Author: troubledproductions

Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: Remember Beetlejuice? He’s back, in fog form.

I think I left it too late to watch the original Beetlejuice. I didn’t see it until I was in my late 20’s, by which time I was already over-familiar with the iconography and character, and it was too late for me to be obsessed with it. Also, I was never the biggest Tim Burton fan. His stuff has always seemed to be a case of style over substance, like a Zack Snyder who hasn’t yet discovered porn.

Maybe Beetlejuice Beetlejuice will change that? While I wasn’t a huge fan of the original, I liked it and consider it among his strongest works. So if anything could get me to buy a ticket to ride the Burton Bus it would be this piece of unfresh meat (if he ever gets accused of sexual improprieties then that sentence is going to seem so bad).

Spoilers, it doesn’t. I have the same issue with Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (BB, pronounced Bébé) that I have with much of Burton’s work; the script. There are five different plotlines, most of them run episodically rather than alongside each other. There are moments which aren’t really storybeats, just stuff happening one after the other. It seems like it’s setting up a plotline or villain, and then it is resolved within 10 minutes.

None of this is the fault of the actors though; all of them are on top form. Winona Ryder continues to be the best, Jenna Ortega slots into this universe perfectly, Keaton is exactly what you expect, and Catherine O’Hara is a damn delight. Jeffrey Jones is missing from BB, but his character isn’t, appearing in animated form in a plane crash, and in live-action form walking around the afterlife without a head. The reason for this is that Jeffrey Jones is a gross paedophile, so having him in this would be a huge PR problem. I do have an issue with his character being in it though, especially being so revered and a major part of one of the characters’ plotlines. Dunno, it just feels a little weird. I know it’s not him, but it is slightly uncomfortable to see that much love shown to a character played by him. It would be like if you dressed up as Jimmy Savile and attended a kids’ birthday party; the adults would know that it’s not actually him, but they would still be a little bit grossed out.

There are moments where BB is better than the original, some of the visuals have a lot more creativity to them, the characters are better defined, and the world feels more real. The “involuntary karaoke” scene is definitely worse though, and that’s mainly down to song choice. The song is still good, but it’s not as well known, not as likely to be sung by drunk people at music festivals, and just not as bombastic and hilarious considering the scene. To the point where it feels like it only exists in this movie BECAUSE it was in the first one.

It’s a shame, this could have been great. It is pretty good, but it doesn’t make you think that Burton has developed much as a filmmaker since he made the original. If there was only a five-year wait for this to be released, that would be okay, but 36 years and THIS is the best he can do? It’s a little disheartening, and definitely not good enough for me not to sing the title of it to the tune of Lollipop Lollipop.

AfrAId (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A family takes an experimental AI into their house. Everything works out fine. Psych! Stuff starts to suck.

AfrAId was directed by Chris Weitz, who also directed About A Boy, The Twilight Zone: New Moon, and The Golden Compass, which is a weird film history if you think about it. Not really relevant at all, I just wanted to mention it.

I went into this with lower expectations than I would if Gillingham were playing Barcelona (football joke, I NEVER make them), I knew it had bad reviews and box office, and bad horror movies are usually The Crow-est of the low. So I knew this would be terrible. But then something went wrong; it’s not terrible. It’s not good, but it’s not terrible. It is never bad enough to be awful, but also it’s never quite good enough to stand out. It doesn’t help that it’s quite derivative, it’s not saying that much which hasn’t been said before (primarily by equally stupidly titled M3gan). It can’t compare to that, and not just because the AI in this isn’t as memorable, or as well-written. Occasionally it only does things BECAUSE it’s a horror movie, there’s no “non-creepy” justification for many of the AI’s choices.

On the plus side, it does seem like it has something to say, which I always like to see in a horror movie. The proliferation of AI is a concerning development and one that’s too big for films to ignore. This film also says a lot about how families interact with themselves and with technology, especially concerning how that affects parenting. It doesn’t always work, though. There are some parts where the AI nature of it just

The revenge porn bit, in particular, didn’t sit right with me. I don’t care that it ruined that kid’s life, he knowingly made and shared porn of his girlfriend. I don’t give a shit that he won’t go to college or that he’s being tried as an adult. To be perfectly honest I hope he gets hit by a fucking car. Now it gets fun. No word of a lie, I legit wrote that line, and then that character died in a car crash. So that’s nice.

On the upside; the performances are good. John Cho is underrated (as anybody who has watched Searching will know), and I’m still waiting for the world to pay attention to just how utterly fantastic Katherine Waterston is. Both of them feel slightly beyond this movie, almost like this was a film made years ago and only just released now to make use of their fame. There’s also no issue with direction; it looks good, has decent audio cues etc.

The main issues are pretty much entirely down to the script. The pacing is like a drunk driver; all over the place, causing great damage, and indefensible. The ending is a huge letdown. It goes too “real”, with the AI making incursions into reality which are a bit too far-fetched and would be easily solved by humans. The closing scenes are also far too predictable, to the point where it feels like a parody.

In summary; not as bad as I expected, but not as good as I wanted. AfrAId is like people who discuss politics on Twitter, too concerned with saying stuff “now” than trying to figure out how to say it.

Never Let Go (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: In response to a worldwide evil, a mother (Halle Berry), protects her children via tethering them to the house with a rope, thus ensuring no evil can come to them. As the years go on, she struggles to keep them content with their new lifestyle.

I have a mixed history with Alexandre Aja (the director of Never Let Go, or NLG, pronounced Nelgg), I enjoyed Horns, but I found Crawl a bit poor, so I was unsure what to expect. Halle Berry is in it, which bodes well as she does seem to be more careful about what scripts she chooses lately (probably because of Catwoman), and even if a film is bad, Berry is always good. I wasn’t aware of the two child actors in this, but they are pretty damn good in this. It’s not “good for child actors”, just flat-out good. So that’s definitely a plus. Aja’s directing is pretty decent too with some brilliantly creepy set-pieces and creative visuals. There are moments where it is a bit too dark to see, but that’s to be expected in a film set in a cabin that lacks as many lights as this does. It’s also a genuinely interesting story, and provides a real sense of survivalism, particularly with how difficult it is even for those experienced in it. Doesn’t matter how good you are at hunting if the animals have all gone somewhere else (unless you’re a nomadic tribe obviously). And it doesn’t matter how good you are at farming if it’s too cold and flooded for the crops to work. It’s not “organic salads made entirely from hand-grown fruits”, sometimes it’s “eating fried bark”. You’re only ever one winter away from starvation, and that will lead to you making difficult decisions like wondering if you should kill your dog. So much of NLG is utterly fantastic. The film itself? Far from it.

Whenever you watch a film, you don’t watch it in a vacuum (or any other household appliance), it can set up expectations and then subvert them, and other times it makes them seem predictable. So movies now need to be written with that in mind. Never Let Go attempts to play with expectations, but in its attempts to do so, it traps itself like a fly in a spider’s web and is just as ugly. It knows that your first thought while watching this will be “Okay so is the twist going to be that she’s actually just making it up?”, which would work. Instead of subtly laying in clues, it has characters outright state that they believe that to be the case. It sets up that “twist” far too obviously, to the point where you begin to wonder if it’s actually a double twist and it turns out she was telling the truth all along. But that’s not a twist, that’s just a straight story. The way that NLG tries to set up both endings means that whatever ending it picks, it will end up feeling predictable. It traps itself by attempting to be too clever.

I suppose that’s to be expected, I mean, it has to attempt SOMETHING, the story itself really doesn’t lend itself to a 100-minute feature. It only has three characters, and the very notion of the story means they can’t interact with anybody else, and two of them have known only this life forever. So with nothing to upset the status quo, and no new characters introduced, it’s difficult to be hooked. I’ve seen worse films, but I’ve yet to see a semi-decent movie be as derailed by a poor script as much as this one was. I suppose at least they’re trying.

The Substance (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Elisabeth Sparkle is an ageing actress who has just lost her job as the host of an aerobics TV show. Desperate to regain her “sparkle” she takes a serum which causes a younger version of herself to “hatch”, with one rule; she must switch between the two versions every week, without fail.

I am so glad this was directed by Coralie Fargeat. As anybody who watched 2017’s Revenge can attest, she’s talented as hell. She is the perfect director for something like this, injecting standard scenes with an air of creepiness. She also makes some incredibly brave decisions, mainly to do with holding a shot MUCH longer than most directors would, uncomfortably long at times. She sets her standards in the opening shot, where we see a star on a Hollywood Walk of Fame get created, and then see it age and decay. Not only is it a beautiful sequence (plus weirdly fascinating), but it’s also thematically appropriate; seeing a star be damaged by the pressures put upon it alongside the natural damages caused by time passing, well it’s not exactly subtle, is it?

The other reason I’m glad Coralie directed this is because it needs to be directed by a woman. It’s a female story. Yes, the worries of ageing and not feeling as sexy as we once were are worries shared by everybody, but it hits women harder because they’re judged for it more harshly. Also, if this was directed by a man then some of the shots would be a bit creepy. I’m not saying they’re odd shot choices, but when a film is telling you about the pressures of enforcing societal expectations of constant youth and beauty on women so that they see being old as a character flaw, but then the next shot is full of VERY close-up of a young woman buttcheeks in exercise clothes, well it can feel like mixed messages.

The young woman with the zoomed-in buttcheeks? Margaret Qualley, who plays a “more perfect” version of Demi Moore’s character. Annoyingly, there is no point in which they seem like the same person. There are no shared quirks or physical tics. They seem like completely separate people, which I know is sort of the point, but I would like to buy into the concept that there is some shared nature between the two of them considering the mind they share is the same.

The moment when they split is truly disturbing. It’s one of the most disturbing things I’ve seen all year, and I’ve watched a lot. Coralie is great at body horror, and it’s those moments which drive the freakishness of the narrative, especially in the final third which is just batshit insane. Normally I say “batshit insane” and it’s a compliment, here it’s not. I liked it, but for some reason, it didn’t hit me. Possibly because it took FAR too long to get to the obvious moments. At one point, it repeats a dream sequence/hallucination from a few minutes earlier, and with no new context or reason for it to exist again.

This may seem like a negative review, and that’s because there is quite a fair bit to dislike about The Substance. It’s unsubtle at times, it’s FAR too long, and it wastes sooo much potential. But there’s also SOOOO much to like and appreciate. It’s stylish, it’s darkly funny, and it needs to be unsubtle to get the message through. I did like it, but I wouldn’t say I “enjoyed” it, at times it was a struggle to continue paying attention. It’s an important one, it’s a spectacular one to see unfold in front of you, but it also needs about 10 minutes cut from it. It’s utterly horrific, but also completely fascinating.

In summary, it’s a dichotomy. Which I suppose also suits the themes.

Lee (2023) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: The tale of Lee Miller, acclaimed war photojournalist

This review was going to be so simple. It was just going to be a lot of jokes about how the name character has the same name as me. Lots of “I don’t remember doing any of this” stuff. It was going to be SOOOOO dumb but funny. Now I can’t do that. And I can’t do that because this film is too good for that. It’s deeply emotional and important, and making stupid jokes about it feels like it would cheapen it a lot. Stupid Lee, being too good for me to make jokes about, as all my friends say: Lee ruins everything.

Lee is not perfect, at times it feels like it assumes you know the importance of certain images, so you’re sitting there and being amazed at the recreations and new insight into how they were constructed etc. As it is, you spend a few moments with no idea what is happening. My other issue, and it hurts me to say this, Andy Samberg is not as good a dramatic actor as the other performers. In a lot of films, that would be okay, but here, he’s opposite Kate Winslet who is at the top of her game. Despite my prediction towards small weird stuff, and my avoidance of the obvious big-budget films (by which I mean, I haven’t seen Titanic), I’ve always been a fan of Winslet, mainly because she’s in the supremely underrated Heavenly Creatures. This is off-topic, but she also seems like a hugely brilliant human being.

The other downside of Lee is going to make me sound a bit weird. There’s been a lot of Nazi films lately. Not films about Nazi leadership, or even the soldiers. But a focus on the ideology, about how it penetrates everyday society and needs to be snuffed out before it poisons. This concerns me. Not because I think “but free speech! people should be free to be racist idiots!” or “WOKE!” etc. But because writers, even those writing about the past, are ALL writing about the current world. So I’m slightly uncomfortable that so many writers in 2020’s feel the need to point out how nazi’s are bad, we don’t have that many “don’t eat lava” films, because we all know that’s obvious. So I’m worried that there is a resurgence in Nazi viewpoints being accepted in polite society, and astute writers are noticing that.

Otherwise, this is damn fine. There is so much to like about this. It’s shot beautifully for a start, done in such a way that it really makes you feel like you’re in a different time. The story is what’s key though. It’s incredibly engaging throughout. It’s the closest I’ve seen to Civil War in terms of how it details the importance of war photographers (incidentally, the lead character in that film was named after Lee Miller). It does so much right. Importantly, it starts off pre-war. But in a time where, in hindsight, war was inevitable. It’s fascinating to see how dismissive they are of the looming threat. It also provides a huge contrast when war does break out, even when you don’t see them, you are aware of what has happened to some of the characters we were introduced to in the opening (although it could do a better job of reminding you they are when they’re mentioned near the end).

In summary; there is A LOT to like about Lee. It’s harrowing, beautiful, and absolutely essential. I’ve seen some movies where the audience stands up and leaves the very second the closing credits start. Sometimes people sit there, but from the general hubbub, you can tell they’re just waiting for a credits scene. With this, there was silence, not of shock, not of exhaustion, but one of appreciation, almost reverance.

The Crow (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: After the love of his that he’s known for a suuuuuuch a long time is murdered in front of him, Eric is given the power of face paint and healing to get his revenge.

I know how this is supposed to go. Reviews for this have been so negative there was concern it would somehow end up with a minus score on rotten tomatoes. The jokes would have been obvious, “This does to Skarsgards career what the original did to Brandon Lee”. About how it was a cynical cash grab, that forgot the “cash” part. Maybe comments about how this is the second review this year which would lead itself to jokes about Sting. Truth is, I won’t be making any of those jokes.

Not because this film is good, far from it, it’s definitely a steaming pile of crap that I wouldn’t recommend to anybody. And certainly not because I feel it deserves compliments for effort and you can tell the filmmakers are trying. The reason it’s hard to rustle up any anger and vitriol towards The Crow is because it’s so unbelievably bland. I haven’t encountered anything so devoid of taste since a Wetherspoons fry-up.

The original Crow movie is iconic, in the 30 years since it was released, the combination of a white face and black trenchcoat has inspired countless school shooters. It’s hard to imagine this version inspiring anything other than complete apathy.

It’s hard to think of anything about this that works. The romance, you know, the entire reason the character is so vengeful in the first place, doesn’t feel real. For some reason, The Crow thinks we need to see their whole relationship, including how it starts. We don’t NEED to see them meeting, in fact, that actually makes it worse because you then realise the “Love of his life” is someone he’s known for a few days. So his reasons for coming back from the dead seem less “I have lost EVERYTHING!” than they should. It’s not helped by the fact they don’t seem to have much chemistry. I don’t get how Skarsgards performance is so meh in this considering he’s basically made a living treading that line between corpse and hot. This is only the second feature film credit for FKA Twigs, and she’s better than that would suggest. Note “better” does not necessarily mean “good”.

The soundtrack is forgettable. I’m assuming that anyway, I can’t actually remember. This would have been the PERFECT time to play a shitload of dark pop. Get some stuff in there that’s both danceable and depressing; some Lana Del Ray, some Ashnikko, some Charli XCX, don’t play fucking Enya.

Nothing about this answers the question “Why was this made?”. Do we need a dark and gritty film which is a remake of a film that’s already dark and gritty? The only notable thing about this movie is that Danny Huston continues to be a solid choice for “threatening mob-like guy”. But even that’s ruined by the inconsistency in his character.

Even the fight scenes aren’t well done. We know Skarsgard can do fight scenes, but you wouldn’t know that if you have only seen this, because of how bland and weirdly neutered the fights are. I’ve never seen scenes so full of blood still manage to come off so sanitised and “safe”.

It’s not the worst film ever. It’s not a complete mess that fails at everything it attempts. What it is, is something much more offensive than that; dull. It doesn’t fail at what it tries because it never tries anything. There is zero effort, zero heart, and consequently, zero reason to watch this film.

I Saw The TV Glow (2024) Review.

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A classmate introduces teenage Owen to a mysterious late-night TV show — a vision of a supernatural world beneath their own. In the pale glow of the television, Owen’s view of reality begins to crack.

I was less than a minute into this and I had a singular thought “This reminds me a lot of We’re All Going To The World’s Fair”. It turns out there’s a reason for that; the writer/director is the same, Jane Schoenbrun. The music was SUCH a big part of WAGTTWF (Pronounced Wag-toot-woof), and I’m glad that Schoenbrun managed to reunite with Alex G to get the music done. I’m going to cheat a bit here and quote my review from WAGTTWF, because so much of my thoughts of that are my thoughts for ISTTG (I-stoot-og). So here are the still-relevant pieces:

This is weird. I’m still not entirely sure if I liked it or not. I am very glad I’ve seen it, and it is one that I would recommend, but my personal thoughts on it are still going through my head.

This is definitely still apt. ISTTG is fucking weird. Worlds Fair felt Green, Glow feels purple. I don’t know what Schoenbrun has planned next but I’m guessing the colour scheme will be red.

the writing and directing has potential. It’s strangely hypnotic. It’s the cinematic equivalent of a lava lamp. You don’t watch and think about character and plot, you’re just entranced by everything and lose track of time while observing. The whole thing feels very personal, 

Oh yeah, very true. Glow is ethereal as hell. There are times where you’re not really sure what’s going on, and in the hands of a lesser director, you’d turn away. But Schoenbrun has a way of making you not want to turn away for even a second. It does have a more cohesive narrative than Worlds Fair, certainly more ambitious. The narrative is helped by how REAL it feels. The fake TV show in particular feels like it already exists. The film he watches in the cinema? Not so much. The downside of that is made me think I really need to finish my script for Hi! School (a horror drama where someone finds a way to go into the universe of their favourite 90’s teen sitcom). So all of that is fantastic to see. On the downside, this is kind of let down by the performances. Brigette Lundy-Paine is great, and there are moments where Justice Smith is, but there are also moments where he doesn’t quite have the range needed. I doubt the ending would work with a different actor though. There are moments where he is weak, but he NAILS that.

The ending is weird. I’m not going to go into the particulars, just the general feeling of it. It’s a culmination of his feelings of isolation and despair. Only at that point, it’s not just that the world is ignoring him, it’s ignoring him to the point of hostility.

Both of Shoenbruns films so far feel deeply personal. They realised they were trans during the production of Worlds Fair (whilst tripping on mushrooms) and came out after the project wrapped. Glow was clearly created by someone with a firmer grasp on their gender identity. It’s not so much a standard narrative film, as much as it is them coming to terms with their egg cracking moment (the moment in a trans persons life when they realise their identity does not correspond with their assigned gender). The parallels aren’t obvious, but once you know they’re there, they are difficult to ignore.

So yeah, see this. Turn the lights off, shut the curtains, turn your phone off, and just be enraptured by what you’re watching. It’s not for everybody, but you won’t see anything else like this. For some reason, it reminded me of the indie game Gone Home (which if you haven’t played, I highly recommend), no idea why. It also has an absolute killer soundtrack

Oh, this is definitely still true. You WILL need to decompress afterwards. You may be annoyed, you may be delighted, but you will have opinions. I’m so glad the director’s career is progressing. I’m not sure their work is quite mainstream enough to justify a major budget, but a bigger budget is definitely deserved. There is going to be a third film in this thematic trilogy, and I look forward to it. I’m glad that Shoenbrun has allowed us to join them on their personal journey of identity.

I should note that this review was written entirely by a cisgender male. Maybe if I was trans, the metaphors and journey would have been a lot more obvious. Maybe it would have been “important” to me and part of my own journey. I love that films like this exist, it’s clearly going to be VERY important to somebody. But to me? It’s just a pretty damn good movie full of unsettling scares and music cues. And that’s fine. This wasn’t made with someone like me in mind, but it doesn’t need to be. It’s aimed at the confused teens (and adults) who NEED this, and I think they’ll love it. Of course, I haven’t actually spoken to any trans people about this film, so for all I know, I’m woefully off the fucking mark. But I don’t think I am.

Babes (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Pregnant after a one-night stand, Eden (Ilana Glazer) leans on her best friend Michelle (Michelle Buteau) for guidance in this millennial hot mess from-com (friendship rom-com).

I was a bit wary of watching this, primarily because of how terrible the poster is. Not the one with the pink background, the one with the yellow background. The faces don’t look real, so your first opinion of the film is “cheap”. Thankfully, the film itself doesn’t suffer the same problems.

I feel weird reviewing this. I want to say “This is an open and honest depiction of pregnancy, with none of the Hollywoodness which usually happens when the subject is displayed on film”. But let’s face it. I don’t know. I have no idea if this is an honest depiction or whether this is just a different kind of lying. This FEELS more honest though. There’s no attempt to beautify pregnancy or downplay the pressures it causes on the female body, or how stressful parenthood can be. It’s not just honest, it’s also VERY good.

Babes is Pamela Adlon’s feature directorial debut. I have no reason to mention that. Adlon did a good job of directing it but nothing really stood out as superb in terms of directing, I don’t mean that in a bad way, Kevin Smith made a career out of that. I only mention it because she voiced Bobby in King Of The Hill, and I just find that weird.

Really, Babes belongs to Glazer (as in, the film called Babes belongs to her, she doesn’t own all women who adhere to superficial beauty standards, nor would I think she would want to). She co-wrote it with Josh Rabonitz, and the dialogue really has her voice running throughout it, she is completely friend goals, I’m not just talking about her character in this, I mean just in general. I have no issues with her performance. I’m not like “Give her ALL the awards” but there were zero points where I thought “She’s only here because she wrote it”. She is the best possible casting choice for the character of Eden. She plays well off Michelle Buteau, who I must admit I’m not that familiar with but has the air of somebody who would be GREAT at Taskmaster.

Babes does set itself a difficult task, Eden gets pregnant from a one-night stand with a man who passes away the day after from nut-related choking. For Babes to have any emotional core you need to buy that the relationship between the two is genuine. That’s difficult to do when the characters only meet once. This manages it though. The connection the two characters have is electric. The interplay between the two on the train is some of the best “getting to know you” dialogue I have ever seen, and it instantly made me slightly sad that I would never have that anybody because of my general repulsive personality and/or face.

It’s helped that the guy is played by Stephan James, best known for If Beale Street Could Talk, Selma (where he played John Lewis, not the shop), and Race where he played Jesse Owens. So he’s used to carrying a lot on his shoulders in his performance. He’s pretty damn great in this. I feel he could replace James Earl Jones as THE VOICE for stuff now.

In summary; this is a lot of fun. It’s the closest a film this year has got to matching the brilliance of Bottoms. I love the film, I love the soundtrack, I love the characters. And I love how it suggests abortion but doesn’t moralise about it, just presents it as an option. It’s proudly pro-choice, and I can’t help but love a film like that. It’s such a fun watch. It’s nice to have something so warm and funny, like a clown on fire, but funny. The downside is that it’s a difficult film to Google. Turns out if you google “babes”, you do not get this movie. Maybe because I’m not focusing on how emotionally naked the characters in this film are, truly displaying their soul to everybody. I’ll try “Naked Babes” and see if that brings up this movie.

The Critic (2023) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn Review, UncategorizedLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A theatre critic lures a struggling actress into a seductive blackmail plot.

I went into this on a weird day. It was one of those days where you can’t stop worrying about one thing, and it just keeps entering your head and ruining everything. So however this review goes, bear in mind that it was good enough to distract me when nothing else did for the three days prior. So whatever else I say, I can’t deny it is effective at keeping your attention. That’s a good thing, because it means you’re still paying attention when the story finally starts. I hadn’t seen a trailer for this, or even read a synopsis. So I wasn’t sure what The Critic was about. That level of not-knowing continued for most of the film’s run-time. Soooooo much of the runtime for The Critic is spent setting up the story, with barely any time spent on the actual story itself. The actual plot-related portion only takes up about 10-20 minutes.

It is mainly about Jimmy, his character is so compelling. He’s acerbic, ambitious, a real drunken hot mess. He’s also gay, which leads to a great scene of him verbally jousting with some nazi dickheads. It’s essentially that scene from Black Books where Bernard approaches skinheads, but more subdued. It’s interesting to see a critic on-screen. It shows just how important reviewers are, and if you ever know any reviewers, even if you just read their stuff online, you should give them presents and compliments. The opening two-thirds mostly focuses on him as a cruel reviewer having to come face to face with the targets of his ire, about how they react to his brutal insults, his words have power and with that power comes responsibility. It’s an interesting look into the power of writing, especially in a time when the country is under threat from the rise of fascist political parties and opinion formers (thank god THAT’s not an issue anymore). That section is so interesting that it overshadows the rest of the narrative. It feels wrong to say, but “people talking” was more compelling to watch unfold than when there was sex, murder and blackmail.

Not that the sex and blackmail aren’t enjoyable (isn’t that Donald Trumps’ campaign slogan?). Visually it’s a delight. The opening scene is a barrage of bright colours that are a true feast for the eyes. The dialogue is also a lot of fun. There are some lines here which could have been written by Noël Coward. The performances are damn fine too. Everybody knows Ian McKellen is great (hence all the awards and respect he has), but this is the first time I’ve ever really “got” Gemma Arterton. Before I just thought of her as “Is that Cobie Smulders? Oh it’s not”. But there are moments in this where she showcases how good she really is. There’s a scene in particular that stands out, where Nina and Jimmy are conversing about how she became an actress because of him, and how she’s craving his approval. Arterton is damn near perfect in that scene, even her silences say so much. Ben Barnes is fun to watch onscreen, even if (for some reason) I thought he was Henry Golding.

In summary; I would say this is worth watching, but maybe not immediately. It probably wasn’t helped that I watched this on Friday afternoon, just after that I watched Lee, and the day before I watched Babes. I haven’t posted the reviews of them yet, but (spoilers), they are both fantastic and among my cinematic highlights of the year. And no matter how good the salmon and cucumber sandwich of The Critic, it’s in between the warm and delicious bread of Lee and Babes. That metaphor makes sense right?

The Garfield Movie (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Garfield gets roped into a scheme alongside his dad to steal milk.

Well after insulting it in my review of Jackpot, I had to actually watch it, didn’t I? If only so my despair at that being rated lower than this would be accurate. There was always a chance that I would be wrong and that this would actually be really good. I mean, look at the cast. Hannah Waddington, Nicholas Hoult, Brett Goldstein, Ving Rhames, and Samuel L Jackson, that is a weirdly strong cast for a non-ensemble piece.

Like all good films, The Garfield Movie (TGM, pronounced Tigg-um) leaves you asking questions, especially with the final action scene. It’s just a shame that those questions are ones like “How fucking long is that bridge? This scene should have ended minutes ago, this movie fucking sucks”.

In 2010 there was a woman named Mary Bale who was filmed walking past a delightfully cute kitty-cat named Lola. She stroked Lola, who was clearly approachable and friendly. Lola’s tail was raised in happiness and delight. Mary then picked Lola up and threw her in a fucking wheelie bin like a bitch. That video was posted online and she became infamous. I have seen that video (I had to, it was EVERYWHERE at the time), so I can confirm that that footage is now the SECOND most painful video I’ve seen involving a cat. You know, because this movie is also about a cat, and is fucking terrible (in case I was being too subtle).

I should have known this would be terrible from the very start. It starts with Garfield ordering food on an app. So the first shot is of a phone screen. There is no effort to make it seem like real food is being ordered on a real app. It moves from the item he wants to the next item he wants, there is no scrolling and picking an item, it just magically goes from one thing he wants to the next thing. I know it’s a small thing to be annoyed about, but it does annoy me because it makes it seem low effort. Also, he’s not ordering a lasagne, he’s ordering a pizza (with sides, which he knocks off the table in the bag without eating them).

This just doesn’t feel like a Garfield movie. There’s nothing specific to the character. In fact, there are very free moments specific to him being a cat. For example, when his dad is tied up with rope, Garfield tries to untie him; he has claws. It’s not a Garfield movie, it’s a movie that has Garfield in it. He’s not a character with his usual characterisation and foibles. He’s not sarcastic or dour, he’s just a normal animated movie lead. I haven’t seen a film misjudge its own main character this much since the Artemis Fowl casting call. It’s not a Garfield movie, it’s more like it’s a standard kids film, that stars Garfield. He’s not a character, he’s an actor playing a character that doesn’t suit him. The tone is completely wrong too, it’s too fast.

So I’ve established it fails as a Garfield movie. It’s not even a good animated movie. It fails at being a movie, and the animation is terrible. It reminds me of the South Park game on the N64, only with less piss-soaked snowballs. The human characters look okay, but the animals themselves look terrible. There’s no sense of realness to it. The animals don’t feel fluffy or cosy, they look like balloons. This is going to be a weird criticism of an animated film, but it’s too much of a cartoon in terms of the physics. There’s a scene where Garfield bounces from one tree to the other without losing any momentum. I know, standard modern animation. But still, it’s completely out of place in a series such as Garfield which has always maintained a somewhat realistic style.

I’ve seen worse films this year, but I can’t think of a movie which has completely failed its own lead character as much as this one did. On the plus side, I don’t have to see it again.