Category: Review

Wolf Man (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Blake Lovell (Christopher Abbot) takes his wife and kid on a vacation to his childhood home. His vacation-as-marriage-counselling efforts are somewhat thwarted by a therianthropic threat intent on killing.

I’m a fan of Christopher Abbott, based ENTIRELY on the fact that I liked the first film I saw him in (On The Count Of Three). Wolf Man having him as the lead, combined with it being made by Leigh Whannell (writer of Saw, director of The Invisible Man) got my hopes up high.

Maybe too high. I didn’t dislike Wolf Man. The last wolf-based movie I watched at the cinema was (I think, but I could be wrong) Wolf, a film so bad that I live-blogged it for Halloween a few years ago, and I haven’t live-blogged anything since. This is nowhere near as bad as that. The score on Metacritic currently stands at 50%, which seems fair. It’s as middle-of-the-road as a dead badger. Not much really stands out as either a negative or a positive.

The biggest negative for me was the story itself. The cause of the transformation feels unearned. It’s as close to “character was bitten by a zombie, but the audience doesn’t realise” as it’s possible to get. He’s in an accident, stuff happens, and he gets scratched by the “wolf” attacking him. He starts transforming later on, and you do get the feeling that you’ve missed something. It’s all the more baffling because near the end of his transformation, there is a moment where his leg is grabbed and he’s attacked. That would have made a much more logical cause for the infection, and it wouldn’t have been in the middle of a car crash scene. The reveal of who the Wolf Man that’s attacking them is is so obvious that I’m not sure it even counts as a twist. “Hmmmm, this character mysteriously disappeared 30 years ago in this very area, and now we’re being attacked by something with slight human characteristics that’s been haunting these wolves for decades. I wonder if those two things are linked?”

The visual effects are fine, I guess? Nothing will ever top An American Werewolf In London for a transformation sequence with weight and body horror, there are moments where Wolf Man comes close, but then there are also moments where it looks a little bit goofy.

On the plus side, the performances are good, Abbot is good enough that you forgive him for Kraven The Hunter (although I completely forgot he was even in that), the biggest issue I have with Matilda Firth is that she was born in 2014 and that makes me feel old. I was most impressed with Julia Garner. She has such a great look, it’s a mix between 80’s Scream Queen and Classic Hollywood Beauty mixed with a smidgen of Crazy Art Teacher/Madonna. She’s in the new Fantastic Four movie which I’m now looking forward to 12% more because of her involvement.

I also have to praise Wolf Man for the scenes from Blake’s world. The visuals, the audio etc all combine to create something new and also make sense. Once the colour change happens you somehow INSTANTLY know that we’re now in his perspective. It would have been so easy to demonstrate it by saying, “This is what he can see,” in a POV shot, but keeping it in a third-person viewpoint is much more visually interesting. It also allows for transitions between Blake’s version of reality and reality reality to be smoother than a Barry White ballad. As a writer, it’s easy to see moments where you think “I would not have done that”, but as a director, it’s difficult to not be thoroughly impressed with what Whannell has pulled off. I have criticised this film, but I appreciate that it made an effort. It instilled emotional scenes, it added character depth so they all seem like actual humans as opposed to just “characters in a horror movie”. So while I have criticised it, I would MUCH rather something like this exist than “Generic Horror Movie Number 57”.

Here (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Multiple generations of couples and families inhabit the same home over the course of a century.

I knew one thing before sitting down to watch this: the CGI used to de-age Tom Hanks was not good. I have to be honest, that didn’t bother me that much. There are moments where you can see the CGI and you’re brought out of the narrative, but it doesn’t happen anywhere near as much as it could.

Here is a fascinating watch, all taking place at the exact same location over the course of hundreds of years in a non-linear fashion. The non-linear nature was a smart choice because it allows you to see how actions can influence people years later. It also allows for more interesting transitions because you can see the changes.

That leads me to the visual downside. Here doesn’t fade directly from one scene to the next, there’s also no attempt to make it look like it’s one scene. Instead, it brings up a small box on the screen which contains the same location at a different time or with different people, it’s only once you get used to that new scene that the movie moves on fully. It’s visually compelling, but there’s one major drawback. It makes it difficult to be invested in the current scene as you’re always seeing what’s next. It would be like if the “here’s what’s up next” part of television shows happened halfway through the episode instead of at the end. The constant look into the future stops you from focusing on the present, Here never exists in the moment, instead just constantly dangling the narrative carrot in front of you and waiting for you to catch up.

As much as it is cool to see it through the different time periods, there’s a definite focus on what happened after 1945; with the characters from then onwards being the ones we see the most of. To be honest, they’re the only ones needed. Yes, the look into the Lenni-Lenape couple and their courtship and burial rituals are interesting, and the William Franklin connection does come into play in the present-day scenes, but they’re not needed. They feel like narrative sorbets designed to cleanse our palate. The post-Young scenes also aren’t that interesting, seemingly just there to remind us that COVID existed, and police racism still does. If anybody watched this movie without those scenes, nobody would say “hey! This family drama set from 1945-2000 doesn’t focus on 2020 pandemics and race relations enough”. It feels like they were put in there just because Zemeckis feels this is an “important” movie, and “important” movies need to discuss themes.

I hate to sound like a Daily Mail reader, but this needed less politics. If it focused just on the family and their life in the house, it would be a much more interesting watch. I can accept the scenes of the house being built, because the house is a character, so seeing how it was “birthed” could also tie in thematically, but we didn’t need the inventor, the wannabe flier etc. If you cut out all the fluff, it would be much shorter. That’s not too big an improvement, as timing isn’t an issue. The “here’s what’s next” nature of the visuals means that even when you’re not interested, you’re still paying attention, so it flies by much quicker than it should.

In summary, it’s an interesting art experience, not a great movie. As much as I did enjoy the narrative, it feels like it’s trying too hard to move you. It’s so heavy-handed that if it slapped you it would knock you out. As Peter Sobczynski said in his review posted on rogerebert.com “there is a point when you find yourself thinking that the only thing that Zemeckis hasn’t thrown into the mix is a needle drop of ‘Our House’ and then he proceeds to do just that”. It’s not a terrible film, but it’s not one that wouldn’t have worked better as a 20 minute short instead. Also, a simply terrible title that makes it really awkward to talk about.

Nosferatu (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Do you really need me to tell you the story for this? Just watch the original.

There was a lot of hype for this. I have been excited since I first heard of it back in 2016, even mentioning how I was looking forward to it in my review of The Witch (or The VVitch). Many journalists and critics raved about early screenings of it.

But then I heard from actual people; moviegoers who I like and respect. Their feedback wasn’t quite as positive. And I agree with them, I was not a fan of this movie. For whatever reason, I just didn’t care about what I was seeing. I haven’t seen the original from the 1920s, but I know it (mainly through the Kill Count video I recently watched). At no point while watching New-sferatu did I feel I was watching something original. It never felt like anything other than a remake. It’s so heavily indebted to its sources that it never feels like it has its own identity.

My other issue is the filming style. A lot of dialogue is delivered straight to the camera, from the receiving person’s POV. As such, there’s a disconnect between everybody, it kind of reminds me of television shows made during COVID where everybody had to socially distance themselves.

Eggers is a fantastic filmmaker, there’s no doubt about that. The visual style is arresting, with every frame mesmerising and haunting, particularly with the use of light and shadow. As a storyteller? I’m afraid that’s his weakness. None of the characters seem that interesting, Ellen Hunter, in particular feeling more of a storytelling device than an actual character. The title character also doesn’t seem that interesting. He’s played well, looks good, but the character itself doesn’t seem to have any presence; when he’s not onscreen, you don’t feel him looming over the narrative.

The performances are fine, Lily-Rose Depp has a haunted look which really suits the character and themes, Nicholas Hoult was made for these movies, and Dafoe continues to be fucking weird. Dafoe and Eggers work well together, their styles suit each other.

Like I said; all the technical parts? Brilliant. All the parts that require how to make a movie? Brilliant. All the parts that require imagination and heart? Lacking. Remakes should showcase and do what couldn’t be done in the original. All we have here is more of the same. It doesn’t remind me of classic Dracula stories, what it does remind me of? Gus Van Sant’s remake of Psycho.

A Real Pain (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Summary: Mild-mannered David (Jesse Eisenberg takes a trip through historical Poland with his cousin, Manic Depressive Pixie Dream Bro Benji (Kieran Culkin)

God damn it 2025! (Yes, I’m aware this film is technically a 2024 film, but it wasn’t released in cinemas here until 2025, so I’m counting it as a 2025 film). 2025 has broken the established rules of cinema-watching already. It’s supposed to go: January is where the expected failures go, the ones the studio is attempting to hide. That way I can talk about how I’m worried if the year is going to be any good. A Real Pain has callously disregarded that rule by being one of the best films I’ve seen in a long time. If it had been released last year, it would have won Best Film, and that’s how good it was. Looking ahead, it’s really hard to see what will beat it.

So why does this movie work? It feels like it was made for me. It’s incredibly character-based, with even the side characters having enough individuality to feel like real people. It’s emotional AF, with moments that WILL break you. The performances are all damn fine too. This is the best that Eisenberg has ever been, he actually seems like a character rather than just Eisenberg again. I haven’t seen Succession yet so I can’t judge whether this is the best Culkin has been, but it’s the best I’ve seen him. The chemistry between the two feels so natural, you do get the feeling they’ve known each other for a long time.

I have to mention Will Sharpe too, his meek whilst trying to stay in charge nature provides a foil to the chaos of Culkin (I think I saw Chaos Of Culkin supporting Dropkick Murphys back in ’04). My main takeaway when it comes to the cast is that it’s nice to see Jennifer Grey again. She’s not my favourite performer, but I (and there’s no logical reason for this) have always felt a great warmth towards her and want to do well.

Be warned, this is not an easy watch. I don’t mean in terms of weirdness or difficulty in understanding. I mean it’s so emotional that there are times you may find it difficult to take in. It’s here where the performances and the script shine. Yes, the funny moments are brilliant (the moment where Culkin’s character Benji meets the rest of the group is so well-written in terms of humour and character introduction), but it’s not the laughs that you’ll remember. You’d think it would be the scene at the concentration camp that would break you, but I was personally more affected by the scenes on either side. Before it you have Benji ranting about how weird it is that tourists and camp descendants take a comfortable train there. The scene after the camp is much less dialogue-based, but just as much Benji. It’s simply him breaking down into hysterical tears.

Those two scenes are emotional, brilliant, and damn brilliant. But still might not be among my favourite scenes. There’s one that takes place near a statue that I think is close to perfection in terms of group dynamics and humour out of darkness and one at a restaurant where Jesse Eisenberg delivers a stunning monologue about Benji, revealing some truths that help explain so much about the character.

If I had to be negative? The ending could be better. I get why it ended the way it did, but it feels like the film has just had sex and is lying there in an awkward post-coital haze rather than just putting its money on the counter and leaving the room. The visuals often aren’t that interesting. That isn’t necessarily a massive negative, as there’s only so much you can do visually when a film is as character and dialogue-based as this is. But there were one or few moments where I thought “If this shot was better, it would be an all-timer”. As I said, these are mild criticisms, and I had to undergo a 10-week yoga training session as I REALLY had to stretch for them. My main disappointment is that Benji is male because if the character was female I could describe them as a Manic Shiksa Dream Girl. I guess Manic Depressive Pixie Dream Bro is good too, but nowhere near as clever.

In summary; one of the best films I’ve ever seen, and one that’s damned the next few films I watch to feel worse by comparison.

Sonic The Hedgehog 3 (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Sonic, Knuckles and Tails reunite to battle Shadow, a mysterious new enemy with powers unlike anything they’ve faced before. With their abilities outmatched in every way, they seek out an unlikely alliance to stop Shadow and protect the planet.

During the Nintendo/Sega “war” of the 1990s, I was firmly on the side of Nintendo. It just suited me better. I liked Mario’s intricate level design, the lush visuals of Donkey Kong, and Luigi’s CEO-handling skills. Truth be told, I’ve never really “vibed” with the Sonic games (except Dr. Robotnik’s Mean Bean Machine for some reason), so the expectation would be that I’d be glad to see the end of this franchise.

Truthfully? I hope there is a fourth one. Not just because the way Sonic 3 ends means there kind of has to be one. But also because I’ve kind of liked these movies. None of them have been among my favourite films of the year, but none are ones that I will consider “bad”. At its worst, it’s mediocre, with weak plotting and no idea how to keep Sonic’s speed consistent. But it never ever gets worse than that. Weirdly, it’s probably among the most consistent franchises of the modern age; with no major changes in tone or quality throughout. It’s hard to imagine somebody only liking one of them as they are all very similar, for better and for worse.

It’s the best one of the three so far, mainly because it cuts down on what I didn’t enjoy of the first two. There’s much less wasted time (still some, but nowhere near as much). There’s one scene in particular which stops the movie dead for a few minutes, and WILL be mentioned in the end of year summary (starting Monday, very excited about that).

For worse, the story of the third is very similar to the second. The story arc that Knuckles and Shadow go on is basically the same. There was a chance to do something special, but it never manages it. This means that from the trailer, you can kind of figure out what’s going to happen. It tries to swerve you by having Robotnik’s grandfather appear as a secondary villain, but it’s not difficult to figure out where that’s going. There are also moments which feel disconnected from the story as if they’re left over from an early draft. On occasion, there are moments where it feels like the story wasn’t decided until the edit, and somewhere there are huge plot points on the cutting floor but they couldn’t remove every reference and set-up.

Overall, this is a really difficult film to dislike. It’s fun and contains more references to the games than you could shake a stick at. In the Mario movies, a lot of the best references were done by the artists, with the narrative references feeling shoe-horned in (especially the kart section). The references here are done by the writers. If you are a fan of the games, you WILL be excited by the post-credits scene, and you will enjoy seeing the likes of Maria on screen and being fleshed out as characters.

It also benefits from having a better sense of emotion at its core. The Maria story is heartbreaking to watch unfold. Its believable backstory is simple but effective. The human characters are essential but not the main focus. This is how it should be. Nobody buys a ticket to watch Sonic to see Tom’s adventures, but those parts still have to be well-written so they don’t come off as annoying.

The key to this has always been the performances. Ben Schwartz was a weird choice for Sonic, but he is perfect for the hot-headedness of the character. Idris Elba is a LOT better at comedy than you’d think he’d be. I know Liam Neeson is up for the lead in new Naked Gun, but I’d like to think there’s a place in that movie for someone like Idris. Keanu Reeves is a fun new addition too, providing genuine gravitas to what could be too silly.

In summary, the franchise continues to impress. Being a lot better than it needs to be. They’re not great, but they’re entertaining distractions from the inevitable heat-death of the universe.

Kraven The Hunter (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Sergei Kravinoff is a big-game hunter who specialises in dickheads. His family history brings him into conflict with Rhino and Foreigner, who wants to know what love is. And to kill people. It’s mainly the killing people.

So it’s ended. After six films, the Sony Spider-verse has closed. Or, as Sony initially called it: Sony Picture’s Universe Of Marvel Characters, shortened to SPUMC. The fact that that is not a joke tells you everything you need to know about it. They have always felt like unwanted distractions. Once people realised they were all setups and spin-offs of a main universe it would never meet (outside of fleeting moments) they began to feel like wastes of time. It’s not a good sign that out of six, two are generally regarded as some of the worst films ever made. If they knew, you’d have to think they would have ended it with The Last Dance, because Kraven is a weird choice as a curtain closer. There’s no sense of closure or wider universe development. Truth be told, the films have NEVER felt connected, which is a baffling choice, almost as baffling as “let’s make a series of films based on villains we treat as heroes”.

So, how about Kraven on its own? It doesn’t work. It’s not as bad as Madame Web, but it’s not really good. It feels like it was written scene by scene by different writers, with no rewriting going on to connect them once they’ve happened. Characters are not just inconsistent, there are times when their very existence seems baffling. He finds a woman based solely on the fact that she put a card in his pocket. He meets up with her and asks for her help in finding people, within five minutes of telling her “I’m a hunter, I can find anybody”. So……..why does he need her again? A lot of his attributes are not only informed attributes (where we hear of them, but never see them), but they’re also often visually disproven. Characters speak as if he hasn’t been spotted and is a complete mystery. He then runs along the street in central London with no disguise. Not only would he have been seen, but there would also be youtube edits of him 5 minutes after the first time he runs on the outside of a building.

Some of the performances are serviceable, but they never ever get better than that. However, they sure do get A LOT worse. The accents are as inconsistent as the visual effects (and that’s not a compliment to either of those), there’s one performer in particular who is only in for a few minutes at the start, but her line delivery is SO BAD that it’s almost laughable. It’s so bad, in fact, that I won’t even name the actor or the character because there’s no way this performer was trained, and if they were, they should ask for their money back.

The ADR is more noticeable than any film I’ve seen in a while, the CGI is ropier than a BDSM pirate ship, and the action scenes are flat, with even bloodshed moments feeling like they have no impact. It’s not just that there are a lot of bad moments, there’s nothing good. The soundtrack is completely forgettable, even Madame Web had a Cranberries song.

In some ways, I’m sad the SPUMC is other, people always look forward to a load of SPUMC coming at them, and every film in this franchise has potential. But it’s never lived up to that. There’s not a single drop of SPUMC that hasn’t made you wonder whether it could have been better.

Moana 2 (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Moana journeys to the far seas of after receiving an unexpected call from her wayfinding ancestors.

Moana 2: More-ana has received a lot of criticism upon release. From people saying “It was obviously supposed to be a TV show” (which it was), to just a general sense of disappointment. At the time of writing, it has a 61% score on Rotten Tomatoes, that’s only 2% away from being rotten. It’s not as good as the first one, but it’s certainly not a bad movie. It currently has an audience score (sorry, “Popcornmeter”, FFS) of 81%. That feels more accurate based on the 95% score of the original.

Yes, it has its flaws. The music isn’t anywhere near as good and feels more unnatural than it did in the original. The villain isn’t quite as present, to the point where the film seems to be building up someone else as the villain, who then turns out to be helpful and isn’t mentioned again. It also has more moments that feel cringy compared to the original.

It is still fun though. It adds to the story from the first one in a logical way, expanding the universe that was created. Most of the original cast return, and the new voices slot right in; Rose Matafeo BELONGS in more Disney movies, and her voice is perfect for animation. David Fane also feels so natural that I had to check he wasn’t in the original. The Rock continues to do what he does, and Auli’i Cravalho is still one of the most perfect castings any animation has ever done, she sounds like how her character looks (although I still maintain that Moana herself looks like an animated version of Jennifer Freeman, the second Claire from My Wife And Kids).

The movie looks GORGEOUS. Water is generally really hard to animate due to the unpredictable nature of how it moves (second only to George Best in the 1966 European Cup quarter-final against Benfica), so it’s very easy to mess up. There are no moments here where the animation takes you out. It looks so perfect and real that it almost feels live-action. This is why it’s so baffling that a live-action version of Moana is being made. Why? It hasn’t been long enough since the original to justify it, and there is no way it will look as good, so what’s the point? The high quality of Moana 2: The Ocean Strikes Back means that audiences are fully invested in this iteration of the character, all a live-action version will do is dilute or taint the love for the franchise.

In summary; this film is good, only tainted by how utterly superb the first one was. The reviews are wrong, except for this one, I am always right.

Dear Santa (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A dyslexic child accidentally writes a letter to Satan instead of Satan. That’s it, that’s the movie.

The Farrelly Brothers have directed some of the most well-regarded comedies of the modern age; Dumb and Dumber, There’s Something About Mary etc. Jack Black also has a pretty damn good history in comedies; the modern Jumanji movies, School Of Rock, Kung Fu Panda. With that much comedy pedigree, and with such a simple premise, this should be fantastic.

It isn’t. It isn’t the worst film Jack Black has been in recently (Hello, Borderlands), but it is definitely in the lower half. None of the issues are with the performers, Black is on form, and even though she’s only in it a little section, I LOVE Cate Freedman as the crossing guard (disappointingly she’s not even mentioned on the Wikipedia page). The issue is the script. It’s incredibly disjointed. The main problem is a lack of cohesion in terms of audience. Much like Red One, this feels like it needs to either age up or down. At times it feels like a kids’ movie. The “here’s what I can do for you” sequence feels like it’s aimed at pre-teens. Some moments feel like they’re lifted directly from a 90s Christmas movie. But then it makes jokes about the sexual abuse of a minor and the consequences of fucking a dog, which makes you feel it’s aimed more at 15-year-olds who want to be thought of as mature and think that just means swearing and sex jokes.

There’s also a surprising lack of heart to the whole thing. It attempts to have heart with a dead brother subplot, but it feels incredibly tacked on, and the way it comes back at the end just raises more questions than answers, to the point where the “wait, but how does the world react to this?” reaction overshadows any sense of narrative closure. That would be acceptable in a kids’ movie, but not in a film with some of the jokes that Dear Santa has.

I get why a studio would diversify their jokes, to appeal to a wide audience. But the way they’ve done it here means that it ends up appealing to nobody. It’s too childish for kids, too mean-spirited for kids, and too one-dimensional for adults. I put more thought into this review than the scriptwriters did into the screenplay, and considering I did this while watching an episode of Smallville, that says a lot.

Timestalker (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Girl meets boy, girl gets decapitated, girl meets boy again in a future life. Repeat.

I’m a massive fan of Alice Lowe, from her television work in Darkplace or Horrible Histories, to her forays into films. She’s weird. I mean that in a good way. She’s one of those actors who could turn up in almost any comedy or horror and it would make sense, how she didn’t make an appearance in Paddington or Wonka is astounding to me. It’s not just a performer, she’s gained a reputation as a pretty darn good writer/director too; giving the world Sightseers and Prevenge. The latter, she made whilst pregnant, and is highly recommended. My plan for this review as to gush over how much I adore her and everything she does, this is the first film of hers I’ve reviewed on this site, and it’s about damn time(stalker) I showed her the love she deserved.

With that in mind, it’s a shame that Timestalker isn’t quite as good as you feel it could be. I’m not saying it’s bad, I’m not even saying it’s not good, but it’s not brilliant. It doesn’t feel as essential as some of her other work. It’s got a really unique premise, and some great visual styles, but there are times when it feels like that’s all it has. Timestalker does have the bad fortune to be released in 2024. It would be impossible to compare this to anything else any other year. You could legitimately say you’ve never seen anything like this. In 2024? It brings to mind Bertrand Bonello’s The Beast (as reviewed here). They take different approaches to it though, whereas The Beast gives you existential dread and nihilistic thoughts, Timestalker gives you laughs and playfulness. It’s certainly more consistent than The Beast, better than the worst parts, but nowhere near as good as the best parts.

My biggest gripe is that Timestalker is that it feels like it is not making the most of the premise. It needs more links between the times, with repeated themes and visuals in different contexts. There are some visuals that keep cropping up (the pink heart for one) but they feel too forced and instead of suggesting a connected universe, this makes it feel more like that object has magical powers. The music, especially, is a component that definitely could have had a lot more fun with connective moments.

This is very negative I know. In truth, I did like Timestalker. It’s darkly funny with many moments where you catch yourself laughing at things you know you really shouldn’t. There are some terrific colours throughout, so it’s never an ugly watch. Aneurin Barnard is a revelation (which I realise now is a borderline offensive thing to say considering how many things he’s been in), he has innate star power, which helps you buy into the idea that she would fall in obsession with him. You see him on screen and you just know “That’s a star”. He backs this up with a good performance too, his performance in the 80’s timeline is a particular delight. The 80’s section was probably my favourite part, and not just because Lowe fits that decade visually. It’s also the part with the best story development, characterisation, and music. Her unspoken romance with Meg is also incredibly sweet.

In summary, it’s weird and wonderful, but not quite great. Alice Lowe is still one of the most unique creators around, and it will take something truly terrible for her to lose stock.

Woman Of The Hour (2023) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: It’s 1970 and Sheryl Bradshaw is so desperate for TV time that her agent books her on The Dating Game, unaware that one of the male contestants is harbouring a dark and disturbing secret: he’s from Texas. Oh, and he kills people. That’s bad too.

Woman Of The Hour (or WOTH, pronounced to rhyme with cough) is like a six-dicked Calydonian boar, a strange beast you can’t turn away from. It’s helped by a truly fascinating story. This actually happened. In 1978, serial killer Rodney Alcala made an appearance on The Dating Game, and he did win, which has to be a real kick in the teeth of the guys who were rejected. Everything else about the story is fiction. The entire story of the woman who went out with him? Fake. The woman in the audience who reports the killer and is ignored? Fake. The host of the show is a complete dick? Fake (for this one specific person). A producer making creepy comments about Anna Kendrick whilst pointing at her breasts? Fa-oh wait, that’s real, happened to her when she was 19, which sadly meant she was too young to drink, so she couldn’t go to a bar, buy a bottle of drink then use the bottle to slit the throat of that producer.

I’m okay with that kind of approach to historical accuracy. This is mainly because it never pretends to be anything other than what it is; it is a fictional narrative that occurs during a real historical story. If it was presented with a subtitle like “The true story” then I’d object. The reality isn’t important, the story and the setting is. The setting is significant. This was a time when, according to the letter of the law, women were mostly equals (sometimes), but the reality was very different. Men still felt comfortable being sexually aggressive with female strangers, who would then be told to “take it as a compliment” or “stop complaining” when they mentioned it. It’s very different from now, I’ve spoken to many men on the subject and they all agree women are treated equally now. The time is just as much a character as the serial killer (now there’s a sentence I’ve never said before).

The other essential half of the jigsaw of WOTH is Anna Kendrick. This is her directorial debut and it’s pretty damn impressive. She does have a tendency towards being overly arty and “oooo look at this” as opposed to using the camera to tell a story. There are no moments which are “bad”, nothing which makes you think “Ooof, I wouldn’t have done that”, and more experienced directors have done that (A Quiet Place: Day One, for example, featured one of my least favourite shots of the year from a coherence standpoint, and that was from a guy with experience). I hope Kendrick continues to direct, and I’m curious as to what her next move would be. I’m hoping she continues to do stories she has a passion and personal interest in (she donated her fee from this movie to charity, because she’s lovely and a badass). She’s about 2 movies away from making an INCREDIBLE feminist AF drama which I will absolutely LOVE.

Her performance is good too. The moment where she calls everyone out on their misogyny is glorious to watch. I’ve seen some reviews state she was the wrong choice, and that she feels too modern for a 1970s character. To those people I say, you’re wrong. I won’t debate this, I won’t explain this, but you are wrong.

The weakest part, for me, is the narrative. The fact he was on a tv show (you know, the whole selling point of the film) doesn’t matter. It’s not his appearance on TV that leads to his downfall, his downfall wasn’t until the next year. So really, the main crux of the film is entirely inconsequential. It’s still a good watch, but I do wish that more things mattered, that the timeline was more coherent, and that the side characters were memorable. So much focus went on the “serial killer on a dating show”, that it feels that not enough effort was put on anything else in the narrative, so it feels incredibly underbaked.

That being said, there is one BRILLIANT scene that’s not set on the show. The date. Specifically, the aftermath when she’s creeped out by him in the car park. It’s CHILLING, and makes the hair on the back of your neck stand on edge. It’s also (I imagine), a scene in which pretty much every woman alive has a “yeah that happened to me too. When? Well the first time was when I was 12, then the next time it was-” series of anecdotes which are similar.

In summary, an easy film to be impressed by. An easy film to be moved by. But also a film in which you can’t help but feel there’s something better from the creators in the future.