Shudder Saturday: Deathstalker (2025)

Despite the enduring love for the series, there are few people you could find who would tell you that the original Deathstalker is a great movie. It's even surpassed by the first sequel it had. So to say that this reworking of the property is better than the first film is quite easy. Yet it has something that still holds it back slightly, just a feeling that . . . well, I can't quite put my finger on one specific fault, but hope to mention a number of factors in this review.

Daniel Bernhardt plays the titular hero this time around, and he certainly looks the part. He's soon joined by a small creature named Doodad (voiced by Patton Oswalt) and a young female thief named Brisbayne (Christina Orjalo). Their fates are all tied together by a magical amulet that is desired by Nekromemnon (Nicholas Rice), and he expects his right hand man, Jotak (Paul Lazenby), to retrieve it from our hardy little band of heroes.

Written and directed by Steven Kostanski, who has been responsible for one of my all-time favourite genre movies of the 2020s (Psycho Goreman), there's a lot here that should be expected, if you're familiar with his work. Plenty of impressive practical effects, a decent amount of blood and guts thrown around, and clear affection for the source material.

The cast all work well in their roles too, which is a big help. Bernhardt has both the muscles and the attitude, Oswalt's voice is a perfect fit for his character, and Orjalo, Lazenby, Nina Bergman, Conor Sweeney, and John Clifford Talbot all feel well-suited to the onscreen environment. Rice is hidden under a lot more make up and prosthetics, as are both Jon Ambrose and Troy James, but the physicality is spot on.

Nobody could accuse the Deathstalker movies of striving for any kind of realism, and they were made with low budgets and limited resources, but this particular Deathstalker movie feels just as limited in one or two other ways. I'm surprised to say that part of that is due to how it lacks a specific charm, perhaps due to the knowledge that everyone involved is very much clued in on the kind of film they want to make. Original films of this ilk were made by people trying to present a fantastical world and a mad menagerie of monsters with whatever they had to hand. This is made by people trying to present a slightly more polished version of an older movie, and part of the charm of the older movies often stems from seeing the tape holding the cardboard together at the very edge of the frame, metaphorically speaking. I also can't help thinking that there's a bit of gentle mockery mixed in with the affection here, a feeling of Kostanski saying "you know this is silly, we know this is silly, but let's enjoy it nonetheless". It's not an overriding sensation, but I could feel it just underpinning almost every scene, and that was enough to stop me from loving this as much as I had hoped to. The Deathstalker movies were not without humour, but it was a very basic and genre-specific kind of humour (aka very '80s humour). This film doesn't have that, and it's the absence of THAT humour, the way that Kostanski tries to allow everything to be played quite straight, that paradoxically makes me sense some of the other humour layered throughout. 

Maybe I am being too sensitive, maybe I am responding to something that wasn't intended the way I am viewing it, but I cannot help thinking that many other Kostanski films have been made with the feeling that they're loving homages that couldn't possibly rival the impact of the original films that inspired them, despite how those original films are viewed with disdain by those who just don't understand the way to the heart of a horror fan who grew up through the halcyon days of VHS madness. Deathstalker somehow makes a major mis-step by being better than the 1983 original, which makes even the slightest wink or smirk feel like it's "punching down" at a beloved film series.

Still, when it comes to the film-making basics, there's no denying that what is onscreen here is done well. I'd love to hear from others, whether to help me better word my opinion or just tell me that I am talking nonsense, but, in the meantime, I still have to rate this as an enjoyable bit of sword 'n' sorcery entertainment. It's just not great, and left a slightly sour taste in my mouth as the end credits rolled.

7/10

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

Prime Time: The Sword And The Sorcerer (1982)

I have fond memories of The Sword And The Sorcerer, all based on one time I probably saw about half of the film and was impressed by both of the titular elements. In fact, let me rephrase that slightly. I HAD fond memories of The Sword And The Sorcerer. I was so convinced that it was a minor classic that I recently purchased a shiny new physical disc release it received from 101 Films, and then I saw that it was also tucked away on Prime Video. Fate was ensuring that I get around to it ASAP.

I'm not going to describe most of the plot, but things start with Cromwell (Richard Lynch) being assisted by a resurrected sorcerer (played by Richard Moll) as he violently places himself at the head of a kingdom. He then betrays the sorcerer, but may wish to have his power helping him once more when a skilled warrior (Talon, played by Lee Horsley) looks to change the status quo. 

Directed by Albert Pyun (who also co-wrote the screenplay with Tom Karnowski and John Stuckmeyer), this is enjoyable enough fantasy fare, and it certainly delivers on what the title is selling. It doesn't hold up as well as numerous other beloved (well . . . beloved by some) barbarian films from this time though, and struggles to hold interest throughout the first half.

Pyun can do a hell of a lot with very little, but he's not a miracle worker. The action here is about as good as you can expect from something relatively low-budget (about $4M, apparently) that presents such a great bit of practical FX and makeup work in the early scenes that showcase the sorcerer. The sets and production design feel like a mix of inventive crew members and camerawork that can recycle the same backdrops with a variety of angle changes and crop off all of the sawdust and plywood just on the edge of each frame. And the acting is based almost as much on who can look muscular and capable in the costumes as it is based on those who can actually act (although, to be clear, Lynch and Moll are definitely in the latter category).

Horsley, in his first feature role, comes close to being a decent lead, but doesn't quite manage it. He's just missing that indefinable star quality, leaving him to undermine a script that tries to give him the perfect recipe of charm, toughness, and wit. Lynch is much more watchable, as he so often is when onscreen with anyone, and he's a very entertaining main villain. Although sidelined for most of the movie, Moll makes one hell of an impression whenever he gets the chance, helped by the people behind the camera who transformed him into such an impressively imposing (even more so than usual) character. Kathleen Beller makes for a fine damsel in distress in the role of Princess Alana, George Maharis is enjoyably scheming and untrustworthy in the role of Count Machelli, and I'll avoid saying anything too negative about Simon MacCorkindal, Anthony De Longis, Robert Terrier, Anna Bjorn, and anyone else joining in the fun. They more or less do what is asked of them, and the sense of enthusiasm and proper fun makes up for the lack of polish.

There's also decent music from David Whitaker, fun (if ridiculous) design work on a couple of featured swords, and pacing that tries to keep viewers interested with either some fighting or gratuitous nudity every 10-15 minutes. The script may struggle to clarify how individuals are related to the central battle for the throne, but the other distractions help you to forget bothering about the minor details. It's easy to see why this has remained a bit of a nostalgic favourite amongst those who first saw it back when it was in cinemas and on VHS. Even as I write about it now, I am smiling and wondering when I will revisit it. Which wasn't the frame of mind I was in when I started this review.

7/10

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: Alice (1988)

Having been a huge fan of the source material it is based on, and also a fan of the clips I have seen elsewhere of Jan Svankmajer's work, I am surprised that it took me this long to finally get around to watching Alice. But it did, and here we are.

Kristýna Kohoutová plays Alice, a young girl who ends up going on an adventure that will be quite familiar to those who have read the most famous tale from Lewis Carroll. Quite familiar, but not overly familiar, because this is the tale filtered through the alternately dreamy and nightmarish vision of Svankmajer.

While not for everyone, which is a phrase I consider redundant every time I use it (but cannot think of a decent replacement), Alice is certainly worth the time and attention of those who know what kind of vision Svankmajer wants to deliver. It's a strange and decaying world, one in which most of the creations are barely held together, but that actually feels nicely in line with the text being adapted to the screen. What is Alice if not this strange and curious lifeforce upending and alarming the citizens of a wonderland always on the very edge of collapsing in on itself?

The stop-motion work may be the highlight of the film, and everything is informed by it, but Kohoutová does well to perform in the middle of such a strange and surreal selection of set-pieces. She feels as if she's performing, but that, once again, feels true to the spirit of the story. Alice is a character who is very imaginative, and her way of speaking, both to herself and to those around her, is often in a performative manner. She is either trying to convince herself of what she is seeing around her, or she is trying to convince others of her relative wisdom.

While this may not be the Alice's Adventures In Wonderland that comes to mind when you think of the story, it is a surprisingly faithful and brilliant interpretation. Every frame feels as if it was carefully considered and crafted with a monumental effort, which is both a positive and a negative (because the Carroll tale feels somehow easy and effortless), and I would certainly put this near the very top of any list ranking the movie adaptations of this timeless classic. 

Drink the potion, eat the snacks, nibble on both sides of the mushroom, and spend time with the characters who don't seem to make sense until you figure out the context of the conversations. Many films try to show you Alice in Wonderland. Svankmajer comes very close to actually taking the viewer all the way down the rabbit hole.

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

Mubi Monday: You And The Night (2013)

It's always hard to schedule a theme month here on my daily blog. I sometimes do a month of animated fare, and I often try to do all horror throughout October (AKA Halloween month to us horror fans), a whole heap of noir in November (AKA Noirvember), and plenty of sweet and snow-covered goodness throughout December. So I did contemplate whether or not to focus on plenty of LGBTQ+ cinema throughout June for Pride, but I decided against it. Mainly because I watch and review so many films throughout the year that could come under that rainbow-coloured umbrella that I knew I would still find a decent selection to discuss throughout the month. You could say the same about horror movies, of course, but horror has been my life-long obsession, which makes October my time for complete self-indulgence.

Speaking of self-indulgence, writer-director Yann Gonzalez, with help from Rebecca Zlotowski consulting, has crafted a film here that allows the main characters to be as self-indulgent as they like, yet still allows them to navigate the rapid waters of consent, kink, and momentary connections that light up brightly before jumping to someone else, like a fast and ever-moving synapse.

The main premise is very simple. A trio awaits the arrival of the guests due to join them in a happy orgy. That's it. The guests feel as if they have been deliberately chosen to mark off a checklist of sexual preference archetpyes. You have the stallion (Eric Cantona), the youth (Alain-Fabien Delon), the older nymphomaniac (Fabienne Babe), and the young  (Julie Brémond). They will all reveal more about themselves as they join in with the evening planned by Ali (Kate Moran), Matthias (Niels Schneider), and their cross-dressing companion, Udo (Nicolas Maury), three hosts who have a hell of a tale to tell about their own journey to this point.

There are a couple of other films that this feels closely related to, but to mention them would spoil some of the enjoyable plot details that are revealed as the full truth unfolds. Let’s just say that this manages to feel both intimate and grandiose, punctuating the moments of frank sexuality with moments describing an enduring love.

The cast all do very well in their roles, although they are all working within the boundaries of their various archetypal roles. Nobody stands out, this is one undulating mass of flesh and erogenous zones, but they all help the film enormously by delivering, and reacting to, dialogue that could have been laughably bad if it was sorely mishandled.

Gonzalez has improved a bit since this impressive feature debut, becoming more daring and confidently transgressive while also delivering some gorgeous visuals, but you can already see his considerable talent here. He makes use of a great ensemble cast to serve up some fantastical fiction that continually dances around moments of unflinching honesty. It’s equally intriguing and endearing.

7/10

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: Wrath Of The Titans (2012)

I can understand why people got upset when the news broke that we were getting a remake of the beloved Clash Of The Titans. I still ended up watching it, and I didn’t mind it. In fact, I eventually bought the double-pack that included both that film and this film in fun 3D. I have had that set sitting on my shelf for at least five years, and this week I decided that I should finally watch the second movie. There was probably some subconscious reason for that, considering the fact that the film is . . . well, we will get to the full critique shortly.

Perseus (Sam Worthington) is trying to live a peaceful life with his son. That peace is ruined, sadly, when his father, Zeus (Liam Neeson), gets himself in big trouble. Hades (Ralph Fiennes) has seen the writing on the wall - gods losing power, the titans almost set to break back through to their realm - and wants to end up on the winning side. He also has help from Ares (Edgar Ramírez), the son of Poseidon. It is up to Perseus to ensure that humanity survives, and he is soon joined by another demi-god, Agenor (Toby Kebbell), and the fierce warrior queen, Andromeda (Rosamund Pike). They will have to fierce a variety of huge and deadly enemies, including a cyclops or two, a minotaur, and at least one of the intimidating titans.

Written by Dan Mazeau and David Leslie Johnson-McGoldrick (billed here as David Leslie Johnson), this should have been a much better, and much easier, film to craft. Moving a step or two away from the beloved original, all it had to do was take a handful of familiar characters and throw them into something spectacular and fun. I guess that is the aim here, but it just doesn’t work, mainly due to the weakness of the villains and the feeling that the structure is just a pale retread of the previous film. 

It doesn’t help that director Jonathan Liebesman is now at the helm. While far from the worst person to take on the role of director, he seems to bring nothing unique to any of his projects. He can sometimes emulate better films informing his own, at best, but he usually just delivers something that lacks any hint of style or proper authorship. If you are asked next week to name the director of this movie then I would put good money on you not being able to remember his name. And the same goes for every other film he has directed.

The cast is quite a mixed bag, but the good far outnumbers the bad. Unfortunately, the bad includes our leading man, Sam Worthington. I don’t mind Worthington, and he’s certainly not awful, but almost every other actor that he shares screentime with does a better job. Except Ramírez, sadly, which makes him a sorely unentertaining villain. Neeson and Fiennes have fun in their godly roles, Danny Huston is welcome for the minute he is onscreen, and both Kebbell and Pike are excellent additions to the ensemble. There’s also a very small role for Bill Nighy, who almost steals the entire movie with his wonderful turn.

There is an over-reliance on CGI once again, as expected, and the cinematography focuses on dirt and flames to the detriment of anything more visually interesting, but the runtime isn’t bloated, the pacing is brisk enough, and it’s always fun to see the creatures featured here that were previously so well-realised in a pre-CGI world by the legendary Ray Harryhausen.

I was still tempted to rate this as ever-so-slightly above average, because I didn’t hate it while it was on, but it’s just too forgettable, too bland, and disappointing for being a waste of such a good opportunity. So I will consider myself generous enough already by rating it as absolutely average.

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

Prime Time: The Green Knight (2021)

A green knight confidently strides into the court of a king. He puts forth a challenge. Someone needs to face him in combat. But whatever injuries they cause will be returned to them in exactly one year. Step forward Gawain (Dev Patel). The fight is over when Gawain beheads the green knight. No need to wait a year for a return injury if your opponent is dead, obviously. Except there is no death here. Reattaching his head, the green knight reminds his opponent of the terms of their duel, and leaves. The clock is ticking.

Written and directed by David Lowery, taking inspiration from a 14th-century poem entitled “Sir Gawain And The Green Knight”, The Green Knight is a fantastical drama that benefits from sterling central performances and gorgeous cinematography throughout (from Andrew Droz Palermo, who collaborated with Lowry on A Ghost Story). It is loaded and layered with intriguing imagery, in line with both the tone of the film and the main themes, but manages to be both dense and accessible.

Also, and I feel this is important to note here, The Green Knight is cinematic and entertaining for the entire runtime. I say that because I wasn’t sure if it would be, which is why I didn’t get to it sooner. I expected/hoped to enjoy this, but I assumed it would be a film that I would need to then spend more time digging into and contextualising. While there is a bit of “further reading” you can seek out, Lowery puts everything in the film that you need, with every well-considered detail available to piece together into a number of fascinating character studies.

Patel is brilliant in the lead role, happy to show his character in a poor light as he wrestles with situations that allow him to either realise his full potential or find an easier, less courageous, way out. Alicia Vikander plays two roles here, both equally important in different ways, and she is just as good as Patel. And disguised as The Green Knight himself is Ralph Ineson, putting his memorable timbre to great use. There are also enjoyable supporting turns from Sean Harris, Barry Keoghan, Joel Edgerton, and Sarita Choudhury, all playing a crucial part in Gawain’s journey. There’s also a gorgeous bit of VFX work that allows Patel to share the screen with a helpful fox for a number of scenes.

Alternating between moments that are intimate and moments that are epic, this is a film that has clearly been made with a great deal of love and care, and it shows. It could have ended up in any number of final incarnations, but I am glad we got this version. Cinematic, thoughtful, and one that will reward rewatches as much as it rewards patience. Having taken inspiration from a poem, it translates the material into cinematic poetry, to hopefully be appreciated and enthusiastically examined by film fans for many years to come.

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

Netflix And Chill: Love And Monsters (2020)

No matter how often it happens, it can always be surprising to see the Netflix effect in action. Everyone and their dog, ironically, seemed to have watched Love And Monsters last week. It was a film on my radar for some time, but I didn't realise it had appeared online until I saw everyone giving their opinions on it. And the general census seemed to be that it was a good one.

Yeah, I don't disagree with the majority here.

Set a number of years after a chain reaction of events that led to our planet being overrun by mutated creatures, we follow Joel Dawson (Dylan O'Brien), a young man who has recently reconnected over the radio comms system with Aimee (Jessica Henwick), the potential love of his life. He decides to leave his own colony to travel the seven days over land and meet her again in person. The only problem is that Joel is not a fighter. He tends to freeze when faced with any nasty monster. Thankfully, he meets a very smart, and helpful, dog along the way, and also meets a couple of other survivors (Clyde, played by Michael Rooker, and young Minnow, played by Ariana Greenblatt) who have skills they can teach him. Growing more and more capable, Joel starts to rate his chances of getting to Aimee. But the threats keep getting progressively more dangerous.

Directed by Michael Matthews (who has a small filmography that doesn't indicate a sudden move in this direction), Love And Monsters is a fun post-apocalyptic creature feature that moves some very likeable characters around in a world chock full of influences, ranging from the obvious (A Boy And His Dog and a number of films featuring Ray Harryhausen effects) to the not-so-obvious (there seems to be a few nods to the famous journey made by Frodo Baggins).

The script, by Brian Duffield and Matthew Robinson, manages to be light and amusing while also maintaining a sense of threat. Our hero is woefully unprepared for so many steps of his journey, but improves on the way. His chances of survival, however, tend to remain the same, depending on what luck he might have on the way. And the comedic approach to the material means that you're not entirely sure that there won't be a way to kill the main character off (temporarily, or for good).

O'Brien is very good in the main role, believably naive and optimistic, and able to step up to some big challenges without suddenly seeming superhuman. It's a world in which brains are just as valuable as any other resource, and O'Brien convincingly plays his role wide-eyed, but not dumb. Rooker and Greenblatt are a great addition to the middle section, and provide some great set-ups that are later paid off. Henwick is also very good, although her character development is undermined by a complete lack of surprise. There are also good turns from Dan Ewing as a yacht captain offering to help a colony move and, best of all, a couple of very talented canines playing a dog named Boy, arguably one of the best scene-stealing animals I can think of from the past decade.

With a finale that even manages to make you think of the wonderful Clash Of The Titans, consistently impressive special effects throughout, a surprisingly positive approach to living in a post-apocalyptic world, and the potential for at least one solid sequel, Love And Monsters is well worth your time, if you like creature features. Although, as far as I'm aware, everyone else has seen it by now anyway.

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

Moonwalker (1988)

Cast your mind back, if you can, to the late 1980s. Michael Jackson, as yet untainted by any serious allegations, was massive. I really don't think there was anyone more famous at that time. He was certainly the biggest pop star on the planet, and arguably the most famous person in the world. His appearance had changed considerably, he had a pet chimp named Bubbles, there were rumours of him sleeping in an oxygen tank, and his eccentricity peaked, without any dark clouds gathered overhead (to our knowledge). I was allowed to pick my two main presents when I turned thirteen. I was becoming a teenager, almost an adult by then (to my mind). I picked up the Star Wars RPG manual (a superb tome that I absolutely loved reading through, even if I never did play the thing). And I HAD to get "Bad", on cassette, with a notebook and pencil packaged alongside it. That birthday is one of the clearest memories I have from my childhood years, and was one of my best birthdays ever.

Then came Moonwalker, the movie that Michael Jackson made, based on a story by Michael Jackson, and starring Michael Jackson. Jerry Kramer and Colin Chilvers may be the directors, but this is a Michael Jackson movie. David Newman may be the writer, but this is a Michael Jackson movie. In fact, in 1988 it was THE Michael Jackson movie that any Michael Jackson fan could have wanted. Looking at it nowadays . . . it's a very different experience.

There's an extended opening montage sequence, mashing up a number of Jackson hits (both with the Jackson Five and on his own), and then you get a slim plot. Michael has to spend some time avoiding some very excited fans, and he then becomes the guardian figure to three children (played by Sean Lennon, Kelley Parker, and Brandon Adams), allowing them to see some of his major dance sequences, a la "Smooth Criminal", and protecting them from the evils of drug-dealing Mr. Big (Joe Pesci), who wants to get every kid in the world hooked on his product.

Fascinating for a number of reasons, Moonwalker may be one of the most interesting vanity projects of all time, not only because of the music and visuals, but also because of the way it shows Jackson and his worldview. He wants to be cute and innocent one minute, he wants to be raunchy and sexy the next. He can make anything possible through the power of his dance moves. He likes to transform into different forms. And, most interesting of all, he views a large section of his fanbase as voracious animals who want to tear various strips off him, feeding their hunger while Jackson gives and gives all he can.

Is this a great movie when compared to other proper movies? No. Is it a fascinating and entertaining movie that celebrates someone at the peak of their powers? Yes. Unfortunately, it has an earnestness and lack of self-awareness that helps other star vehicles to be more enjoyable (yes, I'm going to mention Spice World again). Whether or not you can watch it now without considering the accusations made against its star, to simply view it as the time capsule it is and to enjoy the soundtrack, that's up to you. I can. But I also have the strength of that thirteenth birthday memory to boost my opinion of the whole thing.

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 

Teen Witch (1989)

I'm not saying Teen Witch killed the careers of those behind the camera, but it's the last film written by Robin Menken and Vernon Zimmerman, and the second-last narrative feature from director Dorian Walker. Some of the cast members have managed to continue their acting careers, which seems like a miracle when you see some of the stuff they have to do here.

Robyn Lively is Louise, a typical teenage girl who spends her time in the company of her friend, Polly (Mandy Ingber), swooning over Brad (Dan Gauthier), and wishing she was more popular at her school. After a bike accident leaves her a bit shaken up, Louise ends up encountering Madame Serena (Zelda Rubinstein), a woman that informs Louise that she's due to inherit some magical powers by the time she turns sixteen. When that happens, Louise finds that she can make herself popular, and put everything in place to give her a good shot with Brad, but at what cost?

Teen Witch is quite a mad film, and I immediately resented watching it as soon as the end credits started to roll. I may have been a bit too harsh though. It's very much a film from the 1980s, it's very much a film thinking it provides a story that teenage girls will identify with and enjoy, and it's unafraid to lean into the sillier moments (at least one of which, an impromptu street rap scene, is the stuff of cinematic legend).

Lively at least makes a good, personable, lead. Ingber is also very good, playing the typical best friend who has become resigned to accepting their station in high school, and at least enjoys the fact that she doesn't pander to her peers in an attempt to gain brownie points. Rubinstein is a lot of fun, and Gauthier, well, he just has to stand in the right spot and look like a handsome schoolboy/middle-aged yuppie. Dick Sargent being cast as Louise's father is a nice touch, Joshua John Miller is a pesky little brother, Shelley Berman and Marcia Wallace are teachers affected in very different ways by witchy powers, and Noah Blake and Megan Gallivan both get standout moments.

There are set-pieces here that have to be seen to be believed, and even then I cannot guarantee that you'll believe them, wild events that have no long-lasting consequences, and characters who learn an important moral lesson or two by the time everything ends. And these things irritated me while I was watching the film, but later struck me as elements typical to pretty much any teen movie. It still may not have worked for me (although I am far from the target audience), but it would be unfair of me to mark it down for elements that I have enjoyed in so many other teen flicks.

I was going to end this review by warning people away from Teen Witch. My view of the film has softened though. I think you should watch it at least once. You may even enjoy it. Whatever you think of it, you certainly won't forget it.

5/10

https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Artemis Fowl (2020)

Of course I'd heard all of the bad reviews. Of course I was aware that not one person who watched Artemis Fowl ended up having a good thing to say about it. Of course I thought I might find at least some small bits to enjoy.

Of course I was wrong.

Artmeris Fowl has the might of Disney behind it, but it's hard to think of a more misjudged and messy piece of family entertainment. Nothing works as it should. Nothing.

Let's start with the plot. Ferdia Shaw is Artemis Fowl, a young boy who ends up alone, having to defend his home, when his father (Colin Farrell) is whisked away by some shady villain. Artemis finds out that there's a whole world around him that he doesn't know about, and there's an item, the Aculos, that many seem to want to get their hands on. This leads to Fowl Manor being besieged, where Artemis works to defend it with the magical Holly Short (Lara McDonnell) and Mulch Diggums (Josh Gad), "Dom" Butler (Nonso Anozie), and Dom's niece, Juliet Butler (Tamara Smart). You also get Judi Dench appearing as Commander Julius Root, determined to get in to Fowl Manor and retrieve the Aculos.

Based on the popular novel by Eoin Colfer, Artemis Fowl is written by Conor McPherson and Hamish McColl, which may be where the the problems begin. McColl has a background that would make him seem suited to this kind of material, perhaps, but McPherson doesn't, and the mix of the two leads to a film that feels inevitably ill-fitting, in terms of the various plot elements. Director Kenneth Branagh also doesn't really feel like the right person to be sitting in the big chair, but it would be unfair to rule him out immediately (considering some of his surprising successes). Sadly, it turns out that he ISN'T the right person to be sitting in the big chair. In fact, he doesn't seem to have spent much time in the chair at all. This feels like something not directed by anyone with any vision, or even a sense of effective film-making techniques.

Then we get to the cast. Shaw is horrible in the lead role. It's not really his fault. His character is annoying, almost from the very first frame, and he acts accordingly. Gad is pretty annoying, although he at least gets to show some of his personality, unlike the majority of the cast. McDonnell is the highlight, a plucky and tough fighter with good intentions, but Anozie is also very good as the talented protector/butler. Judie Dench looks suitably embarrassed every now and then, and Farrell has the good sense to take on a role with such little screentime that I'm sure he was handsomely rewarded for what amounted to a day of work, at most.

Artemis Fowl isn't as bad as you've heard. It's worse. Characters are generally awful and unappealing, the plot is slight and impossible to care about, and the action sequences wouldn't have impressed most viewers a decade ago. It's mind-boggling to think of how many decisions were made by people who all tried to go for the worst possible options. It's only the fact that it had enough money thrown at it that saves it from being among the very worst I have seen. It's definitely one of the very worst blockbusters of the 21st century though.

3/10

https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

The Garbage Pail Kids Movie (1987)

Ahhhhhhhh the 1980s. It was the best of times, it was the worst of times. It was the best of the worst of times. Just look at deeley bobbers, Minipops (seriously . . . search for clips of Minipops and look on in absolute horror), and the Cabbage Patch Kids, which the Garbage Pail Kids trading cards were very much parodying. Cinematically, it was a decade that wasn't afraid to put kids in real peril, wasn't afraid to use ANY fleeting fad in order to make a quick buck (arguably, every decade of cinema does that), and wasn't afraid to deliver something so wild and ridiculous that the only possible explanation for some of the creative decisions made starts with co and ends with caine. And The Garbage Pail Kids Movie ticks all of those boxes.

Directed, produced, and co-written (with Linda - AKA Melinda - Palmer) by Rod Amateau, The Garbage Pail Kids Movie is like some kind of Troma-esque attempt to make a modern day fairytale with some of the most unappealing animatronic creations you've ever seen in your life. It doesn't exactly speed along at a breakneck pace, yet it feels that way because the plot just seems to take one erratic turn after another.

The plot, and I'll try to summarise it without vomiting all over my keyboard, focuses on a bullied young lad named Dodger (Mackenzie Astin, impressively looking anywhere between 8 and 15 at any given moment). Dodger has a crush on Tangerine (Katie Barberi), the girlfriend of main bully, Juice (Ron MacLachlan). One scene of mild torture later, Dodger is handcuffed to a rail in a sewer, a pipe pouring nasty waste onto him, and is saved by the Garbage Pail Kids. It turns out that the Garbage Pail Kids have been living in the antique shop of a man named Manzini (Anthony Newley). Dodger is a friend/relative/groomed pet of Manzini and this leads to a plan in which Dodger . . . gets the kids to make clothing that Tangerine can sell as part of her very odd business model of entering nightclubs with piles of clothes for sale. There are many more clothes to be made, one or two bars to be visited, a State Home For The Ugly, and a grand fashion show that serves as the background for the finale.

There you have it. All of it. An adult with an unspecified relationship to a teenage boy. A bunch of "kids" who crawl out of a bin and then are mistreated by someone who decides to make use of them in a way that surely contravenes a number of child-labour laws, and may even veer perilously close to a thinly-disguised sweatshop environment, and a third act that gives you nobody to really root for. 

This could have been better if it had delivered some more memorable characters. Greaser Greg, Valerie Vomit, Ali Gator, Foul Phil, Nat Nerd, Windy Winston, and Messy Tessie are far removed from the more fun creations that I remember seeing on some of the Garbage Pail Kids trading cards that I managed to get my hands on.

To add insult to injury, the soundtrack features two songs that are so ear-offendingly bad the speakers on my TV hatched a plan to detach themselves and dive into the nearby duck pond.

It's no surprise that a number of people involved in this movie went on to do not much else of note. Amateu wrote one story after this (Sunset), Linda Palmer has written one movie since this, and it's about killer ants, and Anthony Newley became quite the fixture in UK TV schedules. Astin and Barberi have managed to move beyond this, fair enough, although I wouldn't be surprised if they still have nights in which they wake up coated in sweat and anything else that may have leaked out while their brain had used this movie for their nightmare fuel. That has been happening to me lately, and I only watched the bloody thing.

Horrible stuff, but undeniably interesting for all the wrong reasons, The Garbage Pail Kids Movie is not for the faint of heart, not for anyone after the real gems of cinema, and not for anyone of sound mind. So I KNOW that one or two friends of mine will enjoy it.

4/10

Knock yourself out with this disc.

Netflix And Chill: Bleach (2018)

First off, yes, this is based on a manga (by Tite Kubo). I know that won't surprise anyone, but I figured I should mention it now in case I forget while heaping praise upon the film. Because I really liked this.

Ichigo Kurosaki is a teenager with a special gift. He can see ghosts. But one of those ghosts is a bit more than just a ghost. Rukia Kuchiki is a Soul Reaper, a spirit who helps others to move on while dealing with the ones who stay behind and turn into things called Hollows. During a sudden attack that leaves her wounded, Rukia transfers her power to Ichigo, which means they have to wait a while until it can be transferred back. This means Ichigo has to train, in order to get good enough to defeat more enemies, and also leads to him seeing more of the unseen world around him, including the skills of his classmate, Uryû Ishida, a member of a group who view Soul Reapers as enemies. There are some creative Hollow designs, some cool action, and a fun blend of fantasy and typical teen content.

Directed by Shinsuke Sato, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Daisuke Habara, Bleach is a slick and well-paced bit of entertainment. It may have a runtime of 108 minutes, but it hits the ground running, introduces all of the main characters with style and wit, and showcases some interesting fights in between the smaller moments. It also has a great cast of characters throughout, from Ishigo and his family (we see him lose his mother in the opening moments, he lives with his father and two sisters) to Rukia, her stern "colleagues" (mainly Byakuya Kuchiki, her older brother, and Renji Abarai), and the blissfully-unaware schoolkids who end up seeing a lot of destruction occurring around them without being able to see the cause.

The cast all do a great job in their roles. Sôta Fukushi is a likeable lead, playing Ichigo with a mix of standard teen insecurity and strength developed from his experiences. Hana Sugisaki is a lot of fun as Rukia, not at all pleased by the way things have developed, but also not wanting Ichigo to suffer because of it. Ryô Yoshizawa does well enough as Uryû, and both Miyavi and Taichi Saotome are good in the roles of Byakuya and Renji, respectively.

The CGI is also surprisingly well-done, with the film walking a fine line between showing everything it wants to show and doing so in a way that is within its resources. The Hollows are the most obvious use of computer effects, and they feel nice and other-worldly while also feeling pretty solid, but all of the enhanced fight moves, and the bigger impact on the surrounding environment, look about as good as you could want them to look.

I guess when reviewing films based on manga material I should sometimes add a cautionary note to people already familiar with the source material, be it the printed page or the many anime adventures that have usually already been put out there (as is also the case here). I don't though, because I just rate the films as films. That's often enough, most of the time, and I certainly feel that way when I've enjoyed something as much as I enjoyed this.

8/10

Mubi Monday: Pan's Labyrinth (2006)

A fairytale framed by dramatic elements, and punctuated by moments of vicious violence, Pan's Labyrinth remains the very best thing from writer-director Guillermo del Toro, despite stiff competition from the likes of Cronos, The Devil's Backbone, and The Shape Of Water.

The main character is a young girl named Ofelia (played by Ivana Baquero), who is taken along by her mother (Ariadna Gil) as they start a new life with the ruthless Captain Vidal (Sergi López). Vidal is under orders to deal with republican rebels in the local area, a job he does with no small amount of rigour and zeal, even fatally punishing people who were guilty of nothing more than hunting rabbits in the wrong area. Ofelia does not like her new stepfather, but she does like Mercedes (Maribel Verdú), a housekeeper who is helping the rebels in their efforts. She also takes a liking to escaping into some flights of fantasy, encountering a Faun (Doug Jones) that sets her a number of challenges, explaining that completing them will prove that she is the spirit of an immortal princess from the underworld.

Intelligent, tense, and beautiful throughout, Pan's Labyrinth is a moving and rewarding experience for horror movie fans. I was worried about revisiting it this time around, having not seen it for about a decade, and I could remember the basic plot elements but not exactly how they all played out, but it took me mere moments to settle into the rich and detailed onscreen world, onside with young Ofelia from her first moments.  I encourage anyone else to revisit this, especially if you have left it as long as I did.

As a cinematic world-builder, I cannot think of anyone who does that better than Del Toro, especially when it comes to his horror work. He's helped in no small measure here by Jones, who plays both the Faun and a character named the Pale Man, and some gorgeous CGI creations (insects and fairy figures), but there's not one element I can think of that feels like anything less than top-notch work.

Baquero gives a wonderful performance in the central role, at ease with the magical sights around her as she retreats further and further away from a reality that is growing bleaker and bleaker. Both Gil and Verdú work well with her, and on their own. The former is playing a character who, due to her heavily pregnant state, spends a lot of her time resting and unable to see the worst of the events unfolding around her, either unintentionally or deliberately seeming oblivious to things. The latter is a strong fighter who has to work even harder in the third act to help save the lives of those she cares for. López portrays one of the great villains of modern cinema, whether he's horrifically bashing in someone's head with a wine bottle, torturing prisoners, or trying to self-repair his own wounds. He's easy to hate, and viewers are clued into how we should feel about him from Ofelia's point of view, but also avoids being a pantomime figure. You could argue that Del Toro sometimes has more time for his villains than his heroes, but he gets the balance right here, and every character, even a local doctor (played by Álex Angulo) becomes someone you're invested in. I've already mentioned Jones. I don't want to harp on and on about him, but his performances are absolutely worth mentioning again, and he has the pleasure of being involved in the most memorable imagery tied to the film.

The script and direction are almost perfect. The only criticism, a very minor one, is that you can too easily tell one or two characters that may be dealing with Captain Vidal while also betraying him by helping the rebels. A couple of nervous movements and glances feel very obvious and unsubtle, especially compared to everything else in the film. But that is the only thing I can think of that stops this from being a perfect modern classic of cinema, and it's still not enough to actually stop it from feeling, overall, like a flawless gem.

For teenagers who have the patience, and for all adult viewers, this is a powerful enchantment. Del Toro himself is the insect/fairy who takes our hand and takes us slowly and surely into an underworld as beautiful as it is dark, reassuring us at every step that we have nothing to fear, as long as we remember everything he is telling us. It's a tale of familial love, a tale of grief, a tale of war, and a tale of tales, how we use them to process horrifying thoughts and to escape reality, even if that escape is only temporary. Even if it is our mind deceiving us while our body endures some harsh mistreatment.

10/10

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

The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader (2010)

I had to look up some figures for the Narnia movies before I began writing this review. According to Box Office Mojo, the first film had a production budget of $180M and made a shade over $745M worldwide. Not bad. The second film had a production budget of $225M and made just under $420M worldwide. And this film had a production budget of $155M, bringing in a worldwide take of just over $415M. How the hell the Prince Caspian movie ended up costing $225M is beyond me, but it seems clear that the series was scuppered at that point. Which is a bit of a shame. Because while The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader ended up making the least at the box office, it's a contender for the best of the three films, taking two main characters and throwing them almost immediately into a wild adventure that involves dark magic, a hunt for special items that can be used to stop an evil force, a dragon, and much more.

Lucy (Georgie Henley) and Edmund Pevensie (Skandar Keynes) are miserable, staying at the home of relatives, including a most horrid cousin, Eustace Scrubb (Will Poulter). It doesn't take them long, however, to get back to Narnia, this time through a painting of a sailing ship. And the astonished Eustace ends up there with them, meeting Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes) and his crew, and soon seeing sights that convince him he must be hallucinating.

I'm not going to beat around the bush here. I liked this film more than the previous two Narnia adventures. There are still some problems. None of these films work as well as they could, but this one comes the closest, and that is despite an adventure that focuses on the two youngest, and previously most annoying, members of the Pevensie family.

Henley and Keynes both do better here than they have done previously, obviously improving slightly with each movie in the series, due to the script helping them out and the fact that they have grown up a bit. Barnes is still absolute fine as the courageous and good-hearted Prince Caspian, and Gary Sweet does pretty well as his right hand man. There's no Eddie Izzard returning to voice Reepicheep so we get Simon Pegg instead. He's fine, despite the fact that his vocal performance feels like a slight step down from Izzard's fun turn. But it's Poulter who steals a handful of scenes, even when he's being an absolutely slappable pain in the backside for the first third of the film. He's entertaining to dislike, and then gradually becomes easier to like as the story allows him to be changed by everything he experiences.

It's Michael Apted sliding into the director's chair this time, working from the script by Christopher Markus, Stephen McFeely, and Michael Petroni (the other newcomer), and he does a nice job of following on from the previous films, in terms of the look and feel of the thing, while taking viewers in a slightly different direction. There are times when this feels more like a Pirates Of The Caribbean movie (and I know not everyone will view that as an improvement), thanks to the menagerie of creatures, the action sequences, and the nautical nature of it all, and times when, just occasionally, it feels like a film that could have been just as much fun with a lower budget and some lovely stop-motion work in place of the CGI, in the vein of an old Harryhausen flick.

It's a shame that this is where the series ended, considering the fact that there were other adventures fans of the books may have wanted to see, but it's also not a bad thing that it finished on a such a relative high note.

And, as a recurring way to end these Narnia-focused reviews, can we all just agree that Aslan is a Superlion who could always help everyone a lot sooner than he does? Bloody poser, just waiting for his big moment in the finale to save the day and then pretend it was a close call.*

*I did warn you that I would also end this Narnia review with this statement.

7/10

You can buy the boxset here.
Americans can get the movies here.

The Kid Who Would Be King (2019)

Writer-director Joe Cornish has, with his two features, gone out of his way to provide entertainment that touches on some great genre history while also staying very much its own thing. Indeed, comparing his movies to others can end up doing them a disservice, and give people preconceptions that I am sure he would prefer you not to have. That's how it was with Attack The Block, and that is how it now is with The Kid Who Would Be King.

It's all about a young boy named Alex (Louis Ashbourne Serkis) who ends up pulling a sword out of a stone. That sword is obviously Excalibur, making Alex the leader that is needed to stop our world being taken over by forces of darkness (led by Morgana, played by Rebecca Ferguson). Alex needs to convince others of his leadership suitability. He has one very loyal friend (Bedders, played by Dean Chaumoo), and there's a strange new boy at school who is actually Merlin (Angus Imrie), but the three of them aren't enough to defeat the approaching baddies.

First off, I think it is very important to emphasise what this movie isn't. It's not a hilarious comedy (although it IS funny). And it's not aimed at older viewers. That doesn't mean that older viewers cannot be entertained by it, as I was. It just means that the best audience for this would be kids aged, at a guess, between 8 and 13, when they can still enjoy the fantastical elements, perhaps even believing in some of the onscreen magic, yet also appreciate the dramatic strands that serve a number of life lessons for the main characters to learn and grow from.

Now let's pin down what the movie IS. What Joe Cornish has delivered here is a movie not unlike the live-action Disney movies from the '70s and '80s. It's a more polished, and slightly less childish, effort than most of those adventures, but it's absolutely branching off from that particular cinematic family tree.

The script and direction from Cornish keeps everything in line with his ultimate aim, this is a film with the kids front and centre for about 85% of the runtime. They are the ones who know about the impending danger, they are the ones who hope to stop it. This is not a place for adults, and the rules of the battles allow for them to be handily "set aside" during the major set-pieces.

Serkis is excellent as young Alex, a boy who seizes the reworked mythology in a way that shows him hoping it will provide an answer to one major question in his life (connected to his father). Chaumoo is equally good as Bedders, and Imrie adds a vital energy and humour whenever he appears onscreen (the older version of his character is portrayed by a relative newcomer named Patrick Stewart, who also seems quite good at this acting lark). Tom Taylor and Rhianna Doris play characters who are initially antagonistic towards our hero, and they do decent work. Their journey may not ring as true as the journeys of the other characters, this is where the script slips up slightly, but Taylor and Doris do all that is asked of them. Last, but by no means least, you have two very different women making an impression in very different ways. Ferguson is an impressively determined and menacing villain, and Denise Gough is the concerned mother of Alex, doing her best to support her son while also trying to stop him from being consumed by what she thinks is a fantasy story that he has taken far too much to heart.

As long as you know what Cornish is aiming for, this has everything you could want from a piece of family entertainment. It updates a classic tale without attempting to include all of the latest trends and pop culture references, and that makes it feel both old-fashioned, in a pleasing way, and also quite refreshing. Cornish is two for two now, and I am very much looking forward to whatever he gives us next.

7/10

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

The Wizard Of Speed And Time (1988)

There are two ways to view The Wizard Of Speed And Time, a film I had been eager to see for decades (since I was won over by the trailer). On the one hand, it's an astonishing achievement by writer-director-FX whizz Mike Jittlov. On the other hand, it's an indulgent and messy attempt to create his own legend.

The story is quite simple. Jittlov ends up being asked to make a couple of things on a very limited budget by two Hollywood figures (played by Steve Brodie and Richard Kaye) who are betting against one another. One has faith in him, the other does not, and does all he can to sabotage the process. The other thing sabotaging the process is seen to be the whole system itself, set up to make things as difficult and frustrating for independent film-makers as possible.

Every scene in this movie is almost overflowing with nice little details and special effects. Seriously. Despite the limited budget, Jittlov has made something that's a real treat for fans of the art, often also showing how some of the bigger moments are set up, or at the very least giving enough clues as to what you're about to see happen.

The biggest problem with this movie is something you will often see people mention when criticising much bigger movies, and this doesn't deserve to get any kind of free pass, a film shouldn't be made up of simply special effects. It needs more to it. A decent story (this is far too slight), good acting (more on that in a moment), and a smart script help.

The script has many decent moments but it cannot work around the weakest element of the film, and that is the fact that Mike Jittlov isn't half as funny or endearing as he thinks he is. No offence to the guy, he just doesn't have the charisma to carry the movie.

Having said that, his acting style is not completely out of place with the friends and colleagues he has assembled. Brodie and Kaye do decent work in their roles, and Paige Moore is enjoyable and sweet in her role (playing an actress who befriends Jittlov), but they are the highlights from the main supporting cast members, with one or two individuals highlighting their lack comfort in front of the camera.

My initial reaction to this movie, as the end credits were still rolling, was very negative. I hated it. I felt it was far too smug throughout, and resented the fact that I had spent decades dying to see it. Now? Having calmed down slightly, it's often a treat, and some will love it, but the good stuff is still outweighed my the bad, and that is saying something when you consider how much Jittlov has packed into every frame.

4/10

Here's a weird jumble of info and links.
The movie has never been available on disc, as far as I know, but has been put out there to find in lieu of an official release.

Yule Love It: The Hudsucker Proxy (1994)

I've said it before and I'll say it again, The Hudsucker Proxy is the best film that the Coen brothers have made. Yes. Re-read that sentence, accept that I am not going to change my mind, and let's now move on to the full review.

Hudsucker Industries is about to experience a turbulent time. The president (Charles Durning) has left the building via a very high window and it is only a month until the stocks are going to be made available to the company. So Sidney J. Mussburger (Paul Newman) comes up with a plan. Put someone in place who will cause the value of the company to plummet, allowing the board to buy up the shares and then get things back on track, making lots and lots of money and ensuring they also keep control. This works out well for Norville Barnes (Tim Robbins), a wet-behind-the-ears young man who has landed a job in the mailroom, but he obviously doesn't realise that he is being used as a patsy. He has one big idea, and one potential ally (Jennifer Jason Leigh, portraying a Pulitzer-winning reporter named Amy Archer, getting her story by working undercover for Norville). Can he somehow survive his express trip to the top of the company food chain?

Written and directed by both Coen brothers (with Sam Raimi helping out in the script department), I really do view this as a perfect movie, and it's most certainly the best cinematic ode to the many films of Capra that we've had in modern cinema. The script alternates between biting and beautifully gentle, there are some standout set-pieces (the main one being a child finally seeing the potential of a lone hula hoop), and the cast are faultless throughout.

The first time I watched this movie I was irritated by Leigh, but when I revisited it I saw that she delivers a performance that rivals those she was tasked to emulate (Hepburn clearly being the main influence). Robbins, on the other hand, gets to play his everyman in a broad, wide-eyed, way, allowing him to draw more comedy out of the material. Newman has a blast, a big grin one minute and a menacing glare the next, and there are equally wonderful turns from John Mahoney, Bruce Campbell, Bill Cobbs, Jim True, and the ill-fated Durning.

And all of those pitch-perfect performances are delivered in the midst of a film that feels like it could have been made in the 1950s and colorised for modern audiences. Every detail, from the layout of the Hudsucker building to the music (a fitting accompaniment to the visual style from Carter Burwell), to the main idea that the whole plot revolves around, no pun intended. Clean, crisp, yet warm, cinematography from Roger Deakins, a master of the craft, editing that veers between sedate and snappy, as required, and even the selection of well-utilised special effects are beyond reproach, in my eyes.

I may have misspoke when I said that this was the best film that the Coen brothers ever made. The more I think about it, the more I think I should just call it what it is; a modern masterpiece. Yes. And you're still not going to change my mind. Well, not until I have a long-overdue rewatch of Miller's Crossing anyway.

10/10

This says that it is UK compatible.
Americans can buy it here.

Dead By Dawn 2018: Dave Made A Maze (2017)

Dave Made A Maze is exactly what it says it is. It's a film that revolves around Dave (Nick Thune) having made a maze. He has made his maze out of cardboard. A lot of cardboard. And is now lost somewhere in the middle of it. Well, that is what he tells his disbelieving girlfriend, Annie (Meera Rohit Kumbhani), who then calls in his friend, Gordon (Adam Busch), who calls in a motley selection of people. Despite protests from Dave, everyone heads inside the maze, and they find themselves in an elaborate cardboard world that includes booby traps, living cardboard creatures, and a certain maze-dwelling mythological character.

What this film lacks in budget and star power, although there is at least one familiar face in the cast, it more than makes up for with creativity, wonderful production design and plenty of wit. Director Bill Watterson, who co-wrote the screenplay with story originator Steven Sears, shows no signs of insecurity or indecision in his debut feature. Instead, he effortlessly draws viewers into the surreal world created onscreen and blends common movie moments with a delightfully childish selection of interpretations.

And it's not just the consistently inventive visual style that entertains. The script is full of wonderful gags that range from the sublime to the ridiculous, whether it's people finding themselves suddenly trying to discuss their problems in rhyming couplets or a running gag with people delivering a particular line from Raging Bull.

The cast also help to sell the silliness and make you care about something that could have easily been risible and too daffy to bother with. Thune and Kumbhani have the two hardest roles, because Dave has brought this upon himself and Annie could easily either come across as too weak for not standing up to him. Their performances are, however, helped by a script that places them where they need to be without dragging them to any annoying extremes, and it's easy to sense that the couple have problems, but also that they really do love one another and want to move forward when they next get the chance. Busch has an easier role, and he's arguably the highlight of the film with his mix of admiration for the maze and concern for his friend. James Urbaniak, Frank Caeti, and Scott Narver are also very entertaining as the small (amateur) film crew documenting the journey into the maze, and both Stephanie Allynne and Kirsten Vangsness at least get a couple of great moments.

Although horror fans will appreciate the absurd and elaborate moments that lead to enjoyably ungory deaths, Dave Made A Maze is definitely not one that should be sold as a horror film. It's a fantastical adventure with some time set aside for relationship counselling. And lots and lots of cardboard.

7/10

You can buy the film here, although I don't know about the shipping options.

The NeverEnding Story (1984)

IF I'd seen The NeverEnding Story when it first came out then I would have been the perfect age. I was 8 years old for most of 1984, and the special effects and simplistic plotting here would have made the film an instant favourite. But I didn't see it back in 1984. Nor did I catch up with it in 1985, or any other year in the '80s. I forgot about it throughout most of the '90s. The longer I left it, the further away I was from that child who would have been the ideal audience member. I knew that this was a beloved fantasy film and I started to worry about how my adult mind might deal with viewing it at entirely the wrong age. And would I be able to stop thinking about bloody Limahl.

I wasn't that far into the film when I realised that I didn't have to worry. Director Wolfgang Petersen, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Herman Wiegel (and a helping hand from Robert Easton), gets everything moving along at a cracking pace once viewers have been introduced to the main characters. And things maintain great momentum right up until the end credits.

Barret Oliver plays a young boy named Bastian. His day starts off with a meaningful chat with his father before he heads outside and finds himself being chased by the usual bullies. Evading them, he hides in a bookshop, and that's where he gets his hands on a very special book. Once safely home again, Bastian starts to read the book, and in those pages he learns about a place called Fantasia, an Empress (Tami Stronach), and a brave young boy named Atreyu (Noah Hathaway). Fantasia is being devoured and destroyed by a force called the Nothing. It's up to Atreyu to save it. But it may also be up to Bastian, even if he has no idea about that when he starts reading the story.

Based on a book by Michael Ende (although it should be noted that Ende felt that the film was so different from his work that he unsuccessfully sued the production), The NeverEnding Story has everything you could possibly want from this type of thing. The young leads are likable enough, the creature design is wonderful (a large rock being named Rock Biter, a cute luck dragon named Falkor, and one or two others), and the lessons are wholesome and satisfying.

Having said that, Petersen isn't afraid to make things a little more interesting than a number of other films you could pick from this style and time. The appearance of the Nothing is the first sign of this, but there's also a dark sequence showing a beautiful horse in peril, and the entire second half starts to twist things and put everything in place to justify the title. A lot of movies aimed at children will promote strength, bravery, good morals, and a whole number of other assets. This film also does that, sort of, but it also tells every child that their imagination is a superpower; it's a way to right wrongs (even if only temporarily), it's an escape, it's the foundation of every major idea that ever helped to build and shape worlds.

That point elevates the whole film, as well as the strange mix of absolute fantasy and the unpatronising way in which it depicts loss and pain. The more I think about it right now, the more I am tempted to revisit it soon. It's a fascinating piece of work, highly recommended to both younger viewers and those who don't think they are already too old to check it out for the first time. You're never too old for that, as I was delighted to discover for myself.

8/10

Get it on Bluray here.
And Americans can get it here.

Errementari: The Blacksmith And The Devil (2017)

There are many times when I am happy that I don't ever sit in the dark of a cinema with a pen and torch, taking notes and distracting everyone else around me with my small beacon of bad manners. I like to just sit back and take in every aspect of a movie, and I generally make a mental note of elements that I can then flesh out later, during my writing of reviews. But there are rare occasions when I am not so happy about my lack of notes, and this is one of them.

I THINK I have enough of the characters and cast names nailed down, but I welcome any corrections from others who have seen the film.

With that disclaimer out of the way, let me get to the main review. Errementari: The Blacksmith And The Devil is based on an old folk tale, and if you're as unaware of it as I was then just know that it's something that runs along the lines of a Faustian pact. A blacksmith, Patxi (Kandido Uranga), spends his life shut up in his intimidating home, avoiding interactions with the local villagers. This situation looks set to change when an official type of gent comes to the village and claims that he is seeking a large amount of gold that is hidden somewhere in the area. It must be hidden at Patxi's home, which leads to a party heading out there to force their way inside. Meanwhile, a little girl named Usue (Uma Bracaglia) has already infiltrated the home of the blacksmith and discovered that he is keeping a small boy imprisoned in a cage. Moments later, the blacksmith is dealing with Usue, a demon named Sartael (Eneko Sagardoy), and that crowd trying to get inside his home. He's also due to be taken to Hell at some point, an idea that appeals to Usue, as she knows her mother is supposed to be residing there after committing suicide.

I'm just about as happy with that summary as I can be, despite how clumsy it might seem. I don't want to spoil any potential surprises for viewers, and there are definitely some fun twists and turns in the second half of the film that utilise interesting ideas about dealing with demons, as well as what happens to those who go to Hell.

Director Paul Urkijo Alijo, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Asier Guerricaechevarria, may not get things perfect, the film has some notable pacing issues when it comes to the third act, but he's definitely someone to keep an eye on, having already cut his teeth on some genre-soaked short films. There are a number of very impressive practical effects on display here, with Sartael and some other demonic forms presented in a way that I haven't seen so impressively rendered since the iconic performance by Tim Curry in Legend, and the production value throughout is of the highest quality.

Deftly balancing the fantastical elements with some comedy and a huge helping of heart, this is a great example of how to present a classic tale to modern audiences without having to patronise viewers or compromise the material. The cast all do their best to sell the characters and events - Uranga is more a man of action than words, Bracaglia is innocent and adaptable to the strange situation, and Sagardoy is a delightful mix of evil and pathetic - and every one of the supporting players manages to do equally good work.

You also get a lovely score, plenty of fiery scenes shot in a way that make you feel the heat emanating off the screen, a punchline to pretty much every set up, and some imagery in the last few scenes that blend technical wizardry with a nice economical approach to capably raise the material to the level of the outright mythological.

8/10

Not sure when this will get a wider release, in the meantime you can buy Faust, if you like.