Gunpowder Milkshake (2021)

Quick synopsis: A young hitwoman (Karen Gillan) has to team up with her estranged mother (Lena Headey) to save a young girl from assassins.

Confession time, I used to be an idiot (hah! “used to”), I remember when I was around 5 years old and hearing about film directors, and I couldn’t see the big deal. “all they do is point the camera at the people talking, what’s so hard and important about that?”. First off, with thoughts like that, it’s no surprise I later enjoyed the work of Kevin Smith. Secondly, I could not have been more wrong, it would be like saying “what’s so hard about writing? It’s just rearranging 26 letters”. It’s the choices that define a director, a good one makes a film coherent and special, bringing their own unique style to it. A great one blows you away with the creative decisions. I’m talking about someone like Edgar Wright, who has his own definitive look and feel.

So obviously it has its imitators, and this feels like one of them. I’m not that familiar with the work of Navot Papushado and even after watching this film I’m still not that sure. Whenever you watch it you can’t help but wonder what Wright would have done with it. Even someone like Snyder would have been interesting to see. The ultra slick action sequences, the stylised look, and the general world-building and sense that it’s an adaptation makes it feel much closer to John Wick though. That’s a huge downside for the film, as being compared to John Wick will make everything seem worse by comparison.

That’s a shame as it’s a real fun film. Everybody is giving it their all, and if you’re looking for a film to sit back with in a group of friends and kill time, you won’t go wrong with this. It’s just……..it should be better. It’s not quite slick enough to get by on being as brainless as it is. In a world of John Wicks, this just isn’t good enough to stand alongside. There’s also an issue with characters. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but this feels like it was definitely shot with the male gaze in mind. It’s made a mistake a lot of similar films made, where “strong female characters” just means “they wear good looking clothes and can fight”, they don’t have agency or enough characterisation to get them through. They’re PHYSICALLY strong characters, but narratively and creatively they’re still weaker than any character in a 70s exploitation film.

This is not helped by the inconsistent look. The fight scenes are over edited to the point that some of them feel like bad marvel fight scenes. The sound also isn’t great. Some of the hits are muffled so the hits don’t land quite as hard as they should. As an example there’s a scene where she bowls a bowling ball at someones head and it hits with a dull and cushioned thud. So you don’t know whether it killed them, knocked them out, or just injured them. With the right editing that could have been clearer.

It’s not the only scene which isn’t as good as it could be. There’s a fight later on where she doesn’t have use of her arms. It’s a really good scene, but it should be great. It’s a solid 7/10 when it has potential to be the highlight of the year. It feels like the filmmakers felt hampered by the restrictions, instead of being excited by the opportunity to creatively think of the new set pieces it allows them to have.

In summary I think this is a case of right film, wrong time. I would have loved to have watched this in the 90s. The music is great, the performances are good and it is in general a lot of fun to watch. It has a really distinct colour scheme and is pure joy to watch. It’s just……as an audience member, I want more.

Jumanji: The Next Level (2019)

Film reviews can be many things: they can be an analysis of the techniques used, a discussion on the relevance of the film subject in a modern world, or even a way to showcase hidden depths within a media some might think of as shallow. Well, professional reviews are anyway, with me, they are basically a long pretentious way to answer one question: Should I see this movie?

With this, I’d say yes, with a but (lol, I said “butt”). I’d see the second one first, if you didn’t like that, you won’t like this (but also, what the hell is wrong with you?), if you like it, you’ll like this. It has the same flaws and brilliance. I found my mini-review of it (before I started doing a review of every cinema film) in which I said this:

“Holy hell this was a lot of fun. I think I actually might prefer it to the original. Got some of the loudest and most consistent laughs from other people in the audience out of any film I’ve seen.

+The performances. All the main characters are basically avatars of other characters. So they have to be played the same way the original characters are (think the scene in Harry Potter where Hermione pretends to be Bellatrix, like that, throughout the entire film). Not the easiest thing to do, but they all do it really well. Jack Black, in particular, makes a fantastic teenage girl, and Karen Gillans “no idea how to flirt” scene was hilarious.

-The entire film you can’t escape the feeling that you miss Robin Williams”

Okay I was kind of wrong with “the performances” part. Yes, Jack Black and Karen Gillan were great, but Kevin Hart was just playing himself, and The Rock didn’t throw himself into it as much as you felt he could have. They completely fix that with this, you occasionally have to remember that that actually is The Rock, and he hasn’t actually been possessed by Danny DeVito. Same with Kevin Hart and Danny Glover; Kevin Hart completely nails Danny Glover’s mannerisms and demeanour.

The addition of DeVito and Glover to the cast takes some getting used to (there are moments where it feels like they’re stretching certain jokes out until they become unbearable), but they do end up (about a third of the way in) meshing into the dynamics of the film and wondering how the previous one managed without them.

Other than that, this film is basically the last one, again, but bigger. It’s just as funny, just as great to look at, and the music is really good (something I hadn’t noticed before was how good the score is). So yeah, I would recommend seeing it, seeing it in 3D isn’t completely necessary, and didn’t seem to make much of a difference, so just see it in 2D if you want. You won’t regret it, it’s funny, heartwarming, and has a REALLY subtle link to the first one, with a returning character who you might not even remember. The story isn’t great, and anybody who has ever seen a film will guess one of the “so that’s her powers” moments before it happens, and is so obvious I thought there was no way they would actually do it. Some character motivations aren’t entirely consistent and there are moments which are just done to forward the story. But it doesn’t matter, the film is fun enough to make you forget that. Plus it sets up a sequel beautifully, and a sequel you actually want to happen.

Why we love Session 9 (and why you should see it)

Well as my colleague continues to beat on with his more relatable posts about films and TV shows normal people actually watch. I’ll cover our indie quota (aka I might have a pretentious taste in movies) and talk about the, should be better known stuff.

session_nine_xlg

Now with that said, welcome to our belated horror special, to celebrate this month of horror we call October. On today’s menu the 2001 psychological horror, Session 9, and why I love it, and you should see it. I didn’t really need to repeat that, as the title already says it.

simpososn
They look pretty guilt ridden. This wasn’t just a pointless image to pad out he words….promise…

Like with mysteries, I’ve always had a fascination with psychological horror. Starting from when I was a young teenager and got into the Silent Hill games (listen out for the coming static), and it mutated from there. But really, psychological is my favorite brand of horror, topping everything from the creature feature to slasher flicks. As I believe the scariest things always come from ourselves, and that’s what the genre reflects. Because what really keeps you up at night? The thoughts of a zombie munching its way through your abdomen, or the guilt over the bad things you’ve done?

Sequence 02To put it in movies, Session 9 is The Shining with a dash of Repulsion, but not as visually out there as either. Set over a week (and yes it even has the obligatory names of the week title cards) it follows a group of five asbestos removers as they work at a condemned Insane Asylum. Which is filmed at the real condemned Danvers State Asylum, where the majority of the film takes place. The work is hard, the personalities clash, and the weight of the place is suffocating. As in a much slower burn (yet much shorter film) than The Shining, our characters begin to crack and question what they’re doing there.

Danvers_State_Hospital
Danvers State Asylum, classic.

Though still fairly obscure, what’s helped build Session 9’s cult film status (a status any fucking film can lay claim to now a days), is it retrospectively has a great cast. Helmed by Brad Anderson, who would go onto direct The Machinist (aka, HOLY SHIT Christian Bale is an insane method actor). And led by a pre-cheesy one liner spewing, shade darning David Caruso of CSI: Miami fame (or infamy depending on who you ask….infamy definitely infamy), and the genuinely amazing and underrated Peter Mullan.
They and their lesser known co-stars do a perfect job filling out their somewhat stock characters into a likeable bunch. From Mullan and Caruso’s hard-boiled boss and cool right hand dynamic, to the annoying young one, the fun sleazy one, and the smart one whose a bit too obsessed with the Asylum. No one you haven’t seen before, but no one you will forget.

cast
How is there no cast photo! This was the closest I could get. And it’s still missing the sleazy one!

The reason Session 9 wasn’t a hit is a simple one. It just doesn’t have much mass appeal (or at the time, even much niche appeal). It lacks the bloodiness for gore hounds, or the jump-a-minute scares for tweens. It even lacks the out-there bizarreness of other psycho -horrors like Jacob’s ladder, or the prestige of budding atmospheric driven horrors like The Others (released the same year). But what it lacks in prestige it makes up for in fledgling filmic style. The camera is always moving, and moving with a purpose, to show and to tell, and the editing is the same, carefully cutting with meaning to foreshadow the coming tragedy.

session-9-suit
Okay, it does have it’s speckles of bizarreness.

Walking the line between true film and a bit home movie-ey, it creates a vividly oppressive atmosphere, without losing its sense of realism. You can feel the dust in the air, the sprinkles of asbestos  , the crackle of old tape recordings, and the cold dark as it lurks round every corner. Though never hide-behind-your-hands scary, it’s a creepy film that rots in your stomach and leaves you infected. Even as the plot gets more ambiguous and the characters get crazier, it never loses the feeling of being just five guys doing this shitty job, just to scrape by and gets some cash. Unlike a lot of modern horror films, it never lacks or loses its human centre (cough cough Until Dawn, cough cough, I know it’s a game).

wheel chair

Even if it wasn’t seen by many people, it has left a long and well warn impression on those who did. Going on to inspire imagery in Silent Hill 3, specifically the hospital level, and though far from a ‘classic’ is now a well-regarded for its atmosphere, story, and themes amongst horror aficionados. And is a personal favorite of mine in the horror genre, if I hadn’t mentioned. It also features one of my most beloved ending lines in cinema, quoted in the picture below, but without the context of the film holds little weight. So SEE IT, if you want to know what it means, and afflict this haunting picture onto yourself.

wounded

It also left us with this; either a funny but completely out of place bit of over the top hilarity, or Brad Anderson can join the ranks of other great directors, like Tommy Wiseau, of unintentionally being funny when trying too hard. But I think it’s probably the former.

If you like Session 9, I also recommend.

recommended