Netflix And Chill: Set It Up (2018)

There was a time, up until very recently actually, when I hadn't really taken much notice of Zoey Deutch. I didn't view her as a standout in supporting roles, I didn't realise she was the daughter of Lea Thompson and Howard Deutch, and there was nothing in her filmography that seemed to pique my interest. That's all changed now. Not only have I recently watched a few films in the past few weeks that have featured Deutch, I've also been completely won over by her ability to move between comedy and drama with a very obvious likeability. 

Deutch plays Harper in this, a young woman struggling with the constant demands from her workaholic boss, Kirsten (Lucy Liu). Glen Powell is Charlie, a man who works in the same building as Harper and has the same problem with his boss, Rick (Taye Diggs). Once they meet and share their woes, Harper and Charlie eventually come to realise that their lives could get easier if they can set up a love match between their bosses. It should be easy enough, considering how much Harper and Charlie plan and maintain the schedules of their respective bosses. All they need to do is keep pushing them together.

One of only a few feature films directed by Claire Scanlon, and one of the better screenplays from writer Katie Silberman, Set It Up is easygoing and fun for those who don't mind watching something that follows a very well-known formula. The laughs may not be big, but they're impressively consistent throughout the 105-minute runtime, and the whole thing is carried on the shoulders of the two leads, as well as some great supporting cast members. So your enjoyment of it is going to depend on just how much you like the leads, and I am certainly a big fan of both by now.

Both Deutch and Powell are on top form, effortlessly working so well together that their journey to the expected big moments in the finale is satisfying and very easy to root for. There's enough friction between them, and enough obstacles, but no potential problem is insurmountable. Both Liu and Diggs are also doing great work, frequently being so enjoyable that it might make you wonder (as I did) why they never got that one major role to insert them into the mainstream collective consciousness. Joan Smalls is entertainingly vain and selfish, Meredith Hagner plays a good BFF, and Pete Davidson is a lot of fun in his small supporting role, but everyone works so well here because they're complementing two leads who already make the movie well worth your time.

It could be a bit funnier, it could spend a bit more time delivering some very heightened romance, and it could work harder to subvert the rom-com tropes that are being commented on by our two leads as they attempt to force a meet-cute and develop a relationship between two unaware individuals. I admit that there's a lot that could have been better. That didn't stop me from watching most of it play out with a doofy smile on my face though. I suspect most won't enjoy it as much as I did, but I still recommend it nonetheless. 

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. 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 Devil Wears Prada 2 (2026)

I wasn't a huge fan of The Devil Wears Prada. It was fine. It absolutely worked for the people it was aimed at. I just never liked the way it tried to mix the aspirational with a lot of elements that should never be acceptable in any tale of the "follow your dreams" variety. And that is what it was, despite the fact that some of the main characters had very different dreams.

Here we are though, twenty years later, and The Devil Wears Prada 2 has already had the kind of hugely successful opening weekend that makes any review, especially one that has been delayed by about a week, absolutely redundant. 

It's good to see that pretty much everyone is back, both behind and in front of the camera. Writer Aline Brosh McKenna, who adapted Lauren Weisberger's novel for the first film, knows how to deal with these characters. Director David Frankel knows how to film everything, whether it's the dialogue or the moments that showcase the fashion. And Meryl Streep, Anne Hathaway, Stanley Tucci, and Emily Blunt all feel exactly right for where their characters would be in life at about this time. 

The plot is quite simple. Runway, the magazine that is very much an in-movie version of Vogue, is in trouble. A scandal has erupted, but it's only a scandal that hangs around long enough to get the main characters back together. Miranda (Streep) remains in charge, but other people believe that the magazine, now struggling with a lower budget and more focus on online content and catching the eyes of scrollers, needs someone who can refresh the brand. Andy (Hathaway) is a journalist looking for a job, and is equal parts shocked and intrigued when she's offered a chance to return to Runway. Nigel (Tucci) remains a calm and brilliant presence. As for Emily (Blunt) . . . she seems to have moved somewhere far less toxic.

I can't think of a way that this could have worked better for what it wants to be, a legacy sequel tapping into nostalgia while allowing the main characters to be pulled into some extra problems created by tech and the modern world, but I still can't say that I really enjoyed it. The fact is that this will work brilliantly for those who loved the first movie. It's quite faultless when it comes to pleasing fans. It just doesn't change anything to make things any more enjoyable for those who weren't won over by this mixture of vibrancy and venom the first time around.

The leads are all fantastic, slipping back into their roles with ease. As for the newcomers, standouts include Kenneth Branagh (playing the husband of Miranda), Tracie Thoms (a supportive friend), a hilarious Justin Theroux (the kind of rich man who seriously over-estimates his own intelligence at almost every opportunity), B. J. Novak (typical "new guard" type of businessman), and a sadly-underused Lucy Liu. Patrick Brammall is a bit disappointingly bland for a potential love interest, but Simone Ashley, Caleb Hearon, and Helen J. Shen are all very enjoyable as other individuals trying to survive in the Runway workplace jungle.

If you loved The Devil Wears Prada then you'll love this. As for me, sitting in the cinema in my supermarket jeans and movie-reference-covered-t-shirt, I was never going to be the target demographic for 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

Presence (2024)

While he has tried his hand at a wide variety of movies throughout his career, there was something that made me roll my eyes and say “of course he would do that” when I heard that Steven Soderbergh was directing a haunted house movie that was apparently presented from the POV of the spirit.

A family move in to a house. Some things start to move around, and some sensations are felt by the new occupants. Other things start to happen, complications in their lives and moments that create more danger for people, which makes it only a matter of time until we find out whether the presence is a friend or foe.

There is a screenplay here, and it’s one written by David Koepp, but you could be forgiven that this was an improv exercise used by Soderbergh to firm up an idea that would later be more fully developed. The biggest problem here is that it feels incomplete, it’s a schematic drawing that needs detail and colour added. None of the characters are interesting enough, the plotting is too little stretched too far, and it all leads to a finale that feels like some kind of parody of the genre. Maybe it is, and maybe that is what drew Soderbergh to the project, but it feels like a bit of a slap in the face to those not looking for the filmic equivalent of a shaggy dog story with a weak punchline.

Callina Liang and Eddy Maday are the teens at the heart of the story, Lucy Liu and Chris Sullivan are the parents, and there are roles for West Mulholland, Julia Fox, and Natalie Woolams-Torres, but they’re all asked to do little more than wander around the scenery until the gimmick is focused on them. There is no way to properly judge the performances that seem designed to simply fill the time in between specific camera moves.

No scares, no tension, not even any drama to feel invested in, Presence is a big bundle of nothing. It’s the kind of thing I would expect to come from a first-time director with misplaced confidence in his own skillset. The fact that it is helmed by Soderbergh is astonishing. He has made other movies that I haven’t liked, but I have always been able to appreciate his intentions. Not this time though. This time around it feels as if he has tried his hand at something he views as being a bit beneath him.

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

 

Red One (2024)

If you're going to be responsible for kidnapping Santa Claus (played here by J. K. Simmons) then you would probably hope to avoid being pursued by Dwayne Johnson and Chris Evans. Okay, wait, I know some people would dream of that scenario, but let's just say that no villain wants to be caught by powerful heroes, especially if they're trying to make up for decades of Santa's apparent leniency towards those who should be, or are, on the naughty list.

Johnson is Callum Drift, the head of security for Santa. Which makes it a terrible time for him when the big guy is kidnapped. Who would do such a despicable thing? Drift doesn't know, nor does Zoe (a capable higher-level boss, played by Lucy Liu), but there's one person who might be able to help. He's a lost cause though, a "naughty-lister" of the highest order who also happens to be very good at tracking people down. That's Jack O'Malley (Evans).

Written by Chris Morgan, who has taken some ideas from Hiram Garcia and sprinkled them with the kind of muscular moments that you'd expect from someone who has been in the writer's room for at least half a dozen Fast & Furious movies, Red One is loud and ridiculous in a way that may well cause some to love it, but didn't really work for me. There are one or two fun set-pieces (you'll know them already if you saw the trailer), but not enough to make this truly worth the runtime that clocks in at just over 2 hours. And it doesn't help that Johnson is armed with a gadget that allows him to pull some Ant-Man maneuvers. Very little of the humour works (especially in the earlier scenes), the action gets messier and harder to keep track of in the third act, and there's a general sense of being underwhelmed throughout the finale.

Director Jake Kasdan obviously found this premise appealing - some more Johnson silliness after their work together on the Jumanji movies, but with lots of seasonal trimmings - and I don't begrudge him giving it a try, but he seems to have been distracted by the idea of presenting a modern and cool new yuletide "classic" that he failed to spot the many weaknesses. Things don't flow well, the tone lacks a sweetness and innocence that the best Christmas films keep at their core, and the best bits don't necessarily feel as if they need to be grounded in a Christmas movie. 

Johnson plays the kind of character he always plays (tough and mean, but with a heart of gold), although he deserves some praise for being able to move around in this onscreen world in a way that makes him feel as if he does belong there. Evans has fun being someone with a much wobblier moral compass, but it's a fun inversion (another one) of his clean-cut image that is never fully committed to. Simmons is a surprisingly good, if also surprisingly muscular, Santa, Liu does perfectly well with her small role, Bonnie Hunt is a pleasant Mrs. Claus, and Kristofer Hivju is a lot of fun whenever his Krampus character appears. Other familiar faces include Mary Elizabeth Ellis, Nick Kroll, Marc Evan Jackson, and Kiernan Shipka, all doing just fine, and Wesley Kimmel is decent enough in the role of Dylan, the son of Jack O'Malley, and the one main child who ends up seeing some of the magical battle to return order to things in time for Christmas. I'll also mention the work from Reinaldo Faberlie as Agent Garcia, a large and intimidating polar bear. Overall, the cast isn't bad. I'm just not sure that the leads couldn't have been replaced by better choices, which could have then led to a screenplay being tweaked and improved to fit different personas.

I could sit through this again. I didn't hate it while it was playing. Nothing stands out though. It's the movie equivalent of the overdone musical Christmas tree. Bright, loud, somehow seeming to miss the point of the season while bathing the whole room in flashes of red, green, and gold light. But sometimes you can still look at it and enjoy the temporary distraction.

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, 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

Prime Time: City Of Industry (1997)

Writer Ken Solarz has seen a movie or two. It’s easy to remember this when he keeps throwing so much onscreen that should be familiar to even the most casual viewer of crime movies. City Of Industry is chock full of dialogue and situations that have been in hundreds of other movies, and it doesn’t manage to put a fresh spin on anything being regurgitated throughout the 97-minute runtime.

A group of guys do a robbery, one big score that could set them up for a good life ahead (of course), but things soon go wrong when someone gets greedy, leading to a betrayed individual plotting some bloody revenge.

Director John Irvin mistakenly puts his faith in others here. He has a great cast to work with, but very few of them are able to improve the material. In fact, one or two (mainly Stephen Dorff and Harvey Keitel) seem to lean into the idea that the characters were written in a way all too similar to some of their previous work.

Aside from Dorff and Keitel, although they aren’t awful (they just seem stuck in a certain lane that the script puts them in), the cast also includes Timothy Hutton, Wade Dominguez, Michael Jai White, Lucy Liu, Dana Barron, and Famke Janssen. It’s the women who do much better, maybe because they have to work harder in roles that would be completely forgettable with less capable performers.

Derivative and uninspired, this feels like exactly what it is - a 1997 crime thriller that wants to be Tarantino-esque without having any actual Tarantino talent attached. So we’re left with thin characters, laughably tired dialogue, and a plot that tries to twist and turn slightly while heading towards a very predictable third act. Not recommended, especially when I can point you towards at least a dozen other “Tarantino-lite” crime thrillers that work better than 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.
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

Shazam! Fury Of The Gods (2023)

Try as I might, I could not muster up any enthusiasm for Shazam! Fury Of The Gods. The trailer was perfectly fine, the cast seemed decent enough, and I had enjoyed the first movie. There was just nothing making me feel like it was unmissable on the big screen. Then I had a long weekend to enjoy and some time to spend at the local cinema. So I figured maybe I was wrong to be so hesitant.

I was right.

This isn’t a terrible film. It just lacks any weight, and has been released at an odd time in this current phase of DC movies. We know that there is going to be an attempt to reboot a number of properties, which makes it even harder to invest in something that is still trying to play around in a slightly different sandbox, but keeping connections with a larger universe that has just lurched in another direction.

Our hero (Zachary Levi) cannot seem to do much right lately. He and his super-friends, nicknamed the Philadelphia Follies by locals, might save lives, but never in a way that is as polished and successful as other superheroes we could mention. Then some Ancient Greek sisters come along, repair the powerful staff broken at the end of the first film, and start causing havoc, culminating in a third act that brings in some fun creature designs and large-scale destruction.

With director David F. Sandberg returning, as well as writer Henry Gayden (joined by Chris Morgan, who wrote SEVEN of the Fast & Furious movies), and most of the main players reprising their roles, from Levi to Djimon Hounsou, as well as at least one canny cameo, Shazam! Fury Of The Gods could have fared better if released by someone more stable and consistent than DC. I don’t think it would have been viewed as any kind of classic, but both Shazam! movies, much like the goofy big kid at the heart of the picture, just want to please as many people as possible. While the direction and writing are competent, there are moments when it feels as if those involved couldn’t agree on which way to take the film, and the compromise allowed everyone to add their personal preferences.

Levi is fun in the main role, Adam Brody is enjoyable as the hero who wants to enjoy his time in the limelight, and everyone else in the main family unit, whether a child actor or their adult counterpart, does a good job. There are a few too many characters to ensure that everyone gets their big moment, but the film tries hard to share out the treats. Mirren does the kind of thing she can do so well, she has steely willpower, a wry smile, and grace to go along with her villainy, while Lucy Liu has fun moving from a potential threat to main big baddie. Rachel Ziegler does an excellent job in her pivotal role, reminding me that I still need to see her in West Side Story, and she joins a number of characters I would love to see again, if there was ever a third film in this series (which currently looks highly unlikely).

A collapsing bridge sequence is a highlight, the final face-off is great, and the central message here is as sweet and positive as it was in the first film. It’s just a shame that the whole thing feels so horribly chaotic, bringing in elements that feel as if they have been pillaged from Harry Potter and Harryhausen, with varying degrees of success. People lose and regain their powers as if playing a game of tag, the tone sometimes swerves unexpectedly towards moments of real grimness, and the very last scenes will have most viewers just impatiently waiting for what they know should happen before the end credits roll. There’s also the usual extra bits to keep watching for, but they suffer from the same problem we’ve seen before; what is set up to be consequential and impactful now just feels pointless, because the suspicion is that nothing more will come of it.

Arguably hamstrung before it hit cinemas, Shazam! Fury Of The Gods is absolutely okay. It does nothing new, it’s pretty inoffensive, and there’s a big dragon that looks pretty awesome at times. If you feel like you’re in the mood for that then give it a go. There are so many better films you could choose though, and that includes a number of “under-performing” superhero movies.

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

Noirvember: Payback (1999)

An enjoyable remake of Point Blank (well, a retelling of the tale that Point Blank was based on anyway), featuring Mel Gibson in the lead role of the wronged man out for revenge, and his half of a criminally-acquired stash of money, Payback is a rough ‘n’ tough bit of entertainment that tries to stand out from the crowd by having more ruthless behaviour and bursts of violence than you might expect from a film with such a big star name attached.

Gibson is Porter, a man shot and left for dead after being betrayed during a job that also involved his wife (Deborah Kara Unger) and his best friend (Gregg Henry). Once he starts on his quest to get the money owed to him - not the full amount stolen, just his half - Porter soon finds himself in more and more danger as he has to approach increasingly powerful members of a large criminal organisation.

Directed, for the most part (the production wasn’t exactly smooth sailing), by Brian Helgeland, who also wrote the screenplay, subsequently reworked by Terry Hayes, it’s hard to see why people viewed this as something that needed rescuing. And when I say people I mean “Hollywood suits”. What is here isn’t for everyone, but the same could be said for Point Blank. The fact that the main character is such a shitty person makes it more interesting, especially when you realise that he still has a certain moral code that makes him one of the least shitty people in a world full of much bigger scumbags who inhabit the world he lives in.

Dialogue may not be sharp, and the dour colour palette isn’t exactly a big plus, but plotting is clear, characters are nicely sketched, and Helgeland does some excellent work, knowing what viewers need to see and what they don’t. The unfolding chain of events may be grim, but it’s also somehow still fun . . . right up until it isn’t. And when the fun stops, well, you know the ending is close. You just don’t know if it’s going to be a good or bad ending.

Helgeland helps himself a lot by casting such a great selection of faces. Gibson is great in the main role, doing the kind of tough and unpredictable schtick he could do in his sleep, and Henry has a knack for playing the kind of character you just know could double-cross you at any moment. Unger is sadly underused, but there are two excellent, and very different, turns from Lucy Liu and Maria Bello that more than make up for the brevity of her screentime. There are also roles for David Paymer, Bill Duke, William Devane (one of the most sorely-undercelebrated actors of his generation, in my view), James Coburn, and Kris Kristofferson, as well as one or two others you should recognise. I cannot single out any one of these actors for praise, but that’s because they all get to be equally brilliant at different times in the movie.

I really like this. It’s not as good as the original work it is based on, some better visuals and a more interesting blend of score and soundtrack could have helped (although the opening music from Chris Boardman, playing over the extended credit sequence, is superb), but I think it’s an enjoyably lean, mean, neo-noir that always seems willing to go one step further than viewers might expect. I recommend it.

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