For It Is Man's Number

Wednesday, 23 April 2025

Prime Time: Identity (2003)

Sometimes people forget some really great movies. They're still around, and they're not derided, but they're not celebrated for being as great as they truly are. Identity is one of those films. It's a great film from James Mangold. It has a great cast. It's a whole load of fun. And you could argue that it was a precursor to the fancier and more sophisticated whodunnits that have achieved more success, and critical acclaim, in recent years. Am I implying that part of the reason for Identity being forgotten/overlooked nowadays is sue to a certain snobbery? Maybe. The film is trashy, but it's absolutely happy to revel in the trashiness while proving to be consistently entertaining for a perfect 91-minute runtime.

A bunch of people all end up at a motel on a dark and stormy night. They don't know one another, but someone seems to know them. People start to die, and each corpse has a motel room key assigned to it. Not necessarily the room that the deceased was occupying. The room keys signify a countdown. 10, 9, 8, you get the picture. The killer seems intent on getting their way until you can state "and then there were none."

Written by Michael Cooney, who seems to have been figuring out the best way to tell this story before he took a hard left turn into writing/directing movies about a killer snowman (Jack Frost and Jack Frost 2: Revenge Of The Killer Mutant Snowman), Identity is a load of pulpy clichés all treated with care and unnecessary seriousness by Mangold and his cast. And, let's face it, as good a director as Mangold is, his cast here take everything to another level.

Who should I spend time praising first? John Cusack before he stopped caring about his work? Ray Liotta having a fine old time, especially when he responds to any potential threat by reassuring those around him that he will shoot anyone or anything coming for them? Amanda Peet being sassy until she starts to pine for some orange grove that she hopes to see in the near future? John Hawkes getting much more screentime than John Hawkes usually gets in something so mainstream? Rebecca De Mornay? Clea DuVall? John C. McGinley? Alfred Molina? Jake Busey? Pruitt Taylor Vince? Nobody does a bad job, even if (in fact . . . especially if) they're allowed to chew the scenery for a while. The material can handle such grandstanding melodramatics, and everyone in the cast is happy to oblige. There are also small roles for Holmes Osborne, Marshall Bell, Leila Kenzie, Carmen Argenziano, William Lee Scott, and one or two others.

I know that I started this review by stating how great this is, and I know that people will have assumed that was hyperbole. They'll be waiting for a bit of balance here, some criticisms to show that I still have my faculties intact. Sadly, that's not ever guaranteed when it comes to me. If the big finale had been played out in a way that felt serious or earnest then the film would have failed completely (just look at something like Serenity), but Mangold and Cooney don't make that mistake. The ending is ridiculous. They know it's ridiculous. They also know that ridiculous can be ridiculously entertaining.

I love the script, I love the music by Alan Silvestri, I love the cinematography by Phedon Papamichael, I really do love everything about this. While I don't expect many to love it quite as much as I do, I implore you all to revisit it. Or, at the very least, remember it for the fine filmic fun it is. With respect to the fine Kenneth Branagh, I'll take this over any star-laden Poirot remake any day of the week.

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

Tuesday, 22 April 2025

Black Bag (2025)

Here's another film from the long-retired director Steven Soderbergh. Coming along so soon after Presence, which was also written by the writer of this, David Koepp, it would be interesting to consider just how many movies we would get from him if he hadn't decided to duck out of the industry years ago and spend time resting on his laurels.

George Woodhouse and Kathryn St. Jean (Michael Fassbender and Cate Blanchett, respectively) are a married couple who are both in the spy business. Their marriage is enviably solid, but things may get tricky when it looks as if Kathryn has been up to some treachery. In order to get to the bottom of things, George ropes in a number of friends (played by Tom Burke, Marisa Abela, Regé-Jean Page, and Naomie Harris) to help him. He'll either ask them for favours or interrogate them with a polygraph attached, but he'll do whatever is necessary to untangle the whole messy situation.

One or two moments aside, and even those could be tweaked, Black Bag is the kind of film that you could easily envision as a stage play. The plotting is smart, yet also keeps things slightly confusing in a way that is nicely in line with the murky world of spycraft that we're dropped in the middle of. Keeping track of everything should show you how it all works out plausibly, but it's one that I think may well require at least one or two rewatches to fully unpick.

Koepp does well to deliver a mix of characters who feel enjoyably different from one another while also feeling capable of doing what their job entails. He also ensures that the dialogue feels authentic for everything that our protagonists are discussing. I'm not saying that it IS, but it feels that way to a layman onlooker like myself.

Soderbergh loves a challenge, which is what I assume drew him to both this and Presence (that one being a haunted house movie from the POV of the presence, this one being a spy thriller with the emphasis on conversations and a look at the mindset of those who take on such work), and it's a good job that he is often up to the task of meeting those challenges. He has times when he misses, and I am one of those people who really disliked Presence, but his hit rate is pretty impressive, and there's usually always at least something of interest in even his weakest features.

Fassbender and Blanchett are both as excellent as you'd expect, and there's a nice little role for Pierce Brosnan that allows him to lift the film momentarily with a perfect mix of menace and that typical Brosnan charm, but it's interesting to see how well the supporting cast do to hold their own alongside the two more established stars. Burke, someone who doesn't always impress me, is brilliant, providing some of the funniest moments of the film in a way that doesn't move everything too far away from the main tone of the whole piece, Abela projects the image of someone very capable, but perhaps trying too hard to disguise her own intelligence, and both Page and Harris sink their teeth into roles that could have easily been all-too-forgettable.

Low-key throughout, but no less thrilling for it, this is top-tier cloak and dagger stuff. It might not be the very best example of this kind of thing, and I suspect one or two loose plot points that I may or may not be satisfied with on a rewatch, but there are times when it comes very close.

8/10

Monday, 21 April 2025

Mubi Monday: The Last Showgirl (2024)

There are many times when others praise things that make it easy for me to agree with them, be it a piece of art or an artist, or something that occurs in the world outside of my entertainment/art bubble. I would say that most of the time I tend to find my views aligning with the majority. Not all of the time though, and The Last Showgirl is one of those times when I am very much at the opposite end of the general consensus.

Pamela Anderson plays Shelly, a showgirl who finds herself with a big problem when the show that she has been part of for decades is due to close forever. Despite the dwindling audience numbers and various struggles, this news seems to be a huge shock to Shelly, Mary-Anne (Brenda Song), Jodie (Kiernan Shipka), and the other women in the show. Not sure of what she will do in the future, Shelly starts to also consider what she has given up in the past, including a relationship with her daughter, Hannah (Billie Lourd).

The first screenplay feature credit for Kate Gersten, The Last Showgirl is a disappointing and muddled look at choices made in youth that reverberate through an entire lifetime, as well as being an obvious exploration of how anyone racing against the clock of natural ageing is always going to be in danger of losing their place in an industry that values youth and beauty above almost everything else. While not a great film, it also has the misfortune of being released very close to the much superior The Substance, which explores similar themes in a much more interesting, and a much smarter, way. It's hard not to keep comparing the two, considering how they also position a "past their prime" actress in the lead role, surround them with one or two relative newcomers, and underscore the main narrative with a mixture of sadness and disappointment in the lack of progress made in the two main industries being looked at.

Director Gia Coppola obviously believes that casting Anderson in the lead role is a great way to play into the material, but that would only work if Anderson was good enough. Sadly, she is not, and the fact that she plays her character with some constant faux-Marilyn Monroe affectation in her speech doesn't help her show a big enough difference between her stage persona and her personality when not performing. Song and Shipka aren't given enough to do, with the latter also unable to make her character work when required to perform a dance that is supposed to get close to something sexy, and the only moments worth your time involve either Dave Bautista (as Eddie, a producer who has a past with Shelly), Jamie Lee Curtis (as Annette, a former showgirl now working as a cocktail waitress), or Billie Lourd (as Hannah, Shelly's daughter).

There are some parts of this that are admirable, but they're overshadowed by a lead actress who cannot make the most of her role, a couple of trips into fantasy sequences that derail the central narrative focus, and a third act that is equal parts unsatisfying and surprisingly empty. I'm not going to say that the whole thing ultimately lacks enough . . . substance, but that wouldn't be an incorrect summary. I don't know who to blame - writer, director, or star - but surely they didn't want people to watch this and just wish they had rewatched Showgirls instead.

3/10

Sunday, 20 April 2025

Netflix And Chill: The Passion Of The Christ (2004)

It's all well and good to dismiss Mel Gibson nowadays, and I certainly wouldn't force anyone to check out any of his movies if they have been disgusted by some of his rants and behaviour over the past couple of decades, but it's also interesting to revisit some of his major features, now that we know even more about what wildfires have occasionally raged across the surface of his brain.

I watched The Passion Of The Christ many years ago, back when it was first available for home viewing, and my one takeaway from that experience was how bored it made me. It shows us the last few hours in the life of Jesus Christ (played by Jim Caviezel), which makes it an experience filled with pain and bloodshed. I think I remember people complaining about it being a Jesus-centric slice of torture porn, but I was unimpressed by the choices made when it came to what we saw onscreen.

This revisit left me similarly cold on the thing, especially when you consider how many people who claim to follow the teachings of Jesus would be the ones denying his power and turning to some flashy false idol instead. Personal faith is a wonderful thing, as I have said many times before, but organised religion seems to be used more as a baton to hurt and keep down others. Just look at . . . well, almost everyone in America today who claims to be Christian. Having also worked with Benedict Fitzgerald on the screenplay, director Gibson clearly equates this religious tale/lesson with the idea of pain and penance being as important to the heart of things as love and kindness. The entire film is a shock tactic, a reminder of what was sacrificed, and it's admirable that he made something that somehow managed to appeal to a great number of people who would be disgusted by this kind of content in any non-religious film. Despite being both R-rated and subtitled, this was massively successful at the box office, proving how well Gibson knew how to sell his vision to like-minded fans.

The cast don't get much wiggle room though, of course, and Caviezel is an actor I have come to like less and less throughout the years. He has always seemed far too self-serious and limited in his abilities, an image that this role does nothing to dispel. Most of the performance is felt through the special effects, and the many moments that Caviezel cries out in pain. Maia Morgenstern is okay in the role of Mary, and Monica Bellucci doesn't get enough to do as Magdalen, but there are good moments for both Mattia Sbragia and Hristo Naumov Shopov, as, respectively, Caiaphas and Pontius Pilate. Rosalinda Celentano also makes a strong impression as Satan. Maybe it's a point of interest that Satan still gets some of the best moments in a film about Jesus.

It's hard to fault the film, technically, with Gibson making great use of a relatively low budget to tell the story (one or two flashbacks allow us to see a pre-persecuted Jesus doing some good deeds) and a lush score from John Debney accompanying the visuals, but it's hard to think of this as something that people will choose to revisit. Other religious films may not be as faithful, and they may not be as graphic in their depiction of what Jesus went through, but not every church-goer wants to spend a couple of hours being presented with so much torture and pain (not outwith a passionate sermon anyway). Sometimes they just want to enjoy a stellar cast holding your attention for over 4 hours in The Greatest Story Ever Told. I think I might also prefer that. So I already know what I am lining up to watch next Easter.

4/10

Saturday, 19 April 2025

Shudder Saturday: Doomwatch (1972)

A feature film based on a popular BBC drama series that ran between 1970-1972, Doomwatch is a strange mix of tame thrills, overcooked acting, and a central concept that arguably feels even more relevant to day than it felt back at the start of the 1970s.

Ian Bannen is Dr. Del Shaw, a scientist from the Doomwatch organisation (a group monitoring our environment with the hope of keeping it clear of any problems that would affect us) sent to the island of Balfe. An oil tanker sank just off the coast of the island some time ago, and Dr. Shaw needs to find out if things are clearing up. He ends up finding something else in the water, however, and it may have been affecting the island residents for some time.

Clive Exton is credited with the final draft here, but Kit Pedler and Gerry Davis are the writers responsible for the series that provides a lot of the main framework. It's hard to figure out whether the film assumes that viewers will have knowledge of the series or whether it's just written in a way that crams enough information into early scenes before delivering some of the expected drama and tension, but there's certainly a clumsiness to some of the exposition and the interactions between our leading man and the many people who are hostile to his presence.

Director Peter Sasdy isn't the best of the British directors working consistently at this time (having delivered a few Hammer movies, as well as many other works on TV, before this Tigon production), but he tries to do his best with material that could easily veer between silliness and sensationalism. The fact that it often feels removed from either extreme may disappoint some film fans, but it's an admirable approach to the whole thing.

Bannen is perfectly fine in his role, and Judy Geeson stands out as Victoria Brown, a lovely young woman who ends up caught up in the unfolding horror. John Paul, Simon Oates, Jean Trend, and Joby Blanshard reprise their roles from the TV show, which helps with the continuity for anyone who also watched the show (I have not, and I believe it's one of those shows that now has a number of sadly lost episodes), and there's a cameo appearance by the always wonderful George Sanders.

While it may be too restrained, and perhaps just a bit too quaint, for many modern viewers, Doomwatch is very much worth your time. If anything, the problems of environmental pollution being caused by, and worsened, by those in positions of power who keep trying to maintain a cover-up while denying any harmful consequences is absolutely on par with a lot of what we see around us today, from the pollution of many lakes and rivers in the UK to every avoidable move to keep using fossil fuels that are contributing to the growing problem of global warming. There may have been a time when this film seemed to be nothing more than a cute curio from the past. It's now sadly a very prescient look at how a handful of individuals have to struggle to change the ways of corporations, as well as changing the mindset of people who have just become used to living with what they deem an acceptable level of harm, as long as they get to live in relative peace.

7/10

Friday, 18 April 2025

The Saint (1997)

There are many films you could choose to watch if you're in the mood to remember the great talent of the late Val Kilmer, who we lost just a couple of weeks ago, but I decided to finally watch The Saint. Having not given it much thought throughout the decades since it was released, I picked up a digital copy of the movie ages ago for less than the price of a cup of coffee. Now seemed as good a time as any to finally get around to watching it.

Kilmer is the titular character, AKA Simon Templar AKA a variety of false names always referencing saints. He's a master thief, as well as a master of disguise, and aiming to hit the magic number of $50M in his bank account to afford him a relaxing life of retirement. That's why he takes on a lucrative job that requires him to steal the ground-breaking work of Dr. Emma Russell (Elisabeth Shue) and help a powerful Russian (Ivan Tretiak, played by Rade Serbedzija) monopolise the modern miracle of cold fusion. Things are complicated by pesky feelings though, and it becomes clear that Mr. Templar will struggle to get to the end of this particular adventure with his halo intact.

There's some talent here, certainly when it comes to the people behind the camera. Writers Jonathan Hensleigh and Wesley Strick have been responsible for a wide variety of films that, whether good or bad, have often been interesting, at the very least. Director Phillip Noyce can do tension and intelligent thrillers, and was coming off a great run of features helmed between the late '80s to the mid-1990s, but none of his skill is on display here. It's obvious that the script isn't strong - it's muddled, lacking action, and even fails to make Templar appealing beyond the natural charm of Kilmer - but very disappointing that Noyce couldn't figure out how to create something that would be able to distract us from that big problem.

Kilmer cannot carry the film alone though, but he's forced to. As much as I enjoy her work, Shue is not served well by having to portray someone smart enough to turn the theory of cold fusion into a reality, yet also silly enough to be taken in by Templar in one or two of his more ridiculous disguises. She needs to be both the valuable "asset" and the standard love interest, although I will admit that it was a pleasant surprise to see a third act in which Kilmer's character only survives thanks to her assistance. Serbedzija is stuck playing a dull villain, in line with the dullness of almost everything else in the movie (from the visuals to the other characters), Valeriy Nikolaev gets to have a bit more fun as the angry son/henchman, and Alun Armstrong, Tommy Flanagan, and Emily Mortimer all appear onscreen just long enough to look slightly embarrassed about being there.

There's a decent score from Graeme Revell, although even that pales in comparison to a soundtrack that includes tracks from Sneaker Pimps, The Chemical Brothers, Daft Punk, David Bowie, and Orbital (delivering a superb reworking of the familiar theme tune), and a couple of nice moments just before the end credits roll that will leave you wishing that the rest of the film played more into the iconography of the character. That's all I can compliment though, aside from Kilmer.

3/10

Thursday, 17 April 2025

Captain America: Brave New World (2025)

I don't know why, but I felt as if Captain America: Brave New World was going to be the fresh start that we needed for the MCU. It didn't have to be weighed down with the baggage of a whole load of other movies. It didn't have to necessarily be setting up numerous future adventures. It could simply . . . be, allowing fans to appreciate what they got onscreen while still remaining calm and unfazed about whatever was coming along next.

It almost worked.

Anthony Mackie is Sam Wilson, now Captain America, having been bequeathed the iconic shield some time ago. He has a few extra gadgets to help him, but no super-serum. Harrison Ford is President Thaddeus Ross, a powerful man who may be ready to empathise and compromise with superheroes who are now necessary to keep countries, and even the world, safe. Things might work out well, but not if the likes of Samuel Sterns (Tim Blake Nelson) and Sidewinder (Giancarlo Esposito) have their way.

There's enough to enjoy here. Mackie is excellent as a leading man, Ford is a great addition to the MCU, and there are some very enjoyable supporting characters. Danny Ramirez is likable enough as Joaquin Torres, someone who wants to be the next Falcon, Carl Lumbly is very good as Isaiah Bradley, a previous Captain America, and Shira Haas is certainly memorable as a leading security advisor to the POTUS. Nelson is also great, and benefits enormously from receiving more time and attention than Esposito, who is sadly wasted (and this is the second of the 2025 movies I have seen that sadly wastes Esposito).

Director Julius Onah, who also worked on the screenplay with four other writers, doesn't embarrass himself. He delivers some good images, keeps the tone impressively serious without being too sombre and gloomy throughout, for the most part, and handles the action well when we get some action. That is arguably the biggest problem with this though, a disappointing lack of action. It feels caught between two places, with some of the paranoid political thriller vibes of the excellent second Captain America film and then some belated crash bang wallop moments to keep fans happy just before the credits roll (and, yes, we’re back to waiting around to see what a post-credits scene will hint at).

It may be a return to form, certainly in terms of the overall look and feel, and there may be a focus that seemed to be lacking from the MCU during the past couple of “wilderness years”, but there’s nothing that makes it feel as entertaining, bombastic, or just outright fun as the better movies under the Marvel umbrella. Much like the titular hero, however, it does give some hope for the future.

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, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
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

Wednesday, 16 April 2025

Prime Time: G20 (2025)

The fact that it took four writers to come up with this - a film essentially summed up as "Die Hard at the G20 summit" - is bewildering. G20 is yet another film that has tried to emulate Die Hard throughout the past four decades without really understanding what makes that film such an enduring classic.

Viola Davis plays President Danielle Sutton, someone who handily comes from a military background. While attending the G20 summit with her family, Sutton has to call on her past skillset to stay one step ahead of some pesky terrorists (headed up by Rutledge, played by Antony Starr). She is helped by Agent Manny Ruiz (Ramón Rodriguez), but we all know that things are leading to a face-to-face battle between the terrorists and a lone Sutton.

Director Patricia Riggen seems to make the mistake of relying on a very weak script here. Writers Caitlin Parrish, Erica Weiss, Logan Miller, and Noah Miller don't really know what they're doing, sadly, when it comes to the movie template they have to work with. They know how to make something that feels like a standard survival-action videogame, especially in the third act (which will feel familiar to anyone who has repeatedly battled Wesker in the Resident Evil game series), but they don't know how to make a fun action movie full of characters that you care about, or that you believe to be in genuine peril.

It doesn't help that the whole thing also feels like a streaming film, as opposed to something with an aim to be more than just content to add to the constant stream of content. There's a flat ugliness to the visual style, a presentation that feels paradoxically expensive and cheap at the same time (don't ask me exactly how, but I'm sure other film fans will know what I mean), and every main plot beat is predictable and quite safe. Aside from some villains and one or two disposable characters, nobody orbiting the central storyline ever feels in real danger. This is complete escapism, fair enough, but a lack of thrills means that you should expect to see some impressive action sequences, at the very least, and that does not happen.

Davis is fine in the lead role though. Capable and strong enough to let you fleetingly believe that America would actually consider voting in a black woman as POTUS, when we all know that in reality they would find reasons to besmirch and reject her. Anthony Anderson is also fine as her loving husband, and both Marsai Martin and Christopher Farrar do well as their kids, the former being the tech wizard who could prove useful after proving her credentials in some very early scenes of rebellious teenage behaviour and the latter being an extra factor to plan around when it is time for the bullets and bloodshed. Rodriguez does what is asked of him, although he has to get out of the way at some point for our brave POTUS to start doing full-on brave POTUS stuff. As for Starr, you can see him poised to chew the scenery and have a blast, but he's never let off the leash, which is a great shame. He could have helped to lift this up, but his character feels disappointingly sidelined until a big finale that has him fairly neutered. Douglas Hodge is amusing, as a stuffy and pig-headed Prime Minister, but there's nobody else who stands out from a supporting cast that could have easily made room for one or two scene-stealers.

I'm sure many people here did their best, including the cast. It's hard to see that though, considering how bad both the writing and direction are (Riggen may do well with certain material, but an action director she is not, sadly). This is the kind of easy viewing choice that makes you resent giving it your time, and I hope others avoid it. If you're after something in this vein then just ask me, let me know what streaming services you have available, and I'll happily give you at least half a dozen better options.

3/10

Tuesday, 15 April 2025

RoboCop 2 (1990)

I really cannot recall whether or not I actually saw RoboCop 2 when it was released years ago. I had either forgotten it completely, which is entirely possible, or I didn't bother with it after hearing that it was no good, which is equally possible. It's also very possible that people telling me it was no good were just plain wrong. RoboCop 2 is pretty great. Just like many sequels, the biggest problem it has is not being as good as the film that preceded it.

Peter Weller is back in the main role, and Nancy Allen is still his partner, Lewis. Detroit isn't any safer, sadly, and the latest threat to people is a powerful and highly-addictive drug named Nuke, with a man named Cain (Tom Noonan) being at the very top of that lucrative supply chain. Will RoboCop be able to deal with the problem, or will it be time to unveil RoboCop 2?

Written by Frank Miller and Walon Green, and directed by Irvin Kershner, the first thing that many will notice about RoboCop 2 is just how much it wants to keep the dark humour running through the nihilism and violence. That is obvious from the first scene, thankfully, and it sets the scene for a film that nicely balances out the thrills and violence with ongoing commentary about businesses over-extending their reach across society, especially when it comes to crime prevention and policing of cities. Kershner is a very capable director, and not afraid to tackle a sequel to a massive hit, and he tries to keep everything on track here, despite the plot strand that takes some time to explore the humanity of our hero before simply making use of it as an additional strength when he once again faces off against a potentially deadlier robo-foe.

Weller and Allen are a good fit, and (as evidenced in the next instalment in the series) it's hard to really think of anyone else as RoboCop. Allen gets less to do this time around, but she's still a loyal and capable partner, and she is still willing to keep fighting back against overwhelming odds when other robots get that urge to kill. Noonan is as watchable as ever, and a lot of fun in the role of Cain. He doesn't get to be as mean and fun as Kurtwood Smith in the first movie, but he brings that patented Noonan menace to his role. Dan O'Herlihy is entertainingly conniving, Belinda Bauer is enjoyable as another person thinking that they have a great idea to progress the profitability and innovation of the company, and it's worth mentioning how good Gabriel Damon is in the role of a vicious criminal kid named Hob. Others to namecheck are Galyn Görg (a bit of a moll, essentially), Willard Pugh (the Mayor), Stephen Lee (corruptible cop), Mark Rolston and John Glover (both with barely any screentime, but just there enough for you to start thinking about where else you know them from).

Maybe I like this a lot more now than I ever would have if I'd seen it back when it was first released. I am more familiar with the main cast members, I can appreciate the humour even more, and I have a really comforting warmth of nostalgia when I see actors positioned in front of matte paintings and rear projections in a way that we rarely see nowadays. It's not able to present the kind of perfectly-realised vision that can be done with computer effects now, but that just adds to the charm. If you have a choice then you should always choose to (re)watch the original film, but this is far from the worst way you can spend more time with these characters in this world.

7/10

Monday, 14 April 2025

Mubi Monday: September Says (2024)

I've seen a bit of praise for September Says already, and I can understand some of it. Co-written by Daisy Johnson and Ariane Labed, with Labed also taking on feature directing for the first time, this is a dark and interesting psychological drama. I've also seen some people refer to this as unique though, and that just isn't correct. I actually defy any seasoned film fan to start watching September Says and not soon figure out where it is going to end up, generally speaking.

Rakhee Thakrar is a mother, Sheela, and our young leads are July (Mia Tharia) and September (Pascale Kann). July often takes part in a game called September Says, which will be familiar to anyone who has ever played Simon Says. Unfortunately, despite September often trying to support and help July, there are times when a game of September Says can quickly turn dark and dangerous. Oh, they're also on holiday in Ireland, which allows them to feel more like outsiders struggling to fit in with those around them.

Although this could go in a multitude of different directions, allowing it to move from drama into something more genre-heavy, Labed isn't interested in that. That's fine, of course, and she can choose to take her own movie in whatever direction she wants. It's ultimately disappointing though, mainly because it soon becomes clear that neither Labed nor Johnson have anything new or interesting to say. Movies don't have to say anything new or interesting, but that harms a movie when there's not much else to appreciate.

The main performances are good, although the cast sometimes struggle with the idea of expressing themselves within their own little bubble. Thakrar, for example, is playing an interesting and complex figure, but there are only one or two scenes that help to make her more than just a bundle of quirks and nerves. Tharia and Kann work really well together, despite being weighed down by material that thinks it is being much more interesting and clever than it actually is.

What could have been an interesting exploration of the harm that loved ones can do to one another, or just a look at the ups and downs of any sibling/friend relationship, ends up being a waste of time, sadly. There's not enough substance to flesh it out, but it also lacks the artistry to make it the kind of viewing experience that you can at least appreciate for the aesthetic while everyone dances around the slim narrative.

Decent. Occasionally interesting. Dark. I already know that some will appreciate this a bit more than I did, and I can understand that. I still cannot view it as anything unique though, and the thing that stops it from being unique is one important aspect that is almost completely mishandled throughout.

5/10

Sunday, 13 April 2025

Netflix And Chill: Unfrosted (2024)

Please feel free to read the following in the style of an exaggerated Jerry Seinfeld impression. What's the deal with non-bread breakfast that you put into the toaster? We have bread for that. Oh, you want fruity goodness too? Put some jam on top. Got a sweet tooth? Add chocolate spread. Want it all feeling as if you have some kind of acceptable hot pocket to start the day with? Just fold it over. But no, someone had to go and invent Pop-Tarts, a filled pastry product made by popping it into your toaster.

A satirical look at the breakfast cereal landscape, and the creation and marketing of the Pop-Tart, Unfrosted is directed by Jerry Seinfeld, stars Jerry Seinfeld in the main role of Bob Cabana, and was written by Seinfeld, Spike Feresten, Andy Robin, and Barry Marder. While it doesn't really help anyone to understand the landscape of breakfast brand creation and marketing, it certainly helps people to understand why Seinfeld seems to have spent the last few years going on about people not being able to just be funny any more. While constantly bemoaning a cultural landscape that he believes is restricting and throttling comedians, Seinfeld has really been signifying to us all that he is just no longer all that funny. And Unfrosted proves that.

Look, I'm no comedian (successful or otherwise), and I have had nowhere near the amount of experience that Seinfeld has. But has Seinfeld actually done much on his own to allow himself to be positioned as some wise commentator on the state of society as a whole, and how it has specifically affected comedy? I am going to say no. Seinfeld is a half-decent stand-up comic who has had his greatest achievements due to the work of other people, whether that is Larry David behind the scenes or the co-stars that we all think of when we think of Seinfeld. And that's a show named after himself.

But let's get back to Unfrosted, as unfunny and charmless as it is. Aside from Seinfeld in his main role, the cast also includes Jim Gaffigan, Amy Schumer, Christian Slater, Melissa McCarthy, Cedric The Entertainer, Thomas Lennon, James Marsden, Tony Hale, Hugh Grant, and many more. Everyone gets a moment, with the slight and silly plot just used as a framework to jump from one selection of gags to the next, but only a select few can do enough to rise above the material. Schumer isn't bad, McCarthy is as much fun as she usually is (I'm a fan, but that statement will also help those who dislike her usual schtick know that they can avoid this), Slater is a lot of fun as a threatening milkman, and Bill Burr is very funny in his portrayal of JFK. It's Grant who steals the film though, looking slightly shame-faced as a classical actor hiding away inside the suit of Tony The Tiger, that well-known breakfast cereal mascot who assured us all that the bowl we were served every morning tasted "grrrrrrrrrreat."

I'm sure that everyone involved in this had fun. There are so many people popping up for one or two scenes, so many different ideas and gags added to the mix, that it feels as if someone came up with the premise to simply gather friends together and have a lot of fun. Good for them. It doesn't translate to a fun viewer experience though. Did I laugh a few times? Yes. Did I hate the whole thing? No. It just all seemed so random and pointless though, and as smug as many other Seinfeld appearances I have seen in recent years (whether he's having coffee in cars with someone much funnier than himself or being interviewed about how he and his peers can no longer deliver jokes to audiences who just don't recognise comedy any more).

People can still very much recognise comedy. It's just that people no longer recognise some of Seinfeld's material as being very funny. Maybe it never was, considering how he has spent his career surrounding himself with layers of other people's talent, or maybe I'm just judging him too harshly after having wasted 97 minutes of my time on this nonsense.

3/10

Saturday, 12 April 2025

Shudder Saturday: Hostile Dimensions (2023)

A lot of people became huge fans of writer-director-star Graham Hughes when he delivered the found footage-adjacent horror Death Of A Vlogger. I liked the film, and it's one that I have enjoyed rewatching since buying a digital copy, but still don't love it as much as many other people. This film, similar in both style and the various tricks used, feels like a slight improvement on his previous feature, but there is a leaning towards sci-fi that may displease those hoping for a delicious selection of oddities and frights.

In a concept that will be familiar to many, but especially familiar to those who have watched Monsters, Inc., or have read (and probably re-read) The Dark Tower series by Stephen King, Hostile Dimensions shows people being presented with a number of doors that don't work according to the known laws of our universe. The doors don't necessarily have to be fitted into a wall, for starters, and opening them up can allow you to step into a very different world. That would be okay if every doorway took you into Narnia, but the title might clue viewers in to the fact that safety is far from guaranteed for those who decide to step over the threshold. Josie Rogers plays Emily, a young woman who disappeared after checking out one such door, and Ash (Joma West) and Sam (Annabel Logan) decide that it might be worthwhile making a documentary about her disappearance. Things take a turn for the interesting/dangerous when they start to piece together what could have happened to Emily. And the same thing might happen to them.

Paced well enough, and with a couple of genuinely great scares sprinkled throughout the thing, Hostile Dimensions is an entertaining slice of oddness that only suffers from never coming close to fully realising the potential of the concept. Hughes does well with his budget, but there are times when his limitations are obvious, especially in the different dimensions that seem to be home to polygons that have escaped from an old Spectrum 48K.

The cast will be familiar to those who saw Death Of A Vlogger, but everyone seems to have become more accustomed to the style, and what is required of them. Hughes is arguably the weakest of the main cast members, although I am not saying that he’s bad, but West, Logan, and Rogers are all very good, and Paddy Kondracki benefits from the fact that he’s not needing to be as over the top and comedic this time around.

Apparently the second in a planned trilogy of movies in this style, this is certainly enough to win over some more fans of Hughes, and to please those who were impressed by his previous feature. I tend to like the fact that we can still see the rough edges and flaws that show his vision and ambition staying ahead of what he has to work with. Others may not view the end product so kindly, and I am sure that I am in the minority for preferring this to the last film helmed by Hughes.

7/10

Friday, 11 April 2025

It Ends With Us (2024)

People may be more interested in the behind-the-scenes drama than the onscreen result now that It Ends With Us is way beyond the marketing and all-smiles-for-the-release phase, but it's a film that I actually saw before the release of the full details of what allegedly happened while it was being made. So I'll try just to judge it on what we get within the film.

It's a strange mix, and ultimately not a great film.

Blake Lively plays Lily Bloom, who is the latest fictional character in a long line of those who prove the idea of nominative determinism when she gathers up the courage and funds to open her own florist shop. She becomes firm friends with Allysa (Jenny Slate), which also leads to her dating Allysa's brother, Ryle (Justin Baldoni). Lily also ends up reconnecting with someone from her past, Atlas Corrigan (Brandon Sklenar), and this causes tension between her and Ryle, which highlights the problem that Ryle has controlling his temper.

Adapted from the Colleen Hoover book by Christy Hall, and directed by Baldoni, there's something worthwhile, and even admirable, about It Ends With Us. The third act presents a surprisingly impactful and pointed look at the many ways people can excuse, and even justify, red flags/violence/abuse in their loved ones, often until it is far too late to get themselves into a much safer situation. The fact that it's all dressed up in so prettily, just like a standard romantic movie, is both a plus and a minus for it. I understand that it's a way to sell the film, as well as being a way to present the rose-filtered glasses that people can have on while trying to hold on to a relationship that isn't worth their time, but it undoubtedly works against the more serious thematic strand that is the main thrust of the film.

Lively is a really good lead, she can do gritty and strong as well as she can do soft and mushy, and this role needs her to do both. Slate is also a big plus, portraying someone who seems to be a really good friend, but takes time to fully step up when things are taking a turn for the worse. As for Baldoni and Sklenar, they're both here more for their looks than their acting talent, from what I can tell, but the latter certainly has more of an appealing screen presence than the former, and that clearly helps with how the story wants to pan out. You get decent supporting turns from Hasan Minhaj (partner of Slate's character), Kevin McKidd and Amy Morton (parents of a young Lily, who is played well by Isabela Ferrer), and Alex Neustaedter (young Atlas), but anyone moving around onscreen tends to be there in service of the unfolding stories of Lily, Ryle, and Atlas, and the film moves in and out of interactions always ready to get right back alongside one of the leads.

I am not familiar with the source material (and I don't think I'll ever want to dive into any Colleen Hoover books, as upsetting as I'm sure that is for her to hear as she cries into her millions), but I can't help thinking there was a better way to adapt it into a film. It's only the third act that stands out, and that's only thanks to the use of a metaphorical bright marker pen underlining the real message of the movie, and even making it feel very like a love triangle seems to be a disservice to a lot of women who will watch this and recognise some disturbingly familiar moments.

Considering the relative success, I'm sure we'll see more attempts to adapt Colleen Hoover novels in the near future. You could say that it's unlikely to end with this. Maybe the others will be less problematic. We'll just have to wait and see.

5/10

Thursday, 10 April 2025

The Monkey (2025)

When I heard that we were getting a movie version of "The Monkey", a short story by Stephen King, I immediately tried to remember how the tale panned out. I've read a LOT of Stephen King work, including almost all of his superb short story collections, but I could not remember "The Monkey", even after being reminded of the fact that it featured in the fantastic Skeleton Crew. I somehow kept confusing it in my mind with "Chattery Teeth", a story from the enjoyable Nightmares & Dreamscapes collection.

Theo James plays twins Hal and Bill (the younger incarnations played by Christian Convery), men who have very different views on a cymbal-bashing monkey that they took possession of for a brief, but memorable, part of their childhood. Piecing things together, they eventually reached that the conclusion that the monkey would always signify the sudden death of someone close by. Hal would be happy to never see the thing again. Bill, on the other hand, thinks he might be able to make use of such a unique power.

Written and directed by Osgood Perkins, who had great success penetrating the last year with Longlegs, this looks as if 2025 is the year that allows him to cash in on all of the goodwill he gained in 2024. While still not necessarily for every mainstream horror fan, this is easily the most accessible film that Perkins has directed. As many others have already mentioned, it's a horror comedy with a number of deaths that would easily nestle alongside those showcased in the Final Destination series.

James isn't the best choice for a leading man, but he doesn't do a bad job with his two roles. There are better moments for Convery though, and Colin O'Brien (playing Hal's son, and someone he has kept at a distance in order to keep him safe) brings a better energy to things. Tatiana Maslany is very good as the mother of the twins, and there are very entertaining cameos from Adam Scott and Elijah Wood. Rohan Campbell also has fun in a supporting role, hard to recognise underneath a hairstyle that makes him look like a member of a Ramones tribute act, and I also have to mention Sarah Levy, Perkins himself (giving himself a small role that allows him to almost steal one scene in the movie, Tess Degenstein, and Danica Dreyer.

Everything is decently put together, from the score to the gore gags, from the dialogue to the pacing of the main plot points, but what matters most is that monkey, and I'm pleased to say that it's exactly as it needs to be. Designed to somehow remain completely impassive, yet also oozing menace whenever it's onscreen, the monkey is a brilliant, and unexpectedly effective, "villain".

Perkins cannot quite navigate the tonal dancing required, but the fact that he gives it a go shows how good his instincts are when it comes to adapting the source material, which really wouldn't work if handled with complete seriousness. The end result is a bit of a mess, but it's an entertaining mess that manages to stand out from a crowd of neater, safer, mainstream horror choices. And I don't need my entertainment to be safe and neat and tidy.

7/10

Wednesday, 9 April 2025

Prime Time: Hellboy: The Crooked Man (2024)

A new Hellboy movie that has both a new actor portraying Big Red (Jack Kesy takes on the role this time) and a new director at the helm (Brian Taylor, he of the fun Neveldine/Taylor film-making duo), I was prepared to seriously dislike this. I have enjoyed previous Hellboy movies, but they had directors and stars I was more interested in. This seemed to be destined to disappoint me, considering the lack of major names and what looked to be, from the trailer anyway, a restrictively low budget.

I ended up not being disappointed.

To boil the story down to the core of the premise, Hellboy and Bobbie Jo Song (Adeline Rudolph) end up in a remote area where they discover someone in need of their help. Tom Ferrell (Jefferson White) has been put in a very difficult position, which makes him a target for a witch (Leah McNamara), and also has him apparently owing a debt to the titular crooked man (Martin Bassindale).

With Mike Mignola helping to adapt his own comic book, joined by Taylor and Christopher Golden, this is a decent little slice of supernatural action that, as I have been assured by fans of the Hellboy comics, actually feels more in line with the source material than previous live-action films. I still have a soft spot for Perlman in the role, and the fact that his Hellboy was surrounded by the gorgeousness of Guillermo del Toro world-building, but there's actually nothing here to be overly critical of.

Yes, this cast and crew seem to be working with more limited resources, but that doesn't stop them from presenting a nicely-constructed number of set-pieces that allow Hellboy to face off against supernatural beings with his usual mix of brute strength and an inability to be too fazed by anything. The opening sequence, involving a speeding train and a troublingly large spider, may not inspire the most confidence, but things improve once we then move to the start of the main storyline.

Kesy is alright in the main role, and perhaps his performance only seems slightly lacking due to my own bias. He certainly does well with what he's given, and the character has the right weight and attitude for almost every minute of his screentime. Rudolph often feels like she's just around to be placed in danger, but the same could be said of others who have shared the screen with Big Red in past adventures. White is enjoyably shaky, even as he tries to stop showing how worried and tortured he is, and both McNamara and Bassindale are a lot of fun as two of the main entities causing trouble for our leads. Hannah Margetson and Joseph Marcell also do well, playing two people caught up in the unfolding events in different ways that could lead to them sharing a very similar fate.

I started to happily recommend this to like-minded friends as soon as I'd seen it. That doesn't mean that I think it's great, but I definitely think it is better than many (including myself) would expect it to be. I keep describing it as being akin to a one-shot comic, which makes sense when you consider the source material, and I suspect that fans of the main character will end up as pleasantly surprised as I was.

7/10

Tuesday, 8 April 2025

A Working Man (2025)

Considering the success that came from director David Ayer helming The Beekeeper last year, it was no surprise to hear about him working once again with Jason Statham in a vehicle that seemed tailor-made for his particular skillset. I was keen to see this as soon as I heard about it, and a standard trailer that basically showed me getting more of the Statham antics that had complemented his apiary time last year didn't do anything to dampen my enthusiasm.

Statham plays Levon Cade, a working man (ahem) with a military background that he's trying to leave in his past. He remains a formidable force though, and is asked to do what the police can't when his employers fear for the life of their daughter (Jenny, played by Arianna Rivas). Jenny has been snatched by human traffickers, caught up in a criminal web overseen by numerous Russian gangsters. Most people would be intimidated by such villains. Not Statham though. He'll tear through those baddies as if they were wet toilet paper.

I don't know why I bothered to write out that description because it doesn't really matter. This is a Jason Statham movie in which Jason Statham encounters a number of escalating problems that he can always manage to sort out with violence. It's very similar to many other Jason Statham movies, and that's not a bad thing for those who enjoy watching him do his stuff. The editing is a bit overdone at times, and the lighting doesn't always help, but it's very much in line with a lot of other action fare.

Based on a book, "Levon's Trade", by Chuck Dixon, this particular slice of kick-ass retribution is co-written by Ayer and Sylvester Stallone. Stallone has written for Statham previously (Homefront, based on a book by Chuck Logan, so maybe he just likes to adapt books written by people named Chuck), but this feels very much like a film that he would write with himself in mind for the lead role. There's more of an even balance between the fists flying and the gunfire, there's a sequence in which our hero speeds over some uneven terrain on a chunky motorbike, and the final confrontation feels as if it could easily have upped the numbers to allow for one or two Expendable-adjacent cameos adding even more firepower.

Statham remains an excellent lead, and he remains convincing enough when it comes to the action. This isn't going to convert anyone, but it should easily please those who know what they're letting themselves in for. Rivas is suitably likable and plucky in her role, although she's obviously sidelined for most of the runtime, and David Harbour has a bit of fun in his supporting role (playing a blind veteran friend who is ready to help our hero stock up on guns when it's needed). There are few highlights elsewhere though, with none of the many villains, minor or major, given enough truly great moments. Emmett J Scanlan, Eve Mauro, Maximilian Osinski, and Merab Ninidze fail to make the strong impression that they should. Jason Flemyng does better, but isn't around for long, and Chidi Ajufo seems set to engage in a grand confrontation that sadly never materialises, and they are the highlights. Isla Gie is okay as the the young daughter of our hero, allowing us to remember that he's a loving father who wants to get home in one piece, and many others jostle onscreen to be pushed to safety or punched in the face by The Stath.

Here's the main thing about A Working Man though. It's just not as good as many other Statham films, and it's definitely not as much fun as The Beekeeper. All we need is a nice and simple journey that has Statham moving up a ladder of criminals until he reaches the head honcho, but what A Working Man does is try to add a variety of extra steps that ultimately lessen the enjoyment and slow down any momentum. The finale doesn't even feel as satisfying as it should due to the network of higher-ups that seem positioned to cause problems in an inevitable sequel. Ayer can handle this kind of material, as he proved last year, but the script causes problems here. A weak script doesn't always matter for a decent action movie, just as it doesn't matter when it comes to certain horror movies, but you need enough bone-crunching action to distract from it. This doesn't quite get the balance right, which is a shame, although there are enough moments here and there to please fans of Statham doing Statham stuff.

6/10

Monday, 7 April 2025

Mubi Monday: Grand Theft Hamlet (2024)

Something is rotten in the state of San Andreas.

2020 was a truly mad year for many of us. And it didn't end as soon as we wanted it to. Some of us had to deal with the effects of a global pandemic and the eerie silence of unpopulated streets while we went into a national lockdown. Some of us had the added strain of recently separating from a significant other and misusing alcohol before figuring out much healthier coping mechanisms. Okay, maybe that last part was just me. But I'm sure I wasn't the only one. Some people began to appreciate the worlds offered to them by online gaming environments. A trip to a virtual beach was, in a way, at least better than nothing. And, despite the focus on crime and anti-social behaviour, it turns out that there are many opportunities to have a rewarding and sanity-saving get-together in the world of Grand Theft Auto Online.

I am a fan of the Grand Theft Auto videogame series, but I'm a fan with very limited ability. Have I played every instalment? No. Do I wish that I could still get my hands on the original top-down games I played on my PSOne back in the late 1990s? Absolutely. Have I spent many hours finding a spot inaccessible to the police only to then set myself up there as a sniper of innocent victims while my "wanted" rating goes higher and higher? Yes. Is it always easier to go for that option after failing some of the main missions multiple times? Also yes.

In case you weren't aware of how any of this relates to Grand Theft Hamlet, what we have here is a film documenting the attempt by two people (Sam Crane and Mark Oosterveen) to stage a production of Hamlet in the world of Grand Theft Auto Online. They have a few good locations to choose from, they know a lot of the speeches, but they have to assemble a cast, rehearse, and keep working hard to get everyone together at the right time. All while avoiding being robbed, beaten up, shot, and/or handled with extreme prejudice by some heavy-handed videogame police. One or two brief moments aside, the whole thing is presented to us within the videogame world, with Sam, Mark, and everyone else represented by their in-game characters.

Having heard a lot about Grand Theft Hamlet before finally getting to see it, I was hoping to find it a rewarding and satisfying experience. It is, for the most part, but I am also a bit surprised by how much praise I have seen heaped upon it. Co-directed, and apparently co-written, by Crane and his partner, Pinny Grylls, there's nothing much to discuss here in terms of the visuals and audio. This is a tale set in the world of Grand Theft Auto Online, and it's only really the editing that reminds you of the fact that you're actually watching a film.

This works well when you're being reminded of various experiences that many of us have shared, at one time or another. The desperation for contact and a sense of purpose during lockdown was a major problem for many. Finding friends online who end up becoming as important to you as people you know in the real world is something that can apply to videogame worlds, social media, and forums where normal and enjoyable conversation can still be found. It works less well, however, when it feels just a bit too polished and inauthentic, presenting conversations that are staged in a way that jars with the many other moments that feel brilliantly anarchic and in line with the problem of trying to perform some Shakespeare in the middle of a world more concerned with carjackings, casual violence, and rewarding bad behaviour. It should be more fun watching people wax lyrically about suffering the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune as they suffer the stabbings and shootings of this videogame environment, but Crane, Grylls, and Oosterveen want to keep giving more space and time to exchanges that feel a bit staged. I appreciate being reminded of the toll that the whole lockdown situation took on everyone, but I could do without a scene that has Crane being berated by Grylls for not spending enough time with her in the real world, even if one or two unintentional laughs come from people trying to have that conversation while videogame characters interrupt them.

Best appreciated by those who are at least aware of the Grand Theft Auto videogame series, but it's certainly also accessible to those who should be able to empathise with some of the themes of loneliness, the way time can be eaten up when you find something to distract you from the awfulness of world events, and a desire to achieve something that becomes more difficult to imagine being a success as you continue to swim against a tide that just keeps getting stronger as it tries to push you back.

"Though this be madness, yet there is method in't."

7/10

Sunday, 6 April 2025

Netflix And Chill: Ánimas (2018)

It's saying something when I can guess where a movie is going quite early on. I have mentioned many times that I am most often the viewer who figures out any twist or major plot reveal in a film just as it is happening. Ánimas is such a clumsy and slight film that I figured out what was going to happen as soon as it began. Seriously, people will know the arc of this film before they even press play, especially if they see any of the marketing with taglines that were created by people who have forgotten how to keep things mysterious for anyone who has seen more than twenty or thirty modern thrillers.

Iván Pellicer is Abraham, a young man who has developed a strong life-long bond with Álex (Clare Durant). Maybe it's time for that bond to be broken though. Álex helped Abraham get through his difficult childhood years, to put it mildly, but it looks as if Abraham is ready to leave the past fully behind and try to live a full and normal life. Álex still wants to protect him, but will she eventually accept that there is no more danger around them.

Co-written and co-directed by Laura Alvea and José Ortuño, this is, at best, a film beset by the problems of optimistic amateurism. The screenplay is very weak, especially when it comes to detailing the main plot points, and there isn't enough visual style or creativity to distract from the obvious train tearing down the tunnel to smash into viewers like a, well . . . like a speeding train.

Things wouldn't be so bad if the cast could carry the whole thing on their shoulders, but they can't. Pellicer just isn't a strong enough screen presence to make his moments work. Durant is better, but she would have to be Atlas if she wanted to hold the entire movie on her back. She's not only hampered by her main co-star, but also the screenplay that requires her to speak in a way that pretends an upcoming third act hasn't been blindingly obvious to viewers since the very first moment. Luis Bermejo, Liz Lobato, Chacha Huang, and Ángela Molina help to round out the small central cast, and they're all as ill-served by the film-makers as the leads.

There's nothing here to recommend this, aside from what I hope is a glimpse of the start of a promising career for Durant, despite this being a bad choice for her. The audio and visuals are about as bland as can be, I'd even be critical of editing that fully leans into imagery you expect to be cropping up all throughout the third act, and the whole experience just feels like a waste of everyone's time, from those who made the film to those who end up watching it. It gets a couple of points for being made with some minimal degree of competence and a point for casting Durant, but that is it.

3/10

Saturday, 5 April 2025

Shudder Saturday: The Rule Of Jenny Pen (2025)

Adapted from a short story by Owen Marshall, The Rule Of Jenny Pen feels like exactly that. Not that I am familiar with Marshall's writing. I just noticed that this movie feels a bit slight, buoyed by two fantastic lead performances, and cannot deliver a truly satisfying third act.

Geoffrey Rush is Stefan Mortensen, an elderly judge who ends up living in a care home after suffering from a stroke that leaves him partially paralysed. Mortensen wants to get back home as soon as possible, but that may not be an option for him as his body refuses to match the health of his mind. Also in the same care home is Dave Crealy (John Lithgow), a man who carries around a puppet named Jenny Pen and spends a lot of his time terrorising the residents. The staff aren't aware of this though, and it looks like Crealy will always manage to avoid any reprisals for his abuse.

Despite a few other cast members interacting with the leads, this is a two-hander that works best when both Rush and Lithgow are being confrontational with one another. In fact, this would work perfectly as a play with the opportunity to watch different heavyweights sinking their teeth into the roles. It's just a shame that the screenplay, co-written by Eli Kent and director James Ashcroft, doesn't do well enough outside of those moments. I think it's trying to look at the difficulty of having a clear mind trapped in a damaged body, but there are times in the film when it shows a level of calm acceptance for a situation that I would rather see characters continue to fight against.

Rush and Lithgow are both very good indeed, even if the latter also tries to maintain an Antipodean accent, and they feel perfectly cast in their respective roles. Lithgow has to deliver the bigger moments, showboating in front of a captive audience on occasion, and he is clearly having the most fun, but Rush is as indignant and strong-willed as he needs to be. George Henare is very good in the role of Tony, another resident who has been a victim of Crealy for a long time, and everyone else in the cast, from Maaka Pohatu to Hilary Norris, does great work, whether playing a carer or resident.

The technical side of everything is also very good. Everyone does their job with a degree of care and competence that keeps the whole thing looking and sounding as it should, but there's a real lack of flair or creativity, for the most part. One or two moments give an all-too-brief glimpse of how things could have been accentuated and presented, including a moment that shows Jenny Pen literally looming large over the leads, but most of the film, but there isn't enough of them to add to what should be an atmosphere of oppressive and smothering horror.

This is a good one to watch, particularly if you're a fan of either, or both, of the leads. It's not great though, and it's disappointingly unwilling, or unable, to use the premise in a way that effectively comments on anything other than the ongoing battle of wills between a bully and his victims.

6/10

Friday, 4 April 2025

Saturday Night (2024)

True greatness often comes about after things skate perilously close to absolute disaster, and that certainly seems to have been the case for the launch of Saturday Night Live. While it may not be what it once was, and while some may argue that it was never actually the giant cultural totem that others view it as, Saturday Night Live is a hell of a thing to be proud of. It's now been going for 50 years, it has given us a great wealth of comedic talent, on both sides of the camera, and it's undeniably part of any conversation about American TV.

What you get here is a look at the frantic and tense 90 minutes leading up to the very first episode of Saturday Night Live. The man trying to herd a lot of cats is Lorne Michaels (Gabriel LaBelle). The stars include Chevy Chase (Cory Michael Smith), Dan Aykroyd (Dylan O'Brien), and John Belushi (Matt Wood). And those thinking it could succeed are largely outnumbered by those thinking it will fail. Spectacularly.

Co-written by Gil Kenan and director Jason Reitman, Saturday Night is an enjoyable bit of sustained tension, especially impressive considering that we all know how things turned out in the end. There are a couple of main touchstones that keep being used as people rush around, ensuring they are ready for a show that is being rehearsed and timed right up until the last possible moment, and certain characters are introduced at key points to really crystallise the friction between the old guard and the new.

It's no easy task for actors to emulate some comedy icons, but I was pleased to see that the performances here seem to focus on the essence and nature of each main character, as opposed to everyone trying to do a perfect impression of who they're meant to be. The only real exception to this is Nicholas Braun, who excels in two roles, playing both Andy Kaufman and Jim Henson. Smith is all of the ego and self-doubt that you'd expect from Chase, O'Brien is a jovial Aykroyd, and Wood exudes the kid of erratic energy that always seemed to be part of Belushi. LaBelle is excellent as Michaels, a graceful swan who sometimes goes through water so clear that we can see the feet speedily paddling away beneath. Rachel Sennott, Ella Hunt, Emily Fairn, and Kim Matula are rather sorely sidelined as, respectively, Rosie Shuster, Gilda Radner, Laraine Newman, and Jane Curtin, but that is sadly in line with a lot of the women who have been part and parcel of SNL over the years. Nicholas Podany is a decent young Billy Crystal, and the only one to disappoint me was Matthew Rhys in the role of George Carlin. Willem Dafoe has a couple of good moments as Dave Tebet (aka one of "the suits"), and J. K. Simmons almost steals the entire movie as the legendarily-endowed Milton Berle.

I was hoping to enjoy this, despite what I saw as my perceived distance from the cultural impact of the show, and I did. It hints at just some of the troubles that would come along in the few years afterward, but it's largely focused on celebrating the fact that everyone somehow managed to get the bloody thing done, and done in a way, albeit a tweaked and streamlined way, that would then be repeated week in and week out for decades. Do people still watch the full show, or do they simply check out the highlights shared to YouTube and other social media sites? I don't know, but I suspect the latter. I'm not sure it matters though. The fact remains that almost every American is aware of SNL, almost every American has their favourite seasons, or favourite skits, and anyone with an interest in comedy and/or films should be happy that a lot of talent became famous worldwide after surviving their time working for Michaels. We also got Rob Schneider, but you can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs.*

*said while having to pretend that I did not at one point own both The Animal and The Hot Chick on VHS.

7/10