Supergirl (2026)

I don't know about others, but I was tentatively looking forward to Supergirl. I had been blown away by the latest cinematic incarnation of Superman, and I had some faith in James Gunn keeping a keen eye on quality control while allowing film-makers to deliver us an enjoyably eclectic mix of features making use of comic-book imagery in different ways. I also tend to enjoy the work of director Craig Gillespie, who seems to have recently settled into a pattern of stitching his movies together between a number of entertaining needle-drop moments.

Sadly, this isn't anywhere close to the previous Super-blockbuster from DC. And a large part of that is to do with Gillespie, who now feels like he's just being lazy and careless while always going for the easiest directorial choices.

Here's the very basic plot synopsis. Milly Alcock is Supergirl, a young woman who spends most of her time either playing with her dog, Krypto, or getting drunk (and perhaps secretly hoping for someone to pick a fight with her). Eve Ridley is Ruthye, a young woman out for revenge after her parents were killed by the vicious Krem (Matthias Schoenaerts). When Ruthye and Supergirl cross paths, Krem ensures that he will be chased down by both when he poisons Krypto. An antidote is needed, the clock is ticking, and there's bound to be a fair bit of mayhem and destruction, especially when Lobo (Jason Momoa) eventually swaggers into the picture.

Written by Ana Noguiera, this is a frustrating watch. Alcock is superb in the lead role, especially when showing her struggle to deal with her sense of loneliness and isolation. She has the perfect attitude to keep others away after accepting that her life seems destined to be one of solitude anyway. It's just a shame that Noguiera and Gillespie only afford her a couple of moments to really show what's going on beneath the surface, instead seeming content to offer viewers a collection of rehashed superhero movie tropes accompanied by some of those aforementioned needle-drops. You want someone almost at their very end, but able to gain a sudden burst of energy to keep them alive? You got it. You want the music to twirl and spiral up to someone opening their eyes to either show the power in them or shoot lasers? You got it. How about a sequence in which someone just gets to cut loose and have fun overpowering villains after spending some time being beaten down and restrained. Oh yes. What could have been a good mix of fun action and teen troubles is, sadly, pushed aside for one MOVIE MOMENT after another. If you want something more than surface-level slickness then you'll have to look elsewhere.

Aside from Alcock, Ridley is also good in her role, essentially providing motivation for the entire plot, as well as a potential redemption arc for our lead. Schoenaerts is buried under some decent makeup, but he does a good enough job of being a mean villain, and Momoa seems to be having a great time. This isn't a Lobo movie though, and nor should it be, and his brash and carefree approach to the situation that he finds himself in is very much at odds with the more interesting intertwining paths of our younger central characters. It's nice to see both David Krumholtz and Emily Beecham in small, but pivotal, roles, and any DC feature that makes room for a cameo from the current Superman is all the better for the screentime featuring David Corenswet.

I can see what is hidden away at the heart of this, and I admire the fact that this was given such a prominent position in the DC movie release schedule, but the good intentions are worn away and covered over by a writer and director who both seem unable, or unwilling, to take enough time away from the super-powered fighting and explosions to more fully explore what it would mean to be a grieving teen forced into the role of reluctant superhero, and how they might somehow manage to do the right thing even while working just as hard to keep their emotional walls up.

Thank goodness Alcock is another great casting choice in the DC universe, because this might have been a lot harder to watch without her presence. Oh, and I'm happy that they didn't overuse Krypto AKA the cutest super-dog and bestest boy.

5/10

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

Lee Cronin's The Mummy (2026)

I get it. I understand why this has been titled Lee Cronin's The Mummy. You don't want to risk confusing people who are eagerly awaiting another adventure with Brendan Fraser and co. You also don't want to risk confusing people (okay person . . . okay . . . me) who might be thinking that one day they'll secretly try to get another Dark Universe movie made, with or without Tom Cruise in a lead role. I'm telling you, rewatch that movie and you may eventually see that it's not as bad as the reviews and box office might have you believe. But I digress. The point I was making was that I won't be insulting to Lee Cronin's The Mummy because of the title. I will, however, be insulting to it because of so many other things in the film.

This is a horrible and joyless mess of a film, seemingly helmed by someone who doesn't really seem interested in the main essence of the monster announced in the title. It's all about Charlie (Jack Reynor) and Larissa (Laia Costa), a couple who go through the pain of having one of their children snatched away from them. Things look up slightly when she's found again years later though, but she's been seriously traumatised. And mummified. What can be done to help her get back to normality? Is she the same soul that she was when abducted years ago? 

As so many others have already said, this is Lee Cronin filtering some mummy movie ideas through the filter of an Evil Dead movie. I wouldn't have minded that if it had been as much fun as that blend suggests. It's not. the 134-minute runtime feels like a real slog, especially throughout the first half of the movie, and there's not enough in the third act to make up for how draining the rest of it is. 

Reynor and Costa are both fine in their roles, although both have been MUCH better in a number of other features. Natalie Grace works well as young Katie, mostly buried under a lot of makeup that helps her to look quite scary and pained. That's really all I have to say. That's not the extent of the cast, but nobody else gets to make a strong enough impression. There's a determined detective (May Calamawy), but she feels as if she's only coming in and out of the film to ensure the main characters get to hear enough exposition. There are other children (played by Shylo Molina and Billie Roy), but they never feel quite as endangered as they could be, considering they are siblings set to be manipulated by their transformed sister. And there are one or two other characters I was waiting to see meet some kind of nasty end. It's a shame that Hayat Kamille isn't used more, because her character (The Magician) felt like someone actually interesting enough to want to spend some more time with.

There's very little else to say about this. It's visually ugly, for the most part, I have already forgotten the score by Stephen McKeon (honestly, it might have been alright, but my mood was so soured by everything else that I was battling against some kind of wall of rage-induced white noise), and someone should have had the sense to scrap everything quite early on and restart from scratch.

I would never claim to be the biggest fan of Mummy movies at any time, they're my least favourite of the big classic monsters, but this turgid pile is already a strong contender for one of the worst cinematic releases of 2026, and also sits very low in any ranked list of Mummy movies, not counting the efforts that were made with a tenth of this budget. 

3/10

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

Prime Time: Over Your Dead Body (2026)

I was hoping to make time for this after finally watching the film that it was based on (The Trip, directed by Tommy Wirkola), but sometimes things aren't meant to be. Which means I saw this was now on Amazon Prime and it seemed like the best way to spend some of my time this past weekend.

Dan (Jason Segel) and Lisa (Samara Weaving) are a married couple who don't love each other any more. Maybe a weekend break will help them. It will certainly help Dan once he's drugged and killed Lisa, then disposed of her body in the nearby lake. Dan isn't too smart though, which allows Lisa to soon cotton on to what he's planning. And she has her own plan. Both of them may try to kill one another, but they might also both be shown exactly how they should do things by three dangerous fugitives (played by Timothy Olyphant, Juliette Lewis, and Keith Jardine).

Written by Nick Kocher and Brian McElhaney, working from the screenplay co-written by Wirkola, Nick Ball, and John Niven, Over Your Dead Body is the kind of film best described as a deliciously dark comedy. It's just a shame that all of the real deliciousness and darkness appears in the third act, and doesn't quite do enough to make up for the disappointments elsewhere in the runtime.

Segel and Weaving are both great performers, but neither of them are doing their best work here. It would have been nice to have more scenes letting them be more vicious to each other, but we instead just get standard griping and poor communication underlining where they both are in their marriage (the end, they're both at the end of it). Everything picks up when a strange trio gatecrash the planned violence, thanks mainly to a typically brilliant turn from Olyphant, although he's almost matched by a lovestruck Lewis. Jardine has to play a strong idiot, which he does fine, but his character is the least interesting of the core selection. The other person to mention is Paul Guilfoyle, playing a grumpy and critical father who believes that a war would be the best thing for his son. Guilfoyle is casually dismissive and careless without seeming loathsome, and he gets a couple of great moments when he comes back into the picture after his earliest scenes.

I've enjoyed some other work from director Jorma Taccone (especially the brilliant Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping), but I believe he works better with light and silly fare. Whether it's the source material or the very wobbly tonal tightrope here, he's not able to do as well here. Mind you, I am not sure many people would be able to spin gold from a sequence in which someone is threatened with anal rape if they don't promise to hand over enough money to help some desperate criminals finalise their escape plan.

If you like the stars then you'll get something from this, and there are some fantastic gore gags in the last 15-20 minutes, but it's just a shame that there wasn't more energy running through this. From the dialogue to the score, nothing really works in the first hour that helps it to get anywhere close to being as entertaining as the finale. I'll be interested to see if the original does it any better. 

4/10

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

Toy Story 5 (2026)

Every time I have heard about a Toy Story sequel I have had the same reaction. No sequel is ever really needed, but Toy Story felt as if it was even more deserving than most to be left as a solo feature. Then things went very well with what became a fantastic trilogy. All good. Crisis avoided. Then Toy Story 4 was announced. Oh dear. Thankfully, it was fun and entertaining. It still felt unnecessary, but it didn't do anything to really drag down the series. Now we have Toy Story 5. Oh dear.

Toys are now facing some kind of extinction event. Tech is taking over. Children are starting to replace proper play time with time spent looking at screens. While toys don't want to be abandoned, few feel more pained by the thought of that fate than Jessie (Joan Cusack). She's been through that before, and takes it very personally when her owner, young Bonnie, is seduced by the glowing screen of a piece of tech named Lilypad (Greta Lee). So begins a quest to get Bonnie offline and connected with other children, although every other child also seems happier to be looking at a screen now.

Co-written and co-directed by Andrew Stanton and McKenna Harris, the best thing about Toy Story 5 is the fact that it's very much focused on Jessie. Fans of the series will remember how sad her backstory is, and you should prepare yourself to be manipulated some more throughout this adventure, but I would argue that it deserves better treatment when being used as the spine of a full narrative. Without spoiling anything, there's one scene here that is supposed to be quite uplifting and revelatory, but I think the whole film would have been all the better if that moment was played to move us into much darker and more complex territory. That would be a trickier sell for kids, of course, but if anyone can do it then Pixar can.

As you'd expect, this looks absolutely gorgeous throughout. While I have fond memories of the first film in this series, there's no doubt that each instalment has seen the talented people at Pixar improve and refine their craft. The textures here are so realistic that there are times when you feel as if you're watching some actual footage of toys that have been caught moving around of their own accord.

The voice cast are also very good in their roles. Many people return, including Cusack, Tom Hanks, and Tim Allen, and Lee is a great choice for the calm and savvy Lilypad. She would be the main highlight, in fact, if it wasn't for Conan O'Brien, who voices a potty-training device named Smarty Pants. Offering some inventiveness and sheer fun that is sadly lacking elsewhere throughout the film, O'Brien is the best thing about this sadly disappointing mess, although I should also namecheck Ernie Hudson, a cameoing Alan Cumming, Shelby Rabaram Craig Robinson, and Tony Hale returning to the role of Forky. Everyone else does very good work with what they're given, but these feel most deserving of being in a much better film.

Coming along so soon after Disclosure Day, this is a strangely appropriate film to sit alongside that one. It's another blockbuster from someone very talented who now feels stuck in place while so many others have raced ahead. And the fact that the film-makers can't even maintain a strong stance set up by the main premise feels either like a) they knew that would be an impossible position, but figured the rest of the film would work well enough anyway, or b) they didn't want to upset the companies that make so much money from selling us our tech and apps and social media bubbles.

The fact that Toy Story 5 isn't as funny as I hoped it would be isn't the biggest problem. It's not really being sold as a comedy, after all. The fact that it stumbles around the main ideas being explored isn't the biggest problem either. The intentions are clear, and one or two moments still manage to work, especially in the best moments that were featured in the trailer. The biggest problem this film has is not knowing what to do with a handful of beloved characters. Jessie feels as if she's being forced to pick at her scars, Woody wanders in to basically show that he's still around, and Buzz Lightyear . . . well, Buzz once embraced the fact that he could fall with style. Now he can fly. And that might best exemplify how the series has now moved too far away from the fun feeling of "let's pretend" that was locked into so many frames of the previous films. 

4/10

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

Mubi Monday: Orphan (2025)

Every time I see that a film is directed by László Nemes I am reminded of his masterpiece, Son Of Saul. That's a bit unfair, especially when I need to try to avoid comparing his other films to that towering achievement, but I can't help it. I have seen one other film from him, Sunset, that I liked, but didn't love. And now I have seen Orphan, which is a marked return to form.

Once again dealing with people and mental states shaped by the horrors of the Holocaust, Nemes this time puts viewers alongside a young boy named Andor (Bojtorján Barabas). Andor has spent some time in an orphanage while his mother (Klára, played by Andrea Waskovics) was hiding in the countryside, but is happily reunited with her a decade later. He has no such luck with his father though, who was killed during the war, but Andor still hopes to see him again one day. Then along comes Mihály Berend (Grégory Gadebois), the man who helped to keep Klára hidden, in exchange for payment. He wants a relationship with Klára, and he would also be happy to accept Andor as his son. But does he deserve them?

Co-writing the screenplay once again with Clara Royer, Nemes has delivered a film here that is arguably more thought-provoking and difficult to process than his feature debut. That film remains his best, and most powerful, work, but there's so much folded in here that it's hard to untangle every strand and unpick every knot. 

A lot of people wanted to quickly forget what they had to do to survive during wartime, whether for good or bad reasons, and Orphan shows how impossible that is, especially for those who somehow managed to profit from it, and maybe even improve their lot in life. Good deeds don't necessarily stem from good intentions, and bad people can be sanctuary for those fleeing even worse people. Can you just leave the past in the past when it arrives in the shape of someone who wants to be a part of your future? 

All of the performances here are as fantastic as they need to be, but most of the praise has to go to both Barabas and Gadebois, playing two people with very different views of the world, but perhaps a common desire for love and safety now that the world seems to be resettling after such a turbulent time. Despite their huge age gap, both characters seem to look at one another with silent understanding as they work around Klára to get things their own way. As the woman caught between her son and an unexpected suitor, Waskovics is superb, showing how much she has to seriously consider her best way forward in life, even if it feels very much like she's caught between a rock and a hard place. Elíz Szabó is also very good, playing a young friend named Sári, and there are one or two others in supporting roles who get to feature in some very powerful moments.

There are a couple of minor elements here that aren't given enough time or attention, but Orphan is well worth your time for the way it continually balances smaller moments with some big, and difficult to definitively answer, questions. The beautiful cinematography from Mátyás Erdély also helps, as does every other technical aspect, but the real power of it comes from the ideas being explored. I'll be thinking of this film for a long time yet, and I encourage others to watch it and join me in some serious contemplation.

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

Netflix And Chill: Flashdance (1983)

I'm always a bit wary when finally getting to movies that had their big moment in the sun many decades ago. Flashdance may not be a film that many rush to watch or rewatch nowadays, but it certainly made enough impact on pop culture to feel very familiar to everyone. The soundtrack is full of great tunes, the plotting is as predictable as expected, and there's a couple of dance sequences that remain more well-known today than anything from Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers.

It's the age-old tale of a young woman who welds by day and dances by night, working shifts at a bar while dreaming about joining a prestigious ballet school. The young woman is Alex Owens (Jennifer Beals), and she soon catches the eye of her boss, Nick Hurley (Michael Nouri). Other people around Alex have different dreams. Jeanie (Sunny Johnson) wants to be celebrated for her ice-skating skills, Richie (Kyle T. Heffner) is a cook who longs to be a stand-up comedian, and Johnny C. (Lee Ving) wants to poach both Alex and Jeanie for his club, where the girls dance with less clothing on.

Written by Thomas Hedley Jr. (billed here as Tom Hedley) and Joe Eszterhas,  and directed with the usual style and polish expected from Adrian Lyne, despite this being only his second feature, Flashdance holds up as a surprisingly interesting film for a couple of reasons. It's still essentially only one step away from being a teen-friendly fairytale romance, but the screenplay works hard to present one or two refreshingly interesting elements, not least of which is the agency and confidence of the main character.

Alex may be young, she may be striving to follow a dream that she's still also slightly afraid of, but she is very aware of the world that is already working to grind down her and her friends. She's also comfortable in her own skin in a way that disarms the older Nick. I liked watching her battle her way through each day, even if not all of those battles seemed completely necessary. Because that's another great thing about Alex. She's far from perfect, and some moments make her feel more like the antagonist than the protagonist in her own story.

The writers also deliver a surprise in the ways they juxtapose the potential silliness of the main plot points with moments that feel a bit more grounded and gritty. I'm not saying this is the Hollywood equivalent of a Ken Loach movie, far from it, but it tries to show why some people will keep taking a number of risks to drag themselves toward one lovely moment in the sunshine after years spent being rained on. It also avoids having most of the main characters judging the dancing women for making some money that way, although there's definitely a tiresome dividing line laid down between those who dance provocatively and those who dance topless. 

Beals is an appealing leading lady, and convinces in both the emotional moments and the dance sequences (helped enormously by the work of Marine Jahan and others). Nouri isn't too bad either, although has to spend most of his times in scenes being outshone by Beals' wardrobe. Johnson is easy to like, Heffner is easy to be irritated by (his character feels more like someone destined to be the second or third victim in some slasher movie sequel), and Ving is an odd mix of menace and empty bravado. It's also worth mentioning Cynthia Rhodes, who made her way into three dance-based films in the 1980s that could all be considered iconic, even if one feels much more forgotten than the other two nowadays.

I'm glad to have finally watched this. It's not a true great, although many who saw it when it was first released may feel differently about it, but it's better than some of the other films from this era that are held within a safe bubble of nostalgia. I guess . . . all's well that ends weld. 

6/10

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

Shudder Saturday: Find Your Friends (2026)

There are good films. There are bad films. There are fun films. There are films that are painful to watch. When I started watching Find Your Friends I was hoping that it would be a good film. After a bit of time had passed I started hoping that it would at least be a fun film. By the time it was all over I had to concede that I'd sat through something quite painful. Not only painful, but also involving people painfully unaware of the sub-genre that they're working in. Although the marketing of a movie and the substance of a movie are two very different things, I saw some recent interview with Bella Thorne that underlined just how little she knew about the tropes she was working with. Not only did she dive into something quite spoiler-ific just days after the film had been released, but she went on to discuss a certain scene as if it was a bold new cinematic vision, also bizarrely trying to state that we normally see that kind of thing portrayed with the gender roles reversed. When you've seen the movie then you'll know just how wrong that is.

Anyway, to the film itself. This is the tale of some young women who head out to a party in the middle of a pretty isolated desert area. There's danger all around them, of course, but some of the main characters seem more inclined to take a risk as they aim to make the most of their carefree time. The one person who seems aware of just how bad things could get is Amber (Helena Howard), but her friends think that she may be acting just a bit too highly-strung. In fact, she's really starting to make a habit of spoiling any parties. 

Written and directed by Izabel Pakzad, her feature debut, Find Your Friends is arguably a much more frustrating viewing experience for what it almost does well. The opening scenes are an impressive mix of agony and ecstasy, and there's also a really good point made about how women can be vulnerable and targeted by abusers even in the most crowded and noisy spaces. There's also an interesting look at what it can mean to be a woman supporting other women, yet also wanting the time and space to make some potentially silly and irresponsible choices without having to fear consequences that could change your entire life. That clash, a clash that really never affects men, who much more often get to drink too much and party too hard and wander through different environments with a much less chance of being harmed (by anyone other than themselves), isn't explored in too many other movies, but Pakzad doesn't find quite the right way to explore it here. A couple of conversations work, but they have their impact lessened by the fact that viewers are waiting for the main, very predictable, plotline to pick back up again at some point. 

Howard and Thorne are both fine onscreen, and they're accompanied by Zión Moreno, Chloe Cherry, and Sophia Ali. It's just a shame that the film doesn't give us any more depth to the characters than "these are young women, and they should be allowed, and able, to party if they want to". It's not worth mentioning the male cast members, who are all asked to generally portray various types of bastards, although Chris Bauer was a welcome familiar face in his couple of main scenes. Again, sadly, his character development was about as predictable as everything else here.

There's a decent soundtrack, and I guess there's also a decent feeling of disorientation here and there (that specific type of disorientation when you're on holiday and trying to find your way back from a good night out to wherever you are supposed to be spending the night), but most of this is one big wasted opportunity. Yes, many will be satisfied by a pleasingly unflinching set-piece in the third act, but the rest of the film really should have been much better, especially when considering the complexity and nuance of the thematic strands presented so clearly in a couple of key scenes. I'll be generous with my rating here, for what I consider to be the good intentions of Pakzad, but I don't think many people will get much from this. Feel free to ask me for five specific films that could be considered similar, but are much better than this, and I'll happily get back to you ASAP.

4/10

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

Mortal Kombat II (2026)

You know the cry. You know the other famous phrases. You know the characters. If you watched the previous Mortal Kombat film, the latest in a number of attempts to satisfy fans of the franchise, then you'll also know that the casting and action choreography seem to have greatly improved since the 1990s movies.

Simon McQuoid returns to the director's chair for this sequel, and the marketing would have you believe that this is essentially a Johnny Cage movie. While Cage (played here by Karl Urban) certainly features in a number of the highlights, this is actually a sneaky way to present a film that focuses on the likes of Kitana (Adeline Rudolph) and Sonya Blade (Jessica McNamee). Writer Jeremy Slater has fun using the tournament as a framework for changing loyalties, but never forgets to leave room for some fights and dollops of gore.

I think I owe Mortal Kombat II another viewing, but it's hard for me to see my opinion changing much, even if I start to look around for other little pleasures within each scene. It's a fun time . . . WHEN it's aiming to be a fun time, but there are too many scenes that either show characters having to once again be convinced of the very existence of Mortal Kombat or having them wrestling with their own insecurities. It's just my personal preference, but Mortal Kombat should always have characters absolutely convinced of their own abilities and morality, whether right or wrong. I know, I know, you cannot just literally translate everything from a videogame directly to a movie, but I just don't need to spend too much time watching deadly warriors hum and ha about whether or not they're on the right side of history.

The fights are good though, and that's really what it's all about. I just wish there had been one or two more of them in the 116-minute runtime. I also wish that those involved had been a bit more inventive. There are so many characters available from this property, many with enjoyably quirky fighting moves, but McQuoid and Slater decide to ignore so many of them. Admittedly, they will have been thinking of ways in which to offer variety and energy in any more sequels, if they're greenlit, but I just kept wanting to see more favourites that would pop into my mind as I reached into my memory banks to consider the many hours I spent playing the first game on my SEGA Master System.

Urban, despite being a bit too old to totally convince in his role, brings his usual humour and charisma to Johnny Cage. He's a smartass, but also has enough skills to stand him in good stead for one or two fights. Both Rudolph and McNamee do better though, with both feeling like a more natural fit for their characters. Lawson also makes a welcome return, playing Kano, but it's a shame that he's onscreen for such a relatively short amount of time. Martyn Ford is believably deadly as Shao Kahn, Tati Gabrielle makes a strong impression in the role of Jade, and you get the welcome return of Joe Taslim and Hiroyuki Sanada, as well as Mehcad Brooks, and the less welcome return of Ludi Lin (no fault of his, just the fault of his character, Liu Kang, not being very exciting). Fans may not like the way Baraka is used, but actor CJ Bloomfield does a great job under that makeup job.

There's a chance that my expectations were too high here, especially when I thought we were getting a Johnny Cage movie, and that's why I need to give it another go. But being prepared for a bit less of a Cage-centric experience won't stop me from being slightly disappointed by the other potential treats missing from this. There's enough here to put it on a par with the film that preceded it, but I had hoped that this would be a lot more adventurous and fun after all of the groundwork laid last time around.

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

Hokum (2026)

I've been a fan of writer-director Damian McCarthy since I was fortunate enough to see his first short film, "Hatch", screened at a horror movie festival years ago. With this, his third full film, I am delighted to say that he is three for three when it comes to his feature filmography. He also seems to have developed a confidence in his own abilities with each success. That explains why he can stand by a film titled Hokum, considering all of the ways in which the definition of that word could be used against him by those who may not appreciate this as much as I did.

Adam Scott plays Ohm Bauman, a writer struggling with his latest work, and struggling to keep going through life accompanied by what may be some spirit caused by a past tragedy. He heads off to an isolated hotel in Ireland to deal with both of these things at once, soon becoming involved in some unnerving incidents that tie the history of the building to his own mental state. 

At the heart of Hokum is something very traditional and familiar. It's the kind of cosy, supernatural-tinged, mystery that wouldn't feel out of place if seriously edited down and presented on the BBC during the Christmas holiday season. What McCarthy does with the various elements, however, is brilliant and impressive. He takes time to layer everything throughout, leading viewers by the hand to a finale that somehow grows in power and impact as you spend more time thinking about it.

Using the same visual style that he delivered so well in Oddity (which was a slight step away from the way he depicted things in Caveat), McCarthy is happy to keep viewers right alongside his main character as events play out. There are no big twists here, not if you've seen one or two other tales in this vein, but a lot of the enjoyment comes from watching McCarthy work so expertly with the tropes and audience expectations. Then you get the extra reward once you've spent some time noticing how McCarthy dotted every i and crossed every t.

Scott is fantastic in the lead role, happy to portray his figure as someone unbothered by others taking a dislike to him. He's a grump, to put it mildly, but transforms throughout the runtime as viewers learn about the parts of his life that he's tried to keep buried deep within himself for many years. Florence Ordesh is a small ray of light in the role of Fiona, although she's sadly not onscreen for too long, and Peter Coonan, Michael Patric, and Will O'Connell do well as other hotel staff members. There's also a wonderful turn from David Wilmot, playing a man with his own dark past that makes him either very useful or very dangerous. 

I don't want to give in to recency bias, but I am tempted to sit Hokum just slightly above the previous two features from McCarthy. I initially viewed it as simply being on a par with those, another blend of the macabre and the dark comedy that McCarthy handles so well. It just has a bit more to it though, and I think it's a near-perfect slice of horror that has surprising depths of emotion contained within the heart of it. 

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

Prime Time: Wheels On Meals (1984)

I suspect it may have changed nowadays, considering some of his mainstream hits, but there was definitely a standard journey when it came to discovering Jackie Chan movies when I was young. You would hear about him, perhaps seeing some clips of his major stunts and set-pieces in a video or TV special (hosted by someone like Chuck Norris). Then you'd probably see the likes of Police Story and/or Project A, maybe even an Operation Condor film. You would think that you'd never seen this action movie star before, not necessarily realising that he had joined in with the self-satisfied fun of The Cannonball Run movies. Then you'd somehow find out about how well he worked with Sammo Hung and Yuen Biao. Which would lead you to the likes of this.

Wheels On Meals isn't a great movie, but it has enough great moments to make up for the many problems with the material. Chan and Biao play two friends who operate a food truck. Hung, who also directed the film, plays a private detective hired to find a beautiful young woman. That woman, Sylvia (Lola Forner), ends up staying with our two leads, at least until she can steal some money and a car to help get her somewhere safer. Meanwhile, some tough henchmen start to throw their weight around, leading to a third act that features the martial arts skills of our heroes, as well as some impressive movies from Benny Urquidez and Keith Vitali.

The comedy here isn't great, and nor are some of the attitudes on display. BUT, and this is all relative (of course, I think Wheels On Meals generally holds up better than a number of other martial arts films from this era. The comedy tends to focus on the friendship, and friendly competition, between the leading men, the treatment of female characters is done in a way that allows Biao and Chan, but particularly the former, to constantly aim for "white knight" status, and a couple of moments allowing Richard Ng and John Sham to cameo feel as if they could have been much worse. And saying "things could have been much worse" isn't necessarily the best thing to say about art, but it's also worth saying when you've sat through Jackie Chan movies littered with homophobia, including "jokes" about AIDS, and horrendous treatment of female characters.

Hung knows what he's doing when it comes to the direction, although I wish that he'd been allowed to throw a lot more action in here. The screenplay, written by Edward Tang and Gwing-Gai Lee, seems content to let Chan, Biao, and Hung play around onscreen while fans get to enjoy spending some more time in their company, but forgets how to make the most of them. As a fan though, I should say that I am one of those kept happy enough by the interplay and tom-foolery of the leads.

Whether skateboarding around to take food orders or struggling to fight back against Urquidez, Chan is on very good form here. Biao is slightly underserved, on the one hand, considering how I have seen him treated by other movies showcasing his acrobatic abilities, but it's good to see him sharing the screen while also being allowed to step forward as the main hero. Hung is aiming to be more comic relief than a proper third fighter, but he at least gets involved in the busy and impressive final round of fights. Both Urquidez and Vitali handle themselves capably, and Forner carries herself well through moments overstuffed with testosterone and lust.

If you want to enjoy these stars in a film with much better fight sequences then Dragons Forever is the film for you. This is a solid mix of action and fun though. It just doesn't hit the high bars set by these performers in many of their other respective star vehicles.

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

Backrooms (2026)

Coming along so soon after the breakout success of Obsession, Backrooms is the most recent low-budget horror movie to be embraced by those claiming that the model for successful cinema releases is changing. That's a good thing, and I'm always happy to see horror once again being hailed for what it can do to the landscape of cinema (remember . . .  the horror genre has saved various pockets of cinema on multiple occasions). Backrooms isn't great though, despite the profit it has made.

Everyone knows the origin story by now. Kane Parsons, director of this, spent some time making short films online that explored the backrooms, spaces just behind the veil of our own reality that are abandoned and eerily silent. Until, more worryingly, they maybe don't seem so abandoned and silent. Either way, liminal spaces are a great fit for horror.

This particular story has Clark (Chiwetel Ejiofor) finding some backrooms in a space behind his furniture store. This is just another problem for Clark, who is trying to process the failure of his marriage and his alcoholism with a therapist, Mary (Renate Reinsve). It could also become a problem for young Kat (Lukita Maxwell) and Bobby (Finn Bennett), two youngsters who Clark ropes in to helping him explore this strange and unnerving new environment.

The look and feel of Backrooms is the big plus. This is a film designed to unsettle and confuse viewers, a film that would have benefited from a narrative as strange and upsetting as the environments on display. Unfortunately, writer Will Soodik either misunderstands the main appeal of the concept or just doesn't have enough faith in how strong it is. This leads to him instead offering the kind of explanation and clumsy psychological insight that I can't imagine impressing those who have been a fan of Parsons for the past few years.

Ejiofor and Reinsve are both great choices for the lead roles, but neither is given the kind of material they can really sink their teeth into. They certainly help to sell the dialogue, but I wish they'd been allowed to do more. All of their main scenes feel incredibly basic, as if they were asked to work with placeholder dialogue that would be greatly improved later in the process, and the resolution is disappointing, at best, and non-existent if you're not willing to grasp on to the smallest grace note. As for both Maxwell and Bennett, neither are given enough to do, which is also a great shame. Mark Duplass also stars in a supporting role, but I cannot separate his character from another major weakness in the screenplay, which means I didn't appreciate his performance here at all.

There are moments here that work. The production design is impressive, as is the idea at the heart of it. Sadly, and in a way that is horribly ironic, what you get to see feels like just a hint of what you might want to see. Backrooms doesn't actually spend anywhere close to enough time pulling viewers into the titular spaces. It just presents one glimpse after another of anomalies that hint at a much better film hidden away behind this one. 

5/10

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

Mubi Monday: My Father's Shadow (2025)

As much as we like to think otherwise, there's often a vast gulf between who we think our parents are and who they ACTUALLY are. That's just natural, and it isn't always a bad thing. Parents can spend time hiding things to protect their children. They can spend time still making mistakes and burning bridges that children aren't even aware of. Meanwhile, the world keeps turning around, delivering more upheaval and uncertainty with incidents often outwith the control of most of us, whether we're looking on as an adult or a child.

My Father's Shadow is an accomplished exploration of this, making use of a specific time and place (Nigeria in the early 1990s) to present a personal and intimate tale that contains elements many will identify with, no matter where they come from, or what they think of their own relationship with their parents. 

Akin (Godwin Chiemerie Egbo) and Remi (Chibuike Marvellous Egbo) are two young brothers who are playing around when they encounter their father, Folarin (Sope Dirisu). Asking to spend a day with him, the brothers soon start to get a very small insight into his life, whether he's waiting to pick up a wage that is months overdue or he's interacting with soldiers who are claiming to have quashed the results of the unfolding election.

Directed by Akinola Davies Jr., who also wrote the screenplay with his own brother, Wale Davies, My Father's Shadow is a powerful and surprisingly moving debut feature. While it doesn't feel as if it's setting out to manipulate viewers, nor does it have any obvious "set-piece" sequences, the structure of the whole thing, and the way things are often being shown to us filtered through the eyes of the young boys, makes it a hugely satisfying journey that delivers an unexpected mix of real highs and lows. Things that seem minor, being allowed to accompany a parent for a day or just being allowed to order a cold fizzy juice, really aren't. This all becomes much clearer when juxtaposed alongside the inevitability of the changes and obstacles constantly pushing at the edges of this potentially wonderful family day out.

The two Egbo boys are very good in their roles, as natural and delightful as you could hope. Dirisu has the harder role, not having the cuteness of childhood to soften the edges of his character, but he's equally good, and presents himself as a struggling individual who isn't necessarily to be condemned because of his flaws. There are a number of solid performances from those in the supporting cast too, but I won't pretend to be able to name them, aside from Uzoamaka Power, who appears near the end of the movie to provide one more specific insight for a son observing his father.

I'm not sure if this will stick around for long in the memories of those who seek it out, but I do know that many will find it a rewarding experience. I am certainly keen to make time for whatever Akinola Davies Jr. does next, and I wouldn't even mind if he decided to revisit the sentiments explored here. 

8/10

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

Netflix And Chill: Beowulf (2007)

While long the film has languished on my shelf,
I now picked it on Netflix to watch for myself.
Leaving the bluray inside its case,
A sign of my movie collecting addiction disgrace.

Ere I was soon feeling slightly remiss,
Being presented the vision of Robert Zemeckis.
An epic poem is translated for the layman,
By writers Roger Avary and that Neil Gaiman.

Things start with Anthony Hopkins and Robin Wright,
Crispin Glover plays Grendel, who gives them a fright,
There's also John Malkovich, and plenty of mead,
Then Ray Winstone comes along to portray our lead.

The epic tale is told with motion-capture animation,
Allowing Zemeckis to show us his grand imagination,
But the end result is a massive misfire,
Despite showing our heroes fighting monsters with ire. 

Brendan Gleeson is here, and Angelina Jolie too,
Alison Lohman plays Beowulf's secret boo,
But none of them work as well as they could,
The technical gimmickry not doing them good.

There's a decent score here from Alan Silvestri,
I'm not sure how to judge the cinematography from Robert Presley,
Darkness and light are used to impress,
But the technique's not perfected, it's a bit of a mess.

There's no real sense of grandiose scale,
Most viewers will mark this as one giant fail.
Zemeckis is now much more devoted to tech,
His film-making style now a glossy pile of dreck.

Here there be dragons, and golden men born of flame,
But it's lacking in thrills and the director's to blame.
I knew when I bought this years ago it was a bit of a risk,
But now I know it won't be long until I resell my disc.

3/10

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

Shudder Saturday: sMOTHERed (2025)

It's often the case that I roll the dice on a streaming option and end up being disappointed. Not too disappointed, mind you, as I have grown used to keeping my expectations low. There's a lot of rubbish out there, easier to find than ever before, but it's all content for websites looking to rotate their film catalogue. sMOTHERed started off in a way that didn't make me think I was going to be impressed by it, but then, in a shock turn of events, I ended up being impressed by it.

Rio Dewanto plays Alif, a man who has been involved in an accident that has wiped out a lot of his memory. He seems happy enough with his wife (Nadine, played by Faradina Mufti) and child, but there's something pushing at him internally, something telling him that things may not be as they seem. That feeling is exacerbated when his mother (Vonny Anggraini) comes to stay. Alif has no memory of his mother. Is he just struggling to recover memories, or is she not who she claims to be?

I'm not familiar with anything else from directors Kevin Rahardjo and Rafki Hidayat (the latter also credited as a co-writer alongside Joko Anwar and Aline Djayasukmana), but this is a good enough feature to have me interested in others that they have helmed. It's impressively tense throughout, and viewers easily get to feel the same sense of things being off-kilter that the main character is feeling.

Dewanto is a solid lead, but gets to do a lot more when things become apparent in the third act that weren't previously known to him. Everyone, whether in the film or watching the film, is waiting for some revelations, but they're still delivered well, and Dewanto reacts in a believably shaken way as he scrambles to reshape his world around the new information available to him. Mufti is also good, playing an understanding wife who views the memory-wiping accident as a bit of a fresh start for the family, and Anggraini plays her part with an enjoyable awkwardness that allows viewers to wonder if there's something wrong with the situation, or perhaps we're just seeing a mother and son who haven't been in the same space for many years.

Impressively dark and disturbing when everything gathers momentum, sMOTHERed is also strangely old-fashioned, in a way, when it comes to presenting the main triggers for the traumatic moments experienced by the main character. Tone it down slightly and you could have something that would easily pair up with something like Psycho or Peeping Tom. It doesn't hold up in direct comparison to those classics, obviously, but it's an interesting exploration of childhood trauma defining someone who then struggles to keep hiding some very big mental scars.

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

Disclosure Day (2026)

Although it's a very different type of movie, Disclosure Day feels very much like a film that partners up with The Fabelmans. It's a film from someone very much looking back. It's director Steven Spielberg playing some of his hits. Unfortunately, the hits have since been overshadowed by, well, different hits from himself, as well as hits created by people who were influenced by him. 

Josh O'Connor plays Daniel Kellner, a young man who is on the run. He has something, something so important that many agents, working under the direction of Noah Scanlon (Colin Firth), won't stop until he is captured. Kellner has his girlfriend, Jane (Eve Hewson), on his side, and he is given a number of supportive phone calls from Hugo Wakefield (Colman Domingo). Meanwhile, Margaret Fairchild (Emily Blunt) is a TV weather presenter who has an encounter with a red cardinal that lands on her table and then gains the power to communicate effectively with everyone around her, in any language. She can also know what they're thinking, which gives her a big advantage when it becomes apparent that she needs to connect with Kellner and help to enable Disclosure Day.

On the one hand, Disclosure Day is not very good. The 145-minute runtime is too long, there are a couple of characters sidelined who I would have preferred to see retained for more of the runtime, and a lot of the decisions made by people are quite inconsistent, to say the least. David Koepp's screenplay cannot keep everything balanced well, but that may stem from how much he has to twist himself in knots to develop the idea from Spielberg, which houses a number of his worst traits, but tries to cover them up with some action and tension in the first half.

There's certainly no blame to be put on the actors, with both Blunt and O'Connor doing absolutely fantastic work throughout. I'd even be tempted to say that this is one of Blunt's very best performances, certainly one of her best from the last decade anyway. O'Connor gets to stay quite wide-eyed and nervy throughout, which he does well, whereas Blunt changes in a number of interesting ways. Firth is excellent as the potential villain of the whole thing, although his character is notably restricted by the screenplay, almost like he's a videogame character only allowed into certain areas once enough time has elapsed. Domingo is very good, even if he's either facilitating, or delivering, a lot of the exposition, but he's also, as others have mentioned, very much an onscreen avatar for Spielberg himself aka the man putting all of the pieces into place and co-ordinating the action. Hewson is involved in a couple of the best scenes in the film, Wyatt Russell is very enjoyable in his supporting role, and Henry Lloyd-Hughes is impressively determined and threatening as the right hand man to Firth's character.

You get alien activity. You get a couple of good set-pieces. There's a John Williams score. There's more lens flare than even J. J. Abrams might feel comfortable with. To paraphrase a famous comedy skit from yesteryear . . . you get all the right notes, just not necessarily in the right order. Disclosure Day is a messy blockbuster, and the relative originality of it (compared to other recent blockbuster properties) and good intentions aren't enough to distract viewers from some inept plotting and numerous contradictions that are the result of either total laziness, temporary stupidity, or a mix of both.

Is it good to see a major release based around the idea that empathy is a super-power and that we shouldn't default to automatically fearing the unknown? Yes. But it would have been even better to see the messaging contained within a movie that had stronger structural integrity than a wet piece of tissue paper. Maybe the Spielberg of 20 or 30 years ago could have helmed that movie, or maybe we have to accept that thought-provoking sci-fi, whether optimistic or pessimistic, is now delivered better by those who spent years studying, and being in awe of, the mothership captain who will always cast a huge shadow over the sub-genre. 

5/10

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

Masters Of The Universe (2026)

I know that I moan about fan service when a film or TV show has nothing more to offer. It's something that crops up a lot, whether related to older properties being refreshed for a modern audience or the many horror movies pandering to people who are resistant to any change. Masters Of The Universe is full of fan service, BUT it's all done incredibly well, and it never brings everything to an abrupt halt. There's also plenty going on to surround all of the fan service.

Directed by Travis Knight, who is now three for three with the features he has helmed, this is a bright and fun fantasy film that makes use of a great cast and paces things well enough to help the 140-minute runtime whizz by. Writers Aaron Nee, Adam Nee, Chris Butler, and Dave Callaham get so much right that it's easy to forgive the minor failings, which all crop up in the first act before the film really seems to grow in confidence, ironically at about the same time as our hero.

Nicholas Galitzine is Adam, a young man who is trying to convince people that he's actually a Prince from another world, Eternia, and searching for a magical sword that will help him to gain immense power, readying him to rescue his home from the bony grasp of Skeletor (Jared Leto). Everyone thinks he's mad, of course, until he eventually finds the lost item . . . and then can't seem to use it. Maybe Teela (Camila Mendes), an old childhood friend now a capable warrior, can help him to stay alive long enough to figure things out.

I was worried during the earliest scenes in Masters Of The Universe. It seemed to be a bit unsure of itself, having to get the exposition delivered while tending to do the Marvel schtick of undercutting any heroics or ending any brief action beat with a joke. At least the jokes worked, but I was still worried about it sticking to that template throughout. Amazingly, it doesn't do that. Instead, you start to get something that blends unabashed earnestness with a different kind of humour, the sort of silliness that fans of the property will recognise from their own thoughts and conversations about the various characters populating Eternia. 

Despite having to spend a lot of the time wearing clothing to cover his physique, Galitzine works as both the insecure and "weak" Adam AND the mighty, sword-wielding, He-Man. He looks the part throughout, and also grows into the role in a way that feels organic and absolutely believable, despite the fantastical context. Mendes doesn't need any similar journey. Her character is absolutely confident throughout, and she's also perfect in her role. As for Leto . . . dammit, it may be his best work in years, helped by the fact that you probably wouldn't even recognise it was him playing Skeletor if he wasn't the one in the credits. The line delivery, the laugh, the physicality, Leto delivers a fantastic turn that helps to keep Skeletor as fun and menacing as he should be. Idris Elba is very good as Duncan AKA Man-At-Arms, Jóhannes Haukur Jóhannesson eventually accepts the name of Fisto, and both Alison Brie and Morena Baccarin are good to watch as two very different types of sorceress, the former being Evil-Lyn and the latter simply billed as The Sorceress. There are also some brilliant cameos, most I won't spoil, including Kristen Wiig voicing Roboto, a battle robot that has been turned into a domestic cleaning robot, but could help our heroes a lot if given her access to weaponry back.

The fact that I watched this and started to wonder whether or not it could be time for us to have another take on Flash Gordon perhaps tells you everything you need to know. Then I was impressed by the film-makers having the confidence to use the Queen track from ANOTHER classic fantasy flick. Whether recreating the imagery from the cartoon or not, the visuals are generally a delight, the score from Daniel Pemberton is absolutely fantastic throughout, and the only other disappointment I had after the end credits rolled was the knowledge that it wouldn't necessarily out-perform some (to me) lesser films at the box office, meaning any sequels and/or spin-offs are sadly not guaranteed. But if they do happen, consider my tickets pre-ordered ASAP.

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

Prime Time: Daredevil (2003)

While most people really seemed to dislike the film when it came out, I've always had a soft spot for Daredevil. It has since been overshadowed by a superior small-screen interpretation of the character, but it still retains a certain charm, feeling even further removed nowadays from the many other bombastic superhero movies that always seem to pit the main characters against either god-like enemies or potential world-destroying threats.

Written and directed by Mark Steven Johnson, this is the tale of Matt Murdock/Daredevil (Ben Affleck), a blind man who works as a lawyer by day and serves up any extra justice required by night. Things are getting tougher on the streets as Wilson Fisk/Kingpin (Michael Clarke Duncan) starts to tighten his stranglehold on the criminal network. At least there's a beautiful woman, Elektra (Jennifer Garner), to get to know. But there's also the dangerous and quite bonkers Bullseye (Colin Farrell) looking to push in for his own particular dance.

It's hard to think of a film that feels more absolutely 2003 than this, from the cast to the stylistic choices made for the visuals, from the soundtrack to the attempts at grittiness. If you haven't seen the film in a while then I tentatively recommend giving it a go, especially when you get to the early scenes that show our hero happier than most to push some villains right off the mortal coil.

Affleck isn't the best fit for the lead, sadly, although he tries. This was during a time when he seemed a bit too smooth and smug, traits that seep into his portrayal of a character who is much more captivating when worn down and roughed up (as they try to make him by the third act). Garner isn't given much to work with, and I think she fares much better in the spin-off movie, but she tries to make the most of a couple of moments that allow her to flex her action skills. Duncan is superbly imposing as Fisk, really helping to lift the movie up on his broad shoulders, and Farrell . . . well, Farrell is an absolute blast for every moment that he's onscreen. He just seems to be in a different movie from everyone else, but that's the more fun and entertaining movie. Jon Favreau is an amusing "sidekick", and the cast also includes Ellen Pompeo, Joe Pantoliano, Leland Orser, David Keith, and Erick Avari, as well as one or two other familiar faces (and, yes, there's also a Stan Lee cameo here). 

It's a shame that the tone wasn't consistent throughout. The same can be said for the action. The film works best when it has some darkness and weight onscreen, but other times (a playground "flirt fight") are almost painful when trying to be a bit too cute. And once Bullseye appears onscreen then it's game over. He's the one you really want to see for the rest of the runtime.

There's still plenty to enjoy here, including the way we're shown Daredevil's reading of the environments and a good musical score from Graeme Revell, but this remains more of a miss than a hit. It's neither as slick or visually-impressive as many other modern spectacles, nor is it as entertaining and brutal as the more recent take on the character. I'll retain a soft spot for it, but I probably won't revisit it again for another decade or so, if ever. 

6/10

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

Scary Movie (2026)

Okay, admittedly, I was never a big fan of the first couple of Scary Movie releases. I've not really been won over by any of the Wayans brothers movies from the past couple of decades. But I knew I'd still have to watch this eventually. I just didn't expect to see it at the cinema. One free ticket and some bad timing, however, and that's just what I ended up doing recently.

I'm sure that everyone else actually wanting to see this film will go to it and have a good time. They won't think of it as the best in the series, but they'll have enough laughs and claim that anyone who didn't enjoy it is just brainwashed nowadays by the "woke-erati", or whatever the latest buzz-word is. Because this film has been advertised as something that will cross every line and upset those who get easily offended. It doesn't even come close to that. It's lazy, self-satisfied, nonsense. Most importantly, it made me laugh only two or three times throughout the entire 96-minute runtime.

I'll do the courtesy of describing a plot, despite the fact that there really isn't one. A killer is back on the scene, and may be aiming to kill off Cindy (Anna Faris) and Brenda (Regina Hall). That's an excuse for everyone else to join the leads, whether it's Shorty (Marlon Wayans), Ray (Shawn Wayans), Doofy (Dave Sheridan), Greg (Lochlyn Munro), or Gale (Cheri Oteri). There are also some younger characters to be put in peril, such as Cindy's daughters, Sara (Olivia Rose Keegan) and Tuesday (Savannah Lee Nassif), and Brenda's children, including the *sarcasm font required here* hilariously-named DEI (Sydney Park).

I'll begrudgingly excuse some of the laziness here. Considering the main slasher movies being targeted by this series, it's appropriate that this instalment gets the gang back together in the laziest and most implausible way. Because that's basically what happened in Scream (2022). It's also fine to have some fun with the newcomers before ensuring that the older stars get their flowers due to them.

What isn't fine is the laziness throughout. While it may not stoop to the levels of the dire Friedberg/Seltzer movies we endured a couple of decades ago, this is painfully unfunny and unimaginative throughout. A spoof of Sinners is an excuse to make many more gags about the not-so-closeted homosexuality of Ray (a joke that was tired by the second movie). A spoof of Get Out is an excuse for some more sex gags, before transitioning into a rare highlight, a well-animated riff on KPop Demon Hunters. Two gags made me laugh, one referencing Candyman and the other referencing the imagery of Weapons. That's it. More should have been done with The Substance, anything would have been better than the horribly smug fan-service moment it delivers, and there are so many other movies that could have been thrown into the mix. But that would show a love for the horror genre, and I don't think the Wayans brothers have any love for the horror genre. According to the third act of this film, as well as a number of gags elsewhere, the Wayans brothers mostly love themselves. They believe themselves to be some kind of comedy film legends, but their filmography doesn't bear that out.

Faris and Hall are people I really like watching in movies. It's a shame that they've spent so much time stuck in this turgid series. At least they help to lessen my pain while I endure them though, which is more than I can say for Marlon Wayans (Shorty is one of the most annoying movie characters in the entire history of the movies, as far as I'm concerned). The younger cast members generally do well as they gamely work with the weak material given to them, and Keegan is particularly enjoyable when being silly. Nobody can do enough to save the film from the director (Michael Tiddes) or writers though (four of the Wayans brothers and Rick Alvarez), who are all pre-occupied with finding the easiest option for anything they mistake for a punchline.

Despite the advertising, there aren't really any lines crossed here. I'd even say that there are some progressive moments, compared to the first movie in the series anyway. Overall, this is a childish attempt to put together a collage of moments that those involved thought would offend those who don't really like these movies anyway. The only people it really offends are those who want their comedy movies to contain enough actual comedy. Others seem to be buying into the hype though, sadly, and I won't be surprised if this ends up being the most financially successful instalment of the series, to date.

3/10

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

Mubi Monday: Kes (1969)

Memory is a very funny thing. I'm sure I have mentioned that before. No, that is not a joke about my own memory. I've always known of Kes, but I had never seen it. It's just always been there, part of British culture that I knew I had to get around to one day. And I expected it to seem a bit dated, a bit rough compared to more modern feature films, but I also somehow remembered it as being such a major work that it made an impact in the mid-1970s, repercussions from it rippling all the way through my childhood. But Kes isn't a mid-1970s work. It debuted in 1969, and was an adaptation of a novel published just one year before, before going on wide release in the first half of 1970. So my memory of Kes, despite having never seen the actual film itself, was already wrong. I did worry when I finally sat down to watch it that I would also be wrong in assuming that it would remain an impactful experience.

That assumption was fine. Kes is quite brilliant, although there have been enough minor changes throughout our society to soften the blow of it slightly. It's the tale of a young boy, Billy Casper (David Bradley), who seems to be killing time at school until he's eventually placed in a harsh and unforgiving manual job that will, if he's lucky, pay him enough to get by and enjoy some time in the local pub. Things change for Billy when he gets himself a kestrel that he aims to train, giving himself something that creates a time out from the continual drudgery of his everyday life. Some may appreciate the fact that he's taking an interest in something, but many may view the development with resentment.

Directed by Ken Loach, who also adapted the book ("A Kestrel For A Knave") with author Barry Hines and Tony Garnett, Kes is absolutely a quintessential Loach movie. He may be credited here as Kenneth Loach, and it may only be his second feature, but this is the typical unflinchingly honest look at people not often given any decent representation in modern cinema. Film is an escape, I get that. It's also equally important that film, like any art, is a mirror held up to society. Loach has held that mirror up for six decades, often showing people reflections that they spend most of their time trying not to notice. 

Not every performance here works quite as well as it could, which I suspect is down to Loach aiming for authenticity ahead of everything else, but young Bradley doesn't really put a foot wrong as he portrays a character who manages to be captivating without having to sand off all of his rough edges. Freddie Fletcher is also very good as the older brother, Jud, who can be an idol or a terror, depending on how his day has gone, and you have the brilliance of people like Lynne Perrie, Brian Glover, and Colin Welland filling out the main cast. Astonishingly, this is the first credited film role for all three of those performers, but it's already evident here that they had the potential for greatness ahead of them, particularly a scene-stealing Glover. I would also like to point out one other actor, but am sadly lacking the knowledge of his name. There's one schoolkid who is supposed to take a message to a teacher, ends up being asked to hide cigarettes in his pockets while some other kids are punished, and ends up getting himself in as much trouble as anyone else alongside him. It's a hilarious and infuriating scene, and the young boy plays it brilliantly throughout.

I can see now why Kes endured for so long, and endures now. I thought it was about a boy and his kestrel. It's not. That's just a way to show someone being able to see beyond the life seemingly allowed for them by those in positions of authority. It's about class, it's about an education system that too often works as a placeholder for children being prepared for a thankless life of hard work ahead, and it's about the importance of seizing on even just one, any, opportunity to spark some passion in those who may then be able to strive toward something previously-unseen beyond the classroom walls and industrial work environments surrounding them.

Give it another ten or twenty years and my memory of Kes may be wrong in different ways. I may go back to thinking it's a simple tale of a boy and his kestrel. I hope not though. It's a hard film to watch at times, especially for those who have the personal experience of the working class life, but, like some of the other superb films from Loach, it's a much harder film to forget.

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

Netflix And Chill: Office Romance (2026)

If you're not a fan of "the c-word" then you may not enjoy Office Romance as much as I did. I've always found it to be the strongest of the swear words, but it's also used much more casually in Scotland than anywhere else in the United Kingdom, in my experience. That aside, Office Romance is a rom-com that generally maintains a nice balance between the rom and the com, and then adds some extra sauce for some unexpected belly laughs.

Jennifer Lopez is Jackie, the CEO of Air Cruz (and also a qualified pilot). Her company has a strict policy against any relationships between colleagues, which should help her fight back against a frivolous lawsuit that has competitors accusing her of winning contracts by sleeping with people she is conducting business with. The other thing that should help her fight back is Daniel Blanchflower (Brett Goldstein), an in-house lawyer who is pretty great at his job. Unfortunately, Jackie and Daniel start to feel a very strong connection, which would ruin everything. It won't be bad if they can keep everything secret, but the likes of heavily-pregnant Sydney Bloom (Betty Gilpin), who has been alongside Jackie for many many years, can definitely sense something different in the workplace.

While director Ol Parker does a perfectly fine job behind the camera, and somehow manages to deliver something that feels like a proper film, as opposed to the Netflix feature products we've seen landing on there so often (which, to be fair, seems to be something that, with the likes of this and Apex, is changing for the better). It's the screenplay, co-written by Goldstein and Joe Kelly, that really makes this work though, working with plenty of familiar rom-com tropes while allowing the leads to feel like more well-rounded and sexual creatures than the more chaste figures we so often see in this kind of thing.

Goldstein also does well to have faith in himself when it comes to his main acting role. I have enjoyed him for some time now, but he's not who you might think of first when you envision a rom-com with Jennifer Lopez as the female lead. It works very well though, his Britishness and awkwardness juxtaposed with everyone around him in a way that makes you believe why Lopez would start to notice him. As for our Jenny From The Block, she can do a rom-com role in her sleep, and she gets to play a fantastic mix of professional, desirable, and passionate here. It's also great to see a film where the female lead is a decade older than her male counterpart, although Lopez doesn't look even close to her actual age. Gilpin is a hoot in her main supporting role, giving scowls and glares to almost everyone around her, Mary Wiseman is entertainingly over-sharing in most of her scenes, Tony Hale is a lot of fun as a put-upon HR worker, and you also get the likes of Jodie Whittaker, Edward James Olmos, Bradley Whitford, Amy Sedaris, Roger Bart, Will Sasso, and a few other familiar faces, filling out the enjoyably varied and sprawling cast. 

This is a perfect film for couples to enjoy together, which is what the best rom-coms should be. There are two leads you will find it easy to root for, an enjoyable storyline with enough obstacles to make things difficult for everyone without ever making things complicated, and a lot of great gags. Again, it won't work for those averse to some very bad language, and there's one visual gag that is hilarious because of how shocking and unexpected it is, and the revelations about the character played by Jodie Whittaker seem a bit odd and out of place, admittedly, but this is one I will happily recommend to most people looking for an enjoyable way to spend just under two hours. 

8/10

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