Month: February 2024

Madame Web (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: Cassandra Webb is a New York City paramedic who starts to show signs of plot convenient-clairvoyance.

I was supposed to watch this a week earlier, but I was unable to go down to the cinema due to a random bout of sickness. Now I’ve not only recovered from illness but have managed to catch this at the cinema I can finally say…

I miss the days when I was ill.

Going to start by saying this; Madame Web is not as bad as Morbius. Morbius had absolutely nothing going for it. MW at least has one GORGEOUS shot, sets something up for the future (which now probably won’t happen), and ends with a Cranberries song. I mean, the rest of the film is dogshit though.

I actually went into this knowing it would be terrible. I don’t think that affected my viewpoint though. I mean, I went into Ghostbusters: Afterlife having only seen negative reviews, and that won me over. Conversely, I went into Wolf expecting it to be great and that………was not. It wasn’t just the early reviews that caused me to think this, it was the trailer too. The trailer said absolutely nothing about who this character is, or why we should bother paying for a ticket to see her movie.

I don’t get how Sony decided that THIS was the movie they wanted to release. They picked the screenwriters of Morbius FFS. How does that make sense? “Hey, these two people wrote one of the worst movies of all time, let’s hire them again”. The plot is DUMB, the dialogue is some of the worst I’ve ever seen, and the characters are badly written. It feels like it was written by AI; nobody speaks or behaves like an actual human. Nothing really has consequences. Cassie is thought to have kidnapped the children, so she has to hide out with the teens to avoid suspicion. All standard so far. But there’s not really a reason for people to believe that. There were witnesses to the police being attacked by the villain, and all it would have taken was one of the multiple police officers on the scene to radio in “It’s a man in a Spider costume”. At least one person would have seen the villain get off the moving train too. They also would have seen him pace down the train whilst angrily staring at the teens. The kidnapping (which happens during working hours), is later reported in that day’s newspapers. You know, newspapers are famous for 3pm printings and distributions, everybody loves picking up a newspaper on the way home from work instead of in the morning. That’s such an easy problem to fix too, just show it on a TV screen. It only seems to be done via newspaper so the film can get a daily bugle reference in.

Usually when I’m writing a script I go through one draft where I delete the names and see if I can figure out who is who just by character actions and dialogue. You could not do that with MW. Characters change personalities from scene to scene, going from nervous and bookish, scared of drawing attention to themselves, to dancing on the table in a diner (completely sober).

The song that woman is dancing to? Toxic by Britney Spears. A song which wasn’t released until January 2004, in a film set in 2003. Why is it set in 2003? No idea. I’ve heard rumours it’s so they could tie it into the Andrew Garfield films, then the Tom Holland ones, then realised none of those timelines work. I’m not entirely sure I would believe that, but it would back up the absolute clusterfuck that is this movie. It being set in 2003 adds nothing. I suppose you could argue it means that you can use Uncle Ben as a living character. I mean, him being Uncle Ben adds NOTHING, if anything it makes Spider-Man a worse character, as it means he likely based himself on the supervillain from this film. All the 2003 setting adds is weirdness, especially in terms of music. It’s not just “that song wasn’t out yet”, it sometimes goes too far the other way, using too many songs from the 80s and 90s. I don’t think many radio stations in 2003 would play the 1987 Tiffany song I Think We’re Alone Now early in the morning. It doesn’t feel very 2003, and unlike the Spider-Verse soundtrack, it doesn’t feel very New York. Except for a Yeah Yeah Yeahs song near the start, it’s the most generic soundtrack outside of royalty-free music. That’s not the most offensive part of the audio though; it feels like a lot of Tahar Rahim’s dialogue was rerecorded in post-production. Sometimes it’s not as noticeable, his mouth being obscured, but then there are some times when the dialogue doesn’t match his mouth movements at all. That’s not just bad, that’s a failing grade at film school.

MW doesn’t even have the decency to look good, it overdoes the swoopy 180 shot. Some of the action scenes are incomprehensible in terms of staging and choreography. That being said, there is one PERFECT shot; a car quickly drives away, turning as it does so. The shot is a standard “snow gets kicked up into the air by a speeding tyre”, but with broken glass. It looks absolutely stunning and may be one of my favourite shots of the year. But other than that? It’s like a glass of cloudy lemonade left for four days; it’s murky, it’s flat, and it’s ugly.

So that’s established that the script is shit, the directing is shit, and the sound is shit, what of the performances? Sydney Sweeney, Isabella Merced and Celeste O’Connor are good and I would like to see a full-length Spider-Women movie featuring them (just with a different director and screenwriter). That’s actually my main takeaway from this; it was a trailer for a film that will now never be mad. I don’t know how much Emma Roberts was paid but considering her level of stardom it was undoubtedly too much for how little she’s in it. Adam Scott is fun, but again, isn’t in it enough to really be memorable. So, no issues with casting there.

Dakota Johnson is fucking terrible though.

American Fiction (2023) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Monk is a frustrated novelist who’s fed up with the establishment that profits from Black entertainment that relies on tired and offensive tropes. To prove his point, he uses a pen name to write an outlandish Black book of his own, a book that propels him to the heart of hypocrisy and the madness he claims to disdain.

This is astounding. I’m leading with that, not because I’m going to be nitpicking and pointing out flaws in this so I wanted to remind you that I did actually like this, but because that’s the message I need you to know first. This was another secret screening, so nobody in the screening knew what it would be. I also haven’t seen a single advert for it being played, so it can’t really be argued to be eagerly anticipated by an audience. From speaking to people in the foyer, the general consensus was that it would be Argylle. So instead of something that had an extensive marketing campaign built around it, something that people were excited to see (note, this was before the early reviews came in so people were still excited about Argylle), they were met with a film that most of them didn’t know. Then to top it off, the first scene is an unsubtle racially charged explosion of sweary dialogue, the kind of moment which will put a lot of people off, yet nobody left.

I commend Cord Jefferson for leading with that scene, as it will weed out audiences who won’t like the film anyway. There’s no attempt to ease them in, AF lays out its themes and societal frustrations from the outset, not so much asking you questions as shouting them at your face.

It is depressing that this film is still relevant today, in a world in which a lot of people will loudly say “There’s no racism anymore”. Whilst there’s indeed less (definitely not “none”) open racism in modern society, it is definitely still there. It’s why people describe Idris Elba as “too urban” to play James Bond, or why the mere existence of a black man in an advert for a supermarket led to multiple people saying they’re boycotting the shop.

You may think a film dealing with race would be a somewhat dour affair, but it also deals with Alzheimer’s, sudden sibling death, and homophobia (in regards to his brother Cliff). Those moments are beautiful though. The death comes from nowhere and doesn’t form a shadow over the movie, but it is always in the back of your head when it comes to character actions and motivations. The other two bits combine in one of the most heartbreaking moments; Cliff is dancing with his mother (who he is out to), and she randomly says “I always knew you weren’t a queer”. Cliff (played WONDERFULLY) by Sterling K. Brown just breaks, he doesn’t need to say anything, you can read all the pain on his face. That pain is doubled in another scene where he speaks about how he regrets never coming out to his dad, he feels that his father died not knowing the real him. There is so much going on in the background of this, every character feels fleshed out and real. You could easily do spin-offs for most of the characters in American Fiction. Crucially, it doesn’t feel like their journeys are centred around the protagonist, they are all floating around in their own orbit, occasionally meeting in the same area.

It’s not all sad, it’s also HILARIOUS. Monks frustration at how he he feels stereotypical “Black” literature is dehumanising and false leads to some brilliant dialogue. He is essentially the sane man in a world gone crazy, but he’s still not entirely sane. It’s the most Larry David I’ve seen a character outside of Curb. Only a Larry David who accidentally Springtime For Hitlers himself. It all feels real too. Even the relationship aspect feels true, the fact that the argument isn’t resolved feels fresh, they had a massive fight, that shit isn’t fixed quickly.

In summary, this is my favourite film of the year so far, and it’s going to take something truly special to displace it from its place at the top. So much about it works, the dialogue is damn near perfect. The story is believable (although some may not like the directions it takes at the end), and the performances are damn fine. It feels weird to say this about an actor with as many awards as he has, but the world really is sleeping on Sterling K Brown. Jeffrey Wright is the true star though, this is the best he’s ever been, and considering how good he’s been in other things, that says a lot.

Lift (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: A group of thieves plan to steal $500million a shit load of gold from a dickhead.

Palestine, Ukraine, economic turmoil, in these trying and confusing times it can be nice to have something to ground yourself, something that you can hold onto that you know is real. So thank Netflix for bringing us Lift and providing us with an undeniable truth; some films are utter shit.

F. Gary Gray has a weird history as a director. Sometimes he brings us Friday or Straight Outta Compton, and sometimes he brings us Men In Black: International. Lift belongs more in the second camp. It’s so by the numbers it’s basically a children’s colouring book. When you watch it unfold you’re not surprised or entertained by anything. There are moments where you can guess what’s going to happen, not just in terms of narrative, but also in terms of action scenes and dialogue. Everything has been done before, and done better.

Lift even copies the stupid things from action movies. They do that usual chase scene thing of using the “make go fast” lever/button when it’s dramatically convenient rather than when it would have been best to use it. It feels like the writer took a bunch of modern buzzwords like “NFT” and “hackers”, and then got AI to write the script. It has the “yes they’re thieves, but they’re the good guys” BS that’s prevalent in a lot of similar stories, but they’re not really good. Yeah, they’re stealing art from dickheads, but they’re doing it entirely for selfish reasons. Also, I’m calling BS on the “we’re the best thieves in the world” claim as the police know every single member of the crew. Not just names, but also their roles within the organisation, their addresses, and their contact details.

I’m also not entirely sure WHY it had to be this group of misfits who helped get the MacGuffin back. The movie states “We legally can’t get the gold because the transaction itself is legal”. But Interpol plans on taking the gold once it’s been retrieved. By doing that, they wouldn’t be able to do anything with it EXCEPT return the gold to the first person, who will then just make the deal again.

I don’t know enough about physics to call out the flight scenes as unrealistic, but even I know enough to doubt the scene where one of the planes flies upside down steadily for an extended period of time. I’m guessing there are more instances which will cause people’s heads to explode, but that was the most obvious. I do know enough to know that planes flying over the English Channel don’t tend to need to be wary of mountains. There’s not really an extended mountain range in Folkestone or Margate.

The worst thing for me about those errors is how unnecessary they are. Just don’t mention the mountains, say “high winds”. Make up a different reason for the crew being needed (maybe they used to work for the Big Bad so have inside information etc). Use a heist method which doesn’t involve flying a jet upside down. All of those are easy fixes for unnecessary problems. The fact that these problems are all over the film like Bill Cosby on an unconscious woman raises concerns. Concerns that the scriptwriter either didn’t realise they were problems, didn’t care, or was told to put these problems in by the studio. Neither of these scenarios is good. It just adds up to the feeling that nobody involved in this plane crash of a movie gave a shit about making it the best movie they could. Nobody went in with the intention of bringing 100%, they just did what they were paid to do, and then left. Nobody cared, and that’s evident throughout.

A plane heist is a unique idea, and one that could be interesting to watch unfold. As it is, it’s hard to recommend something as lazy as this. If nobody involved is going to care about a film, then why should the audience? Billy Magnussen is dope as fuck though.

Argylle (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Reclusive writer Elly Conway finds herself in the middle of danger when it turns out her spy novels have started coming true.

Mystery and riddles are always good ways to sell a film. You provide a question, and people will want to answer it. You provide intrigue, and people will want to delve further into it. On the other hand, it can also kill a movie. Jennifers’ Body was marketed to appeal to the type of people the film wasn’t meant for and put off those who would have liked it. Argylle is the latest example of a film completely devalued by its marketing campaign. Firstly, it was built around “Who is Agent Argylle?”. The issue is, the type of people who would be intrigued by that are the kind of people who would use Google (well, duckduckgo as Google is pretty much useless at this point) and social media to work it out. If they did, then they’d have seen that the question was answered in the initial press release for the film back in 2021. The other issue I had with it was the line “From the twisted mind of Matthew Vaughn”, it’s a 12A. That pretty much guarantees you’re not going to get the violence that made him famous. So people go into this knowing that they’re going to get a lesser version of what could possibly be made.

There are definitely a few moments where the rating harms the experience. Some of the fight scenes sag when they should soar, the action not being creative enough to make up for the lack of blood. Intense fight scenes are normally the highlight of a Vaughn movie, but with Argylle they’re arguably the worst. There’s a smoke-filled scene near the end which is laughably bad. Nothing about that particular scene works except for possibly the colours. The choreography is poor, everything looks CGI, and the music choice is the wrong one. Note to directors; if you’re looking for an iconic piece of music to score an action scene, a Leona Lewis cover of a Snow Patrol song is never the right choice.

I mentioned the CGI earlier, I have to reiterate that it’s terrible. If someone told me that none of the actors in the film actually met each other and it was all filmed adhering to social distancing regulations, I wouldn’t be surprised.

There are a few things to like about it though. Some of the music choices are fun. It’s a good ensemble cast, and there are some very funny lines. The moments where she’s struggling to write so Henry Cavill’s character keeps restarting the scene are also fun.

But for everything to like about it, there are three things to dislike. There’s a moment in the middle where there is potential for an incredibly tense “she could be killed at any point in this scene” section, instead it’s over far too quickly. That sums up Argylle, great potential, completely wasted. Ironically, completely wasted would be the ideal way to watch this.

The Zone Of Interest (2023) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: In this drama written and directed by Jonathan Glazer, a couple (Rudolf Hoss and Sandra Huller) struggle to raise their children under the pressures of his work, that work? Commandant of a concentration camp.

The Zone Of Interest (Tzoi, pronounced Soy) is an important film. The holocaust is a strange and emotive subject. We are taught a lot about it, and the facts are discussed often in modern society. So, we learn a lot about it, but we don’t learn much FROM it. We don’t discuss how the Nazis used language specifically to dehumanise people so that the treatment of them was deemed more appropriate. If we did learn that lesson, we wouldn’t have politicians describing refugees as “vermin”. We don’t discuss how the citizens of Germany ignored what was going on for their own comfort. If we did, then we wouldn’t be okay with the government essentially making homelessness illegal by arresting anybody sleeping rough in the street. So we do need films like this, even in a time far removed from the events. We need something that shows how to some people it wasn’t a constant threat to their lives, it was just something that happened to other people. To some people involved, it wasn’t the most important part of their lives, it was just something they worked on to get a promotion. TZOI’s focus on the “banality of evil” is both its greatest strength and its biggest flaw. The fact that Glazer focuses so much on the mundane and regularness of the family is fascinating and incredibly harrowing. But lets face it, watching people do nothing for 105 minutes soon does become quite dull, that level of boring mundane stops being fascinating and starts becoming, well, boring and mundane.

A lot goes unsaid and happens in the background. But it could have done a slightly better job of pushing some of that to the front. I’m not asking to make it very obvious, but there are a few moments (particularly at the end) where a bit of clarification would have improved not only the understanding but also helped push through the idea and message that the film was trying to put forward.

Outside of the normality of Nazi life, there’s not really that much to it. It makes its point, and then continues to make that same point, never developing or adding to its themes. Once you’ve watched 5 minutes, really you’ve seen it all. In general, it leaves you with a hollow(caust) feeling, a realisation that this would have been far better as a short.

The worst realisation though? The fact that the people who need to learn the lessons from this is trying to teach, are the EXACT type of people who won’t watch a film like this. It’s essentially preaching to the converted.

It’s a shame, as this is at times fascinating, and depressingly real. It’s shot very realistically. Not like a documentary, with static shots and a set of people well aware they’re being filmed. It’s more like you’re an invisible witness to the goings-on. Sandra Huller continues to be one of those performers I now feel guilty for not paying attention to sooner. Christian Friedel as Rudolf Hoss is a revelation. His non-verbal reactions are key to the horrors TZOI contains. He is helped by the script giving him a lot to work with, there’s a moment near the end where he is so overcome with revulsion over his acts that he tries to vomit, but is unable to. It’s reminiscent of the (incredibly disturbing) documentary The Act Of Killing. There are lots of subtle moments which are equally horrifying (finding body parts in the river his family swim in, the soundtrack of slight screaming), but none have quite as much humanity as that moment does.

I do like how the ending shows that his legacy wasn’t as a great commander, but of the builder of one of the most horrific displays of humanity anybody has ever witnessed. His name is not sung in glorious tones but is instead spat out with disgust and hatred.

Like I said, there’s a lot to, well, not exactly “enjoy”, but appreciate. I just, I kind of wish it had bigger ambitions than “Art Student Film”.

The Beekeeper (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: After his friend Eloise kills herself in shame after being the victim of a phishing scam, Adam Clay goes on a roaring rampage of revenge.

If you like Jason Statham films, you’ll enjoy The Beekeeper. Actually, that’s incorrect, if you LOVE Jason Statham films, you’ll enjoy this. If you’re on the fence about him as a performer, this isn’t going to change your mind. It’s standard Statham-ware (Not Stathamwear of course, which is his fashionline). It’s actually got quite good reviews so far and I have to be honest; I don’t get it. I never really saw it get better than average. Nothing about it is memorable, not in a good way anyway. The action scenes really should be better. There are a few exceptions; the destruction of the call centre early on is deliciously cathartic, but those moments are few and far between. On the plus side, the action scenes are comprehensible, which is more than could be said for a lot of recent action films. Comprehensibility does not mean excitement though, I don’t find Humpty Dumpty exciting, even if I can understand it (it’s about breakfast, right?). As anyone who watched the first Suicide Squad movie can attest, as a director, Ayer knows how to create colourful shots. But he doesn’t know necessarily how to make them exciting. He just seems to think that adding purple neon makes a shot dynamic.

Similar accusations of laziness can be directed at the performances. It’s a weirdly talented cast; Minnie Driver, Phylicia Rashad, and Jeremy Irons. Performers like that should elevate the film and bring it up to a higher level. Instead, it feels like the film is dragging them down. For example, Statham does a weird not quite English/not quite American accent.

In their defence, the script doesn’t really give them much to work with. It’s hard to deliver a good performance when you have to give some of the worst dialogue ever committed to film. Some films improve when you think about them, this actually seems like it gets worse the more you think about it. Not in a “plot holes reveal themselves when you think about them” way, but for the events of this film to happen, certain things must have happened or will happen after the film ends. In this universe, “Beekeepers” is the name of an organisation of highly trained assassins who operate and kill with complete impunity from the law. I’m not quite sure how they’re funded, it possibly mentioned it but I stopped caring. But what makes it weird is the idea that their training library includes not only “How To Sneak Past Things” by “S.Tealth”, and “How To Fight” by “That Guy In The Pub Who Doesn’t Have Training But When He’s In The Zone You Totally Better Watch Out, Bro. fka. Keith”, but also “The Naked Apiarist; Elementry Mistakes In Beekeeping”. Statham’s character really commits to the bit, by actually keeping bees after he retires from the service. Weirdly enough, it’s only his beekeeping that alerts people to the organisation in the first place. If he stopped living the gimmick and started an alpaca farm, then the bad guys wouldn’t have had a clue how to identify him, so they wouldn’t have set so many highly trained killers on him.

I’d also like to see more of what happens after this film. It’s been revealed that the president’s son is behind a multinational operation that scams people’s life savings from them. and used that money to fund the election campaign. How would the world react to that? That’s the most interesting part of the story, and it’s not in the film itself.

In summary, an incredibly frustrating watch. If it was more in-depth and intelligent that would have allowed it to say something important about corruption and election funding. Although, in some ways, if it was trashier, that would improve it too. As it is, it’s stuck in this middle ground between shlock and serious, so just ends up shlerious, which isn’t a word. It does have one huge plus for it though; it genuinely is an incredibly effective way of teaching basic cyber security to those who aren’t that computer literate. Okay, all that lesson is is “don’t give your bank details to a stranger”, but you know, baby steps.

Do do do do do do

The Holdovers (2023) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: It’s 1970 and a New England boarding school sends it’s students and staff home except for Christmas, with the exception of classics professor Paul Hunham (Paul Giamatti), student Angus (Dominic Sessa), and greaving cafeteria worker Mary (Da’Vine Joy Randolph).

Normally, I start these reviews with an introduction, or sometimes just a weird wandering paragraph that’s very loosely tied into the themes (spoilers for my review of The Iron Claw, which is likely to start with a paragraph about Mulan). Today, I’m going to launch into it on the back of a single sentence:

I see in The Holdovers what everybody else sees in Wes Anderson. The time capsule nature approach to directing, the rapid-fire dialogue, and the general nostalgic feel to it. The main difference between this and Wes Anderson films is that I actually like The Holdovers. I like how it never breaks the 70’s immersion, even in the opening classification card. I’m sure there are a few anachronisms, I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the songs are actually modern indie. I like how funny the dialogue is. I like the performances, Giamatti continues to remind the world just how brilliant he can be, Da’Vine Joy Randolph provides a good foil with her warmth and humanity providing a contrast to the sarcastic misanthropy of Giamatti. The real revelation is Dominic Sessa. This is his first acting role but you wouldn’t guess. He easily holds his own against acting heavyweights. Time will tell if this leads to Sessa developing further, if he continues on this path he could genuinely become one of the best actors of this generation. That’s not an exaggeration by the way, if this is his first EVER performance, then who knows how far he could go. The big downside is he does look distractingly like an American James Acaster.

The thing that will stick with me the most about The Holdovers is just how utterly charming it all is. The whole thing feels incredibly real and relatable. The script is one of the most effortless of the year. It flows from one moment to the next with ease. Heartbreaking tales of loss and mental illness sit aside quick scenes involving frozen prostitutes. At times it feels like nothing is happening, but then you realise that so much is developing inside the minds of the characters. I did mention how good the dialogue is, but there is so much that happens when people say nothing. The unspoken conversations, the unsaid realisations, they’re all so powerful.

There are moments where it does feel like the film is pottering about a bit too much. Annoyingly, there are moments where it feels like it’s doing the opposite and moving on too quickly. There are numerous moments where the scenes fade out and I was disappointed because it didn’t feel like the scene was over. I wanted to see where the conversation was going to carry on to, or how people would react to what had just happened. On the other hand, there are scenes that reach their natural ending point, then continue to the point where it’s tiresome.

Some people won’t like it, they’ll find it dull, maybe a bit too nostalgic for a time that a lot of people don’t belong to, that a film focused entirely on privileged people isn’t something the world needs right now. But then again, sometimes it’s nice to have a distraction, something that’s not ABOUT anything, something that’s not important or out to change the world, something that exists simply as observation and storytelling. On those days, there will be few better options to watch than this. That being said, it is absolutely baffling that the studio decided to release it in the UK in late January, it’s clearly made to be watched in December. There was nothing really Christmas-ey out at cinemas in December (nothing that was new anyway), and it would have been nice to have the option to watch a new potential Christmas classic.

Poor Things (2023) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Bella Baxter is a young woman with the brain of a child, who goes on a journey of self/sexual discovery before her impending marriage.

I’ve been looking forward to this for a while, specifically, May 30th 2022, when I posted my review of On The Count Of Three, and mentioned that the two leads (Jerrod Carmichael and Christopher Abbot) will be sharing the screen in this. They didn’t actually share the screen at any point, but they are both vitally important to the plot in how they affect the lead character of Bella. Abbots’ character of Alfie Blessington is incredibly vile, one of the most despicable characters in modern cinema. It’s not just him though, the world of Poor Things is full of cruelty, abuse, and manipulation. It’s so cruel that it’s kind of uncomfortable to watch. The whole film is uncomfortable really. Bella’s sexual awakening is treated as a feminist story about her escaping the trappings of man and discovering herself. But considering she’s treated by men as the Ultimate Sexual Fantasy it’s kind of unsettling once you realise the implications. I mean, she has the mind of a child, clearly not understanding consent. There’s a lot of that, characters show their true selves not by how they act in public, but by how they treat Bella. There’s a fascinating “you’re defined by who you are in the dark” message, but it seems underdeveloped and like it’s not given enough care.

Something which was given care and love is the world that Lanthimos has created. It’s a visual masterpiece with ancient architecture and bright colours creating a real treat for the eyes. The skies in particular are breathtaking to watch, full of true beauty and wonder. The beauty of the visuals is matched by the performances. The aforementioned Abbot and Carmichael are great. Ruffalo is suitably pathetic, Dafoe brings his usual creepy energy, and Ramy Youssef is innocent but with dated notions of gender equality. But the real star is obviously Emma Stone. Most of the other performers could be replaced by someone similar, but only a handful of performers could bring what Stone does. It helps that she brings a tremendous physicality to the role. If she brings anything less than 100% she’d risk coming off (weirdly) as overacting. But because she throws herself completely into it, she’s believable, she does so much that she kind of feels grounded because “well nobody who was TRYING to be weird would do that”.

Now onto the downside, some of the music makes it difficult to pay attention. At times it’s so abrasive it feels like it doesn’t want you to be comfortable. I’m used to that when it comes to visuals, but uncomfortable sounds are different, it’s not just uncomfortable, it’s painful. It backs up my theory that sometimes Lanthimos doesn’t want you to like the film, and is actively hoping you’ll dislike it. It’s sometimes so weird that you can see it being off-putting to a lot of people. I wasn’t put off by the weirdness, but I was put off by how the script sometimes seemed to be made up as it was going along. At times it feels like it’s forgotten that it already made a point, and so makes it again in a slightly less effective way. There are a few things which feel like Chekovs Guns, but when they are eventually fired feel like a damp squib, like the writers realised “Oh shit, we set this thing up earlier, we need to pay it off quickly” and just had a quick line (as in, a line of dialogue, not cocaine).

It may be weird at times, but it does raise a lot of questions. Is it, as Samira Ahmed described it “a heterosexual middle-aged man’s fantasy about nymphomania, with the flimsiest covering of “satire” and a tagged-on message about female genital mutilation being “bad””, or is it as Leslie Felperin puts forward, just a tale of a woman “unburdened by any of the inhibitions women of her time would usually be tethered by, limiting their interests and ambitions”? Is it feminist? Misandrist? Misogynist? Or is it none of those things? That’s always up to interpretation, and no matter what you say about this film, you can’t say it’s boring and doesn’t inspire discussion. And sometimes that’s what you want from a film.

One Life (2023) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: The story of British humanitarian Nicholas Winton, who helped save hundreds of predominantly Jewish children from the Nazis on the eve of World War II.

Something I don’t hide particularly well is that I am in general quite a cynical person (probably due to living in the UK in the 2020s teaching me that nothing good ever happens), I’m also not a fan of predictability in cinema, plus there have been so many films about the second world war that, to be honest, I’m kind of bored of them. We get it, it was the last time Britain was important on a global stage, plus it’s one of the few examples of war where there was one side that was undeniably evil and unjustified, so it makes good cinema. But my word, I’m bored of seeing it on screen.

So you’d think I would not really be a fan of this. But I have to admit, it got me. You know how it ends, there are no twists or surprises, and everything is incredibly obvious. But it’s so well made that it’s still effective. I’m glad I saw this at the cinema as it meant I could confirm that it wasn’t just me, the whole cinema felt emotionally affected by it. When the film ended and the credits started to roll, nobody moved. Normally you get people who stand up to go pee or beat the traffic, but when this ended, everybody in the screening stayed seated for a good minute. There were no angry mutterings, or even excited chatter, the only sound was the distinctive sound of everybody trying to hide the fact they were crying.

He seems to be doing a lot of schlock lately (Armageddon Time, Zero Contact, Transformers etc), but when you see a performance like this, it reminds you that Anthony Hopkins is a phenomenal actor. When I saw the trailer, I thought it would be a case of Hopkins just appearing at the beginning and the end, with the bulk of the narrative being flashback, and as such, the younger version of the character. I’m glad that’s not the case, we’re given enough of present-day Nicholas Winton that Hopkins is given a lot to work with. Johnny Flynn as the younger version of Winton? He’s okay. He mainly suffers from two things which he can’t control. One is that he’s playing the younger version of a character played by Anthony Hopkins, and it’s constantly switching between the two which means that comparisons between the two are inevitable. It’s difficult to give a good performance when you’re being compared to one of the best actors of all time. The other comparison is more in his control, but I don’t blame anybody for not making the comparison; Harry Enfield’s character Tim Nice-But-Dim. Once I noticed the similarities in vocal cadence, it became hard to take it seriously.

The other performers are all fine, but they obviously pale in comparison to Hopkins. Helena Bonham Carter does what she needs to, but could be replaced by a cheaper performer without affecting it too much. Samantha Spiro does an almost pitch-perfect imitation of Esther Rantzen, but is only seen for a few minutes. To see the similarities, you do need to watch the original clip online, which is weird as I thought they would have played it during the credits. It’s standard to show real-life photos of characters in biographies, and it doesn’t do that for this, which is a bit weird.

This isn’t a perfect movie though. I’m not sure the story has enough legs to justify a nearly two-hour movie, there was just enough for a one-hour television episode. The predictability also harms it, and it’s not that interesting from a visual or audio perspective. From a technical standpoint, it feels like there’s a lot of “well this will do”. The actual operation feels kind of underbaked as well, with the story focusing on the people in Britain who are in no danger.

To summarise; this a hugely emotional experience. It’s a good reminder that the people being helped aren’t soldiers, politicians, or anybody who had a choice in the war or where they live. They were just children who were at constant risk of being arrested and executed just for existing in their current location or as their current ethnicity/religion. It’s impossible to comprehend something similar in modern society.

Unless you’re Ukrainian

or Palestinian

or….

2023 In Film: Day Ten (The Amazeballs)

On By troubledproductionsIn Year round upLeave a comment

Barbie

Ups: Very funny

Depressingly relevant

Creative

Unique look

Downs: The final third is a little messy.

A lot of the supporting actors are wasted.

It’s going to lead to studios learning the wrong lesson. They’re going to think “let’s make movies based on toys”, rather than “let’s have movies which are well written”.

Best Moment: America Ferrara’s monologue about womanhood. Absolute perfection.

Worst Moment: The chase scene in the office is a bit drab.

Best Performer: Ryan Gosling. Robbie is good, but if she didn’t have Gosling to bounce off, it wouldn’t work.

Opening: Essentially 2001: A Space Odyssey but with Barbie instead of a monolith, showcasing how she was the first doll that wasn’t a baby. The kids respond to this by throwing away their old dolls. Somehow, this was described in at least one review/commentator as “children say they want to kill all babies and then massacre them”.

Closing: Barbie goes to a gynaecologist. Again, some reviewers misconstrued this scene and said it was her “getting a sex change/having an abortion”. This is why media literacy is important, it stops idiots. It could have ended slightly more powerfully than it does, but it works.

Best Line: The aforementioned monologue.

Original Review here

Bottoms

Ups: Hilarious.

In your face.

Fun performances.

Downs: They never really feel like outcasts. They say “We’re at the bottom” but it never feels like it.

More could be done to set up the school rivalry.

The dickhead jocks never get their comeuppance

The use of music at some points could be better

Best Moment: The final fight. Violent, stylistic brilliance.

Worst Moment: The falling out between the characters feels a little fake.

Best Performer: Ruby Cruz

Opening: The main characters at a fair. Sets up their characters well enough, gets some jokes out the way quickly too.

Closing: A tree bomb explodes, disappointing a local goth who is displeased about the gimmick infringement. Such a hilarious coda.

Best Line: “Let’s do terrorism”

Original Review here

Godzilla Minus One:

Ups: Visually stunning.

Has a purpose.

Mature.

Godzilla is terrifying.

Compelling story.

Downs: Bit too unsubtle.

There are a few moments where the effects are a bit too “man in suit”.

Hard to see it appealing to casual movie-goers

Best Moment: The attack on Ginza. Especially when it ends on a nuclear explosion.

Worst Moment: Shikishima receives a telegram, only because it kind of telegraphs the ending.

Best Performer: Ryunosuke Kamiki.

Opening: Godzilla attacks an island. I like that we got to see him early, and the scene is BRUTAL. This is not a monster who is aiming for balance etc, this is one that wants to kill humans.

Closing: Godzilla flesh starts to mutate. I really hope we get a sequel.

Best Line: Is your war finally over?

Original Review here

John Wick: Chapter 4

Ups: Some great fight scenes.

Donnie F’ing Yen

Keanu Reeves continues to kill it.

Good world-building

Downs: Bit too long.

Requires you to remember too much from the previous films.

Lacking “THAT” scene.

Best Moment: John in a hotel. Mainly because of how it’s weirdly shot and I loved it. Was like a video game at times.

Worst Moment: The Continental being destroyed could have been done better.

Best Performer: Keanu Reeves

Opening: John travels to Morocco and kills the elder. Unless you’ve seen (and can remember) the previous films; this meant nothing.

Closing: It ends the only way it could. The place it’s been heading to since the first film.

Best Line: “You arrogant asshole”.

Original Review here

Missing

Ups: Very original idea.

Ties into Searching brilliantly.

Incredible twists and turns.

Great performances.

Rewards a second viewing

Downs: The gimmick will be hated by some people.

Best Moment: The twist, it’s so good.

Worst Moment: There’s a death which seems out of place.

Best Performer: Storm Reid

Opening: Camera footage of a 6-year-old June with her father James, who died shortly after the video was made. Very good, and when you learn the context later, so much better.

Closing: The story has been adapted into a Netflix show. Weirdly funny and feels so true.

Original Review here

Past Lives

Ups: Very sweet.

If you let yourself into it, it opens itself up to you beautifully.

Stunning shots.

The leads have great chemistry.

Downs: Might be a bit too slow for some.

Not much happens.

Best Moment: The diner scene, it says so much about the relationship between the three.

Worst Moment: The title drop, seems like it was only there to get the title in.

Best Performer: Teo Yoo

Opening: The two main characters meet as children before leaving each other. Very sweet.

Closing: Essentially “we’ll see what happens in the next life”.

Best Line: You make my world so much bigger and I’m wondering if I do the same for you?

Original Review here

Polite Society

Ups: Great twist

Fun fight scenes.

Likeable characters

Good performances

Downs: The twist may put people off

As good as the stunt scenes are, there are none that stand out as “best scene ever”

Best Moment: Torture wax.

Worst Moment: The school fight scene might be a bit too silly for some.

Best Performer: Priya Kansara

Opening: She introduces herself, fun, and gets her character across well.

Closing: Not saying, the entire final third of this is a huge head-fuck, I love it.

Best Line: The gods whispered to the warrior, ‘You will not withstand the fury.’ The warrior whispers back, ‘I am the fury!’

Original Review here

Spider-Man: Across The Spider-Verse

Ups: The animation.

Best use of the multiverse in cinema this year (ordinarily that would be damning with faint praise, but lately?)

Has one of the best villains in superhero movie history

The different Spider-men are all great

Emotional

Downs: The soundtrack isn’t as memorable as the first one.

Ends on a cliffhanger

The studio treated the animators like dicks apparently.

Best Moment: The explanation of canon events.

Worst Moment: About 5 minutes from the end where you realise they don’t have enough time to wrap the stories up.

Best Performer: Shameik Moore.

Opening: Gwen Stacy fights a version of the Vulture from a universe made to look like an Italian Renaissance painting. Visually interesting, and very cool. But some people might have preferred it to start with Spider-Man

Closing: Miles is in trouble, and Gwen is establishing a team.

Best Line: Almost everything Hobie said

Original Review here