Godzilla × Kong: The New Empire (2024)

While I may have been thinking about it a lot during the movie, I will not be reviewing Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire in direct comparison to every other Godzilla movie that we've seen in recent years. That wouldn't be fair, especially in the wake of the superb Godzilla: Minus One, and it's fair to say that, whether you like or dislike this movie, it feels like an attempt to stay true to the featured big beasties while taking the movie series into even wilder and more fantastical territory.

Kong is lonely. That's pretty much what the movie starts with. He also has a toothache. So he moves from the Hollow Earth back to the surface of our planet, where he can receive some dentistry from a brave specialist vet, Trapper (Dan Stevens). Meanwhile, Godzilla is on the move, and there are signs that things are changing down in Hollow Earth. Ilene Andrews (Rebecca Hall) heads there, accompanied by her adopted daughter, Jia (Kaylee Hottle),  a returning Bernie Hayes (podcaster and social media ägitator", played by Brian Tyree Henry), Trapper, and Mikael (Alex Ferns). It doesn't take long to start figuring out what kind of new problem they have on their hands, but can they figure out a solution before Kong is badly affected by it. And will Godzilla be of any help to them?

With so many people returning to roles both behind and in front of the camera, this could have easily been an easy continuation of the storyline that proved to be so much fun in Godzilla Vs. Kong. Adam Wingard is back at the helm, having helped to develop the story for this with Terry Rossio and Simon Barrett, assisted by Jeremy Slater when moving from story to screenplay form. They do try to stick to the rules that were put in place in the last movie, but they also try to keep moving faster in between the set-pieces to avoid giving viewers enough time to pick apart the many plot holes.

The cast all seem to know that they're very much playing second fiddle to the headlining creatures, and that's fine. Both Hall and Henry try their best with some weak dialogue, Hottle remains as cute and vulnerable as she was in the previous film, and everyone watching can breathe a sigh of relief whenever Stevens is onscreen, because he actually knows how to lean into the silliness of everything and have fun with his role. 

A blockbuster movie doesn't need to make great use of the human cast, and nor does it need a script that would win any literary awards. Sometimes just being fun and spectacular is enough, and any film with both Godzilla and King Kong in it should deliver on that front. Welllllllll . . . I don't think this does. There a few great visual moments here and there, especially when Godzilla in being shown travelling around the planet, but most of this film is an ugly mess, with an overuse of CGI that varies wildly in quality, a lack of decent reference points to keep track of locations and scale, and a disappointing lack of weight (sometimes literally). There are also scenes of mass destruction that focus on buildings and cityscapes being reduced to rubble without maintaining any interest in the human cost. But that’s all meant to be ignored because there are occasional moments that make good use of neon.

I wanted to have fun with this, but it never once hooked me in. There is a nice extra “cameo” later in the movie that I enjoyed, but the film needed to do more elsewhere. A better script, a better main villain, better visual effects, and generally something that makes it easier to ignore the inherent silliness of it all and just enjoy the monster mash moments.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
  

The Night House (2020)

I haven't had much luck lately with a couple of interesting titles that I had hoped to enjoy, films that I presumed may have some horror genre tropes in the mix, even if they ended up playing out more like a straightforward drama or thriller. The Lost Daughter left me underwhelmed, as impressed as I was by Olivia Colman in it (who impresses me with everything she does), and now it's the turn of The Night House. This is much more of a simple genre piece, and moves further into absolute horror with each predictable bit of plot development, but it's yet another film not deserving enough of the central female performance (Rebecca Hall this time around).

Hall plays Beth, a teacher who is grieving the sudden death of her husband, Owen (Evan Jonigkeit). Owen took a small boat into the middle of the lake beside their home and shot himself in the head. Beth is understandably pained and puzzled by this, having had no idea that Owen felt any such depths of despair. She starts to dig around into the life of the husband she starts to suspect she never really knew, all while being pushed on by some presence that visits her at night.

Directed by David Bruckner, who previously gave us the excellent The Ritual, as well as segments in both V/H/S and Southbound, this is a film that suffers from a script, written by Ben Collins and Luke Piotrowski, stuffed full of familiar moments to anyone who has seen any popular supernatural thriller from the last few decades. It also feels unsure of itself, trying to play out as a supernatural-tinged drama for most of the runtime before diving fully into the potential horror of the situation when it feels like too little too late.

It's fortunate that Hall is in the lead role, she's an actress who has been delivering some great performances for some time now (although her project choice isn't on par with her talent, landing her in films as diverse as The Town, The Awakening, and, ummmmm, Holmes & Watson) and this is a fantastic turn from her. Her journey is depicted in a way that feels realistic and believable at all times. Sarah Goldberg is good support, playing a caring friend named Claire, but the other standout performance comes from Vondie Curtis-Hall, playing a neighbour/friend who doesn't want to see Beth's life undone by the grief she is processing. Stacy Martin also does well, playing a young woman named Madelyne who Beth finds after discovering photos of her on her deceased husband's phone. 

This isn't a bad film. It's just a film that doesn't have any faith in any direction it could take, and therefore seems to end up trying to do a bit of this and a bit of that, leading to end results that feel half-baked and half-hearted. Bruckner directs well enough, despite the fact that Collins and Piotrowski undermine things with a premise that feels very much like it could have been entitled The Entity That Jack Built.

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 

Godzilla Vs. Kong (2021)

Adam Wingard gets his turn to direct a film featuring famous giant monsters and you may have already heard from a lot of people who are delighted with how Godzilla vs. Kong plays out. I enjoyed it, particularly the fun little moments that seemed to reference other movies (there's a particularly enjoyable Jaws reference during the first major encounter), but there are some things stopping it from being the film that finally gets everything right in this developed Monsterverse.

Let's get the plot out of the way first. A big corporation, Apex, want to find a way down and into the Hollow Earth, a space underneath us where the titans may have originated. They hope to find a powerful energy source down there, and the best way of making it there is to follow Kong, who has been kept in a containment unit near Skull Island that looks generally pretty similar to Skull Island. This leads to some Monarch staff (mainly Ilene Andrews, played by Rebecca Hall) journeying with a scientist (Nathan Lind, played by Alexander Skarsgård) and some Apex bods to a place where they can drop off Kong, and hopefully follow him down into the Hollow Earth. But transporting Kong may alert Godzilla to his presence, which could lead to a fight between the two of them. There's also a little deaf girl (Jia, played by Kaylee Hottle) who can communicate with Kong, and the return of Madison Russell (Mille Bobby Brown), who teams up with a friend (Josh, played by Julian Dennison) and a podcaster/Apex-insider (Bernie, played by Brian Tyree Henry) to find out what is behind the recent resurgence of Godzilla, and his attack on a specific Apex site.

What I've just summarised there is pretty much everything you need to know about the plot of Godzilla vs. Kong. In fact, if you were to miss large sections of the movie and only saw the fight scenes then you could thank me for keeping you up to date. It's understandable that this is a film that plots everything out as an excuse to give viewers scenes with the two titans battling one another. That's the selling point, and Wingard definitely delivers on that front.

The action is nicely shot, enough of the surrounding environment has some weight to it as it all gets demolished, and there is a smooth and clear approach that allows you to enjoy the loud noises and spectacle without getting a headache. No small feat.

The screenplay, by Eric Pearson and Max Borenstein, is nonsense, but it's nonsense that is generally perfectly acceptable for this kind of thing. The science seems vaguely plausible, the characters work together, or fight one another, for believable reasons, and everything kills time in between the moments of mass destruction. It's a shame, however, that the script feels the need to include the characters of Madison, Josh, and Brian. Their inclusion feels completely unnecessary, and moments featuring them could have easily been transferred to other characters. It would have also saved us from some of the worst of the acting, which I'll get to next.

In the Kong-centric narrative strand, the cast do well with what they're given. Skarsgård is likeable and has the right motives for his actions, Hall feels very much like a perfect fit for her character, and young Hottle shines in the moments that highlight her smallness against the giant figure of Kong. Eiza González also works well, the company figure along to make sure any decisions made protect the Apex investment. Elsewhere, sadly, the acting ranges from poor to downright abysmal. Demián Bichir is Walter Simmons, heading up Apex, and is basically asked to act as if he's wearing a monocle and twirling a moustache. Then you have that aforementioned trio. Henry is good fun, but Dennison is wasted (it's the only film I have seen him in so far where I didn't warm to his character), and Brown is so bad at times that I was waiting for her to "break character" onscreen and show that she was playing someone trying to emulate tough and determined from characters she'd seen in other movies. She doesn't, which means the moments with her over-acting to show she is tough and determined are actually choices made for the performance. She's never been that bad in anything else, which leaves me to wonder whether she'll struggle to transition into other non-Stranger Things roles, or whether Wingard was just not great at directing his cast.

But the action delivers, and that's what a lot of people wanted from this film. It's what a lot of people wanted from all of the films in this Monsterverse, but different approaches elsewhere have led to wildly varying results. Personally, I prefer the first two movies in this cinematic series, but this has a number of highlights that are undeniably pleasing for fans of the featured titans (including a third "fighter" that was obvious to anyone who looked more closely at some of the trailers).

Watch it, enjoy it, have a big bowl of popcorn with it, and don't overthink any of the plot details. I'll happily buy it when it becomes available, but I still much prefer the stranger pleasures of Shin Godzilla.

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

Holmes & Watson (2018)

How bad is Holmes & Watson? Considering how much is was roundly battered by critics, and anyone brave enough to go and see it at the cinema, could it really be THAT bad? Yes, yes it could. And I can say this with a degree of confidence, having been one of the few people to have now seen it twice.

The first time doesn't really count though. When I first watched this movie I was laughing aloud at a number of moments. I'd also taken an excessive amount of valium before a short flight (I'm just a nervous flyer, and it turns out I wasn't listening to my wife when she reminded me of the recommended dosage of something I wasn't used to). But you can certainly take that as a different view of the film. It will make you laugh if your brain has been suitably altered by some substance that keeps you in a very good mood, be that alcohol, medication, or your favourite Doritos.

So, for the purpose of this review, I am going to focus on my second, most recent, viewing. My brain was not altered in any way (beyond the usual warping), although I definitely wish it had been.

Will Ferrell plays Sherlock Holmes, John C. Reilly is Doctor John Watson, his constant sidekick, and their latest adventure involves the dastardly Moriarty (Ralph Fiennes) and a plot to kill the Queen of England (Pam Ferris). That's about all you need to know, other than the fact that Kelly Macdonald is Mrs. Hudson, and Rebecca Hall and Lauren Lapkus play two women who turn the heads of our detecting duo.

It has been a decade since Guy Ritchie entertained audiences with a Sherlock Holmes that mixed the traditional elements with some fun cinematic updates (the "Holmes-vision"). We have had Sherlock since then, and also Elementary, both shows that have smartly updated the famous detective for modern viewers, while retaining a lot of the little details that make Sherlock so quintessentially Sherlock. So Holmes & Watson feels like too little too late as soon as it begins. That would be fine though, as long as writer-director Etan Cohen had some good enough gags to make it worthwhile. Sadly, that is not the case.

Cohen seems to rely on the chemistry between Ferrell and Reilly (used so effectively in their previous comedy work), but that's not enough on this occasion. Not when the script is full of unfunny jokes transposing modern habits (selfies, drunk text messages) into the period setting, numerous gross-out gags that fall flat, and sequences that make use of that aforementioned "Holmes-vision". The one time I smiled was due to a fun cameo towards the very end. Nothing else really works, one or two very minor chuckles aside.

Ferrell and Reilly are quite irritating in the lead roles, Macdonald is the highlight of the film, and Fiennes at least manages to get paid for a relatively short amount of screentime. Ferris is very game in her royal role, Hall almost comes out of the whole thing with her dignity intact, but Lapkus is undone by the fact that she has to match Ferrell at his juvenile antics. There are also small roles for Rob Brydon (who is actually a good fit for Inspector Lestrade), Steve Coogan, Hugh Laurie, and that great cameo star.

I am going to give this a fairly generous rating, considering how well it amused and distracted me while I was on valium and trying not to think about anything that could send me plunging to my death. But don't let that fool you into giving this a try. Even Sherlock Gnomes was better than this.

3/10

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

The Prestige (2006)

Every great magic trick consists of three parts or acts. The first part is called "The Pledge". The magician shows you something ordinary: a deck of cards, a bird or a man. He shows you this object. Perhaps he asks you to inspect it to see if it is indeed real, unaltered, normal. But of course... it probably isn't. The second act is called "The Turn". The magician takes the ordinary something and makes it do something extraordinary. Now you're looking for the secret... but you won't find it, because of course you're not really looking. You don't really want to know. You want to be fooled. But you wouldn't clap yet. Because making something disappear isn't enough; you have to bring it back. That's why every magic trick has a third act, the hardest part, the part we call "The Prestige".

The Prestige is another sumptuous Christopher Nolan film in a fine line of sumptuous Christopher Nolan films, co-written by himself and his brother Jonathan, based on the novel by Christopher Priest, and arguably more intriguing and intimate than anything else he has directed since he reached the level of success earned by Batman Begins. That's not to say that this is better than any of his other films since then. It's just nice to see him work on something of a smaller scale, something that doesn't need to warp cityscapes or throw you headlong into grand moments seemingly designed to look best in IMAX.

After a stage trick goes horribly wrong, Robert Angier (Hugh Jackman) and Alfred Borden (Christian Bale) find themselves growing more obsessed with each other. Each wants to outdo the other, but Borden seems to have the upper hand when he achieves great success with his "transported man" illusion. Angier grows more and more desperate to learn the secret of the trick, unaware of what it will end up costing both men if he continues on his self-destructive path.

The Prestige is very much constructed like a magic trick, and very much in line with the quote above. But while this could have seemed a bit precious and self-congratulatory, with the Nolans spelling out the structure of the film and trying to trick viewers on the way to the finale, it instead comes over as something that has simply been crafted with great attention to detail and an aim to entertain. The twists in the plot are enjoyable enough, but rewatching the film emphasises just how unimportant they are when it comes to the quality of the tale. You can know how a card trick is done, but that doesn't stop you enjoying it being done by a slick showman who also tells you an entertaining story while he's trying to keep everyone else from figuring out his secrets.

Jackman and Bale are both great, although Bale's accent does occasionally veer a little bit towards parody cockney territory, and they both get their share of excellent moments throughout. Michael Caine is also very good, helping both men out at different times in their lives. Piper Perabo, Rebecca Hall, and Scarlett Johansson all play women who are adversely affected by the obsessions of these men. They're not given as much to work with, at all, but all do a good enough job, with Hall giving a surprisingly effective and moving performance that sits up there with the best I have seen from her. David Bowie plays Tesla, which allows him to yet again be effortlessly cool in a much smaller role that absolutely works for him, and both Andy Serkis and the magical Ricky Jay do well with their brief amount of screentime, Jay is a cameo you could easily miss.

The music by David Julyan is very good, the production design and composition of every scene is gorgeous, and the editing allows for lots of nice foreshadowing and reveals on the way to . . . The Prestige.

All too often overlooked nowadays, which is understandable considering the impressive body of work that Nolan has built up, The Prestige is definitely worth a watch/rewatch. It's a film for fans of Nolan, for fans of the cast, for fans of magic, and for fans of great film-making.

8/10

Buy the shiny disc here.
Or, in America, buy it here.

Sci-Fi September: Transcendence (2014)

Most people will tell you that Transcendence stinks like a sweaty gym bag that has been dumped in a closet and not cleaned out for months. It's drawn comparisons to The Lawnmower Man (okay, I made that comparison, but I think others also did it) and Max Headroom, and most of those comparisons haven't been too kind. But I enjoyed it. I didn't love it, but it was certainly better than I was expecting.

The plot is pretty simple. Johnny Depp plays master computer egghead Will Caster. When Will is hospitalised, and diagnosed to be dying, he decides that the time has come to overcome the problem of developing computers with self-awareness by inputting himself into the system. When his body dies, he will live on. His wife (Evelyn, played by Rebecca Hall) is very happy with this, but a couple of colleagues (Morgan Freeman and Paul Bettany) are highly disturbed. And perhaps they should be. Because Will in computer form may not actually be Will, but rather a facsimile of him to cover for a computer that can take over the world.

A first time in the director's seat for Wally Pfister (probably best known for his cinematography in the movies of Christopher Nolan) and a first time getting script to screen for Jack Paglen, it would be easy to put the failings of Transcendence down to the fact that the two men didn't have the right experience in their relevant fields. Yet, that just doesn't seem to be the case. The script is far from the best, but it tries to keep things on point while weaving through the plot developments. This is not a film about cool sci-fi stuff and supercomputers. Well, it IS that, but it's more concerned with the moral responsibility that comes with that potential ability to access anywhere, and anything, in the entire world. Pfister may let down anyone who comes looking for a decent set-piece of two, although he doesn't do too badly at all in the big chair.

Depp is okay in the main role, I guess, even if he seems to be phoning it in (no pun intended). It's the rest of the cast who carry the film, which is probably as it should be. Hall is very good as a loving wife adjusting to a new way of life, Freeman does the same kind of thing that he's been doing for a good few years now, and Bettany is able to remind viewers that he's always worth watching, even when not voicing robo-butlers in Marvel movies. Clifton Collins Jr. does well in a relatively small role, Kate Mara is alright as a main player in a group opposed to the growth of modern technology, Cillian Murphy is sadly underused as a cop, and Cole Hauser pops in during the final third to be his usual bundle of awesomeness.

More a mix of Eagle Eye and Lucy than either of the two films mentioned in the opening paragraph, Transcendence may not be to everyone's liking but it at least sticks to its main remit for the duration - which is about two hours. It's serious fare handled with a lightness of touch, although it's also a pretty humour-free experience, and should find one or two extra fans now that it's away from the cinemas and in the home entertainment market.

Never a film for those seeking big thrills or explosions, this focuses on one or two big ideas. Not anything new or perfect, by any means, but I'd tentatively recommend it as something worth watching once. You may hate it. You may end up liking it more than I did.

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