Cold Storage (2026) Review

Quick synopsis: Two employees of a self-storage facility have to deal with an escaping parasitic fungus. Shit gets wild.

Thoughts going in: I get the feeling Liam Neeson is going to die very early on. This was incorrect, by the way.

You don’t get enough films like Cold Storage. Films which are dumb fun without being stupid. Yes, there is a difference. Dumb means its just fun, not intended to have a deeper meaning or be too interested in plot twists and wrongfooting the audience. Stupid is when characters change personalities based solely on what the story needs; there’s no consistency in villain weakness, or everything is just too convenient. Cold storage is firmly in the “fun” category. It does occasionally get close to stupid, but the general tone allows it to do things I’d insult other films for.

The best example comes in the opening scene. There’s a character called Dr Hero. Most films, I’d insult that, but for this, it kind of works. The tone is so tongue-in-cheek you can swear it’s searching for an ulcer. It’s helped by the music. Lots of high-tempo songs to get the blood pumping, from Blondie, all the way through to a cover of Don’t Fear The Reaper. The performances are good too. Obviously, Liam Neeson, Vanessa Redgrave, and Leslie Manville are good performers; that’s not a shock to anybody. It’s been said before, but Neeson is great at comedy. Leslie Manville has done comedy before, but it’s usually been sitcoms or farce; this is a completely different ballgame, and she nails it. Georgina Campbell is the best performer throughout, but she is responsible for the worst line delivery of the movie. When she realises Neeson’s character set off the bomb before handing it to them, her “he set the bomb off” delivery sounds flatter than a freshly ironed shirt. It brings to mind someone saying, “My landlord, and my plumber are both here. And I don’t have the money to pay them”, in a low-budget porn. I get the feeling it was ADR’d, it certainly sounds like it, and it’s a weird blemish on an otherwise sensational performance.

I also wasn’t happy with the way this movie ended. What’s worse is I could sense it coming. I knew we’d get the “there’s still an infected creature out there” opening, and I knew it would end up with something either jumping at the screen, or exploding, or something similar, where it’s a split-second THING before credits. It’s a trend in modern horror movies, and I hate it. You wouldn’t write an atmospheric horror novel, have an incredibly well-crafted conclusion, then have the final line be “Emily sat down in peace, drifting into a peaceful slumber. AND THEN A SHREK ATE HER!” It would ruin the atmosphere, destroy the story you were telling, and get you sued by DreamWorks.

Those are minor complaints, though. Cold Storage is one of the most outright fun films of the year. It’s incredibly funny at times, a lot slicker than its budget would suggest, and has a script full of likeable and believable characters. It reminds me of Shaun Of The Dead, mixed with slight Kingsman energy. It’s only Johnny Campbell’s second film as a director, his first being Alien Autopsy. He’s most known for his TV work, directing two episodes of Doctor Who that could not be more different from each other: The Vampires Of Venice, and whatever the Van Gogh one was called. This has more in common with the vampire episode than it does the Van Gogh one, with emphasis on scares (with a small “S”) and shlock than emotion. That’s for the best, as emotion has no place in a film like this. If anything, it would just slow things down.

Which brings me onto the pacing. Cold Storage is efficient as hell; setting up the fungus very quickly. The opening scene could be a short film on its own. Fun fact: the part about a parasite that takes over an animals brain and makes it climb high so that the parasite can be released over a wider area? That’s accurate, and is why I’m deeply suspicious of mountain climbers. It feels longer than 99 minutes, but that’s only because of how much it gets done in such a short space of time. It juggles so many characters, so even characters with only a few minutes screentime have clear motivations and character arcs.

I won’t say this is among the best films of 2026, but it is one of the least flawed. Yes, it never reaches greatness, but it also doesn’t make too many mistakes. In the buffet of cinema, this is a lasagne. Not going to be the best meal you’ve eaten, but you’ll enjoy it more than you would most.

Whistle (2025) Review

Quick synopsis: Terror strikes when a group of misfit high-school students discovers an ancient death whistle.

Thoughts going in: Saw this the same day I watched Cold Storage, and Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die. I knew this would be the one I enjoyed least.

It may not seem like it, but I do genuinely love horror movies. I’m getting that out of the way now, because I did not like this. It had too many moments which annoyed me. The most obvious one was the use of music. Horror movies have a long history of music use, probably more than any other genre as a whole. But it has to be done a certain way. During the early 2000’s, it was standard for horror soundtracks to consist of nu metal tracks, whether it suited it or not. This resulted in a weirdly high number of deaths set to the songs of Ill Nino or Spineshank, which tonally didn’t work as there was no atmosphere. This does something similar; there are at least two deaths which are accompanied by what sounds like the start of a metal/hip hop song. This makes it seem like the deaths are supposed to be “cool”. The songs don’t even lead anywhere, so it’s not as though they build into the next scene where we find characters listening to the song. It also felt weird to have a character who was portrayed as a dark, brooding gothic teen, and have her accompanied by an Olivia Rodrigo track. That’s not a slight against the big O, I love her stuff, but it doesn’t suit the character as much as the movie thinks it does.

It’s a shame that one of the deaths is so badly soundtracked, as that death is otherwise pretty good. The deaths are unique here, with the characters being killed by what would have killed them later. Kind of. Some, the ones which are disease/age-based have the disease rapidly develop, so it is that which still kills them. Then there are some where it just injures the body in the same way; so a car crash victim is thrown into the air by an invisible force. The disease death happens almost instantly, whereas the accident deaths seem to happen in real-time. So there’s a kind of inconsistency which harms the internal logic.

Speaking of logic: a scene in a hospital establishes that a teenager who died was identified by the coroner as being in his late 40s. So the coroner was handed a body of someone who died in mysterious and unexplained circumstances (he burst into flames in the shower), you’ve been told that the deceased was a 17-year-old athlete, yet in your analysis, you discover that the body in front of you actually belongs to a man in his late 40s. Would that not be a big deal? Would that not get reported? At the very least, there’d be a conspiracy theory about it. Yes, you could make the argument that the town covered it up. But if that’s the case, the coroner wouldn’t note the age in his report; he’d list the body as 17. Also, the staff at the school haven’t taken a vow of silence about it, because the teacher has zero idea either, being equally confused at the death whistle.

The way the town reacts is weird: it doesn’t. A star basketball player dies mysteriously, and the school barely acknowledges it. They don’t even clean out his locker. You could say “but the whistle magically transported itself back into his locker”. 1) That’s lazy writing. 2) Why did it wait six months? Why not transport to another locker straight away? 3) Unless it also packed lunch and schoolwork, that’s demonstrably false.

I looked at the user reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and saw some which called it “agenda-driven propaganda”. Which made me think I watched the wrong movie. Then I remembered the main character is a gay woman who ends up in a relationship with another girl. It’s weird to hate this film for that, considering there are many other reasons to hate it. Plus, that relationship provided some of the best parts. Dafne Keen and Sophie Nelisse have a naturally sapphic chemistry when they share the screen. It’s badly written, though. They fall in love far too quickly, and it means Chrys seem kind of callous when she appears to be unbothered by the death of her cousin, but completely crushed by the harm potentially coming to a girl she’s known for roughly two days. You can’t deny their chemistry, though, and I’d love to see the two of them work together again in a standard romantic drama/comedy.

Anything else positive? It constantly flirts with good concepts, but then turns away from them. Characters hitting future versions of themselves, which causes physical harm to their current self? Smart. Those same people continuing to fire a gun at future versions of themselves, even after they’re aware of what’s happening? Less smart. Death skipping you if you die, then come back to life? Smart, albeit a rehash of Final Destination. Being able to “pass death” onto someone else if they touch your blood? Also smart (but the way it’s done in this is done in a way that absolves them of responsibility, because you can’t have morally complex characters). Using BOTH of these at the end? Feels like overkill.

In summary, some good ideas, but the script is nowhere near good enough to make the most of those ideas. Also, can we call for an end to horror movies doing the “creepy character crawling unnaturally” thing? It’s overused to the point of annoyance. The image at the top of the screen may make it seem like an 80’s throwback, but this is very much a film of the 2020’s, for better or worse.

The Moment (2026) Review

Quick Synopsis: As her arena tour debut looms, a pop star finds herself caught inside the afterglow of a breakout summer under the mounting pressure of what it costs to stay on top.

Thoughts/Opinions going in: I’m the only male in the audience, and I’m a good 10 years older than everybody else, this is unsettling.

I’m not a huge fan of the Bohemian Rhapsody movie. Not just because of the editing, or its somewhat creative approach to band history. My main issue is that it feels more like a film about Queen than it does a Queen film. Visually, it’s incredibly bland, with none of the excitement and overbombastic nature that you’d associate with the band. That wasn’t as big an issue until I watched Rocketman, which felt very much like an Elton John movie, change the scripts, etc., and make that a film about Bob Dylan, it wouldn’t work. That’s how I felt about The Moment. The way it’s edited, the colour scheme, it all combines to create something authentic. It’s what I imagine being at her gigs is like.

That approach won’t work for everybody, though. There will be people who find it too loud, too busy, too obnoxious. Those are valid criticisms, but I feel that the people who make them aren’t the target audience for this anyway. I get the feeling that Charli XCX, as well as the director Aidan Zamiri, are not only aware of how off-putting this film can be, they’re counting on it. A running theme is how Charli is determined to stick to her vision, not compromising for the comfort of others. It’s a huge part of what she wants her live show to be. So it makes sense that the film would be the same. So whilst a lot of criticisms can be levied at this film, you can never say it’s inauthentic.

There’s another thing that helps the authentic feeling; it feels like a documentary. Other mockumentaries make the mistake of shooting things that no documentary filmmakers would show: either it’s too slick, it’s the kind of thing where the subject would tell them to turn the camera off, or it’s too personal, and they end up shooting people in bed going to sleep, or waking up. Every single shot in The Moment, you can see why a documentary would film and show it. The realism does hold it back in some aspects, though: the satire doesn’t bite quite as hard as it could, seeming content with teasing nibbles (yes, I did double check I put B’s, not P’s there). There are times when characters motivations aren’t completely clear. And the incident which changes her mind on how to approach the tour feels too low-key, it would be like watching an action hero where the hero decides to finally go after the villain because they ate a life-affirming slice of bread.

As I said, that will put people off slightly. As the closing credits rolled, I saw a lot of “as herself”, full of people I didn’t know. Most of them just passed me by, so it wasn’t an issue, but there’s one that was involved in a core plot point. Again, I’m not the target audience, and I’m certain the target audience would recognise them. So I can’t really hold that against it too much. But there’s an easy fix. The Moment is made to look like a documentary, and what do a lot of documentaries have? Information on the screen telling you who people are. Not something overly obnoxious, just plain text. Like I said, a small issue, and it won’t affect most of the audience: that’s judging by the reaction from the other people in the screening.

I didn’t love this movie, but I did appreciate it. As a film, it’s good. As a showcase for the personality of Charli, it’s superb. It also kind of feels like therapy for her, and it’s hard to begrudge her that.