Tag: fiction

Ella McCay (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A look at the lives of those close to or under ella, Ella, Ella. That only works if you sing it like Rihanna’s Umbrella

On January 27, 1992, George HW Bush was making a speech during his re-election campaign that included the sentence “We are going to keep on trying to strengthen the American family, to make American families a lot more like the Waltons and a lot less like the Simpsons”, this was after his wife had described the show as “the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen”, which answers the question of whether she spent much time with her own son. Three days after Bush’s speech, the rerun of Stark Raving Dad (the Michael Jackson episode) featured a new opening; the family watching the speech on television, then Bart saying, “We’re just like the Waltons. We’re praying for an end to the depression, too”, which is a truly great joke. I do have a reason for saying this; it may be difficult to picture now, but there was a time when The Simpsons was considered subversive and dangerous, when schools forbade any Simpsons merchandise as they considered Bart a bad example.

I’m mentioning this because the writer/director of Ella McCay is James L. Brooks, one of the key writers for The Simpsons in its early years. With that in mind, it’s weird that he made this movie. On the one hand, it’s nice to see movies like this; simple movies about women going through tribulations which don’t involve sexual assault. Films which are ultimately pure at heart and can be watched on a Sunday afternoon after dinner. On the other hand, it feels socially irresponsible to make a movie in 2025 about US politics and have it be utterly toothless. If this were released 10 years ago, I’d have had no problems with it. I wouldn’t have loved it; it’s far too flawed for that, but I wouldn’t be quite as disappointed as I am. Today, Rob Reiner was murdered, and the President of the United States essentially responded that he died because he was anti-Trump. The most surprising part of that is that it’s not that surprising. This is the world we’re in now; if you make a political comedy, it needs bite. In 2025, making a movie like this feels like an act of cowardice.

But aside from that, how is it? It’s a mess. Characters are inconsistent in terms of behaviour; it seems to be written by an AI that’s ignoring previous input. There are so many stories running through it, but very few of them are given enough time to justify their existence. They all feel like they’re building towards something, then they just choose not to. This is most obvious with her dad. His story ends with her saying she won’t accept his apology. But it never looked like she was going to anyway, so it’s not really that satisfying an ending; nothing is gained or changed. There are moments where the film that it could be makes an appearance. Watching her verbally express her anxieties and worries in a cannabis-induced monologue is a fantastic window into her psyche, is close in quality to the monologue from Barbie, which is very high praise.

It feels like it was originally designed as an ensemble piece, focused on a large group of people all connected through one person; the trials and tribulations of her friends, family, and colleagues. But then, somewhere in the edit, they decided to cut out non-Ella scenes. As a result, none of the side-characters are memorable; they don’t feel like actual people with their own lives; they just feel like they don’t exist outside of Ella.

I refuse to accept that James L.Brooks has financial difficulties. He is not forced to make movies anymore. He’s at the stage of his career where every project should be a passion project. It should be “I NEED to tell this story, and only I can, it must be told”. So for him to be 85 years old and think that THIS is the film he needs to make? I can’t help but feel a little disappointed.

Plus, the title (Ella McCay) is far too close to the name of the lead actress (Emma Mackey), and I don’t like that. It’s not an actual issue, but it will mean I am forever not quite sure whether I’ve got the title of this film correct. Also, whenever anybody called out her name three times, my brain automatically ended “ey ey ey” and started singing Umbrella.

Queen Of The Ring (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: The tale of Mildred Burke; those who know, know why she’s important. Those who don’t? Prepare to find out.

I know a little bit about Mildred Burke, I could probably BS my way into a small essay about the impact she had on professional wrestling, as long as I kept some details incredibly vague, especially when it comes to names and dates. But I will always watch a film about professional wrestlers, mainly because it attracts such weird personalities. In what other performance medium could you have a lottery winner buy their way in and then later die whilst running around a hotel covered in baby oil and carrying a baseball bat, and not have it be one of the most iconic stories? So really, I’m the perfect audience for this. I will understand the basics, but won’t know the exact details, so I’ll still be surprised.

I’m not sure how this will fare with non-wrestling fans. On the plus side, it explains the wrestling business well; its history in relation to the carnival circuit is something that a lot of films about the subject overlook. I hope this becomes the biggest film ever because then it will seem normal when I use the phrase “heel turn” in reviews (there’s really no better phrase). On the downside, it could have done a better job of explaining who some people were. It feels like it expects you to know who some people are based on context, waiting far too long to name on. I know the NWA and the territory system, but a lot won’t, and the lack of knowledge about that could also hamper some people’s enjoyment. Even with that in mind, I think there’s still enough here for non-fans to be interested and to learn. That’s based on my assumption that this is accurate. Considering Jim Cornette is involved, that’s a pretty safe assumption as he’s notoriously respectful of classic wrestling.

There are really only two moments where I felt my being a fan changed my perception a lot. One, it’s fascinating to see a representation of a younger Mae Young. I’m used to her being in her 70s and still being tougher than a burnt stake, so it’s interesting to watch a time period where she had the body you’d expect someone with her physical resiliency to have. The other one is one I’m possibly wrong about: the racially mixed crowds, I know that was still illegal in some parts of the country, it’s why the work of Sputnik Monroe and his efforts to desegregate the audiences in 1957 were so controversial., so there’s a chance that was bad choice, but I’m willing to be told I’m wrong, and I probably am.

One thing that is clear to everyone: Mildred Burke really got screwed over. I wish she had got her flowers while she was alive. Her story is iconic; what she did was something that cannot be overstated (despite the best efforts of some people). I thought this was surprisingly fair in how it dealt with controversial characters. It openly states, “Despite his many flaws, Billy Wolfe helped popularise women’s wrestling”, see THAT’S how you do it. He was a complete prick, but he did change women’s wrestling for the better, so there’s no turning him into a cartoonish villain or diminishing his efforts.

I thought her time in Al Hoft’s territory went by too quickly in the film. She goes from unknown to headliner way too fast, and the montage isn’t good enough. But if it went slower, then it might have caused a bigger gap between the explanation of what a “shoot fight” is, and one actually occurring, so I can see why it was done that way. That’s what most of my criticisms are, just small imperfections that stop it from being great; scenes which feel needless (the shoe-horning of Vince McMahon Sr feels weird), the way some characters you’d feel are important are neglected, and how for a lot of events we’re not really given enough context to understand WHY certain things are big deals.

There’s a really small moment which I liked; she was showing off her skills, beating a random guy, and a tiny girl flexed her muscles nearby, showing the influence she was having. There’s no “and that little girl grew up to be……”, it helps emphasise how important role models are to everyday people.

The performances? They’re hard to fault. Emily Bett Rickards is in great shape. Weirdly, she looks tougher than some of the actual wrestlers cast in the movie. Josh Lucas is a suitable mix of charming and scummy. Due to the way characters revolve in and out of the narrative, it’s hard for many of them to leave an impression, but none of them are negative, so that’s a plus.

One thing I didn’t expect to find myself enjoying so much was the music. It’s mostly new songs, but with an old-fashioned feel to them, like modern takes on old tales. Which is thematically perfect for this story. This feels like the perfect time for a movie like this to be released, and I’m glad it was. I had to watch it on Amazon, but I’d have absolutely loved if I got a chance to see this at the cinema. Ah, well, maybe in 10 years, when it becomes a cult classic. I’d love Avi Avildsen to take a chance on some of the other characters. I trust he’d do well with telling the story of Gorgeous George, Fabulous Moolah, or Ethel Johnson. But seeing as those stories are unlikely to be told, we’ll have to settle for this one brilliant one.

Good Fortune (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A well-meaning but inept angel named Gabriel meddles in the lives of a struggling gig worker and a wealthy venture capitalist.

Aziz Ansari could have gone down a very different career path. He was a pretty big deal in comedic circles in the late 2010s, then in 2018, he got caught up in a #MeToo-related scandal (albeit one of the tamer ones). At this point, he could have gone the Jimmy Havoc route and retired from public life, he could have gone down the Louis CK path and ignored it, or he could have done what Russel Brand did and gone full-blown conspiracy theorist (albeit one who agrees with a US political party funded by billionaires). Instead, he did something almost unheard of in celebrity circles; he took ownership of his mistake. Not in the form of a multi-million dollar apology tour, but instead by admitting he misread a situation, fucked up, and he apologised for it. As such, he’s avoided the stink that surrounds someone like Kevin Spacey and is forgiven for it to the point it never comes up anymore (outside of idiotic reviewers who start their reviews of his movies by talking about it, oh wait).

Good Fortune is his first foray back into cinema (with the exception of The Bob Burgers Movie, which is more a continuation of something he was already working on), and it’s nice to see him back. Not just as a performer, but his skills as a writer have also been sorely missed. He avoids the trap that a lot of comedy writers fall into, making sure that the other performers get just as many laughs as he does (seriously, watch some films written by comedians and see how unbalanced the comedy is in their favour). Keanu Reeves gets to show everyone he can still pull off the Wholesome Bro shtick he perfected in Bill and Ted.

Not that the writing is perfect. It comes across a little dismissive of its own lead, Arj. Arj is mostly likeable and charming, but his getting fired from his job as Jeff’s assistant doesn’t come off as particularly unfair or something that Jeff needs to atone for. He’s not fired over a misunderstanding or something beyond his control; he was fired because he used company money to pay for an expensive date. I know, techbro millionaire could afford it, but still. It’s like being fired from Woolworths for eating Pic-a-Mix; you can disagree, but it’s hard to argue against. It’s such a simple fix, too. Just have him use the company card accidentally. Or use it for something essential, where he’s so desperate he has no other choice BUT to use the company card; his car gets towed a few scenes later, it would have been easy to have him try to stop it happening, but realising the only way it can happen is if he uses the card, but show he’s conflicted about it. His using it to pay for an expensive lunch comes off a little “the poor deserve to be poor because they make bad choices”. It’s a relatively small moment, but it paints an ugly colour over the character as it means you’re aware that whenever he’s complaining, it’s kind of his fault, and he never realises what he’s done is wrong.

If you ignore that scene, the film is pretty damn good, with moments that are depressingly relatable and frustrating, even in the small moments. For example, he can’t sleep, so he tries to listen to a relaxation app for assistance. It starts to work, but the peace is interrupted by a loud, obnoxious advert, meaning the “free” app is utterly worthless unless you pay for premium, which is pretty damn shitty for something designed for health reasons.

There are many moments like that, moments which are relatable and you hope will age badly because the problems won’t exist in 5 years. If you want to explain to certain people why younger people are struggling despite working, show them this. As one character explains, it’s hard not to live as a worker in a gig economy and not be angry. It never lets the message it’s telling get in the way of a good narrative, or in the way of jokes. There are some great jokes here, moments which caused the (disappointingly not full) screen I was in to burst out in laughter. Then there were moments where you could sense people really invested in the story.

In summary, thoroughly enjoyed this. I’m not going to feel an urge to buy it on DVD, but that’s mainly due to space rather than quality. It is a bit unrealistic, though, especially at the end. I can buy the existence of angels. But a rich person being prosecuted for financial crimes? As if.

For a lot of comedians (particularly American ones), The Aristocrats routine is a staple. It allows them to showcase their talents within an expected framework, take something everybody knows and show an audience how they do it. I believe there are two versions of it for scriptwriters, two stories every single writer should do their own version of to showcase their skills. One is A Christmas Carol (which I’ve done, and might post this year when I run out of reviews to post). The other? It’s A Wonderful Life. This is Anzari’s Wonderful Life, and I’d love to see him do a Christmas Carol. It’s strange how a film can make you want to see a completely different one, especially one that will never exist. But Good Fortune is so entertaining that you can’t help but want more, but realise a sequel would be terrible.

Matt And Mara (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Mara, a young professor, is struggling with marital problems when she suddenly meets Matt, a man from her past, who wanders onto her university campus.

Despite what my rather morose personality may make you think, I genuinely love a good rom-com. That’s mainly because they’re usually character and dialogue-based, which are things I adore. They’re also not restrained by budget; a low-budget one can be just as good as a multi-million dollar one. They’re a real display for both writers and performers, allowing them to showcase what they do (especially with actors because they get to do emotional grand scenes).

So it’s kind of disappointing how much I didn’t like Matt And Mara. It’s not that it’s too low-budget (but that will be a turn-off for some people, who will be put off by the opening 20 seconds and how muffled some of the dialogue is). The main issue for me was the characters.

To paraphrase It’s Always Sunny; there’s no will they/won’t they, instead it’s “I know they won’t, and I don’t want them to”. The actors have chemistry, but the script doesn’t really allow it to show. I know movies like this need conflict, and often that conflict is silly and can be solved by a twenty-second conversation. Or it’s over something so inconsequential like “Oh my god, you prefer cheesecake over sponge? It’s over!” that the characters come off as stupid. MAM has the opposite problem, the script (or the actors, with the improvisational nature of the movie, it’s hard to figure out who caused it) is so focused on the conflict that it occasionally seems like they’re constantly either arguing or on the verge of arguing. Not small ones either, harsh words which will definitely need to be either discussed in depth or completely ignored for their friendship to carry on. It gets to the point where I’m not actually sure these characters like each other at all.

One thing that is definitely the fault of the filmmakers rather than the performers is the editing. It keeps cutting away before interesting things happen, or just after they happen but before we’re allowed to see the aftermath. Bombs are dropped but we’re not allowed to see the explosions or the burning crater. This would be acceptable if the rest of the film worked; but as a whole, it’s too unfocused and underbaked.

It’s not all bad; there are some charming moments, but they’re fleeting, not enough to sustain the story. I wish there were more of them but as it is they’re peppered through like croutons of hope in the soup of disappointment. I saw one review which describes it as “an excursion into nothing much”, and that’s incredibly accurate. In the 90’s, Seinfeld described itself as “a show about nothing”, Matt and Mara is a display of what happens when you take that theory too far. That being said; the scene in the cafe was actually brilliant, partly because it feels like one of the few moments where you can see why they’re friends and what they’re like when they’re working on the same side.