Showing posts with label anthony hopkins. Show all posts
Showing posts with label anthony hopkins. Show all posts

Wednesday, 7 January 2026

Prime Time: Locked (2025)

A remake of an Argentinian thriller, 4x4, that I haven't seen, Locked was a film that ended up reminding me that, no matter how much older I get I can always be suckered in by a decent trailer. I was convinced that I was going to have a good time with this. Then it soon became clear to me that there was a big problem at the heart of the story that couldn't be overcome.

Bill Skarsgård plays Eddie Barrish, a petty criminal who is trying to get part of his life in order. Unfortunately, he needs money that he doesn't have to get his van repaired. He thinks there may be something valuable in a luxury SUV that he finds unlocked in a quiet parking lot though, and that's when his troubles really begin. The SUV is owned by William (Anthony Hopkins), a man who has rigged the whole thing with surveillance equipment, remote-controlled systems to make life as comfortable or uncomfortable for whoever is inside, and a whole lot of reinforcements on the body and windows. Eddie is trapped, and his only way out is to convince William that he's not the criminal that he appears to be.

Although I am not sure how closely this sticks to the screenplay by Mariano Cohn and Gastón Duprat, writer Michael Arlen Ross shows no real imagination or care, and he probably thanked the day that both Skarsgård and Hopkins signed on to play the two leads. Director David Yarovesky has kept me highly entertained with his last couple of features (Brightburn and Nightbooks), but he obviously needs a decent script to work from. This isn't it, mainly due to the fact that once Eddie is in the SUV everything becomes a series of circular moments until we get to the inevitable final act in which our anti-hero has been shown to have just enough goodness within him to allow a potential reprieve . . . depending on who the movie sides with in the final scenes.

Skarsgård tries his best here, and it's the kind of role that he has done in a few other movies from the past few years, but he's as trapped by the script as his character is trapped by William. Hopkins is allowed to have a bit more fun, as expected, but even he is let down by a screenplay that is forced to give too much baggage to both leads, steadfastly aiming for a middle ground between the two that should allow for viewers to enjoy some self-reflection and conversation after it's all over, but sadly just leaves it feeling like it was neutered to appeal to the widest possible range of opinions. We know Eddie is a bad guy, but he wants to become better for his daughter. We know William is a bad guy, but he's doing all of this in the name of someone he once loved. The more potentially interesting conversations that could be had, about the growing chasm between the very rich and those living in poverty (for example), are given brief lip service before we get to another sequence showing Eddie trying to outwit his tormentor. I understand why this was done, it's a thriller and not a social commentary piece, but I think adding more commentary would have made it more worthwhile. At least it would have felt as if it had something to say.

It can be difficult to make a movie all set in one location. While this isn't exactly that, the fact that so much of the runtime involves Skarsgård stuck in a car and talking on the phone to Hopkins makes it feel like a one-location film. And all of the added tech contained within the car cannot make up for the fact that it's not a very good one. The engine goes flat after the first 15-20 minutes, and any attempt to jump-start things before the end credits roll is just too little, too late. I give it a generous bonus because of my appreciation for the two star names.

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 

Wednesday, 30 July 2025

Prime Time: Shortcut To Happiness (2007)

AKA The Devil And Daniel Webster.

Based on a story by Stephen Vincent Benet, which was subsequently adapted into a play, "Scratch", by Archibald Macleish, Shortcut To Happiness (known in some other territories as The Devil And Daniel Webster) shows how strange and mesmerising it can be when life imitates art. The production history of this film, which was due to premiere in 2001 before financial issues and investors being investigated for bank fraud delayed things by a number of years, and led to Alec Baldwin removing his name as the director of a film that he claims was taken away from him in post-production, is more interesting than anything onscreen. But considering the plot is all about someone who wants success, and then finds that getting what he wants doesn't really make him happy, it's hard to hear about the troubles of this feature and not think of it as the end result of someone slightly tempting fate.

Because it's clear that Baldwin wasn't ready to direct a feature. Look, to be fair, maybe there's a better version of this with the right money in place and the right editing of the footage, but it's hard to see it as anything other than a huge disappointment, only of note because of some of the supporting players. It adds nothing to a familiar Faustian tale, doesn't ever get the tone right, and has a lead character that is hard to root for.

Baldwin plays Jabez Stone, a writer who isn't having much luck. He continues to write, but has yet to make any progress when it comes to getting actual sales and readers. That looks set to change when he meets The Devil (played by Jennifer Love Hewitt, who at least has a twinkle in her eye missing from many others onscreen). As his success builds, other things fall by the wayside. Things like friendship, good company, and his reputation. Julius Jensen (Dan Aykroyd) is a fellow writer and friend, but The Devil decides he must take a fall in order for Jabez to climb higher. The same goes for Mike (Barry Miller), albeit in a different way. Molly (Amy Poehler) seems to remain quite neutral, but even she states that she isn't as big a fan of the new Jabez as she was of the old version. Can anything be done to make the deal with the devil null and void? If it can be done, Daniel Webster (Anthony Hopkins) is the man for the job. Considering he's not a complete stranger to The Devil. 

Pete Dexter and Nancy Cassaro may be unfamiliar writers to me, but I'm astonished that Bill Condon joined them for this project and was unable to salvage it. The whole thing is a messy mix of teenage-level philosophy conversations and utter smugness, livened up by the occasional scene that allows Hewitt to have fun. While some of the cast members can save individual moments, none of them can make up for the awfulness of Baldwin in the main role. Maybe he should stick to his strengths, considering how great he can be when he delivers cameo performances that allow him to almost steal entire movies away from featured cast members.

Aside from Baldwin, just bad, and Hewitt, who I wish was given this role in a far better movie, you have Aykroyd being a bit of a boor (which he does well enough), Miller being quite the downer (which HE does well enough), and Poehler being, well, barely present. Hopkins does a decent Hopkins turn, although it needed to be a bit MORE full-on Hopkins, not something I say often, and there's a disappointing waste of both Bobby Cannavale and Kim Cattrall.

There are times when everything about this seems designed to repel viewers, particularly an ending that presents the viewer with absolutely nothing worth mulling over as the credits roll. It's not clever, nor is it thought-provoking. It's just a final middle finger from a film that has already spent 106 minutes insulting anyone who continued to watch it in the hope that it would get any better.

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

Sunday, 16 March 2025

Netflix And Chill: Fracture (2007)

It's hard to deny that Fracture is quite ridiculous. It's actually not very good. I would also argue, however, that it's hard to deny that Fracture is also entertaining. It's a legal drama with a focus on fun ahead of any pesky stuff like plausibility or reality. Neither of the two leads, Anthony Hopkins and Ryan Gosling, are doing anything close to their best work, but they're perfectly in sync with the tone of the whole thing.

Hopkins is Ted Crawford, a man who we see at the start of the movie shooting his wife. He did it. He confesses to it. It should be an easy case. Gosling is Willy Beachum, a smooth and skilled lawyer who really likes easy cases. When he is asked to take on the case, despite readying himself for a move to a more lucrative private practice, he agrees, thinking it will be quickly dealt with. Complications soon arise though, and Crawford may be getting just as much satisfaction from playing with those around him as he got from killing his wife.

Director Gregory Hoblit has been involved with some landmark TV shows throughout his career, but his film work has been a bit more forgettable. There are some treats here and there, and most of his features actually came out between 1996 and 2008, but he's the kind of figure you would be more likely to describe as dependable rather than great. The same could almost be said of writers Glenn Gers and Daniel Pyne, although Pyne started strong with his first theatrical features at the start of the 1990s. It's clear that the draw here needs to be the cast, which is why we get Hopkins and Gosling.

Both of the leading men are working with accents that they would have been better to leave well alone, and both somehow play their parts well while also barely containing a smirk in response to how laughable everything is. Thankfully, there's a great supporting cast to help remind viewers of how actors can be great when not being pushed towards increasing silliness. Rosamund Pike, David Strathairn, Billy Burke, cliff Curtis, Bob Gunton, Fiona Shaw, Embeth Davidtz, and Xander Berkeley are the other names worth mentioning, although some do better than others, and some have much more screentime than others.

I cannot bring myself to make too many excuses for my enjoyment of this. The cinematography, editing, and other technical and production work stays decent throughout, but that's not enough to make up for the script and the hamminess. The script and hamminess are also part of the appeal though, and I have already watched this film twice while many much worthier films sit unwatched on my shelves. I won't rush to rewatch it, but I wouldn't speed by it if I was channel-hopping and saw it playing. Maybe that's down to the fractures in my own mind though.

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

Sunday, 3 July 2022

Netflix And Chill: The Rite (2011)

You would think that Anthony Hopkins would be well-suited to the role of a priest who can conduct exorcisms in a firm, and seemingly non-traditional, manner. In a way, didn't he already play just that kind of role, and superbly, when he took on the famous character of Van Helsing? So The Rite, a handsomely-mounted horror/drama about a younger priest full of doubt (Michael Kovak, played by Colin O'Donoghue) learning much from a stoic elder (Father Lucas Trevant, played by Hopkins), would seem to be an easy winner. Sadly, that is not the case.

Based on, possibly very loosely, on a book of the same name by Matt Biaglo, this is a "true story" that ticks almost every exorcism movie cliché off the list, and that's always a tricky proposition. Because if you're going to do that, especially if you're pairing up an older priest with a younger priest who is starting to doubt his faith, then you need to be pretty bloody special. Because there's one movie that casts a hell of a long shadow over all of these movies.

All of the characters are sketched out and put in place quickly enough. Michael feels like someone it is easy to root for, and we see plenty of backstory involving his relationship with his father (Rutger Hauer). He is asked to go to Rome to attend a course in exorcism, which will either help him to find his faith once more or convince him that his journey on this particular path is at an end. Father Trevant is a force of nature, and a bit of an expert in exorcisms (of course), and remains convinced that he always does whatever is necessary to save any tortured souls. And Angeline (Alice Braga) is someone else attending the course, which means she can have conversations with Michael as he continues to feel doubt over any other sensation.

It's no surprise to look through the filmography of screenwriter Michael Petroni and see that nothing stands out, with the exception of the wonderful, and disappointingly underseen, The Dangerous Lives Of Altar Boys. Petroni has, for most of the past two decades, been specialising in writing films seemingly destined to be forgotten. And this is coming from someone who quite liked The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader.

Director Mikael Håfström has a slightly better success rate, especially around this time (1408 was a few years before this and Escape Plan was just after), but this feels like a movie where his hands were tied. It is an exorcism movie for a mainstream audience, meaning the horror element is never really satisfying and it is all far too safe and predictable.

Hopkins is the highlight, and selling the movie on his presence alone is no bad thing. Hauer is also very good in his much smaller role, and it's a shame that he isn't used to much greater effect. Braga, through no fault of her own, feels completely superfluous, an addition for the sake of having a female character who isn't just a possible victim of possession. The weakest cast member is O'Donoghue though, who just doesn't feel very convincing at any point. I wouldn't say he was actually bad, but he certainly feels as if he's been miscast, unable to sell viewers on him being a doubtful priest OR a worthwhile leading man. Ciarán Hinds and Toby Jones have very small roles, but I will mention them as the other main positives in a film in need of all the help it can get.

Easily the worst of the mainstream exorcism/possession movies from the last few decades, this is eminently forgettable and unworthy of your time. In the same way that multiplying two negatives leads to a positive, it turns out that numerous wrongs can add up to a rite. 

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

Monday, 28 March 2022

Mubi Monday: Howard's End (1992)

Although it is easy to roll your eyes at the lifestyles of the rich and super-repressed depicted in Merchant/Ivory movies, especially while now removed so far from their original warm receptions, it is also easy to sit back and let them work your magic on you. You have a story told well with a cast of British stalwarts helping things along by basically being very British, and stalwarts.

Emma Thompson plays Margaret Schlegel, a woman going through life with less propensity for dramatic declarations than her sister, Helen (Helena Bonham Carter). But it is thanks to Helen that the Schlegel family become associated with the residents of Howard’s End, a lovely country house. Margaret becomes close friends with the ailing Ruth Wilcox (Vanessa Redgrave). After the passing of Mrs Wilcox, Margaret then, very unexpectedly, grows increasingly close to Mr Wilcox (Anthony Hopkins). Meanwhile, Helen becomes obsessed with helping a Mr Leonard Bast (Samuel West) and his wife, a couple places in dire financial circumstances from incorrect advice offered to them, via the Schlegel sisters, by Mr Wilcox.

Directed with the usual elegance and patience by James Ivory, this is a familiar clash of principles and viewpoints, drama made all the more important for the impact it could have on someone’s standing in society. The script, by Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, adapts the E. M. Forster source material in a way that preserves everything precious, from the characters to the time period and setting, without forgetting that it should entertain and mesmerise viewers. Of course, this kind of fare isn’t for everyone, but those who love such costume dramas should find a lot to appreciate and enjoy here (although it should be noted that this feels a notch or two below the excellent The Remains Of The Day).

Thompson is as wonderful as ever, giving yet another one of her high-spirited turns that allow her to navigate the nuances of differing social strata without completely erasing her own personality and opinions. Hopkins also does something he does so well, the flawed man who knows little more than how best to maintain his social standing, and his reserved manner is interspersed with moments of brutal honesty, conflict, and an openness that is hard to recognise until it is underlined by his response to certain major events. Carter has to play the more annoying character, which she does well, a woman who wants to right some wrongs in the world without considering some of the better ways to get results (or maybe her direct approach is best, it’s complicated by a further revelation that changes the film once again). Everyone else does their best, all very polite, and often entitled, but the others worth noting are West and Nicola Duffett (playing his wife). Both are victims of of circumstance, with one trying to stubbornly refuse more help while they believe they can improve things on their own.

This is, in many ways, cosy fare. Things look bleak, there are highs and lows, but the story always seems poised to lead towards a better destination for the main characters. The technical side of things may be spot on throughout, but it is the casting that makes this as good as it is, particularly Hopkins and Thompson, two greats who seem to bring out the best in one another.

Recommended, but only after you have treated yourself to The Remains Of The Day first.

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

Monday, 29 July 2019

Mubi Monday: The Elephant Man (1980)

The Elephant Man has always struck me as the most un-Lynchian film in the filmography of David Lynch (although someone did recently remind me of The Straight Story, which I have yet to see), and yet it is no less worthwhile, or rewarding, for fans of his work.

Based on the true life story of John Merrick (played under a load of make up by John Hurt, with a performance that I would argue remains his finest achievement), this is a fairly straightforward look at someone who was viewed as a freak for most of his life. And even those who sought to help him ended up falling into a trap of occasionally putting him on display for the benefit of others. The main person to try helping Mr. Merrick is a doctor named Frederick Treves (Anthony Hopkins), who decides to home the man in the hospital he works at, helped in his endeavours by a matron (Mrs Mothershead, played by Wendy Hiller), and the governor of the institution (played by John Gielgud).

Describing various moments from this movie would easily make you question my opening paragraph. There are some nightmare and dream sequences that certainly wouldn't be out of place in other Lynch movies, and nor would the idea of evil making visits in the guise of various humans. But here, couched within a film that has such a strong emotional core in the plight of Mr. Merrick, it all feels a bit different. The darker, sometimes surreal, touches are just that. This is a story told respectfully and effectively by Lynch, with incidents in the script (co-written by himself, Christopher De Vore, and Eric Bergen) that show why it would appeal to him, cinematically.

The performances are brilliant across the board. Hurt gets all of the praise, and rightfully so, but he's rivalled by the beautifully restrained, for the most part, turns from Hopkins, Hiller, and Gielgud. Freddie Jones and Michael Elphick are far less restrained, playing the kind of nasty and abusive individuals who wouldn't look out of place in a classic Dickensian tale (which this very much feels like), and you have a number of familiar faces in smaller supporting roles: Anne Bancroft (who gets a few wonderful main scenes alongside Hurt), Dexter Fletcher, Hannah Gordon, Lesley Dunlop, Pauline Quirke, and Kenny Baker.

The black and white cinematography is gorgeous, whether scenes are crystal clear or murky when showing the smoke-filled and less hygienic back lanes of London, and Freddie Francis deserves no small amount of praise for his contribution as director of photography. In fact, this is a film in which I wish I could namecheck everyone, from the make up team to the costume designers and on and on. I always remember that film is a collaborative effort, and am always aware that when writing reviews I am picking and choosing the "main names" to discuss, but The Elephant Man is a classic that simply emanates care and hard work from every frame, making me feel more remiss than usual in not listing every credited contributor.

If you have seen this before then revisit it some time, when you can handle something serious, rewarding and moving. If you haven't seen it yet then get to it, and do it as soon as possible.

9/10

You can buy the movie here.
Americans can buy a disc here.