Netflix And Chill: Femme (2023)

Expanding on a short film made a couple of years previously (that starred Harris Dickinson and Paapa Essiedu in the main roles), Femme is a fascinating and complex character study that looks at sexuality, damaging machismo, revenge, consent, and homophobia. Co-written and co-directed by Sam H. Freeman and Ng Choon Ping, it's a brilliantly tense and breathtaking work that marks them out as two exciting talents to keep a close eye on.

Nathan Stewart-Jarrett plays Jules, a young man we first see in his drag queen persona. He looks so good that he catches the eye of Preston (George MacKay). Later on, however, Preston is with a group of friends in a small shop that Jules is using, leading to a confrontation that ends with Jules being violently attacked. Retreating further and further inside himself, Jules eventually starts to regain his confidence, and a sense of purpose, when he befriends Preston, who doesn't recognise him in his non-stage persona, and figures out that he can use sex to entrap and embarrass him.

I really wasn't sure about Femme when it started. Nothing to do with the subject matter, I just don't always respond well to MacKay in lead roles. He's a good actor, but not always the right fit for the roles he gets, and I was worried that his character here would feel like the character he played in I Came By. Thankfully, that wasn't the case. He's still not the ideal choice, especially when you think of how good Dickinson was in the first incarnation of the character, but you can't feel him struggling to maintain the accent and act this time around. It helps that he's often alongside Stewart-Jarrett, who is phenomenally good in his role (whether leaning into his drag queen persona or being forced to "pass" in the company of Preston's friends). There are a handful of others populating the screen, all doing well, but this is all about the two leads, and both have enough faith in the material to fully commit to roles that require them to be unhesitant and nakedly intimate with one another (metaphorically and, sometimes, almost literally).

Freeman and Ping know what they're doing here, and they guide viewers through these muddy waters with a very steady set of hands. There's the kind of standard narrative arc that you would expect from that plot description, but there's also much more going on around that. Both Preston and Jules fail to keep themselves within any one particular box, and both act around other people in ways that often cost themselves a chance for moments of happiness. This isn't dissimilar to how so many people act every day, although there may be very different factors involved, and everyone watching this should be able to empathise with some of the interactions depicted (particularly the peer pressure that, to a certain degree, holds both of our leads back at various times).

I can't even begin to properly pick apart all of the threads that I mentioned in the first paragraph, but just know that everything mentioned here is treated with intelligence and care as the film builds to a powerful and moving finale. The audio and visuals match the energy of each main sequence, as well as the growing intensity, and the whole thing is a perfect blend of the gripping and the thought-provoking. Highly recommended, and bonus points if you sit down to watch it in the company of any homophobes you want to start a dialogue with, or just make feel very uncomfortable.

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

Candyman (2021)

There are two things associated with this latest working of the Candyman mythos that can provide a lot of irritation and/or amusement. First, the amount of people that keep referring to it as a bloody Jordan Peele film, when it was directed by, and co-written by Nia DaCosta (ironically . . . say her name, and remember it). Peele also worked on the screenplay, and his name as producer most probably helped the studio get behind this, but the ignorance/laziness of people wrongly crediting Peele, whether they love or hate the movie, is astonishing. Not the first time, of course (remember "Eli Roth's" Aftershock, or poor Henry Selick so often being forgotten as the actual director of The Nightmare Before Christmas?), and it won't be the last, but if the past few years have taught us anything it is, surely, the importance of correcting inaccuracies and misinformation. The other main thing that you should choose to just roll your eyes it, well, it's the amount of people complaining about the content of this film, either trying to call it racist, or complaining about it being "too woke", as if the original films weren't exploring the racially-charged mistreatment and abuse of a black man, the social climate and systemic issues that bundled African Americans together in one small area where they could be left to their own devices, gentrification, and the power that can be gained by examining something in the open that has been left to fester for so long behind closed doors.

Anyway, let's get to the film itself, a continuation of the story delivered to audiences in the original film. This time the main characters are an artist, Anthony McCoy (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II), and his successful partner, Brianna (Teyonah Parris). Struggling to find his way back to anything like his previous form, to put it mildly, Anthony finds his imagination fired up when he bumps into William Burke (Colman Domingo), a man who confirms the tale of Candyman, and the subsequent incident that ended with a stolen baby being returned and the fiery death of Helen Lyle. Anthony creates a new selection of work, based around the phrase "say his name", and starts a chain of events that could drastically affect his future, while also forcing him to find out a bit more about his past.

From the very first seconds of Candyman starting, the focus of this film is crystal clear. Much like the first film, it's about exposing something that has been kept in the dark for too long. This is the perfect way to craft a sequel to a well-loved modern horror classic, despite the fact that some people will just want more of the thing they enjoyed most the first time around. You still have commentary on gentrification, you still have the amusing dissection of art and culture from people acting smug and superior while living outwith the main sphere of influence that helped to create that art and culture, and you have a study of an urban legend, and how it can be reshaped and turned into something better or worse over time. You also get a look at the ongoing problem of police brutality, something strongly underlined by the whole "say his name" mantra that runs through the whole film.

DaCosta doesn't go for many easy scares, but they're very well done when she does. She instead creates a growing atmosphere of unease, emulating the original film with a blend of fear of the boogeyman and fear of very real problems afflicting some of the main characters. The script, co-written by herself, Peele, and Win Rosenfeld, is smart, layered, and pretty much a textbook example of how to respect an original work while not feeling the need to slavishly replicate everything it did. There are mirrors, and other reflective surfaces, everywhere, and so many shots are framed to allow viewers to consider everywhere a danger could be lurking.

Abdul-Mateen II is a fantastic lead, someone charismatic enough to make it easier to stick alongside him as his journey takes him further and further away from the person he once was, and Parris does well with a character who is allowed to react naturally to someone who changed into what could be a very dangerous presence. Domingo is fine, but ends up overacting slightly in the third act, and Vanessa Williams reprises her role from the 1992 film. Nathan Stewart-Jarrett and Kyle Kaminsky help to lighten things up a bit, playing Brianna's brother, Troy, and his boyfriend, Grady, respectively. Brian King, Miriam Moss, and Rebecca Spence play people who may well say "Candyman" five times while looking in a mirror, and the inclusion of Tony Todd will surely keep fans happy.

Is it a flawless masterpiece? As is the case with the majority of movies released throughout time, no. But it's easily one of the best mainstream horror movies I can think of in recent years, and it's a thought-provoking, and often beautiful (I didn't even mention the backstories told in shadow puppet form), piece of work. It also doesn't forget that people will want a hook-handed "boogeyman" to turn some victims into a mass of blood and gore. I would definitely be interested in seeing what could happen in a sequel to this, and I am very keen to see what comes next from DaCosta (say her name).

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share