Prime Time: Pretty Lethal (2026)

When I heard that Pretty Lethal was an action movie with ballerinas at the heart of it, and when I saw the poster with the tagline "blood, sweat and tutus", I mistakenly assumed that this would be something along the lines of, well, Ballerina. I already had the film playing out in my head. A group of innocent-looking ballerinas working together to successfully complete one deadly mission after another, probably using their skillset and grace to their major advantage. I was a bit off, but not entirely incorrect.

Pretty Lethal DOES have ballerinas using their skillset and grace to their advantage, but these are actual ballerinas. They're not trained killers. They just end up in a situation that forces them to become inventive and fight back against a large number of armed and menacing men.

It all starts with a bus breaking down. Our featured dancers end up sheltering in an inn, one owned and run by Devora Kasimer (Uma Thurman). A bad man is embarrassed by a woman, which leads to death, and that's what leads to the ballerinas all being kept in place until it's time to get rid of them. Once they realise how serious their situation is, however, the ballerinas find a way to dance around some of the baddies and weaponise their ballet moves.

With two women at the helm, (this was written by Kate Freund, who also has a small role in front of the camera, and directed by Vicky Jewson) there's definitely something running through Pretty Lethal that allows it to feel just a bit different from the many other films it could have been. It's bloody and violent once everything kicks off, but it's also very much about women supporting one another, and reminds viewers more than once about the pain and dedication required to become a celebrated ballerina. There's a really nice balance of the masculine and feminine here, perhaps inevitable due to the main premise, but also nurtured by both Freund and Jewson.

The cast all help too, particularly the youngsters who have to fight for their lives while wearing tutus and looking woefully out of their depth . . . until they show a natural talent for despatching brawny henchmen. The main five are played by Maddie Ziegler, Lana Condor, Avantika, Millicent Simmonds, and Iris Apatow, and they're all fantastic at being believably frightened, but also determined to fight back, for the sake of themselves and those right alongside them. Thurman has a lot of fun portaying a heavily-accented villain with a real appreciation for the discipline of ballet, Tamás Szabó Sipos is the main instigator of all the trouble, and easy to hate as he spends a lot of time trying to stay protected under the cloak of his father's reputation. 

If someone else hadn't already described this as "reasonably en pointe" then you know that I would have rushed to use that great pun. I was too late, unfortunately, and I don't think anyone is waiting to hear this referred to as Tutu Fast Tutu Furious. It's maybe not quite as packed with violence and death as some would like, but it does maintain a good amount of energy and momentum once everything kicks off. If you're looking for a new action flick to help you pass just under 90 minutes then you shouldn't be too disappointed if you give this your time. 

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

Ready Or Not 2: Here I Come (2026)

Anybody keen to be served up a sequel to Ready Or Not is going to be kept happy enough with this, a film helped by the fact that everyone returns to their main roles, both in front of and behind the camera, and by the fact that it seems to be even more gleefully sadistic.

Things pick up immediately from the end point of the first movie. Grace (Samara Weaving) is taken to hospital, soon to be visited by an unhappy estranged sister (Faith, played by Kathryn Newton), who only ends up there because Grace forgot to change her main emergency contact. Nobody believes Grace about the shocking events of the past day, but the worst part of it all is that her ordeal isn't over. Grace AND Faith are snatched, terms are explained by a lawyer (Elijah Wood), and it's time for a whole new bunch of rich and entitled psychopaths to hunt some human prey. They're headed up by Ursula (Sarah Michelle Gellar) and Titus Danforth (Shawn Hatosy), and they are happy to use Faith as leverage to keep Grace in line.

It's clear that Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett returned to this premise because they figured they could have more fun with it. That's exactly what they do, adapting a story about two sisters into something that writers Guy Busick and R. Christopher Murphy could easily fit into the Ready Or Not world. It's a classic case of "here's what you enjoyed, but a little bit more of it", for the most part, and the direction keeps the focus on fun in a way that makes the slightly longer runtime (this is 108 minutes compared to the 95 minutes of the first film) feel just right.

Weaving slips back into her (iconic?) character with ease, and believably becomes more badass and dangerous as she becomes more desperate to stay alive, and keep her sister in the same condition. Newton is a great addition, entertainingly unhappy with her sister, but also soon showing how much they are cut from the same cloth when things start getting bloody and deadly. Gellar and Hatosy have a lot of fun in their roles, and the former always seems very aware of, and respectful of, the genre baggage she will forever carry into any project. Wood is fun, a calm presence in the middle of a lot of madness, and there are good moments for Dan Beirne, Olivia Cheng, Nestor Carbonell, Kevin Durand, Varun Saranga, Nadeem Umar-Khitab, Antony Hall, and even a cameoing David Cronenberg.

Much like the first film, there are no scares here, and there's very little actual tension, but you get some inventive kills and a whole lot of bloodshed. One or two sequences are drawn out into a showcase of violence and pain, many others are all about the hilarity of how quickly some people can be killed when they're not hidden away in a protective bubble. Everything is very enjoyable for those who were eager to rejoin Weaving in another bit of deadly gameplay.

And special recognition has to go to costume designer Avery Plewes on the outstanding dress that makes an important appearance in the very last scenes. You'll know what I'm on about when you see it. It's a stunning look, but also nicely in line with the journey that the main character has been on.

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

Mubi Monday: Tom At The Farm (2013)

Xavier Dolan has, to date, directed something like 8 feature films, unless my counting is incorrect. He's also helmed some shorts, music videos, and TV work. I have seen almost all of his feature filmography. I would not hesitate to recommend his films to other film fans who are open to exploring less mainstream cinematic territories.

Also acting in front of the camera, as he does for most of his movies, Dolan plays the Tom of the title. The farm that he ends up at belongs to the family of his recently-deceased lover. There's a devastated mother (Agathe, played by Lise Roy) and an angry brother (Francis, played by Pierre-Yves Cardinal). Skirting around his own relationship, simply referring to himself as a close friend, Tom soon finds himself in an awkward and scary position when Francis makes it clear that he knows exactly who he is, and he also doesn't want his mother to ever find out. In fact, he created a fictional girlfriend for his dead brother, which plays a big part in the story later when Tom convinces another friend (Evelyne Brochu) to visit in the guise of that fictional partner.

Looking at the very real problem that many can encounter when they lose a loved one who wasn’t necessarily able to be honest with family about their sexuality, and even when they lose a loved one who was honest, but can have things completely reframed by those who want to erase that part of them, Tom At The Farm is a spiralling nightmare that works as well as it does because of the many main plot beats that feel very much grounded in reality. Despite everything that goes on, one thing worth remembering is just how Tom is unable to even show the full depth of his grief in the way he might want to. That may be the least of his worries, but it really serves as a reminder of how members of the LGBTQ+ community are oppressed and restricted in many ways, even from those not threatening them with violence. And then there’s the very real and constant threat of violence, shown here in the character of Francis.

Dolan is as savvy in front of the camera as he is behind it. He knows what’s happening around him, and acts in a way that shows how much he has learned to balance his defiance and his instinct for self-preservation. Both Cardinal and Roy are excellent, playing people who have very different ways of trying to maintain a connection with a lost loved one. Brochu has a lot less screentime, but does well enough, despite her character taking a bit of a turn that didn’t feel satisfying to me, although wasn’t necessarily delivered as a huge rug-pull.

Having worked on the screenplay with Michel Marc Brouchard, who wrote the original play, Dolan excels at looking after the main themes being explored, maintaining a sense of tension and dread throughout, and also avoiding a static and dull approach that would have focused on the words and ideas ahead of any film techniques. Dolan is interested in a lot of things, but, first and foremost, he’s undoubtedly interested in making films. This stands as one of his best.

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: Woman Of The Hour (2023)

Based on the strange true story of a woman being matched up with someone on a TV dating show who turned out to be hiding a lifestyle of horrible rape and murder, Woman Of The Hour is the directorial debut of Anna Kendrick, who also takes on a lead role, and it's good enough for me to already want to see much more from her.

Kendrick plays Sheryl Bradshaw, an actress struggling to find any job opportunities in the 1970s. She doesn't want to conform to what every male studio exec seems to be looking for though, which means it may be time to give up on her dream. Her agent convinces her that appearing on a TV dating show will be a bit of a boost for her, at least getting her onscreen and raising her profile slightly. That also requires conforming to certain expectations, however, and Sheryl soon annoys show host Ed (Tony Hale) when she starts to cut loose and have more fun questioning her potential suitors, highlighting their weaknesses and misogyny with wit and intelligence. One man manages to stay ahead of the others though. That's Rodney Alcala (Daniel Zovatto), but a female audience member (Laura, played by Nicolette Robinson) believes that he is responsible for the rape and murder of someone she used to know.

What could have been an enjoyable, but fairly simple, idea - woman meets man on dating show without being aware of his horrible crimes - is turned into something much more, thanks to both the screenplay by Ian McDonald and the direction by Kendrick. This isn't just a look at a horrible series of crimes, nor just an exploration of circumstances that led to a now-infamous TV appearance. It's a look at double standards and sexism, and how those things have contributed to, and continue to contribute to, the abuse and deaths of so many women.

Kendrick allows viewers to notice and become bothered by every slight dig, every micro-aggression, and every moment of discomfort, laying down a path that she clearly illustrates can take someone vulnerable right into major danger. I cannot think of one man here who comes out of this looking like a good guy, but that's very likely to be something that can be said by most women, particularly back in the 1970s, but also here and now.

Playing to her strengths in front of the camera, Kendrick allows herself to become stronger as she becomes emboldened by one or two supporting comments and reactions from others. Her character has clearly gone beyond some kind of breaking point when it comes to her mistreatment at the hands of men, and it's a cheering victory to watch her make some guys squirm while she starts asking them questions with more depth and challenge than the usual TV show fluff. Zovatto is chilling in his role, but also able to turn on some charm for moments that have him getting close enough to his victims until he's ready to strike. Hale is an enjoyable bundle of 1970s prime-time misogyny, Robinson does a great job of portraying her traumatic reaction to the reveal of the dating show contestants, and both Matt Visser and Jedidiah Goodacre do a very good job as the other two bachelors made to look bad by Rodney. It's also worth mentioning the fantastic performance from Autumn Best, playing someone who was pivotal to the eventual case made against Alcala.

I knew about the main "hook"for this film, and hoped I would enjoy it. I ended up being pleasantly surprised by how well it showcases and criticises the many every day pitfalls of the female experience. And it really helps that Kendrick plays her role in a way that allows her to subtly move further offscreen as we eventually get to know someone who is equally deserving of the spotlight and the honorific title used by the film.

8/10

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

Shudder Saturday: The Mortuary Assistant (2026)

When I saw the trailer for The Mortuary Assistant a few weeks ago I thought it would be something I would enjoy. It looked enjoyably creepy and entertaining. I had no idea that it was based on a videogame of the same name. To be fair, it doesn't feel like a videogame movie. I am mentioning the source material here for those who may be even more inclined to see it due to an already-established connection.

Directed by Jeremiah Kipp, who has already helmed a few other features in amongst the many shorts that make up the majority of his filmography, this is the tale of a young woman, Rebecca (Willa Holland), who starts a new job in a mortuary and soon finds herself surrounded by dark and demonic forces aiming to hurt and destroy her. The situation seems to be known to her boss (played by Paul Sparks), and it's almost like a rite of passage if she can survive her first night on the job.

Co-written by Tracee Beebe and Brian Clarke, the latter responsible for the videogame, what you get here is an atmospheric horror film that spoils things by moving far too quickly between what could be real and what could be imagined. Horror can often make use of vivid imaginations in an effective and tense way, especially when a character is so disorientated that they end up walking themselves into potential danger, but it needs to be done with care, and I think it works best when used sparingly, unless the overall effect is one of spiralling insanity. The Mortuary Assistant starts the shenanigans so quickly, and refuses to let up with them, that it quickly becomes impossible to care about anything that is happening onscreen. There's some decent imagery, and the lead remains someone you hope will survive the ordeal, but wondering if everything is real or none of it is real just leaves you shrugging as yet another scary moment occurs.

Holland does a good job in the lead role, and her ability is especially important while she carries the film for the majority of the runtime, but she's weighed down by a screenplay that gives her an all-too-familiar tragic backstory without enough full context and detail regarding her daily life as it is now. Sparks never feels like more than a creepy figure delivering exposition (funnily enough, he's a bit like a videogame guide), and there's not enough for the likes of Keena Ferguson Frasier, Emily Bennett, Mark Steger et al., to get their teeth into. 

There's enough to enjoy here if you're after something that feels entertainingly spooky. It's just a shame that it's also so hard to be invested in. I stopped caring about how the film would end as soon as things started to go bump in the mortuary. The more the main character was confused, yet also not reacting as strongly to the things happening around her as I would, the less I cared about where it was all going.  

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

Ella McCay (2025)

Written and directed by James L. Brooks, and with a cast that includes Emma Mackey, Jamie Lee Curtis, Albert Brooks, Jack Lowden, Julie Kavner, Woody Harrelson, Jack Lowden, Kumail Nanjiani, and Ayo Edebiri, I was hoping to enjoy Ella McCay. I'd already heard some luke-warm reviews of it, at best, but still thought that it couldn't really be bad with the talent involved. Not for the first time . . . I was wrong.

This is all about a young woman (McCay, of course, played by Mackey) about to become the governor of her state. She's idealistic and hoping to effect some real change, but events conspire against her. Problems loom large with the reappearance of her father (Harrelson), the unhappiness of her husband (Lowden), and the ongoing depressive state of her younger brother (Casey, played by Spike Fearn). There are some good people on her side (her aunt, Helen, played by Curtis, and her secretary, Estelle, played by Kavner), but they may not be able to help Ella when she finds herself becoming cornered by a very determined and scheming reporter who wants to blackmail her into giving him some priority access.

I don't have the enthusiasm to go into too much detail here. Ella McCay feels sadly pointless. It gives us a character who should clearly be supported, and celebrated, but then spends most of the runtime breaking down various parts of her life as if proving some kind of point about how good she remains in the face of overwhelming awfulness. Bizarrely, despite the relatively light and fluffy way the material is presented, this is as much a film about someone shaped by past traumas and present abuses as more extreme films I could start to list here. It's not really a bitter pill with a sugar coating, but more of a teeny tiny sugar core in the middle of a horribly bitter pill.

I know the main point that Brooks wants to make here, and it's one well worth making in the current climate, but he lacks the ability to navigate through territory that needs a much steadier hand at the wheel. I know that's an unexpected thing to say about his direction, but not only is this a comedy lacking enough laughs, it's also a commentary on the modern political landscape without the courage to get close to any of the targets it takes aim at.

Mackey is okay in the lead role, although it's not the best performance from someone who has yet to fully win me over. Lowden suffers from the fact that his character is so easy to dislike, even when he's apparently trying to be nice. Both Curtis and Kavner fare much better, and both benefit from receiving some of the best moments in the film, and Harrelson is very enjoyable as the man who can't convincingly apologise to people when his actions fail to back up his words. Nanjiani is a highlight, even if sorely underused, as is Edebiri. Albert Brooks is good fun, Fearn does well with his scenes, and there are one or two other supporting players who manage to stealthily steal a scene away from the main stars.

I almost forgot that I disliked this, that's how much the cast helps the material, but I really didn't have a good time. It's forgettable, at best, and I suspect many will like it even less than I did. At least it clocks in at just under two hours (the runtime is actually 115 minutes). That's about the most positive note I think I can end on. It's saved by the cast, and it clocks in at just under two hours.

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

Send Help (2026)

It's always good to see Sam Raimi having fun with his directorial work, and if there's one way to describe Send Help it's fun. It's not great, nor is it in the top 5 (maybe even top 10) of Raimi films, but it's definitely fun.

Rachel McAdams plays Linda Liddle, a put-upon employee who has to once again swallow her disappointment when passed over for promotion by her new boss, Bradley Preston (Dylan O'Brien). That promotion had been promised to her by Bradley's father, but he's more interested in helping his buddy, Donovan (Xavier Samuel), progress his career. And as long as they can still get Linda to do the actual maths and the work then it should be a win-win situation for them. Which is how Linda ends up on a flight with them en route to Bangkok. The flight doesn't get there though. It crashes, and Linda and Bradley end up on a deserted island. Luckily, Linda is a huge fan of Survivor, and knows how to make the best of their bad situation. Unluckily (for Bradley), this seriously inverts the balance of power between the two of them.

Written by Damian Shannon and Mark Swift, a duo who have delivered a couple of very enjoyable horror movies, and then the not-so-enjoyable Baywatch movie, Send Help works best when it's focused on the conversations between the two leads. Both of them often have an agenda, whether it's proving a point or trying to push an escape plan, and watching them tip-toe around their words as they strive to maintain the fragile co-dependency that might be essential for them is delightful. Surprisingly, and despite the moments that run far too close to similar moments in Triangle Of Sadness, those interactions are more delightful than any of the expected Raimi-isms.

Raimi doesn't care if things are a bit rough around the edges, considering he's done some of his best work with creativity and energy far outweighing budget, but viewers may not feel the same. From the plane crash to an angry wild boar, from scenes that have people in peril on a crumbling high path to a particular bit of pain delivered in the finale, the varying quality of the CGI is a bit too distracting, even when it's being used to get things more in line with some familiar Raimi beats. One dream sequence feels particularly unnecessary, pretty much just an excuse to have a sequence that would be better off in another Tales From The Crypt movie, and even a bit of propulsive camerawork fails to amuse because of it feeling awkwardly shoe-horned in. It's almost as if Raimi had to mark off a checklist of his own trademark touches, but his heart wasn't in it.

McAdams and O'Brien ensure that they do more than enough to make you appreciate when the focus is back on them, however, and both are in fine form. McAdams enjoys transforming from timid pushover to strong survival queen, and makes herself believable at both ends of that spectrum. O'Brien doesn't have the same kind of arc, but he is consistently amusing as the kind of inconsiderate asshole boss that you would never want to be working for. Samuel is equally inconsiderate, and equally amusing, Dennis Haysbert is sadly only here for a cameo turn, and Edyll Ismail gets a fantastic feature acting debut, playing the persistent fiancée of Bradley who, for unfathomable reasons, really wants to find him alive and safe.

I enjoyed many different parts of this. The performances, the Danny Elfman score, the too-infrequent moments that felt like Raimi being gleefully sadistic. It's just a shame that it never really came together into something completely satisfying though. Having said that, it's hard not to stay chuckling and think back on it fondly enough when you're treated to a cheeky and ridiculous final shot that acknowledges how silly it's all been. Sometimes silly is just fine. Sometimes it's what you need to distract you from the less silly events that can fill up your day.

6/10

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

Prime Time: Dracula (2025)

I have seen worse films than this. I've also seen films that seemed more pointless. I just can't think of too many of them right now. Dracula AKA Dracula: A Love Tale, as it was titled when writer-director Luc Besson was trying to pretend that this wasn't just a pale imitation of Francis Ford Coppola's movie, is a disappointing mess for all involved. I'll mention them all individually very soon.

The story is one that everyone should be familiar with by now, to a certain degree. There's a deadly and sometimes charming vampire (Caleb Landry Jones), there's a woman who bears more than a striking resemblance to the past love that he thought was gone forever (Zoë Bleu), and there's a priest who knows about the vampire menace and knows how best to deal with them (Christoph Waltz). There are a few other characters allowed to take up some screentime here, none of them very interesting, you get some unnecessarily lively gargoyles, and there's a sequence at the end that helps to lift it above some other, even worse, films making use of the Dracula name, but only just. And it's just too little too late.

I wasn't sure what to expect when I first heard that Besson was giving us his version of the classic vampire tale, but I certainly didn't think it was going to be as dull as this. Although he has moved far away from the peak of his career (you could argue over a few different titles, but probably wouldn't argue that his best work was at least a few decades ago now), Besson remains someone I think of as stylish and willing to take some risks. Dracula has one or two decent visuals, but is mainly quite dull. It's also disappointingly risk-free. I would have much preferred to see something bold that would divide audiences, but instead we get something so safe and tame that it barely feels like a Dracula film. It certainly lacks . . . well, you know how this sentence should end.

Jones is an interesting choice for the lead role, and he tries his best to showcase his talent, but he's rarely given anything truly worthy of him. I could say something very similar about Waltz, and Bleu is just an utter bore for most of her screentime. Nobody decides to throw a curveball here, there are no big performances, and it's clear that Besson wrote the screenplay with his focus on a couple of half-decent ideas ahead of any proper characterisations. Despite the variety of the main character roles, nobody has a distinct voice. 

One scene saves it, one that moves from some enjoyable action to a provocative and philosophical conversation about good and evil, and what is done by people in the name of god. Unfortunately, that's about five minutes, give or take, in a film with a 129-minute runtime. I'll have forgotten it all in a day or two, and I suspect many other people will feel the same way about it. Even those involved in making it.

3/10

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

Project Hail Mary (2026)

If you don't know what to expect from Project Hail Mary then you've never watched any other movie that presents the fate of the entire world resting on one smart individual who has to dig deep into reserves of courage that they never even knew they had. You've also never watched The Martian, the previous sci-fi blockbuster success adapted from source material by writer Andy Weir. That film also shared the talent of Drew Goddard, deftly working to ensure that the film maintained a fine balance between the science and the entertainment.

Phil Lord and Christopher Miller direct this particular tale, and it's all about a teacher, Ryland Grace (Ryan Gosling), who ends up a hell of a long way from his home planet. Not prepared for any kind of space mission, as we learn from seeing his present learning curve and numerous flashbacks that show how he ended up there, Grace nonetheless wants to succeed in a mission that could hopefully stop Earth from losing the sun. That's all you need to know. Grace is on his own, he seems ill-suited to the role, but maybe he can be helped on to the greatness that others already know lies within him.

While this works best if you go into it knowing as little as possible, I suspect that ship has sailed. The trailer gives too much away, and promotion of the film has decided to lean into certain aspects that would have been better kept hidden away for viewers to enjoy while watching the film. I'm not going to add to all of that noise though, which may hamper me slightly. You're just going to have to trust me when I say that Project Hail Mary is, very much like The Martian, a science fiction movie that uses a science-heavy premise to tell a story that's all about humanity and heart.

Lord and Miller are a fine choice for the direction here, comfortable with material that allows for a surprising, but not unwelcome, amount of comedy. This is material that needs to keep that light touch, considering what is at stake and the journey that our lead character is on, both literally and metaphorically, and Lord and Miller make very good use of a sharp screenplay and winning performances to ensure that most people should be entertained and amused without ever feeling as if they're watching an outright comedy.

Gosling hasn't been able to do any wrong throughout most of his film career, and he continues that streak here. He's perfect as the smart teacher who eventually becomes a reluctant potential hero after resisting his fate in the strongest way he can. Sandra Hüller is also fantastic, playing someone who is in charge of the mission that she knows will cost a few lives in exchange for saving the population of Earth. She's tough, but not without empathy and understanding for those who may often be a step or two behind her while she looks at the big picture. Lionel Boyce has his best movie role yet, and one that I hope serves as a stepping stone for him as he looks to capitalise on the goodwill afforded to him thanks to his outstanding work in The Bear. Ken Leung and Milana Vayntrub do well in very small roles, but the other cast member who needs singled out for praise is James Ortiz, giving a delightful vocal performance that is as essential to the film as any of the visuals.

I wish the score from Daniel Pemberton had a bit more oomph to it at times (yes, that is the technical term), and the cinematography from Greig Fraser is often dictated by some major environmental factors that stop the imagery from being as clear and impressive as I sometimes wanted it to be, but those are minor nitpicks in a film that reminds you of how great it is when you can enjoy a blockbuster that can appeal to the majority of cinema audiences without feeling too dumb or patronising. And I may even change my mind on these issues when I get to revisit the film in the comfort of my own home.

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

Mubi Monday: No Other Choice (2025)

If you can remember the last time that director Park Chan-wook delivered anything less than a brilliant feature then you have a better memory than I do. Or maybe you just have more discerning taste. I'd be willing to bet on the former though. Has Chan-wook ever been underwhelming? I think not. And No Other Choice  is another winner.

Lee Byung-hun plays Man-su, a papermaking company employee who finds himself in financial dire straits when he is laid off. It's not long until his wife (Mi-ri, played by Son Ye-jin) takes charge of the situation, explaining to Man-su and their two children that they'll have to cancel a number of extra-curricular activities, temporarily rehome the family pets, and sell their home before it is taken away from them by the bank anyway. Man-su doesn't want to lose the home he worked so hard to own. He eventually comes up with a plan to find his main competitors in the job market . . . and kill them.

What you may think is simply a thriller with a rich vein of dark comedy through it is actually a damning look at the treatment of workers by companies consistently chasing cheaper working methods and bigger profits. It's also a thriller with a rich vein of dark comedy through it, and many viewers may be surprised to find that it's based on a novel, "The Ax", by Donald E. Westlake, but the scenes that bookend the film really hammer home a point about the mistreatment of people by the bosses who end up wielding far too much power over them. 

As well as his usual excellent direction, Chan-wook also once again collaborates on the screenplay with Jahye Lee, as well as being joined by Lee Kyoung-mi and Don McKellar this time around. Despite the 139-minute runtime, it feels perfectly paced, allowing time for Man-su to be sorely impacted by his downturn in fortune, time for him to come up with a deadly plan, and plenty of time to show him working out how best to deal with each potential victim. Everyone gets treated equally, which helps, and we're shown how Mi-ri is affected by things, how the children deal with the situation, and even how each of the victims spends their time, whether they're in a good place or not.

Byung-hun is as good as you'd expect him to be in the lead role. If you've seen him in any other role then you will already know his talent. Ye-jin is equally good alongside him, and both Woo Seung Kim and So Yul Choi do well as the younger family members. Lee Sung-min and Yeom Hye-ran are interesting and entertaining as a married couple who end up targeted by our leading man when he starts putting his plan into action, Cha Seung-won is enjoyable as a more timid character, and Park Hee-soon has fun as the kind of individual you really hope to see get their comeuppance before the end credits roll. 

The cinematography from Kim Woo-hyung has some moments that allow for a helping of beauty alongside some of the macabre developments, the music from Jo Yeong-wook is wonderful throughout, and every little detail, whether it's vital or not, helps to make the whole film feel cared for and classy. I loved it, and I could happily rewatch it immediately. Like almost every other Park Chan-wook film I could mention.

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: Double Jeopardy (1999)

In case you didn't know, double jeopardy is a legal term that, apparently, means you cannot be arrested and judged for the same crime twice. There's more nuance to it than that, and I am in no way offering any kind of legal advice here, but that's what this film wants you to believe. So, for example, if your husband framed you for his murder while he disappeared and started a whole new life then you could, once out of prison, track him down and shoot him in the middle of a crowd without anyone being able to do a damn thing about it. Apparently. And that is the premise for what turns out to be a very enjoyable thriller from the late '90s.

Ashley Judd plays Libby, a woman who has her world rocked when she wakes up one morning to find blood everywhere, a knife nearby, and no sign of her husband (Bruce Greenwood). She is found guilty of his murder, and serves six years of a prison sentence before showing enough contrition to get herself out on parole. She knows that her husband isn't dead though. She wants to find him, and she wants to reunite with her son, Matty. All that her parole officer wants, however, is a peaceful life, and the fact that her parole officer is played by Tommy Lee Jones ensures that Libby would be unwise to start breaking any rules.

Directed by Bruce Beresford, who has a lengthy film career stretching back decades, but may still hold this film up as a real highlight, Double Jeopardy is very enjoyable nonsense. The fact that it has some level of self-awareness, thanks to the screenplay by David Weisberg and Douglas Cook, helps a lot, especially when you start to wonder about certain repercussions that are then shown mere moments later (almost as if the writers allow you to have a moment to consider things before winking and letting you know that they've given some thought to keeping the whole thing both entertaining and at least slightly plausible).

It also helps that Judd and Jones are both fantastic in their lead roles. Judd moves from entirely sweet and innocent to righteous and tenacious, and everyone watching will want to see her succeed, while Jones gives us the kind of gruff and "slowly and surely" hunter that he basically perfected in The Fugitive. Greenwood is enjoyably smarmy and dangerous, and there's an enjoyably pivotal role for Annabeth Gish, who ends up committing the major error that sets Judd's character on her determined quest for revenge/reparation.

A third act set in New Orleans helps to keep things interesting and lively, there are a number of scenes that have a surprisingly good dollop of wit in the mix (our lead being hit on by someone who helps her with an internet search is perhaps the first example, and made me properly chuckle), and the whole thing may just make you nostalgic for these smaller, but still star-powered, movies that we sadly don't seem to see any more. It's also a reminder of how good Judd was in the prime roles she was given throughout the 1990s and 2000s.

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

Shudder Saturday: Bodycam (2025)

I have liked a number of movies from Brandon and Ryan Christensen (Brandon being the director, Ryan being a co-writer on a number of their past few features). Bodycam is easily their worst film yet, and it's almost insultingly bad in a number of ways. I'm annoyed with myself for being mildly impressed by the trailer that I watched last month. That didn't really misrepresent anything. I just allowed myself to think that it was a good concept that might be executed well. I was wrong on both counts.

What you have here is a tale of two cops. There's Officer Bryce (Sean Rogerson) and Officer Jackson (Jaime M. Callica). Their shift quickly goes from bad to worse when they're called to a domestic disturbance that leads to the accidental killing of a baby. Bryce is the one who could end up in major hot water, and he wants to figure out a way to change the narrative. That would mean figuring out a way to get rid of their bodycam footage though. Not only does that seem unlikely, the bodycams soon start showing more and more disturbing events as the two officers are manipulated and terrorised by numerous individuals who seem to be serving some malevolent deity.

I have mentioned it many times before, and will undoubtedly do so again, but there are certain warning signs to keep an eye out for when watching any "found footage" film. Bodycam doesn't manage to stay true to the nature of the format, which is actually one of the warning signs, but that would be the main descriptor for it. Many of the early scenes use torchlight, there are hardly any moments that don't have the action being obscured by the movement and unsteadiness of the camerawork, and the third act feels based around one or two main jump scares. I won't namecheck the far superior horror movie that this made me think of, but some imagery in the last scenes may have a lot of people thinking of the same one. (and thinking "I wish I'd watched *insert the title here* instead of this rubbish") 

It's hard to really rate the performances of Rogerson and Callica, who both do well enough at hitting their marks, but are hampered by the constantly painful hyperactivity of the pacing and the camerawork. Catherine Lough Haggquist, playing the mother of Callica's character, isn't as obscured, although her performance feels so weak that I wish it had been. Some others onscreen do quite well, despite the fact that they're simply moved around hither and thither in service of the central concept.

Are there some moments to give you chills? I guess so, but nothing that wouldn't work better packed into a short. This isn't an effective feature. It's a potentially enjoyable V/H/S segment, at best. The attempts to build atmosphere don't work, a lot of the first half feels like a waste of time as our two main characters go around in circles trying to cover up something that feels impossible to cover up, and the details littered throughout, meant to create a bigger picture of a dark world pushing at the membrane of our own, feel more tiresome than interesting. 

2/10

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

Snow White (2025)

There's something really annoying about watching a movie that has had the critical conversation around it hijacked by people frothing at the mouth while they misuse the word "woke" and then finding out that, sadly, it really is awful. Not for the reasons that the raving racists and misogynists would claim, but it's still very hard to defend.

Snow White isn't just bad. It's consistently awful in a way that feels designed that way. From the casting of Gal Gadot as the Evil Queen to the horrible CGI/motion-captured dwarfs, it's a live-action remake that serves no purpose, other than to drive viewers back to enjoy the animated classic once again. 

Everyone knows the story. I am not going to repeat it here. Rachel Zegler is Snow White, and she's the best thing in this. I'm not going to name those voicing the dwarf roles. The only other cast member to mention is Andrew Burnap, playing Jonathan (a replacement for the bland prince in the original movie).

Written by Erin Cressida Wilson, who has a number of much better movies to her credit that you should check out ahead of this one, and directed by Marc Webb, who also has a number of better movies you could choose ahead of this (hell, if Neil Breen worked on this then I would even be recommending a number of his past features), this is such a mishandling of the classic tale that it's only saved from being the worst of the worst by Zegler. There's no charm to it, no improvement offered by the move from animation to live-action, and it stands as the best argument yet against Disney rushing to remake so many of their classic works.

Zegler is a great talent, as she has also shown in a number of other recent projects. She also absolutely looks the part, and kudos to the make up and costuming department for their work on both Zegler and Gadot here, with them being allowed to impressively recreate some iconic looks. Someone else really needed to be cast as the Evil Queen though. Gadot isn't just bad, she's mistakenly given a musical number that also proves how ill-suited she is to anything that requires a bit of singing. I would rather listen to her joining other celebrities on another horrible and patronising rendition of "Imagine". As for Burnap, he's simply fine, if forgettable. I don't want to spend any time critiquing the dwarf characters, mainly because I am hoping to wipe them from my memory as quickly as possible.

It brings me no joy to be so scathing here. The backlash against this meant that I was rooting for it, particularly when that backlash was often most passionately supported by those who were just looking to push their own agendas, but if it quacks like a duck and tries, but fails, to walk like a duck then it is, in fact, a lame duck.

2/10

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

Ghosted (2023)

A mix of action and rom-com starring Chris Evans and Ana de Armas in the lead roles, Ghosted should have been an easy success. The familiar faces, the familiar plotting, and a succession of cameos make it an obvious choice for some straightforward entertainment. There's a reason that it's pretty much been forgotten already though. It's not good. It's hard to describe as truly awful, although I am sure some will, but it's certainly as bland as some vegetable that has had all of the flavour boiled out of it.

Evans plays Cole Turner, a young man who falls hard for Sadie Rhodes (De Armas). He thinks that it might be a good idea, after spending one day with her, to pay her a surprise visit in London. Things don't go according to plan though, with Cole soon abducted by people who believe him to be an infamous CIA agent known as "The Taxman". Can you guess who is actually that agent? Bickering, gunfights, and various hijinks soon ensue.

Written by the not-insubstantial-quartet of Rhett Reese, Paul Wernick, Chris McKenna, and Erik Sommers, Ghosted is what happens when you believe that your film has enough star power to ignore things like proper wit, pacing, and characters with some depth. There is nothing to this when you remove the stars. Nothing.

Director Dexter Fletcher is often a capable talent, but he is clearly hamstrung here by the demands of delivering such studio fluff. The action doesn’t have any weight or impact, there’s a surprising, and debilitating, lack of chemistry between the two leads, and nothing is done to make things more interesting around the superficial glossy smoothness of everything.

Evans and De Armas have rarely been worse. They can be charismatic, they can be convincing with action beats and physical work, and they can be fun, but you wouldn’t know that from watching this. Adrien Brody is a main villain, but feels like the wrong choice in every scene focusing on him. It’s either him just cashing a big cheque or not able to find his way into a performance that should just be a bit ridiculous and entertaining. Nobody else makes much of an impression, and the many cameos that crop up feel like a desperate and lazy attempt to please Marvel fans. They are smug and unfunny, like so many other parts of the movie.

I still won’t describe this as truly awful, there were one or two moments I enjoyed before completely losing any optimism about it improving, but it is bad. Very bad. It deserves to be as forgotten as it already is, and I am sure the main cast members are happy to see it fade from memory so quickly.

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: The Bluff (2026)

I like Karl Urban. I also tend to like Priyanka Chopra Jonas. And, good job for me, I like pirates. Despite the plot summary accompanying the thumbnail imagery of this one online, I didn't realise that The Bluff was a film set in the pirate-filled past until it started. Thankfully, Urban is such a good pirate that I soon knew I would have a good time with this.

Jonas plays Ercell, a woman with a disabled young son (Isaac, played by Vedanten Naidoo) and a strong-willed younger sister (Elizabeth, played by Safia Oakley-Green). She wants to keep both of them safe and protected when her home island is invaded by Captain Connor (Urban) and his crew. They're after some hidden treasure, of course, and they believe that Ercell is the one who has it. Maybe it was hidden away somewhere by her husband, T.H. (Ismael Cruz Córdova). Or maybe she did it herself, and is more than capable of defending it from those who would seek to steal it from her.

Co-written by Joe Ballarini and director Frank E. Flowers, there are no major surprises here in The Bluff, especially when you consider the billing order of the stars, and the only thing to differentiate from a hundred other similar movies are the stars and the setting. Those two factors are enough to make it feel a bit better than many other viewing choices though, especially when the pirates get busy delivering their pirate violence to those they consider to be standing between them and their payday.

Jonas is convincing when it comes to the physicality, very quickly asserting her skills and deadliness in an impressive sequence that shows her turning the tables on two home invaders, and she's good enough to keep viewers on her side as things ramp up and she has to become more and more resourceful and capable, and also a little bit fortunate. Urban growls and scowls in his usual manner, looking damn good in the pirate garb and being as entertaining as ever. Oakley-Green and Naidoo may be there to add some vulnerable people needing protection, which they do well enough, but there are more enjoyable supporting turns from Temuera Morrison, David Field, and those having fun using their cannons, muskets, and swords.

The action is depicted clearly enough, and there's a nice mix of smooth cinematic moves and occasional grisliness, and the 103-minute runtime feels just right, allowing for just enough character development in between the numerous set-pieces. Flowers may not be any kid of master of cinema, but he handles things well enough, and at least knows how to make the most of the two biggest names heading up his cast. The only major disappointment by the time the end credits roll is regret that Urban has never been cast as Blackbeard in a movie. Someone needs to get on that.

7/10

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

The Master (2012)

After the success that Paul Thomas Anderson enjoyed at the Oscars this year, it seemed like a good enough time to finally check out one of his celebrated movies I had somehow never made the time for before now.

Joaquin Phoenix plays Freddie Quell, a Navy veteran struggling to return to any kind of normal life after his time spent in service during WWII. Dealing with a number of issues, many of which we would nowadays connect to PTSD, Freddie ends up meeting Lancaster Dodd (Philip Seymour Hoffman). Dodd is the leader of a movement known as "The Cause", which seems to focus on interrogating people and psychologically breaking them down before helping them to rebuild into some better version of themselves, apparently. Not that Dodds is medically qualified for whatever he's doing, but he and Freddie seem to make quite the effective team. Until they don't.

Although there are a number of different inspirations for The Master, it's hard to view it as anything other than a thinly-disguised exploration of Scientology. The methodology seems familiar, Dodd also writes a number of books that may fall a bit short of literary greatness, and, well, he generally feels like someone you don't want to end up getting entangled with.

Phoenix is very good in his role, although he's played the confused and tortured individual so often by now that it would arguably be more interesting to watch him play someone simply content and dealing with more everyday problems (like trying to remember which day is bin day, for example). Hoffman is fantastic, giving a performance that ranks up there with his very best, which is really saying something. Amy Adams is excellent in her main supporting role, and the cast also includes Laura Dern, Jesse Plemons, and Rami Malek, as well as Kevin J. O'Connor, Jillian Bell, and a few other familiar faces.

I must say that I was surprised to find I didn't love this though. I was never drawn into it, never completely engrossed while Phoenix was playing another of his twitchy and angry men, and never entirely convinced that the story was being told in the best possible way. Because there is a great story here, but that story revolves around Dodd. A number of scenes work because of him at the heart of them, but there are too many moments that take viewers elsewhere, mainly keeping them alongside the less interesting and less complex character of Freddie.

There's a typically great selection of music from Jonny Greenwood, fantastic cinematography from Mihai Mǎlaimare Jr., and the standard skill and confidence you'd expect from the writing and direction of Anderson, but it never all comes together as it should. Ironically, the 137-minute runtime feels too short, yet certain moments drag when there's no riveting presence of Hoffman onscreen.

Everyone else seems to absolutely love this, rating it as one of Anderson's best, and one of the best films of 2012. I thought it was good, but it wouldn't crack my personal top 5 list of PTA movies.

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

Mubi Monday: It Was Just An Accident (2025)

The latest feature from celebrated Iranian film-maker Jafar Panahi, It Was Just An Accident takes a familiar premise, someone believing that they recognise an individual who was once their jailer/tormenter, and uses it to take viewers on a complex journey that makes space for people dealing with shared trauma, obstacles in the shape of standard societal "protocols", and even some comedy mined from the fact that our lead character isn't cold and callous enough to ignore those in need of help while he already has quite a lot on his plate already, to put it mildly.

Vahid Mobasseri plays Vahid, a mechanic who is approached by Eghbal (Ebrahim Azizi) when his car is in need of repair. Vahid believes that he has encountered Eghbal before (mainly due to the noise of his walk, due to a prosthetic leg), which leads to him following the man, kidnapping him, and aiming to take revenge. There's still a shadow of doubt though, which leads Vahid to enlist the help of Shiva (Mariam Afshari), Goli (Hadis Pakbaten), Ali (Majid Panahi), and Hamid (Mohammad Ali Elyasmehr). 

I could say more, particularly when it comes to a couple of other figures who end up impacting the plot, but that would spoil the many delights and surprises of this film. It's a tough watch, particularly in the third act, but Panahi, who collaborated on the central ideas for the story with Nader Saïvar, Shadmehr Rastin, and Mehdi Mahmoudian, does a superb job of making everything consistently entertaining, despite the uncomfortable subject matter. It's also interesting to watch this kind of material, used many times before in darker genre fare, and be convinced that revenge (usually so cinematically satisfying) would not be the best outcome here.

Mobasseri is excellent in his main role, and Afshari easily matches him, but nobody falters. Azizi goes through a wide range of emotions as he reacts to the situation, especially when concerned about his family, and Pakbaten, Panahi, and Elyasmehr do excellent work making up the rest of the potential vigilante group. 

Although I have not seen nearly enough of Panahi's filmography, this feels like as good a place to start as any. Maybe watch This Is Not A Film to get a bit more of an insight into the risks that Panahi has taken over the years to make his movies, as it perfectly illustrates his intelligence and good humour while providing context to his reputation, but definitely make this one a high priority when it comes to making your way through the essential films of 2025.

10/10

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

Netflix And Chill: War Machine (2026)

When I saw War Machine pop up on the main page of Netflix I admit to being slightly confused. I remembered it being something I'd seen advertised some time ago, with Brad Pitt in a main role, but I didn't know why it was getting a renewed push now. Maybe it was to do with Alan Ritchson also having a main role, and his star being on the rise was reason enough to ensure some extra interest in something that has passed many people by when it was first released. Or maybe, as it turned out, this was just a new Netflix movie with the same name as a previous Netflix movie. You can still hunt around on Netflix to find War Machine (2017), which I still want to get around to one day, but it's a lot easier just now to find this War Machine (2026), a sci-fi action movie with Ritchson in the lead role.

The premise may sound very familiar to most of you. A group of soldiers on a mission (albeit a training mission) end up being noticed by a deadly alien. That's all there is to it, and that's all it needs. These people are looking to complete their training to become U.S. Army Rangers. Most of them will struggle as they reach their limits, but Ritchson's character already went beyond that point a few years ago, when he was in Kandahar with his seriously-wounded brother (Jai Courtney). Once they realise that their training mission has turned into something very real, and very deadly, the squad must work together to try to survive, and hopefully warn others of a potential invasion.

This is predictable and cheesy entertainment, but it's also a good bit of fun. In fact, I'd argue that it's the best thing Patrick Hughes has done since his excellent film from 2010, Red Hill. It's certainly good enough for me to try not holding his past few films against him any longer. Hughes also worked on the screenplay with writer James Beaufort, delivering something that unabashedly works through a number of military movie tropes while adding an impressively deadly antagonist into the mix. It helps that the cast is based around Ritchson as the central lynchpin, a man who looks as if he could do everything that the movie requires of him, no matter how difficult or far-fetched.

Certainly more suited to this kind of material than his ill-judged attempt at comedy, Ritchson keeps a straight face while delivering a performance that ticks off everything you might write down on some kind of stoic war hero bingo card. He's good enough to root for nonetheless, and any scenes with him trying to outwit the enemy are easy highlights. Stephan James, Blake Richardson, and Alex King are the other main squad members to get decent screentime, although James spends a lot of the film incapacitated, and all of them do well enough, Courtney makes a strong enough impression in his few scenes, and stereotypical military leaders are portrayed by Esai Morales and Dennis Quaid, just as happy as everyone else to accommodate every cliché you might expect from this sort of thing.

The special effects and sound work are impressive, the action is generally shot well (although one sequence with a vehicle being chased gets a bit too frenetic and hard to watch), and there are some surprisingly gory wounds and deaths filling up the screen. This is not for the faint-hearted, certainly not when it introduces the main threat anyway, and those after something that seems to epitomise a "no guts, no glory" attitude should be easily placated by this.

It's not great, especially when you consider how derivative and stuffed full of tropes it is, but it is a solid viewing choice that at least feels, and looks, better than many other movie choices that often feel like content instead of proper movies. 

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: The Last Horror Film (1982)

I've heard a wide range of opinions on The Last Horror Film, and now that I have finally seen it I can at least say that, well, it sure was something. Whether it's something good or bad is something I hope to settle on by the time I reach the end of this review.

Joe Spinell plays Vinny Durand, a New York taxi driver who dreams of one day making a great horror movie starring the wonderful Jana Bates (Caroline Munro). There's no need to go the traditional route though, obviously, so Vinny heads to the Cannes Film Festival, where he sets out to get rid of some competitors and put Jana in his movie, even if she doesn't want to do it.

I knew what I was in for here when we had gratuitous toplessness within the first thirty seconds. This was going to be a bit sleazy, it was going to be unconcerned with good taste, and it was going to deliver some very standard 1980s horror movie moments. Would it have any surprises for me? Sadly not, although there's a moderately enjoyable layering of self-awareness and meta commentary as it turns into something increasingly self-reflexive on the way to an ending that whimpers when it should be bellowing out a primal scream.

It's not up there with the best work from either of the leads (Spinell has been even sweatier and more disturbing in Maniac, whereas Munro has her Hammer and Bond highlights), but both are cast for what they obviously bring to their respective roles. That's more than can be said for the likes of Glenn Jacobson, David Winters, or Judd Hamilton (although Winters and Hamilton being in control behind the camera explains why they cast themselves in front of it).

Winters directs with a lack of any notable style, happy enough to fill out the runtime with snatched footage from Cannes in between a few disappointingly tame death scenes. There are some good lines scattered throughout the screenplay (co-written by Winters, Hamilton, and Tom Klassen), but nothing truly clever or memorable enough to make the most of the concept at the heart of the film. 

It may not be essential viewing, not even close, but there’s still enough here to make it one that horror movie fans should want to check off their watchlist. I am glad that I finally got around to it, but I doubt I will ever want to give it a rewatch.

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

The Roses (2025)

If you have forgotten The War Of The Roses (1989) then I encourage you to revisit it. Based on the book by Warren Adler, directed by Danny DeVito (who also gives himself a fun supporting role), and starring Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner, who are both clearly having a blast in their main roles, it's about as dark and twisted a black comedy as you could hope for. Don't watch it if you're planning to check out The Roses though, which is a "reimagining" starring Olivia Colman and Benedict Cumberbatch in the lead roles. 

The Roses isn't bad. It just doesn't hold up when you compare it to the original film. 

The story is all about a married couple who seem to fall out of love. A lot has changed since they first met, and resentment grows into something that eventually makes them toxic and dangerous to one another. Some may want them to stay together, but many eventually realise that they'd be better separating. The lawyers (played by Allison Janney and Andy Samberg) look set to be the only real winners though.

It's odd that this was written by Tony McNamara, who must have seemed like a great choice after his recent work with Yorgos Lanthimos. In fact, I'll take the rare opportunity now to recommend the wonderful The Rage In Placid Lake, his directorial feature film debut, adapted from his own stage play. While this is passable entertainment, I can't really recommend this. It lacks real bite, which is even more of a shame when you get the feeling that both Colman and Cumberbatch would have enjoyed leaning even further into anarchy and viciousness.

While they're not on top form, I cannot blame either of the leads for their work here. They both do quite well with what they're given, although Colman easily outshines her male co-star in the second half of the film. Janney is very good fun as the out-for-everything lawyer, Samberg is fairly amusing as a more timid member of the legal system, and there's some fun to be had with Sunita Mani, Ncuti Gatwa, Zoë Chao, and Jamie Demetriou. The actors who play the Rose children also do well enough, but their characters are generally passive observers to the disintegration of the relationship between their mother and father. The biggest disappointment comes from Kate McKinnon, someone I often enjoy seeing in comedies. Her character here feels like she's been dropped in from a completely different movie, or (more accurately) a very weak SNL skit.

The main person I blame for this being such a disappointment is director Jay Roach. Roach can do comedy, but he has come unstuck before when trying to add some edge to the laughs. The fact that he also doesn’t have strong enough comedic talent here (with no offence intended to the leads) just undermines his decision to try to keep things more fun and funny until lurching sideways for the grand finale. 

Casual viewers should find enough to enjoy here, especially if you like either of the leads, and, despite my criticisms, I really cannot call it a bad film. It just feels completely neutered and toothless, which is something that could have been avoided with a bolder individual at the helm.

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

Fackham Hall (2025)

All you need to know about Fackham Hall is that it's essentially a silly parody of Downton Hall fare. Imagine that kind of period piece drama given the Zucker/Abrahams/Zucker treatment and you're in the right area. Director Jim O'Hanlon has a pretty good body of work to his name already, including a couple of enjoyable Christmas movies and an episode of Hemlock Grove. (anyone else remember Hemlock Grove with fondness, or is it just me? and where the hell does Hemlock Grove "live" nowadays?)

The main cast members are Thomasin McKenzie, playing Rose, Ben Radcliffe, playing Eric, and Damian Lewis and Katherine Waterston playing Lord and Lady Davenport, respectively. Others onscreen are Tom Felton (as Archibald), Emma Laird (as Poppy), and Jimmy Carr, who also helped to co-write the screenplay, cameoing as a vicar who keeps breaking up his sentences in ways that make his speeches to the congregation hilarious inappropriate.

While there is a plot here, it's really all about throwing a lot of gags around and hoping that some of them land. The good news is that many of them do. They may not be the best gags, nor the most hilarious, but I ended up surprised by how much of the 97-minute runtime I spent consistently chuckling at the entertaining silliness being put before me. Jimmy Carr, Patrick Carr, Tim Inman, Andrew Dawson, and Steve Dawson are clearly comfortable, and skilled, when it comes to constructing a selection of jokes. The fact that the plot is slim enough to leave plenty of room for them, yet also constructed well enough to feel like the bones of a proper film, is impressive.

Considering some of his past work (especially having helmed a number of episodes of A Touch Of Cloth), it's no surprise to find that O'Hanlon has a good handle on the material. What is surprising is just how many of the leads trust themselves, and one another, to play things wonderfully straight in the midst of all the stupidity. McKenzie is particularly good in her role, as is Waterston, and they're rivalled by both Radcliffe and Lewis, although the latter can't resist adding a bit of extra ham to his performance at times. Felton almost unsettles things, but just stays within the perimeter of permissible parody behaviour, and things are quickly back on track whenever the focus moves to someone like Laird, Lizzie Hopley, Sue Johnston, or Tom Goodman-Hill (as Inspector Watt, called in when a corpse really puts a dampener on things for those at the titular hall).

It may rarely feel like a proper feature, more likely to be stumbled upon by viewers when it appears somewhere on a streaming service, but it does exactly what it sets out to do. If you know what to expect then you should laugh as much as I did. If you're after something a bit more clever and cinematic then I would encourge you to look elsewhere.

I started this review thinking that I would ultimately finish it off with a "good, but I won't rush to rewatch it" comment. In fact, thinking about how amused I was for the duration, and considering how that is a pleasant distraction from the madness of the real world, I might give it a rewatch soon. There might even be a number of little jokes that I missed the first time around. Which means I MAY one day return to edit this review/rating. I doubt it, but it could happen.

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

Prime Time: Melania (2026)

Considering the fact that Melania is nothing more than a sickening and slick propaganda piece, it would seem inappropriate to review it in a standard way. You cannot watch Melania, if you watch it at all, and not be aware of how much it is just yet another shiny trinket in the overstuffed temple that is the "cult of personality" that has been used by the Trump family to grab power, make themselves richer, and offer up their uneducated and ignorant opinions on platforms that amplify and empower them.

In a world where truth is an increasingly flexible thing, when it really shouldn't be, here are some absolute truths about Melania.

It's a vanity project. Focused on Melania, but also allowing her husband to have a moment or two where he tries (and fails) to come across as a normal human being, all while director Brett Ratner sycophantically bends the knee and shows how much he knows what side his bread is buttered on.

Because, lest we forget, Brett Ratner went very quiet for years, mainly due to a number of women who accused him of sexual assault during the height of the #METOO movement. Separating from Warner Bros., it looked as if Ratner's career might have been all over, but accusations of sexual assault are water off a duck's back when someone is able to become POTUS for a second time after being found guilty of sexual abuse by a jury having to veer just enough away from the word "rape". In fact, a statement from Judge Kaplan did actually affirm that Trump had raped E. Jean Carroll, which makes it seemingly inevitable that Ratner would now find favour in a festering and toxic White House.

There's a lack of self-awareness here that would be laughable if it wasn't so sickeningly contributing to an infection that is turning our entire planet into a broken and bleeding shell that may bear the scars for decades to come. Melania claims that her husband has gone through more than anyone else in history (you'd think he was Joan Of Arc by the way she talks about him). She also takes the opportunity to remind everyone that she loves her family, in a really standard way that doesn't feel alien and robotic at all (honest). She is desperate to save the children, and happily serve the people of America. And did I mention that she thinks her husband is a great man? Because he's apparently a great man. The greatest. 

This is a horror movie, for the most part, and I cannot recommend it to anyone who is outwith the horrific cult of personality that we've seen developed over the past decade or so. All Trump has done since getting the throne he so clearly coveted for many years is fail. His crowds are never as big as he wants them to be, his negotiating "skills" show why he couldn't even make a success out of a casino empire (seriously, it's quite a feat to do that), and his narcissism, xenophobia, and misogyny are impossible to deny, yet we have to watch an entire "documentary" in which Melania acknowledges no imperfections, big or small, in either herself or any part of her family.

Considering how much money Amazon paid for this, and how they are now platforming it, I would implore all of you to once again think about how you use the site. I am currently figuring out how to be a bit more ethical in where my money goes, and made sure to watch this via a portal that would not give Amazon the click or traffic it would use as any metric of viewer numbers, and I encourage you all to do the same. It may now be impossible to extricate ourselves from such an online behemoth, but it's clearly now a moral imperative to work against anyone who considers this a worthwhile investment. 

1/10

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