nash had worked more on the rest of the scenes surrounding the kills, especially an interminable final sequence that ends the film with a whimper instead of any climactic scream, then this could have been a modern classic. Sadly, he doesn't do that, and that ending is hard to forgive.

I enjoyed a lot of this, and was willing it to completely win me over, but it doesn't quite get enough right. If you're presenting a slasher movie with a lot of "behind the scenes" moments that we don't usually see, you need to do it with more wit, inventiveness, and passion. This is an interesting exercise, but it all too often feels like it is most interested in being exactly that.

5/10

Monday, 15 July 2024

Mubi Monday: Jaggi (2022)

I admit that I almost stayed away from Jaggi. I wasn't familiar with anyone involved, I wasn't sure of how the central ideas would be explored, and I worried about making myself look a bit silly. Then I remembered that I've often looked silly, and that's not the worst thing in the world, especially while trying to spread the good word about a movie that many others may also not be aware of.

Jaggi is all about the titular character (played by Ramnish Chaundhary), a young man who starts to struggle with impotence. His struggle is initially made all the worse by the fact that everyone around him seems to be obsessed with sex and masturbation. It then gets even worse when everyone starts to assume that Jaggi being impotent equates to Jaggi being gay, which seems him targeted repeatedly by men who use and abuse him.

Written and directed by Anmol Sidhu, making his feature debut, this is a jaw-dropping and searing dissection of toxic masculinity and abuse that makes up a part of, but is in no way exclusive to, Indian society. Sidhu tackles his main subject with a fearlessness that puts viewers on edge from very early on, especially when you know that things could keep going from bad to worse for the main character.

Chaundhary does a superb job in the main role, especially when you consider that he is also making a feature debut (according to the information I could find). It's a performance that requires the actor to be incredibly vulnerable in a way rarely seen onscreen. Although they are playing characters who are the polar opposite of the lead, both Harmandeep Singh and Gaurav Kumar also do excellent work as Jaggi's main tormentors. Starting off by pretending to be friendly to our lead, even pretending that they have medicine to cure his impotence, both Singh and Kumar play two men who deserve to be in the running when you discuss the most awful and disgusting abusers in all of cinema, and their abuse is underlined by the fact that they see themselves as ultra-masculine "winners" taking advantage of one weak gay victim.

It should be obvious to people that this is uncomfortable viewing, from the many homophobic slurs thrown around onscreen to the horrible scenes that keep the camera focused on moments of extended sexual abuse, but it's also worth trying to stick with for the 114-minute runtime. Sidhu works hard to maintain a balance between what is shown, and there's plenty shown, and what is heavily implied (with the blocking, character positions, etc).

Not one that I would swiftly recommend to everyone, but Jaggi is a film that I recommend to film fans who are pre-warned about the content. I doubt I'll ever rewatch it, but I also doubt that I'll ever forget it. Astonishing and disturbing stuff, and I look forward to whatever Sidhu does next.

9/10

Sunday, 14 July 2024

Netflix And Chill: A Family Affair (2024)

If you liked The Idea Of You then you should like A Family Affair, a rom-com with a similar age and status divide getting in the way of the potential romantic relationship at the heart of things. Unlike the former film, this gets a better balance of both the rom and the com elements, but it suffers slightly from a lack of any real chemistry and heat between the leads.

Zac Efron plays Chris Cole, a vain and selfish actor who constantly makes life difficult for his young assistant, Zara (Joey King). When he eventually goes too far, once again, and has Zara walking out on the job, Chris knows that he has to make things up to her. He heads to her family home, where he meets Zara's mother, Brooke (Nicole Kidman). Things quickly get hot and heavy for the two of them, which makes things very awkward when Zara eventually walks in on them in flagrante. Not only could this complicate things if Zara returns to work for Chris, but it puts Zara on edge as she waits for the moment when Chris inevitably hurts her mother. Because Chris eventually hurts every girl that he's been in a relationship with. It's what he does.

Although he has numerous directorial credits already, I am not overly familiar with the filmography of Richard LaGravenese. I have seen some of the features that he has written, including the fantastic The Fisher King, but nothing of his work that had him sitting in the big chair on set. Writer Carrie Solomon is also someone I am not too familiar with, but that's because this is her first big feature after holding a few production assistant roles on various projects (which is something to make you wonder how much of this is based on a strange reality that us normal people struggle to comprehend). I hope to see much more from Solomon in the future, she's got a great writing style that blends the melodrama with some good laughs, and just a pinch of raunch to keep things skating close to the realm of the spicy (relatively speaking).

The cast helps though, in many ways. While they don't have sparks flying between them, both Efron and Kidman are beautiful people who you could imagine falling for one another. The problem maybe lies with Kidman having to spend some time pretending she can hide her light under a bushel, and also having her character being a bit too restrained to allow herself to have as much fun as possible, but Efron doesn't need to worry about that. He has a blast portraying his character as the most ridiculously selfish and needy star you could imagine, although it's nice when the script also allows him to have just enough self-awareness to also occasionally poke fun at his lifestyle. King is also a lot of fun, very good with the sharp dialogue and the physical comedy she is given, and Kathy Bates pops up to play the wise and kindly grandmother in a turn so sweet and lovely that you can almost forget that time she hobbled a stranded writer in her home. Almost.

This kept me chuckling throughout, it gave me a central relationship that I eventually felt invested in, and there were a few big laughs sprinkled throughout the 111-minute runtime (which felt nice and brisk, compared to the stream of movies that seemingly have to hit the 2-hour mark nowadays). The soundtrack is decent, the visuals help to keep things romantic (there's even a holiday sequence, because Christmas trimmings always add to the dream of an ideal love, for some reason), and the finale is as predictable and satisfying as you'd expect.

I'm not sure whether I would necessarily recommend a double-bill of this and The Idea Of You, but you could certainly do a lot worse. I rate both of them equally, but for different reasons, and if you had a good time with one then you're unlikely to hate the other.

7/10

Saturday, 13 July 2024

Netflix And Chill: Lord Of Misrule (2023)

I might not have taken a chance on Lord Of Misrule if I'd remembered some of the past films from the director and writer. William Brent Bell has more good than bad in his filmography, just, but writer Tom de Ville was responsible for one of the worst mainstream modern horror movies of the last decade (although his screenplay for The Quiet Ones was then filtered so thoroughly through a trio of other writers that I barely mentioned him in my review of it). Anyway, it's thanks to the cast that I decided to give this a go. I am glad that I did.

Tuppence Middleton plays Rebecca Holland, a new minister in a small country village. The area has the usual traditions and local lore that you'd expect to encounter, especially if you have seen any folk horror movie over the years, but Rebecca tries to balance her traditional approach to ministering with the unique sensibilities of the locals. Things change for the worse when her daughter, Grace (Evie Templeton), goes missing, leading both Rebecca and her husband, Henry (Matt Stokoe), to believe that everyone around them is actually conspiring to ensure that there's not going to be a happy resolution to the situation. Jocelyn Abney (Ralph Ineson) should know how this feels, having lost his own son about twelve years ago, but he's resolute in his belief that everything happens for a very good reason.

There's nothing here that is going to surprise anyone with even the slightest experience with movies in this vein, but neither Bell nor De Ville ever attempt to convince viewers that they are looking to surprise anyone or create something startling new to add to this particular area of the horror landscape. It may be a bit too predictable and derivative, but at least there are a number of individual moments that all simply work. There's less chance to build a sense of dread when you know roughly what's going to happen, but Brett Detar tries to help with his musical score, and Simon Rowling's cinematography also helps add to the atmosphere.

The biggest plus point that the movie has is Ineson though, a fantastic actor who is used to great effect here. Brooding, often slightly ambiguous even as everything around him becomes much more overt and obvious, and with that distinctive voice making every word he utters feel like a tombstone being moved into place, Ineson is the essential ingredient that helps to make this a success. Not to take too much away from Middleton, Stokoe, and Templeton, or anyone else appearing onscreen. Everyone delivers solid performances, whether they are shown acting in a relatively normal manner, or getting ready to don masks and robes and join in with the kind of festivities that would amuse and please Lord Summerisle.

I liked this. A quick look around shows that most people didn’t, and the main complaint tends to be the familiar feeling that permeates it, as well as many claiming that it just isn’t scary. I can see their point, but I felt that the atmosphere and pacing worked well, even as I knew where we would be heading for the third act.

7/10

Friday, 12 July 2024

One Crazy Summer (1986)

Another teen comedy that pairs director Savage Steve Holland with John Cusack, One Crazy Summer may not hit the heights of their best work (no matter what Cusack might think of the one I prefer), but it's a fun time for fans of many of the main cast members. And there are a few stars given some time to shine in this.

Cusack plays Hoops McCann, a young man who seems to be a bit lost after the end of his high school days. He does a decent job of creating cartoons, but that's not necessarily the way to set himself up for a great future. Or maybe it is. Anyway, Hoops ends up spending a summer holiday on the island of Nantucket, Massachusetts, in the company of a bunch of outcasts who will be there to help when the time comes to teach a lesson to the irritating and smug Teddy Beckersted (Matt Mulhern).

Savage Steve Holland just knows how to make me happy, whether or not he's successful in everything that he tries to do. This film feels like much more of an ensemble piece than a controlled and focused directorial vision, although that's maybe just the feeling you get when all of these people are together and having fun with each other, but it's certainly none the worse for it, with Holland making the most of his assembled talent to craft some fun narrative strands and enjoyable set-pieces (one Godzilla homage is so hilariously set up that it gives the entire film an entire bonus point for goodwill).

Cusack doesn't have to stretch himself here, nor does he, but this is in line with many of his other roles from the decade, which means that fans of his work from this era should enjoy themselves. Demi Moore is very easy to like, playing a travelling musician named Cassandra, and I think this film does more to show her screen presence than anything in the fairly dire St. Elmo's Fire, and both Joel Murray and Bobcat Goldthwait are good fun for anyone who appreciates that they are very much an acquired taste. Curtis Armstrong is another member of the gang, and I always enjoy him onscreen, and there are enjoyable, but brief, turns from Taylor Negron, Rich Hall, Jeremy Piven, and William Hickey. Mulhern is a suitably douchebro baddie, Mark Metcalf and Joe Flaherty play two different, but somehow equally problematic, fathers, and Kimberly Foster creates some extra tension as the other female in the midst of all of the hormonal men.

Not the best of the teen comedies from this decade, and you could argue that it doesn't really count anyway (the main characters all feel just a bit older, although none the wiser, compared to those in the big movies you would think of in that sub-genre), but this has plenty of little chuckles in between the few big laughs. Holland is a hell of a talent, wonderfully surreal and anarchic with his approach to familiar material, and I hope he comes along one day with another film that recaptures the energy and wit of both this and Better Off Dead.... That's unlikely, but I'll keep my fingers crossed anyway.

7/10