Prime Time: Death Of A Unicorn (2025)

Despite the general negative reviews I saw for Death Of A Unicorn, I held out hope that I would enjoy it. There's a decent idea at the heart of it (some people hit a unicorn with their car, and it's not long until some mono-horned revenge seems to be on the cards) and a great cast. In fact, my hopes would have been even higher for this if I'd known in advance that it not only included Paul Rudd, Jenna Ortega, Téa Leoni, and Richard E. Grant, but also Will Poulter, Sunita Mani, Anthony Carrigan, and Jessica Hynes.

Rudd and Ortega play Elliot and Ridley, a father and daughter heading to an important weekend event which could improve Elliot's earning potential. He has to schmooze his super-rich boss (Grant) and his family (his wife, played by Leoni, and son, played by Poulter). Things are complicated by the fact that Elliot hits and kills a unicorn on the drive there. Well . . . he THINKS he has killed it. There's no time to mourn for the beast though, nor appreciate the majesty of it, when the assembled rich folk realise that unicorns have magical healing properties.

The first full feature helmed by writer-director Alex Scharfman, this is full of amateur errors, although it must also be said that Scharfman does well with the visuals and his ensemble cast. He cannot nail down the tone though, starting things off with an emphasis on black comedy, trying to then deliver some scenes of tension and gore, and then swerving back to the comedy, but not without shoe-horning in some unearned emotional moments in the third act. The 107-minute runtime makes the whole thing feel a bit baggy, most of the dialogue lacks a required sharpness, and the very end scenes add to a feeling of the whole thing just being ever so slightly pointless.

Rudd is good, even if he is asked to dull his light slightly, while Ortega strives to make more of her part than just being "moody girl who sees the truth ahead of everyone else". Grant and Leoni are effortlessly enjoyable in roles that they could do in their sleep, and Poulter has the most fun of anyone onscreen, playing his part with a hilarious mix of selfishness, stupidity, and attempted menace. Hynes is an interesting choice for her character, and I must admit to being so delighted to see her in such an unexpected role that she didn't have to do any more than be present onscreen to keep me happy, and both Mani and Carrigan are used to highlight the huge chasm that exists between the haves and the have-nots (aka the employees).

This could have been so much more. Some decent creature design aside, it's a visually unappealing film, the main message running through it has been conveyed so much better in a number of better movies released in the past few years, and I would even say that the music by Giosuè Greco and Dan Romer is sadly lacking something. All of the ingredients are here, but only one or two can still be tasted by the time the lacklustre end result is served up.

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
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Warfare (2025)

There has been at least one comedian who has noted that America will invade other countries, kill a lot of people, and then make movies decades later about how it made them so sad. It happened after Vietnam, of course, and it has happened even more frequently in the years after the two times that the USA ended up in Iraq for reasons totally not to do with oil. Warfare is another in this ever-increasing selection of movies.

Co-written and co-directed by Alex Garland and Ray Mendoza, the latter a former US Navy SEAL and a military advisor for some in the film industry, Warfare is interested in nothing more than placing viewers right in the heart of a tense war-time situation. Sadly, once again, it really is interested in nothing more than that, similarly to how Civil War was interested in nothing more than placing viewers as passive spectators in the unfolding titular scenario. 

While much more intense and impactful on a visceral level than his previous movie, Warfare underlines the fact that Garland no longer wants to use art to provide any insight into complex aspects of the human experience. There are main characters we don't really get to know (despite learning some names and superficial identifiers for them), they're ready to fight an enemy for reasons that are never probed and examined, and it's only the bullets and tanks appearing onscreen that will save viewers from slipping into a bored daze.

I get it, I really do. War is hell, and it's also really boring for people in between major life and death moments. But that boredom is also accompanied by tension and a sense of paranoia (although just because American soldiers are paranoid doesn't mean that lots of people around them aren't out to get them). Garland and Mendoza may aim to provide an immersive and authentic experience of life during a specific wartime, but it's all so disappointingly . . . pointless. People are familiar with this particular kind of modern warfare (and I can recommend at least half a dozen movies to anyone who isn't . . . each one better than this) and I would argue that none of the immersion and authenticity here is new or unique. 

The cast includes D'Pharaoh Woon-A-Tai, Will Poulter, Cosmo Jarvis, Joseph Quinn, Aaron Mackenzie, Michael Gandolfini, and many more. Everyone does good work, but they're avatars, coming perilously close to being portals into some Call Of Duty game for those who prefer their wars without any context or complexity. I'd offer a financial reward to anyone who could name more than two of the main characters without double-checking the details online.

There's a level of skill on display here, technically, and that's one of the things that helps this to be a bit better than Civil War. It's a very close call though. Alex Garland said a while ago that he intended to take a break from directing. I hope he does so soon, because he's at risk of sliding further and further from the highs of the first half of his filmography into the tedium and mediocrity of his more recent projects.

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
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 3 (2023)

It took a while, a span of time that saw writer-director James Gunn move from Marvel to DC and then back again, and then back AGAIN to accept a very senior role at DC, but we got there eventually. The third, and final (at least in this incarnation), adventure for the Guardians Of The Galaxy. A lot of people are happy, most seem to think that Gunn managed to stick the landing. I am not in agreement with those people.

Our main group aren’t in a great place when the film starts, with Peter Quill (Chris Pratt) spending time drunk and sad while the others are unable to snap him out of his funk. Everything gets much worse when Adam Warlock (Will Poulter) turns up, picks a fight with our gang, and then leaves after being seriously wounded. He isn’t the only casualty though. Rocket (Bradley Cooper) ends up in critical condition, and the fact that he has some kind of killswitch inside him makes it impossible to immediately heal him. The guardians have to figure out how to bypass the killswitch, which means they have to find out more about Rocket’s past, putting them on a headlong path towards someone known as The High Evolutionary (Chukwudi Iwuji). Well, we find out about Rocket’s past as we see many flashbacks showing us everything that the Guardians may or may not find out about at a later stage.

While I am not going to say that this is the worst Marvel movie since Thor: Love And Thunder, there are a lot of the same problems dragging this down from the great ending it could have been. Much like Waititi being encouraged to further indulge himself with his second Thor movie, Gunn seems to have been given free rein to cut loose and go crazy for the final instalment of this trilogy. With the exception of The High Evolutionary, who is a fantastic main villain, almost everyone now speaks in banter and gags. There are very few instances without an abundance of jokes. I get that these movies have been full of humour throughout the previous instalments, but it’s all overdone here in a way that jars with the more serious moments. And, hooo boy, are there some serious moments here. The whole backstory for Rocket is an upsetting and emotional look at animal vivisection, and the third act feels even more callous than some of the other Marvel movies, when you fully consider the impact of the large-scale destruction. So I can see that Gunn would have wanted plenty of humour to offset these moments, but it just doesn’t work well enough, mainly due to him twisting other characters too far away from how they used to be. Even a surprising Groot (still voiced by Vin Diesel) moment feels a bit disappointing and at odds with the charm of his essence.

The production design is wild throughout, and that also feels as if it has gone too far. Gunn wants every scene crammed full of alien species and strange environments, but too much of everything just has you wishing for a moment or two of something refreshingly normal. And then there’s the soundtrack, which people have once again marked as a highlight. No. This is a selection of obtrusive needle-drops that simply don’t work as well as by soundtrack choices from the first two movies. I love most of the songs used here, but they rarely felt like a natural fit for the scenes they were shoehorned into.

The cast generally do a good job, working well with what they are given. If you enjoyed Pratt, Cooper, Diesel, Dave Bautista, Pom Klementieff, Karen Gillan, Zoe Saldana, and Sean Gunn in the previous movies then you should enjoy them here. Poulter is sadly wasted in his role, as is Elizabeth Debicki (playing his “mother”), Maria Bakalova provides the voice of Cosmo, another fairly wasted character, and I am sure fans of Gunn’s work will enjoy seeing a small role for Nathan Fillion. Iwuji would steal the film though, were it not for the fact that many of his scenes involve him interacting with a super-cute, younger version of Rocket. His genuinely threatening and cruel villain is good enough to lift the whole film up a notch or two.

It’s hard to stay angry or disappointed with Guardians Of The Galaxy Vol. 3 though, knowing that everyone involved really wanted to come back and do their best to ensure a fitting end to this particular chapter in their cinematic incarnation, but it’s not one I will be revisiting, as opposed to the previous two adventures. Not only is the main storyline surprisingly predictable, it’s also surprisingly unsatisfying. One moment near the very end had me thinking that Gunn was actually committed to making the most of this opportunity to provide a properly emotional ending for this ragtag bunch of reluctant heroes, but it was soon undercut by one of the many easier options available in his storytelling toolbox. And it's also worth noting the most egregious and unnecessary "f-bomb" I can think of, seemingly just to take full advantage of the 12A rating here in the UK.

There are still moments here to enjoy, and many other people found less to be critical of than I did, but I was disappointed, and it feels like yet more proof that Marvel will struggle to get back to the consistent greatness they made seem so effortless as they built everything towards the cinematic conclusion of the Infinity Saga.

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

Prime Time: Midsommar (2019)

Unlike many other people, I wasn't overly impressed by Hereditary, the feature film debut from writer-director Ari Aster. It was certainly an assured piece of work, and had some great moments, as well as an impressive visual style, but everything started to unravel in a third act that, to me, felt surprisingly hokey and predictable, considering what had come before it.

So I wasn't anticipating Midsommar with much enthusiasm, especially when the trailer gave me a strong feeling of having been there and done that before. And if I want to see a film like The Wicker Man then I'll usually just watch The Wicker Man.

I am pleased to be proven wrong. Midsommar is one of those films that is so good I am considering revisiting Aster's previous feature, especially as both movies are thematically connected by exploring how people deal with death, and how they grieve.

Starting off with one hell of a grim opening, viewers are then introduced to the main characters. Dani (Florence Pugh) has been changed by a devastating personal tragedy, which means it has never been the right time for her boyfriend, Christian (Jack Reynor), to separate from her, as he feels he should. Christian and his friends, Josh (William Jackson Harper) and Mark (Will Poulter), have been invited to a special festival in Sweden by another friend, Pelle (Vilhelm Blomgren). It will be a chance to relax for some of them, while one or two others may make it the subject of their big university dissertation. But the trip could feel very different when Christian decides to invite Dani along, expecting her to say no. The welcoming residents at the Swedish retreat soon start to show some bizarre behaviour, to say the least, and it becomes obvious that the first impression of something pretty and sweet hides something much darker.

As mentioned above, this is another exploration of death and grief from Aster, and it's an impressive flipside to his first feature. Where Hereditary was all about the consuming darkness and the constant pain hanging overhead like a heavy weight ready to crash down, Midsommar looks at someone attempting to take their mind off things and constantly attempt to act "normal" until that becomes natural to them again.

The visuals throughout are gorgeous, with the bright colours, floral displays, and geometric design of each shot giving you plenty in every scene to appreciate, explore, and dissect. Not always noticed by the central characters, many of those at the festival make sure they sit or stand in a certain formation, and the camera moves around to let viewers see what the leads might miss.

Pugh puts in another superb performance here. The past two years have seen her immediately become one of my favourite actresses, thanks to the sheer range and undeniable talent shown throughout her roles, and this turn is arguably her strongest yet. Reynor is the right choice for Christian, because he's charming and likeable enough even as he's being a bit shitty to people. Poulter provides a number of the lighter moments, and they can grate slightly, and he's good in his role, Harper is a considerate guest interested in learning more that will help him in his studies (so not too far removed from the character that he's best known for playing on The Good Place), and Blomgren is enjoyably ambiguous for a lot of the runtime. As for the many other festival attendees, all are believably beatific and everyone ends up onscreen precisely where Aster wants them.

I am sure that some will dislike the fact that Midsommar is highly derivative and predictable, if you've seen even one other film like it, but it's a film all about the journey, not the destination. And it's one hell of a journey.

8/10

Buy the movie here.
Americans can buy it here, or browse for other options.

The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader (2010)

I had to look up some figures for the Narnia movies before I began writing this review. According to Box Office Mojo, the first film had a production budget of $180M and made a shade over $745M worldwide. Not bad. The second film had a production budget of $225M and made just under $420M worldwide. And this film had a production budget of $155M, bringing in a worldwide take of just over $415M. How the hell the Prince Caspian movie ended up costing $225M is beyond me, but it seems clear that the series was scuppered at that point. Which is a bit of a shame. Because while The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader ended up making the least at the box office, it's a contender for the best of the three films, taking two main characters and throwing them almost immediately into a wild adventure that involves dark magic, a hunt for special items that can be used to stop an evil force, a dragon, and much more.

Lucy (Georgie Henley) and Edmund Pevensie (Skandar Keynes) are miserable, staying at the home of relatives, including a most horrid cousin, Eustace Scrubb (Will Poulter). It doesn't take them long, however, to get back to Narnia, this time through a painting of a sailing ship. And the astonished Eustace ends up there with them, meeting Prince Caspian (Ben Barnes) and his crew, and soon seeing sights that convince him he must be hallucinating.

I'm not going to beat around the bush here. I liked this film more than the previous two Narnia adventures. There are still some problems. None of these films work as well as they could, but this one comes the closest, and that is despite an adventure that focuses on the two youngest, and previously most annoying, members of the Pevensie family.

Henley and Keynes both do better here than they have done previously, obviously improving slightly with each movie in the series, due to the script helping them out and the fact that they have grown up a bit. Barnes is still absolute fine as the courageous and good-hearted Prince Caspian, and Gary Sweet does pretty well as his right hand man. There's no Eddie Izzard returning to voice Reepicheep so we get Simon Pegg instead. He's fine, despite the fact that his vocal performance feels like a slight step down from Izzard's fun turn. But it's Poulter who steals a handful of scenes, even when he's being an absolutely slappable pain in the backside for the first third of the film. He's entertaining to dislike, and then gradually becomes easier to like as the story allows him to be changed by everything he experiences.

It's Michael Apted sliding into the director's chair this time, working from the script by Christopher Markus, Stephen McFeely, and Michael Petroni (the other newcomer), and he does a nice job of following on from the previous films, in terms of the look and feel of the thing, while taking viewers in a slightly different direction. There are times when this feels more like a Pirates Of The Caribbean movie (and I know not everyone will view that as an improvement), thanks to the menagerie of creatures, the action sequences, and the nautical nature of it all, and times when, just occasionally, it feels like a film that could have been just as much fun with a lower budget and some lovely stop-motion work in place of the CGI, in the vein of an old Harryhausen flick.

It's a shame that this is where the series ended, considering the fact that there were other adventures fans of the books may have wanted to see, but it's also not a bad thing that it finished on a such a relative high note.

And, as a recurring way to end these Narnia-focused reviews, can we all just agree that Aslan is a Superlion who could always help everyone a lot sooner than he does? Bloody poser, just waiting for his big moment in the finale to save the day and then pretend it was a close call.*

*I did warn you that I would also end this Narnia review with this statement.

7/10

You can buy the boxset here.
Americans can get the movies here.

Detroit (2017)

Based on a true incident that happened in Detroit in 1967, Detroit is an intense, infuriating, engrossing return to top form for Kathryn Bigelow, a director I have always enjoyed, despite not loving her past few projects as much as many other people.

Things kick off with a police raid on a club that leads to a riot. African Americans feel, quite rightly, that they are being unduly picked on by authorities. With rocks being thrown, stores being looted, and properties being vandalised, it's not long until permission is given to back up the police with the National Guard and Army bods. Against this backdrop of racial tension, the members of a vocal group on the verge of great success decide to relax and party in their hotel. Someone mucking about at the party decides that they will have fun with a starter gun . . . and that is when things really start to go downhill. The police surround, and enter, the building. And they're not leaving without being satisfed by their own level of justice.

As mentioned in the film itself, this isn't a 100% factual representation. It's a depiction of an event provided after sifting through a variety of conflicting accounts of what happened on that night. But it certainly feels as if writer Mark Boal doesn't ever veer too far away from the truth. Whether things were twisted to make them more cinematic or not, this is a masterclass in character sketches, ratcheting tension, and how to shade morally bankrupt figures without making them seem completely inhuman.

Bigelow has been working with material this tense for some time, with moments of The Hurt Locker being the most obvious example, and she's a dab hand at it (to say the least). Those scenes dealt with physical explosives. Detroit focuses on a situation that viewers know could explode at any moment. Things are bad, but everyone involved knows that one wrong move could make things a hell of a lot worse.

It helps that the cast are all very much up to the task in hand. Algee Smith and Anthony Mackie are two of the main men being held by the police, with the latter a war veteran who prompts one or two individuals to consider changing their tack. John Boyega is on the scene, a security guard torn between his duties as an employee and his desire to resolve the whole situation peacefully without anyone being beaten or shot. And Will Poulter, Jack Reynor, and Ben O'Toole are the three main officers dictating how the whole scenario will play out. Reynor and O'Toole are both very good, but it's the sheer disgust coming out of the very pores of Poulter that overshadows everything else. His performance is excellent, as discomforting and scary as anything you might see in a mainstream horror movie.

It's a great shame that none of the events depicted in Detroit feel any less believable nowadays. We should be watching this in state of incredulity, shocked at what was once acceptable but has since become a rarity. And the fact that it's not hard to believe adds another layer to the whole experience. It's not comfortable, it's not pleasant, but it's one of the best films of 2017.

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