Prime Time: The Wrecking Crew (2026)

Dave Bautista and Jason Momoa star as two estranged half-brothers who reluctantly reunite after the death of their father. He was killed in a hit and run, but it soon becomes apparent that there was more to his death, and James (Bautista) and Jonny (Momoa) start an investigation that turns parts of Hawaii into a warzone as they upset bad guys, destroy numerous vehicles, and work their way up the chain to face off against whoever is the head villain behind everything.

Simple and entertaining, and even managing to feel well-paced for the 124-minute runtime, The Wrecking Crew is sometimes a nice throwback action comedy that is happy to make the destruction ridiculous, the main villain obvious, and every pay-off predictable. Writer Jonathan Tropper is happy to make the leads enjoyably childish when it comes to the insults and competitiveness between them, and he does well to refrain from adding too many twists and turns that would get in the way of the fun.

Both of the leads are good in their roles, with Momoa having the most fun of the two of them (being sillier and more irresponsible for most of the runtime), and there's a great supporting cast that includes Temuera Morrison, Roimata Fox, Frankie Adams, Claes Bang, Jacob Batalon, Morena Baccarin, Stephen Root, and one or two others you may recognise. 

While director Ángel Manuel Soto does well enough with the material, he fumbles things in a couple of ways. First of all, he overdoes at least one main set-piece. I enjoyed the ridiculousness and carnage of a sequence that has road vehicles and a helicopter targeting our heroes, but it's nowhere near as much fun as the moments that have more grounded and crunchy action. There's also at least one moment, a reveal, that would have worked better as a punchline to an earlier set-up, but it's simply presented without any other context to improve it. And don't get me started on the ill-advised Oldboy homage. These might sound like minor complaints, but they stand out more because of the other times that the film gets things just right. 

Anyone after an easy bit of entertainment should find enough here to enjoy, even if it keeps slipping up every now and again. I suggest a sequel, if we get one, keeps everything much more grounded, maybe kills off, or seriously hurts, one of the main supporting characters, and gives us a moment or two when we can at least consider the possibility that one of our leads is in very serious trouble. It would definitely be worth pairing up Bautista and Momoa again though. They play off one another well, and they feel very capable when it comes to the physicality of their fight scenes. 

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 

Mubi Monday: The Last Showgirl (2024)

There are many times when others praise things that make it easy for me to agree with them, be it a piece of art or an artist, or something that occurs in the world outside of my entertainment/art bubble. I would say that most of the time I tend to find my views aligning with the majority. Not all of the time though, and The Last Showgirl is one of those times when I am very much at the opposite end of the general consensus.

Pamela Anderson plays Shelly, a showgirl who finds herself with a big problem when the show that she has been part of for decades is due to close forever. Despite the dwindling audience numbers and various struggles, this news seems to be a huge shock to Shelly, Mary-Anne (Brenda Song), Jodie (Kiernan Shipka), and the other women in the show. Not sure of what she will do in the future, Shelly starts to also consider what she has given up in the past, including a relationship with her daughter, Hannah (Billie Lourd). 

The first screenplay feature credit for Kate Gersten, The Last Showgirl is a disappointing and muddled look at choices made in youth that reverberate through an entire lifetime, as well as being an obvious exploration of how anyone racing against the clock of natural ageing is always going to be in danger of losing their place in an industry that values youth and beauty above almost everything else. While not a great film, it also has the misfortune of being released very close to the much superior The Substance, which explores similar themes in a much more interesting, and a much smarter, way. It's hard not to keep comparing the two, considering how they also position a "past their prime" actress in the lead role, surround them with one or two relative newcomers, and underscore the main narrative with a mixture of sadness and disappointment in the lack of progress made in the two main industries being looked at.

Director Gia Coppola obviously believes that casting Anderson in the lead role is a great way to play into the material, but that would only work if Anderson was good enough. Sadly, she is not, and the fact that she plays her character with some constant faux-Marilyn Monroe affectation in her speech doesn't help her show a big enough difference between her stage persona and her personality when not performing. Song and Shipka aren't given enough to do, with the latter also unable to make her character work when required to perform a dance that is supposed to get close to something sexy, and the only moments worth your time involve either Dave Bautista (as Eddie, a producer who has a past with Shelly), Jamie Lee Curtis (as Annette, a former showgirl now working as a cocktail waitress), or Billie Lourd (as Hannah, Shelly's daughter).

There are some parts of this that are admirable, but they're overshadowed by a lead actress who cannot make the most of her role, a couple of trips into fantasy sequences that derail the central narrative focus, and a third act that is equal parts unsatisfying and surprisingly empty. I'm not going to say that the whole thing ultimately lacks enough . . . substance, but that wouldn't be an incorrect summary. I don't know who to blame - writer, director, or star - but surely they didn't want people to watch this and just wish they had rewatched Showgirls instead.

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 

Prime Time: The Killer's Game (2024)

The second feature film directed by J. J. Perry (after the enjoyable Night Shift), I have to start this review by saying that there was a lot here that seemed to be appealing directly to me. I like both Dave Bautista and Sofia Boutella, who have main roles here. I like a lot of movies about hitmen, of which this is one. And I like a lot of people in the supporting cast, from Scott Adkins to Terry Crews, and from Alex Kingston to Pom Klementieff . . . and I suppose that Ben Kingsley does okay in the right role. So it's a shame that this was so awful. 

Bautista plays Joe Flood, one of the best hitmen in the business. He meets a beautiful dancer named Maize Arnaud (Boutella), and that makes him start to consider retirement. Retirement isn't always a luxury afforded to hitmen though, especially when they have been as busy and successful as Joe. But when he is given bad news by a doctor, Joe decides the best thing to do is to put a contract on himself. Unfortunately, he soon discovers that he has a big reason to renegotiate, but Antoinette (Klementieff) isn't interested. She's sent out the call and a number of flamboyant killers have answered.

Apparently based on a book by Jay R. Bonansinga, The Killer's Game has a screenplay, written by Rand Ravich and James Coyne, that is one of the most derivative and tired I have encountered in the past year or two. The hitman ordering a hit on himself is standard stuff now, as is the change of circumstances coming along too late to stop the onslaught of greedy mercenary murderers, and everyone involved having their own quirky style makes it feel like something that would have been much more fun about twenty years ago, before that choice was used in far too many other movies.

Crews is a lot of fun in his role, and Scott Adkins has fun putting on a Scottish accent to work alongside Drew McIntyre, but they are the only ones who liven things up. Okay, Dylan Moran is an unexpected delight in his small role, playing a priest who receives quite the confession, and Kingston has a couple of amusing moments, but nobody else seems to stay awake in front of the cameras. Bautista seems very stilted and slow, and he has no chemistry with Boutella, who is hampered by being the love interest kept in the dark for most of the runtime. Klementieff fails to make her potential villain truly menacing or memorable, Kingsley is so low-key that he seems to have wandered in from a much calmer movie, and that covers the people who actually made any impression on me. 

Perry can showcase some action that feels visceral and impactful, but he even undermines that aspect of the film by trying to make everything more fun and funky with each main fight sequence choreographed to some pop song that, at best, ensures the film has zero tension and, at worst, reminds you of whenever tht song was used in some other, much better, movie.

The pacing isn't bad, some of the scenes look nice enough, and I am easily entertained by groups of people descending upon one another to engage in a mass brawl, but this is generally not worth your time. It's a huge disappointment, and every single main cast member has a handful of better films that you could enjoy checking out instead of this.

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

Dune: Part Two (2024)

The film that fans of Dune: Part One were forced to wait an extra five months to see in cinemas, that delay seems to have done nothing to dampen the enthusiasm of those eager for more visually gorgeous sci-fi on the big screen. It certainly gave me time to FINALLY watch the first instalment and join those who were eagerly awaiting the concluding part of the tale. Except, and I feel it’s important to say this somewhere in this review, this isn’t really a conclusion to the tale. It’s another lengthy chapter, and I was disappointed as the end credits rolled after an ending that didn’t feel like a proper ending. It might be in line with the source material, and there is certainly more to come from Denis Villeneuve working in this world, but that didn’t help me when I was underwhelmed by the way in which things just started to move towards the next part of the epic tale.

I will give a brief, and very poor, summary of the plot. After the events of the first film, Paul Atreides (Tinothée Chalamet) and his pregnant mother, Jessica (Rebecca Ferguson), are living with the desert-dwelling Fremen on the planet of Arrakis. Powerful people still want to destroy the Fremen, all to control the spice and become even more powerful, but Paul may well be the secret weapon that helps to end the ongoing battles. Or he may well cause even more destruction and bloodshed. There are strong bonds forged, and broken, there is a prophecy that many start to doubt, and there is a need to learn how to walk without rhythm in order to stay safe from the giant sandworms.

Although a visual feast from start to finish, as well as an aural feast too (thanks to Hans Zimmer and everyone working in the sound department), Villeneuve and Jon Spaihts have once again done a magnificent job of compressing an epic tome into a digestible and entertaining movie. It has a slightly different tone from part one, mainly due to the fact that we are witnessing Paul exploring his true potential, but it’s often the equal of the first film.

The cast are perfect, as many of them already proved last time around. Both Chalamet and Ferguson get to be a bit stronger and meaner this time, which is an interesting change to their characters, Javier Bardem has a bit more fun in his role, and Zendaya gets to do a lot more than just be some mysterious woman in a vision. Christopher Walken and Florence Pugh are sorely underused, as is the wonderful Léa Seydoux, while the likes of Stellan Skarsgård, Dave Bautista, and Josh Brolin are given just time to stay involved in the ongoing plotting and scheming until Austin Butler comes onscreen and threatens to steal the entire movie away from everyone.

I have less to say about this than I had to say about Dune: Part One, but only because it is so perfectly in line with the groundwork set out a few years ago. Villeneuve is arguably one of the best directors around when it comes to creating an entire world in which to immerse viewers (imagine the worlds we could see if he ever worked alongside Guillermo del Toro), and this is incredible stuff. It’s grandiose, it seems to emanate dry heat from every frame, and the prospect of getting to spend more time in this world is the silver lining to the small cloud that is that non-ending.

Much like the spice featured at the heart of the tale, this is pure and powerful stuff. And that’s without even mentioning how depressingly it parallels events in our reality that have been ongoing for decades. 

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

Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 3 (2023)

It took a while, a span of time that saw writer-director James Gunn move from Marvel to DC and then back again, and then back AGAIN to accept a very senior role at DC, but we got there eventually. The third, and final (at least in this incarnation), adventure for the Guardians Of The Galaxy. A lot of people are happy, most seem to think that Gunn managed to stick the landing. I am not in agreement with those people.

Our main group aren’t in a great place when the film starts, with Peter Quill (Chris Pratt) spending time drunk and sad while the others are unable to snap him out of his funk. Everything gets much worse when Adam Warlock (Will Poulter) turns up, picks a fight with our gang, and then leaves after being seriously wounded. He isn’t the only casualty though. Rocket (Bradley Cooper) ends up in critical condition, and the fact that he has some kind of killswitch inside him makes it impossible to immediately heal him. The guardians have to figure out how to bypass the killswitch, which means they have to find out more about Rocket’s past, putting them on a headlong path towards someone known as The High Evolutionary (Chukwudi Iwuji). Well, we find out about Rocket’s past as we see many flashbacks showing us everything that the Guardians may or may not find out about at a later stage.

While I am not going to say that this is the worst Marvel movie since Thor: Love And Thunder, there are a lot of the same problems dragging this down from the great ending it could have been. Much like Waititi being encouraged to further indulge himself with his second Thor movie, Gunn seems to have been given free rein to cut loose and go crazy for the final instalment of this trilogy. With the exception of The High Evolutionary, who is a fantastic main villain, almost everyone now speaks in banter and gags. There are very few instances without an abundance of jokes. I get that these movies have been full of humour throughout the previous instalments, but it’s all overdone here in a way that jars with the more serious moments. And, hooo boy, are there some serious moments here. The whole backstory for Rocket is an upsetting and emotional look at animal vivisection, and the third act feels even more callous than some of the other Marvel movies, when you fully consider the impact of the large-scale destruction. So I can see that Gunn would have wanted plenty of humour to offset these moments, but it just doesn’t work well enough, mainly due to him twisting other characters too far away from how they used to be. Even a surprising Groot (still voiced by Vin Diesel) moment feels a bit disappointing and at odds with the charm of his essence.

The production design is wild throughout, and that also feels as if it has gone too far. Gunn wants every scene crammed full of alien species and strange environments, but too much of everything just has you wishing for a moment or two of something refreshingly normal. And then there’s the soundtrack, which people have once again marked as a highlight. No. This is a selection of obtrusive needle-drops that simply don’t work as well as by soundtrack choices from the first two movies. I love most of the songs used here, but they rarely felt like a natural fit for the scenes they were shoehorned into.

The cast generally do a good job, working well with what they are given. If you enjoyed Pratt, Cooper, Diesel, Dave Bautista, Pom Klementieff, Karen Gillan, Zoe Saldana, and Sean Gunn in the previous movies then you should enjoy them here. Poulter is sadly wasted in his role, as is Elizabeth Debicki (playing his “mother”), Maria Bakalova provides the voice of Cosmo, another fairly wasted character, and I am sure fans of Gunn’s work will enjoy seeing a small role for Nathan Fillion. Iwuji would steal the film though, were it not for the fact that many of his scenes involve him interacting with a super-cute, younger version of Rocket. His genuinely threatening and cruel villain is good enough to lift the whole film up a notch or two.

It’s hard to stay angry or disappointed with Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 3 though, knowing that everyone involved really wanted to come back and do their best to ensure a fitting end to this particular chapter in their cinematic incarnation, but it’s not one I will be revisiting, as opposed to the previous two adventures. Not only is the main storyline surprisingly predictable, it’s also surprisingly unsatisfying. One moment near the very end had me thinking that Gunn was actually committed to making the most of this opportunity to provide a properly emotional ending for this ragtag bunch of reluctant heroes, but it was soon undercut by one of the many easier options available in his storytelling toolbox. And it's also worth noting the most egregious and unnecessary "f-bomb" I can think of, seemingly just to take full advantage of the 12A rating here in the UK.

There are still moments here to enjoy, and many other people found less to be critical of than I did, but I was disappointed, and it feels like yet more proof that Marvel will struggle to get back to the consistent greatness they made seem so effortless as they built everything towards the cinematic conclusion of the Infinity Saga.

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

Knock At The Cabin (2023)

Taken on a purely superficial level, director M. Night Shyamalan has kept to his usual remit over the past few years. He has delivered thrillers that are centered around an intriguing idea, pleasing or displeasing viewers with his approach to executing the material. Dive under the surface though, which is easy to do when the surface level doesn’t seem anywhere near as emotional or complex as his best work, and you start to see some worrying ideas (almost propaganda) at the heart of them. I am not here to point these aspects out to everyone, but I do think that Shyamalan is now focusing on his subtextual messaging ahead of straightforward storytelling, which makes it necessary to start acknowledging where he seems to be expending more of his energy.

Knock At The Cabin is a tale of four people who arrive at a cabin and request entry. They are headed up by Leonard (Dave Bautista). The people already in the cabin are Eric (Jonathan Groff), Andrew (Ben Aldridge), and their adopted daughter, Wen (Kristen Cui), and they are blissfully unaware that there is an impending apocalypse, apparently. Leonard and his cohorts have had visions. They don’t want to harm people, but they have been asked to knock on this cabin door and ask those inside to make a sacrifice. If they can choose a loved one to sacrifice then they can save the whole world. That’s hard to believe though, obviously, and the film is essentially a lengthy dialogue in which the believers try to convert the non-believers to their cause.

Adapting a book by Paul Tremblay, Shyamalan and co-writers Steve Desmond and Michael Sherman certainly have their work cut out for them, dealing with an implausible scenario that is mostly confined to the one location. They give it an admirable attempt, helped by a cast that deliver on the acting front, but there just isn’t enough mixed in to the plot to distract viewers from the ridiculousness of the central idea. At the risk of moving further away from the source material, this needed to have characters more fleshed out, more debate about the choice to be made, and more ambiguity in the third act.

Shyamalan directs competently, happily keeping viewers in the cabin with the main characters, and I was pleased that he didn’t require his cast to deliver some of their worst performances this time around (as he did with Old), but he doesn’t elevate the middling script. This would arguably work better as a stage play, allowing a focus on the ideas and conversation, but Shyamalan wants a film. He manages to do that, only just, but the end result, if being ranked, sits almost right in the middle of his filmography.

Bautista is quite brilliant in his role, a gentle giant who is as sad about his actions as he is determined to carry them out. He is flanked by Rupert Grint, Nikki Amuka-Bird, and Abby Quinn, who all do good work. It’s a shame that they aren’t given more screentime, but Bautista is the spokesperson for the group, and that’s how he ends up being the most impressive onscreen presence. Groff and Aldridge are also very good, required to spend most of the movie in a state of fear, and young Cui is a very sweet little girl that you hope will be kept safe from any harm, be it interpersonal or global.

I enjoyed this while it was on. The cast make it work, often being good enough to improve dialogue that could have seemed goofy and ridiculous. That’s all there is to it though. It’s an acting showpiece, directed by someone who seems too distracted to make the most of what could have been a much more impressive, and much more tense, killer thriller premise.

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

Netflix And Chill: Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery (2022)

When Rian Johnson gave us Knives Out a few years ago, he served up a delightful murder mystery that made great use of some excellent plotting, provided numerous laughs, and allowed for everyone in the ensemble cast to have at least one or two moments to shine. I loved it, and I was far from alone in loving it. I'd say that a lot of people were looking forward to this follow-up, another case for the talented detective Benoit Blanc (Craig David) to crack.

Edward Norton plays Miles Bron, a super-rich tech "genius" who is gathering a number of people together on his island to take part in a murder mystery weekend. Most of the guests are his friends, but most of them also have a reason to relish his potential demise. They include Birdie Jay (Kate Hudson), a fashionista and social media personality, Duke Cody (Dave Bautista), a famous idiot who has found an audience for his idiotic agitation, Lionel Toussaint (Leslie Odom Jr.), a tech guy who actually ends up doing the work that Bron can then take credit for, and Claire Debella (Kathryn Hahn), a woman making moves in the world of politics. Janelle Monáe also turns up, not necessarily a friend, but certainly an integral part of the group, and there are a couple of other people present (Peg, the assistant to Birdie Jay, and Whiskey, the partner of Cody). The most important guest, however, is Blanc. And things take a turn for the mysterious when it is revealed that he wasn't actually invited. Who is really orchestrating the events of the weekend, and who will wind up dead?

It's hard to think of people hating this film. The cast and the quality of the film-making should please most viewers. It's also hard, however, to see how fans of the first film can consider this a superior mystery. Before getting into detail, it's overlong (by a good 10-15 minutes, and most of the opening act could be trimmed down easily), it's not as engaging or clever when it comes to the plotting, and most of the cast are sadly wasted.

Craig is clearly having a wonderful time in the central role, and that emanates from the screen, which is a big plus. Hudson also has a lot of fun, it's good to see Norton not in full serious mode (especially in the flashback scenes that have him sporting hair stolen from Magnolia's Frank T. J. Mackey), and Monáe sinks her teeth into a script that gives her a chance to shine bright, which she does with aplomb. Unfortunately, that leaves the rest of the cast floundering. Bautista can't do much with his underwritten character, nor can Odom Jr., and wasting Hahn this painfully should be punishable by public flogging. Henwick manages to shine in her supporting role, but that's more to do with her presence than the writing (for comparison, just look at the way Cline feels almost non-existent), and Noah Segan has no need to be in the tiny role that he's given.

I like Johnson, he's a film-maker who often mixes in just the right amount of cine-literacy (and he's been very open about this film being influenced by The Last Of Sheila) and sheer fun, but this feels like a mis-step, as if he's already forgotten, or didn't actually realise, what made the first film work so well. This lacks bite, it lacks enough solid laughs, and it lacks that important feeling of satisfaction that viewers should get when all of the pieces lock into place during the final act. Some of the silliness is deliberate, especially when Johnson is underlining the idea of people mistaking wealth for intelligence and class, but some of it feels out of place, almost as if Johnson was worried about people becoming bored. Which, ironically, leads to a few scenes which may leave some viewers bored.

Generally well-made, and with some delightful cameos, this is a nice bit of escapism for the swollen runtime. It's just a bit disappointing, especially when stood alongside the brilliance of the first film in the series, although it's not essential to have seen that before diving into this one. I'll still look forward to the next Knives Out mystery though, and I wouldn't be too pained if I was ever made to rewatch this.

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

Netflix And Chill: Army Of The Dead (2021)

I went in without any expectations, I assure you I did. Zack Snyder isn't someone I have a very strong opinion on, despite his ability to stir up lots of fans online and get away with much more than most directors would. I like his visual style, he's done a couple of great modern blockbusters, and I'll still try to view anything he directs with an open mind.

Unfortunately, it seems that Snyder, like one or two other big name directors I could mention, has started to believe his own hype. And may be surrounded by people who don't say no often enough. There's no other reason I can think of for the succession of bad decisions made here. And I will roll my eyes and wag my finger at anyone who forgives all other errors because "zombie tiger . . . coooool."

The plot is simple. A nasty accident means that there's a massive outbreak of zombieitis in Las Vegas. There's a lot of carnage, and then Las Vegas is basically quarantined, thanks to a handy complete ring of large containers placed around it. If you're already unable to handle this level of disbelief, it just gets worse from here. Scott Ward (Dave Bautista) is tasked by Mr. Tanaka (Hiroyuki Sanada) to put together a team and head into Las Vegas, with the aim of collecting a massive sum of money from a casino vault before the place is flattened by nuclear rockets that don't cause any other issues for the surrounding area. Yes, this is a film in which a plan to enter a zombie-infested area just to snatch millions of dollars becomes one of the least dumb things in it, certainly by the time you get to that nuclear rocket strike.

It's also a film that features a fleeting cameo by Sean Spicer. At that point I knew that it would have to work bloody hard to win me back around. It never did.

There's some good stuff here. The gore isn't tamed down, there's an interesting variety to the zombies, and Bautista is a good leading man. It also helps that they ended up with Tig Notaro in the role of Marianne Peters, the pilot for this exploit. Notaro, from her very first scene to her last, is gold. And I'm not completely oblivious to the coolness of a zombie bloody tiger, which is involved in what is the very best death sequence in the whole film.

That's all I can think of for the positives. The script, co-written by Snyder, Shay Hatten, and Joby Harold, is mostly awful. Everyone is given too much time, no matter how minor their characters should be, the motivations are unbelievable, and the attempt to establish an actual society within the zombie realm is a big mis-step, especially when you get to a reveal in the third act that is properly hilarious when I suspect it was meant to be a serious attempt to surprise people. Surprises are lacking throughout, from the characters who turn out to have other agendas to the inevitable resolution to different relationship issues.

The runtime, just under two and a half hours, is another issue. This is a film that should have been all about forward momentum, especially if that would help to distract from the poor script, but it meanders around instead, with Snyder needing to show off every idea that popped into his head while creating the film.

Although the cast aren't bad, some are better than others. Standouts are Bautista (not great, but feels just right in his role), Notaro, Nora Arnezeder (playing someone who can guide the team into Las Vegas), Matthias Schweighöfer (the safecracker), and Garret Dillahunt. But when is Dillahunt not a standout? Ella Purnell, Omari Hardwick, Ana de la Reguera, Theo Rossi, and Raúl Castillo do what is necessary, but are either hampered by the script or just not as good as some of their co-stars.

It's not that I hated watching every minute of this. I just wished that I'd spent two and a half hours watching something much better. And there's a much better film to be made from this premise. Snyder, however, does what Snyder does. And that includes filling up the soundtrack with some horrendous cover songs, despite starting well with another bit of Richard Cheese (used so memorably in Snyder's Dawn Of The Dead remake).

I've already seen some high praise for this, and it's confounding. Everyone can like whatever they like, and it's always different strokes for different folks, but I can't help thinking that some of the people rating the film so highly are simply looking to continue keeping the pedestal upright that Snyder has managed to get himself placed on. 

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

Hotel Artemis (2018)

We've had a lot of great action movies in recent years, and a number of them have taken the time to at least hint at an unseen criminal world running parallel to our own. Hotel Artemis is another film along those lines. It's a blend of sci-fi, action, and standard thriller stuff. It's not great though. Unfortunately, it struggles to even be good.

Jodie Foster plays The Nurse, the woman in charge of the titular building. It's a safe haven for criminals, an exclusive medical facility that has some hard rules in place for the safety of everyone who comes and goes. If you're not up to date with your subscription payments then you can't get in. You can't bring in weapons. And you don't hassle the staff (Foster and her right hand man, Dave Bautista). Of course, these rules all start to be broken on a night when one man (Sterling K. Brown, in a lead role that feels very much like a supporting one) turns up, wounded brother in tow, after a botched robbery. There's a riot in the city causing problems, a couple of other residents (Sofia Boutella and Charlie Day) not getting along too well, a wounded cop (Jenny Slate) in need of assistance, and a surprise visit from the wounded owner of the establishment (Jeff Goldblum).

Hotel Artemis is so close to being a good film that it's almost frustrating to consider how much it misses the mark. The cast are all very good, and very good in their roles (even Charlie Day, who I like in comedic work but sometimes seems miscast when in more serious roles), the hints at the unrest going on in society are intriguing, but never developed into anything more worthwhile, and the few scenes that show the more badass characters actually being badass are fun (although Bautista is sorely underused, and when will Sofia Boutella be given the action movie lead role that she deserves?).

Writer-director Drew Pearce spends far too much time showing that this is his first feature, and that most of his written work used him best as part of a team of creative minds working towards the same goal. There's a damaging lack of focus, an unearned confidence in the dialogue scenes (Foster and Goldblum may be enjoyable to just listen to as they speak but they still need to be given more than the cheesy and clichéd dialogue that they're given here), and a general inability to give any of the main players material that is worthy of their talents. I also had an issue with the way we were given the rules of the hotel, only for them to be broken with far too little time or pressure applied to the decisions.

Take a bunch of lesser-known names and this movie becomes a straight-to-disc time waster. With this cast, however, there's really no way it can be viewed as anything other than a disappointment. The only person who comes close to being used well is Boutella, and even that feels too little too late, in an action sequence during the third act that puts her front and centre.

5/10

You can buy the disc here.
Americans can buy it here.

Netflix And Chill: Bushwick (2017)

I've seen a lot of love in recent months for Bushwick, a film that throws together two characters (played by Brittany Snow and Dave Bautista) and shows part of America heading to civil war hell in a handbasket around them. Co-written by Nick Damici and Graham Reznick (the former having been a vital component in the filmography of Jim Mickle over the past dozen years), it's an interesting "what if?" scenario.

Snow plays Lucy, a young woman who starts the movie about to get on a train with her boyfriend. Moments, and at least one explosion, later, her boyfriend is dead and Lucy has to find shelter while wondering just what is going on. Circumstances lead her into the home of a war veteran named Stupe (Bautista) and that's when the two begin to get a clearer picture, as hard as it may be to believe. It seems that a small military force has decided to help a number of states secede from the rest of the USA, and that will be a turbulent, painful, process.

Directed by Cary Murnion and Jonathan Milott, Bushwick may be far removed from their previous work (Cooties) in content but it's similarly problematic when it comes to the execution of the script. This is a film that wants to be serious and sombre throughout most of the runtime, yet it very quickly piles on one wildly implausible moment after another. I'm not going to pretend to know how things would pan out if a new civil wore ever broke out in America but even I would be surprised if it led to such quick and sudden complete anarchy, and individuals so devastated by the fighting around them that they would rather commit suicide.

Snow and Bautista are both excellent in their main roles, believable as, respectively, the naive youngster quickly out of her depth and the professional ex-soldier who knows how is prepared for the worst and keeps clear aims in mind. It's easy to imagine Mickle in Bautista's role, and I wonder whether he deliberately decided to just stick to the writing this time around or whether Bautista's name helped in terms of funding and ensuring that the film was made. Angelic Zambrana and Jeremie Harris are two of the main supporting players, and do just fine, with many other faces just appearing for one or two scenes in between skirmishes.

Bushwick is not a bad film. It's just a film that doesn't ever seem to be sure of how it wants to put things across. If you want something based in a grim reality then it has moments of that, yet it also has far too moments of nonsense that feels like they've been pulled from a book entitled "101 Classic Doomsday Scenario Moments". And the ending doesn't help. It just feels like a sucker punch, and undermines a lot of what came before it.

6/10

You can buy the disc here.
Americans can buy it here.

Is Spectre a Bond film that completely misunderstands Bond?

Unfortunately, what has set me back to the keyboard is a movie that has disappointed me. Well, not just disappointed me. Perhaps saying that it angered me would be closer to the truth. You see, many have decided to come out again in favour of James Bond, and many are heaping some great praise upon Spectre. And I, for the life of me, can't see how this is possible. From the perspective of a Bond fan, Spectre is a bad movie. It is, in my eyes, the worst instalment in the entire official series. And I've endured The Man With The Golden Gun.

For anyone interested, I have previously written about Bond movies here (Connery, with a hint of Lazenby), here (Moore), here (Dalton), here (Brosnan), here (Craig), and here (a couple of interesting movies that are never really considered "canon"). And I reviewed Skyfall here. I'm not linking to those reviews and articles to claim to be any kind of expert. I simply think that if you browse through those and share any of my taste then the following may be a bit easier to stomach. Otherwise, feel free to think of me as someone talking out of his posterior.

Now, although this won't be a full, standard movie review, I'd like to try to pinpoint a few aspects of Spectre that make it such a bad Bond movie. Let me try to highlight everything in, hmmmmmmm, 7 main points.

1) That opening. The opening sequence of Spectre has some great moments. In fact, up until a building collapses and Bond (Daniel Craig, once again totally at ease in the role) has to get to ground level, I was very happy. But then it simply reprises the opening minutes of Casino Royale. We've seen Bond do this before, keeping pace with a target through a busy, exotic locale. We've seen him do many things before, of course, but the familiarity of his drinking, his seduction of women and his one-liners are part of the appeal. Watching repetitive scenes, as opposed to repeated character traits, isn't the same thing. Then we have some great helicopter stunt work. Seriously . . . kudos to all involved. But was I the only person noticing one or two moments of green screen that were all-too-obvious? The 21st century equivalent of Roger Moore's stunt double taking up most of the screentime in his latter outings? The visuals were decidedly so-so, and a bit irritating in their incessant reminder of the events from the previous movies that have SHAPED our hero (don't you know), but I could have accepted them if they'd been accompanied by a decent song. Oh no. The worst Bond movie in the Bond-verse also has the worst Bond song. I don't think Sam Smith should ever be allowed to write jingles for breakfast cereals after his godawful slice of drabness put forward here.

2) The ladies. Bond has always been about the Bond girls as well as the man himself. And there was much talk about Monica Bellucci being a leading Bond girl. She is *gasp* 50. I love Monica Bellucci, and was looking forward to seeing her role in the movie. If anyone had told me that she was in it for about all of five minutes then the poor treatment she receives at the hands of the scriptwriters might have been easier to stomach. The other main Bond girl here is played by Lea Seydoux, who easily fares better than Bellucci. Sadly, the makers of the movie use her as a way to show a Bond developing a heart and feelings. You know, like he did in Casino Royale . . . . . . . . before events changed him into the figure we knew he had to become.

3) This is not a Mission: Impossible movie, but nobody told the writers that. Okay, Q (Ben Whishaw) is a younger man here than he ever was in the older movies, but we don't need an unnecessary scene putting him in some danger out in the field. We can watch Simon Pegg try to keep up with Tom Cruise for that kind of fish-out-of-water fun in an action spy franchise. And I know that the new M (Ralph Fiennes, who looks more and more like Leonard Rossiter with every performance he gives) has seen action in the field, but that doesn't make me want to watch him join in the battle either.

4) Stunt set-pieces are for the stunts and the gadgets. This is pretty much why every Bond movie exists. So it's weird to see a car chase occur in which Bond spends a large amount of the time speaking on the phone to Moneypenny (Naomie Harris). Or a fight sequence in which Bond faces off against a physically superior opponent (Dave Bautista) for no reason whatsoever. Seriously, you're supposed to think that there's always a reason for Bond and co. to be in physical danger, but the last 30-40 minutes contradict that, as it contradicts so many things.

5) Bond, as he is displayed onscreen, isn't the introspective type (bar occasional moments of brilliance, such as THAT final scene in On Her Majesty's Secret Service). Whether by choice or necessity, he acts and he moves on. Sometimes the consequences aren't as good as expected, but the alternatives are often a hell of a lot worse. Not here, however. Oh no. This is a thoughtful Bond. A Bond who looks as if he wants a bit of a holiday. Which isn't what you really want from your number one international secret agent.

6) The villain(s). A good Bond movie can be made or broken by the villain. Christoph Waltz is on hand here, another reason to rejoice. Until you realise that he's given a character who is completely mishandled. The big speeches never feel powerful enough, the threat only gets specific in a strange, and ill-fitting, torture sequence, and his development from the start of the movie to the end is as laughable as it is predictable.

7) Can I fit my problems into only seven main points? Oh, oh, I think I can. The biggest problem with Spectre is one that almost occured in Skyfall. Director Sam Mendes and co. seem unable to decide on just what to do with their lead character. One minute they're tearing down his established world, allowing him to rise again from the ashes like some kind of 00-phoenix. The next they're trying to shoehorn in familiar elements that they either want to reinvent for the modern era or they're adding unwanted touches from other movies that were themselves influenced by Bond (the shadow of Christopher Nolan seems to be a problem here, yet again).

Bond CAN be serious (Licence To Kill remains one of the best in the series, and it's also one of the darkest). He CAN be silly (look at most of those Moore outings). He can be an entertaining mixture of the two (as has been the case with most of the Brosnan and Craig films). But he always has to ultimately be Bond, and everything else should stem from that. Don't try to make a movie that you then use to shape James Bond. Let James Bond shape the movie that you're making.

 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 

Sci-Fi September: Riddick (2013)

Mixing the expanded ideas of the second movie with the smaller focus of the first movie, Riddick is a bit of a muddle film that doesn't seem to know exactly what it wants, leaving it as the weakest of the Riddick films so far.

Vin Diesel returns to play the main character, this time left for dead on a hostile planet after a series of events that are eventually explained in flashback. He needs to shake off the cloak of civility that he allowed himself to wear for too long, he needs to heal, and he needs to figure out a way off the planet. Inviting some bounty hunters along seems like a good idea. They'll want the price still on his head, affording him the opportunity to steal a ship and make good his escape.

Written and directed by David Twohy, who has worked closely with Diesel to keep this franchise on the right track from the very beginning, there are a lot of moments here that are fun for fans of the character. Seeing him wait for the bounty hunters to arrive, and watching his plan unfold, provides plenty of potential, but it's a shame that the movie then starts to seemingly wind down when it should be building towards some kind of impressive finale.

Diesel is great, once again, in the lead role. He loves the character, and always does well by him. Matt Nable does well with the most interesting supporting character, Jordi Molla is stuck with one cliche piled on top of another, Katee Sackhoff is in the mix to please her fans, Dave Bautista and Bokeem Woodbine both do solid work, and Karl Urban returns in a cameo role that allows the series to maintain a nice line of continuity.

The main problem lies with the script, which is repetitive, unmemorable, and overlong. It takes almost half an hour just to get to the more entertaining aspect of the plot, with the first quarter of the movie proving to be quite a chore to get through.

Then there are the special effects, which are a step down from the second movie. In fact, they also feel like a step down from the first movie. That's due to the fact that some of the insert shots are as unnecessary as they are unrealistic. It feels like a child showing off his new toy while everyone around him realises that Santa gave him the cheap, knock-off version of a popular brand.

Last, but not least, is the general issue with the pacing. I mentioned the first quarter being a chore, but the rest of the film also feels less entertaining than it could be, simply because so many moments are dragged out, or wedged in between other scenes that feel as if they should have been edited out completely.

We'll have to wait and see what lies in store next for Riddick, but I'll be very surprised if the next movie (if there IS a next movie) isn't an improvement on this one.

5/10

http://www.amazon.com/Riddick-Complete-Collection-Blu-ray-UltraViolet/dp/B00GHP8T1Y/ref=sr_1_5?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1410721344&sr=1-5&keywords=riddick

Guardians Of The Galaxy (2014)

Guardians Of The Galaxy is a rare thing indeed. A blockbuster that exceeds expectations, a slick slice of comic-book entertainment that perfectly blends heart, humour, thrills, and action (and some great songs). It's like a flipped upside-down version of The Avengers, while also serving as a perfect companion piece to that ensemble piece. So let me get the plot description out of the way, and then I can start the drooling words of praise.

Chris Pratt (having a great year, thanks to both this and The Lego Movie) stars as Peter Quill. Well, he'd prefer everyone to call him Star Lord, but that doesn't seem to be happening. Peter gets himself in some trouble when he tries to steal a mysterious orb. It's wanted by a big baddie named Ronan (Lee Pace), who is working for the evil Thanos (Josh Brolin). That's why a deadly assassin named Gamora (Zoe Saldana) is sent to deal with Peter. And that's why there's a bounty on his head, that ends up interesting Rocket (voiced by Bradley Cooper) and Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel). There's a big fight which lands the four individuals in prison, where they meet the vengeance-seeking Drax (Dave Bautista). Unbeknownst to them, they are about to work together as a team on an adventure that will start off with them looking for riches, or vengeance, in the case of Drax, and end up with them finding . . . . . . . . . . . . . well, something else.

Worthy of the name Star Lord?

There's SO much in this movie that's just pretty perfect, it will have many viewers with a big grin on their face as the end credits roll, and repeat viewings won't dampen its appeal. It may run for about 120 minutes, but that just flies by. Very few scenes are completely extraneous, with almost every line of dialogue and every action fleshing out the motley team onscreen, showing their motivation, their fears, their courage, their humour, their very entitlement to be main characters in this big-budget film.

The script, co-written by director James Gunn and Nicole Perlman, deftly balances everything that I've already mentioned. The action beats aren't ever forgotten, but the real draw here is the fact that we can spend time with such great characters, and see them grow into their roles. And, yes, the fact that Groot basically says nothing but "I am Groot" makes for both a nice running joke and also a surprisingly effective way of establishing his closeness with Rocket, a raccoon with a sharp mind, smart mouth, and penchant for building potent weaponry at short notice.

Gunn takes the script and overlays it with assured, slick direction. He may have already gotten used to the big chair, with the likes of Slither and Super, but this is a massive step up, and viewers never once see any signs of nerves or insecurity. Which is as it should be. Gunn's instincts have been steering him right for years (yes, yes I do also love Tromeo & Juliet - his first movie as a writer - so sue me) and it seems that audiences might finally be completely receptive to his output. Okay, it's the Marvel name being sold, but it's Gunn who takes this gamble and makes it into an outright winner.

He's helped immensely by a cast full of people all on top form. Pratt, as mentioned above, is due to make 2014 HIS year. His performance here is wonderful, and I've no doubt that he'll win over lots of new fans with this role. Saldana gets another chance to be tough and sexy, and she can do that with ease, even with green skin. Cooper and Diesel may be providing voices only, and the latter may only be mostly saddled with the one sentence, but don't underestimate the great work that they do. And Dave Bautista is surprisingly good as the angry brute who has a habit of taking figures of speech literally. Pace is good enough, yet his character is a bit weak, especially when compared to other villains from the Marvel universe,and ESPECIALLY compared to big bad Thanos. I shouldn't have to check the name of the villain at IMDb while writing this review, but that's what I had to do.

"I am Groot"

The other bonus here is the supporting cast, with Gunn giving viewers an embarrassment of riches in that department. Michael Rooker is blue-skinned Yondu, the man who took Peter away from Earth when he was just a young boy, Karen Gillan is blue, bald Nebula, a woman who wants to help Ronan cause some major destruction, Benicio Del Toro is The Collector, and there are worthwhile moments for Djimon Hounsou, Glenn Close, John C. Reilly, Peter Serafinowicz, Gregg Henry, and Ophelia Lovibond. It's easy to spot the Stan Lee cameo, and there's also the usual Lloyd Kaufman cameo that we've come to expect from Mr. Gunn.

Oh, and there's that soundtrack. If you've seen any of the trailers for this movie then you'll already suspect that it has a few good tunes on the soundtrack. It does. More than that, however, is the way in which the soundtrack is almost a character in its own right. The songs are a link to the past for Peter Quill, and his precious Walkman and mix tape both hold just as much importance as the orb that so many people want to get their hands on.

I could go on and on: about how surprisingly tight the structuring is, about how many moments managed to sneak up on me and make me unexpectedly emotional (including a moment with a raccoon - yes, the damn raccoon almost gave me a lump in my throat), about the flawless visual effects throughout, about the one great gag that will fly over the heads of kids while parents laugh their asses off, about the post-credits surprise.

This is a film full of many surprising delights, with one of the best being just how many people have decided to go with the flow and help it achieve some stellar results at the box office.

9/10

Trust me, you'll want to buy this - http://www.amazon.com/Guardians-Galaxy-Blu-ray-Chris-Pratt/dp/B009NNM95Y/ref=sr_1_1?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1406851090&sr=1-1&keywords=guardians+of+the+galaxy&dpPl=1