For It Is Man's Number

Friday, 10 October 2025

Good Boy (2025)

Great cinema is often based around a great idea. There are some who will tell you that Good Boy has a great idea at the heart of it - a ghost movie from the POV of a dog. I would argue that the idea isn't strong enough to sustain the relatively short runtime (it comes in at just over the 70-minute mark). In fact, it feels a bit too oddly unimaginative now that we have, for better or worse, seen a haunted house movie presented to us from the POV of the main spirit. Everyone else seems to have fallen in love with Good Boy though, which I think just shows how easily we can so often be won over by a cute dog.

Indy plays Indy, the canine protagonist here (and, yes, I am biting my tongue to stop myself from over-using the phrases "lead actor" and "lead performance). Indy spends a lot of time alongside Todd (Shane Jensen). Todd isn't well, and a move to an isolated house in the middle of some woods doesn't look as if it will help him to make any miraculous recovery. It does allow Indy to start noticing a ghost or two though.

Directed and co-written by Ben Leonberg (with Alex Cannon also helping on the screenplay), Good Boy has one major positive. That's Indy. A wonderful and expressive star, helped in his transition into acting by the fact that he is, in fact, Leonberg's dog.

Look, let me be clear in emphasising that I am not actually a cold-hearted deadite. Okay, sometimes I am, but not all the time. And I'm an animal lover (more of a dog person, but I've also had cats at one point in my life). So I was really looking forward to Good Boy, especially after hearing such glowing praise for it from people who had already seen it at one or two film festivals. It's just not great though, sadly, and doesn't do enough with that great idea at the heart of it. I suspect that some people may have had their viewing experience slightly rose-tinted by that festival audience viewing experience, but there's also a good chance that I'm just very much in the minority this time around.

Leonberg creates some good atmosphere, helped by an interesting score from Sam Boase-Miller, but he ultimately doesn't do much more. I'd also argue that the focus staying on the dog is the only reason to avoid thinking about how bad his owner is when it comes to making logical decisions. There are small reveals of a backstory here and there, but nothing to add enough of interest in between the different scares that feel as if they've been crafted without caring about how the whole narrative ultimately fits together. Leonberg has stated that the filming took place across 400 days spread throughout 3 years, which doesn't surprise me. Good Boy may be made by someone with the best intentions, and one very good boy, but you can feel the stop and start nature of the filming throughout.

There are individual moments to admire here, and I also admire the fact that Leonberg actually got the film made, but the end result if a bit of a disappointment. It's something a bit different, I'll give it that, but somewhere between the idea and the execution things went slightly amiss. And I'm not just saying that because they refused to use my tagline that said "his bark is worse than his fright".

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

Thursday, 9 October 2025

Him (2025)

Everyone knows that sport is a serious business. People get so passionate about it that it's quite scary. There are a number of sports that could take top priority in your life, and many Americans absolutely love their American Football, whether they're supporting a team or spending some of their youth risking injury and pain for the sake of becoming a decent player. Him is a film about someone who could be more than a decent player. That person could be a new GOAT, but it's going to require a fair amount of sacrifice, of course.

Tyriq Withers plays Cam, a young football player who looks to have a bright future ahead of him. Then he's suddenly attacked, which leads to him requiring some rehabilitation and a reconsideration of his options. He still wants to play football though, and he wants to be the best. That's how he ends up being given the opportunity to be mentored by the great Isaiah White (Marlon Wayans), a quarterback who is due to retire from his team, the San Antonio Saviors. Has Cam got what it takes to make it? And will he want everything that comes with his potential superstardom?

If I told you that I'd already heard some mixed opinions on this film then I'd be lying. Most people I know disliked it. Some hated it. I couldn't help being intrigued though, especially with the cast including Wayans in that main role, and support from Julia Fox, Tim Heidecker, and Jim Jefferies. I also enjoyed the fact that I both knew the kind of film that I was getting, yet also wasn't sure exactly where it was going to go before the end credits rolled.

Directed by Justin Tipping, who also co-wrote it with Skip Bronkie and Zack Akers, Him is an enjoyable trip into some truly bonkers horror territory. Things start off strange, and it only gets weirder and weirder with each subsequent sequence, but it's easy to believe that Cam would tolerate almost anything as he stretches further out over the abyss while ready to grab his golden prize. It feels very much like a case of someone being bemused, but also thinking "okay, this is how things happen when you can just do anything you want".

There's a great soundtrack and score accompanying the impressive visuals, with everything designed to be impressively cool and unsettling, and the lead performances are good enough to sell the main storyline. Withers is decent, although he's the least interesting character until allowed to have some fun in the third act. Wayans is superb, almost giving us two very different characters in one, a man who has given his all to something that has also given him everything in return, for better or worse. Heidecker is cast well, Jefferies equally so, and Fox seems to have been asked to play her character as a cross between a business manager and Lady Gaga. Which, to be clear, I am not complaining about.

While it may not work for those wanting something comfortably familiar, and less darkly comedic, Him absolutely hit the spot for me. It looks at pain, at sacrifice, at being pushed along a certain path through life that was plotted for you by others, and it felt like a genre-shaded mockery of the lengths that people and clubs will go to in order to tie a potentially great player into a contract. And it does it all in a decent 96-minute runtime. It may not be a complete blowout, but it's a convincing victory.

7/10

Wednesday, 8 October 2025

Prime Time: Terror At London Bridge (1985)

AKA Bridge Across Time.

When I heard there was a weird little movie that has David Hasselhoff trying to apprehend a killer who my or many not be a time-travelling Jack the Ripper then I just knew I had to see it. Don't pretend you wouldn't at least have some morbid curiosity about it.

The plot is pretty much what I've just said. It all starts with a missing stone that is recovered and then placed back on the old London Bridge that is now in Arizona. That missing stone may be very powerful, and may well bring back the famous murderer, Jack the Ripper. Who would believe such a theory though? Detective Don Gregory (Hasselhoff) would, especially when he starts to match up murders with dates that correspond to the dates of the original Ripper murders. Struggling to convince Chief Dawson (Clu Gulager) while he argues with Anson Whitfield (Lane Smith, effectively playing his character as if he's Murray Hamilton in Jaws), Gregory eventually comes up with a plan that will require the use of Angie (Stefanie Kramer), a woman he has just started a relationship with.

Director E. W. Swackhamer seems to have a large body of TV work to his name (and this was a TV movie first shown back in the mid-1980s), but there's enough canny casting and good pacing here to show him as someone who knows what they're doing in that medium. Writer William F. Nolan has a couple of better-known properties that he will be remembered for, but he is equally deserving of praise for doing what he can with something that could have been so much worse.

This is silly, especially when playing up the moments that invite comparisons to Jaws, but it's consistently entertaining. The Hoff is a capable enough lead, delivering his usual level of charisma that somehow keeps him feeling like a bigger star than most TV actors without ever being right for lead work in theatrical features, and it's great to see Gulager and Smith in their supporting roles. Kramer is stuck with the most thankless role, but she does fine, and I was pleasantly surprised to see Adrienne Barbeau given some screentime.

If you want more serious movies that make use of Jack the Ripper then there are many to choose from. If you want some Ripper tension with some time-travel in the mix then I'd point you towards the excellent Time After Time. But if you want something that has "Saucy Jack" travelling to our time due to some mysterious bridge magic, and then causing consternation and trouble for a cop who you just know is going to eventually have to reconsider his stance of not using his gun (tied to a tragic incident in his past), well . . . this is the film for you.

6/10

Tuesday, 7 October 2025

The Devils (1971)

If you've seen The Devils a long time ago and wondered why I would include it alongside the many other horror movies I have chosen to watch at this time of year then I would suggest to you that it's time you revisited The Devils. This is a horror film, and it's as powerful and wild to watch today as I'm sure it was when first released in 1971. In fact, having heard all about it for many years, both the content and the power of it, I was worried about it feeling a bit dated and diluted nowadays. Trust me, this is one that remains a test for hardy viewers.

What you need to know is that Oliver Reed portrays Urbain Grandier, a holy man who has his own particular way of living a holy life. He doesn't deny himself some pleasures of the flesh, but he does try to ensure that those around him are safe and spiritually-nourished. Vanessa Redgrave is Sister Jeanne, a woman who becomes obsessed with Grandier, believing that he can be her saviour. It's not long until frustration and resentment lead to some accusations that allow some powerful figures to cut Grandier down to size.

While Ken Russell isn't a director I will always respond positively to, it's undeniable that he has directed a number of features throughout his career that different people could refer to as masterpieces. This one would be my choice, and I know I am far from alone with that opinion. Based on a play by John Whiting, itself based on a novel, "The Devils Of Loudun", by Aldous Huxley, Russell fearlessly looks at religious hypocrisy and the kind of ridiculous show trials that could be used to get rid of anyone deemed to be a threat. It could all be laughable, and there are some fleeting moments of amusement here, if it wasn't all so cold-hearted and deadly.

Reed is as brilliant as he needs to be in his role, embodying his character with the gravitas and brooding presence of, well, peak Oliver Reed. Redgrave also does very good work, as do Gemma Jones, Georgina Hale, and the many others portraying women who feel themselves getting a bit flustered and faint in Reed's presence. Dudley Sutton and Brian Murphy are familiar faces in supporting roles, but the other key player to mention is Michael Gothard, playing one of the most cretinous and punchable villains I have seen in any film of any genre.

It's a shame that we STILL cannot see the full and uncut version of this (the controversial content has ensured that Warner Bros. keep doing their best to control what version is available), but it's a testament to the film, and to Russell, that what we have is already such an incredibly powerful work, full of astonishing imagery and moments that convey absolutely horrendous pain and trauma. Part of me never wants to watch this again, but another part of me thinks that I could watch it every day for the rest of my life and never get sick of appreciating the blend of the beautiful and the grotesque.

I implore others to avoid making the same mistake that I did. Watch this as soon as you possibly can, and see it in the best possible quality. It's a masterpiece. And to the devil with those who say otherwise.

10/10

Monday, 6 October 2025

Mubi Monday: Animals (2019)

When I saw that Alia Shawkat was one of the leads in Animals then I knew I had to watch it as soon as possible. It turns out that Holliday Grainger is an equally good lead performer, which made this even more enjoyable than I expected it to be.

Based on the novel by Emma Jane Unsworth, Animals is the tale of two close friends who seem to spend their time drinking, amusing one another, and keeping a distance from others they can then safely mock without pangs of painful self-awareness. Shawkat is Tyler, a superb and fierce force to be reckoned with. Normality and social norms are obstacles to be faced and overcome. Grainger is Laura, a writer who seems to be stuck on the actual writing part. She takes many notes, but hasn't put anything down that even comes close to resembling the start of her debut novel. Things start to change when Laura meets Jim (Fra Fee), a pianist who is happy to live a fairly normal life in between his times impressing people with his piano-playing prowess.

Having only seen one other film directed by Sophie Hyde (Good Luck To You, Leo Grande), and nothing else yet written by Unsworth, I was drawn to this by the cast alone. They are fantastic, but there's an energy and truth to the writing that makes me keen to try other material written by Unsworth. She may still need a good enough cast to help get everything successfully from page to screen, but the characters and observations are so well-crafted here that I wanted to spend more time exploring them all. I hope I can find similar satisfaction in other Unsworth projects.

Aside from Shawkat and Grainger, because I think I've made my views on their acting skills quite clear already, there's a solid turn from Fee as the pianist who forces one of the main characters to start re-evaluating and reframing their approach to life. Dermot Murphy also does a good job portraying Marty, a poet who somehow lives his authentic life without any of the self-doubt or guilt that Laura has, reflecting her own faultlines and insecurities back at her as she finds herself at an unexpected crossroads in her life.

Not only does Animals look at the struggle of those wanting to spend their lives being creative artists, it also highlights the chasm that exists between the self-belief of men and women, with the former generally benefiting from a history of not being told that they should give up on their dreams to settle down, marry, and have children. The main characters here might seem selfish and irritating at times, but being selfish and irritating is sometimes what it takes to do whatever your real passion is. And women get far fewer opportunities to try taking that demanding journey than men. That might not be the point of Animals, especially when one scene has characters actually discussing the priorities that animals need in their lives, but I suspect that it's definitely one of the main ingredients helping to make the final dish what it is.

8/10

Sunday, 5 October 2025

Netflix And Chill: Van Helsing (2004)

Sometimes I have to wonder about myself. My thoughts on Van Helsing are a prime example of just why I have to do that. I remembered quite enjoying this movie. I own the 2-disc special edition released years ago. I have even defended it, considering how much I enjoyed the general plot points used to bring together the main Universal horror icons. But I just rewatched it. Everyone else was right when they kept telling me how awful this film is.

Hugh Jackman plays the titular character, an action hero with the might of the church behind him (although they equally frown upon his methods, and deny his position as their main soldier). He ends up sent to Transylvania, accompanied by the much more timid Carl (David Wenham), as a certain Count Dracula (Richard Roxburgh) seems intent on finding a way to create a whole brood of baby bloodsuckers. Dracula needs a monster, of course (Frankenstein's creation being played here by Shuler Hensley), but he also tries to experiment with a werewolf or two. Meanwhile, Anna Valerious (Kate Beckinsale) does her best to keep thwarting a supernatural enemy who seems to have a keen interest in her family.

There are things to enjoy here, and I'll mention some of them soon, but it's worth noting that this is a film so awful that it pretty much derailed the directorial career of Stephen Sommers, a white American man. Do you know how hard you have to fail to have your movie career derailed when you're a white American man? You get about three attempts for everyone lone chance a woman would get. Okay, Sommers did direct a couple of other features after this, and seems to have something in development at the moment, but he's far from the celebrated figure he was when helming two fun Mummy movies.

Those in front of the camera have generally fared better, perhaps helped by the fact that people seem to have (rightly) wiped this film from their memories. Jackman has been busy in many better movies, although he doesn't do a terrible job here as an action hero version of the famous character. Beckinsale has kept fans happy in a number of other vampire movies, of course, as well as a number of lesser-known, but fun, films. Roxburgh seemed to realise how bad he was at picking blockbuster projects (just look at his choices between 2000-2004), Wenham continued to move between bigger and smaller projects with ease, and Hensley isn't someone I can say I've noticed in anything else.

It's almost impossible to describe Van Helsing as anything other than an ugly movie, and that's a descriptor it works hard to earn. The sets and production design are quite gorgeous, as are many of the costumes and the many props, but shame on Sommers for putting faith in computer effects that weren't yet ready to deliver anything close to what he must have so happily envisioned in his mind. The werewolf moments are the worst, but it's also not good when the brides of Dracula morph from the real actresses (one being the wonderful Elena Anaya) to clumsy CGI. Then we have action sequences that are overdone and ridiculous in a way that makes everything unforgivably boring. It's hard to enjoy any spectacle when it all feels as if it has been created in a computer-enabled vacuum.

I like the Alan Silvestri score, that is the other main plus, and I do like the core idea at the heart of the plot, but it's hard to think of anything else I can be positive about. Kevin J. O'Connor is a fun Igor, and there's still something entertaining about the opening sequences (one presented in line with the Universal classics from the 1930s, the other featuring a bizarre interpretation of Mr. Hyde, voiced by Robbie Coltrane), but I would have to encourage people to stay away from this one. It's a lot of loud noises and overfilled scenes that ultimately lead to nothing really worth your time. But everyone else knew that for the past two decades.

4/10

Saturday, 4 October 2025

Shudder Saturday: Night Of The Reaper (2025)

While I have enjoyed the previous movies from Brandon and Ryan Christensen, I tend to forget that I am fans of their work. That's why I wasn't aiming to watch Night Of The Reaper, a film that had a fairly generic title and was described as a slasher with an '80s vibe. I WILL eventually watch films described in that way, but I've been burned enough in recent years to make me wary of them. Then I started to see people mention a couple of details that piqued my interest. I won't mention them here, because this is best viewed without any spoilers, but there is a fun third act that more than makes up for some of the other flaws.

Jessica Clement plays Deena, a young woman who ends up babysitting young Max Arnold (Max Christensen), son of the local Sheriff, Rodney Arnold (Ryan Robbins). This wouldn't be a big deal under normal circumstances, but there have been some recent murders that put Deena on edge. And things get a lot worse when it becomes clear that she's being targeted by the killer.

Written by both Brandon and Ryan, and directed by Brandon, Night Of The Reaper is decent enough until it becomes a bit more than that in a fun finale. It's a shame that it feels a bit too tame and bloodless for the majority of the runtime, but a couple of decent moments near the end try to make up for that. This is more about making use of familiar slasher movie tropes (including, of course, the babysitter in peril, which is handled well in an enjoyably tense opening sequence) than it is about delivering loads of kills and carnage.

Clement is a decent young lead, and she works well in her scenes with her young onscreen charge. The two of them feel absolutely convincing in the babysitter/babysittee relationship depicted. Robbins also does well as the desperate Sheriff, Matty Finochio is a good fit for the role of Officer Butch Cassidy (yes, that is the name given to them), and Keegan Connor Tracy is a welcome addition in the role of Elizabeth Talbot.

The emphasis is always on building things up (be it the tension, the suspect pool, or the obstacles placed en route to the expected climax), but the Christensens just about deliver enough pay-off to make it all worthwhile. I think they could still have gone a little further when finally leaning into the fun factor and bloodshed.

An enjoyable way to pass the time, and there's certainly a good dollop of spooky atmosphere throughout, Night Of The Reaper should do enough to keep horror fans happy. Those wanting something with that classic "old school" vibe, however, will probably still do best to simply (re)visit one of the many lesser slasher movie entries from the halcyon days of the sub-genre.

6/10

Friday, 3 October 2025

Frankie Freako (2024)

If you were a horror fan in the 1980s then you saw at least one VHS featuring some small creatures causing havoc. There were a couple of big hits, of course, but also many lesser-seen films that worked just as well for those working their way through the genre rental choices. I'm not going to start naming them. You know them. I know them. Steven Kostanski, the writer-director of Frankie Freako definitely knows them. And this is his attempt to make a fun little film that can easily sit alongside them.

Conor Sweeney stars as Conor, a workaholic yuppie who seems incapable of letting his hair down and having any fun. It's the 1980s, which would surely be the ideal time for workaholic yuppies to have some fun, but Conor seems to be the exception to the rule, much to the frustration of his wife, Kristina (Kristy Wordsworth). Left on his own for a couple of days, but planning to do some extra work for his boss, Mr. Buechler (Adam Brooks), Conor is tempted to call a party hotline that puts him in touch with the titular Frankie Freako. That's when Frankie and co. end up in his home, bringing a big dose of anarchy and destruction with them.

Incredibly silly and over the top from start to finish, Frankie Freako is also pretty perfect in achieving what it sets out to achieve. It feels like a film that could have easily been released in that mini-critter boom time between the late '80s and early '90s, and those who have the same nostalgic fondness for them that I do will find that this really hits a sweet spot.

The only real downside is the acting of the humans, but even that feels on par with what we used to put up with in these films. I wouldn't rush to call out anyone as bad, but they're all delivering very deliberately heightened performances. Sweeney plays his character so stiff that he could be 90% starch, which adds to the fun when Frankie and co. start to cause mayhem for him. Brooks is amusing as the standard boss with misdeeds to be covered up, and his name is a nod to one of the great practical effects maestros, John Carl Buechler. Wordsworth may have very little to do, but she's fine in her role, and gets to show a different side to her character before the end credits roll.

The puppets are the stars though, and they're delightful. Full of character, yet also amusingly "lo-fi" and limited in what they can do, Brooks uses a lot of the standard tricks we've seen many times before to keep them moving around as the camera tries to obscure their obvious limitations. There are three main characters to enjoy, but one sequence eventually shows us a few more, and they're very much related to some other creatures I would label "children of John Carl Buechler".

You will already have an idea about whether or not this is for you. I admit that I'd hoped for a bit more mayhem, and maybe some more modern spins on old ideas, but I soon settled in to enjoy the ride when I understood that this didn't want to reinvent anything. It just wanted to emulate the kind of film that we've not really seen for a good few decades now. Viewed in that way, it's an absolute success. Those who don't see the appeal in the concept should stay away though.

7/10

Thursday, 2 October 2025

Clown In A Cornfield (2025)

When it comes to movie titles, Clown In A Cornfield is probably up there with Snakes On A Plane when it comes to something that succinctly explains the film, yet also sounds a bit ridiculous. That's pretty much where the similarity ends. Despite how you might feel about the title, Clown In A Cornfield is a surprisingly straightforward slasher movie that makes use of well-known genre trappings and, of course, the pervasiveness of coulrophobia that has only been exacerbated by horror icons such as Pennywise, the Killer Klowns (from outer space), and Art.

Quinn Maybrook (Katie Douglas) is the new girl in town, having been forcibly relocated with her father, Dr. Glenn Maybrook (Aaron Abrams), after the death of her mother. It isn't long until Quinn makes some friends, but they may not be the best people to hang around with. They seem okay to Quinn though, and are able to give her the background on the town, and the background on a mascot named Frendo the Clown, before everything starts getting quite bloody.

Based upon the novel by Adam Cesare (and there are also a few sequels that may end up being adapted after this delivered a decent return on such a relatively small budget), this was written by Carter Blanchard and director Eli Craig, who both do well enough to make the most of the imagery conjured up by the title, as well as the expected slasher movie deaths. There's a sense of fun throughout most of the film, although the ending eventually grinds to a halt for viewers to sit through the big reveal that gives us a sadly grounded explanation for all of the mayhem.

Douglas is a decent lead, but the rest of the younger cast members alongside her - Carson MacCormac, Vincent Muller, Cassandra Potenza, Verity Marks, Ayo Solanke, etc - don't make much of an impression. In fact, I wish we'd had more screentime for the grown-ups, including Abrams, Kevin Durand, and Will Sasso. That divide between the old and the young is where the best stuff lies, in between the set-pieces that have clowns murdering their victims anyway.

It's all good fun without ever being great, but I could easily rewatch this and not be too bored. I'd also check out any sequels we may get. It's just a shame that Craig didn't decide to lean even further into the horror. This keeps things light and fun, which makes sense considering Craig's filmography, but also holds back on the gags. That ultimately gives viewers something too tame to be a great slasher and too restrained to be a great comedic horror.

I AM tempted to read the book series now though, and I'm sure that's a good result for Cesare.

6/10

Wednesday, 1 October 2025

Prime Time: Castle Freak (2020)

I'm not going to try to tell you that the original Castle Freak was any kind of classic. Nor am I going to try and tell you that it was tasteful and full of effective scares. It was a fun time though, helped by performances from a couple of well-known leads and the fine directorial instincts of Stuart Gordon. This remake, in comparison, is a bit shambolic.

Rebecca (Clair Catherine) and John (Jake Horowitz) are the young couple who move into the castle with a dark secret. Rebecca is blind, John is struggling to live a clean life. Their relationship is strained, and it's about to be strained further by the secrets contained within the castle. Some other people join our leads, a creature creeps around and kills some of them, and the whole thing leads to a very silly finale, and tiresome post-credits sting that references another Gordon horror movie.

This is only the second feature from director Tate Steinsiek, who has spent years working in the art and special effects departments. The lack of experience shines through, with almost every scene highlighting the low budget and the weak cast. Unsurprisingly, there are some decent effects here and there, to be expected from someone who knows that side of things so well, but I defy anyone to watch this and actually care about any of the characters or the storyline.

Kathy Charles may or may not have been pleased to have this as her first feature writing credit (she would do much better in collaboration with others on her next project, Jakob's Wife), but this feels like more of an assignment than any passion project. Every item on the list must be checked off (Lovecraft references - check, gratuitous nudity - check, clumsy exposition - check, people being oblivious to the real danger until it's ready to disembowel them - check, etc) and it would be laughable if it didn't feel so lazy.

Neither Catherine nor Horowitz do a very good job, sadly, and there's nobody else to help distract from their relatively poor performances. Emily Sweet seems to be there for her willingness to be involved in the main nude scene, Chris Galust is frankly appalling in a role that was crying out to be performed by a genre legend cameo, and the only other person I want to mention is Kika Magalhães, who at least tries her best to carry the movie with the many scenes revolving around her character.

It just goes to show you that people can make very different things with the same sets of ingredients. Some may view this and think it's on a par with the original film, considering how schlocky and grubby that one seemed at times. Others, like myself, will simply point to it as a prime example of what happens when you provide a fairly low budget to people who don't have the experience to rise above it.

3/10

Tuesday, 30 September 2025

One Battle After Another (2025)

At the start of One Battle After Another, the main character, Pat (played by Leonardo DiCaprio), is shown helping to free immigrants from a detention centre. He is part of a revolutionary group, The French 75, but it's soon revealed that he became part of the cause because of his love for Perfidia Beverly Hills (Teyana Taylor). The group make a powerful enemy in Col. Steven J. Lockjaw (Sean Penn), but the Colonel also becomes immediately infatuated with Perfidia. Things go wrong, years pass by, and Pat is now going by the name of Bob, and is now raising his daughter, Willa (Chase Infiniti) as a single father. He's often busy drinking or smoking weed, and he's paranoid about the past catching up with him. Being paranoid doesn't mean he's wrong though. The past soon starts catching up with him, and Lockjaw uses all of the military resources at his disposal to target Willa.

Before I get into some of the substance of the film, I'll mention all of the main cast members. DiCaprio gives another performance that taps into his talent for comedy, although it's different from the comedy he's done in other movies from the past decade. He's a burnt-out loser, but he at least had one or two shining moments in his past. Infiniti is so great in her first film role that I wouldn't hesitate to call this a star-making turn. And as for Penn, he gives what could well be his best turn in a very long time, somehow making his character buffoon-ish, but also constantly dangerous and threatening. Taylor makes a hell of an impression in her role, as powerful and majestic as she needs to be, and there's also time for brilliant work from Regina Hall and Benicio del Toro, the latter a calm and smart operator nicely juxtaposed alongside the frantic shambling of DiCaprio.

The tenth narrative feature film from writer-director Paul Thomas Anderson, and his second developed (loosely?) from source material written by Thomas Pynchon, One Battle After Another shows a film-maker absolutely confident in his abilities to juggle tone, explore some interesting themes in complex ways, and deliver moments of cinematic joy. This is a long film, the runtime is 161 minutes, but anyone who finds it pressing the right buttons for them won't be bothered. In fact, I was happy to spend as much time as possible revelling in this mix of madness and mayhem.

Despite taking a hell of a long time to finally get to the screen, Anderson had wanted to make this for years, this is a film that feels very much of the here and now. It shows the huge divide between the strong and the vulnerable, shows the ripple effect emanating out from acts of political violence, and also takes time to show that those with the real power and money will ultimately do their utmost to seek ideals of racial purity that would be laughable if it wasn't so deadly. While Anderson appears to plant his own flag very much in territory that would try to fend off the likes of Lockjaw and co., he has both a protagonist and an antagonist who end up as extremists due to dishonest motivations. But whatever the reasons, when you make major decisions based on either love or hate then you have to deal with the repercussions of those decisions for the rest of your life. It's not enough to be an occasional tourist in the kind of lives that we're shown. Commitment is necessary, for better or worse.

Taking time to let us know all of the main players, and the stakes, Anderson then has fun with a premise that keeps the characters constantly on the move. Accompanied by another great Johnny Greenwood score, there's an ongoing pursuit of our addled hero, gorgeous Michael Bauman cinematography and camera moves that you'd expect (although it never feels as if it is calling attention to itself), and at least one cracking car chase sequence in the third act. I've seen many rush to praise Anderson for his ability to handle action though, and I would warn potential viewers not to expect too much. But when you do get some unadulterated adrenalin-pumping moments then, oh boy, it IS good stuff indeed.

The more I think about One Battle After Another, the more I am impressed that the end result feels so completely satisfying. This is a film that features both pratfalls and a sequence showing Americans being executed by military personnel, it has horrible racists shown to be as absurd as they are deadly, and it paints a bleak picture of modern American scenarios we can see unfolding on the news daily while somehow also pointing out the characters and tactics that should give us some optimism.

I came away from this first viewing thinking that I really REALLY liked it, but didn't think it was quite the masterpiece some were already calling it. I'm already not so sure about that, and I can see myself considering this another slice of cinematic perfection from PTA whenever I get around to a rewatch, which I could happily indulge in right now.

9/10

Monday, 29 September 2025

Mubi Monday: Moon (2024)

Sarah (Florentina Holzinger) is a former MMA/cage-fighter who is looking to make a living from personal training. Things aren't looking too good for the future of her career, but that looks set to change when she's made an offer to work for a rich family in the Middle East. She can make some good money doing what she loves, but it soon becomes clear that the young women she has been hired to train aren't all that interested in learning exercises and fitness.

Written and directed by Kurdwin Ayub, an Iraq-born film-maker who has been making features for about a decade now, Moon is a low-key and intriguing film that keeps viewers fairly comfortable until things start to close in around the main characters. But that's all down to the distractions provided by Ayub. Because these are characters who are closed in from the very first time that they're put together. Moon looks at complicity, it looks at the systems put in place by powerful people to maintain control of the environment, and the people, around them, and it looks at ways in which desperate people can struggle to fully convey their situation to others.

Ayub does as much with the dialogue as she does with what's unsaid. Glances between characters tell of necessarily silent communications. People with everything they could apparently ever want yearn for some of the simple mod-cons that we all take for granted (such as wi-fi and mobile phones). Are we being shown a paradise or a prison, and how much does the distinction matter for those who are observing as an outsider?

While there's a very good supporting cast here, with the main young women to be trained by Sarah played by Celina Sarhan, Andria Tayeh, and Nagham Abu Baker, Holzinger holds the screen in a way that keeps you focused on her situation, and keeps you right alongside her as she slowly starts to figure out the full complexity of her situation. Sarah is the confounded visitor, and Holzinger portrays her as someone walking a tightrope between sensing something not being quite right and hoping to do enough to keep earning her pay, which may mean looking elsewhere to avoid certain truths.

Ayub looks at a specific situation here, but it's another case of something specific being used to show something that many others can identify with, whether that is the need many women feel to always be ready to defend themselves and physically fight off danger or the various bad situations that are allowed to continue because too many people do nothing to help, either because of fear or because of how much they can benefit from those in power. This has face-to-face personal interactions in every scene, but could easily be a comment on the many politicians and business leaders who rarely keep human rights and personal freedoms as a priority ahead of business deals and ambitious international ventures.

8/10

Sunday, 28 September 2025

Netflix And Chill: The Thursday Murder Club (2025)

Okay, let me state this very clearly from the beginning, books and movies are very different things. You have to accept that they just cannot deliver the same experience. Liberties need to be taken when it comes to adapting something from the page to the screen. Having said that, I believe I made a mistake in rushing to read The Thursday Murder Club, a very successful murder mystery novel that started the lucrative fiction writer phase of Richard Osman's long and healthy career in the world of media and entertainment.

Let's get to the film anyway, and what it gets right. The Thursday Murder Club is set in a fairly luxurious retirement home, in which a few residents work together to see if they can find solutions to various cold cases. The club used to include an ex-PC named Penny (Susan Kirkby), but she is currently barely hanging on to life in the hospice wing. The main members are now Elizabeth (Helen Mirren), Ron (Pierce Brosnan), Ibrahim (Ben Kingsley), and, relative newcomer, Joyce (Celia Imrie). Each brings their own set of skills to the group, but Elizabeth appears to be the one with a past that has her most prepared for anything that can be thrown at them. And what ends up thrown at them is a new murder, a lot of suspects who seem very bleeding obvious, and ties between the past and present that recontextualize friendships and relationships. Oh, and then there's another murder.

Turned into screenplay form by Katy Brand and Suzanne Heathcote, The Thursday Murder Club would seem to be a hard film to get wrong. Chris Columbus is in the director's chair. The cast includes the four leads just mentioned, as well as Naomi Ackie and Daniel Mays as a couple of investigating officers, Henry Lloyd-Hughes and Tom Ellis as younger men who find themselves entangled in the creeping spiderwebs that the murder creates, and Jonathan Pryce, David Tennant, Geoff Bell, Paul Freeman, Ruth Sheen, and Richard E. Grant. It's a real pick 'n' mix of delightful performances.

So why does it feel like such a slog?

The dialogue generally works well, helped by the fact that it's being delivered by people who feel almost perfect in their roles (let's just not mention the accent that Brosnan uses), but the mystery feels half-baked and hard to care about. Having said this, I wonder if I feel that way because I just read the book. While I still stand by my opening statement, there are choices here that feel very odd, including a detail revealed in the very opening scenes that is actually held back in the book until a finale that shows all of the pieces finally falling into place. I can understand some things being omitted, one other plot strand would have required the runtime to have at least 5-10 minutes add on to what already pushes up close to the 2-hour mark, but that just makes it a bizarre experience for those who know the material well enough to know that certain characters and moments are only being hinted at while never being given the time and attention that they deserve.

Both the direction and writing feel trapped by a prison of their own design. They're either too beholden to the book, or they make strange decisions to veer away from elements that could have made the film a much more rewarding experience, for both readers and non-readers alike. And, as much as I complain about it as a new standard, would anyone be bothered if the runtime had been just over, instead of just under, two hours? Those ten extra minutes could have given us a very brief overview of two whole other lives, and those whole other lives feed into the main themes of aging, regret, and the repercussions of different choices made at crucial junctures.

Still, it's easy enough to forget the many mistakes and mis-steps made here when any scene revolves around Imrie having a twinkle in her eye and Mirren having a glint in hers. The cosy and easygoing feel of the whole thing will certainly appeal to those after something that feels like the movie equivalent of a comfortable pair of slippers. I just wish we'd been given nicer slippers. Slippers that stay warm and comfortable for the duration. Not the cheap kind that fall apart after one month of regular use.

5/10

Saturday, 27 September 2025

Shudder Saturday: Medusa (2022)

There's a lot going on in Medusa, but it can be easy to think otherwise as strands are stretched out throughout the 132-minute runtime. I'm also going to start this review by saying that I'm only, as ever, providing my own interpretation of the thing. Others may get something very different from it, and I would love to hear from anyone who has a different view on the whole thing.

Mari Oliveira plays Mariana, a young woman who is part of a religious group that believes in confrontational action. They sing nice songs and dress up for formal events, but the evenings can be spent looking for "sinners" they can attack and frighten into apparently seeing the error of their ways. One of those attacks went too far though, even by Mariana's standards, and there's a whole lot of guilt to be dealt with and questions to be answered. Sometimes Mariana tries to discuss the situation with Michele (Lara Tremouroux), but it's hard to really communicate with people who are keeping themselves permanently ready to receive the words of Pastor Guilherme (Thiago Fragoso).

The second feature directed by Anita Rocha da Silveira, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Éri Sarmet, what you get here is a fantastic melting pot of ideas being explored. The push and pull, and hypocrisy, of organised religion is one, but also the ways in which those unsettled by their own feelings can take out their frustration on others, and it's surely no coincidence that all of the women onscreen are still caught up in a structure that has a man in charge of the whole thing.

The screenplay is helped by composer Bernardo Uzeda and cinematographer Joäo Atala, as well as editor Marilla Moraes, while Da Silveira has the main characters weaving between neon lights and dark alleyways, from grim reality to surreal visions, all tied to the constant ebb and flow of their own self-confidence and perception.

Oliveira is fantastic in the lead role, able to handle the toughness and complexity of the material. Tremouroux may have a slightly easier job, but she does just as well. It's also essential to mention Bruna Linzmeyer, playing Melissa, a woman who didn't submit to the onslaught when confronted by the religious mob. Melissa may be recovering from major injuries somewhere, and her absence has a big impact on the characters. Fragoso does well with his scenes, and Felipe Frazão makes a strong enough impression to throw another spanner in the works.

Calling to mind some other fine directors, Da Silveira makes use of some gorgeous and memorable imagery, some impressively grotesque body horror, and a lot of the danger and tension that comes from simply being a woman in a world that is still very dangerous for, and scared of, them. Some will find this too bizarre, and I certainly wouldn’t label it as a horror movie ahead of a social commentary piece, but it’s quite brilliant, and I appreciated it even more while mulling it all over for this review.

8/10

Friday, 26 September 2025

On Falling (2024)

I know that I am part of the problem. There are many of us who will already know this. Convenience and low cost has taken precedence over everything, locking us in to a spiral of consumerism as the algorithm continues to monitor what we might like, or need, at any given moment. Meanwhile, the workers who have to work harder, for low wage, to meet our needs continue to be locked in their own situation, one of exhaustion, isolation, and disappointingly low wages. I could be talking about a big company like Amazon, but let's assume that I am on about any company that keeps huge amounts of stock in vast warehouses where staff are constantly timed as they aim to fulfil orders.

On Falling stars Joana Santos as Aurora, a young woman working for a big company that keeps huge amounts of stock in vast warehouses. She spends her time picking orders and then simply existing in a home that she shares with others in a similar situation. There are moments of happiness, but they're snatched in between the many hours of exhaustion, isolation, and relative poverty.

The first feature from writer-director Laura Carreira, who has already given us a few shorts looking at the struggles of individuals trying to maintain a work-life balance while also ensuring they have enough money to live, this is a timely reminder of the real price of the convenience, choice, and budget options offered by online shopping. It may seem as if nothing much happens, but the main character has a lot going on beneath the surface as she continues to spend her time tied to a job she would obviously rather not be doing. Which is the way of things for so many of us.

Santos is fantastic as Aurora, emanating a sadness and loneliness even during the moments that have her smiling or interacting with others. She's going through the motions during many scenes, and her performance is so good that you can almost see every thought running through her mind as she wanders around on auto-pilot while at work. While nobody else stands out, that's more to do with Santos being so riveting in her role. There are others onscreen, with both Inês Vaz and Piotr Sikora doing very good work, but every scene revolves around Santos, who works through a full range of emotions with great skill and grace, allowing Carreira to easily show the correlation between Aurora's environment and her headspace.

There are obvious similar films I could point to here (particularly a couple of well-known Ken Loach features), but it feels like a disservice to make too many comparisons. Ths is a look at a modern life that sketches out a painful kind of limbo in something akin to pointillism. Every small detail is another reminder of the dire situation, every little distraction undermined by the encroaching dark clouds. It's the kind of life in which a very busy and demanding day at work doesn't lead to any pay increase or substantial bonus . . . it's a choice from some chocolate bars laid out in the office. And yet, thankfully, Carreira makes all of this clear without making the whole thing unrelentingly grim and unwatchable for viewers.

8/10

Thursday, 25 September 2025

Kickboxer 3: The Art Of War (1992)

If you're as equal parts bemused and angered by the burning dumpster fire of the world around us then you can seek to find answers in many different places. Art can be one of those places. Films can often provide insight into human nature while maintaining a comforting layer of artifice. Sometimes there are answers, but sometimes it's just enough to see other people struggling with the same questions that we all have. Oh, and sometimes you need to escape reality by watching people kick each other in the face. Kickboxer 3: The Art Of War is here for those who need that last option.

I watched this a couple of weeks ago, and spoke about it on my podcast, but I am not going to pretend that it made any strong impression on me. It was fun though, a distraction that I was happy to experience ahead of numerous, more sophisticated, alternatives. I knew what I was in for, considering I also recently enjoyed Kickboxer 2: The Road Back, and it gave me what I wanted, more or less.

Sasha Mitchell is back in the role of David Sloan, and Dennis Chan returns as Xian. The two characters end up in another country, and it's not long until there's the opportunity for some fighting to happen. There's a man named Lane (Richard Comar) who wants to present audiences with an impressive spectacle, but Lane might have his fingers in some other business interests that make him a lot less pleasant and accommodating than he appears.

Kickboxer 3: The Art Of War is very silly stuff. Dennis A. Pratt may not be the best writer, and Rick King isn't a top-notch director, but both do enough to make this a fun and entertaining, if tame, action movie. There's a crime ring to be busted, some youngsters to be protected, and (of course) faces to be kicked.

Mitchell has a bit more fun this time around, due to the fact that the screenplay isn't trying to add extra weight and importance to the fighting (beyond allowing our hero to be heroic), and Chan also seems even more playful than he was in the previous movies. Noah Verduzco and Alethea Miranda are there to be threatened by the villain, which they do, and Comar does well in a role that is the best in the film. His character is atypical when compared to so many other action movie villains, and that's something I will credit to both the writing from Pratt and Comar's performance.

I admit that before being reminded of the existence of this film I had completely forgotten how many sequels Kickboxer has. Now I'm ready to eventually get through them all, especially when needing a face-kicking distraction from the madness of the real world.

6/10

Wednesday, 24 September 2025

Prime Time: The Client (1994)

Susan Sarandon, Tommy Lee Jones, Brad Renfro, Mary-Louise Parker, Anthony LaPaglia, J. T. Walsh, Anthony Edwards, Will Patton, Bradley Whitford, Anthony Heald, Kim Coates, William H. Macy, Ossie Davis, William Sanderson, and Dan Castellaneta. That list of names covers almost everyone you might recognise in yet another John Grisham adaptation making use of a stacked cast and a star director. The star director this time around is Joel Schumacher, which allows The Client to feel like a pleasingly different beast to the Grisham-based blockbusters of the previous year.

Brad Renfro plays Mark Sway, a young boy who ends up in the wrong place at the wrong time. There's a man about to kill himself, but he decides to confess one or two disturbing details to Mark before he does the deed. This puts Mark in a very difficult position when the DA figures that they can use his testimony to take down a powerful crime family. Trying to figure out how to avoid getting his family, and himself, killed, as well as avoiding any charges himself for obstruction of justice or perjury, Mark ends up hiring an attorney named Reggie Love (Sarandon). Reggie wants to do her best by Mark, but Mark expects all attorneys to be untrustworthy and manipulative. Like the team headed up by Roy Foltrigg (Tommy Lee Jones).

Adapted from page to screen by Akiva Goldsman and Robert Getchell, The Client is a decent mix of legalese and standard thrills, especially in the second half. The premise is very familiar, but the fact that the main witness is a street-smart kid who automatically distrusts most adults helps to make it a bit more compelling than many other films in the same vein. It also helps that Renfro is so good in his first film role (and he would build up one hell of an interesting filmography before his untimely death in 2008).

It's easy to forget how good Schumacher could be at the old directing lark, especially when his more memorable works aren't always memorable for the right reasons, but, like it or not, he would often let his directing style be dictated by the material. This is a restrained and straightforward tale (well . . . compared to some other Schumacher films anyway) and he treats it just so.

LaPaglia isn't restrained though. Neither are Coates or Patton. They're almost ridiculous in how the act around the young lead at times, but that adds some fun to what could have otherwise been a bit too dull and earnest. The heart of the film is Renfro and Sarandon, and both work so well together that they make it hard to be critical of the fact that Jones, Parker, Edwards, Davis, and a number of other great talents have relatively little screentime. That's not really a problem for Jones anyway, who can make use of the smallest amount of screentime to create an unforgettably strong impression, and every one of the supporting players benefits from the glow reflected from the stars shining as brightly as possible.

I wouldn't be disappointed if I never watched The Client again, but I certainly wasn't disappointed to spend a couple of hours rewatching it this week. All I could remember about it were the leads and how well they worked together, which turns out to still be the most memorable thing about it. It's a perfectly enjoyable and polished thriller, but it doesn't do enough to be anything more than that.

7/10

Tuesday, 23 September 2025

Summer Of 69 (2025)

I know this may seem like a strange thing to say, especially coming from someone as far away from their teen years as I am now, but there have been some absolutely fantastic teen comedies released over the past few years. One or two have been noticed, but a couple of them seem to have been sadly overlooked or ignored. Incoming is one that I tried to bring some attention to a few months ago. Summer Of 69 is the one I am recommending today.

As the school year comes to an end, Abby (Sam Morelos) decides that it's time to get what she wants. And what she wants is Max (Matt Cornett). She figures she can get Max by giving him what he wants, which is the sexual pleasure of a 69, apparently. The only problem is that Abby is not experienced in sexual matters, at all. So she hires a stripper/escort (Santa Monica, played by Chloe Fineman) who she believes can teach her all she needs to know. She's going to offer $20,000, which will give Santa Monica the money she needs to stop her workplace being sold to a sleazy new owner (Charlie Day).

The feature directorial debut of Jillian Bell, who has spent most of her career in a variety of comedy roles in films covering an entire range from awful to great, Summer Of 69 has a great cast of characters, a load of references to other teen movies (and, considering the main premise, it has particular fun with Risky Business moments), and, most importantly, plenty of laughs. Bell also co-wrote the screenplay with Jules Byrne and Liz Nico, and the end result is a very clever use of teen movie tropes to create that strangely brilliant blend of the lewd and the sweet that some of the best teen movies have.

The cast all help a lot, particularly Morelos in the lead role. She may not have been in the business long, relatively speaking, but this is the kind of performance that should have her actively pursued by those wanting to make use of her comedic skills. She's great at delivering the dialogue, keeping a straight face in the middle of a load of absurdity (the film has her character often disappearing into daydreams as she considers her plans), and fully committing to the moments that are all about physical comedy as her awkwardness clashes against her attempts to learn how to be sexy. Fineman is very good alongside Morelos, and she's allowed to be a mix of strong exterior and vulnerable interior, allowing her to embody the standard teacher who also has to learn a lesson or two of her own. Cornett is allowed to play his desirable male without being a complete pig, helped by the fact that he spends most of the movie unaware of how Abby feels about him. Day is a lot of fun as a sleazy pig, Paula Pell is very funny as Betty Spaghetti, Natalie Morales is decent as a woman who seems to be everything that Santa Monica isn't, and Fernando Carsa is very amusing and entertaining as someone who can offer advice to everyone at the school while he's hidden underneath a large team mascot outfit.

I smiled all the way through this, even though here were some minor things I could pick at (look, I'm not being a perv, but it's strange to see films that feature strippers, or a strip club, in so many scenes without having any of the strippers actually looking as if they take their tops off . . . but that's what you get when the film isn't all about indulging the male gaze, which is as understandable as it is unbelievable). The 101-minute runtime feels perfect, the soundtrack has some excellent choices (including a track at the end of the film that references another classic teen movie), and it's heartwarming to see the lessons being learned by the two leads, especially when viewers are often one or two steps ahead of them.

I really cannot think of who would dislike this. It has clever gags, it has clever dumb gags, it has an entertaining ebb and flow between sexual honesty and naivety, and Morelos and Fineman work as well together as any other two comedy leads I can think of. Get to it when you want a good laugh. If you end up disappointed then I'll throw out my fluffy animal costume and refrain from offering any more movie advice to those who metaphorically sit down beside me.

9/10

Monday, 22 September 2025

Mubi Monday: The Wrestler (2008)

I'm pretty sure I have said this when reviewing every other Darren Aronofsky movie, but it's pretty safe to assume that nobody has ever taught him the meaning of the word subtle. You can get a lot from his movies, but subtlety is nowhere to be seen.

The Wrestler is the story of Randy 'The Ram' Robinson (Mickey Rourke), a wrestler who is battling age and his aches and pains to keep making a living that might afford him a very basic life. He is quite smitten with Cassidy (Marisa Tomei), a stripper who is pretty much in the same situation. As he tries to take a step away from the wrestling ring, perhaps also rebuilding some bridges with his daughter, Stephanie (Evan Rachel Wood), Randy struggles to live a life without that rush he gets when playing to the crowd.

Written by Robert Siegel, who has built up an impressive selection of projects inspired by real events and characters, The Wrestler is an impressive character study that is as hard to watch as it should be. Randy seems to be someone that truly believes he is best in the ring, but also may believe that the injuries and the bloodshed are all very much due to him. There's sometimes a huge difference between the man inside the ring and the man outside of it, but trouble happens when Randy blurs elements of his two different personalities.

Aronofsky makes the most of a very committed leading performance from Rourke, and he keeps the camera close and intimate for many of the interactions between his lead and the other people in his life. He also gets up close in the ring, especially when showing a couple of the tricks used to sell the hits and the wounds, but remembers to move around enough to show the crowd and the bright lights.

Enough has been said already about what an amazing turn this is from Rourke, so I'll just say that I agree with all of the praise he received for this. The fact that both Tomei and Wood acquit themselves so well alongside him, particularly without feeling that they have to overact or shout to hold your attention, says everything you should need to know about their performances. Both have done consistently great work over the years, but both find just the right way to be believable and impressive in roles that could have easily been overshadowed by the large shadow cast by Rourke.

While it's very much about the life of a wrestler, and the toll that can take on the human body, this is also a film about anyone who has given their all to something, even as the rewards seem to dwindle while the losses grow. That might be a hobby, a trade, a sport, a relationship, or even a standard career. We don't always get back what we put in to things, but sometimes the crumbs that can be scavenged are as temporarily satisfying as the most sumptuous feast. Even as the dinner table starts to look more and more like it's being prepared for a last supper.

9/10

Sunday, 21 September 2025

Netflix And Chill: The Wrong Paris (2025)

Once I'd finished watching The Wrong Paris, I checked out a few of the credits. I was unsurprised to see that director Janeen Damian has a filmography that lists a lot of producing credits on Christmas TV movies, and her previous two features were two of the Lindsay Lohan movies made as part of her Netflix deal. The Wrong Paris is a film that should have been given the Christmas wrapping. It's absolutely on par with many other films in that vein, albeit with a few compromises made to some more modern sensibilities, and it's another Netflix film that feels like what it is, content.

Miranda Cosgrove plays Dawn, a young Texan woman who hopes to travel to Paris and study at an art school there. She has been saving up for that dream for years, but recently had to spend the majority of her money on some medical expenses incurred by ger grandmother, Birdie (Frances Fisher). Her sister, Emily (Emilija Baranac), convinces her that she should audition for a TV show called "The Honeypot" (think of The Bachelor and you're close enough). It's even going to be set in Paris . . . Texas. After the disappointment of realising that she's still a long way from France, Dawn figures that passing a couple of the main challenges could get her enough money to help boost her savings. So Dawn joins the show and starts to act as if she really doesn't want to be there, as per her aim. But things change when she starts to have very obvious chemistry with the handsome "prize" of the show, Trey McAllen (Pierson Fodé).

Cosgrove is a decent lead, although she's served better by the comedy moments when her character isn't interested in being in the show than when she has to resort to the typical loved-up act. Fodé has clearly based his character entirely around his abs, and he supports those abs with enough charm and warmth to make himself seem worthy of being a TV show prize. Yvonne Orji does well as Rachel, a producer on the show who is often the only one aware of the reason for Dawn's behaviour, and Madison Pettis convinces as the main competitor, Lexi, an online influencer who knows the best way to play to the cameras and potentially win the show. Elsewhere, Christin Park, Madeleine Arthur, and Veronica Long are fun contestants, and both Fisher and Baranac are perfectly fine in their few main scenes.

Damian directs with a degree of competence, but no desire to lift the film above anything other than a mild distraction. Nothing feels believable once we get to the show being produced, and there are too few moments making use of the language of "reality TV". It's all just about pairing up the leads, keeping them together for a while, presenting a seemingly-insurmountable obstacle, and then having things ready for a finale that will satisfy those who picked this to revel in the cheesiness and romance.

Writer Nicole Henrich has one other writing credit before this (something tagged as both comedy and documentary online, and I cannot find out anything else about it), but this is their first solo effort. They have an idea of the template, as we all do, but they don't have any idea about how to really season their everyday recipe.

I won't hate on this, despite not really enjoying it. Cosgrove and Fodé feel like a decent match, and that helps a lot. It's not good though, unless you're just after something to play in the background as you switch your brain off and relax. Hey, maybe that is the point. In fact, we KNOW that is how some of these Netflix features are planned. It's just not always so painfully obvious and tiresome.

3/10