Joker: Folie à Deux (2024)

I was one of many people who ended up enjoying Joker when it was released back in 2019. It was a divisive movie though, and many hated it. Surprising as it may seem, one of the people who seems to have hated it more than most is . . . director Todd Phillips. Well, to be more accurate, he seems to hate the character, and seems to hate how he has been held up as some icon of cool. And the people who use images of Joker and Harley Quinn to state "couple goals"? Yeah, Phillips hates you just as much, if not more so.

It's time for Arthur Fleck (Joaquin Phoenix reprising the role) to be put on trial. Having been imprisoned since the events of the last movie, Fleck has become a lightning rod for an uneasy population thinking they may have an anarchic hero to support and push forward like a giant wrecking ball. Arthur gets the attention of Lee Quinzel (Lady Gaga), the two sharing a love of daydreaming their way through some song and dance numbers, but this doesn't sit well with his lawyer, Maryanne Stewart (Catherine Keener). None of this growing unrest, nor the celebrity prisoner's growing popularity, sits well with prison officer Jackie Sullivan (Brendan Gleeson), which essentially paints a large target on Arthur's back.

EVERYTHING that was good about Joker is destroyed here. Everything. And when I say destroyed I mean fully torn apart, shredded, pulped, shredded again, set on fire, and the ashes packed into a small rocket that is fired directly into the sun. Did you like the visual style? It's here again, but somehow feels like the lazy choice this time around, especially when it invaded even the scenes that should make use of some colour and light. Did you like the nihilism and misanthropy? It's here, but it's so constantly in your face that it feels like an angry toddler pulling on your ears as it screams Nietzsche quotes at you. Did you like the central character? You shouldn't, not according to Phillips anyway. Joker is a weak and pathetic victim, unexpectedly elevated to a position of power that he is absolutely unprepared for.

I'm not exaggerating when I say that Phillips tries hard to make his disdain palpable in every scene. There are very few moments here that actually work in movie terms, and one of those atypical treats happens at the very beginning of the film (a bit of animation that hints at an anarchy and energy the rest of the film stubbornly refuses to revisit), and even the much-discussed musical numbers fall flat because a) Phillips refuses to commit to them, and b) they feel as if they're just present to deliberately repel anyone who enjoyed the first film. There's something slightly admirable about Phillips making use of the money and resources available to create such a huge Joker-topped pyre, but it also feels, well, just a bit rude.

At least there's a decent cast, and I don't really have any complaints about Gaga, Gleeson, Keener, Zazie Beetz, Steve Coogan, Harry Lawtey (as a rather bland Harvey Dent), and Leigh Gill. I do have complaints about Phoenix though, and the fact that he is still the main star means that his awful performance helps to damage the film in a way that I am sure Phillips actively encouraged. Phoenix is limp and lifeless throughout, except for the moments in which he deliberately chooses to overact and fool around. Everything he did so well in the first movie is alchemically transformed from gold to lead this time around.

Phillips, co-writing the screenplay once again with Scott Silver, does everything to ensure that this second film puts a handful of nails in the coffin of the main character. Both he and his leading man should be embarrassed by how bad this is, but I suspect they're already on to other projects without giving this a second thought. It's just fans who will be affected by it, fans of the Joker and/or fans of cinema. And Phillips couldn't be clearer about what he thinks of those people. Remember that the next time he works on something that he actually cares about.

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, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
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

Mubi Monday: Living In Oblivion (1995)

This is yet another film I had heard about decades ago, when it was first released, but sadly didn’t get around to. Everyone I took notice of gave this plenty of praise, proclaiming it a smart and funny film that worked particularly well on people with even passing knowledge of the chaos and egos that can often occur while films are being made. And, once again, everyone I took notice of proved to be absolutely correct.

Living In Oblivion shows us the trials and tribulation of a director (Steve Buscemi) trying to get his film made. He has a superb leading lady (Catherine Keener) to help, but everyone else seems to bring extra problems to the filming process, whether it’s an egotistical male lead (James Le Gros) or a cameraman who keeps trying to change the shot (Dermot Mulroney). There’s a focus puller (Kevin Corrigan) who doesn’t always stay focused, another temperamental actor who comes on the scene later (Peter Dinklage), and tension whenever the sound mixer (Michael Griffiths) is trying to ensure that anything caught on camera has good enough audio to accompany it.

Written and directed by Tom DiCillo, a director with a small filmography that you could find in a dictionary alongside the definition of “quirky”, Living In Oblivion is entertaining and amusing from the earliest scenes, and then just gets better and better as it all builds towards a satisfying, and hilarious, finale. Roughly split into three distinct acts, and moving between moments of colour and moments shown in black and white, this is a fairly low-budget and small film that never feels confined by the limited resources. Because the focus is always on a director just trying to get one main scene finalized it feels natural to be observing that one main scenes, with the repetition and frustrations being the main point of the film. The script is brilliant, with almost every line and moment featuring either a gag or a knowing commentary about life on a low-budget film set, from the dubious selection of goods available to eat and drink to the tension that can arise when a relationship spurs between two colleagues.

Buscemi is great in his role, a typical director with a vision often exceeding the resources he has available to him. It’s his film, because the film within the film is HIS film, and he gives one of his absolute best performances, which is high praise indeed when you think of everything he’s done. Keener is easily equal to him, and understandably steals every scene that focuses on her (which makes up a lot of the screentime), as viewers are shown how much the camera and crew are enthralled by her performance. She has the tougher role than Buscemi, and her effortless greatness shows why she has long been someone that movie fans love to see appear in any role she takes. Mulroney and Corrigan are both fun, Le Gros is an entertaining douchebag, and Dinklage gets to have the second-best outburst in the film (nothing tops Buscemi’s outburst about 20-30 minutes into things). Everyone else deserves praise, from Griffiths to Danielle Von Zerneck (playing the main assistant to Buscemi’s character), and there’s not one weak spot in the entire cast, with even the smallest roles feeling absolutely spot on.

If you enjoy comedies then you should enjoy this, especially if you’re also a fan of any of the main players. If you have even a passing familiarity with how much blood, sweat, and tears it can take to make any movie, however, then this could well become a firm favourite. I know it is now one of mine.

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

Prime Time: Sicario 2: Soldado (2019)

It may sound like a cliché to say it, but I really enjoyed Sicario because of the way it showed a very different kind of war, and the cold-blooded and tech-assisted approach to dealing with an enemy who wasn’t cloaked in an easily-identifiable uniform. Working around the rules and diplomacy, pushing everything right to the breaking point, those being depicted weren’t necessarily shown as heroes, but they believed they were working towards a greater good.

As good as that film was, nobody was crying out for a sequel. But here we are. A number of characters return, the main goals are similar, but permission has been granted to go even further than before. There has been another terrorist attacking on US soil, and the President wants to hammer the enemy into the ground.

Written by Taylor Sheridan (who also wrote the first movie), there’s even more shown here to reveal the dangerous game being played by the protagonists, and how disposable they are if things get too uncomfortable for those in power who give approval for their tactics. Matt Graver (Josh Brolin) is told he can let his main asset “off the leash”, which isn’t good news for anyone viewed as a target by Alejandro (aka the main asset, played by Benicio Del Toro). The plan is to pit Mexican drug warlords against one another, and the way to do that is with a few killings and the kidnapping of someone’s daughter (Isabel, played by Isabela Merced). Nobody wants to hurt the young girl, which is why the kidnap will then lead to her “rescue”, getting the Americans some brownie points while the gang war escalates. In theory.

Director Stefano Sollima is at the helm this time around, replacing Dennis Villeneuve, and his filmography will quickly show why he would seem to be a good fit for this material. Thankfully, the end result here also proves him to be a great choice, because this is a film that I feel easily sits alongside the first one, further developing some of the character arcs in a way that is hugely entertaining, yet also feeling organic and true to the nature of everyone involved. Sheridan’s script does that, Sollima’s direction does that, another excellent score from Hildur Guðnadóttir does that, and everyone else behind the camera works together to present a vision of organised violence, murky political machinations, and a palpable sense of intense heat (in more ways than one).

Brolin and Del Toro are once again excellent in their main roles, with both being determined and single-minded about achieving their desired results. Brolin’s character is more tied to the chain of command, and he nicely balanced his grit with the minimal amount of diplomacy required. Del Toro’s character, on the other hand, is free to act more off his gut instinct, showing that he’s more than just a guided missile in human form, at least until those in charge decide that he shouldn’t. Matthew Modine and Catherine Keener are both people higher up in the chain of command, and both appear in a few scenes to set up the main mission and then balk as the parameters start to move further away from the initial vision. Then there is Merced, billed here as Isabela Moner. Although I have only seen her in a handful of main roles, Merced is an actress I will always have time for. Her performance here is as excellent as anything else she has done, and she would already be a huge star in an ideal world. Keep an eye out for her name in any future movie releases, she is surely destined to soon have numerous projects more deserving of her talent than the dire Transformers film that she ended up in. I should also mention Elijah Rodriguez, who does a decent enough job playing a slightly under-written character who proves to be pivotal to the plot.

If you like violent thrillers then you should like this. If you liked the first movie then you should like this. Like Brolin and Del Toro? Then you should like this. I might like it more than most people, but I hope that at least a few others agree with me.

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

Netflix And Chill: The Adam Project (2022)

A time-travel action comedy with a number of lovely moments of sweetness throughout, The Adam Project is a film that manages to deliver what you expect from it, yet also makes one or two decisions that prove mildly surprising, considering how by-the-numbers you may expect it to be.

Ryan Reynolds is Adam, a man who travels back in time to 2022. His vehicle is damaged, as is he, and it won't begin the self-repair program until a healthy Adam can command it. Which means Adam needs help from his younger self (played by Walker Scobell). Young Adam is currently being a bit of trouble for his mother (Ellie Reed, played by Jennifer Garner), mainly due to him grieving the loss of his father (Mark Ruffalo) just over a year before. There are bad people trying to capture Adam and take him back to his own timeline, headed up by Maya Sorian (Catherine Keener), but Adam has made his leap into the past because he thinks the timeline has already been corrupted. He doesn't want to be in 2022 though. He wants to be in 2018. And young Adam may need to join him on the next part of his journey.

Director Shawn Levy has been delivering easygoing hits for a couple of decades now, giving us films such as Cheaper By The Dozen, The Pink Panther, the three Night At The Museum movies, Real Steel, and, most recently, Free Guy. That's not to say that you necessarily view him as a great director, and let's not be too quick to forgive him for The Internship, but he's a relatively safe pair of hands who manages to work well with comic actors. Between their previous collaboration and this one, he may well be the person who helps Reynolds deliver his best, non-Deadpool, work (although he's also now directing the third Deadpool movie, which doesn't feel like an obvious match, but let's wait and see how that goes). This is definitely up there with his better films, and it's easily one that provides a bit of something for almost everyone.

Writers Jonathan Tropper, T. S. Nowlin, and Jennifer Flackett have a very mixed filmography between them, from The Maze Runner movies to Nim's Island, and TV work that includes Banshee and Big Mouth, but they seem to have worked well together to craft something that provides a perfect mix of laughs, action, and heart, with enough science to allow for cool tech, and to allow for the plotting to work, without getting bogged down in too many conversations about the timelines. There IS a set approach to time-travel here, explained well enough, but it's an approach with rules that allow the whole thing to be feasible. And also allows Reynolds to enjoy another big magnet set-piece, as he does seem to love his big magnet set-pieces.

People seem to complain nowadays about Reynolds doing the same thing in every movie he makes. That's a fair comment, in some ways, but it's also something you could say about any comedic actor in their "bread and butter" roles over the past three or four decades, at least. I like his work, and he's excellent here. Scobell, in his first film role, gives him a good run for his money though. Often just as quick-witted and quick to open his mouth, Scobell has all the smart-ass attitude, but with the attitude of being a cute young kid to underline the occasional punchline/insult. Garner and Ruffalo do very well in the role of the loving parents, viewed in very different ways by the two Adams because of how the loss of one parent affected their lives. Keener is a great menace, flanked by a strong and capable fighter named Christos (played by Alex Mallari Jr), and she has a great way of trying to persuade older Adam that things can be fixed, they can go back to how everything was, while prepping weaponry to destroy him if he continues to disobey her requests. There's also a small role for Zoe Saldana, once again being a perfect combination of loveliness and badassery.

It's an overused compliment when it comes to modern family entertainment, but this really does feel like something that could have been made in the late 1980s. The quality shines throughout, from the music and cinematography to the performances, and the sweetness is offset by the sense of fun, and the odd swearword thrown around. There are also one or two moments that may make you cry, even as you realise how easily you're being emotionally manipulated. This is definitely a film worth making some time for.

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 

Ani-MAY-tion Month: The Croods (2013)

There was nothing that appealed to me when I saw the trailer for The Croods. It looked okay, I guess, but it also looked quite bland and unfunny. In fact, had it not appeared on Netflix (ahhhh, thank you Netflix) I probably wouldn't have given it a look for some time. But it did appear on Netflix. And I thought I should at least give it a try.

Well, within the first 10 minutes I was glad that I'd decided to give the movie a chance.

The Croods was definitely sold short. It's not up there with the very best animated movies that I've seen in recent years, but that's simply because the best animated movies nowadays are SO good. Thankfully, this film is very enjoyable, and also benefits from visuals that cram in so much colour and detail that even the more ridiculous onscreen moments can appear photo-realistic at times.

The story concerns a prehistoric family who live in a cave for most of their time. This is because the father (Nicolas Cage) wants them all to be safe, even if it means that they're not too happy. The unhappiest member of the family is Eep (Emma Stone), a young girl who wants to get out there and explore the world. Well, she gets her wish when she meets Guy (Ryan Reynolds) just as some major environmental changes force the family out of their cave and wayyyyyyyy out of their comfort zone.

Building the comedy from the cast of characters and situations they find themselves in, as opposed to a load of pop culture references and one-liners, The Croods is good fun for the whole family that doesn't always take the easy option. Oh, okay, it DOES often take the easy option, but not without an enjoyable feint in a different direction before getting back on track.

Directors Chris Sanders and Kirk De Micco, who developed the screenplay from a story they worked on with John Cleese (yes, John Cleese), have done a great job, balancing spectacle with humour and heart. There are times when The Croods becomes *shock, horror* slightly mawkish, but it's always just the right level of sweet without becoming sickening.

That balance is helped by the vocal cast, who all seem to have a lot of fun. Cage should really do more work like this. His voice is instantly recognisable, but his character gets away from his usual tics and twitches thanks to the fact that it's delivered by animators. Stone is very enjoyable as the little girl wanting to grow up and strike out, Reynolds is good as the young man showing people a way to potential safety, and Cloris Leachman and Clark Duke both provide some chuckles as, respectively, Gran and Lunk. Catherine Keener has the most thankless role, as the mother/voice of reason, but she's just fine in the role.

I've not heard many people discuss The Croods, although it appears to have done well enough at the box office to get a sequel greenlit, but I hope that its reputation starts to grow. As surprised as I am to be saying it, this may very well be the second-best American animated movie of 2013 (with the top spot held by the brilliant Monsters University).

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

Where The Wild Things Are (2009)

Where The Wild Things Are is, as most of you probably already know, a film based on the beloved book by Maurice Sendak. I never read the book, neither in childhood nor at a later stage, so I can't comment on the adaptation of the source material but I have seen some of the artwork and must say that the film certainly seems to brilliantly realise the creations of Sendak. Directed by the enjoyably offbeat Spike Jonze, who co-wrote the screenplay with Dave Eggers, there's a lot to enjoy here but also a few choices and moments that I just can't help thinking spoiled what could have been a really great film.

Young Max (Max Records) is an energetic and moody young man. He also seems to be quite a lonely boy, as seen in the opening sequence of the film in which he tries to get his sister to play with him, attacks her friends with snowballs and then gets upset when the whole thing backfires and his freshly-made igloo is brought crashing down around him. His mother (Catherine Keener) eventually comes along to make things better but she's a very, very busy woman. The time with his mother is clearly Max's favourite time but he doesn't have a very good way of showing this. In fact, he simply ruins an entire evening when he's jealous of the fact that she has male company round and then runs off . . . . . . . . and this is when the film finally hits its stride. After jumping into a boat and sailing as far as he can, Max ends up on an island populated by strange, wild creatures. At first they are tempted to eat him but he convinces them that he is a king and will lead them to a happier future. Of course, that's easier said than done and as things don't go according to plan Max starts to realise just how his behaviour impacts on others. Maybe.

With some absolutely wonderful creature creations - voiced by a great selection of people including James Gandolfini, Catherine O'Hara, Lauren Ambrose, Paul Dano, Forest Whittaker, Chris Cooper and Michael Berry Jr - and a magical way of replicating that childhood sense of freedom, imagination, rulebreaking and entitlement, Where The Wild Things Are is a superb film for reminding you of just what it is/was to be a child. It's not a children's film though, not really. Some moments are a bit too dark, not enough is spelled out in more obvious terms for kids to learn lessons from and the emotions and various relationships shown are slightly too open and honest in a way that befits the behaviour of children looked at studiously by adults. It's a hard thing to describe, and I don't really want to pigeonhole the movie, but I'd say that the whole thing certainly aims to prompt feelings and memories of childhood rather than appeal directly to children.

The acting is great from everyone involved, whether they're visibly onscreen or just being heard or even being one of the hardy physical performers wearing the wonderful creature suits.

What spoils the movie, for me, are the bookends. The time spent with Max on the island dealing with the creatures is fantastic stuff, it's funny and thrilling and uplifting and saddening and all over the place like the typical rollercoaster of emotions a child can go through on any given day. Sadly, there's nothing to like at the start or end of the movie. I don't require it in every movie I see but there's no real resolution here and it's a film that cries out for one, whether it occurred in the original story or not.

Spike Jonze has yet to create anything that I have seen and disliked (from his music video work to his wonderfully unique movies) but this is the one that proves to be the least satisfying so far. The fact that I still rate it so highly is just testament to how truly great the main middle section is.

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