Dogma (1999)

Writer-director Kevin Smith has a filmography that can be rated and ranked in a number of different ways. You can pick his best film, which will always be Red State for me. You can pick his funniest film, which is where I may end up going for the wonderful silliness of Jay & Silent Bob Strike Back. Or you can pick his most fully-formed and cinematic film. That is where Dogma comes in. Very cleverly having fun with some aspects of organised religion without necessarily making fun of those who have faith, Dogma is smart, funny, and has a couple of sequences that show Smith able to deliver more than just great dialogue.

Linda Fiorentino plays Bethany, a woman who is very surprised when she is visited in the night by Metatron (Alan Rickman) AKA the voice of god. Metatron tells Bethany that she must go on a quest, one to stop two angels (Loki and Bartleby, played by Matt Damon and Ben Affleck) being allowed to reclaim their places in heaven. If Loki and Bartleny manage such a thing, only made possible by a Cardinal (George Carlin) who has stupidly offered absolution to everyone entering his church, then it will prove God to be fallible. And if God is proven to be fallible then, well, that will destroy everything. Literally. Bethany finds herself accompanied on her quest by two unlikely "prophets" (Jay and Silent Bob, played, as ever, by Jason Mewes and Smith), an apostle named Rufus (Chris Rock), and the delightful Serendipity (Salma Hayek).

At 130 minutes, this is also the longest narrative feature from Smith, but it doesn't feel it. Taking time to get all of the pieces in place during a number of opening scenes that don't start to fully intertwine into a full main throughline until some time later, Smith remembers to keep the comedy dotted throughout until he can then relax and have the most amount of fun when everyone has been introduced and set on their respective journeys. Things step up a notch whenever Rickman, Damon, or Affleck appear onscreen, but it's also fun to watch the whole thing derail momentarily when the characters of Jay & Silent Bob barge their way into the story.

While the dialogue is still clearly the area in which Smith is most comfortable, he surrounds it in this film with a number of great ideas and a real sense of everything building towards a grand and satisfying ending. The execution is imperfect, arguably hampered by what I am sure were limitations that were placed on budget and resources for a film that many would start to protest even before it was released, but Smith tries hard to deliver some set-pieces that keep viewers aware of much more happening just outwith the edges of every frame. 

Fiorentino may not be the best lead, but she does well enough as someone both confused and hesitant to keep doing what she's being told must be done. It's the rest of the supporting cast who shine though, particularly the stars who you either wouldn't normally think of as being part of a Kevin Smith film (Rickman, Carlin, Hayek, and Rock) or stars who are very much well-suited to delivering his writing (Damon, Affleck, a delightfully devilish Jason Lee). Almost everyone feels as if they're having a LOT of fun, and that fun emanates from the screen. Elsewhere, film fans will enjoy seeing small roles for Bud Cort, Brian O'Halloran, Janeane Garofalo, Jeff Anderson, and Alanis Morissette. 

It seems fitting that Smith wrote and directed a movie that could at times feel like his most mature and smartest work, and at other times had some of the main characters battling against a demon made of poo. Dogma is very often crude, in both the dialogue and the film-making tricks used to get Smith's vision onscreen, but it holds up well because the intention is always clear. Faith is good, the wide spectrum of humanity is often also good, and the worst thing to happen to religion stems from the humans who decided to twist and wield it to suit their own agenda. 

I still love many of Smith's rougher comedies. I still love Red State. This remains his greatest cinematic achievement though. Amen. 

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

Prime Time: Magic Mike's Last Dance (2023)

I like Magic Mike. I also quite like Magic Mike XXL, although it's a lesser film. Magic Mike's Last Dance is an example of seriously diminishing returns. While I can understand some people returning to the series (Channing Tatum, writer Reid Carolin), it's strange that director Steven Soderbergh agreed to helm what is essentially a feature-length promo for the live stage show of the brand.

A lazy voiceover introduces us to where Mike (Tatum) is right now. He has lost his business, he's working as a bartender at various functions, and he's generally just trying to get by, in the same way as so many other people who took a financial hit during the global pandemic. Mike meets Maxandra Mendoza (Salma Hayek Pinault) while bartending at an event she is hosting, eventually gives her a sexy dance after saying that he no longer sexy dances, and ends up being employed by her to head to London and put on a show that will hopefully enable other women to feel what she felt while being gyrated upon and straddled by a hunky man.

Equal parts ridiculous and tedious, Magic Mike's Last Dance is also extremely lazy. I wouldn't mind it being so predictable if I cared about the main characters, but I didn't. Mike is defined by the fact that he keeps saying he no longer sexy dances . . . and then does a sexy dance (seriously, this is used to essentially bookend the main narrative arc of the film). Maxandra AKA Max is defined by wanting to get revenge on the husband she is due to divorce, as well as the glow she is meant to have gained from one night with Mike. Jemelia George has to roll her eyes as the teen daughter, Zadie, until the third act requires her to be completely on board with everything, and supportive in a way that is uncharacteristic, but that's what is in the screenplay so that's how it just is. Ayub Khan Din is fun, playing a butler/chauffeur/assistant named Victor, perhaps because he's only required to make minor alterations to his amusing grumpiness, and Juliette Motamed works well as an actress who jumps at the chance to move from some staid and old-fashioned fare to something much sexier, but the rest is a big shrug of a film, although I am sure many viewers will be pleased enough by watching some hunky men learn some choreographed routines.

Maybe I'm way off here, but it didn't even seem as if the leads had any chemistry together. Okay, their first main encounter starts well, but it all fizzles out as soon as it's supposed to be heating up. Tatum still has skill, no doubt about it, but his character is taken on a journey that no longer feels worth being invested in. It's a silly fairytale, which would be all well and good if it wasn't bolted on to that lengthy reminder that there's a stage show wanting to keep those ticket sales high.

I wanted something distracting and slick. What I got was horrible writing from Carolin (that intermittent voiceover is shocking), flat direction from Soderbergh, a seriously mixed bag of acting performances, and a potential love story between two people who don't feel as if they have any strong connection to one another. So many scenes end up being completely inconsequential, including a preposterous sequence showing the performers spying on a woman who deals with regulation paperwork that could seriously affect their prospects, and the 112-minute runtime seems to stretch out forever. But maybe it's fitting that a Magic Mike movie feels lengthier than it actually is.

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 

Prime Time: Wild Wild West (1999)

When Wild Wild West was first released, I wasn’t familiar with the TV show it was based on. I just got excited at the prospect of another blockbuster comedy pairing up director Barry Sonnenfeld with Will Smith. I also liked Kevin Kline, a LOT, Kenneth Branagh, and any decent-sized role for Salma Hayek. That excitement may be long gone now, it started to dissipate during my first viewing of the movie, but little else has changed. I am still unfamiliar with the TV show this was based on, and I still like the main cast assembled for it.

Smith plays James West, a skilled and sharp-shooting special agent who ends up partnered with Agent Artemus Gordon (Kline). Gordon prefers to use inventions and disguises to help him achieve his aims, while West prefers a much more direct approach. Both men have to work together as they try to apprehend the devious Dr. Arliss Loveless (Branagh), a man who lost his legs during wartime, but makes up for that handicap with a number of inventions, from a “super-charged” wheelchair to a huge mecha-spider vehicle, that give him an advantage over his enemies. Oh and Salma Hayek plays Rita Escobar, a women who ends up accompanying West and Gordon for part of their journey.

Arguably most famous nowadays for featuring a creation mentioned in a Kevin Smith anecdote (one of the producers on this movie REALLY had a hankering for a giant spider to feature as a third act menace), Wild Wild West is a real oddity. Some of the comedy works, some of the action is nicely put together, and the steampunk element provides some cool visuals, but the very essence of the film seems to work against the charisma of all of the leads.

Smith constantly feels as if he is cosplaying, too cool to play his cowboy in a more straightforward way, Branagh does too much moustache-twirling while murdering his attempt at an American accent, and Kline doesn’t get enough moments to shine, which is even more annoying when you have scenes that fleetingly show just how funny he can be. Hayek is given no real arc, the movie would work just as well without her (although I, for one, am glad she is in it), while there is more care and attention given to supporting turns from Ted Levine, Musetta Vander, and Bai Ling.

There are, as expected, numerous writers credited with the end result here. You get the names of the people who delivered the TV show concept, but you also get S. S. Wilson and Brent Maddock (originators of a certain graboid hit), who then claim that their original screenplay was severely reworked by Jeffrey Price and Peter S. Seaman (who only had a couple of other movie writing credits before this, but one of those was Who Framed Roger Rabbit). Whoever was most responsible for it, the end result is a mess, and Somnenfeld is unable to improve it.

The direction is competent, but weighed down by the script. There’s no decision to make someone a straight man, which just leads to the laughs being spread thinner amongst everyone (including Branagh), and thereby ever any real sense of danger. This is a romp, nothing more, and that in itself isn’t a terrible thing. It just also happens to have a few dull patches throughout the runtime, an inability to have more fun with the clash between the traditional Western ways and the technology available to the characters, and even the Elmer Bernstein score can’t help. At least you get to hear the funky Will Smith theme song over the closing credits.

Wild Wild West is a mess, but it is one I feel the need to check in on at least once a decade or so. I always suspect that I am misremembering it, that I like it more than most people. I’m not misremembering it, and I don’t. Although I might be a bit more generous to it than most.

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

Eternals (2021)

If you want some wholesome and enjoyable content to make you smile then you should check out the many photos of Lia McHugh on her IMDb page. Most of them have clearly been out there by McHugh herself, complete with contextualising text descriptions that show how much she loves her acting career.

If you can spend two hours browsing that selection of photos then you will probably have a better time than you would if you actually watched Eternals, a Marvel movie that feels more redundant than any others we have seen so far.

Described as Earth’s first superheroes, Eternals are a group of people with different powers who work together to help care for the human race. They can only ever intervene when humans are being attacked by monsters called deviants, which conveniently explains why they never tried to help when “the snap” happened, and most of their time is spent just observing people and trying to act like one of them. There hasn’t been any deviant attack for a long, long time. And then there is one, one unlike the others. This deviant may be able to absorb powers while it takes lives. And it may reveal a truth about the Eternals that they will struggle to accept.

Although it’s not actually a bad movie, in many ways, I can feel my enthusiasm for this film ebbing away with every word I write. There is a mildly interesting development in the second half that takes things in a slightly unexpected direction, but the end result is still a group of people dealing with some giant CGI. What’s worse is that the more enjoyable characters seem to be too quickly dismissed from the action.

Director Chloé Zhao, who also helped write the screenplay (Patrick Burleigh and Ryan Firpo being the other writers on this), does what is expected of her, trying to liven things up enough with an action sequence here and there to distract from the fact that these are the dullest superheroes we have seen in a long time. Sadly, she cannot do enough to make up for the central problem.

At least the cast help, although the lead being played by Gemma Chan leads to the big problem of, well, the lead being played by Gemma Chan. Richard Madden does a bit better, as does the aforementioned McHugh, but the best cast members are Angelina Jolie, Brian Tyree Henry, and Kumail Nanjiani. Barry Keoghan plays an interesting character, but plays him as if he can barely be bothered to stay awake. I don’t blame him, it’s a tough job to stay energised with such a mix of deja vu and plodding mediocrity. Even Salma Hayek cannot help, although her relatively small amount of screentime was better than no Hayek at all.

There is a nice cross-section of characters here (Lauren Ridloff is a deaf Flash-like character who speaks in sign language), but the bad outweighs the good. By far. With the pacing issues, the inability to engage viewers properly, and the tired feeling the material has, I have to say that this is the weakest big MCU movie so far. I hope it is an anomaly.

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 Hitman's Wife's Bodyguard (2021)

You would, I think it is safe to say, be hard pushed to find someone who really LOVED The Hitman's Bodyguard, an action comedy that starred Ryan Reynolds and Samuel L. Jackson alongside one another. It was decidedly okay, but below average for that kind of fare. The action wasn't great, the comedy was far too reliant on one of the lead actors swearing, and it just felt a bit careless. BUT you did have the charisma of both Reynolds and Jackson, and a small role for Salma Hayek.

And now, bewilderingly, we have a sequel. Reynolds is back, Jackson is back, Hayek has a bigger role (being the titular hitman's wife), and you also get some screentime for both Antonio Banderas and Morgan Freeman.

Here's the basic plot summary. Michael Bryce (Reynolds) is upset at the fact that he has lost his licence to bodyguard. Attending therapy, he is encouraged to try and relax for a while, keep away from guns and violence. It's during some relaxation time that he is dragged into action by Sonia Kincaid (Hayek), who believes that he is the only person her husband, Darius (Jackson), trusts to get him out of a very tricky situation. Unfortunately, Darius had been trying to tell his wife that she should ask for help from . . . anyone but Bryce. Banderas plays Aristotle Papdopolous, a dangerous man with a dangerous plan involving a major cybercrime, and Morgan Freeman allows the film to explore some amusing daddy issues.

Director Patrick Hughes returns, taking no time at all to reassure viewers that they will be getting exactly whatever it is they enjoyed the first time around. Yes, there may be a few more big names in the main roles here, but the format is very much the same as it was before. Bullets and cursewords fly around each act, neither of them as amusing as they're intended to be. Just keep reminding yourself that there was a time when Hughes made a brilliant impact on the cinematic landscape with his superb feature debut, Red Hill, and maybe one day he will find his way back to that kind of brilliance.

It's no surprise to find that the screenwriters, brothers Phillip and Brandon Murphy, are first-timers, and I can imagine a bit of improvising may have been encouraged, certainly between the three leads. The dialogue throughout is pretty poor, in between gags of varying quality, and the plotting is as predictable as you might expect from something like this.

The leads do lift the material though, just not enough to make this a good film. Reynolds and Jackson once again spark off each other brilliantly, and Hayek is a lot of fun as the fiery Sonia. Banderas is typically suave, Freeman is a fun choice for his role, and there's some time to include the likes of Frank Grillo (an Interpol agent), Richard E. Grant (a drug addict who used to be under the protection of Bryce), and Tom Hopper (a top bodyguard). Caroline Goodall plays another agent, with her scenes generally made more amusing thanks to her main colleague being played by Alice McMillan, confusing some people around her with her strong Scottish accent.

I've not watch The Hitman's Bodyguard in a couple of years, because I've never felt the urge to revisit it, but this sequel feels like a lazy retread. Which means I am sure enough people will enjoy it to somehow make a third movie viable. And that's making me feel grumpier already. That's never a good way to feel after reviewing a comedy film.

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

Mubi Monday: The Hummingbird Project (2018)

Two cousins, Vincent (Jesse Eisenberg) and Anton (Alexander Skarsgård), have a dream to pursue in The Hummingbird Project, which uses an unusual central idea to create a fascinating journey for the main journey. It is a film full of familiar moments, but things feel fresh because of the main character motivation.

Basically, the plan is to lay a 1000 mile long line of fibre between one location and the New York Stock Exchange, which could allow someone to get stock market information milliseconds before anyone else. And those milliseconds can allow people to make millions more dollars. Vincent is the one driving this plan, and Anton is busy working through computer code to see how much time he can shave off the data transfer.

Written and directed by Ken Nguyen, someone I am not familiar with (but a quick look over his filmography shows that I should check out the rest of his work), The Hummingbird Project gives a unique perspective on the race to make money from the stock exchange. While focusing on the attempt to create that one, absolutely straight, line - under properties, through mountains, underwater, etc - it manages to emphasise that single-minded pursuit of monetary gain, with no real thought to others affected by it.

Things are helped a lot by the leads. Eisenberg is able to do a lot of his usual stuff, talking quickly and with confidence to get people on his side even as they are still trying to process the information, and he’s a perfect fit. Skarsgård is playing someone much more awkward and quiet, the typical genius who isn’t so good at social interaction, and he does a great job, especially on moments that show him not being quite as vulnerable and lacking in common sense as you might suspect. Salam Hayek gets to add tension, playing their ex-boss who knows something is going on and wants to either be part of it or beat them at their own game, and Michael Mando is superb in a large supporting role, playing the man who can head up the massive job of getting that line stretched out along 1000 miles.

As described by Eisenberg’s character at one point, this is a “David vs Goliath” tale, which means viewers can all root for the underdog, even if the underdog is harder to distinguish from the strong reigning champion this time around. You get strong performances, an intelligent and thoughtful script, and an enjoyably bittersweet third act. Highly recommended.

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

Ani-MAY-tion Month: Puss In Boots (2011)

Here it is. The spin-off movie for a character first introduced to viewers in the Shrek sequels. Puss In Boots is a character that I, and many others, enjoyed when he joined in with the other established characters and helped to mix things up a bit. He never, however, seemed like someone who needed his own movie. And Puss In Boots proves me right.

Part adventure romp, part "origin story", Puss In Boots puts Puss (Antonio Banderas) in the middle of an adventure with his former friend, Humpty Dumpty (Zach Galifianakis), and a talented, attractive thief named Kitty Softpaws (Salma Hayek). Will the adventure have a good outcome, allowing Humpty to finally forgive Puss for letting him take a great fall some years ago, or will old wounds be reopened as the trio attempt to get hold of the magic beans that will let them grow a giant beanstalk and grab themselves a golden goose?

Some movies just grab you and some don't. Puss In Boots fell into the latter category for me. So much of the movie has been done before, and done better, and it feels like a trip back to a drying well (although, good grief, there's a sequel planned at the time of writing, so I may be in the minority).

Banderas and Hayek both have rich, warm voices, suitable for their kitty cat characters, and there are no problems with the line delivery. Galifianakis isn't as enjoyable, but he does what's asked of him. The main problem seems to be that the script, mainly written by Tom Wheeler, just isn't good enough. None of the dialogue stands out, and most of the set-pieces suffer from a sense of overfamiliarity (e.g. another dance off, but, y'know, with cats instead of people).

Director Chris Miller doesn't do much to help, but I guess he doesn't have to. There's enough here to make the film passable entertainment, it's not as if I will say that it's a poor film, thanks to the decent animation, movie references, and the fun that comes from heroics being accomplished by such cute cats.

Basically, this is a movie that will probably keep the kids entertained even if it doesn't try to be half as good as it could be. Considering the amount of great family entertainment that has appeared in recent years, that's a great pity, and puts this low on any list of prioritised viewings.

5/10

http://www.amazon.com/Boots-Triple-Blu-ray-Digital-Region/dp/B005A5YYZ2/ref=sr_1_5?s=movies-tv&ie=UTF8&qid=1399902918&sr=1-5&keywords=puss+in+boots