Venom: The Last Dance (2024)

I sometimes forget how much fun I had with the first two Venom movies, considering how low my expectations were for either of them. Both are an enjoyably refreshing mix of anti-hero shenanigans and superhero-type stuff, and Hardy has loads of fun in the central role. It's a shame that this is the final outing for the character in this iteration, but it's also definitely time to call it a day. This is the weakest of the three movies, and it's even messier than anything else we've seen so far, but at least it feels like a proper ending (in as much as these kinds of movies can ever feel like they have a proper ending nowadays).

Eddie Brock is back in our world, with everything established in early scenes that may confuse anyone who had forgotten about the multiverse shenanigans teasing treats in the previous movie. He and Venom continue to have a pretty good relationship nowadays, always finding the best lowlife criminals to enjoy as a tasty snack, but trouble is coming their way. The fact that they are such a successful fusion makes them valuable to a major villain who sends the alien equivalent of sniffer dogs to find them, and there's also a determined military man, Strickland (Chiwetel Ejiofor), who believes that Venom needs to be destroyed. Dr. Teddy Paine (Juno Temple) thinks otherwise.

It's no surprise to see that writer Kelly Marcel has finally been rewarded for her contribution to the series with a directorial gig here, and it's also no surprise that this is her directorial debut. Having worked with Hardy on the story idea, Marcel is also responsible for the screenplay. That makes it easier to know who to blame for this whole mess, although I think Hardy has broad enough shoulders, and enough invested in the series, to share the burden. There are individual moments of fun, but the third act is particularly painful to the eyes, as well as being hard to stay patient with while you wait for all of the characters to figure out how to make use of Chekhov's . . . well . . . something that was surrounded by neon signs and arrows pointing at it as soon as it was first shown onscreen.

Hardy is still good in the main role, although always more fun when he is free and loose to avoid acting heroic, and he deserves to be given this vehicle to bid a fond farewell to a movie series that seemed to succeed more due to his sheer willpower than anything else. Ejiofor brings his usual excellence to his role, despite the fact that he is just there to be the human-shaped threat in amongst all of the alien monsters and, to use the technical term, squiggly-wiggly CGI. Temple connects various plot points and provides extra exposition, and there's some comedy provided by Rhys Ifans, playing a believer in aliens leading his family on what will end up being a very eye-opening road trip. Stephen Graham and Peggy Lu both return, and both are given far less screentime than they deserve, and it's strange that the latter is involved with a scene that seems to directly reference a heavily-derided sequence from Spider-Man 3.

Fans of more variety in their symbiotes will find plenty to enjoy in the third act, there are set-pieces that at least maintain the mix of action and humour that has been a positive aspect of the trilogy, and you get more amusing exchanges between Eddie and Venom as the two discuss their plans and the path that they cannot seem to avoid hurtling along. I still have to end this review by reiterating that the whole thing is a big mess, but it's an intermittently entertaining big mess, helped by a 110-minute runtime that allows it to feel a step removed from the longer and more bloated blockbusters we've become used to in recent years.

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, 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

Netflix And Chill: Nyad (2023)

The start of any year is always the time when I try to catch up on all of the movies that have been doing well in the journey to the Oscars, which often forces me to watch films I can't get enthusiastic about. Nyad was one of those movies. I just didn't see what I might find to enjoy in the true story of swimmer Diana Nyad, an open-water swimmer who attempted multiple times to swim between Havana, Cuba and Florida, with her final attempt also being hampered by the fact that she was then aged 64.

As has happened before, and will undoubtedly happen again, I was wrong. Nyad had me riveted from start to finish, despite me knowing about the outcome, thanks mainly to the performances from three main cast members (Annette Bening, Jodie Foster, and Rhys Ifans).

There's nothing here that is a surprise, whether you're considering what is shown onscreen or who is behind the camera, but it's all put together very effectively, with just the right reverence for the central characters accompanied by an acknowledgement of the self-mythologising that has been a part of Diane Nyad's character as long as she has been a figure in the public eye.

I would write a plot summary here, but it would just be repeating the end of the first paragraph. That's all you need to know. Bening plays Nyad, Foster is her coach, Bonnie Stoll, and Ifans comes onscreen just in time to be the integral third, a navigator/boat owner named John Bartlett. As well as the standard problem of swimming such a distance, Nyad has to deal with the weather, which can seriously affect the path taken through the sea, potential shark attacks, and dangerous jellyfish. There will also be a moment or two when such conditions start prompting hallucinations, something Stoll is well aware of and ready to deal with, as and when they occur.

Even if you know how this story ends, and I think everyone will have some idea of that (I mean . . . if I knew what happened, considering my limited knowledge of sports and athleticism, it must have been given some fairly substantial world-wide coverage), this is a great story of not only individual determination, strength, and courage, but the fact that it takes a whole team of like-minded people working together to help anyone even come close to achieving their life-long dream.

Both Bening and Foster have been deservedly nominated for awards already, and have already won a few accolades for their performances, and the film is carried along by both of them. With footage of the real Nyad and Stoll interspersed throughout the feature, there are easy points of comparison, and both leads feel like a perfect embodiment of their real-life counterparts, as well as a perfect embodiment of the main themes of the film. Ifans gives one of his most low-key turns, even dealing with an accent that he handles well, and his outsider view of the Nyad/Stoll dynamic is a great way to explore the good and the bad of the whole situation.

Co-directors Jimmy Chin and Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi bring their skillset from a background in a number of celebrated documentaries, writer Julia Cox adapts Nyad's own book with a liberal attitude towards pesky things like truth and facts, "minor details" that would just get in the way of the cinematic journey, and the end result is as easy to dissect and criticise as it is to sit back and enjoy, or you could say . . . just go with the flow.

I was really impressed by this. And whether I completely believe Nyad, or whether she got away with printing her own legend, I was equally impressed by her journey (not just through the water, but moving from being so self-involved to realising how much help and support she received from others). I hope others end up feeling the same way, even if this is just a step on the way to discovering other athletic swimmers, and some documentaries looking at similar challenges (e.g. The Deepest Breath).

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

Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)

If you have made it this long without having Spider-Man: No Way Home spoiled for you then I congratulate you. I'll also try not to spoil anything here, although that makes this review a little bit trickier. I AM going to work on the assumption that most people saw one or two of the trailers, revealing some familiar villains coming back to our screens.

The basic plot concerns Peter Parker/Spiderman (Tom Holland) having quite a miserable time of things, all because of the repercussions from his battle with Mysterio. Everyone knows who he is, and everyone has a view on his actions. Some of them believe the lie fabricated by Mysterio. Some don't. What's worse is that it's not just affecting Peter, but also the ones closest to him. His friend Ned (Jacob Batalon) and his girlfriend, MJ (Zendaya), are guilty by association, which leads to them being unable to get into the colleges they have applied for. Desperate for things to go back to how they were, Peter heads to Dr. Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) and asks him to cast a spell that will make people forget who he is. The spell goes just a bit wrong, resulting in our universe being invaded by characters who have met other incarnations of Spiderman in other universes.

Director Jon Watts and writers Chris McKenna and Erik Sommers may not have been the only people shepherding this Spiderman through his latest cinematic trilogy, but they have certainly been there for each instalment, helping to maintain the balance of light fun and major peril that our friendly neighbourhood Spiderman has dealt with over the past few years. This is the darkest of the new Spidey films yet, but it still allows plenty of time for humour, and it still incorporates a bright, solid, colour palette for the majority of the runtime. It helps enormously that Holland has a brightness to him that lights the screen further whenever he's not being beaten down by overwhelming odds.

Holland does his best work yet here (in these movies, I'm not talking about his entire career), moving from lighter moments to moments that are all the more heartbreaking because of his vulnerability, and it's hard to imagine what the bigwigs will plan next for the character. They clearly have to keep making the most of having Holland in the role, but this feels like a tough one to top. And yet, somewhat paradoxically, it's far from the best Spiderman movie. It's overlong, it's overstuffed, it's all just a bit overdone, and the third act has to ensure that every single character gets at least one satisfying moment. And the CGI is equally overdone, even if it is generally at a very high standard.

As well as Holland, both Zendaya and Batalon are as good as they have been in the previous movies. Cumberbatch has fun, playing a strong supporting role. And there’s pure joy in seeing the return of characters played by Alfred Molina, Willem Dafoe, Jamie Foxx, Thomas Haden Church, and Rhys Ifans, with each actor appearing to relish the opportunity to give their character a better resolution. Marisa Tomei remains an excellent Aunt May, doing her best to help and protect her nephew as danger crowds around them. And there are at least three other cameos/supporting turns that will have fans enthralled and delighted while the screen is loaded up with one treat upon another.

It’s clear that this has been made with the aim of really pleasing fans of the web-slinger, especially those who have enjoyed every one of his modern cinematic outings. Pretty much every big rumour you already heard about is true, but that doesn’t lessen the impact of every wonderful moment, whether big or small. It’s just a shame that it feels like a bit too much, this is a film that would have worked better split into two. It’s stimulation overload, just barely allowing the quieter, more sombre, moments time to breathe. That doesn’t mean that it’s not great, it just also feels slightly exhausting as you move towards the inevitably super-busy third act.

With great film-making tools comes great responsibility. The people putting this extravaganza together have been very careful to treat the characters with care. They just weren’t quite so careful with the pacing and the excess of visual effects.

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

The King's Man (2021)

I am very well aware that I am in the minority for the fact that I enjoyed Kingsman: The Golden Circle a bit more than Kingsman: The Secret Service. But I think I was pretty much in agreement with everyone else when I was seriously underwhelmed by the trailer for The King's Man, a prequel to the other movies that didn't have any of the charismatic leads we'd already enjoyed accompanying on two adventures. It did still have Matthew Vaughn in the director's chair though, and roles for Ralph Fiennes, Djimon Hounsou, Gemma Arterton, Rhys Ifans, Charles Dance, and Matthew Goode, so maybe it would be alright.

It wasn't.

Set during the first half of the 20th century, The King's Man shows events that lead up to the creation of a new kind of British agent. A soldier that can help win wars without all of the bloodshed and death of a full war. In theory. Fiennes plays Orlando Oxford, a man who wants to help the world avoid further conflict while he also keeps his son (Conrad, played by Harris Dickinson) as safe as possible. This proves very difficult. There's a shadowy super-villain moving pawns into place, including a certain individual named Rasputin (Rhys Ifans), and the stormclouds of war start to gather apace.

Co-written by Vaughn and Karl Gajdusek, based once again on the comic books by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons, The King's Man feels like a step back in a film series that should have continued to stride onwards and upwards. What would you rather see, Ralph Fiennes being as good as ever while also being allowed to kick ass, or Eggsy on another ridiculous plot that inevitably leads him into space a la Moonraker? I know which I would prefer.

The cast is too much of a mixed bag to really help. Fiennes plays his part well, but also brings to mind his steely cool and gentlemanly approach to his starring role in The Avengers (which I don’t think anyone really wants brought to mind). Ifans is a real highlight, attacking his larger-than-life character with relish. Artery on and Hounsou are both good, but sadly underused, as is Dance, and the younger cast members are a bit too bland, whether it’s Goode being completely unsubtle or Dickinson being a bit of a wet blanket. I didn’t even mind the dodgy accent from Aaron Taylor-Johnson, considering it was a very small role, because he was a slightly more interesting character than the young man being played by Dickinson.

There are a couple of set-pieces here that are moderately enjoyable, with the best being an lengthy fight with the famously-difficult-to-kill Rasputin, but this is often as disappointing and weak as the trailer implied. The action is rarely impressive, the tone veers all over the place, and the sense of something cool and fun is completely lost.

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

Netflix And Chill: The Five-Year Engagement (2012)

Another offbeat rom-com from Nicholas Stoller (director and co-writer) and Jason Segel (star and co-writer), The Five-Year Engagement is a lot more fun, and a lot sweeter, than I expected it to be (considering the mixed opinions I had heard on it). The biggest problem it has, like so many other comedies from recent years, is a lengthy runtime. Having said that, I am not sure what I would cut out of it to slim it down. I just know that I was waiting for a suitable final act about thirty minutes before it was due to be delivered.

Segel and Emily Blunt play Tom and Violet, a couple who are very much in love, and so get engaged. As the title may suggest, things keep cropping up that extend their engagement again and again. They end up living in Michigan, which Tom resents, while others start to race forward with their own life plans (mainly Violet's sister, Suzie, and Tom's best friend, Alex). Nothing seems to get easier, which puts more and more strain on their relationship. Can they get through this problematic stage, or does such a lengthy engagement mean that it's just not meant to be?

The middle section of The Five-Year Engagement is the weakest part, as the film seems to relish piling on the misery for the two main characters and becoming far too sour for a rom-com (even for an anti-rom-com, which this seems to be for a while, before making amends in the final stages). There are still a lot of funny lines and moments, but everything is tinged with sadness, doubly so for viewers who like both of the leads (and I do).

Stoller directs capably enough. You get plenty of obvious, amusing, transitions, the soundtrack has some jangly guitar tunes on there, and he allows the cast to interact with one another in a way that feels natural without feeling like the extended improvisations you would get in a Judd Apatow film. But that's definitely the biggest problem here, the Apatow effect. There's just no need for a film like this to be over two hours long.

It's a good job that the cast are so enjoyable, making it easier to accept the inflated runtime. Segel and Blunt are fantastic in the lead roles, and you really root for them to stay together, and a lot of laughs come from Alison Brie and Chris Pratt, playing Suzie and Tom. Rhys Ifans is also good fun, playing a professor who supports Violet in a way that may creep beyond professional interest, and others joining in with the fun include Brian Posehn, Dakota Johnson, Mindy Kaling, Randall Park, Kevin Hart, Jacki Weaver, and more.

This is a fun film. It has enough laughs to be a good comedy. It has enough sweetness to be a good romance. It's a fantastic ninety minutes. Stretched to over two hours.

7/10

Pick it up here.
Americans can go buy it here.

April Fools: Kevin & Perry Go Large (2000)

The character of Kevin the stroppy teenager was very funny when he first appeared. One of many creations from famous UK TV comedian Harry Enfield, he was an amusing exaggeration of the worst aspects of those turbulent teenage years. Unfortunately, he wasn't as funny by the turn of the century, and this attempt to take the thin gag and stretch it further, into a full movie, stands up now as nothing more than a bit of an embarrassment.

Enfield is Kevin, of course, and Kathy Burke plays his mate, Perry. The two obsess over girls and getting a sex life, and they look to have the best chance ever to impress some lovely young ladies when they're allowed to go on holiday to Ibiza. Unfortunately, Kevin's parents (James Fleet and Louisa Rix) are also along for the holiday. Will Kevin and Perry get to make their dreams come true? Will they get to make out with some young ladies (mainly the two played by Tabitha Wady and Laura Fraser)? And will they somehow manage to convince people that they have the potential to be superstar DJs, just like Eyeball Paul (Rhys Ifans)?

Kevin & Perry Go Large has a pretty good soundtrack, so there's that. But there's really nothing else, with the exception of a brilliant turn from Ifans as the uncaring DJ who strings the lads along while promising to play their song at his club. Director Ed Bye has a career full of TV work (including Red Dwarf, which may hold up as the best thing that he's worked on) but he proves able to take this small-screen work and bulk it up enough for the cinema screen. It's just a shame that he can't do anything to detract from the sheer awfulness of the script.

Remember in Caddyshack when someone dropped a chocolate bar in the swimming pool and everyone thought that it was a floating piece of human waste? Well, this movie has a similiar scene, except there's no chocolate bar involved. It's just a piece of shit (which is a fitting summation of the entire film). Yes, that's the level of the script, written by Enfield and Dave Cummings.

Enfield is almost consistently annoying, Burke is a bit more fun, and I already mentioned how good Ifans is, but there just isn't anyone onscreen that viewers will enjoy spending time with. Fleet and Rix are the most pleasant, but maybe teenagers will disagree with me on that point. Paul Whitehouse has a fun cameo, and Steven O'Donnell gets a couple of good moments as Big Baz, but that's really all of the minor pleasures of the movie covered.

I'm sure there are people who still enjoy this. I am not one of them, however, and recommend avoiding it completely.

3/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Kevin-Perry-Go-Large-DVD/dp/B001AMMAHS/ref=sr_1_1?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1394127421&sr=1-1&keywords=kevin+and+perry+go+large

Christmas Carol: The Movie (2001)

Anyone who knows me either online or in the real world will know that I'm not only a fan of the Christmas season but also a huge fan of A Christmas Carol. After years spent watching movie adaptations, I finally got around to reading the original story when I was in my mid-20s and I rate it as one of the most delightful classics ever written. The fact that there have been a number of great movie adaptations over the years pleases me immensely but the fact that some people can take such great material and still somehow screw it up really irks me. From the numerous adaptations of the story that I've seen, none have screwed it up more than this one - a shockingly bad animated film that features a largely British vocal cast (to their, and my, eternal shame).

I'm not going to reiterate the story of Ebenezer Scrooge here because everyone already knows it. Okay, I'm being horribly assumptive there but I'd wager that ALMOST everyone reading this review knows of the tale so that's good enough for me. The story is changed this time around, but only ever so slightly. The main addition to the material comes in the shape of two mice who go alongside the main characters and observe everything. There's no reason to have these mice scampering around onscreen. They're just there to appeal to kids who like cute little animals.

With a vocal cast that includes Simon Callow, who also plays Charles Dickens in a small live-action prologue, Kate Winslet, Michael Gambon, Rhys Ifans, Nicolas Cage, Jane Horrocks, Juliet Stevenson and Robert Llewellyn (who is best known to many fans of UK comedy for his role as Kryten in Red Dwarf), this had the potential to be something very enjoyable indeed. There was even a hit song included, "What If" sung beautifully by the talented Miss Winslet. Everything had the potential to be great.

Sadly, all of the failings of the movie become obvious within mere moments. Director Jimmy T. Murakami gives audiences lifeless, flat and horribly poor animation while the script (actually written by Piet Kroon and Kryten, I mean, Robert Llewellyn) is so bad that it will hurt the ears of anyone who enjoys the best lines contained within the source material.

Then we have those vocal performances. It's only Kate Winslet who appears to have put any energy and effort into her performance whatsoever. Callow is especially disappointing in a lead role that most viewers, myself included, would expect him to attack with relish and from the rest of the cast, it's only Cage and Gambon who stand out, simply because their voices are more recognisable.

This film was so bad in every conceivable way that it actually made me angry while I watched it. The only good thing I can take away from the experience is knowing that it didn't sell quite as easily as those involved surely hoped it would, performing relatively poorly at the UK box office. I would advise everyone to avoid this travesty at all costs. Even if it just happens to come on telly while you're recovering from a typically excessive Christmas meal I urge you to rouse yourself from food-induced drowsiness for just long enough to change the channel. Nobody will thank you for leaving it on. Nobody.

2/10

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Christmas-Carol-the-Movie-DVD/dp/B00006SKV8/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1354570845&sr=8-1