Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die (2026)

There's no way that this should have been as bad as it was, considering the talent involved. I have enjoyed a couple of other recent movies from writer Matthew Robinson, and I've also been a fan of Gore Verbinski. A cast that includes Sam Rockwell, Juno Temple, and Zazie Beetz? Sign me up. Alas, this is a half-developed decent idea in search of a much better movie.

Rockwell plays a man who bursts into a diner, reveals that he's wired up to explode, and claims to be from the future. Everything has gone horribly wrong in the future, but Rockwell just needs to find the right group of people to help him save them all from a powerful AI overlord. That group of people ends up including Susan (Temple), Ingrid (Haley Lu Richardson), Mark (Peña), Janet (Beetz), Scott (Asim Chaudhry), Marie (Georgia Goodman), and Bob (Daniel Barnett). Each one of these individuals has something to make them an essential part of the plan, hopefully.

There are so many interesting ways this could have gone. You have potential timeloops, you have evil tech that might be able to tap into unlimited power, and you have Sam bloody Rockwell in a starring role. Unfortunately, the only one of those three things to work here is Rockwell, who gives another performance so enjoyable that I wish he would get more star vehicles worthy of his considerable talent.

Robinson does very little with the screenplay, apparently ensuring that the whole thing can be made with a reasonably low budget. I understand his thinking there, especially when the premise is so bonkers that you know it's not going to be breaking any box office records, but limited resources is no excuse for limiting creativity. Just look at any great sci-fi or horror movie made by people who often had a lot less to work with.

Verbinski doesn't seem to know what to do. It's been a while since he's had to show some self-restraint, perhaps he's forgotten how to do it. Perhaps he was never able to do it in the first place. There are certainly some moments in the second half of the film that show him making some horrible decisions that highlight failings in the screenplay. Robinson may have handed in a weak framework, but Verbinski moves it all around and ensures that it will collapse under the weight of his directorial additions.

Aside from Rockwell's winning turn at the centre of the madness, Temple, Richardson, Peña, and Beetz all do very well with what they're given, as do Chaudhry, Goodman, and Barnett, although they are given a bit less. Tom Taylor is also good, and given the chance to show a fair bit of range with the events that befall his character, while many others fill out the supporting cast without being given any chance to make a strong impression amidst numerous scenes that are often too busy and chaotic.

The 134-minute runtime is overlong, especially with a final sequence that proves to be so unsatisfying, and I struggle to think of anything to recommend here, the cast notwithstanding. I guess the title applies just as much to viewers as it does to the film, but it's only the last two words that I suspect most people will be able to follow as instructions.

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

Prime Time: Mousehunt (1997)

There are some movies that you form a surprisingly strong attachment to. I'm not on about those films regarded as absolute classics. I'm not on about those films that you saw at the cinema and were immediately blown away by. I'm on about the kind of films that don't get talked about too often, yet you used to own, on either VHS or shiny disc, haven't seen in a while, and then immediately fall immediately in love with (again) when you revisit them after a gap of many years.

Mousehunt is one of those movies for me. When I clicked on the "start watching" button, I immediately remembered how many times I had watched the thing when I bought it on VHS. I could recite almost every line, and I never tired of it. I was like a child with a beloved Disney favourite.

But what's it all about? I'll tell you, although the title sums it up adequately.

Two brothers, Ernie Smuntz (Nathan Lane) and Lars Smuntz (Lee Evans) come together to claim their inheritance after the death of their father (Rudolph Smuntz, played by William Hickey). The inheritance comes to a seemingly paltry amount. There are some old cigars, a string factory that doesn't look likely to become a big money-maker, and an old house. Amazingly, the house turns out to have been the work of a very famous architect. It is a "lost" masterpiece. Determined to renovate the house and sell it for a life-changing amount of money, the brothers get to work. And that's when they start to become frustrated by an extra, unwanted, house guest. A mouse. But this mouse is smarter than most.

This comedy works as well as it does because it benefits from a number of people doing work that is up there with their very best stuff. I can't think of anything from writer Adam Rifkin that tops this, so it's his absolute high point, and director Gore Verbinski may have a number of other films that could be considered better, but very few of them are as much fun.

As for the stars, both Lane and Evan are comic actors I have enjoyed in a variety of roles. They work perfectly here, playing to their strengths, with the former getting the best lines and the latter allowed to go over the top with the physical gags. If the film only involved those two actors and the mouse then I would have been happy, but there are more people joining in the fun. Maury Chaykin is the man most interested in bidding for the house, Vicki Lewis is the ex-wife of Evans, and has a couple of great scenes with him, and Christopher Walken almost steals the film away from everybody with his wonderful turn as Caesar, the exterminator called in when other plans to get rid of the mouse have failed.

There are at least half a dozen magnificent set-pieces, a delightfully playful score by Alan Silvestri, a mouse so cute that it tucks itself into a little "bed" when about to go to sleep, and a great energy throughout that builds and builds towards a frenetic and hilarious grand finale. Some may think I have rated this too highly. I would urge those people to revisit the movie and come back to me with any major criticisms. It's a near-perfect comedy that works for almost every member of the family.

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. All links are HERE.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

The Lone Ranger (2013)

Here's an anecdote that will make sense to nobody outwith Scotland. When I was quite young I wrote in to the letters/joke page of the Oor Wullie section of The Sunday Post. I sent in a joke and received, if I remember correctly, a £5 gift token, and my name in print. The joke wasn't great, but I still kinda like it. See what you think.

Tonto is riding through the countryside one day and sees The Lone Ranger coming towards him, with a bin bag over his shoulder.
"Where are you going?" asks Tonto.
"To the dump, to the dump, to the dump, dump, dump. To the dump, to the dump, to the dump, dump, dump."

I admit, it may not work quite as well when written down. Anyway, let's move on.

There are some movies that just don't stand much chance with the critics. That can happen for a variety of reasons. The subject matter. The budget. Bad casting choices. And much more besides. The Lone Ranger was one of those movies. And I can think of two main reasons for the knives being drawn. One, the budget, which apparently went just over $200M. Two, the casting of Johnny Depp in the role of Tonto, the Native American sidekick to the main character. I don't care about the budget for blockbuster movies, personally. Once you're over $100M then everything tends to blur into one big, fat wad of cash anyway. I do agree with everyone who thought that casting Johnny Depp as Tonto was ridiculous, however, but realise that he's the only BIG name in the cast. That means that the decision is still dubious, but a bit more understandable. Yet it's still not a good enough reason to completely drub a film that actually has some moments of rollicking entertainment.

The story is, as if you couldn't guess, all about how a man (Armie Hammer) assumed the role of The Lone Ranger. With Tonto by his side, for better or worse, he eventually comes to realise that his idealistic approach to the law may not be beneficial to his health, especially if the criminals that he wants to capture are just working for more powerful, but hidden, villains.

Directed by Gore Verbinski, there's no denying that the film has a certain Pirates Of The Caribbean vibe to it. There are issues with the pacing, there are some big, entertainingly complicated, action sequences, and there's Johnny Depp being a bit kooky. The script, by Justin Haythe, Ted Elliott and Terry Rossio, packs in much more than it needs to. The Lone Ranger doesn't have to be a complex character. He's a good guy, plain and simple. Yet the writers here decide to focus on his steep learning curve, as he grows into the mask, and then amuse themselves with a framing device that allows them more room to play around with the narrative. It does make for a few good moments, admittedly, but could easily have been trimmed to save the movie a good 10-15 minutes, in my estimation.

Hammer is good as the hero. I like him a lot, thanks to his ability to temper the stoic heroic qualities required with some solid comedic talent. Depp - well, we've already covered his performance. He's not terrible, although many will disagree. Ruth Wilson is a tough woman who finds herself in danger, and she's okay, but given short shrift by the script. William Fichtner fares much better, playing the dangerous criminal known as Butch Cavendish, and Tom Wilkinson repeats the kind of decent performance that is often required of British actors in American blockbusters. Barry Pepper proves to be a highlight, once again. As he does in almost every movie that he appears in. And there are also small roles for James Badge Dale, Helena Bonham Carter, Harry Treadaway and Stephen Root, among others.

There are a number of scenes that feel a bit dull and lifeless, yet the movie really shows how great it could have been in a few extended set-pieces that raise up the energy levels and mix CGI, fantastic stunt work, and a healthy dollop of humour to provide the kind of exuberant fun that I wish more blockbusters would strive for. And the finale, accompanied by that rousing theme music (well, it's the final section of the "William Tell Overture" but many grew up with it as "the theme tune from The Lone Ranger"), is a surprisingly great piece of cinema, marred by some excessive FX work and both helped and hindered by a sense of ridiculousness.

I wouldn't be brave enough to say that this is a movie that you may be pleasantly surprised by. Okay, what the hell, I will. Give The Lone Ranger a try some time, and you might be pleasantly surprised. I certainly was.

6/10

http://www.amazon.com/Lone-Ranger-Blu-ray-Digital-Copy/dp/B00DJYJWVW/ref=sr_1_2?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1409322376&sr=1-2&keywords=the+lone+ranger