Author: troubledproductions

Twisters (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: Haunted by a past encounter with extreme weather conditions, Kate is tempted back into tornado chasing in an attempt to prove her method of disintegrating dangerous tornados will work.

Let’s say you were on a date with someone. The two of you have been messaging for a while and there have been a few moments where their actions could be misconstrued as rude and/or abusive but you felt “I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt”. There’s an undeniable spark between the two so you decide to meet. You sit at the restaurant waiting for them, it’s exciting and you’re nervous. They suddenly appear out of nowhere spinning a circle whilst operating a chainsaw, nearly decapitating you and forcing you to jump away at the last second to avoid getting hurt. For whatever reason, you continue the date. On the journey home they stop the car to let some ducks cross the road, and then pull someone out of a burning car. The next day you get a text from your friend asking how it went. Are you going to respond “Oh it was great, they were so cute and saved someone’s life”, or are you going to respond “They nearly killed me with a chainsaw, fucking sociopath”? The odds are that it will be the second. Once someone nearly kills you with their arrogance and stupidity, it’s hard to overcome that initial “what the fuck is their problem?” feeling, and it will taint every action they do from that point on. I mention that because in Twisters, the kind-of sequel to the 1996 “Oh yeah that film existed, and made a lot of money” disaster Funtime flick Twister, very early on in their interactions we witness Glen Powell’s character Tyler Owens nearly run Kate (a fantastic Daisy Edgar-Jones) and Javi (Anthony Ramos) off the road whilst they’re all chasing a tornado. It’s very easy to see how those actions could have killed those characters. After that, it’s hard to buy him as a romantic lead or someone to root for.

That’s a shame, if they cut out those 3-seconds of almost vehicular manslaughter then Twisters would work a lot better than it does. It’s a much better film than you’d assume it would be. The tornado scenes are incredible to look at, giving you a true sense of the damage they can cause. People who have never seen a tornado may think, “It’s just a bit of wind, just put some Blu-Tack on your shoes and you’ll be fine”. Twisters does a fantastic job of showing why that’s stupid (beyond how expensive Blu-Tack is now), they are destructive forces of nature that arrive, fuck shit up completely, and then leave. That is never more felt than in the opening scene, which introduces a group of dynamic and loveable (plus incredibly smart) teens who it looks like could anchor this film, and then kills almost all of them. It possibly could have done a slightly better job of showing the destruction that flying debris can cause, most of the danger does seem to come from being sucked off.

Some of the dialogue does come off a bit weird. There’s a lot of talk about how “weather has changed a lot and become more dangerous lately” but no discussion as to why. Like it’s so scared about upsetting certain (American) people that it dares not utter the words “Climate Change”. Other than that weird omission, the conversations feel real. That’s because the characters do too. Oddly, there didn’t seem to be any characters from the original movie here at all, I didn’t even see any mention of them. I don’t mind that though as I don’t remember that much from the original, at one point a cow went wooosh. So I think it’s probably for the best that this doesn’t go full “Look kids, it’s the person from the original! Applaud!”, although it does feel like there is one character who was written with “let’s see if we can get Helen Hunt to come back” in mind.

I appreciate how they didn’t dumb the science down. The characters are all supposed to be intelligent and experienced in the field of tornados, so if they were talking to each other they wouldn’t dumb it down. Why would they? They wouldn’t explain the basics, they would talk as if everybody in the room already knows, because odds are they would. Most films wouldn’t do that, they’d write it to get the audience to understand it, which means the characters would be speaking like nobody with their expertise would talk to their peers.

To summarise; a surprisingly good experience, that’s completely tainted by a few seconds of character stupidity that makes it hard to truly love. That moment lingers over the film far too heavily to forget it. Which is a genuine shame, I haven’t witnessed a more damaging three-second incident since [paternity suit pending].

The End We Start From (2023) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: After floods decimate the UK, a new mother does her best to find a safe space for her and her child.

I watched this in the middle of summer, and you’d think a film about torrential rainfall wouldn’t make sense to be watched in the summer. Ordinarily, you’d be right, but you’ve forgotten one thing; I live in England. I’ve spoken before about how the external atmosphere can affect the film-watching experience (I am wondering if part of my disdain for how Oculus ended was because the cinema turned the lights on early), but watching this in a weirdly wet summer definitely changed it, was like having surround sound.

The End We Start From (TEWSF, pronounced Two-soff) sets its genius relatively early on, having the scenes of her giving birth be intercut with scenes of her house being flooded. This is both smart and an obvious thing to do, but obvious like “having cheese on pizza instead of boiled foot dust” is obvious, in that if you did otherwise it would be weird. I do have some issues with the opening section though. It has her husband (referred to as R, and played brilliantly by Joel Fry) be away. With that, you’d assume the story would be about the two of them trying to reach each other. But then he just appears at the hospital after she’s given birth, so his not being in the opening didn’t affect the plot. It’s peculiar when you consider they get separated again. So their on-screen chemistry feels very stop-start. Ordinarily, I’d say “Keep them separated until the end so when the two meet again it feels special”, but that would be a stupid thing to do as it would rob TEWSF of a key scene; the one where R’s parents die. We know one dies but aren’t told anything about how or why until a few scenes later, and when you find out, damn it’s brutal, so, damn, brutal. It all feels real too. COVID taught us a lot (For example; that you should wash your hands after peeing, and that you shouldn’t sneeze directly on people. Both of which are things that apparently needed teaching), but the most sobering thought (so sobering it drives me to drink) was that people are dicks. They need to go to Ladbrokes even if it does kill the person behind the counter who’s forced to work even whilst sick.

I kind of wish we saw more of the world the film takes place in, most of what we see is just the universe surrounding the main character (Jodie Comer, credited as Woman). Much like AQP: DP, it all happens so quickly and the character isn’t at the centre of it. We do see a few other people, but only sporadically. It’s essentially a road movie where we only see the pit stops. As such, we feel like we’re in a weird purgatory where the character spends a lot of time in various places but none long enough to let the audience feel grounded and like we’re getting to know anybody. So much happens, but because they all feel like they have no impact, weirdly it seems like nothing happens.

That’s a shame as I would like to see more of some of the characters; partly as an excuse to see more Gina McKee and Katherine Waterston, especially Waterston who is always incredible. Of course, Comer is great, but that’s to be expected. I was surprised by how good Joey Fry is, I’ve only seen him in comedies, or acting alongside other sitcom actors. He more than holds his own in this. He’s surprisingly key to how this works. Considering it’s about a mother and a newborn child, you’d think it would contain a lot about modern femininity, and it does. But it also tackles masculinity, the feeling that if you’re not a provider then you are failing as a man.

It’s not just the people on screen, there’s a lot of talent behind the camera too. The music is mostly fitting, there is one part where it feels slightly too jaunty for what just happened, but otherwise, it’s dour and depressing. The visuals are sublime too, there are no gorgeous shots in it, but it’s not a movie for beauty, it’s about ugliness. Mahalia Belo has done a fantastic job of directing TEWSF. Even just the little moments are done as well as they could be. There’s a two-second shot of the television networks shutting down, that two seconds is creepier than most horror movies. Watching TEWSF is like wading through a murky puddle, but doing so in the middle of summer so that even when you are nearly stuck, you can still feel the warmth and have a small glimmer of hope of what’s coming.

In summary, it has flaws, but it’s incredibly powerful and definitely worth your time. Although I do question the logic of the main character crying so much during a flood; that’s just making it worse.

A Quiet Place: Day One (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: New York city comes under attack from an invading force of noise-hating aliens.

Longtime readers (or those who click this link here) will know that as much as I loved the first Quiet Place, the second one (A Quiet Place Two: Shhhhhh-it Happens) didn’t do as much for me. My biggest issue with it was the use of music. The first one used silence perfectly, to the point where it affected audiences watching it; the screening I was in had the quietest audience I’ve ever been a part of. The second one? It had music to set the tone, which meant it just felt like any other horror movie, and the effect of silence wasn’t as big as it could have been. That same issue plagues A Quiet Place: Day One (AQP: DO, pronounced Aquop-do), I’d actually argue it’s worse in this. In the start, the time before the attack? There it makes sense. In fact, the use of noise in that section is brilliant. There’s SOOOO much background sound that when it does turn silent it is a huge difference. The use of music does ruin it though, and lessens the impact of one of the closing scenes. Spoilers; this film ends with a character committing suicide by music by unplugging their headphones from a radio, thereby broadcasting music everywhere, ensuring their death. If there was NO music before that, the impact of that would be HUGE. But because we’ve heard music throughout the film, it doesn’t hit quite as hard as it could. There’s also not as big a difference in audio level between “music on headphones” and “music unplugged” as there could be.

There’s also one pretty big flaw with AQP: DO. It doesn’t feel like a prequel We see what life was like before the attack, and we have a character who was in the second movie. But other than that, there’s not that much of a difference between this and the other two in terms of what it does. There’s nothing here that could only be done in a prequel. No questions are answered, and because the main character passes out we don’t see that much of the initial panic.

There was a perfect opportunity to use this to find out more about the initial response, but we don’t get that. How do we know they hunt by sound? No idea, the film doesn’t tell us. How did politicians respond? We don’t know. What was the initial media reaction? We don’t know. Yes, communications do get cut out, but there would still be a few minutes/hours of social media reactions. But the most important question that goes unanswered: exactly how much hentai of the invading aliens was drawn before the world collapsed?

Other than that, the film itself is good. The characters are likeable. Lupita Nyong’o’s character (Samira) is beautifully written. She’s a terminal cancer patient so her character shows us something so far unexplored in this franchise; those who NEED civilization to survive. Those with illnesses that require medication, and those with health issues that mean they’re dependent on others. In an apocalypse situation there will be people like that, people who know that if people don’t turn against them now, they will when resources start getting depleted. It is seen in a somewhat more optimistic light than in The End We Start From (spoilers for that review), with Samira having a more “fuck it, let’s do this” attitude.

When the film does remember its gimmick, it’s brilliant. There’s a scene of Samira and Eric (played by Joseph Quinn) at a jazz club. The silence lends it a weird sense of intimacy which would otherwise be lacking. It’s one of the few moments of hope in an otherwise quite bleak experience (bleak in a good way).

That scene is helped by the performances of Nyong’o and Quinn. They play off each other very well. That’s probably for the best as most of the film is spent just with the two. For a film set in New York City, it does feel incredibly isolated in terms of other characters. We occasionally spend time in the company of others, but not that much. Everybody has found themselves groups to hang out in very quickly. We all know that if this did happen they’d be separate factions etc, none of that in here. Everybody just stays silent and moves as a group (except for the leads).

It is a pleasant surprise to see effective organisation though. The military quite quickly figured out a plan to send one helicopter to make a lot of noise in the city, and thus distract the aliens to allow another helicopter to marshall survivors onto the boat. That kind of competence porn is always great to see.

In summary; this is a really good film, but it would have been SOOOO easy to make it great.

Fly Me To The Moon (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: NASA is struggling to make people give a shit about them, so they hire a marketing expert.

I remember as a stupid teen not being entirely sure of what a “director” did. “All they do is point the camera and film it”, which may have had something to do with me discovering Kevin Smith movies. I’m older (definitely) and wiser (debatable) now, so I know better. It’s with that knowledge I can say that Greg Berlanti was the wrong choice to direct Fly Me To The Moon (FMTTM, pronounced Fem-toe-Tom). He’s not a bad director, he’s actually really good and it would be foolish to suggest otherwise. But it doesn’t matter how good someone is, sometimes it’s just not a good fit. It doesn’t matter how talented a guitarist Jimi Hendrix was, I wouldn’t hire him to remodel my back garden (partly because he’s dead). And just because Berlanti is a good director, doesn’t mean he was the right choice for this. It’s obvious why he was chosen, he has a background in romantic comedies so knows how to craft them to make them believable (the “meet-cute” between the two leads in this is brilliantly done, it has to be said), but he directs very slowly; shots linger, characters stay still, there’s a lot of blank space in the background. Meanwhile, the dialogue is quick and almost Noël Coward-esque. So you have incredibly quick-witted characters stuck in a directorial style that doesn’t really suit them.

I was somewhat disappointed by how FMTTM wastes its satirical possibilities. It says nothing about life or the politics of the time. A large portion of the runtime is focused on the “making a fake moon landing in case the real one doesn’t work” part. Which is silly. There was a lot of silliness in international politics around that time, especially regarding the moon. Fun fact, at one point the US planned to nuke the moon. That’s not mentioned here, nor are the multiple other mindblowing moments of stupidity that were everywhere at the time. It doesn’t even attempt to lampoon the society and politics of the time. It’s as biting as a gummy bear.

The performances are fine. I will admit this isn’t Channing Tatum’s best work, Scarlett is fantastic though; showcasing her talent with accents. The rest of the cast is fine, and they’re talented enough that this would work as an ensemble piece if they wanted to make it a television show instead so they could focus on the background characters more. The focus is definitely on the two leads, and it works for this genre. They share a definite chemistry, the kind where even when they’re not saying anything it feels like they’re flirting with each other just by being in the same room. That’s difficult to do because Kelly (Scarlett’s character) isn’t the best-written character. Sometimes, she’s supposed to come off as dynamic and forceful but just as incredibly rude and condescending. She’s written like a Bill Murray character, and let’s face it, most of them are annoying pricks when you think about it.

I was a bit mean about Berlanti earlier, but it has to be said that whilst his style doesn’t suit the script, it is slick and stylish as hell. It’s helped by the costume design, but a lot of the reason the film feels like it genuinely takes place in the period it’s set in is down to how Berlanti shot it. A sense of nostalgia permeates every inch of the screen. It could do more with the music. I can only remember two pieces of music from it, one is Fly Me To The Moon being sung by Woody at the end (and you just KNEW they were going to play that), the other is To Love Somebody by the Bee Gees, which is a ducking fantastic piece of music, but isn’t a song that inspires a sense of nostalgia. Put it this way, there’s no way they could sell a soundtrack album to this, which feels like a waste.

In summary; a good film, but you can’t get past the sense of both wasted opportunity, and how “made by committee” the whole thing feels. This is film as product, not as art.

Inside Out 2 (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: Riley is now a teenager, and with increased age comes increase emotion.

With Pixar, you know what you’re getting; emotions. They’ve given emotions to a wide variety of things: toys, dinosaurs, Scottish people. Inside Out is the most obvious example of this: What if emotions had emotions? It wasn’t crying out for a sequel, it was pretty self-contained and didn’t leave any unanswered questions. That doesn’t mean a sequel doesn’t make sense. It was a film about childhood emotions, and (spoilers), emotions don’t stop when people hit their teens.

Let’s be honest, even if it didn’t NEED a sequel, it’s very easy to picture how to do one. As people grow, their emotions develop and become more complex. It’s the complexity of developing emotions that drives the plot of Inside Out 2 (IO2, pronounced Eye-owe-two, like the surname of a lower league Ghanaian footballer). As well as the returning Sadness, Joy, Disgust (sadly no longer voiced by Mindy Kaling over a pay dispute), Anger and Fear, there are also new emotions in the form of Anxiety, Envy, Embarrassment, and Ennui. Three of them slot effortlessly and are believable (albeit incredibly late arriving, are you saying other people didn’t have anxiety until they were teens? Lucky bastards), Ennui feels the most out of place and unnecessary.

The main difference in this entry is the importance placed on Sense Of Self. At first, it just seems like a clever way of displaying something, but the pay-off when Riley is affected by self-doubt, and how it affects her sense of self, is f*cking marvellous and one of the best things I’ve seen this year. It’s a perfect encapsulation of how you can crippled by anxiety and worries, and how they can lead to you keep making things worse in an attempt to make them better.

IO2 actually does a pretty good job of explaining the benefits of anxiety; preparing you for things which have not yet come to be (a bit like that super scary thing in The Muppet Christmas Carol). On the downside, that does mean that Joys arc of “oh, I see that negative emotions value now, I should help them and ease them into this system” is very similar to her arc in the first movie. I know there will be some narrative crossover, but there are times where it does feel like we’re just watching the same thing again.

That’s a very small issue though, overall it’s delightful, in a kind of depressing way. This, like all Pixar films, will break you slightly. But it will also rebuild you. That’s what Pixar do, they make you sad, but then they leave you feeling inspired and hopefull. They’re masters at it, and nobody does it better, except for Carly Simon.

Fun fact btw: When I left the cinema after seeing this I overheard a small child say it wasn’t very realistic because “why would someone’s brain make them feel worse?”. That poor sweet innocent child.

Bad Boys: Ride Or Die (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis; Will Smith slaps people, which never happens outside of these movies.

Is it just me or does it feel like there’s a missing film in this franchise? To me, it feels like the franchise has been: Original film in the ’90s, a surprisingly improved sequel in the mid-2000s, a more serious and mature entry from roughly 2010 or so, a “we’re back” 4th movie, then a 5th “we’re old now” entry. But nope, there was no 2010’s entry. That genuinely surprises me, and not just because I assumed the 2020 one was called Bad Boys For Life only so they could get a “4” in the poster somewhere. None of that was relevant at all, I’m just saying it to demonstrate how, despite having now seen all of them, I don’t particularly have warm feelings toward this franchise. I don’t dislike them, and will never turn them off if they’re on, but I will never go out of my way to watch them. More importantly, I could never speak about anything from these movies with any passion. I never really think of this franchise unless I’m watching them or someone talks to me about them (which makes reviewing it a bit difficult).

Bad Boys: Ride Or Die (Or BB: Rod, pronounced exactly how you expect it to be) doesn’t change that. It’s the most stylistic of them by a long shot; with some actual visual creativity displayed. There were inklings of that in the third one, but Adil and Bilal really let their creative flair flow in this, usually to its advantage. “Usually”. There are moments where it’s ugly as fuck in terms of shot composition. Not every shot HAS to be creative and visually impressive, sometimes a standard shot or transition is acceptable. Yes, there are times when you want cinematic deliciousness, but sometimes you just want a simple toast. BB: ROD has far too many moments where it takes a simple toast and over eggs it like a [generic hotel breakfast joke]. I know it’s weird to criticise a film for being too creative but it definitely does hinder this. Some of the shots are so weird that they actually distract you from what you’re actually seeing.

The story is okay. Doesn’t really surprise you at any point and it is far far too busy. It kind of feels like it wasted some things which could be decent subplots but instead, it was decided to use them for a single joke. There’s one running joke/theme that just doesn’t work though. It feels completely out of place and far too mystical/spiritual for a relatively grounded character. Let’s face it, you’re not watching this for character consistency though. A character nearly dies and is told that he needs to look after his health; this only ever comes up in non-action scenes. Even after being told to avoid stressful situations, he still chases down villains and shoots them with seemingly no issue. The other character does have issues in those scenes though, and it’s here where the film thinks it’s making a point about the need for therapy and dealing with PTSD. But considering the characters actively mock the idea of panic attacks, it doesn’t do a VERY good job of being supportive of mental health issues.

In summary; frustratingly mediocre, but at least it’s trying.

IF (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A young girl discovers she can see everybody’s imaginary friends.

John Krasinski has had a weird film career, especially as a director. Brief Interviews With Hideous Men was a comedy-drama based on a series of short stories by David Foster Wallace. The Hollars was standard film student drama fare. Then came A Quiet Place. If you thought that was a weird transition, nothing will prepare you for this.

It kind of makes sense though. There are many similarities in visual/narrative storytelling between horror and kids’ fantasy. Both of them depend heavily on effective world-building, creating something unbelievable but making it believable, and both depend on a “WOW!” shot, where the audience is made aware of the scale of what’s happening. He does a good job though; there are not that many moments where the visuals feel cheap or distracting in a way that takes you out of what you’re watching. On the other hand, there are not that many visuals that will stick with you. There’s nothing that makes you think “f*ck damn that is cinema”. I can’t imagine a child watching this and having a scene stick with them that they’ll remember forever.

The story will though. It’s incredibly sweet. Yes, people who have seen a lot of films and are familiar with story structure etc will guess the ending relatively early on, mainly because it’s the only way that plot holes aren’t created. But if you’re one of those fortunate people who can just sit and watch something without overanalyzing everything, you’re in for a treat. It has a sense of genuine heart and warmth to it. It does look like it’s heading in one direction, and I’m pleased it went in another way. The new way ended up being able to display much more heart. Spoilers, I watched this the same day as I saw Inside Out 2: Inside Harder. I didn’t expect THIS to be the film that slightly broke me. The moments where we see some of the characters “reunite” with their childhood IFs are genuinely delightful and emotionally powerful. They’re helped by the performances, Reynolds does exactly what you expect (For better and worse), the vocal performances are all good but most are too brief to matter that much (the fact that Brad Pitt is credited as an invisible and silent character is hilarious though), Cailey Fleming is incredible considering her young age, especially considering she’s playing a character at that awkward age where they want to be seen as an adult, but they are still kids. Alan Kim is fun whenever he’s on-screen, and Fiona Shaw provides a touch of “theatre, darling” prestige.

The biggest criticism is that it feels kind of dated. There is a distinct lack of technology and mobile phones present. If this was firmly set in the 90s, that criticism would disappear so it is kind of weird that they didn’t just do that. It also takes FAR too long to get to the point. I know it has quite a bit to set up, but it spends forever getting to the main premise that you’ve paid to see.

Those are minor criticisms though. Overall I enjoyed it. It’s not going to change your worldview forever, but there is a chance it might remind you about the joys of innocence and inner strength. It handles topics such as bereavement (and fear of it in regards to others) and childhood anxiety with sensitivity and class. It very rarely puts a step wrong, but it also rarely puts one forward in amazement. It’s a difficult film to really LOVE, but it’s an incredibly easy film to like.

The Watched a.k.a The Watchers (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: A guilt-ridden American is trapped in an Irish forest when she is shepherded into a mysterious dwelling with three strangers, all being watched by strange creatures in the night.

I hadn’t planned on watching this, I only decided to see it because it started 10 minutes after another film I saw at the cinema ended. As I watched The Watched unfold I was slightly disappointed with many of the script choices. I didn’t want to be too harsh on it though, this was obviously a story told by a first-time Irish storyteller and as such I felt I needed to be more encouraging than dismissive. Then the end credits started (about 10-20 minutes after they should have) and I saw the words “directed by Ishana Night Shyamalan” and that need for encouraging and forgiving of mistakes disappeared like a shot of piss in a swimming pool. Yes, she is still a first-time director, but she’s a first-time director with access that no other first-timer would get. She’s in a position most people would kill for, and needs to justify it. This needed to be incredible to wash away any claims of nepotism.

It’s not incredible. Nothing in the script or the directing justifies the chance she has been given. It’s 102 minutes long, which is about 90 minutes longer than it deserves. At times it felt like most of that 90 minutes was spent on expositional dialogue. There’s no attempt to make these moments interesting visually. That’s a shame as there are parts which look pretty damn good, the moment where the creatures first stand up and stretch is haunting and wonderful. There are a lot of moments when it’s too dark to see anything, especially with the exterior shots.

My biggest issue is the script. It’s a mess. There are plot holes so big you could drive a truck through them. I also get the feeling that the Night Shyamalan family assume audiences are idiots and must be directly told every piece of information because just seeing it unfold in front of us isn’t enough. I haven’t been spoonfed so forcefully since I was in a high chair.

The third act is one of the worst I’ve seen in a long time. At one point I genuinely picked my bag up because the cinematic and narrative language was telling me “okay the film is ending in a few minutes”, there’s then another entire 10-20 minute section that kills the minimal momentum it had. I get why she went with the ending she did, it fleshes out one of the characters, and layers over a few of the smaller plot holes. But it could have been done a lot sooner. Spoilers btw.

Okay so three of the characters escape the forest, they fall asleep on a boat and drift away until they wake up near the main city. They then all split up and go about their day, one of whom (the main character, played by a Dakota Fanning who’s underacting to the extent it barely registers more than if she didn’t turn up at all) has made it clear she plans to go to the university and destroy the research into fairies/the watchers that another character (The Professor) has written. Now, one of the other survivors (played by the brilliant Olwen Fouere) turns out to be The Professor’s dead wife so is actually a Watcher who now plans to kill more humans in revenge for fairies being forced underground. So she was on a boat with two humans she’s spent a lot of time with, and didn’t think to quietly sink the boat and escape onto land? She’s spent enough time with both of them so that she can change to look like them, and thus gain access to more people. Plus it would stop Dakota’s character from finding out the truth about her.

There is sooooo much wasted potential. So The Watchers want to watch humans so they can best imitate them, and they watch them through a mirrored window, with numerous shots of the humans standing next to the mirrors and looking at their own reflections. You know what shot DOESN’T happen in this film? A split shot of someone in the building looking at their Watcher double with the two of them being similar but different (as was done a few times in Us). WHY would you not have that shot? Surely the only reason to make this film is so you can wow people with that shot? It reminds me of the end of Glass where the whole thing was building up to a fight scene that then didn’t happen just because the writer wanted to trick the audience and subvert expectations. Sometimes expectations are there for a reason, and you can only subvert expectations if you replace it with something good. You can’t just cut it and then be like “We didn’t do what you thought! Surprise”. Its why food places that offer surprise menus still offer plates of actual food as the surprises, as opposed to if a Shyamalan did it, in which case you’d be served a plate of burnt pornography with rat droppings sprinkled over it. Just give me f*cking food.

I should probably add that due to personal reasons, I don’t think I’m ready to watch a horror film where a young male called Daniel dies. But even without that personal bias, this is still shit. At most, that bias knocked it down a 0.1 mark. Which considering I don’t give marks out of 10, doesn’t really matter.

Sometimes I Think About Dying (2023) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A story about isolation, boredom, and lacking purpose. No it’s not my biography and it’s rude of you to say that.

A few years ago I travelled to New York at the end of winter. In preparation, I purchased some winter clothing. Among them was a new pair of boots. Not just warm and sturdy, but they also came with a neat little extra; spikes on the soles that you could flip down in harsh icey conditions. I still have those boots (we don’t really have “winter” here, we just have rain) and I consider the flippable cleats a genius design. It’s so simple too, you see them and think “why don’t more companies do this?”. That’s how I felt about the opening credits of Sometimes I Think About Dying (Otherwise known as SITAD, pronounced sit-add). The fact that they use a different font is embarrassingly mindblowing. It takes the same amount of effort as doing them the same way as everyone else, but it does SO much in establishing style. I’ve mostly seen it in horror movies to be like “Oh look, we’re spooky”, or to establish the time period in which the film is set. Here it’s to establish a theme. It’s such a simple thing but it works beautifully and it means that no matter what happened for the rest of the runtime, I was going to take something positive from this.

Thankfully, even without that, I’d be able to be positive about SITAD, it’s delightful. But not in a “everything is fantastic and wonderful if you just believe” fake BS way that Hollywood provides. In a way, you can say it’s twee, kind of. But it’s a sense of twee with all the colour and joy drained away from it. Mostly it’s a film that says “I don’t understand people”. Those three previous sentences may seem disjointed (and some would say inherently contradictory) but that’s the wonder of SITAD. It’s depressive elegance, with some stark cinematography that’s beautiful in its simplicity. It’s shot not to sell a story, but to sell a character and a mood.

The script matches that, doing so much with so little. Normally characters establish themselves by saying things, SITAD establishes itself by having the main character not say anything while everybody else talks around her. In a lesser film, this would be met with scenes of her trying to say something but getting cut off whenever she tries to speak. Here, she doesn’t even attempt to say anything, she just stands in the background until she can safely leave without anybody noticing. She doesn’t have isolation thrust upon her, she actively prefers it. It’s great because when she speaks out loud, it actually means something. It’s at least 20 minutes before Fran (Daisy Ridley’s character) utters her first words. Side note, one of these days I’ll remember what Daisy Ridley looks like when I’m not looking at her, my brain keeps picturing Charlotte Ritchie. Daisy Ridley gets a lot of praise (and she should, she’s PHENOMENAL), but I feel that Marcia DeBonis needs praise too. Her speech near the end where she’s talking about her husband suffering health issues is heartbreaking and delivered perfectly. Crucially, it’s not delivered as “a performance”, with perfect diction and line delivery. She stumbles over her words, is slightly unclear on a few syllables, and pauses mid-sentence. In essence; she feels REAL.

That’s partly why I loved this film so much, nothing about it felt fake. It doesn’t feel like we’re there watching them, it’s better than that. Even though we see her from an audience’s perspective, it somehow feels like we ARE Fran. It’s helped by a powerful score (brought to you by Dabney Morris), and a powerful performance. But it is mostly anchored by how good the writing is.

It’s not perfect though. Fran is a little bit too cruel at times which can make her hard to root for. But when she does say something heartless such as “You’re exhausting, no wonder you can’t stay married”, the VERY next scene shows her obviously regretting it.

As you can probably tell. I LOVED this movie. It’s not up for my favourite of the year, but it is possibly the one I’ve connected with the most. Good films entertain, and great ones inspire. This will inspire you as a writer, as a director, as a musician, as a performer, fuck it, with the way this tackles themes of isolation and self-sabotage, this will inspire you as a person. A lot of people won’t like it, and even those who do like it might not like certain parts of it. For example, I saw some reviews say the party scene was cringe and went on too long. Personally, that was the highlight of the movie. It felt like the first time Fran felt accepted, she was letting the mask of insecurity slip, and the sheer joy she showcases is infectious. I’m not saying this is the best film of the year, but it is probably the one I would recommend most at the moment if you want to feel things and be touched (not in a Kevin Spacey way). One of the most genuine movies I’ve seen all year, and I’m a better person for having watched it.

Lisa Frankenstein (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A misunderstood teenager and a reanimated Victorian corpse embark on a murderous journey together to find love, happiness, and a few missing body parts.

I was looking forward to this. I’m not gonna lie, that was mainly because of Kathryn Newton. I absolutely LOVED her in Freaky, and I thought she was one of the best things about Quantumania. I’m unsure as to whether I like Diablo Cody or not. I loved Juno and Jennifer’s Body, but even then in those I was aware of how overly written and stylized the dialogue was.

If you’re on the fence about Cody, this won’t push you towards being a supporter of her. The dialogue is still overly painful to listen to at times, and she feels like she’s holding back a bit. The violence feels incredibly sanitized, which makes me think the studio wanted to lower the rating at the last minute, or they’re planning to release an unrated version later. It’s not just the violence, the dialogue also suffers from a general sense of “edited for television”. And that’s before you listen to the words being said and realise how overly hipster and fake the characters sound. This would be easier to deal with if the characters were likeable. As you can guess by that previous sentence, they’re not. What made Juno work was how relatable and real the characters felt, even when the dialogue was a bit naff. You don’t get that here. There’s also a stunning lack of consistency in characterisation, Lisa in particular seems to change personalities more than me when I’m creating a Sim in that video game where Sims do things in their Sim house, speaking Simlish and living with other Sims (I think it’s called The House That Keeps Burning Down). There’s a way to make it so characters can kill people and still make them likeable. Lisa Frankenstein doesn’t bother with that. As such, there’s a feeling that somewhere there’s another 10 minutes of LF which helps bridge the gap and makes their actions feel more real. As it is, it’s essentially “You killed my stepmother? Well let’s bury her and I’ll sew her ear to your face”. Yes, the stepmother was a bitch, but it still seems like they missed a few steps in making her death feel deserved. Especially since the creature was hiding in a cupboard, and was established as not being able to hear that well, so do we know for certain that he actually heard what she said? Doug was a sex pest so his death would have been much more cathartic. Doug does die, but not for much longer into the film than he should. I feel he should have been explored more, not explained or justified, he’s a date rapist. But he only appears in like two scenes, flesh out that character as a supposed “nice guy” then his rapey tendencies (and taking advantage of a drugged woman IS rape, and it’s weird how that is a controversial statement) would come off as more shocking and would allow an instant death.

Now on the bright side; it looks fucking fantastic. Kathryn Newton’s wardrobe is like someone sitting on a thumbtack; it’s on point. Hard to believe this is Zelda Williams’ feature-length directorial debut. I see in her what everybody else sees in Tim Burton. There’s a beautiful gothic elegance to a lot of the scenes, especially the opening which reminded me a Lotte of the work of Reiniger (possibly the most dated reference I will ever make). That gothic style meshes well with the 80s setting, everything feels oversaturated to the point where it seems to drain all sense of fun out of the colours. It’s stunning, showing great potential for her as a director, but it is a shame she will never get a chance to mesh her visual style with her dad’s acting style.

And now I’m sad.

Oh, and the music is good too. So overall, I’m not angry at this film, I’m disappointed. It’s too difficult to truly like and enjoy this film. Visually it has an identity, but in terms of story etc it just comes off as a parody that’s taking itself far too seriously.