The Bride! (2026)

On the one hand, kudos to Maggie Gyllenhaal for taking such a bold approach to what you could arguably classify as the full-bodied legacy of Mary Shelley. On the other hand, maybe she should have taken some more time to ensure that her bold approach and mix of ideas could be bundled up into something that would work as a satisfying and cohesive movie experience. This absolutely fails, and the bigger failings help to obscure any of the more praiseworthy elements.

Christian Bale plays Frank (the monster, having taken the name of his creator). He walks into the workplace of Dr. Euphronious (Annette Bening) and asks for her help in creating a companion. He's desperately lonely, and so unique that only another creation similar to himself will offer him any hope of a relationship. Enter the corpse of Ida (Jessie Buckley), a woman who ended up being shot by horrible gangsters mere moments after she was possessed by the spirit of Mary Shelley (also portrayed by Buckley). While struggling to figure out whether or not they can have any kind of proper relationship, especially when trying to accept how it has all begun, Ida and Frank quickly become a notorious pairing, for their unique look and their behaviour. Seemingly unable to stop calling attention to themselves, although often due to calling out the behaviour of others, Frank and The Bride soon find themselves pursued by strangers, determined police, and some gangsters who are very surprised to see that Ida has somehow not stayed dead.

While a very divisive movie, I know there are some people out there who have really liked this. I don't know many of them, but I know one or two. So it works for some people. And I can see some of the appeal. It's very admirably bonkers, almost punk in the way that it makes use of some famous genre archetypes to crash through some other archetypes, all while commenting on misogyny and the constantly overlooked misbehaviour of men. Just typing out that sentence has made me wonder if I am about to be too harsh on the thing. But, alas, no. The ingredients aren't mixed together well enough, and the social commentary is picked up and dropped so casually that it may as well be a toy discarded by an over-stimulated child.

I guess that some of the visuals work, and the cast is full of considerable talent and/or people that Gyllenhaal knows well enough to get on board, but the overriding feeling is that this is a feature barely shaped into a tolerable form by someone seriously overreaching.

Some people appreciate the performance from Buckley, especially when considering the variety of personas that she ends up portraying, but I thought it was never nailed down. Perhaps that is the fault of the screenplay and direction, but Buckley certainly suffers most from the material given to the leads. Bale is okay, if a bit disappointingly low-key. The most interesting main character is actually portrayed by Bening, which makes it all the more frustrating when she is so underused. Jake Gyllenhaal brightens things up a bit with his role, playing a movie star from the era, but I cannot say the same for either Peter Sarsgaard or Penélope Cruz, who are disappointingly weighed down by the fact that their characters are more avatars carrying around some of the central themes than proper characters.

Some may love this, and I am glad that the movie exists for them. I suspect that most will dislike it though, and many will absolutely hate it. I find myself closer to that last grouping, and it's only the ambition and confidence of Gyllenhaal, however it was improperly channelled, that has me rating this just a bit higher than I otherwise would. 

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

Amsterdam (2022)

Writer-director David O. Russell seems to be coasting along lately, to put it nicely. His films have become an excuse for an ensemble cast to put on some glad rags and have some fun together, but without saying anything of substance. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, not every film needs to be substantial, but it’s odd that they are still being presented as praiseworthy and interesting when they, sadly, are not. 

Maybe I am part of the problem, considering I gave American Hustle a pass and genuinely enjoyed Joy, neither of which were on a par with his better films. So this disappointment was probably inevitable, and I suspect many others will have felt the same way when they finally watched Amsterdam, a pretty, but ultimately hollow, distraction.

The plot is more convoluted than it needs to be, which is why I am not going to properly summarize it here. Let’s just say that a suspicious death alerts one or two people to the idea that certain individuals may be plotting to overthrow the US government. This puts the people (played by Christian Bale, John David Washington, and Margot Robbie) in a lot of potential danger.

This material could have been done any number of ways, from tense thriller to farce, from straightforward historical drama to action movie, but Russell, in all his wisdom, decides to do just what he’s done before. You get some humour, you get a lot of drama, and you get a cast allowed to indulge themselves as long as the director is also happy with their work.

As for the cast, it’s more of a mixed bag than you might think. Bale doesn’t feel enjoyable in his main role, his character defined by the false glass eye he wears, but both Washington and Robbie improve every scene they are in, both avoiding that sensation of just repeating tics and tricks from their own back catalogue that Bale conveys. Zoe Saldaña is good in her small role, Robert De Niro is fun without being funny, and Timothy Olyphant brings the added bonus of, well, being Timothy Olyphant. If there is ever a film in which I don’t welcome the appearance of Olyphant then I want to be slapped repeatedly around the face until I see sense again. There are also supporting turns from Rami Malek, Andrea Riseborough, Taylor Swift (just a cameo, really, but she’s decent), Alessandro Nivola, Matthias Schoenaerts, Anya Taylor-Joy, Michael Shannon, and Mike Myers.

The production design is very good, as are the wardrobe choices and the musical score, but this is a film that needed more than just the visual distractions and a couple of key performances to make it worthwhile. It needed a better-written, and better-performed, lead, and it needed a much better approach to the story, which is an interesting and intriguing tale. Instead, we get to once again look on as Russell and his cast appear to be enjoying some in-jokes that nobody else is privy to. To sum up . . . disappointing, but pretty.

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: The Pale Blue Eye (2022)

I read a book that was gifted to me many years ago called "Quoth The Crow", by David Bischoff. I enjoyed it, but I also recognised that it wasn't great. It just happened to tie into things that I enjoyed; namely The Crow and Edgar Allen Poe. I also quite enjoyed The Raven, a film that pits Poe (played in that movie by John Cusack) against an inventive serial killer, despite also recognising that it wasn't great. It was entertaining, and fun, but not great. The Pale Blue Eye isn't great, yet it has a great cast and the makings of something great. So why did I dislike it quite so much?

Christian Bale plays Augustus Landor, a detective who is hired to investigate the murder of a young military cadet. Landor soon meets a young, striking, Edgar Allen Poe (Harry Melling). Poe is insightful, but also soon comes under suspicion himself. Getting to the bottom of the mystery may not lead to a happy ending for either of our two main characters, and they will surely ruffle some feathers on their way to unmasking the killer, who murders once again while the investigation is ongoing.

Based on a novel of the same name by Louis Bayard, writer-director Scott Cooper gives himself a big helping hand by casting the film well. Bale remains an undeniably effective and talented performer, but he seems to settle into a bit of a rut nowadays when aligning himself so closely to the likes of Cooper, and David O. Russell (of course). Melling is a good fit for the role of young Poe, and the supporting cast includes such notable luminaries as Timothy Spall, Simon McBurney, Toby Jones, Robert Duvall, and Gillian Anderson. Unfortunately, most of them are sorely underused, leaving time and space for performances from Harry Lawtey, Lucy Boynton, Fred Hechinger, Joey Brooks, and Charlotte Gainsbourg, as well as many others populating a tale that paradoxically delivers far too much and far too little. You get a wealth of talent unable to shine, you get a murder mystery without any real tension developed, and you get Poe as a main character without making it feel as if him BEING Poe is really relevant to the premise or plotting of the film.

I would rush to say if the script was the big weakness of this film, and it could certainly do with some tweaks and improvements here and there, but I think the biggest problem is the way that Cooper half-heartedly serves up a film that he doesn't seem passionate about. The thriller side of things doesn't thrill, the drama is even less engaging, and there's no sense of anything coming together as it should. That wouldn't be so bad if Cooper had decided to at least sprinkle some fun into the mix, but he doesn't do that either. The Pale Blue Eye, lacking any one successful element, cast notwithstanding, just feels like a few people showing how smug and clever they can be, all while onlookers (and that includes other cast members) become increasingly bored and exasperated.

It looks nice, generally, but that's not enough. This is a movie with the money and resources to do more than just look nice. A basic level of technical competence is the minimum to be expected, and it's what you get (including a score by Howard Shore). But you don't get more than that. The Pale Blue Eye = the bare minimum.

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

Thor: Love And Thunder (2022)

I really liked Thor: Ragnarok. REALLY liked it. For me, it was the best of the Thor films so far, and the comedy worked for me throughout. I could see why some might dislike it though, especially if they didn't appreciate the comedy. Funnily enough, watching Thor: Love And Thunder has put me in an even better position to sympathise with people who disliked Thor: Ragnarok. Because I really disliked this.

The plot this time around revolves around Gorr (Christian Bale), a grieving father who ends up turning himself into a killer of gods. That puts Thor in the way of danger again, of course, but he's not alone. He has the help of King Valkyrie (Tessa Thompson) and a returning Jane Foster (Natalie Portman). There's also Korg (voiced once again by director Taika Waititi) by his side, and a few other familiar faces scattered throughout the runtime.

There's a very obvious problem with Thor: Love And Thunder. In fact, there are two things worth noting as the obvious problems. First of all, the comedy doesn't really work. It feels tired this time around, like a joke you laughed at on the first day of your new job but now hate because you know that your colleague makes the same damn joke every single morning. Second, the more serious aspects of the film aren't given enough room to breathe, which means nothing is as effective as it could be, and nothing really feels earned on the way to the end credits (and don't even get me started on the mid-credits and post-credits scenes here . . . because URGH).

Waititi works as the voice of Korg, but he falls flat on his face in his role as writer (working out the story that was further hammered into screenplay form by Jennifer Kaytin Robinson) and director. There are some nice visuals here, and some entertaining set-pieces, but so many of the best moments do little more than remind viewers of very similar moments in the previous Thor movie. 

At least the cast all work well though . . . is something you could easily say if the cast worked well. Sadly, that's not the case. Portman and Thompson are both good, dealing well with clumsy plotting that asks them to do some heavier lifting with their performances. Bale is also good. He's the highlight of the film, an impressive and scary presence for every minute of his screentime. Hemsworth, sadly, is on autopilot. This is his worst turn in the MCU yet, having forgotten how he once played a character that has now become a messy mass of mugging and ridiculousness. The first ever Thor movie managed to burst the bubble of pomposity that viewers worried about, but also balanced the fish-out-of-water comedy with the weight and seriousness of Thor's responsibilities. This film forgets about that balance, and Hemsworth suffers because of it. The same can be said for Russell Crowe, who turns up as Zeus, sporting a terrible attempt at a Greek accent and an equally terrible line in over the top swagger. At least Crowe is more fun though, simply because he's a newcomer to the silliness.

There are still some good moments here and there, especially whenever Bale is involved, but this is a film that generally feels misguided, at best, lazy, and out of touch with what viewers want to see. The transformation of Portman's character is pretty great, the Guns ‘n’ Roses soundtrack choices are pretty great, the rest of the film . . . not so great. And the rest includes unfunny voiceover commentary moments, unfunny depictions of Thor "comedically" trying to deal with jealousy and regret, and a running gag involving screaming goats.

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: Rescue Dawn (2006)

Written and directed by the always-interesting Werner Herzog, who turned the subject of his documentary "Little Dieter Needs To Fly" into a narrative feature, Rescue Dawn feels like one of the stranger Herzog movies, which is saying something when you consider his whole filmography.

Christian Bale plays Dieter Dengler, a German-born American citizen who is shot down in his aircraft during the Vietnam War. He ends up in a jungle prison, doing time alongside other individuals who have given up all hope of freedom until the war is won. Dieter is quick to start plans for an escape, despite the protestations of his fellow prisoners. The prison itself may not be that challenging to escape from, it's the jungle environment surrounding them that makes it a life-threatening challenge.

Things start off a bit wobbly here, to put it bluntly. Herzog depicts the downing of Dieter's plane in a way that shows him to be far less confident with a special effect sequence than he is with actors and ordinary people. But it's not long before things settle down after that, with the main character confused and pained by his captors.

Although I have said that this feels like one of the stranger Herzog movies, the reason for that is because it feels like his most mainstream film. It's a prisoner of war drama, and the moments that feel most like a prisoner of war drama are the moments that feel less . . . Herzogian, but there are also a lot of great little moments showing people handling their very extreme amounts of stress in different ways, and forging different connections with one another.

Bale is fantastic in the main role, giving the kind of performance that allows him to once again also change his physicality as he gets put through the wringer, and there are two superb supporting performances from Jeremy Davies and Steve Zahn. Both are very different in the way they handle their prison life, but both are equally good and fitting in their roles. And everyone else onscreen does decent work, whether they're portraying American military personnel or Vietnamese soldiers.

Despite the documentary already being out there (and I still need to see it for myself), it's easy to see why Herzog was drawn to the material for a second feature. Especially with this cast and the way it very much feels like a well-plotted Hollywood drama. I'm not sure how many liberties were taken with the original tale, but it turns into yet another standout film from a director who has given us more than his fair share.

8/10

Ford V Ferrari (2019)

A contender that never really seemed to have a chance in the awards season, Ford V Ferrari came to cinema screens with a small amount of fanfare, but no real way to sell it to anyone other than fans of stars Matt Damon and Christian Bale (and, yes, I went into this film thinking one played Ford and one played Ferrari). That's a shame, because this turns out to be one of the more enjoyable films put forward in various award categories over the past year. It's easy to see why others edged ahead in pretty much every category, and it's easy to dismiss it as a formulaic movie that takes no risks, but that shouldn't take away from the fact that the film deserves to receive a bit more praise than it got (from the response I have seen to it anyway).

Matt Damon is Carroll Shelby, the man who ends up tasked with designing a car for Henry Ford II (Tracy Letts) capable of beating the almighty Ferrari cars that have dominated the Le Mans racing event for many years. The car is only part of the solution though. What's also required is a driver who knows exactly how to get the most out of the machine. That's where Ken Miles (Christian Bale) comes in. But Ken is a racer who doesn't necessarily fit the image that Ford may want to put out there as the winning driver to get results that will also lead to more car sales.

Director James Mangold has a good foundation to work with here, with a smart and sharp script hammered into shape by Jez Butterworth, John-Henry Butterworth, and Jason Keller, and his quality cast. He also shows a great understanding of how to use the technology at his disposal to best display the intensity of the racing moments without making it all feel like a CGI showcase.

Although Bale is as good as you would expect in the main role, he's a man with a very singular purpose. He knows cars, he wants to win races, he doesn't care for whatever else may be happening around him, in terms of the business and PR side. Damon gets to have a bit more fun, knowing when to play the game with people and when to do whatever it takes to protect the man who he knows is the best fit for the car. The supporting cast is also full of treats, from Letts as Ford, to Jon Bernthal as the vice president of Ford, to Caitriona Balfe as Mollie Miles, the supportive wife of Ken. Josh Lucas gets to be the kind of arrogant douchebag that seems to be the highlighted role type at the top of his CV, and he does it so well, and Ray McKinnon is Phil Remington, a team engineer who is also adverse to all of the games being played off the track, his only aim being to help Miles and Shelby make their case with the fastest lap times.

There may be few surprises for those who were already familiar with this tale (I wasn't, I have no knowledge of the history of racecar driving), but there's enough added, in terms of the character development and little fun details, to definitely make this worth the time of even those who think they know the story too well to find it tense or entertaining. Mangold uses a lot of tried and tested tricks to make sure that it is a complete, and completely enjoyable, cinematic experience.

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

The Prestige (2006)

Every great magic trick consists of three parts or acts. The first part is called "The Pledge". The magician shows you something ordinary: a deck of cards, a bird or a man. He shows you this object. Perhaps he asks you to inspect it to see if it is indeed real, unaltered, normal. But of course... it probably isn't. The second act is called "The Turn". The magician takes the ordinary something and makes it do something extraordinary. Now you're looking for the secret... but you won't find it, because of course you're not really looking. You don't really want to know. You want to be fooled. But you wouldn't clap yet. Because making something disappear isn't enough; you have to bring it back. That's why every magic trick has a third act, the hardest part, the part we call "The Prestige".

The Prestige is another sumptuous Christopher Nolan film in a fine line of sumptuous Christopher Nolan films, co-written by himself and his brother Jonathan, based on the novel by Christopher Priest, and arguably more intriguing and intimate than anything else he has directed since he reached the level of success earned by Batman Begins. That's not to say that this is better than any of his other films since then. It's just nice to see him work on something of a smaller scale, something that doesn't need to warp cityscapes or throw you headlong into grand moments seemingly designed to look best in IMAX.

After a stage trick goes horribly wrong, Robert Angier (Hugh Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Christian Bale) find themselves growing more obsessed with each other. Each wants to outdo the other, but Borden seems to have the upper hand when he achieves great success with his "transported man" illusion. Angier grows more and more desperate to learn the secret of the trick, unaware of what it will end up costing both men if he continues on his self-destructive path.

The Prestige is very much constructed like a magic trick, and very much in line with the quote above. But while this could have seemed a bit precious and self-congratulatory, with the Nolans spelling out the structure of the film and trying to trick viewers on the way to the finale, it instead comes over as something that has simply been crafted with great attention to detail and an aim to entertain. The twists in the plot are enjoyable enough, but rewatching the film emphasises just how unimportant they are when it comes to the quality of the tale. You can know how a card trick is done, but that doesn't stop you enjoying it being done by a slick showman who also tells you an entertaining story while he's trying to keep everyone else from figuring out his secrets.

Jackman and Bale are both great, although Bale's accent does occasionally veer a little bit towards parody cockney territory, and they both get their share of excellent moments throughout. Michael Caine is also very good, helping both men out at different times in their lives. Piper Perabo, Rebecca Hall, and Scarlett Johansson all play women who are adversely affected by the obsessions of these men. They're not given as much to work with, at all, but all do a good enough job, with Hall giving a surprisingly effective and moving performance that sits up there with the best I have seen from her. David Bowie plays Tesla, which allows him to yet again be effortlessly cool in a much smaller role that absolutely works for him, and both Andy Serkis and the magical Ricky Jay do well with their brief amount of screentime, Jay is a cameo you could easily miss.

The music by David Julyan is very good, the production design and composition of every scene is gorgeous, and the editing allows for lots of nice foreshadowing and reveals on the way to . . . The Prestige.

All too often overlooked nowadays, which is understandable considering the impressive body of work that Nolan has built up, The Prestige is definitely worth a watch/rewatch. It's a film for fans of Nolan, for fans of the cast, for fans of magic, and for fans of great film-making.

8/10

Buy the shiny disc here.
Or, in America, buy it here.

American Psycho (2000)

Based on the fantastic book by Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho is, to be perfectly honest, an astonishingly great movie that's boosted by a mesmerising central performance by Christian Bale and a script that lines up memorable scene after memorable scene. In all seriousness, I was very tempted to turn this review into nothing more than a selection of excerpts from the script. The scene involving the lead character explaining his love of Hue Lewis & The News is rightly regarded as a classic, mixing humour and insanity in equal measure and leading to a jaw-droppingly superb punchline.

The 80s, a decade of bad taste and excessive wealth. The rise and rise of the yuppie. The accessories and the lifestyle accoutrements became essential to many, a way to show your identity through prestigious brand names and expensive fashions. And those with the richest and easiest lifestyles all seemed to be doing the same job which was, well, something to do with money that other mere mortals never quite understood. In fact, it often didn't seem like work at all as these people went to "business lunch" after "business lunch". American Psycho looks at all of this with a cold and accurate eye for detail. Everything is brought to our attention by the behaviour of the psychopathic Patrick Bateman (Bale).

A great big middle finger raised to the rise and rise of materialism and the erasing of individual personalities, and their morals, in the workplace, American Psycho is hilarious from start to finish if you have the right sense of humour to enjoy the pitch black material. It's also equally, and impressively, disturbing from start to finish.

 Director Mary Harron (who adapted the novel to screenpla form with Guinevere Turner) deserves a lot of credit for getting the tone just right and following through with every brave decision made in getting the source material onscreen but just as much praise can be heaped upon a flawless cast. Christian Bale takes the lead role by the scruff of the neck and becomes Bateman. Perhaps this is most appropriate because the character views himself as nothing in the first place (a shell to be inhabited by whichever performance best suits, perhaps?). Despite such a strong lead performance, nobody in a supporting role ever feels completely overshadowed because the material is so good and the performers are most definitely able to rise to the occasion. Justin Theroux, Josh Lucas, Jared Leto, Reese Witherspoon, Samantha Mathis, Chloe Sevigny, Willem Dafoe, Cara Seymour, I could just list everyone involved to give them their due but, instead, I encourage you to just watch the movie and enjoy every single piece of acting onscreen.

Whether he's discussing the greats of 80s pop, worrying about new business cards, telling people how he has to rush off to return some videotapes or considering feeding a cat to an ATM, Patrick Bateman is a character you enjoy watching even as you alternately cringe, recoil and laugh at his actions. The movie is defined by him in the same way that he is defined by his perceived status. It's also essential viewing.

10/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/American-Psycho-DVD-Christian-Bale/dp/B00004WZWB