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

Shudder Saturday: Jack Be Nimble (1993)

I have JUST finished watching Jack Be Nimble and I'm not entirely sure that I can properly explain it to other people. Which is a bit of a problem when it comes to someone who enjoys writing and sharing their movie reviews. I guess I'll give it a good try, but please be understanding of my confusion.

Jack (Alexis Arquette) and Dora (Sarah Smuts-Kennedy) are siblings who become separated at a young age. Jack ends up living with a horrible and abusive couple, Dora ends up getting by until she becomes involved in a relationship with Teddy (Bruno Lawrence). Things get strange and twisted when Jack and Dora reunite. Jack has killed, and seems happy to do so again, and Dora has tapped into some psychic power that makes things even trickier when she is caught between her brother and Teddy. Oh, and there are four daughters seeking vengeance for the death of their parents at the hands of Jack.

Truly bonkers stuff, but not bonkers in a way that is entertaining and fun, nor in a way that is impressively dark and disturbing, Jack Be Nimble is directed and co-written by Garth Maxwell (with some input from Rex Pilgrim), and it's clear that everyone involved was trying to make something unique and memorable. They manage the first part. I cannot think of any movie that I would mention in comparison to this film, but I just wish that there had been more here to draw viewers into the onscreen world. All you get is occasional strangeness. The characters aren't people you want to spend any time with, every subsequent main plot point feels sillier than the one preceding it, and it's visually dark and ugly throughout in a way that feels more like poor choices made than any artistic style.

The cast don't help, sadly. Arquette isn't given enough to work with, and simply has to look angry and resentful at anyone who isn't his sister. Smuts-Kennedy gets a bit more to do, but her character feels far too passive for most of the runtime. Lawrence is good, perhaps arguably too good in comparison to the rest of the cast, and the material itself.

There’s certainly something to be said for films that are so impossible to pigeonhole, and that is what Jack Be Nimble has going for it. Unfortunately, it has nothing else worthwhile for all but the most curious film fans. Horror movie lovers won’t think it spooky or gory enough, fans of the odd will wish it diverged even further from our known reality, and anyone simply looking to experience something wallowing in strangeness can find it in a hundred better movies I could happily point out to you.

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

The Super Mario Galaxy Movie (2026)

Considering how little I cared for The Super Mario Bros. Movie, although I didn't outright hate it, I knew that I wouldn't be in the target demographic for this sequel. There's an extra Princess (Rosalina, voiced by Brie Larson, alongside Princess Peach), an extra baddie (Bowser Junior, voiced by Benny Safdie), and even an appearance from another Nintendo hero, Fox McCloud (voiced by Glen Powell). A lot of people will love it. I am not one of those people, but I will start this review by saying that I slightly preferred it to the first film. Maybe I was in a better mood. Or maybe it's actually a better film.

There's no reason to fully summarise the plot. Mario (Chris Pratt) and Luigi (Charlie Day) are living their best life. Princess Peach (Anya Taylor-Joy) is also happy enough, as are both Toad (Keegan-Michael Key) and a cute little newcomer going by the name of Yoshi (Donald Glover). Bowser (Jack Black) has been kept in a shrunken and harmless form, working through his anger management issues, but he may be the one character able to help everyone when Bowser Junior starts kidnapping royalty and developing a ginormous super-weapon.

It's a good sign, in general, when everyone returns to their main roles for any sequel. As well as the extensive voice cast, writer Matthew Fogel is back for this adventure, as are directors and co-directors Aaron Horvath, Michael Jelenic, Pierre Leduc, and Pabien Polack. They may not be making a film aimed specifically at me, but they certainly know how to make a cute and colourful film that should keep Mario fans amused and entertained throughout. Every scene is bright and busy, but somehow avoids being too much of either, and the score from Brian Tyler, also returning, continues to blend in plenty of reworked game themes and fun audio cues.

Pratt and Day are fine in their roles, but nobody feels like a full-on lead here. This is a sprawling ensemble piece, with plenty of time given to fun moments featuring the other characters. Black is a bit more restrained this time around, but actually works better for it, Safdie is very entertaining, and both Taylor-Joy and Brie are the most excellent princesses since the two excellent princesses won over by the charms of Bill & Ted. As well as Glover and Key, who both work well for their characters, there are enjoyable small roles for Roxana Ortega, Luis Guzmán, Issa Rae, as well as the star cameo from Powell.

If you liked the first movie then you're sure to like this one. Even if you didn't really like the first movie, but didn't hate it either, this might just win you over. Despite cramming in more references for fans of the game series, it somehow feels more free. There's no need to pretend that we need any more "tutorial guide" moments, nor any complicated origin tales, when we can just get to Mario and Luigi wandering around various environments, bashing bricks, being helped by Yoshi, and finding a variety of timely power-ups. I may even end up rewatching the first film, and perhaps warming to it, after enjoying this one so much more.

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

Armageddon (1998)

The odd thing about rewatching Armageddon, a film I have watched a number of times before, is that it is somehow both worse and better than I remember. It's quite ridiculous, but manages to be ridiculous in many right ways to balance out the times that it's ridiculous in many wrong ways.

Most people know the story. There's a giant rock hurtling towards Earth. The only way to save our planet is to travel into space, land on the giant rock, and drill down into it to plant some major explosives. There's no way astronauts could manage that. The world needs the best drilling workers, and those drilling workers come in the shape of Harry S. Stamper (Bruce Willis) and co. There are some lame attempts to make things tense, there's plenty of heroism and "America: F**k Yeah!" throughout almost every main sequence, and you get to remember how much you love or hate Aerosmith singing "I Don't Want To Miss A Thing."

It might be Jonathan Hensleigh and J. J. Abrams credited in the writing department, with a bit of input from Tony Gilroy, Shane Salerno, and Robert Roy Pool, although I couldn't say how much any one person added into the mix. It's easy to see the overwhelming stamp of director Michael Bay all over it though. There's no subtlety, of course, and no desire to keep the action clear and watchable. In fact, I would argue that Armageddon is at its worst when viewers have to suffer through the poorly-shot and messily-edited action beats.

Willis may not be doing his best work, but he's fine in blockbuster star mode. Ben Affleck, playing the younger and more hot-headed "drill Jedi", who also happens to be in love with his boss's daughter, Grace (played by Liv Tyler), is also fine, although he has never been as comfortable in these kinds of films as he is in less mainstream fare. Tyler does what is asked of her, and is a welcome presence, despite being constantly pushed offscreen by the tide of testosterone. The supporting cast is pretty great though. Billy Bob Thornton does well, Will Patton and William Fichtner are both as dependable as ever, and there's a lot of fun to be had with any scene involving Steve Buscemi and/or Peter Stormare. You also get Owen Wilson, Keith David, Michael Clarke Duncan, Jason Isaacs, and very brief appearances from Eddie Griffin, Grace Zabriskie, Udo Kier, Shawnee Smith, and Matt Malloy.

There's plenty of impressive hardware on display, the bombastic score from Trevor Rabin ensures that nobody gets to forget the heroism and machismo of our main characters for even one minute, and John Schwartzman tries hard to impress with cinematography that is undermined by the horrible editing so familiar to anyone who has watched any other Michael Bay movie.

Armageddon is not good, but it's comfortingly ridiculous for a lot of the bloated 151-minute runtime. I would put almost every other Bay movie ahead of it, and there are a number of Bruckheimer-produced movies from this time period I would also put ahead of it, but I cannot deny that I can still happily sit down with it once every ten years or so, like treating myself to an unhealthy bit of fast food that makes me hate myself as soon as I've swallowed the last tasty morsel. 

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: Prom Night III: The Last Kiss (1990)

Are we all allowed to finally acknowledge that Prom Night isn't one of the great slasher movies? There are many times when I would much prefer to watch Prom Night II: Hello Mary Lou. And I can now say that I'd also happily revisit this third film in the series before wanting to go back to the original. It's perfectly fine, does everything that you need from a standard slasher, but both the second and third films are more creative and enjoyable. I assume I will be disappointed by the fourth film, but part of me can't help holding on to a small amount of optimism.

What we have here is something ridiculous and silly from start to finish, but it's also self-aware enough to make everything work. Some may not appreciate the emphasis on comedy in this horror comedy, but I think it works very well in balancing the supernatural horror plot elements with a surprisingly high number of successful gags. 

Courtney Taylor is Mary Lou for this outing, and she's a lot of fun in the role (although I think Lisa Schrage could have done just as good a job, if only she'd been approached with an offer). Returning to her high school, Mary Lou decides to spend her time and energy on Alex Grey (Tim Conlon). Alex has a girlfriend (Sarah, played by Cynthia Preston, billed here as Cyndy Preston), but he also has a number of standard teen problems. Mary Lou can get rid of those problems, but her approach usually results in someone ending up dead.

Ron Oliver moves from his writing work in the previous movie to both writing and co-directing (with Peter R. Simpson) this. It may feel a bit crude and cheap in places, but that is part of the charm. This is a film that shows a young man seduced by a woman offering him easy solutions until he finally figures out just where this path of good intentions ultimately leads, and Oliver has great fun juxtaposing the traditional housewife imagery with entertainingly psychotic set-pieces.

Conlon and Preston are both fine in their roles, and David Stratton, Dylan Neal, and Lesley Kelly are highlights in supporting roles (the latter also the subject of a particularly great running joke about her status as a guidance counselor, as opposed to being a teacher or a "real person"), but the film belongs to Taylor, in her first feature role. Okay, she has the best role, but she also attacks both the comedy and the craziness of it with such gusto that she more than does enough to keep Mary Lou as one of the great "unsung" slasher movie villains in the stacked history of the sub-genre.

I can imagine a lot of horror movie fans being put off by the tone of this one, but I absolutely loved it. I didn't expect it to be so silly and irreverent, but I was absolutely on board when I saw what everyone was aiming for, and how well they were all doing in service of the material.

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

Primate (2025)

If you're going to make a film that owes a strong debt to both Cujo and Halloween then it's quite a good idea to have a rabid chimpanzee at the heart of it, and that's exactly what director Johannes Roberts has done. Having also co-written the screenplay with Ernest Riera, Roberts gives himself every chance to make something that feels nicely in tribute to some classic horrors without seeming to slavishly adhere to their templates.

Lucy (Johnny Sequoyah) and her friends arrive at her isolated Hawaiian home, where she soon has to introduce everyone to the family pet, Ben. Ben is a loving chimpanzee who communicates via a soundboard device. Unfortunately, Ben is bitten by a mongoose, which creates a big problem for Lucy and her friends when they end up trapped by him. Lucy's father (Troy Kotsur) has to spend some time away from home, of course, but he might end up in a race against the clock before the end credits roll.

I tend to like the films of Johannes Roberts. They can be quite silly, but are often silly in just the right way. He also tends to make very good use of whatever financing he manages to arrange. Primate is enjoyably silly, putting the fun premise in a decent location, and it often looks much better than you'd expect something so proudly schlocky to look.

The main problem lies with the cast. They're not bad, but they aren't able to really make any strong impression, aside from being part of the group due to be terrorised by a killer chimp. Sequoyah is joined onscreen by Jessica Alexander, Victoria Wyant, Gia Hunter, Benjamin Cheng, and a few others, but they're very much a group in dire straits, as opposed to individuals working through various problems while trying to stay alive. That's not the worst way this lot could be presented, by the way, and many films have done far worse, but it's the main weakness. The main characters you'll remember once it's all over will probably be the one played by Kotsur and the one played by Miguel Torres Umba (he's the physical performer who does such a great job of pretending to be a chimpanzee). Oh, there's also a memorable uncredited cameo role for Rob Delaney.

There are times when you may be distracted by elements on the screen, either the slight strangeness of the impressive work done to make Ben seem like a real character or one or two moments that go a bit too heavy on the homage (a scene with a couple of characters hiding in a closet being the main offender there), but Roberts generally knows how to keep viewers entertained, and he's delivered a creature feature that feels like a perfect choice for those wanting something simple, tense, and a bit gory, all within a runtime that's just a shade over the 90-minute mark.

I'm not sure this will stand the test of time, but I can see it being well-received by those who either find it on sale or check it out when it hits one of the many streaming services vying for your eyeballs. And I'd happily rewatch it any 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

Mubi Monday: Father Mother Sister Brother (2025)

I don't want to be too quick to dismiss writer-director Jim Jarmusch, but he's certainly been on a bit of a creative downward swing since the fantastic Paterson, which was ten years ago now. And let's not mention The Dead Don't Die. There's a feeling that Jarmusch still enjoys working with the talented collaborators he has befriended over the years, but he may now struggle to come up with a premise truly worthy of their talents.

Father Mother Sister Brother sees Jarmusch returning to the kind of portmanteau form that he's previously used to great effect. I just don't know what to make of it though, although I think it's a look at the unhealthiness of forced family duties. Maybe I'm wrong, but the sections titled "Father" and "Mother" certainly feel more strained and less healthy than the third "Sister Brother" section.

Tom Waits is Father, visited by his son, Jeff (Adam Driver), and daughter, Emily (Mayim Bialik). It's an odd situation, with the children feeling more responsible and parental than the actual parent, but very little actually happens until an amusing enough beat at the very end of the tale. Then it's time for Mother (Charlotte Rampling) to be visited by her two daughters, Lilith (Vicky Krieps) and Timothea (Cate Blanchett). There's a bit more happening here, considering how the two daughters seek approval from their mother, and also from one another, while Lilith tries to hide the fact that she's not exactly in the healthiest of financial situations. Finally, siblings Skye (Indya Moore) and Billy (Luka Sabbat) spend some time reconnecting as they process the recent death of their parents.

There's nothing to fault here when it comes to the performances. Waits, Driver, and Bialik get to play up the awkwardness in a way that is light and fun, Rampling, Krieps, and Blanchett are mesmerising as they take part in what feels like some kind of three-way swordfight on criss-crossing tightropes, and both Moore and Sabbat are nicely relaxed for the majority of their segment. Whether he nails down his dialogue and thematic strands or not, Jarmusch can always rely on his casts to deliver.

Aside from the focus on family, there's also a Rolex watch linking the tales (the same one? doubtful, but it's a possibility) and the feeling that relationships are always inextricably linked to that constant root of all evil, money. It's just a shame that Jarmusch keeps things so light and relatively inconsequential. Especially when he has a lot of people who could have easily enjoyed sinking their teeth into something much more substantial. I didn't dislike the time I spent with this, but I doubt I'll ever want to rewatch it. I'd also be surprised if many Jarmusch fans strongly disagreed with me.

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

Netflix And Chill: Ladies First (2026)

If Ladies First had been made in the 1980s then it might seem like something fun and harmless. It could make use of some comedy stars to have some fun with the deep-rooted problems in a patriarchal society that would seem ripe for an overhaul. As a film released in 2026, however, it's just a depressing reminder of how little progress has been made throughout modern history. And it doesn't have the right lead actor needed to make it an amusing enough distraction.

Sacha Baron Cohen plays a male chauvinist pig named Damien Sachs. Working for a company that needs some better optics, he promotes the talented Alex Fox (Rosamund Pike), but doesn't really want to take note of her good ideas. He doesn't really want her input on anything at all, because he and his colleagues are used to completely ignoring women unless they're trying to sleep with them. That becomes a big problem when Damien hits his head and wakes up in a world where the roles are reversed. Women are in charge, and he will be trapped there until he can figure out a way to get into a top management position.

I actually wondered why I didn't have more fun with this, but writing out that plot summary has clarified things for me. This is a Netflix film based on another Netflix film, "Je Ne Suis Pas Un Homme Facile", which may not seem like a great idea, but there's just about enough talent behind and in front of the camera to make it work. If only anyone involved actually made some effort.

Director Thea Sharrock doesn't do much to liven things up, settling for a reliance on numerous production design gags (various ads using males in very little clothing, Burger Queen, etc.), and writers Natalie Krinsky, Cinco Paul, and Katie Silberman seem so busy having fun with the role reversal concept that they forget to pack in more gags or any storyline that viewers may actually care about. Everything about this, from the obviousness of the jokes to the character names (male character names Sachs, female is Fox, and even a character our lead needs to pursue as he tries to get promotion is named Chase), is lazy.

There are better performances from most of the other players, but Cohen cannot make his main character work, which is a big negative. He can be cocky and rude, believably sexist for most of the runtime, but there's nothing tempering that, either because of the writing or because Cohen cannot manage to add a touch of honey to his sharpness. Pike is much better, but even she is unable to do anything truly great with what she's given. Fiona Shaw presents a riff on a character that she's done a number of times before (she's very good at being the polite Brit who also happens to be struggling to contain a burning passion), Richard E. Grant is amusing enough as he portrays "Pigeon Man", and there are decidedly okay turns from Emily Mortimer, Tom Davis, Charles Dance, Bill Paterson, and Kathryn Hunter, to namecheck the main faces I recognised.

I had heard bad things about this before I pressed play, but I figured that it was just being dismissed by people who weren't in the mood for some silliness. I was wrong. Silly isn't bad. Silly and lazy and unfunny is bad. Did I smirk a couple of times? Yes. Did I laugh enough times to be able to rate this as a comedy? Not even close.

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: This Is Not A Test (2025)

Adapted from a YA novel by Courtney Summers, This Is Not A Test comes to the screen via writer-director Adam MacDonald. He's done quite a bit of horror before this, and can be very good in the genre, but you wouldn't necessarily know it from this.

It's zombie outbreak time yet again, and a group of teens end up hiding out in a school building. One of them (Sloane, played by Olivia Holt) seems to spend most of her time thinking about her past life, one in which she had to put up with an abusive father (Jeff Roop), but also spent a fair bit of time with a loving older sister, Lily (Joelle Farrow). That's really all you need to know.

Although I'm unfamiliar with the source text, I'm tempted to assume that MacDonald didn't have the greatest material to work with. There's no other reason for this being as bad as it is, unless you were trying to stay true to something that just wasn't very good. The school setting has excellent potential, considering the dividing line between adults and children in that environment, as well as the various divisions between the children themselves, but nothing is used effectively here.

Viewers are instead stuck alongside a group of characters who are, at best, painfully uninteresting. At worst, they're annoying enough to make you want to root for some of the zombies. I struggled to care about a single person onscreen, aside from Holt's character, and that's at least partly to do with how little they're given to actually do, aside from bicker and fight amongst themselves for what seems like most of the runtime.

Holt at least feels worthy of the lead role, and she's already been involved in some other projects that will help this to vanish from memory soon enough. Others around her are played by Froy Gutierrez, Carson MacCormac, Chloe Avakian, and Corteon Moore, and I wouldn't be able to tell you what they managed to bring to their roles. In fact, I doubt I would recognise them right now. This is the kind of film that turns the end credits into the equivalent of the memory-erasing flashy thing used by the Men In Black. Roop and Farrow both fare a bit better, and Luke Macfarlane livens things up a bit for his few scenes at about the halfway point.

This should have either been more fun, maybe a bit livelier (no pun intended), or a bit darker. YA fans can handle dark content. I've seen most of the movies aimed at that demographic (hey, I'm often happy to watch anything and everything out there) and I know that some of the better ones are not afraid to tackle some very serious and dark themes. This isn't one of the better ones, and that's possibly down to MacDonald not having faith in the audience. Or it's weak source material that nobody decided to overhaul. Either way, this is one to avoid unless you've exhausted most of your other viewing options.

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

You, Me & Tuscany (2026)

This may not be your first choice when it comes to a film to take up 105 minutes of your time, and it wasn't my first choice either, but You, Me & Tuscany aims to be a sunny and soppy bit of fun pairing up two leads that hopefully have enough charm to win over most viewers. How much fun you have with the film will depend on whether or not you DO consider the leads charming though.

Halle Bailey plays Anna, a young woman who tries to make a living from house-sitting. She's not great at it though, especially when caught in the act of wearing clothes that belong to someone she is working for. Down on her luck, majorly down in her finances, and considering some time away from it all, Anna enjoys an evening in the company of Matteo (Lorenzo de Moor), who convinces her to take a long-overdue holiday to Italy. Once there, Anna takes a bit of a liberty, however, by staying at Matteo's empty villa. And a couple of Matteo's relatives pop in while Anna is trying on a ring that she found in the villa, leading to the obvious idea that Anna is due to marry Matteo. Soon enjoying time with the family, and unable to reveal the truth, things become more complicated when Anna falls for Matteo's cousin (actually more like a brother), Michael (Regé-Jean Page).

Written by Ryan Engle, fleshing out a story co-created with his wife, Kristin, You, Me & Tuscany is very silly and fanciful stuff from start to finish. I doubt anyone will start watching this without having an idea of where it will all end, but it's a shame that there are absolutely no surprises placed anywhere throughout the story, and too few laughs, despite the opportunity for them to be more liberally scattered around. It's a Christmas TV movie in a summer dress. You get the deceased parent, and the weight of their memory. You get the woman travelling somewhere out of her comfort zone, destine for a meet-cute with an unbelievably charming and good-hearted man. There's the sassy and fun best friend (played by Aziza Scott, sadly relegated to being present only via text message form for most of the runtime).And there's heavy-handed messaging about following your heart, being true to yourself, and becoming part of a new family unit.

It may not be the best feature helmed by director Kat Coiro, but she at least makes good use of some beautiful and sunny locations, although a couple of main interiors may have helped to keep the budget lower than it could have been. It's not at all cinematic, but it's generally cute and mildly enjoyable.

Bailey is decent in her role, as is Page, and the two leads certainly have some chemistry. It's not always there, anything too passionate dampened by the safe and sanitised approach to the material, but it appears just enough to make their will they/won't they journey something that viewers can feel invested in. Lorenzo de Moor has fun as he gets to appear both good and bad to people, and Marco Calvani is a highlight, portraying a friendly and useful Italian cab driver. Isabella Ferrari, Paolo Sassanelli, and Stefania Casini all feel believable enough as, respectively, the mother, father, and grandmother of Matteo, and Stella Pecollo is a lot of fun as Francesca, someone with an odd view on just what makes a happy marriage.

Some will find this pleasant enough. I can't imagine anyone being a huge fan of it though. It's decidedly average in every way, the kind of film that will probably only be remembered by people when it's picked up by a streaming service and given some promotion in one of their prime spots.

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
 

Milk & Serial (2024)

Although I am just getting around to writing this review now, I actually made time to watch Milk & Serial before getting along to the cinema to see Obsession. I had already heard good things about it when it landed on YouTube in 2024, but I wasn't convinced that it would work for me. Then Curry Barker's name started to get quite a bit of heat attached to it, which made me realise I would be better arriving late to the party than not turning up at all.

This is the tale of Milk (Barker, who also wrote and directed the thing) and his friend, Seven (Cooper Tomlinson). They're a couple of YouTube personalities who keep themselves busy doing YouTube personality things. Basically, the kind of nonsense I try to avoid watching. Things keep getting wilder though, and viewers get to discover a number of twisted secrets as Milk and Seven spend some time trying to get one over on each other.

Clocking in at just over an hour, and with a budget that was apparently comfortably under $1000, Milk & Serial may not have been the lazy mess I was thinking it might be back when it was first released. It's not really a calling card that could have led to people expecting something as good as Obsession either though. Barker helps himself immensely by working in an environment he seems comfortable in, and there's something running through the premise that makes it that bit more plausible because of who the main characters are, but that also means that some of the standard YouTube prankster moments feel as cringe-inducing and narcissistic as YouTube prankster moments usually feel (to me). Thankfully, the developing darkness, and moments of creative nastiness, soon overshadow the more vapid and lighter first act.

Barker and Tomlinson both do very well in their lead roles, although it's the former who impresses more, and getting the easier job because of having all of the facts available and spending more time talking directly to the camera. Jonnathon Cripple is also very good, playing a man who becomes caught up in what I'll horribly mislabel a "prank war", and there are decent performances from Adlih Alvarado, Sterling L. Pope, and John Simmonds, as well as one or two others, all working hard to present things in a way that feels as natural as can be when everyone is aware of a camera pointed in their direction.

While I wasn't blown away by this, and spent some time wondering why it garnered quite so much praise when it first appeared, I must admit that I've been more impressed with it as I've spent some more time thinking about it. I would have had a much stronger reaction to it if, like many others, I'd been surprised by this after following the many short videos done by Barker and Tomlinson on their YouTube channel. You may think it's quite simple, and technically crude, for a lot of the runtime, but Barker and co. actually work a lot of nice little touches and details throughout that make it smarter and more disturbing than it initially seems. 

I recommend this to people who are now hearing all the love for Obsession. You don't have to watch this one first, but it's interesting to see what works here, and just how much he improves in every area for his breakout hit.

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: Balls Up (2026)

If you want to know the level of care and thought that went into writing and directing Balls Up then you should know that it's set during a football world cup tournament in Brazil. In 2025. I'm no great follower of sports, and certainly no football expert, but even I know that the World Cup has taken place every four years since it began back in 1930 (with the exception of a couple of tournaments that were not played due to a little historical event known as WWII). 

Directed by Peter "How Far The Mighty Can Fall" Farrelly, and written by Paul Wernick and Rhett Reese (two men who have proven that they could be funny on past projects), this tall tale concerns Brad (Mark Wahlberg) and Elijah (Paul Walter Hauser), two men who are aiming to make their latest prophylactic (one that covers both testicles as well as the shaft of the penis) the only one to be features in the World Cup final. Things don't go to plan though, and Brad and Elijah soon end up stumbling from one mess to another, seemingly pursued by every Brazilian football fan.

I never thought I would say this, but I think Mark Wahlberg needs a Ted 3 to save him before he hits any new lows that he won't be able to come back from. It's almost as if he's become so enslaved by the streaming services, and their paychecks (of course), that he has forgotten how the movie business works when it comes to stars maintaining their value. I could be very wrong, but right now . . . if Wahlberg was a stock market commodity then people would be selling their shares before the inevitable spiral and crash. Hauser is also devaluing himself, but he at least has a fairly varied selection of features that offer him a chance to hold on to enough goodwill until another upswing saves him from potential obscurity. 

It's not just the leads who dive into this bog of eternal stench, however, and both Benjamin Bratt and Sacha Baron Cohen should have a stern word with their agents. At least Bratt isn't onscreen for much of the runtime. Cohen is a big presence in the middle third, sadly, and does nothing to stop it from being a fairly laugh-free zone. Molly Shannon made me smile a few times, there's an amusing voice cameo from Larry David, but Eric André, Chelsey Crisp, Jackson Tozer, Daniela Melchior, and Eva De Dominici are sorely mistreated by a screenplay that's stinkier than Pepe Le Pew in self-defence mode.

If you're after some simple laughs then the opening scenes may give you some hope. There's nothing smart or gut-busting there, but at least one or two moments are entertainingly silly without having to feel connected to a whole wide world outwith the workplace environment. I'd advise you not to let that sense of hope fool you though. Sometimes, yes, hope can set you free, but it can just as easily set you up for a plunge into mirth-free darkness and pain. And that is what you get here. 

I was going to rate this a 2/10 for the opening scenes, but I decided to generously bump it up by one because I admit that I chuckled when Wahlberg and Hauser were shown performing a karaoke version of "Somebody That I Used To Know". Others may not be so easily amused, although there's a chance that my reaction was akin to someone being given a sip of water after three days wandering through a desert. Consider yourself duly warned.

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

The Mandalorian And Grogu (2026)

I guess I am what you would call a very casual Star Wars fan nowadays. I have seen all of the previous live-action feature films. Even those focused on the ewoks (hey, I was young, it was the thing to do before we had so much more content to enjoy). I've seen the first season of The Mandalorian. And I've even sat through the infamous The Star Wars Holiday Special. I couldn't name you every minor character though, and I certainly couldn't answer questions on the timeline and shifting politics of the Star Wars universe. So I went along to see The Mandalorian And Grogu with the hope that it wouldn't rely on me being some kind of expert on the main subjects.

Fortunately, this doesn't ask much of viewers. Unfortunately, you could argue that it's far too insubstantial. I've already seen other people comment (quite rightly) that it feels a bit flat and un-cinematic.

Co-written by director Jon Favreau, Dave Filoni, and Noah Kloor, this adventure puts our titular characters in jeopardy when The Mandalorian (voiced, and infrequently given a face, by Pedro Pascal) is asked to rescue Rotta the Hutt (voiced by Jeremy Allen White). Doing that should gain him some information about the whereabouts of a valuable individual. He also has to look after little Grogu, of course. Or will things happen that require Grogu to look after The Mandalorian?

This looks okay, and it's an entertaining distraction, but that's the best I can say about it. Nothing really feels as if it's envisioned as spectacle on the big screen, some character designs really work against some of the action in the third act (Hutts are better as mob boss types than fighters), and none of the pretend peril ever really works. Let's face it, this is still a fillm aimed at younger viewers, despite the 12A rating here in the UK, and nobody wants to make a decision that would ruin any future adventures and merchandising opportunities.

Pascal is a comforting presence throughout, even if he's not often fully visible, and White delivers an excellent vocal performance, as do the likes of Stephen McKinley Henderson, Shirley Henderson, and even Martin Scorsese. Sigourney Weaver adds another huge sci-fi franchise to her filmography, doing well with her relatively small role, and Jonny Coyne is entertainingly untrustworthy when he's onscreen. Most of the humanoids are easy to forget whenever Grogu is in the middle of the action though. It's a good job that they're as cute as ever, because the film wouldn't work otherwise. I'll also mention composer Ludwig Göransson here, thanks to the score feeling like an important supporting character throughout.

I like Favreau. I believe that he would have made this with good intentions. Those seem to have dissipated quickly though. While The Mandalorian And Grogu certainly gives fans of the duo some more time in their company, which is the minimum you'd expect, it doesn't work as a film. Nothing feels majorly different between the start and the end of the movie, and I might have enjoyed this more if it was marketed and made available as a special in between seasons of the TV show, or maybe a special providing a nice way to end the TV show. Which is what it is, basically.  

Keep an eye out on my rating for this though, I may actually end up liking it more when I rewatch it in the comfort of my own home. 

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: Sirāt (2025)

There's something so unexpectedly brilliant about Sirāt that it feels silly to try and convey the sensation of it in words. It needs heat, it needs something to cause disorientation, and it needs a pleasingly thumping bassline that grows and growls and starts to shake your internal organs as it increases to levels that you suspect will create some kind of fissure in your soul. Not that you would mind, because that would be a life-changing scar that would immediately align you with other travellers through such a transcendental experience.

Mixing the heavenly and the hellish, Sirāt is all about a father, Luis (Sergi López), in search of a missing daughter. He is travelling through some Moroccan desert landscapes with his son, Esteban (Bruno Núñez Arjona), and they soon become linked to a group of ravers who may be of some assistance. Or maybe they'll be too busy basking in the glow of their desert dance beats.

Although the film defies any simple description, I am going to say that it at least comes within touching distance of something that blends together Walkabout and Eden, with a couple of sequences that even brought to mind the towering classic that is The Wages Of Fear. Director Oliver Laxe, who also shares a writing credit with Santiago Fillol, seems to have gone for mood over everything else, but it's hard to argue with his approach when the end result is this good.

Despite the bright sunlight, the loud music, and the people who wander in and out of the frame, Sirāt often feels unnerving and dangerous. It's the feature film equivalent of an intense dry thunderstorm, and the few lightning strikes are all the more impressive and worrying because of the lack of any expected rainfall.

Populated by a large number of non-professionals, although you wouldn't know it from their performances, the whole thing is anchored easily enough by López, who does a brilliant job portraying someone trying to stay calm and in control while he is gradually moved further and further out of his comfort zone. Young Arjona does well alongside him, but he's slightly pushed aside when the camera decides to spend time with Jade Oukid, Stefania Gadda, Tonin Janvier, Joshua Liam Henderson, and Richard Bellamy, all absolutely brilliant as "the ravers".

Having read back through what I've just written, I'm still not sure that I've come close to describing just what a strange and confusing and satisfying experience watching this film is. You'll just have to see it for yourself. But make sure your volume is turned up for those moments of thumping bass, and don't expect to be able to easily discuss it with others once you've decided whether you liked it or not. 

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: Remarkably Bright Creatures (2026)

A film based on a book (written by Shelby Van Pelt), there have been very few films in the past few years that I have realised were based on a book from the very opening moments. The main conceit here, a story presented, and sometimes narrated, by an octopus (voiced by Alfred Molina, no less) practically screams "THIS WORKS A LOT BETTER IN CUTE AND QUIRKY BOOK FORM". There's a cosy feeling here, but it's definitely a cosiness that I would appreciate more in a book than in a film, and the talented cast cannot do enough to make up for the lack of any real substance in the material.

Sally Field plays Tova, an elderly woman who spends a lot of her time being very good at her job, a cleaner at a local aquarium. That's where she has developed a bond with an elderly octopus named Marcellus (voiced by Molina). Things start to change when Tova is injured, forcing her to take some time off work just as Cameron Cassmore (Lewis Pullman) rolls into town in a van that breaks down. Cameron needs a job, which means that he needs to spend quite a bit of time with Tova. 

Directed by Olivia Newman, who also co-wrote the screenplay with John Whittington, this is a film I would only recommend to people who are fans of anyone involved. As well as Field, Pullman, and Molina, you have decent screentime for Colm Meaney and Sofia Black-D'Elia. While they're not given the best material to work with, they're given enough to make spending some time with them a pleasant enough experience.

In fact, all of the main performances are pitched exactly where they need to be. Field is sweet and caring, for the most part, but also has moments in which she is abrasive and lashing out at anyone close to her, and Pullman continues to display the same kind of likability and easygoing demeanour as his famous father. Meaney is a lot of fun as a source of local knowledge for Pullman's character, as well as someone with more than a passing interest in our leading lady, and Black-D'Elia is introduced in an amusing enough meet-cute moment that signifies how she may become an integral part of the storyline. Joan Chen, Kathy Baker, and Beth Grant are members of the wonderfully-named "Knitwits", and there are one or two other individuals who do well enough with very small amounts of screentime.

I cannot say I disliked this. But a large part of that was tied to how much I like Pullman onscreen. I also cannot say that I liked it though. The script is a bit flat, and that's before you consider the horribly predictable and clumsy way in which everything is tied together neatly in the third act, and Newman doesn't do anything that supports the cast, aside from some nice shots of octopi and some other marine creatures.

And I should end this review by admitting that it took an observant comment from a friend to make me realise how enjoyably meta and cute having Molina voicing Marcellus was. He has a good voice for the role anyway, but Doc Ock delivering the ock talk feels like a deliberate extra treat.

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

Shudder Saturday: T Blockers (2023)

This is the third or fourth film that I've seen from trans film-maker Alice Maio Mackay. I wish I had nicer things to say about it, and I wish I had nicer things to say about her career. Unfortunately, Mackay doesn't seem to have developed much in her first few years or film-making, although she has the advantage of youth on her side, having helmed her first feature when she was only 16 years old.

T Blockers is a film about Sophie (Lauren Last) and her friend, Spencer (Lewis Dawson), trying to survive when a parasite starts infecting local men, turning them even more dangerous than usual. There are parallels between the unfolding events and an old (lost) film directed by another trans film-maker that Sophie has been researching. 

While there are a number of interesting ideas mixed in here (trans rights, of course, but also toxic masculinity being pushed to a deadly extreme, different forms of abuse, and the value of artistic pioneers speaking to those who don't often see themselves properly viewed and represented), Mackay doesn't have the budget, nor the savvy, to make use of them as well as she should. There's inherent value in this being a trans film that speaks to the trans experience, undoubtedly, but nothing else really works. That's a real shame, because Mackay has positioned herself as someone with a very valuable platform, and I'd love to see her do something to fulfil her potential. Maybe it's already happened in one of her other features, and I guess that being able to keep making movies is the only way she can keep hold of that chance to improve until delivering something truly worthwhile.

Last and Dawson are fine in the lead roles, working hard to overcome the many obvious limitations around them, and Toshiro Glenn does well as one of the very few decent men shown onscreen. Stanley Browning is an entertaining POS, and there are a number of cool scenes showing off an artist named Etcetera Etcetera speaking directly to camera in the role of Cryptessa.

It's a real shame that almost nothing else about the film works. The standard genre elements are mishandled, bordering on incompetent at times. The blending of the story strands is clumsy, at best. Even the commentary on the trans experience, and the prejudices of those who cannot empathise with people of different sexes or genders, is disappointingly weak. The only moments I enjoyed revolved around the exploration of the "film within a film", and even that could have been improved by putting even more focus on it. 

I'll keep watching the movies made by Mackay, and I'll keep being optimistic, but I'll keep wanting more from her until she tries harder to make the most of the opportunities that seem to have been afforded to her. 

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