Showing posts with label angeli macfarlane. Show all posts
Showing posts with label angeli macfarlane. Show all posts

Monday, 6 October 2025

Mubi Monday: Animals (2019)

When I saw that Alia Shawkat was one of the leads in Animals then I knew I had to watch it as soon as possible. It turns out that Holliday Grainger is an equally good lead performer, which made this even more enjoyable than I expected it to be.

Based on the novel by Emma Jane Unsworth, Animals is the tale of two close friends who seem to spend their time drinking, amusing one another, and keeping a distance from others they can then safely mock without pangs of painful self-awareness. Shawkat is Tyler, a superb and fierce force to be reckoned with. Normality and social norms are obstacles to be faced and overcome. Grainger is Laura, a writer who seems to be stuck on the actual writing part. She takes many notes, but hasn't put anything down that even comes close to resembling the start of her debut novel. Things start to change when Laura meets Jim (Fra Fee), a pianist who is happy to live a fairly normal life in between his times impressing people with his piano-playing prowess.

Having only seen one other film directed by Sophie Hyde (Good Luck To You, Leo Grande), and nothing else yet written by Unsworth, I was drawn to this by the cast alone. They are fantastic, but there's an energy and truth to the writing that makes me keen to try other material written by Unsworth. She may still need a good enough cast to help get everything successfully from page to screen, but the characters and observations are so well-crafted here that I wanted to spend more time exploring them all. I hope I can find similar satisfaction in other Unsworth projects.

Aside from Shawkat and Grainger, because I think I've made my views on their acting skills quite clear already, there's a solid turn from Fee as the pianist who forces one of the main characters to start re-evaluating and reframing their approach to life. Dermot Murphy also does a good job portraying Marty, a poet who somehow lives his authentic life without any of the self-doubt or guilt that Laura has, reflecting her own faultlines and insecurities back at her as she finds herself at an unexpected crossroads in her life.

Not only does Animals look at the struggle of those wanting to spend their lives being creative artists, it also highlights the chasm that exists between the self-belief of men and women, with the former generally benefiting from a history of not being told that they should give up on their dreams to settle down, marry, and have children. The main characters here might seem selfish and irritating at times, but being selfish and irritating is sometimes what it takes to do whatever your real passion is. And women get far fewer opportunities to try taking that demanding journey than men. That might not be the point of Animals, especially when one scene has characters actually discussing the priorities that animals need in their lives, but I suspect that it's definitely one of the main ingredients helping to make the final dish what it is.

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 

Thursday, 20 July 2023

Lola (2022)

A relatively low-budget and low-key sci-fi movie, Lola is an interesting way to riff on the whole “butterfly effect” that has featured in many a time-travel tale. I knew I had to see this as soon as I started hearing about it. I was very eager. I was optimistic. I was wrong.

It’s all about two sisters, Thomasina (Emma Appleton) and Martha (Stefanie Martini), who end up reaping the benefits of an invention, the titular LOLA, that allows them to view moments broadcast from the future. The year is 1940, war is breaking out and about to encroach upon their lives, but the girls are able to enjoy future treats such as the amazing music of David Bowie. It’s when they realise that they can use the machine to help end the war early that the sisters start to get into trouble though, setting off a chain of events that might be impossible to undo.

The feature debut from director Andrew Legge, this is perfectly in line with ideas he has been exploring for the past 15+ years, with most of his short films focusing on interesting inventions and/or manipulation of time. Having co-written this script with Angeli Macfarlane (who has a very different filmography back catalogue), Legge appears to have made his first feature without being quite up to the task. The brief runtime - it clocks in at just under 80 minutes - still feels overlong, there are numerous times when the plot feels as fragile as water-soaked paper, and the ending . . . well, I may have missed a minor detail, but it seemed to rely on a massive happy coincidence (someone tuning in to an exact moment being broadcast from one exact place).

While the opening scenes feel unique and visually striking, with everything being shown in black and white film that has been shot by amateurs making some home movies, even that soon becomes more of a chore than a delight. As later footage starts to feel a bit cleaner, and less authentic, viewers may start to wonder why Legge didn’t mix in some various stylistic choices.

Appleton and Martini both do fine in their roles, I guess, but it is hard to appreciate them as their characters are forced to change so severely between the start and end of the film. Neither are given quite enough to work with, and the film becomes weaker when they start to spend less time together (which happens far too early in the runtime). Rory Fleck Byrne plays a main supporting character, but he is allowed to show all the personality of a postage stamp, which makes me reticent to compliment or condemn his performance. He’s not very good, but he’s even more hampered by the material than either of the leads.

I still admire what Legge tried to do here, and I wouldn’t be averse to him trying again, perhaps with much more time spent on the script and an idea of how to subtly move from the crudity of the “amateur footage” to a more polished style underlining the unfolding horror of the second half. This doesn’t work as well as it should, but I will always give more kudos to an interesting failure than a lazy cash-grab. Lola didn’t work for me, falling apart quite quickly after an impressive start, but it’s certainly an interesting failure.

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