Showing posts with label alfred molina. Show all posts
Showing posts with label alfred molina. Show all posts

Sunday, 24 May 2026

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

Wednesday, 23 April 2025

Prime Time: Identity (2003)

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

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

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

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

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

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

9/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Tuesday, 22 March 2022

Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)

If you have made it this long without having Spider-Man: No Way Home spoiled for you then I congratulate you. I'll also try not to spoil anything here, although that makes this review a little bit trickier. I AM going to work on the assumption that most people saw one or two of the trailers, revealing some familiar villains coming back to our screens.

The basic plot concerns Peter Parker/Spiderman (Tom Holland) having quite a miserable time of things, all because of the repercussions from his battle with Mysterio. Everyone knows who he is, and everyone has a view on his actions. Some of them believe the lie fabricated by Mysterio. Some don't. What's worse is that it's not just affecting Peter, but also the ones closest to him. His friend Ned (Jacob Batalon) and his girlfriend, MJ (Zendaya), are guilty by association, which leads to them being unable to get into the colleges they have applied for. Desperate for things to go back to how they were, Peter heads to Dr. Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) and asks him to cast a spell that will make people forget who he is. The spell goes just a bit wrong, resulting in our universe being invaded by characters who have met other incarnations of Spiderman in other universes.

Director Jon Watts and writers Chris McKenna and Erik Sommers may not have been the only people shepherding this Spiderman through his latest cinematic trilogy, but they have certainly been there for each instalment, helping to maintain the balance of light fun and major peril that our friendly neighbourhood Spiderman has dealt with over the past few years. This is the darkest of the new Spidey films yet, but it still allows plenty of time for humour, and it still incorporates a bright, solid, colour palette for the majority of the runtime. It helps enormously that Holland has a brightness to him that lights the screen further whenever he's not being beaten down by overwhelming odds.

Holland does his best work yet here (in these movies, I'm not talking about his entire career), moving from lighter moments to moments that are all the more heartbreaking because of his vulnerability, and it's hard to imagine what the bigwigs will plan next for the character. They clearly have to keep making the most of having Holland in the role, but this feels like a tough one to top. And yet, somewhat paradoxically, it's far from the best Spiderman movie. It's overlong, it's overstuffed, it's all just a bit overdone, and the third act has to ensure that every single character gets at least one satisfying moment. And the CGI is equally overdone, even if it is generally at a very high standard.

As well as Holland, both Zendaya and Batalon are as good as they have been in the previous movies. Cumberbatch has fun, playing a strong supporting role. And there’s pure joy in seeing the return of characters played by Alfred Molina, Willem Dafoe, Jamie Foxx, Thomas Haden Church, and Rhys Ifans, with each actor appearing to relish the opportunity to give their character a better resolution. Marisa Tomei remains an excellent Aunt May, doing her best to help and protect her nephew as danger crowds around them. And there are at least three other cameos/supporting turns that will have fans enthralled and delighted while the screen is loaded up with one treat upon another.

It’s clear that this has been made with the aim of really pleasing fans of the web-slinger, especially those who have enjoyed every one of his modern cinematic outings. Pretty much every big rumour you already heard about is true, but that doesn’t lessen the impact of every wonderful moment, whether big or small. It’s just a shame that it feels like a bit too much, this is a film that would have worked better split into two. It’s stimulation overload, just barely allowing the quieter, more sombre, moments time to breathe. That doesn’t mean that it’s not great, it just also feels slightly exhausting as you move towards the inevitably super-busy third act.

With great film-making tools comes great responsibility. The people putting this extravaganza together have been very careful to treat the characters with care. They just weren’t quite so careful with the pacing and the excess of visual effects.

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

Friday, 18 March 2022

Maverick (1994)

Springboarding from the old TV show (not one I have ever actually seen), Maverick is a comedy Western that coasts along on the charm of the leads, rejigs a lot of the classic Western tropes in ways that subvert them for comic effect, and entertains from start to finish. It's the kind of film that has the feeling of good humour and camaraderie emanating off the screen, and I think it's one that too many people seem to have forgotten about already.

Mel Gibson plays Bret Maverick, a cowboy who lives for the thrill of the draw. The draw of cards from a deck. He’s a gambler, and one who makes more money by acting naive. He also stays alive by acting cowardly, avoiding fights whenever he can. But being unwilling to fight everyone who wants a fight doesn’t mean that Maverick is incapable. He’s actually quick and sharp with a gun, and his wit. Alongside a couple of other main characters (Annabelle Bransford, played by Jodie Foster, among them), Maverick is aiming to get his place at a major poker tournament set to take place on a riverboat. He needs his entry fee, he needs to avoid people who are dead set against him taking part, and he needs to keep lady luck on his side.

Directed by Richard Donner and written by William Goldman, the marriage of expertise both behind and in front of the camera makes this a real treat. It’s easygoing - the more tense and dangerous encounters remain focused on being cinematic, without needing to add grit or any complete revisionism - and the story hits all of the expected beats without feeling tiresome. Goldman has given us better scripts, undoubtedly, but this is a film that really plays to his strengths, and subsequently rewards anyone who appreciates his writing skills (which should be pretty much everyone).

Gibson gives a star turn up there with the best of his star turns, charming and cheeky and always one step ahead of people who think he is two steps behind. He’s a reluctant hero, always making time to sigh and roll his eyes before endangering his life to help others. Foster isn’t quite as good, playing her scheming “Southern belle” character in a way that fails to light up the screen as it should. She improves as the film goes on though, and her comedy chops work better whenever she is verbally sparring with Gibson. James Garner is welcome in his strong supporting role, especially as he brings the baggage of his performance in the main role when it was a TV show, and the rest of the cast is stuffed full of great actors and faces from the Western genre. James Coburn, Dennis Fimple, Denver Pyle, Leo Gordon, and many others are all given some screentime. There’s a great villainous turn from Alfred Molina, a very fun cameo from Danny Glover, and a hilarious sequence with Graham Greene helping the main character to scam some money from a rich hunter. Add in small turns from Geoffrey Lewis, Art LaFleur, Dan Hedaya, and Max Perlich and you have a non-stop parade of great turns.

There’s also a playful Randy Newman score, a number of impressive stunts (including an excellent runaway coach sequence), players winning poker with hand that defy astronomical odds, and occasional glimpses of classic cowboy gun-handling. And it all adds up to a fun time, one that doesn’t even feel overlong with a 2+ hour runtime because you are rarely left without a smile on your face as things play out.

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

Tuesday, 17 November 2020

The Da Vinci Code (2006)

Dan Brown is not Charles Dickens. He's no Brontë. No Stephen King. Even when it comes to thrillers, he's not as good as the likes of Patricia Cornwell, Lee Child, or even (when he's on form) Dean Koontz. But that's not to say that his writing is terrible. He has amassed a huge fanbase over the years, and a lot of that stems from the success of The Da Vinci Code, a thriller that blended some fact with a whole lot of fiction in a way that intrigued readers and made them feel as if they were becoming a bit smarter while the plot became dumber and dumber. That kind of success is very easy to turn your nose up at (especially when you recognise the formula that Brown has used in almost every one of his books, and I have read, and enjoyed,  Deception Point, Digital Fortress, and three of his Langdon adventures, the ones that have so far been adapted into movies), but it also happens for a reason.  Brown knows how to thread together ludicrous plot points into something that is entertaining and thrilling.

You could say the same of director Ron Howard, who has been at the helm of numerous hit movies throughout his career. It's also easy to turn your nose up at many of his works, but they're often hugely popular for similar reasons. Howard is a pro when it comes to the technical side of things, and when it comes to crafting moments of cinematic emotional manipulation. Has he made any absolute classics? You can be the judge of that, but if he's not made one movie that you would always enjoy if you caught it randomly on the TV then I'd be very surprised.

So Howard directing the cinematic adaptation of the book that really made Dan Brown a household name was surely always a guarantee of a blockbuster hit. Put Tom Hanks in the role of Robert Langdon and what could possibly go wrong? Not much, actually, not much at all.

It's a simple enough premise, a straightforward journey complicated by numerous obstacles and twists. Langdon is called to a murder scene inside the Louvre, and that sets him on a quest to both clear his name and find the Holy Grail, which seems to have had its location hidden away in a number of coded messages over the years. Langdon is accompanied by Sophie Neveu (Audrey Tautou), and hopes to enlist the help of and old friend, Sir Leigh Teabing (Ian McKellen), as he tries to continue evading Captain Fache (Jean Reno), a self-flagellating albino monk named Silas (Paul Bettany), and others who are in hot pursuit.

Although Howard is in the big chair for this, a lot of the credit should be shared by everyone involved. This is a film that makes it clear just how much care and attention has gone into every department, from the props and design to the casting, and it's also got a gorgeous score by Hans Zimmer. Brown came up with the source material, but Akiva Goldsman does a superb job of making things more cinematic. The twists and turns are nicely handled, the exposition delivered in ways that don't let the film feel as if it has come grinding to a halt, and Hanks and Tautou are a winning pairing in the lead roles.

The supporting cast aren't half bad either. Reno works with an ambiguous character who may have an agenda of his own while he tracks our hero, McKellen has fun with a character who is oh-so-English that it's positively precious, and Bettany is an intriguing presence. Alfred Molina and Jürgen Prochnow also have good parts to play, with the latter involved in a set-piece that emphasises how silly some of the plotting can be, which doesn't necessarily make things any less fun.

It's very easy to mock and dismiss the Dan Brown books. It's also very easy to mock and dismiss the movies based on his books (and I know many complained at the time that Tautou seemed a bit wasted in her role, I think she remains a plus, thanks to her sheer screen presence). Maybe try to see how many positives there are, and simply accept the fact that being a crowd-pleasing work of art is almost always far removed from being the best work of art, but isn't any less worthy when it comes to having made people feel happy and entertained.

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

Saturday, 7 March 2020

Shudder Saturday: Paint It Black (2016)

There's nothing inherently wrong with Paint It Black. Nothing that makes it stand out as a terrible film. In fact, I'd say quite the opposite. The cast, the performances, the script, it's all good stuff. Which makes it a shame that I, and many others, end up discovering it on Shudder. Although I am always happy for Shudder to show work that pushes at the boundaries of horror (and they've included a number of Japanese crime movies that aren't really horror at all, but either have moments of horrific violence or simply have that crossover appeal), Paint It Black isn't a film that horror genre fans will enjoy, if they're expecting a horror film. Or even a film with some elements of horror. This is not one of those films.

Alia Shawkat plays Josie, a young woman who ends up rocked by the sudden death of her boyfriend, Michael (Rhys Wakefield). While trying to process her feelings, she ends up at loggerheads with Michael's mother, Meredith (Janet McTeer). Meredith wants to find someone to blame for the death of her son, wants to share memories of him, and wants to prove that she retained a strong bond with him, despite mounting evidence to the contrary.

I'll admit that it took me a bit longer than it could have to warm up to Paint It Black. I initially wondered where the horror elements were going to come into play. When I realised that this wasn't a horror movie, not by any stretch of the imagination, I settled into it more easily, enjoying it more for what it was than what I expected it to be.

The first feature directed by Amber Tamblyn (who has been acting onscreen for over two decades now), Paint It Black is an impressively interesting and unique work. Tamblyn also helped to shape the script with Ed Dougherty, adapting the book by Janet Fitch, and she shows a real knack for treating dark drama in a way that is thoughtful, stylish, and a step removed from the norm.

It helps that the cast is so good. Shawkat puts in yet another great performance (when has she ever been bad?) and McTeer attacks her role with gusto, giving and taking the hits in her battle of wills with Shawkat. Wakefield does well enough to make his presence more impactful than it otherwise could have been, Alfred Molina pops up to steal a couple of scenes in a supporting role, and Simon Helberg does exactly the opposite.

Grief is processed by people in many different ways, and that can depend on many different factors. This is what Paint It Black scrutinises, and it's not necessarily saying one person has more right to grieve in their way than any other. Yes, there is one character here who is certainly a villain of the piece (almost a pantomime villain, at points), but things go on longer than they would because of others trying to offer them room to battle through the grieving process in their own way.

This is definitely worth your time, and I'll look forward to whatever Tamblyn does next when she's behind the camera, but you can't go into it expecting a horror movie, or something even containing a hint of the supernatural. That will only lead to disappointment, does a disservice to both the film and the viewer, and may stop you seeing a great little drama for what it is.

7/10


Wednesday, 14 August 2013

The Pink Panther 2 (2009)

Following on from the 2006 movie, obviously enough, Steve Martin returns to the character of the bumbling Inspector Clouseau in this amusing sequel that I think is just as good as the previous movie. Be warned, however, that I seem to be the only person who thinks this way. Most other people would like to take both films and burn them on a small pyre before returning to their happy place with some help from the classic films starring Peter Sellers.

This time around, a number of audacious thefts have been committed by The Tornado, a legend in the criminal world. Nobody knows who The Tornado is, but a dream team is assembled to put a stop to the crimewave. That dream team consists of Vicenzo (Andy Garcia), Pepperidge (Alfred Molina), Kenji (Yuki Matsuzaki) and Sonia (Aishwara Rai Bachchan). And Clouseau. When he's not busy driving Dreyfuss (played by John Cleese this time) up the wall, upsetting the lovely Nicole (Emily Mortimer) and sparring with his assistant, Ponton (Jean Reno), he's either showing how much of a calamity he is or, strangely enough, how sharp his mind can be.

A few people jumped ship in between the previous film and this one, which isn't ever a reassuring sign, but if you enjoyed the first film then I can't imagine you hating this one. Oh, you're unlikely to enjoy it as much as I did (so I have discovered), but there's plenty of fun to be had. The script, by Scott Neustadter, Michael H. Weber and Steve Martin, has plenty of decent lines peppered throughout and the direction by Harald Zwart is competent enough for something this lightweight.

The cast all look suitably worn down by Martin's chaotic character, with Andy Garcia especially good fun in his role and Aishwara Rai Bachchan having fun as the distractingly beautiful member of the team who is also an expert on The Tornado. John Cleese is okay as Dreyfuss, though he never seems quite as exasperated as Kevin Kline did in the previous movie (who never seemed quite as exasperated as Herbert Lom, the actor most associated with the role). Martin, Reno and Mortimer are all very good, and the supporting cast includes Jeremy Irons, onscreen for just a few minutes, and Lily Tomlin, playing someone who tries to help Clouseau adjust his attitude to women and people from other nations.

There's no denying that this is Steve Martin wayyyyyyyyy past his prime, coasting along and working with material that's often beneath him, but I still find it enjoyable and entertaining. Part of that will undoubtedly be down to just how highly I think of Martin. But part of it might be, just MIGHT be, down to the fact that the film isn't actually as bad as most people make out.

6/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Pink-Panther-Double-Pack/dp/B008N6EUNG/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1376507915&sr=8-4&keywords=the+pink+panther+2