Category: Review

Send Help (2026) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A dickhead boss is trapped on an island with a co-worker who hates him and is an expert survivalist.

Oh this is painful. This is a very good movie, it’s entertaining, bloody, violent, and has an important message. The issue is, it’s a specific genre that I’m not a fan of. Not horror, not even wilderness horror, a genre/style even more specific. Evil Vs. Evil. Where someone who is clearly an abusive dick comes across someone who they think is innocent but turns out to be sociopathic. What can I say? I like likeable characters, even if they are flawed.

This could have worked, it could have shown her descent into darkness. But to do so, it would have needed Bradley (Dylan O’Briens character) to be more of a dick. Yes, he’s condescending and annoying to Linda (Rachel McAdams), but it could have gone further. Nobody will argue he’s a good person, but if his character was more of a scumbag, the events of the film would have been more entertaining. Firstly, he’s a newly appointed CEO who only got that position because his dad ran the company. He’s clearly a finance bro, yet he’s not that misogynistic. He’s not a feminist, but I feel he’d be more entitled and ruder to women, especially ones who work for him. The closest he gets to that is being kind of creepy to a woman he’s interviewing for a job, but we only find out about that because Linda barges in, which kind of makes her seem unprofessional. Also, that moment is referenced later on, in one of a few situations where it seems like Linda is into him. That’s weird, and kind of devalues her as a character. He can mistreat her, deny her promotion, leave her for dead, and yet she’s still sexually attracted to him.

It’s a shame, as if you took those moments of her lusting over him out, added a few scenes of him calling her the c-word etc, it would be one hell of a film. It’s visually interesting, mostly taking place in daylight, which I always love for a horror movie. The plane crash itself feels horrifying, and you won’t mourn most of the deaths in it. Weirdly, the plane crash isn’t the most violent part of it. That comes from a wild boar. I feel wild boars are like hippos; we don’t really appreciate how scary they can be. Send Help does a great job of showing what they’re like; a massive danger and it takes a lot to kill them. That scene may be among my favourite of the year so far: it’s violent, and indicates just how far she can go when pushed.

Good time to say this: Rachel McAdams is great in this. She tiptoes the line between “I’m just a happy hippy” and “I will cut your f*cking nuts off” as finely as anybody else could. She’s definitely playing against type, but does it so well that you’d assume this was her type. She’d make a great serial killer. In a movie, I mean. Well, maybe in real life too, who knows? #GirlBoss

When I sat down to watch this, I was uncertain as to how it could stretch the premise to nearly two hours. The answer? It can’t. It constantly resets the characters and their motivations. You could edit and reorganise 60% of this films events and it wouldn’t matter. It reminds me of when a TV series gets given 5 more episodes in its final season so the writers have to pull back on character development to fill the unnaturally extended runtime.

Personally, I would have had more of the plane crash victims survive. That way, the film could demonstrate how dangerous the island is by killing them. It would also give Bradley a reason to still be a dick. He could think that a group of alpha males could easily outsurvive a woman, and then he gets more and more panicked when they start to weaken. Or maybe he’s the most injured but still bosses everyone around, and they abandon him because of it, which is when she saves him.

I have been overly harsh on this. It’s a solid 7/10 (which depressingly makes it one of the best films I’ve seen this year). I have no need to watch it again, but if its on netflix and I need something to watch? I’ll give it a go.

Is This Thing On? (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Thoughts going in: No matter what, the stand-up comedy of this should be good. That being said, the trailers have felt strangely lifeless and dull.

Quick Synopsis: Alex Novak is going through a divorce and is deeply traumatised. Instead of therapy, he tries stand-up comedy.

This should have been an early contender for best film of the year. I like films about stand-up, and I like deeply personal, intense dramas. As soon as I told someone I was about to watch this, they said it seems right up my street. Plus, I like Will Arnett; he has a talent for making reprehensible people likeable.

Which is why it’s so disappointing that I didn’t enjoy it. I think part of it is that he never really seems that good as a comedian. The reaction the other comedians give him doesn’t match the reaction he gets on stage. You could show the stand-up sections independently to someone and ask if the comedian succeeded or bombed; they’d be unable to tell. It’s supposed to be cathartic, but you never really get that sense. There’s no joyful release; it’s just abject misery and pain.

The reaction he gets is weird; he’s immediately embraced by his fellow comedians. I have spoken to comedians who do these kinds of gigs, it can be brutal. Everyone is trying to break out and get noticed; they’re not going to take pity on a newcomer like that. Also, I’m sure it was unintentional, but having a group of comedians who are all women or people of colour fawn over a middle-aged white guy is kind of strange, especially when one of the female comedians sleeps with him despite them having less chemistry than somebody who decided to only do physics and biology as their GCSE science options. There’s a scene where his wife accidentally attends a comedy night where he’s performing (by which I mean, she didn’t know he’d be performing, not that she fell over and ended up in a comedy club). The comedian this is based on (John Bishop) actually had this happen to him; he told a joke about how he misses his ex so much that he keeps her head in the fridge. That joke doesn’t appear here; in fact, I can’t even remember what it was he actually said. They slept together that night, despite the fact that she was at the comedy club on a date. There’s a way this could work; if his on-stage persona was confident and charming, if he was charismatic and owned the room, allowing her to see him in a new light. But he’s the same person as he is for the rest of the film, so why would she be into that? That might be my biggest issue; comedy doesn’t change his life. He doesn’t feel like a different person because of it; we see him writing jokes, etc., but his personality and demeanor doesn’t change through his experience. He doesn’t seem to gain confidence or happiness.

My other issue is that I didn’t want the two characters to end up back together. Their characters don’t suit each other. It feels like they’re constantly looking for excuses to be annoyed at the other one. Again, there is a way to do a film where a relationship ends, he finds a passion, and they end up back together. The best example I can think of is High Fidelity. Actually, now I think about it, there are a lot of similarities between the two. They’re both about a couple that split acrimoniously, he sleeps with someone in his professional field, and they end up together after discussing their flaws and expressing regret for how they treated each other. The key difference is that in High Fidelity, Rob seems genuinely remorseful of his previous actions; you can tell he genuinely loves Laura, and we see him happy sometimes.

None of this is on the performers, by the way; Laura Dern continues to be amazing. Will Arnett can do this role; he has proven it in Arrested Development and Bojack Horseman (vocally at least), but he’s REALLY let down by a script that refuses to let him be likeable. Amy Sedaris is a highlight in the few moments she’s onscreen. Bradley Cooper is also in this film.

Bradley Cooper’s direction is strange. It’s mostly close-ups. Sometimes that choice works, making you feel the stress that each character is going through. But then there are times where it makes ITTO feel more like you’ve been cornered at a party by a guy who’s way too drunk and won’t stop talking even though you’re clearly uncomfortable.

ITTO isn’t a terrible film, but it’s not a particularly likeable one either. As I said, it’s based on a true story, and you have to wonder how many of his friends would be deeply offended if they think some of the characters are based on them. If you want a movie about a couple that dislikes each other, watch The Roses. If you want a movie about how tragedy can affect stand-up comedy, watch The Big Sick. If you want Will Arnett to be a complete mess, watch Bojack Horseman. Basically, there are hundreds of better options, and I really wish that wasn’t the case. I went into this expecting to fall in love, but instead I felt like how the main characters at the start: despondent, and like love is a waste of time.

Shelter (2026) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: On a remote coastal island, a former assassin living in self-imposed exile rescues a young girl from a deadly storm. As their lives start to intertwine, he must protect the orphan while battling enemies from his past.

Thoughts Going In: Jason Statham is going to punch people. I have to be honest, the first time I saw this trailer, I thought it was a sequel to The Beekeeper, that’s how interchangeable his performances are.

Years ago, I was reading about a script for a Robin Hood movie that was focused on the sheriff of Nottingham. Essentially, he was going to be a CSI-style forensic investigator. That movie was made into the 2010 Robin Hood movie that was just another generic retelling. I can’t imagine a bigger gap between potential and reality than that. Shelter is a close second, though. No, the script was never going to be the best in the world, and you won’t be able to improve on some of the stupidity, but it nearly had a much better director. The original director was Baltasar Kormákur, who has previously directed 2022’s Beast, 2018’s Adrift, and 2015’s Everest. I’m not saying those films are masterpieces, but Kormákur is an award-winning director, so at the very least, he can be depended upon to be visually interesting. Shelter needs that. The action scenes are lacking any sense of excitement. Even the non-action scenes make use of an annoying handheld camera that makes it nauseating to watch. Most baffling is the use of music: there are some action scenes with no music at all. When I first noticed it, I wondered whether that was the film’s gimmick, an action movie with no non-diegetic audio. That would at least be interesting and unique. But then the action scene ended, and the characters got out of the car and started talking normally, and that was deemed music-worthy. What made the non-audio scene so notable was that it was a car chase across mostly rural roads. Have you heard a car chase without music? It’s just a long droning whine (a bit like a speech from [insert politician you don’t like here, even one who is famous for being an entertaining speaker]). It genuinely made me think it was a mistake; that they just forgot to put music on.

There are also issues with the script, mostly logistical. I’m not speaking about “A person high up in British intelligence wouldn’t kill an innocent person just for convenience”, because that would DEFINITELY happen. I mean, “they drove from Scotland to London without being caught on a single camera?” Or when a teenage girl is dragged kicking and screaming into a black van, and nobody seems to notice/care/film it for social media. Top tip: go over to the O2 Dome in London, when all the clubs are still open, and the streets are occupied but not bustling. Then fire a gun multiple times, see if anybody notices, because they don’t in this. For a group of highly trained secret agents, they are shit at being secret. I mean, the main villain shot someone in the head whilst they were surrounded by police. Did that get mentioned again? Nope. In fact, none of the police members who are attacked there are referenced ever again. You’d think there’d be something, some kind of news report at the very least. Is the general public aware of what’s happening? No idea, the film isn’t interested in telling us. It doesn’t even stick around at the end to tell us the repercussions of a former head of MI6 being killed in his own house. I suppose expecting closure for that is a bit much, considering the film states the Prime Minister is in political trouble due to illegal surveillance of civilians, and then is never seen again, and nothing happens to that system. The controversy is never mentioned again. It’s as if the script set up a lot of narrative dominoes, then got bored and wandered off before using them.

I’m not asking for this to be groundbreaking. I’m not asking for it to be an intelligent study on human nature. But I am asking it put effort in. For someone to look at the script and take out stuff it doesn’t need. For someone to think of the logic of some scenes. For someone to make it so that the action scenes are actually entertaining. Shelter had zero chance of being my favourite movie of the year, but there’s no excuse for it to be as lazy as it is. Bodhi Rae Breathnach is pretty damn good, though.

Again, it’s not that it’s a bad film. It’s that even as a first-time viewer, you’ve already seen it. You can guess the dialogue before it happens. There are 1000 movies just like this, so what’s the point of this one?

Mercy (2026) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: In a supposedly dystopian future, police officer Chris is on trial for the murder of his wife. He has to prove his innocence to an AI judge in 90 minutes, or he’ll be executed.

Thoughts Going In: This movie is going to be terrible. I’ve not seen a trailer for it; it was dumped in January, and it’s already rumoured to be a surefire bomb.

Films can be bad for different reasons. Sometimes it’s someone involved in it who is just not good at their job, sometimes it’s studio interference, and sometimes it’s just bad timing, and it’s released near something that’s clearly superior. Then you have films like Mercy, films which are so peculiar and flawed that it almost feels like a deliberate attempt to fail. I’m not too big a fan of Chris Pratt as a performer; he’s a good side character, but as the lead, his flaws are exposed, and you realise he is essentially playing the exact same character in every film. He’s not helped by the decision to have him spend most of the film locked in a room, tied to a chair and talking to a computer. You may think my problem would be the “locked in a room” or “talking to a computer” part. I have no issue with that. A guy trying to solve a crime while not being able to physically interact with anything is interesting. My problem is the “tied to a chair” part. If you do that with someone, you need them to have immense screen presence; you don’t need them to have the energy of someone who has just been asked to file a report at work 5 minutes before he’s due to leave. His being tied to a chair means there’s very little to praise in terms of visual dynamics. It’s him talking to a screen, yes, we see things on the screens, but the focus is still on a guy locked in a room ,whilst tied to a chair. He’s not allowed to pace around the room, break things in rage, hold his head in his hands; it essentially robs him of using body language. I’m not sure what the benefit of having him tied to the chair is. Could they not think of another execution method other than “sonic blast to the head”? Could they have not had the room itself kill them with a soundblast? If you want to lean into the computer aspect, have the room change into a 3D reconstruction of the crime scene, and then he can walk through that, have him haunted by the sights, cry at family mementos etc.

In terms of performance; Kali Reis continues to impress. It’s a shame that her performance in Catch The Fair One didn’t lead to the roles she deserves, but I hope if she continues to prove herself, those roles will come. Rebecca Ferguson is a definite highlight, Despite seeming for all intents and purposes, human, there’s something uncanny valley in her performance. Part of that is down to how her character is written. On the subject of characters, Chris is kind of an idiot. He knows he only has a short period of time to prove his innocence, he knows the system will investigate his history, yet he still lies to it. It would have been so much shorter if he admitted things straight up; if he told the system he was an alcoholic who relapsed. Yes, lying to the cops because you don’t trust them is a strategy. But when you’re a cop who’s trying to tell everyone this new AI judge is brilliant, you’d trust it.

A key thing to successful sci-fi is world-building. You need the universe created within to make sense and feel true. Obviously, this is the key to all movies, but sci-fi has it harder because it usually has to introduce its rules first. So how does Mercy fare? Not well. It cuts to occasional riots, but this never really feels like a futuristic LA with a huge crime problem; mainly because they’ve segretated most of the problem people into one area (the ethics of which are NEVER discussed). Outside of that, there doesn’t seem to be much day-to-day crime. The use of hover bikes is a nice touch, though. But they wouldn’t be needed if he was allowed to examine a VR version of the scene himself.

Every time I think of this movie, a new issue I had with the plot rears its head, which is strange as I’ve barely thought of it; I saw it, immediately forgot it until it came time to write this review. It doesn’t bring anything new or exciting to the table. The concept is full of possibilities. Possibilities which the film itself refuses to look at. The problem with AI deciding court cases is one of nuance and human nature; it’s not “if it’s controlled by the wrong people, it may go wrong”, it’s the system itself that is flawed. But Mercy has no interest in discussing that. It also isn’t interested in exploring the guilt he could (should) feel for being responsible for the execution of an innocent man. There’s no “The system I defend executed somebody when it shouldn’t have? Oh no, I caused this!” PTSD, which forces the film to discuss the ethics of this justice. It’s just “this guy died because of me? Ah well. Oooo, is that a sandwich?” Side note: When we see riots in this movie, the police tend to just leave them alone instead of teargassing them. And no children get shot in the face at point-blank range. So in some ways, the “dystopia” America in this movie’s 2029 is less traumatic than actual America in reality’s 2026

This could be great. It could be slick. It could be smart. It’s none of those things. It’s not even passable.

Primate (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Monkey goes mad

Thoughts Going In: Could be dumb fun. Also, I went to grab lunch before this movie, intending to order a small cocktail, I instead ordered a pitcher, which I had to drink by myself in 10 minutes. So this entire review should be read under the knowledge that I was pretty drunk, and based on a conversation I had before the film started, I was trying to think of how Snickers could possibly be a euphemism for lesbianism. and Mars chocolate bars refer to men. No, I won’t provide context.

In 1971, Daniel Mann released the horror film Willard, about a man who befriends an army of killer rats. This was followed by a sequel the following year, called Ben. The theme song (called simply, Ben) for this film was performed by Michael Jackson, and is genuinely very sweet. The rabid chimpanzee in this movie? Ben. The lyrics are surprisingly apt for this film, which meant I couldn’t unhear the song every time they said his name.

So besides my own weird shit, how is Primate? It’s okay. As an early-year blood-filled popcorn horror, it’s good. It does what it needs to, and doesn’t overstay its welcome. There are moments where it’s a bit too dumb to be enjoyable. Characters state that rabies doesn’t exist in Hawaii, then doesn’t bother to provide an explanation as to how it does now. Some of the stupid decisions only happen so that the plot can advance, with multiple people doing things that nobody would do. I can’t tell you that much about the characterisation, because there didn’t really seem to be any. Characters don’t really develop, and only occasionally dip into their personality traits. When I write, I like to do a draft where I cover up the characters’ names, and see if I can tell who’s talking based solely on the dialogue; it’s mainly a test to see if each character has an individual voice rather than just me doing a narrative ventriloquist act. I struggle to think you’d be able to do that with this.

None of that is meant as an insult to the cast; all of whom do their job well. Most of them are relative unknowns, but you wouldn’t know that by the performances. I like that they actually cast a deaf actor in Troy Kotsur, a disappointingly high number of films wouldn’t.

Now onto the best part; the kills. This film is bloodier than the firstborn daughter of Henry VIII. Primate doesn’t shy away from not just the blood; but the pain. When characters get their jaws ripped off, it’s not quick and painless, you can tell they are suffering. I’m quickly beginning to like the work of Johannes Roberts. With this, and the two 47 Meters Down movies, he’s finding a niche as a talented creator of animal-based horror movies. I’m not saying he should be given billions to remake Jaws, but he’d be a decent choice if you wanted to remake The Swarm and make it actually good.

In summary: exactly what it needs to be, but never anything more.

Rental Family (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Struggling to find purpose, an American actor lands an unusual gig with a Japanese agency to play stand-in roles for strangers. As he immerses himself in his clients’ worlds, he begins to form genuine bonds that blur the lines between performance and reality.

Thoughts Going In: None, it was a secret screening, and I assumed it would be Saipan.

If you think about this movie for more than a minute, it falls apart. Not just one or two moments. I mean, the entire premise falls apart. He’s in Japan because he received an acting job there years ago, so why would the Rental Family company hire him to pretend to be someone else for different families? They must know that at least one person will go “hang on, I’ve seen you on TV” and find him on IMDB, and thus find out his real name. Unsurprisingly, that does happen. Yes, it was just an advert (and a few TV shows), but if Barry Scott from the Cillit Bang adverts turned up at a pet shop in Cardiff, a few customers would notice. There are a few other issues I have with RF: the two subplots of him pretending to be a fan of a female performing duo and playing video games with a male shut-in just disappear. Would it have been too much of a stretch to have him take the shut-in to see the singers and have him befriend one of the women? So they have a genuine fan, and he has a reason to leave the house. There’s also another character who is clearly important to Phillip, yet is only in two scenes and really isn’t given enough to do. Overall, it’s a mess which doesn’t do enough to flesh out most of its characters.

So why did I like it so much? Even as deeply flawed as it is, it’s really hard to not feel charmed by it. There are two main relationships Phillip has as part of his job: one with retired actor Kikuo Hasegawa (Akira Emoto), and one with a schoolgirl called Mia (Shannon Mahina Gorman). With Kikuo, Phillip has to pretend to be a journalist making a profile of him. With Mia, he has to pretend to be her father who abandoned her, because the school that her mother wants her to attend is very old-fashioned and needs to believe Mia is part of a traditional family (again, not sure how this will work once she’s there and tells teachers her dad left again). Both allow him to display different sides of his personality and background. It is somewhat strange that they don’t overlap at all, but that’s maybe my brain being wired by too many episodes of Seinfeld, where two separate plots meeting at the end was one of their trademarks.

They’re both emotional as hell, and both end up as you’d expect them to. It’s really not a surprise that the old actor with dementia will die, and it’s also not a surprise that Mia will find out the truth. But if you go into a film like this expecting to be surprised, you have the wrong mindset. This isn’t a movie for plot twists and surprises; it’s a movie to sit back and watch, allow it to emotionally wrap itself around you in a comforting embrace. It’s not a film to challenge you; it just makes you happy, makes you sad, then makes you happy again. That’s not to say it’s stupid or simple. A lot is going on with the workers of the Rental Family company, but I wish that stuff were given more time, as some of it doesn’t really have enough time to land emotionally: Aiko’s arc, where she gradually gets tired of being yelled at and called a whore by random women because the husbands are too weak, feels like it could have been explored more. I would like to have seen more of Shinji, his boss, but I’m not sure how that could have been done without exposing his secret early.

In summary, flawed brilliance.

Hamnet (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: There once was a playwright called Will
Whose son became unfortunately ill
His death caused his family a shook
400 years later, a book
And many reviewers said it was brill

Thoughts Going In: This is going to be incredible and moving. I’d heard it was very good, so I was looking forward to it.

There are times when my viewpoints don’t align with those of most reviewers. This may be one of those times. At the time of writing, Hamnet has an 84 score on Metacritic, which means on average, reviewers see it as an 8.5 out of 10 (as opposed to RottenTomatoes, where it would mean 84% of reviewers have given it a 3/5 or more). Many reviews have described it as one of the best films of the year. Don’t get me wrong, I liked it, but I’d be disappointed if this ended up among the best of the year. It’s emotional, perfectly acted, and looks beautiful. But it feels so hollow; two actors in search of a script. It feels like it spends most of its time just spinning its wheels, trying to think of a justification for itself before it reaches the end.

The end is superb, though. When Agnes realises the pain William is in and how he’s channelling it through his work, it’s incredibly powerful. The entire film is building towards this moment, and it doesn’t disappoint. It reminds you just how great an actor Paul Mescal is. For most of the film’s runtime, every scene belongs to Jessie Buckley, who owns every moment she’s in, but the ending is where Mescal shines.

Maybe it’s because I haven’t read the novel it’s based on. It seems like readers of it have appreciated the film a lot; whereas those who haven’t read it are a little more lukewarm. Or I just found it a bit too Oscar-bait, overly artsy at times, where I would have preferred it to be a bit simpler. There’s a high chance it was my expectations that ruined this; I expected Hamnet to die earlier, and for the film to be mostly about the aftermath of that. Nope, we spend most of the film building up the relationship between the characters; setting up the situation, etc., THEN he dies. I get that, it makes a lot of sense. It just wasn’t what I expected, and it’s not what I would have preferred. It feels somewhat cheap to criticise a movie just because it’s not what you personally would have liked, but in the end, isn’t that what all reviews are? If there were a movie called “All Daily Mail Journalists Should Be Shot In The Face”, and it was 90 minutes of justifying why everybody who works for, or even reads The Daily Mail should be shot in the face, I don’t think that paper would give it a positive review, no matter how well-written it is.

In summary; Hamnet is a superb film that’s expertly made and performed. It’s a film that will be studied and discussed for decades, and will rightfully win a lot of awards. It’s also a film that, for whatever reason, I didn’t connect with at all until the final scene. I left the film not knowing more about Shakespeare, and not feeling any closer to him or his work.

Song Sung Blue (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Lightning and Thunder, a Milwaukee husband and wife Neil Diamond tribute act, experience soaring success and devastating heartbreak in their musical journey together.

Thoughts Going In: I am never going to be able to remember that title. I’m not sure how much I’m going to get from this film, as I really don’t give a shit about Neil Diamond, let alone an impersonator.

As you can guess from my thoughts going in, there was a high chance I wasn’t going to vibe with this film. I don’t actively hate Neil Diamond; I feel the same way about him as I do about the Sega Mega Drive. I recognise it’s a huge deal to a lot of people, but outside of one or two tiny things (Solitary Man and Sword Of Vermillion), I have had zero connection, and it’s too late for me to get one now. I hadn’t seen any trailers so I legit had no idea what to expect. So when the film starts with the main character in an alcoholics anonymous meeting, pulling out an acoustic guitar and starting to sing like a douche at a house party (only without Wonderwall), my expectations were lower than Shemika Campbell’s 2010 world-record-setting limbo (yes, I did research that).

Song Sung Blue is incredibly melodramatic, to the point where it’s almost comedic, even during some of the most serious moments. The main character is delusional and selfish to the point of narcissism; taking it as a personal offence when a group of bikers don’t like Neil Diamond songs, or when a promoter who exclusively books cover artists asks him to play cover songs. The central romance doesn’t feel natural; the audience has no desire to see the two together before they get together; it happens so quickly that we don’t really get a sense of who they are outside of the relationship.

All of that was a long way to say that this film pushes a lot of my “Not for me” buttons, so why did it charm me so? It’s a genuinely fascinating story to watch; comprised of moments which, if you saw in fiction, you’d dismiss as unrealistic or stupid, but it all genuinely happened. The side characters are mostly lovable, especially the two teens. I’d love to see Ella Anderson and King Princess together again; they have great chemistry with each other, which I’d like to see explored further. Hugh Jackman is fine; most of the issues I had were with his character, not the performance. Kate Hudson probably gives the best performance; her character suffers so much over the duration, and her performance is the only thing that sells it. It’s full of moments which are life-affirming and sweet, with a warmth that is missing from many modern films.

I alluded to it earlier, SSB is based on a true story; specifically, a documentary of the same title released in 2008. I haven’t seen the documentary, so I don’t know what was taken from it and what was changed (I’m guessing the home movies played a big part in the documentary), so I won’t be judging it based on that. It’s going to be weird to say, but I kind of hope that a lot of this was invented for the sake of this film, because if it’s not, then the lead character is kind of a dick. Especially after his wife loses her leg. She’s traumatised by it and is not shown an ounce of compassion or love by her husband. Would it be that hard to show him displaying kindness to her?

When it works, it really does work, though. The gig with Pearl Jam is the culmination of everything this film wants to be: charming, loving, funny, and life-affirming. There are many small moments throughout that are just like that, but that’s the best example of how powerful it can be when it tries. I wish it had more moments like that, but I appreciate that it would feel a little much after a while.

In summary, not a brilliant movie, but worth your time watching.

Wake Up Dead Man (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A baffling death inside a quiet church draws Benoit Blanc into a tense investigation where faith secrets and suspicion blur as a close community turns against itself.

I should note that this will be my last review of 2025. To be honest, I just couldn’t be bothered to go see Anaconda, and Marty Supreme wasn’t available for viewing at my local cinema until 2026. Plus, it feels right to end 2025 on this movie. A few weeks ago, I was discussing the end-of-year awards with someone, and I mentioned the potential winners for “best film”. I narrowed it down to a list of five, but added “There’s a gap left for the new Knives Out”. In a year of uncertainty, I was certain it would reach that. So it’s weird that I don’t think it has matched my expectations. It’s not a bad film; it is still amazing, but it does feel like a slight downgrade from the two previous entries. It does improve on a second watch, but the initial feeling of slight disappointment doesn’t leave.

The main issue is that there’s very little Benoit in this Benoit movie. He doesn’t appear for 40 minutes. Now, Jud is a good character, played brilliantly by Josh O’Connor. But he’s not Benoit Blanc, so you do spend the time waiting for him to arrive. The lack of Benoit does break with tradition somewhat, but other than that, it stills to the formula pretty well; someone is dead, there’s a cast of characters all played by phenomenal actors, there’s a picturesque location, Blanc teams up with someone who is kind and very good at their job, plus there’s some weirdness.

I have no complaints about that. The formula works, so breaking it just for the sake of breaking the formula would feel silly. It does make me feel a bit sad that we won’t get to see some of these performers in another Knives Out movie; Jeffrey Wright, in particular, feels underutilised. Cailee Spaeny continues to be absolutely fantastic in everything she does. Josh O’Connor is good enough that it only took roughly 10 minutes for my brain to stop going “Is that Ralph Little?”.

The world-building of these movies frustrates me. On the one hand, it is great that they reference cases we haven’t seen; it makes it feel like the character exists outside of this universe. On the other hand, the two cases we have seen would be pretty high profile; one involved the death of a world-famous author, and the other involved an Elon Musk proxy. You’d think that would have come up in this. The right-wing influencer definitely would have asked Blanc about Miles Bron, and a best-selling author would definitely ask about Harlan Thrombey. I’m not asking for the entire film to revolve around the previous entries, but it would be interesting to see Blanc dismiss their questions as he’s too focused on the current case. Also, the first movie had Martha vomiting on Chris Evans, Glass Onion had the moment where everyone smashes shit up. Both of them are moments which are highly cathartic and entertaining, moments which you can point to as highlights of the year. There’s no equivalent in this. There’s no moment which stands out as being a highlight.

I do genuinely love this movie; it’s a solid 9/10 at the very least, but the others are so close to perfection that you can’t see this as anything other than a downgrade. Like the other two entries, it does NAIL the closing, though. It’s definitely the best Netflix movie of the year, but when their other efforts have included “Kinda Pregnant”, that’s not a high bar to clear.

Avatar: Fire And Ash (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: After dealing with air in the original and water in the sequel, it’s now fire’s time to shine when the conflict on Pandora escalates as Jake and Neytiri’s family encounter a new, aggressive Na’vi tribe.

Are you ready for the most cinematically blasphemous sentence I’ve ever uttered? Oh, you’re not.

Okay, how about now? Good, then I’ll begin: I think of the Avatar movies a lot like the Transformers and Insidious films.

Now that the fire and ash-hole chants have died down, I’ll explain. I have seen all three Avatar movies at the cinema, I’m pretty sure I’ve watched all three Insidious movies too, and at least two Transformer movies. Now, can I name more than three characters from either of those? Nope. I have always admired the Avatar movies for their technical brilliance. There’s barely a single frame which doesn’t look spectacular (although I personally found the drugged sequence in this one kind of goofy). These movies are cinematic art, and I will never not be wowed by them. Although the negative consequence of both this and Water being filmed at the same time means that the visual jump between the two of them isn’t nearly as impressive. This still looks fantastic, but outside of some of the fire sequences, you’ve seen a lot of before.

The stories, however? I’ve always found them to be a little bit emotionally sterile. Avatar: Fire And Ash (A: FAA, pronounced Ah-fah! like you’re singing Knowing Me Knowing You) already slightly soured itself with me by making Spider such a prominent character. Something about his character annoys me, and I can’t quite figure out what. I think it’s partly because he reminds me of when kids’ TV shows written by old people would introduce a “hip” new character who would enter and immediately be worshipped by everybody because he could do a kickflip. I also found it recreated most of the story beats from the previous films, especially the second one.

On the upside, the action sequences are among the most dynamic the franchise has ever seen. Oona Chaplin oozes a mix of danger and sexuality that you can’t take your eyes off. Stephen Lang’s character is given much more to do than be the stereotypical Colonel of before. The background characters are more fleshed out than they ever have been, meaning that this is the first in the franchise that feels like it belongs to the universe rather than just Jake (although a lot of characters keep ending up in just the right place, which makes the planet seem small). It got me very excited for the future; it truly feels like it lays the groundwork for something spectacular. Also, it’s just nice to see spectacle in the cinema. This would not work on a mobile phone or a laptop; it deserves a big screen.

In summary, I have never been as simultaneously bored and impressed.