War Machine (2026) Review

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.

Glenrothan (2025) Review

Quick Synopsis: After 40 years abroad, Donal returns to Scotland to make amends with his brother, Sandy.

In case you weren’t aware, there’s an app called Runpee. What it does, simply, is tell you the best time to pee during a movie so you don’t miss too much. Some films are so densely packed that they have a few very short windows you can use. Glenrothan would be the easiest film to find peetimes on, because no matter what happens, no matter when you leave, you’re not going to miss much. Sure, you’ll miss some jokes or heartwarming moments, but it’s like falling asleep on a plane. Sure, you missed the in-flight movies, but you know where you are when you land.

That’s a somewhat negative way to start this review, and considering the Rotten Tomatoes score (17% at the time of writing), you’d be forgiven for thinking the rest of this review would be negative. It’s hard to argue against some of the points the negative reviews make. The characters feel like sitcom characters: not in terms of jokes, etc., but because they go through stuff which should change their character, yet for some reason it doesn’t. Donal (played by Alan Cumming) is constantly having his flaws pointed out to him, and he seemingly acknowledges them, but then in the next scene it’s like he’s never been told them. It doesn’t do a good enough job of explaining WHY the two brothers are estranged. The way the flashbacks are lined up, you’d think it’s building up to a revelation that explains and changes everything, but it never comes. There are minor disagreements, but mainly it’s Donal being generally fed up with living there and feeling the need to leave. It’s teenage petulance, but one the character never comes back from. I know sometimes family disagreements happen, but the events we see don’t seem big enough to cause a generational rift like that. It feels like it’s missing ONE scene, one scene that changes everything.

The biggest downside is that you’ve seen this movie before. I know there are not unlimited ideas and concepts in the world, but everything about this is too familiar to be interesting. Two family members are reunited by disastrous health news, a somewhat snobby family member sees the errors of his ways and the importance of home, the notion that “no matter where you go, this will always be home”, which in Western media is limited to a few countries (you never see an American film about how someone really misses their home country of Luxembourg). These are all narrative paths that everyone is familiar with. So it’s hard to get that excited by what we’re seeing.

On the upside, whilst it does have all the originality of a cover song by a tribute band, it is expertly made. Everyone does their job well. At 79 years old, it may be a bit optimistic to say that Brian Cox can transition into a director capable of cinematic genius that will make the works of Hitchcock and Cameron look like warmed up piss on a cold plate, but if there’s a story he’s been pitching for decades, one that’s incredibly personal to him that he would consider his lifes work to complete, Glenrothan does enough to convince studios that they should let him. Alan Cumming has a lot riding on his shoulders, and he manages it. In fact, he’s so good that I finally realised he’s not Michael McDonald of “Killed by a leprechaun” fame. Well, I say “fame”.

The script isn’t good enough for Cox to showcase the story. But what he does showcase is the landscape. The shots are so beautiful that at times it doubles as a tourist advert for Scotland. So whilst I can’t see Glenrothan inspire someone to start film-making or performing. I can see it inspiring someone to finally take that holiday Scotland they’ve been dreaming of. To phone that family member or friend they haven’t spoken to in decades over something stupid. To cherish the time they have. So whilst this won’t be the best film anybody will see (tbh, it’s just a step above “White Male British people do things” fare like Mothers Pride or Fisherman’s Friends), it could end up being one of the most important movies in someone’s life.

And really, it’s hard to muster hate for something that could do that. Plus, it has the balls to have an anti-monarchy song in a pivotal scene. So it has that going for it. It’s not perfect. But it’s nowhere near as bad as the critic score says.

Lee Cronin’s The Mummy (2026) Review

Quick Synopsis: A teenage girl who has been missing for 8 years is suddenly found. But she’s come back a bit more possessed and nonverbal than they remember.

It’s really hard to make a Mummy movie (and in the case of the 2017 version, it can be difficult to watch, too). I think it’s because, well, essentially, what do they do? Especially compared to other similar properties. Look at the intended movies in Universal’s attempted Dark Universe. Dracula. He can fly, bite people, slight hypnotic powers. Wolf Man, animalistically bites and mauls. Invisible Man? His powers are pretty much stated in his name. The Mummy? The powers there depend entirely on who’s writing them. Sometimes they control undead armies, sometimes they have magical powers, and sometimes they’re basically zombies with toilet paper. Also, they’re fairly localised. Vampires can travel, werewolves are usually attached to woods and villages, but there are a lot of them in the world. The mummified corpse of an ancient Egyptian pharaoh? They’re usually only found in Egypt or the British Museum. You’re highly unlikely to see one in Berwick-Upon-Tweed. To the general public, if asked to define a Mummy, they will go to the 1999 Stephen Sommers film. That’s kind of scary, but it’s mostly a fun adventure movie.

Lee Cronin’s The Mummy (LCTM, pronounced Lick-toom) is DEFINITELY a horror, unashamedly so. But is it a mummy movie? I have no idea. It just feels like an Evil Dead movie with added sand. It’s absolutely disgusting, in the best possible way. There’s a sequence involving a toenail which still makes me wince when I think back to it. The body horror is off the charts and will make you feel uneasy. Cronin is great at making stuff seem like it actually hurts: the sound design, the make-up, etc., it’s all perfectly crafted for maximum efficiency.

The editing? Not so much. At times, it feels like the horror movie version of the Bourne shaky action cam. There’s a moment near the end which is near incomprehensible due to the way it’s edited. I know some people like that; they like the sense of unease that it creates, and how energetic and jumpy it is. I’m not a fan; I like to actually see what’s happening during scenes. Not in a “no, light everything like daylight so I can see the monster before it jumps out”, but if I can’t tell whether a character is on top during an action scene, am I supposed to be pleased the good person is winning, or scared because the villain is? We can’t tell. I had a similar issue with the Transformers movies, which often just felt like car parts rolling around.

It doesn’t feel like a Mummy movie, though. The moments which make it so feel incredibly tacked on. There’s a subplot involving a local expert that could be excised completely, as most of the information provided is given to us by someone else later on. I also felt the ending dragged. The closing moment has to be the shortest part of a film that’s ever dragged. I’d estimate it’s roughly 90 seconds long; it should be 10. I’m not saying every scene has to be quick, but there are so many moments which aren’t necessary, just dragging any momentum to a halt.

Lee Cronin is very good at making you disgusted and freaked out, but what he’s not so great at is giving those moments a reason. The powers are inconsistent, at times seeming only to exist to serve the plot. Characters are possessed, but only to call the teacher a cunt, not to do anything that would be useful. The grandmother’s wake is expertly crafted in terms of horror, but never followed up on. Did none of the people there feel the need to alert the authorities of a feral child bursting through a ceiling and biting a corpse? There’s not really any indication that the events of this movie affect the characters’ day-to-day lives. There’s no intense media pressure on the return of the child. Yes, the police in Egypt didn’t release that information, but SOMEONE would have noticed. Can you imagine if Madeline McCann turned up at her parents’ house? That news would be released VERY quickly, and the fact that the parents hadn’t announced it would then be seen as suspicious. There’s no way the events in this movie happen without some form of media intrusion. The dad works for the local news; you’d think that would be relevant to the plot at some point.

The parents act a bit weird in this. Leaving it WAY too long to attempt to get help or figure out what’s wrong. It wouldn’t take as long as it takes for the parents to question whether the child is possessed. I mean, they’re American, they’d call for an exorcist if their child is left-handed. The hospital staff are a bit weird, too. Sending her home WAY too early. And I’m not sure the police would SHOW parents a video of their child being tortured.

Personally, I don’t think the opening section of them in Egypt before she gets kidnapped was necessary. The kidnapping itself is brilliantly creepy. Okay, when I say “I don’t think it was necessary”, I mean the way it’s done. If it were the pre-credits scene, it would be great. It would also help sell the timeskip. We’re told it’s 8 years she’s been missing, but it never feels like it. Because we go straight from “she is missing” to “8 years later”, we don’t feel the torment and pain the family have gone through, because the audience has only just seen her, and the mother and father look exactly the same. If it were pre-credits, that pause would allow the time jump to sink in. The actual pre-credits scene is a scene of a family coming home and finding out their bird is dead, which leads to the dad dying. It adds NOTHING to the story and is seemingly only there under the misguided notion that every horror pre-credits scene must feature a death. Out of the 4 characters in the opening, only 2 of them are seen or referenced again, and one of them is completely different, so her inclusion in the opening didn’t influence how you saw her later. This also has the effect of making the unseen mummy the focus, when it should be the family. Imagine if The Shining opened with Charles Grady (the former caretaker) murdering his family. Think how that would change the audience’s reactions to Jack, Wendy and Danny.

In summary: a film I didn’t hate, because I respect that Lee Cronin was trying something. It just feels like a waste of an IP. That being said, if anybody ever makes an Eternal Darkness movie (and they should), Cronin is the person I’d want directing it. Also, the people complaining because it’s not the same movie as the 1999 one are stupid.

Pretty Lethal (2026) Review

Quick synopsis: A group of ballerinas tries to escape from a remote inn after their bus breaks down on the way to a dance competition.

Action movies are better in the cinema: that’s not an opinion: the bigger screen, the atmosphere, everything about it makes it perfect. That being said, Amazon has released some fairly decent ones in the last few years: Deep Cover, Heads Of State, and surely there’s a third one? That being said, they’ve also given us the My Spy sequel, War Of The Worlds, and they were the service that landed Bride Hard, so it’s hit and miss.

Pretty Lethal isn’t as bad as Bride Hard. But it’s nowhere near as good as Deep Cover. On the bright side, PL knows its gimmick. It never lets you forget that it’s an action film about ballerinas. There are times that the reliance on the gimmick works against it, where the characters do something physically complicated when something simple would have done. It doesn’t happen enough to ruin it, but there are times when they add a random twirl just because that’s what they would do in a dance.

I’m split on how I feel about the fight scenes. On the positive side: the hits themselves have an impact. When characters bleed, it makes sense, and it feels suitably distressing. But the choreography? It’s somewhat lacking. It’s the opposite of They Will Kill You. Whilst that was a horror movie that seemingly was made by a director more suited to action, this is a horror movie made by someone seemingly more suited to horror. If Vicky Jewson made They Will Kill You, and Kirill Sokolov made Pretty Lethal, I feel it would have improved both films. Rest assured, if Jewson were to make either a horror movie or an action movie focused on brutality rather than finesse, I’ll be second in line to watch it (not first, I’m not that eager). I’m trying to think how to phrase this without sounding creepy: I like that the women involved in this breathe heavily after and during intense scenes: it’s a little thing, but it really helps sell how physically taxing the fights are.

Even if the fights were better, it would be hard to see this as something incredible. There’s an issue with tone. At times it seems like it wants to be serious, then at other times it has something that sounds like a swanee whistle accompany someone ducking behind a table. I’ve yet to see anything to convince me that Iris Apatow gets cast based purely on merit. I’m not saying she gives bad performances, but her screentime is far beyond what her performance deserves. On the subject of casting, Michael Culkin doesn’t quite have the presence needed to carry off the role. Physically, he’s fine. But he’s missing that indescribable “it” factor that the character deserves. That’s not a slight, like I said, it’s hard to define and even harder to find, but when it happens, you know. The best way to explain it is professional wrestlers: show someone a clip of Hulk Hogan in his prime, even with the audio muted, you can tell that he is someone. Now play a clip of the Brooklyn Brawler, you’ll see the difference.

Millicent Simmonds is great, though (although I do question why the villains find it so hard to kill a deaf woman who’s lost her hearing aid). Uma Thurman is her standard, brilliant self. Avantika is so good that it almost made me forget she was in Tarot. Almost. Maddie Ziegler is the true star, though, with the perfect blend of physicality and facial performance.

In summary, only about 4 steps away from being great, but those steps are huge. Also, just once, I want to see someone attempt a Molotov cocktail and just have the glass bottle bounce.

Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die (2025) Review

Quick Synopsis: Claiming to be from the future, a man takes hostages at a Los Angeles diner to recruit unlikely heroes to help him save the world.

Thoughts Going In: No thoughts, just singing the song from the trailer.

Finally! 2026 has not been the greatest year in terms of films. Nothing has stood out as being particularly innovative or exciting. It says a lot that I already have 2 possible nominations for “Worst Film Of The Year”, but nothing that will get beyond the “very good” in the end-of-year roundups. To be honest, looking ahead I can’t really see anything that I’m incredibly excited about. So I’m very glad something like Good Luck, Have Fun, Don’t Die (GLHFDD, pronounced Goo-lah-fa-dud) exists. It’s flawed, deeply. But it’s also a lot of fun.

It’s also very necessary right now. The world needs more anti-AI media. Creatives should be against AI. Someone using AI to make something creative is like hiring someone to do it for you and still claiming credit, only you don’t pay the person you hired, and they’re liable to make mistakes. Bragging about making art using AI is like bragging you wrote a perfect letter K using a stencil. GLHFDD isn’t exactly subtle, but it’s not supposed to be. It’s supposed to be eye-opening.

I have a few issues with it. For a film predicated on “I’ve travelled back in time on multiple occasions and everytime I’ve seen failure”, we don’t see much from the other times. I’m not asking for every journey to be accounted for, or for the films runtime to be split between his different attempts, but a few quick cutaways of the main characters dying in different timelines would have helped make it seem a bit more dynamic. It also would have made this world seem a bit less important, as it is, it has definite “this is main timeline” vibes to it. The way it’s laid out, you get the feeling that even The Man From The Future feels this is the main timeline, that this is his only chance and all the others have been practices. On the subject of The Man From The Future, that’s his name in the credits, but to improve how this review will flow, I’m going to call him Carl from now on, no reason for picking that name.

Carl doesn’t seem particularly haunted by the other timelines, he’s seen these deaths 117 times, yet he only seems bothered when they happen right in front of him, almost as if he knows that this one is the one being seen by an audience. My other complaint is the ending. It really drags in the closing section. But it then drops a HUGE left-turn in the final few minutes. So it’s both too slow, and too quick. It feels like it needed 10 minutes or so, whether that’s 10 minutes added to expand the ramifications of the final plot point, or 10 minutes taken away so it has a more improved pace, I’m still not sure.

This has all been overly negative, for the most part, I absolutely adored this movie. At times it felt a bit like an anthology, when it went into the backgrounds of some of the group. They all provide backstories which add to the finale. It feels like Susan’s backstory (She cloned her dead son) doesn’t quite align with the world, or it’s not interested in explaining the ramifications: mainly how the world reacts to “didn’t your son die? How is he back now?”. It would have been an easy fix: just explain that once it happens you have to move cities. I don’t dislike it though, as it allowed some truly delicious bits of satire. Clones being cheaper if they come with ads is depressingly realistic. There’s a moment where two parents discuss the changes they made to their daughters personality for their own amusement which is shocking and brilliant.

That’s how I feel about this movie as a whole: you spend half your time laughing, and the other time with your eyes open in shock. Even more so when you see the budget. This was made on only $20million. That’s not exactly spare change, but that’s $5million less than it took to make domestic abuse drama It Ends With Us, which (as far as I’m aware) didn’t feature a Kaiju-sized cat made of other cats. I haven’t been this impressed/confused with a budget/product discrepancy since The Creator.

I love the performances. Asim Chaudhry’s accent is off-putting, but that’s probably only because I know what his actual accent is. Sam Rockwell is insane. Haley Lu Richardson gives the best performance I’ve seen from her, miles away from her role in The Edge Of Seventeen, almost Florence Pugh-like in how cynical and weird she is. Juno Temple continues to impress. Her roles are so varied that everytime I see her in something, I recognise her, but have no idea where from because the thing I’m currently watching is unlike the last thing I saw her in.

GLHFDD will not be everybody’s cup of tea, but it’s certainly mine. So far, my favourite movie of 2026, but I still REALLY hope that’s not the case by the end of the year.

2025 In Film: Day Eight (The Very Good)

Ballerina
Ups: Worthy addition to franchise.
Really creative fight scenes.
Weirdly funny.
Downs: Very dependent on knowledge of previous film.
Needs better music.
Best Performer: Ana De Armas
Best Moment: The hotel staff reaction to the fight.
Worst Moment: Her reunion with her sister, isn’t given enough time to mean anything.
Opening: Her dad is killed by assassins, she gets taken in by Winston. Very fun action sequence. Shows you that the franchise hasn’t lost a step.
Closing: She meets up with a character who was attacked earlier, who I assumed was dead. I feel he should have been.
Best Line: One bullet, well placed, can change the world.
Original review here

Deep Cover
Ups: Funny, very funny.
Downs: Could have better action scenes.
I would have liked to have seen how this affected their lives.
Best Performer: Orlando Bloom
Best Moment: When they sell the albanians drugs back to them.
Worst Moment: When they drunkenly meet her friends, only because the misunderstanding could have been solved easily. It would have made much sense for Hughs colleagues to be the ones met, have him stand up to them.
Opening: A quote about improv comedy. At least its honest. Then car chase. I don’t think the car chase was needed though. I feel it went action too quickly.
Closing: The madcap adventures have improved their lives. Again, would have been nice to see how others reacted; particularly Hughs old colleagues.
Best Line: You’re from the Cotswolds. You’re not Al Pacino
Original review here

Drop
Ups: Stylistically shot.
Compelling story.
Well-developed background characters.
Good chemistry between the leads.
Downs: Not as smart as it could be.
Loses something in the final third.
So many small imperfections.
Best Performer: Meghann Fahy
Best Moment: The way she gets the gun at the end, so smart.
Worst Moment: The written note to the piano player, mainly because it’s difficult to read what it says, which is kind of an important thing to know.
Opening: Interior Night; a woman is being attacked by her abusive husband. It’s weird as the way it’s presented makes it seem like “this is where we are now” and the rest of the film is a flashback.
Closing: A second date is planned. Very cute.
Original review here

Final Destination Bloodlines
Ups: Some great kills.
Actual emotion.
Downs: Keeps hinting at a much better movie.
Best Performer: Gabrielle Rose. At first I was disappointed that they didn’t get a classic Scream Queen to play this part, but god damn is she good.
Best Moment: Tony Todd’s goodbye. Perfect. Absolutely perfect.
Worst Moment: The end. Every single one of these films ends the same way, and it’s getting hard to care.
Opening: The same way every one of these starts; a massive catastrophe, only this time in the past. Some great kills, and I like that they didn’t spare the kid, rarely made you realise that nobody is safe. It did change from tradition somewhat by the vision being had by a descendant instead of the actual person.
Closing: They all die.
Best Line: Tony Todds farewell.
Original review here

Freakier Friday
Ups: Will always appreciate Chappel Roan music in a film.
Heartwarming.
Weirdly good British accents from American actors.
Good supporting cast.
Downs: Lohan doesn’t seem to fully buy in at times.
A few too many superflous scenes.
Best Performer: Jamie Lee Curtis
Best Moment: The immigration interview.
Worst Moment: Harper in Anna’s body trying to dance. Mainly because it doesn’t feel like it’s actually Harper.
Opening: “Here’s where the two characters from the first one are now”. Anna tries to wake her daughter Harper using “modern” parenting techniques, not knowing that she’s actually out surfing. There’s a MUCH better opening afterwards.
Closing: Tess finds the picture that was taken of her when Lily was in her body. A nice coda.
Best Line: The school had our pension invested in crypto, but since I’m not supposed to complain about it, per my lawyer, it’s neither here nor there.
Original review here

Freaky Tales
Ups: Manages to be both consistent whilst also being different.
Charming.
Great music, more films should use Operation Ivy and Black Flag songs.
Creatively shot.
Some great messages for audiences. By which I mean, it tells you to punch the shit out of Nazi’s.
Downs: Doesn’t set up the telekinesis well enough.
The ending of the second story isn’t that satisfying.
Best Performer: Pedro
Best Moment: The fight at the punk club. There many fights, but this is the best one.
Worst Moment: The death of the basketball players family. Weirdly subdued compared to the rest.
Opening: “weird shit happens” narration. Sets the tone quickly, especially with the visuals and synth music.
Closing: Sleepys advert, alongside the protagonists of the first two segments. Then a nazi’s head explodes.
Best Line: “if there was secret vampires, we’d be all up in that shit
Original review here

Heads Of State
Ups: Weirdly timely.
Funny.
Actually addresses the “but the Prime Minister isn’t the UK head of state”, although IMDB still bitches about it.
Good chemistry between the leadsH
Downs: Tries to be too smart at times.
Takes a somewhat glib attitude to death.
Best Performer: Idris Elba
Best Moment: The Belarus fight.
Worst Moment: There’s a really bad edit where it cuts to black and silence for a bit too long and without the “oomph” that makes it clear it’s deliberate. Had to rewind it three times to make sure it wasn’t my HDMI cable fucking up.
Opening: Tomato festival. One of those things that I’m sure isn’t as fun as it seems. Quickly devolves into spy stuff, starring none of the two main people advertised. Brave, but it makes sense and works.
Closing: Alliances are reformed. The two are now close friends. Incredibly obvious but this movie isn’t made for subversion, it’s for fun. Thats fine, but then there’s another scene showing Comer survived, and meets up with Bissett. It means nothing and adds nothing. The other scene felt like an actual ending.
Best Line: Yeah, well, based on my experience, okay, hope is just delayed disappointment. Doesn’t put food on the table. Doesn’t put a roof over anyone’s head. And if you want to focus on making people “feel good,” then you’re never gonna understand how to help them.
Original review here

M3gan 2.0
Ups: Bloody fun.
The genre change is the only way this franchise could continue.
Great performances.
Heartwarming
Much smarter than it needs to be.
Downs: Incredibly obvious twist.
Inconsistent tone
Best Performer: Violet McGraw
Best Moment: M3gan stops a home invasion. Not as violent as some of the other scenes, but much more fun.
Worst Moment: The villain reveal. Only because I called it the second the character was introduced.
Opening: AMELIA infiltrates an enemy compound to rescue a hostage. She shoots the hostage. Good showcase of what she can do, and some good action moments.
Closing: M3gan didn’t die, obviously.
Best Line: Did you ever consider the idea that killing me was slightly disproportionate to the crime?
You threatened to rip out my tongue and put me in a wheelchair.
I was upset.
Original review here

Novocaine
Ups: Some fun fight scenes.
Genuinely good mid-movie plot twist.
Does a decent job of showing how not feeling pain can actually be a bad thing.
It’s nice to see Jack Quaid in a movie where his female partner doesn’t end up on fire. Makes a change,
Decent make-up on his burned hand.
Downs: A character reveal was ruined by the trailer.
Very one-note. Like an SNL sketch that goes on too long.
The villains are pretty dull.
Best Performer: Jack Quaid, has to be.
Best Moment: The Torture. Hilarious.
Worst Moment: When he gets his bone broken in the final fight. Mainly because it’s shot in a way that you can’t really tell what’s happening.
Opening: Nathan offers advice to a store owner, allowing him some financial peace for a brief period. It shouts “he’s a good guy” so loud it gave me tinnitus.
Closing: Nathan visits Sherry in prison. Delightful surprise that there are consequences to actions. Always nice to see that in a movie like this.
Original review here

Now You See Me, Now You Don’t
Ups: Incredibly fun.
Foreshadows brilliantly.
Handles all its characters well.
Introduces new characters expertly.
Downs: If you think about some of the moments for more than a second, I’m sure it will fall apart.
Gets a bit too ridiculous at times.
The big twist is too easily telegraphed.
Best Performer: Ariana Greenblatt
Best Moment: As always, the reveal as to how they pulled it off at the end.
Worst Moment: The party in Antwerp. Not bad, but there are moments here which do stretch the credulity.
Opening: Crypto dickbags lose their money. Fun, and displays the talents of the new cast.
Closing: Someone we thought was dead turns out to be alive. It’s weird, he wasn’t really missed from this film.
Best Line: Atlas. What’d your mom have sex with a map?
Original review here

The Running Man
Ups: Some fun action scenes.
Sadly relevant.
Adapts the book brilliantly.
Downs: Not quite as dynamic as the directors other work
No scenes which stand out as particularly noteworthy.
Best Performer: Colman Domingo
Best Moment: Elton and Ben defending Eltons home.
Worst Moment: The hostel fight. It’s good, but there’s something about it which makes me think it could be a lot better.
Opening: Simple set up of the universe. Kind of needed.
Closing: Killian is kill(ian)ed.
Best Line: Do not shake your dick at the crowd. That’s a bad note.
Original review here

Zootropolis 2
Ups: Looks incredible.
Vocal performers are at their best.
Important message
Not many kids films will parody The Shining like this.
Downs: Repeats the first one.
Wastes potentially important stories/characters
Best Performer: Ginnifer Goodwin
Best Moment: When they arrive at Marsh Market. Dynamic, and funny.
Worst Moment: The villain reveal, too obvious.
Opening: Summary of the first one. Weird that the stuff they show us wasn’t that relevant.
Closing: They arrest Dawn Bellweather, who has had no impact.
Best Line: The world will never be a better place if no one is brave enough to do the right thing.
Original review here

Ella McCay (2025) Review

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.

Five Nights At Freddy’s 2 (2025) Review

Quick Synopsis: One year has passed since the supernatural nightmare at Freddy Fazbear’s Pizza. Former security guard Mike has kept the truth from his 11-year-old sister, Abby, concerning the fate of her animatronic friends. When Abby sneaks out to reconnect with Freddy, Bonnie, Chica and Foxy, she sets into motion a terrifying series of events that reveal dark secrets about the true origin of Freddy’s.

I won’t lie, I could just repost my review of the first movie, SOOOO many of my issues with it are repeated here.

It’s a horror movie without gore, without suspense, and without scares. 

Yup, same here. It’s incredibly neutered. I’m not asking for full hardcore violence, but a little bit of blood and more disturbing sound design would have helped sell the violence.

Piper Rubio outshines all of them, though. She’s only 8 years old but never misses a beat, even when she has to express some relatively complex concepts. I haven’t seen a child perform this well since McKenna Grace in Gifted. Her relationship with her brother and her need for social acceptance are a core part of the narrative of FNAF. The moments where it dwells on that are the strongest parts of the film (that and the animatronic work, which is sublime).

The only part of this that is changed is that Piper Rubio is no longer 8. She’s still the strongest performer by a wide margin. Elizabeth Lail seems to be having an off-day; I know she can give a better performance than this. Also, that mention of McKenna Grace seemed to be weirdly prophetic, as she’s also in this. Not for long enough, though, I hope she has more screamtime (pun intentional) in Scream 7.

Like I said, when it’s not a horror movie, when it’s a family drama dealing with loss, that’s when it’s at its best.

Oh, that’s definitely the case here. The relationship between Mike and Abby is core to why this works. The two are so sweet together; so even when the film itself isn’t that entertaining, it’s just so damn nice to watch the interplay between the two.

The continuity lockout is much bigger for this than it was for the first one. If you’re not familiar with the original games, you’ll struggle to work out why certain things are met with dramatic music, or why some of the sentence structures feel clunky and designed to get certain phrases in. I have a slight knowledge of the games, so I recognised some of the references; but there were a few moments which I recognised as references, but didn’t get the references themselves (like when an American sitcom starts talking about NY politicians).

My biggest issue is the ending; it doesn’t really have one, not in the traditional sense anyway. Not in a “the story is complete and we’ve reached a dramatic conclusion” way. It ends with a character being possessed and about to hunt down everyone. That’s not an ending; that’s the third-act setback that leads to the ending. It feels like they cut an entire section out. I also wasn’t happy that seemingly essential plot points were in the middle of the credits. Not a fan of that, if something is important, it should be in the actual film, credits scenes are for fun stuff, not essential.

In summary, incredibly similar to the first one, but with newer mistakes.

Zootropolis/Zootopia 2 (2025) Review

Quick synopsis: Detectives Judy Hopps and Nick Wilde find themselves on the twisting trail of a mysterious reptile who turns the mammal metropolis of Zootopia upside down.

I may have made a mistake going in. I tend to avoid reviews before seeing a film, but sometimes I do accidentally glance at one, or at least see the headline. The one headline I saw for this described it as a “soulless film-by-numbers affair filled with corporately approved jokes” and “might as well be AI-generated”. So I went in with low expectations. After viewing Zootropolis 2, I don’t understand where that reviewer was coming from. It’s not quite as good as the first one, but it is still a worthy viewing experience.

Most of the cast from the first film return, including Tiny Lister, through the use of archival recordings. Joining the cast are Patrick Warburton, Macaulay Culkin, Ke Huy Quin, and Andy Samberg. That’s the main cast; the voice cameos make it look like whoever wrote the Wikipedia page is just making shit up; Ed Sheeran, Mario Lopez, Mae Martin, Auli’i Cravalho, Tig Notaro, The Rock, CM Punk, Roman Reigns. The last two are particularly fun as the Zebros, who seem like the kind of characters destined for a spinoff.

So how does the story compare? It’s good, but it does feel reminiscent of the first one. The whole “the ones you think are dangerous aren’t really” message is essentially the same as the first one. There’s even the “cuddly animal you thought was friendly turns out to be a dick” plot twist. That one in particular hurt, as it seemed so obvious that I felt it must be a red herring. The Nick and Judy relationship also repeats some moments from the first movie. If the first movie didn’t exist, this would be great; as it is, it feels kind of like a remake.

I think it would have been stronger if they hadn’t done that late-stage heel turn; it would have backed up the film’s thesis that “it’s your personality that determines you, not your species/family”. It also misuses Dawn Bellwether from the first movie; she gets broken out of prison, then arrested again at the end. I’m not asking for her to have a huge impact on the story, but why bother bringing her back if you’re not going to use her at all? I also wasn’t impressed with how they say that Nick has a phobia of reptiles, then never mention it again.

That is a rather negative way of looking at it. On its own merits, it’s charming. It’s also very funny; packed full of jokes; there are moments where it feels like they’re cramming them in until it’s fit to bursting. Gary The Snake is a wonderful character who suits the franchise. It has enough heart to carry it through its weaker moments, and the animation is absolutely gorgeous. This isn’t as focused on the characters in the world as the first one, but the world itself is explored more; we get a much bigger focus on how the world works, how the different zones interact, etc.

In summary, just as good as the first one, and the signs for the inevitable third one are good.





Clown In A Cornfield (2025) Review

Quick Synopsis: Some kind of circus worker (can’t remember the specifics) kills teens in a rural setting of some sort.

Fun fact: this was the 100th new movie I’ve seen this year, beating my previous record by roughly 11. It kind of sucks that such a momentous occasion is being marked with a film so bland that even a local cheap chicken shop wouldn’t sell it. It says a lot that the most memorable thing from this film is that you can sing the title to the same tune as Goldfinger’s cover of Man In A Suitcase. Also, I kept spelling it Cornfrield for some reason. If this movie were a colour, it would be mud-brown.

For Clown In A Cornfield (CIAC, pronounced Sigh-ack) to work, it needs to do one of two things: either be ridiculous and weird, or be brutal beyond belief. This does neither. It’s rated 15 in the UK, and it feels like it’s towards the lower end of that rating. The kills, even the most violent ones, feel remarkably pain-free. None of them really sticks in my mind. The opening two in particular feel neutered. One is offscreen, and the other one breaks physics. The clown approaches the future victim while they’re lying on the floor, then does a sideways sweep (like a hockey player making a quick pass), it then cuts to the person being lifted up on the weapon high up above the clown’s head.

The actual script isn’t too impressive either. Seinfeld famously described itself as “a show about nothing”, CIAC takes it to the next step by having nothing happen. The background characters are so underwritten that they might as well be cameos, so when the film shows us that there are multiple killers (I don’t count as a spoiler as it occurs before the halfway point,) it’s not difficult to see how the unmasking is going to go. The iconography of Frendo is so underbaked that I’m pretty sure it gave me salmonella. It doesn’t feel like “this has haunted the town for years”, or even a recent urban legend. The main characters use the idea that Frendo is a killer as a joke in a YouTube video. Also, for most of the deaths, the clown is only seen by the person they kill; so why dress as a clown in the first place? It’s unfair to single out CIAC for that, as SOOOO many slashers make the same mistake, to the point where I was actually impressed when Heart Eyes provided a good reason for the characters’ “fame”.

I don’t want to spoil the ending, but it’s basically Hot Fuzz, only we’re expected to take it seriously. I think we are, anyway. By all logic, this should be comedic, and there are times where it feels like it’s trying to be one, but it’s like being headbutted by a teletubby; incredibly po-faced. It’s weird as Eli Craig also directed Tucker and Dale Vs. Evil, which got the comedy/horror balance spot on. Here, it feels like it didn’t do enough to satisfy either genre.

On the upside, there are some musical choices. And there are some surprisingly subversive choices made with the main characters. It’s nowhere near as bad as I’ve made it sound. I doubt it will be in the bottom half of my movie rankings this year. There’s not much offensively awful about it, but there’s absolutely nothing worth highlighting. It’s mediocre, and in some ways, I find that more offensive than being bad.