Tag: Film

Balls Up (2026) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Two marketing executives end up public enemy number one in Brazil after ruining the world cup final they were invited to because they invented a condom that goes over your balls.

Weird timing. There’s a World Cup this year; in fact, that’s why I actually watched it, so I can have a somewhat topical review for once. But it’s now June; this movie was released in April. 15 days away from the final teams qualifying, two months before the first game. Wouldn’t it have made more sense to release it closer to the tournament?

The World Cup in Balls Up takes place in Brazil. That country hosted a World Cup in 2014. So is this film saying it takes place in 2014? Or is it marketed at people who want to watch a film based around the World Cup, but don’t actually like the World Cup? Why make a movie to capitalise on an event if you get all the facts wrong? It kind of feels like they wanted to make this movie, but realised the World Cup final this year is in the US, and a film that makes the US look bad isn’t likely to get funded in modern times. And they couldn’t go to Qatar or Russia due to US interest in those territories.

Also, Balls Up describes the event as the “2025 World Cup”, which doesn’t exist. For Americans: this would be like making a Super Bowl movie that says the event takes place every few months and features international teams. I’m not saying you need to know absolutely everything about something before writing a script. God knows, I dislike when people use esoteric expert knowledge to insult a film. If the cloud formation in the sky of a historical film annoys you because that’s not what the weather was like on that particular day, that’s on you, not the film. But if the entire central premise of your film is based on bullshit, then I have a problem. It would be like making a film about George Washington and having him grow up a poor black child in southern Lagos.

Also, I didn’t buy the general concept. “A condom that also goes over the balls”, that’s apparently a million-dollar idea. It’s not, stupid. It’s also not really explained WHY this would be wanted in the first place, or how it works. There’s not even a scene of someone trying to put the condom on and it snapping painfully on their balls, even when a character is about to have sex. That being said, it is possible there WAS a brief scene of that; I was just unable to watch it because my eyes were blinded by the sheer volume of shit.

It’s not all bad. Larry David being the voice of a translator app is funny. There are one or two other very brief moments that almost caused a smile. Plus, Daniela Melchior is pretty damn good at what she does. Also, watching it won’t cause a ghost to crawl out of the screen and say you’ll die in 7 days. It also hasn’t been shown to increase the risk of death by plane crash. As you can tell, I’m really struggling to find positive things to say about it. So I won’t.

It’s not just research which is missing from the script. There’s also not really a story. There’s no cohesive narrative that depends on you knowing these characters and their situation, where their characters gradually change and those changes effect behaviour. It’s just a series of long sketches and skits. They’re not scenes, they’re video game worlds. You have drugs party world, jungle world etc.

Maybe it’s saved by the characters being likeable? Nope. These characters are written as if we’re supposed to hate them and be annoyed by them. But they end up getting everything they want, so I think we were supposed to like them. They’re not easy to like, though. They’re juvenile, annoying, dumb, and are written as if they’re constantly drunk as fuck. It baffles me that this was written by the same people as Now You See Me 3, Zombieland, and the three Deadpool movies. But I suppose they did also write GI Joe: Retaliation and Ghosted, which makes more sense.

A film like this is usually released to capitalise on current events. I’m assuming this was made because Amazon isn’t showing the World Cup, so they needed to make something so bad that it would make people hate football.

And if it wasn’t for the Spain-Cabo Verde game, almost mission accomplished.

We Bury The Dead (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: During a zombie outbreak, a woman travels across a devastated Australia to find her missing husband and confront the unresolved fractures in their marriage.

It’s weird to say about someone so famous, but Daisy Ridley is underrated. Much like R-Patz after Twilight, she’s still shaking off the stink from starring in a franchise that wasn’t well received. It’s a shame as she’s really good. She is consistently excellent, gravitates towards interesting projects, and usually nails her performance. I’ll be upfront, this isn’t as good as Sometimes I Think About Dying (a film I’ve come to appreciate more and more over time, and one I definitely underrated when I first saw it). But it is worth a watch.

That recommendation comes with a relatively sizeable “but”.

If your ideal zombie movies are fast-paced, violent, and intense, you will absolutely despise this. The zombies aren’t the focus; the characters are. We Bury The Dead (WBTD: pronounced Woo-bah-ted) isn’t a zombie movie; it’s a movie that just happens to be set during one. It’s mainly about a woman travelling to meet her stranded husband in the aftermath of a social apocalypse. Much like society, their marriage is also on the rocks; damaged by infidelity, dismissiveness, and resentment. The end of the world hasn’t solved or caused their problems; it’s just meant that every excuse and distraction that they had is no longer there.

Obviously, there are zombies, but they’re not traditional lumbering monsters awaiting destruction. They’re more like a manifestation of pain, regret, and grief, physical reminders of things that refuse to stay buried. And if that sentence repels you, WBTD isn’t the movie for you. It’s not a film about survival; it’s about what happens when people lack closure; what happens when they have unsaid conversations and unfinished business. The relationships they assumed they’d have time to fix, the apologies they wished they made, and the lifetime they assumed was still ahead of them. You could tell pretty much the exact same story by having Daisy Ridley die at the start and have her character be a ghost. She spends most of the time just wandering, coming to terms with the sudden change, carrying the weight of her damaged relationship. The end of the world doesn’t make her problems disappear. If anything, it exacerbates them. WBTD asks whether reconciliation is possible when time has effectively run out. It also highlights how, when the world has gone to shit, sometimes the most important part of your life are the friends you’ve made along the way. That’s an oddly optimistic and hopeful approach, but it is one you have to dig among the grief to find.

Like I’ve said (many times, and will say many more), this isn’t for everyone. The pacing is glacial (enjoy that metaphor while you can, because in 5 years time, global warming will render it nonsensical). There are stretches where it feels like nothing happens, and then nothing continues to happen, only to be interrupted by, you guessed it, nothing happening. The characters aren’t fighters; they’re traumatised victims trying to come to terms with what’s happened. Personally, I liked it. But I understand how it would be divisive to some. The pace gives the emotions time to breathe, reinforcing the isolation the characters find themselves in.

Not to say it isn’t brutal when it needs to be. But it doesn’t enjoy its brutality. Characters don’t whoop and cheer when they are face to face with decaying corpses; they throw up and refuse to continue. Death isn’t entertaining; it’s tragic. The characters recognise that every zombie they approach isn’t an anonymous monster to be killed; they were humans, every single one had a life full of hope, potential, and family. They were neighbours, friends, eaters of cheese. The violence has an uncomfortable feel to it. There’s no triumph when zombies die. Relief, but not triumph. The characters aren’t becoming badass with every kill; they’re becoming more emotionally exhausted.

As a zombie film, WBTD is unconventional to the point you could argue it barely counts as one. As a meditation on grief, regret, forgiveness, and the possibility of reconciliation when time has effectively run out, it’s far more successful. I recognise I may have repeated myself a lot during this review. Truth is, there’s not that much to say about it. That’s not because it’s not interesting; it’s because it’s so atmosphere-based, it’s not a film to watch, it’s an experience to get lost in.

It’s slow, sombre, occasionally frustrating, and absolutely not for everyone. I liked it. But didn’t love it. It did sometimes feel like it was so desperate to be understood, it wouldn’t move on after it made its point; instead it would repeat them. There’s not a lot in this 95-minute film that couldn’t be said in a 30-minute one. The supporting characters are underutilized to the point of almost being invisible.

Plus, the fact that it’s caused by America accidentally detonating a weapon is uncomfortably realistic in 2026, where wars are threatened on a whim. And more importantly, I can finally get “Bury Our Friends” by Sleater-Kinney out of my head whenever I see this film in my “to-watch” list.

Scary Movie (2026) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Lol, as if you give a shit about the plot

Scary Movie 6 (which is how I’ll refer to it during this review, just for the sake of clarity and because “new movie shares same title as the original” trend annoys me) has been rumoured for a long time, and people have been weirdly excited for it. It feels like people assume the Wayans brothers haven’t made a similar film since Scary Movie 2. Like there’s a delusion that they made two successful movies, then went into a 20-year coma.

They’ve made multiple parody movies since then; two of them have been horror-based, and NONE have entered popular culture. Really, the closest they’ve got to it is White Chicks, otherwise known as the number one defence for blackface on the internet. It would be like if a band/singer announced a sequel album to their biggest hit, and it caused fans to negate that it’s the same band that’s been putting out shit music for 20 years. The same people are making it. They never went away. You just stopped paying attention.

I didn’t see a trailer for this until only a few weeks ago, so I didn’t know much about it. When I saw the poster, I made this post on Bluesky:

The following will be jokes in this movie:
1) A horror movie villain does some drugs and pulls a silly face.
2) Gay sex references.
3) “Remember this thing? Reference!”
4) “Did you just assume my gender?”
5) Someone getting murdered in a safe space.

The funny thing is I didn’t even need to watch the film to find out whether I was right. The trailer arrived a week later and immediately confirmed all five. Not only that, it was needlessly confrontational. There was a weird amount of “there are no safe spaces here” energy (by which I mean, I’m pretty sure they actually used that exact phrase) radiating from the trailer, as if the filmmakers genuinely believed they were producing some dangerous act of artistic rebellion rather than a sequel to the sixth entry in a parody franchise.

It’s a bit weird because the original Scary Movie wasn’t really famous for being offensive. Crude, certainly. Juvenile, almost definitely. But it wasn’t some culture-war lightning rod that stuck it to the man. The only reason to market this one that way is that it provides a convenient shield. Any criticism can and will be dismissed as people being too sensitive or too woke rather than confronting the possibility that the jokes just are lazier than I am after I finish work.

Let me be clear; I don’t hate this film because it’s offensive or not PC. I hate this film because it’s lazy. I love the first film; some of the scenes were so spot-on that it’s difficult to take Scream seriously. Nothing in this movie will have the same effect. Mainly because none of the jokes have any point to them. Take the Weapons parody. The joke is that somebody accidentally hands out weed gummies to children, who then run around the street until one gets hit by a car. That’s it. That’s the entire concept.

Watching Weapons doesn’t improve the joke. Knowing the source material doesn’t add another layer. If you have no idea of Weapons (the film, not the concept), it just looks like random nonsense happening for no reason. That’s because most of the film isn’t parodying actual movies; it’s parodying movie trailers. The best parody films take apart the logic, style and clichés of the thing they’re mocking. This mostly points at something recognisable and waits for applause.

The story doesn’t help much either. There technically is one, but it feels like it exists purely to transport characters between references. Every time the plot threatens to establish momentum, somebody takes a detour because another horror character needs to walk through the frame. The jokes come before the narrative, every time.

The internal logic is….well it’s not there. One character can be fired into a wall of barbed wire at motorway speeds and suffer little more than mild inconvenience, while another dies from something considerably less dramatic. Consequences fluctuate depending entirely on whether a joke requires them. So nothing has stakes or consequences. When nothing has stakes, it’s hard to give a shit about the characters. I know, it’s a comedy, but even the characters in Airplane took the situation they were in seriously; they didn’t jump out of the plane from thousands of feet up and walk away. Here, everyone exists in a universe where the rules are rewritten every thirty seconds.

The boyfriend being blatantly, impossibly suspicious throughout the film is a genuinely enjoyable running gag, even if it overstays its welcome. The Final Destination-themed fairground where every ride appears specifically designed to massacre its passengers is inspired. Two legacy characters comparing their respective “what are you waiting for?” moments is exactly the sort of self-aware horror joke the film should have been built around. The refusal to do an It Follows flashback is surprisingly clever.

Even the ending lands a couple of strong punches. The second motive reveal is excellent. The first one is idiotic, but the second almost tricks you into believing the film has been secretly smarter than it appeared.

Almost.

The music is better than I thought it would be, to the point where I’m pretty sure I’d buy the soundtrack before the dvd.

As for the performances, they’re a mixed bag. Olivia Rose Keegan occasionally pushes things into that exaggerated sketch-comedy territory where every line sounds like somebody signalling that they’re delivering a joke. Then again, when she finds the right rhythm, she’s one of the better parts of the film. It feels less like a talent issue and more like a performer trying to navigate a script that doesn’t always know where its own punchlines are.

I love silly comedies; two of my favourite films from last year were The Naked Gun and Fackham Hall, which were some of the dumbest things I’ve ever seen. So I have no objections to comedy, but I do object to “look, here’s a thing from a film” as a substitute for humour. This was sold as a return to the spirit of the original Scary Movie. In reality, it feels much closer to those dreadful Friedberg and Seltzer parody films that spent the 2000s convincing studio executives that references could replace comedy.

Scary Movie mocked horror films. Scary Movie 6 mostly just reminds you that horror films exist.

The Rip (2026) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A group of cops find a fortune in cartel cash, and almost immediately start wondering which one of them is going to betray the others first

I’m not going to lie; I went into this with low expectations. It was a Netflix original, which doesn’t exactly fill me with confidence anymore. Plus, it was from the writer of Bad Boys for Life (which I still maintain should have been the fourth movie), 2018’s Death Wish, and 2010’s The A-Team. And as much as I love Affleck and Damon, they do occasionally choose quite poorly. For every Gone Girl or The Martian, there’s a Hypnotic or Downsizing.

So I was surprised by how much I enjoyed this. To the point where I wish it got a cinema release. A huge part of that is the chemistry between Matt and Ben. Seeing them on-screen like this is like watching your favourite band reuniting; you can tell they’re relying on old tropes, but they are both bringing a more mature energy than they have before. Sure, they may not be hitting every note perfectly, but the chemistry leaps off the screen. It would be nice if the other characters were given time to shine or, God forbid, actual characterisation. But you can’t have everything.

The plot? If you ever wanted to see a more American version of the supremely underrated Shallow Grave, you’re in luck. The pacing is surprisingly quick for a film where not a lot happens. The opening is kind of dull, and full of “people are investigating cops for corruption? How dare they!” weirdness which I’ve always been uncomfortable with seeing on screen; why is the idea of police being held accountable seen as a bad thing? Thankfully, it moves past those moments quicker than Obsession moved past Ian’s billion-dollar windfall. Once the money appears, shit gets real. Relationships disintegrate like cake in the rain. Trust withers down, and suspicion grows quicker than those toys that were tiny but then expanded when you doused them in water. It’s less action-heavy than you’d expect, being more interested in metaphorical explosions than real ones. There are still some action scenes, but they’re not the things you’ll remember most.

The action scenes themselves are fine, but nothing special. It feels like they’re there just because its expected of them, almost as if netflix had certain script stipulations that meant it needed a big action scene in the first 5 minutes so people would stay tuned in, and *checks the script of a Matt Damon interview from January 2026* if the plot needed to be reiterated three or four times so that people on their phones could still understand whats going on. The best way to describe the action? Competent. It won’t blow you away, but it won’t bore you either. They’re just there.

In terms of other technical aspects: there are some weird lighting choices. It looks artistic, but it makes the film less comprehensible than it would be otherwise. It’s like they want to show off technical prowess and cinematography rather than whether it’s the best thing for the story. As cliché as it sounds (and if there’s one thing The Rip is familiar with, it’s clichés), sometimes the simple option is the best one (“Go For The Simple Option” is also the tagline on my dating profile).

There’s nothing in The Rip that you haven’t seen before, but most attempts at it won’t be as good. It’s a film you’ll be glad you watched, but not one you’ll be in a hurry to see again. It’s not big, it’s not clever, it’s not original, but it is entertaining. Maybe that’s all that’s needed now.

Before I go, fun fact: two police officers tried to sue the makers of this movie because they said it made them look like they stole stuff. No characters are named after the police officers, so it kind of seems like a guilty conscience, right?

Tuner (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: A talented piano tuner’s meticulous skills for tuning pianos lead him to discover an unexpected aptitude for cracking safes

Tuner is impressive. I have to say that at the start because, well, to be honest, it’s unbearably hot right now, so there’s a good chance I might start writing nonsensical bullshit (more so than usual) in a state of heat-based delirium. So I wanted to get that fact out of the way first. Everything about Tuner works. The performances are stunning. Leo Woodall, in particular, stands out. He’s a critical darling due to his performances in One Day and The White Lotus, but I’ve only seen him in Nuremberg, where he played interpreter Howie Triest. At the time, I assumed he was one of those actors with an established career full of stuff that I wouldn’t be into. Nope, he’s still relatively fresh, especially for the roles he’s been trusted with. Obviously, most of the attention will be on Dustin Hoffman, and it’s unfair to deny him that, considering his career. It’s nice to get a reminder of how great an actor he is. He’s in a similar boat to DeNiro; he made his name as a serious actor. turned out to be surprisingly good at comedy, and is now mostly known for broad comedy and “hey, it’s that guy” cameos, to the point it’s hard to remember what made them well known in the first place. He isn’t the thing you’ll remember most from Tuner, but he is the thing that will draw casual ins. On the subject of performers: I’m not entirely sure when Havana Rose Liu sleeps because she has been in so many things lately, and she’s always good to see. The entire cast all work together very well, harmonising perfectly (music pun #1 of, well, I’m not counting them, but it will be a lot).

The real highlight of the movie is the sound design. The music is incredible, not just as music, but also as a soundtrack. I will overexplain this out of fear of uncertainty that what I’ve said hasn’t made sense. It’s not just good music, but I believe it truly improves the film. It’s not done in an obvious “this is tense music because it’s tense” way; it ebbs and flows, connecting with the visuals and the narrative perfectly, the music itself telling a story. I know, that’s the point of a soundtrack, but it very rarely is pulled off as well as it is in Tuner.

The story itself is fine. The different moving parts all work together in perfect harmony. What I like about it is that it uses the uniqueness of a character with hyperacusis to drive things forward. There are moments, plot points etc which could only happen in this film. The ending hit a bit of a sour note, lacking the beautiful melody that makes the rest of the film work. Not the entire final third, which hits all the right notes. But the final scene itself, where he plays music again, then declares the piano out of tune. The performance goes on slightly too long (not quite a Coheed And Cambria 5-minute drum solo, but it’s up there), and doesn’t really add anything. There’s not really any beauty, story progression, etc. It’s just there to say “see, he can play”, which could have been done simply by having Dustin Hoffman’s character show Ruthie a video of Niki playing when younger. I’d have actually preferred that. You’d see the wonder on Ruthie’s face, the pride on Harry’s, and the despair on Niki’s that he can no longer partake in something that he loves. It could have worked as a “that’s when she understands him” moment, which is something Tuner kind of lacks. The relationship between the two feels like it skips a beat (accidental music pun), like we’ve missed something happening between them that would help develop the relationship. These are all minor issues. It’s generally a fine watch. It’s not “I must see it again immediately” good, but it’s the type of film I’ll buy in a 2 for 1 deal at HMV or Fopp. I might never watch it again, but I would recommend others mic-check it out.

Passenger (2026) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A travelling couple are haunted by what’s essentially a hitchhiking demon.

The last André Øvredal film I reviewed was Scary Stories To Tell In The Dark back in 2019. I thoroughly enjoyed that, although I was surprised by it because I assumed it would be more kid-friendly/my first horror. I’ve also heard very good things about The Autopsy Of Jane Doe, The Last Voyage Of The Demeter, and Trollhunter, with all three of them being on my list to watch. I didn’t love Passenger, but it didn’t dampen my enthusiasm for his work. The most interesting things about Passenger are the things he brings to it. It’s far more visually interesting than similar films; at times, it’s close to art. Disappointingly, it does dip into the “random face jumps at the camera” scares, which are cliché to the point of boredom. Weirdly, there are times when I think it does a bit too much. Some scares are heavily signposted, and maybe it would have been better if they were a bit more subtle. The perfect example of this is a scene where Maddie (played by Lou Llobell) is trying to get to the van. She hears a noise and turns to look at the source, then turns back, and the van is further away. There are dramatic scare chords accompanying this happening. Personally, I would have liked it to be a bit more subtle, so the audience had to pay attention, putting them in the same place as the character: wondering if it is actually further away, or if her mind is playing tricks on her.

I didn’t know that much about Passenger. I saw the trailer months ago, but for some reason, the trailer wasn’t available online at the time, so I haven’t watched it again. I mainly remember it focusing on someone driving and seeing the same figure again and again by the side of the road. That kind of intrigued me, but I was curious as to how that could extend to a feature-length film. I mean, how can you get 90 minutes of someone driving and NOT picking up a hitchhiker? So I was doubtful it would have enough meat on its narrative bones. Good news, that’s not what the film is about. Bad news, it still doesn’t have enough meat. The main characters are cursed because they decide to stop their car (which kind of seems like this film is saying that stopping to help people is a bad thing and should be avoided, but what do I know?). So it’s somewhat ironic that the film itself keeps stopping. Weirdly, those are the parts of the film I think worked best. There’s an incredible scene where the two are watching Roman Holiday on a projector in the woods. It’s very sweet, the scares are subtle enough that they gradually build, and there’s actual tension. But then they get back into the van, and it turns into visual noise.

In contrast, the dumbest part is when they’re in the van and time suddenly skips forward to night. The set-up for this is that the entity is powerful at night and weakened during the day, so the characters think they’re safe in the day, but that safety is disrupted by the time skip. I would argue that manipulating time in such a manner requires immense supernatural power, much more than it would take to, say, loosen a wheel and cause a car crash. Or did he just make them fall asleep for that long? If that’s the case, why not kill or hurt them then? Also, why wake them up? They’re heading to the church of Saint Christopher, patron saint of travellers and the only place where someone would stand a chance of killing the entity. The characters don’t know where it is, so they have to look out for symbols and clues to try and find it. The characters appear to have travelled in the missing time. Here’s my issue: the demon wakes them up BEFORE they get a sign with a symbol on that tells them where the church is. If he can only timeskip a certain number of hours, why not wait until they’ve travelled a few more hours, THEN jump ahead so that they unknowingly drive past the only clue that’s visible from the roadside? They might have even taken the wrong exit and ended up avoiding it entirely. If anything, he got them closer towards it. He’s a video game boss who just happens to have the only weapon that defeats him in the hallway outside his dungeon.

On the upside, the lore is fantastic. It FEELS like a genuine urban legend. Specifically, an American one. It appears to be based on a few different ones rather than a single one. But when you watch it, it feels real, like the kind of thing travellers will tell each other. I’d have loved to have seen this as part of another movie, where we see new urban legends get told. But as a full movie? There’s just not enough to it to justify it. It says a lot that the best scares and most memorable scenes were all ones that could have come from any movie, not many that are unique to a road trip horror.

Obsession (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: Baron (nicknamed Bear, maybe so he gets an ego boost by seeing women online say they’ll choose him?) is deeply in love with his friend Nikki. He decides to win her over by improving himself, gaining confidence, and being a dateable candidate. Sorry, he does none of that, he makes a wish so that she’ll fall in love with him. It ends badly.

I’m a big fan of “be careful what you wish for” movies. Where someone gets what they want, but it’s twisted to be negative. But it’s one of those subgenres that fails more than it succeeds. Okay, maybe “fail” is the wrong word, but they’re very rarely what I want them to be. A lot of them (thinking mainly of Fantasy Island at the moment, but there are others) have the same issue: the negative consequence is too stupid. If the consequence is so unrealistic and stupid, then it doesn’t work as a warning. If someone says, “I wish I won the lottery”, and that wish comes true but leads to betrayal and paranoia, that makes sense. If it leads to them going on holiday, antagonising the locals, and it leads to a world war, that makes slightly less sense, but if it’s well written, sure, why not? But if it turns out that the characters’ dead relatives all come back to life to claim the money, then it turns into a zombie movie? That’s f*cking stupid.

That’s my main problem with Obsession (by Calvin Klein). There’s an interesting story to tell about how someone being creepily into you can cause problems: how it costs you your independence and sense of self-worth, how they control your life, making you lose your friends because they’re jealous, make you lose your job so you’re dependent on them, etc. All in all, there’s a very realistic way to tell this story. Obsession does not do that. The obsession doesn’t feel real or sensical. There’s no “be careful what you wish for” because the end result doesn’t feel like a natural progression of the want and desire.

That being said, Inde Navarrette plays her part perfectly. She goes from sweet and innocent to psychopathic weirdo with just a change of posture. Michael Johnston didn’t quite work for me. He reminded me of Matthew Baynton, but not as accomplished. He’s fine with some of it, but when he has to show terror or any ounce of vulnerability, you’re very much reminded that he is an actor playing a character, rather than an actual person.

There’s no doubt that Curry Baker is one hell of a director. The fact that he pulled this movie off on such a small budget is something to be commended. If Blumhouse want to make a Conjuring spin-off that’s actually worth watching, then Baker would be a great choice to direct. He crafts scares without ever being cliche or cheap. There are a few jump scares, but they’re well-crafted. Think “end of Carrie” rather than “random video a friend shows you to see your reaction”. Actually, screw a Conjuring spin-off, I think Baker could pull off a Carrie remake.

I’d want someone else doing the script, though. Really, that’s the part of Obsession I didn’t like. There are no characters to root for. The main character is an incel douchbag who feels entitled to affection and sex. His friend is a slight douche. We don’t really see enough of Nikki to get a gauge on her actual character, but there are hints that she’s kind of a bitch. Obsession ever needed to make Baron seem sympathetic and then gradually descend into darkness, or do it from Nikki’s point of view and make Baron an out-and-out villain so the movie becomes about her being aware of what’s happening but unable to stop it (kind of like Get Out).

Their friend Ian is involved in one of the dumbest scenes of 2026. Baron takes another One Wish Willow to Ian and tries to get him to wish that Nikki is no longer obsessed. Instead, Ian wishes for a billion dollars, which starts raining from the ceiling (it’s at this point I realise the director severely underestimated how big a billion is). Baron is frustrated that his one chance at happiness is over, so he runs back home. So, Ian is aware that the wishes come true, and he’s aware that Nikki is now borderline sociopathic (whether he believes what Baron said or not, he’s seen enough evidence that should make him careful). The only other person on the planet who knows about Ian’s new wealth is Baron. So why would Ian then go to Baron’s house to celebrate? The two are no longer particularly close, and it’s shown at the party scene that he has other friends. So I’m really struggling to think of a reason the character would do that, outside of “the film needs Nikki to kill him”. That scene also makes it seem like Baron and Nikki are the main characters of the universe. Ian only dies because of those two. The wishes are supposed to backfire, but really his only backfired because of the main characters. Would it not have made more sense for him to actually be crushed to death by the falling cash? It would tie into the “be careful what you wish for” concept, would make his death mean something, would mean that Baron is left completely alone, and it would be kind of comedic in an Osgood Perkins way.

So in summary, a very well-made horror movie. It’s not my type of movie, but it was damn close.

Mortal Kombat II (2026) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: The fighters of Earth-Realm take part in a tournament to stop Shao Khan from taking over.

I know I’ve seen the first movie. I know this because I remember one or two moments from it, plus I reviewed it here. That being said, I can’t remember much from it. I can’t remember the story, the characters (I remember Scorpion and Sub Zero were in it, but not their characterisation). Reading through, that’s probably for the best, as there are some weird changes. The first movie established that champions can be identified by a dragon-shaped birthmark. That doesn’t matter here. Johnny Cage is a reluctant champion, but the mark never comes up. Not even a scene of him complaining about how long it took makeup artists to try to cover it. Also, the first film ended with Cole going to LA to talk to Johnny Cage. Do you know who talks to Cage in this movie? Sonya and Raiden. Spoilers: Cole dies in this movie. The characters don’t mourn him for that long; I don’t even recall them mentioning him after he dies. If Cole were the one to “recruit” Cage, it would have given some semblance of emotion, as it would have meant Cage lost his introduction to this world. It could have motivated him, given him what he needed to do what must be done (Punch people in the balls).

MKII is miles better than the first one. For one, there’s more focus on the fights. There are a lot more references to the games, so fans will find a lot of things to enjoy about it. It’s great to see some of the characters and stages come to life onscreen. It’s fantastic to see the acid stage finally recreated in a way that brings to life how terrifying it is. I appreciate how MKII managed to do all those references without alienating people not familiar with the games. Unlike the Uncharted movie, which featured such a distractingly obvious game reference, MKII still works if you’re not that familiar with the game. The source material isn’t essential, but it does make it a better experience. The fights themselves look great, with some fairly decent choreography and use of locations. Hits look like they hurt, and when there’s ultraviolence, it looks pretty damn glorious.

Now onto the bad. There’s one major issue I had with it. Shao Kahn doesn’t come off as a big threat. He comes off as fearful, but beatable. We see him in a few fights throughout the film, and in almost all of them, the person he’s against gets a lot of offence in, and at times nearly beats him. That’s not how you build that character up. The audience needs to see him go against someone we know is talented, and yet utterly annihilate them. That’s what the fight with Cole should have been. Cole should have hit him with everything he had, and it should have had no effect. Essentially, I’m looking for Brock Lesnar Vs. John Cena from Summerslam 2014 (just without that annoying kid in the crowd). The other thing this movie could have learned from pro wrestling: jobbers. A jobber is someone whose entire job is to lose and make the winner look good. That’s what this film needed. The franchise is full of recognisable characters who the audience would like to see but won’t be too disappointed if they were to die: Stryker, Nightwolf, Smoke. All of them could have been introduced and then killed quickly to demonstrate Shao Khan’s power.

I’d have liked to have seen more of Scorpion and Sub-Zero, but I understand why the film does what it does with them. Karl Urban is an odd choice for Cage. This iteration of the character isn’t a cocky, arrogant person; he’s riddled with self-doubt and uncertainty. In a way, it makes sense. But I can’t help but feel how much more FUN this movie would have been with someone a bit less dour. That’s not an issue with the casting; it’s the writing. The way that this iteration of the character is written, Urban plays it perfectly, bringing to mind Jean-Claude Van Damme in Jean-Claude Van Johnson. Hiroyuki Sanada is the perfect Scorpion when we do see him. Adeline Rudolph and Tati Gabrielle as Kitana and Jade are fine; they do what they need to, but don’t excel. Was Jessica McNamee this good in the first one? Because she’s fucking great in this. Circling back to Cage, I didn’t buy the movie of his they showed us. It didn’t feel like a dated action movie; it felt too modern. The action scenes themselves felt silly, lots of obvious missed punches, but visually, it looks very 2020’s. All they needed to do was change the colours, make it a bit less HD, add different music, etc., and it would have helped sell it. As it is? It feels like it was only there to get moments they could put in the trailer.

MKII is not a fantastic movie, but it is a lot of fun. And whilst I do have a lot of issues with it, you can bet I’m going to be in the seats for the third one.

The Sheep Detectives (2026) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A group of sheep investigates the murder of their shepherd.

A detective drama starring talking sheep. Directed by the same guy who directed the two Minion movies. Written by the guy who wrote The Hangover Part 3 and Scary Movie Part 4. It rained VERY heavily on my walk to the cinema so I was in a pretty shitty mood when I sat down to watch what would surely be something terrible. I even planned how long I was going to wait until I described this movie as “baa-d” in my review.

But then The Sheep Detectives (TSD, Tooshed) ruined my plans by actually being really good. Not “good for a kids movie” or “good if you go in with low expectations”, but genuinely good. It’s not the best film I’ve seen this year (at the moment, that’s probably still Project Hail Mary), but is the one I feel the need to recommend to people the most. Mainly because the gap between expectation and quality is huge. Yes, it is a kids movie, but it’s not a kids movie that talks down to the audience. At no point do the sheep do a CGI song and dance to a Taylor Swift song. It doesn’t pander or condescend; it just has a well-written story full of fun characters. The characters are kind of one-note, but they are sheep, so it’s not as though they have access to a lot of human narratives that would drive change, such as money worries, social media, or that the t-shirt they purchased at their first gig over 24 years ago has finally become unwearable. It’s a curious mix of a family film that touches on heavier themes, and Paddington-style cuteness and fun. The characters are a lot of fun to watch. Nicholas Braun’s character is very different from what he normally plays, but he pulls it off. Playing an idiot is like playing crazy; it’s much easier to get wrong than it is to get right. I would say this is the best I’ve seen that kind of character played, but since watching this movie, I’ve watched Hugh Skinner in Twenty Twenty Six. Nicholas Galzatine continues to showcase just how secretly good at comedy he is. I’d have liked to have seen more of Mandeep Dhillon, mainly because she’s always a welcome presence onscreen. The sheep voices are all pretty damn good, too. Bryan Cranston nails his vocal performance. I love Julia Louis-Dreyfus in almost anything, and have seen her in SOOOO much, but this is probably her best performance. Really, the only weak link is Rhys Darby, and he’s not even bad; it’s just that everyone else is much better.

As any fans of who-has-done-this’s can attest to, the story is key. If clues and foreshadowing are too obvious, then the audience will get there before the characters. On the other hand, if they’re too hidden or depend on the audience knowing something they haven’t been told, then the audience will feel cheated. It’s a really tricky tightrope to walk, and TSD puts more hurdles in its way by having the main characters be sheep, so they can’t communicate with local police or anybody else who can help. Plus, it’s aimed at kids. So how do you do a mystery aimed at kids but not make it too obvious for adults? I’m still not sure HOW they did it, but they definitely did. It provides enough suspects. There’s one, in particular, who I felt certain was the killer. They were in the film enough to be notable, but quiet enough that it would be a shock. I was ahead of the filmmakers because I am smart.

I was wrong. I am not smart. And I love that. I love that the reveal is satisfying. I love how, in 30 years time, an author will describe how watching this film as a child was the moment they fell in love with mystery. This will be someone’s introduction to the genre, and it’s hard to think of one that would be better.

There we go, a whole review and I didn’t make one sheep pun. None, didn’t refer to it as a “ewe-done it”, didn’t describe the character as Angela Lambs-bury, no Hercule Poir-ewe, didn’t say it’s a wooly good time, or shear perfection, or describe nervous characters as feeling sheep-ish,

War Machine (2026) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: America fights aliens.

I’m not a complete idiot (that sound you hear is my family and friends laughing), so I am aware of the influence the US military has on films. The US Department of Defense even has an entertainment unit that handles requests when filmmakers want to utilise military equipment or locations. It’s not just “we need to make sure you use the equipment safely”; they denied support to Independence Day because the director refused to remove references to Area 51. The 1954 animated movie Animal Farm was purchased by the CIA and had the ending changed, which is ironically, very Orwellian. It’s not just film; the DoD also has agreements with TV shows such as The Price Is Right, America’s Got Talent, and The Kelly Clarkson Show. So, yeah. I’m used to American media figuratively fellating the US military. But few have done it so obviously as War Machine.

War Machine (WM, pronounced Womb) is not a movie; it’s a recruitment service. To the point where it almost seems like a parody. The villains? Alien machines that land on Earth. Now, and I believe this is very important, they don’t attack first. The machines just sit there. The US military decides to attach explosives to it to blow it up, after which, the machines rise and attack. So to reiterate: the good guys attempt to kill something, then claim to be victims when they get attacked in revenge. If that doesn’t showcase US foreign policy, I don’t know what does. I know Hitler Simpson wants to be heavily involved in the making of Rush Hour 4, but if it turns out he was involved in this, I would not be surprised. That’s how blatant the propaganda is.

WM feels like an early 90’s action movie, and that’s not a compliment. The villains are basic “others”, the characters are ultra masculine to the point of being laughable (the main character refuses to go to therapy after the death of his brother), and it all boils down to “one straight, white, American male will save the entire world”. How does he save the world? By blocking the machine’s ventilation ports. Did the visitors not realise that would be a problem? This keeps happening in movies like this, and it feels like it comes down to writers not understanding the ending of War Of The Worlds, where the aliens were defeated by a random virus. That’s not “invaders will all have one fault we can exploit”, it’s “invaders can be so cocky they neglect to take into account everything”, and that has historical precedent: think of the empires built where the first contact involved a lot of people dying of unknown diseases that their bodies weren’t used to. “Leaving a port open” is not like that; they would know that Earth has dust, rocks, and dirt. It feels slightly cheap to have a big threat defeated by what’s essentially a banana in a tailpipe. What’s weird is that this only happens once. At no point in their invasion of Earth did the alien machines get clogged up with sand in the desert, rocks from a collapsing mountain, or glass bottles full of piss thrown by English football hooligans.

How about the characters? Do they salvage this? Nope. For one thing, they’re all given numbers instead of names. Which strips them of their humanity. I get it, that’s probably the point, the military dehumanises you so you work as part of the machine. But for films? You’re supposed to give a shit about the people you’re seeing. Compare the two sentences:

  1. “It absolutely devastated me when Martha died”
  2. “I still haven’t fully recovered from the death of number 81”.

One sounds reasonable, one sounds stupid. You remember names; they’re unique, they have emotional resonance to them. Numbers don’t. It makes you feel like these characters don’t matter

So yeah, it’s dumb. But you wouldn’t know this by the Wikipedia page, which I feel has been edited by the production company. The top line says “the film received generally positive reviews from critics, praising it as a fun, old-school, throwback action movie despite its familiar, formulaic storyline”. Even the positive reviews are 3 out of 5, etc. The kindest response would be “mixed”

On the upside, it looks good. The action scenes themselves are fine, and the villains look menacing. The performances are fine, but nobody is really given enough to do. I also like the brief insight into survivor’s guilt, especially when 81 mentions how the medal he was given is just a constant reminder of the worst day of his life. That’s a fascinating look into both his character and American culture.

I’ve seen worse films this year. But it’s hard to think of films where I’ve given less of a shit.