Lilo And Stitch (2025) Review

Quick Synopsis: Stitch is an alien who pretends to be a dog when he gets adopted by Lilo.

I need to preface this review with one important detail: I’m not a massive fan of the original. I don’t dislike it. I find it charming, funny, and it is actually a brilliant film. However, I have no personal attachment or deep love for it, so I’m not personally offended by changes made. With that in mind, I’m going to be reviewing this mostly as a stand-alone and will be judging it on its own merits. I’ll try not to make too many comparisons to the original, ranting about how “but they changed this so it sucks”.

That being said, I do have to acknowledge that this is a live-action remake of an animated film. Which is why I wasn’t a fan of the opening. For a film like this, you want to show off how different it looks outside of animation. You want to heavily showcase either the design of Stitch or the beautiful locations. Instead, LAS starts on a spaceship full of CGI characters. Yes, it’s photorealistic CGI, but it would have been nice to see them show us something real first.

The downside of a live-action film based on a child is that a lot of children aren’t good actors, so it’s risky getting them to lead your movie. It’s somewhat easier in animation because you can go race-blind (and age-blind too) if you need to, a trick you can’t get away with in live-action; no matter how long she’s done the voice for, nobody would buy Nancy Cartwright as a live-action Bart Simpson. Maia Kealoha is charming as Lilo. Her interactions with Stitch are heartfelt and wonderful, really selling the idea that they’re close. The rest of the cast is pretty good. I always love seeing Billy Magnussen in anything; he brings a Tudyk energy to everything he does. It’s also nice to see Hannah Waddington firmly stepping into her role as the Queen of British Accents. She’s long been appreciated for her theatre work, but since Ted Lasso, she now seems to be Hollywood’s new “middle-aged posh British lady”, and I’m all here for it. Also, every time I see her, I fall a little bit more in love with Amy Hill; she has the energy of a grandparent who slips you whiskey behind your parents’ back.

I have no issues with the look. It would have been nice to showcase more of the island, but I suppose that would go against the “OMG, fucking tourists!” message. Although the “tourists are ruining this island and forcing us into demeaning customs” message is already diluted somewhat by a car company offering a holiday to Hawaii in association with this movie. Disney are the fucking worst.

Stitch looks fantastic. He feels more dog-like in this, not enough that you still don’t find it weird that nobody notices he’s not a dog. But enough that you can conceivably buy it. The live-action nature of this means his chaos seems more real. When he ruins a wedding party, it’s not “wacky animated hijinks”, it’s “if I find this thing, I’m going to kill it because it ruined my day”.

Now onto the ending. I’ll talk about it more at the end of the year, so I can do so without spoilers, but lets just say it’s received A LOT of hatred online. “Ohana means nobody gets left behind, unless I have somewhere better to stay, in which case, fuck you Lilo”. I don’t hate it as much as everyone else seems to. I mean, it’s not good, and it definitely goes against the spirit of the movie. But I see what they were going for. I recognise they were going for something different but equally heartwarming; they just didn’t pull it off. There is a way to pull that ending off, I’m not sure what it is, but it does exist.

Dangerous Animals (2025) Review

Quick synopsis: A surfer is trapped on a boat with a serial killer intent on feeding her to sharks.

It may seem counterproductive to say so, but sometimes it can be counterproductive for a sitcom to be given more episodes or a new season. Not all sitcoms, but there are some sitcoms which have a definitive endpoint (think How I Met Your Mother), or a story arc that the series is based around (Ted Lasso). These things are normally planned meticulously in terms of timing, so it can be weird to have new episodes jammed into the middle, it forces writers to unnaturally extend things. If it’s a sitcom based around a relationship, that usually involves knocking the relationship status back a bit. This can be frustrating as an audience member because it can make you feel like there’s no progress being made.

It may seem weird to start a review of a horror movie with a paragraph about sitcoms, but there’s a reason. That elastic nature of storytelling, pulling characters back to the same position again and again, is my biggest issue with Dangerous Animals. I’m going to tell you about a scene:

The character tries to escape.

They manage to get out of the restraints and make their way to freedom.

JUST before the final hurdle, they’re stopped, and they wake up tied to the bed again.

That happens multiple times. The majority of this film is that scene repeated. As good as it is at times, Dangerous Animals suffers from having no idea how to fill its runtime. To be honest, I’m not sure how you could do it either. Two characters on a boat, one trying to kill the other? There’s very little you can do with that to fill 98 minutes.

None of that is the fault of the performers. Hassie Harrison is as fun to watch as her name is to say. Jai Courtney is delightfully unhinged. When they’re together, it’s magic. Courtney’s maniacal terror meshes well with Harrison’s innocent yet determined nature. Their characters are fun to watch, especially when Zephyr is in full-on flirtation mode with Josh Heuston’s character. I liked the moments where she was safe; it really helped flesh her out and make her seem like an actual human. It could be argued that the two do fall in love too easily; maybe it would have been better if they were a couple at the start of the movie, or had at least started dating.

This is Sean Byrne’s third film as a director, but the first one he hasn’t written. Thankfully, there’s not a huge disconnect between the script and the directing. He makes the most of the setting, with the open sea providing some gorgeous shots, while also helping to emphasise the isolation. The script really should play up the isolation aspect more. The boat comes back to land far too often. It’s difficult to really FEEL the isolation Zephyr is going through when she’s constantly so close to land. Technically, you could argue that’s the point. That she’s always so close to freedom and society, but never quite able to reach it. If that was the aim, then it could just as well have all taken place in a basement or an abandoned factory. Part of the USP of Dangerous Animals is it takes place on a boat. So the terror comes from knowing that even if she escapes the room, getting off the boat wouldn’t help because she has no way of getting back to land.

It is probably not helped by the fact that it was released in the same year as Last Breath, which, while not a horror movie, was also a tense movie about someone out at sea, so used similar techniques to emphasise distance from civilisation.

This is all coming off very negatively, but it’s unintentional. I did enjoy Dangerous Animals. When it works, it’s tense as hell. The music choices are first class, and it’s a unique idea, I can’t do deny that. Also, a lot of it takes place in daylight, which I will always appreciate. It’s not overly bloody or gory, coming off as more of a tense thriller than a full-on horror. Compared to other recent shark-based movies, this is the best one I’ve seen since 47 Meters Down, 8 years ago. It does well with highlighting how, when sharks kill, it’s not based on anger or hatred, it’s food. It points out how sharks kill fewer people than mosquitoes, but are considered scarier (let’s face it, saying sharks aren’t that dangerous is a risky move in a film designed to make sharks an element of fear). It also points out how tourist boats that pour food into the ocean to attract sharks so people can swim with them lead to sharks associating those boats with food. It’s incredibly clever in how it approaches the creatures. It is a good movie, but I know it could have been great

The Ugly Stepsister (2025) aka Den Stygge Stesøsteren Review

Quick synopsis: Cinderella, but from one of the stepsisters’ POV, and with added body horror.

“Dark versions of fairy tales” will always be intriguing. Although it’s a bit weird to think about because really, we’re not seeing dark versions of them; we’re seeing versions that are “more accurate to the original books than the Disney adaptations were”. Whether we like it or not, though, the Disney versions are the ones in the public consciousness. When people dress as Cinderella, they dress as the Disney version. So a film like The Ugly Stepsister will always be welcome. That being said, this is possibly the worst time to release it. The last few years have seen multiple copyrights expire, which has led to shit horror movies based on characters who are now in the public domain such as Winnie The Pooh and the original Mickey Mouse design. So you’d be forgiven for being a bit sceptical of a “horror reimagining of what most people see as a Disney property”.

TUS is better than those others, for a start, it focuses on the correct character, the titular stepsister. Secondly, it takes it seriously. It starts off like a normal costume drama. This is great as it allows you to adjust the universe. If a movie starts with blood and gore, you assume that’s normal for that universe, so later violence isn’t as shocking. Whereas if you start from a grounded position, the violence hits hard. There is a small hint of horror with the cruelty, which is then amped up when he coughs up blood. This interesting “not a costume drama but looks like one” approach is also represented in the opening credits, which are a weird mix of horror and regency.

When TUS gets brutal, it is horrific. The nose being broken by a chisel is horrendous. It’s not overly gory, there’s a tiny bit of blood, and no other visible damage. But the screaming? Oh my god the screaming, that sells it. I’m trying to think how to say this without coming off as creepy, but Lea Myren is one heck of a screamer. Her anguished howls of pain will reach deep inside you and claw at your guts.

I loved some of the music, but it doesn’t always work. I know that sounds contradictory but it is possible to recognise something as great but not appropriate. O Fortuna is a magnificent piece of music, but you wouldn’t use it to score a porno. There are so many music choices here which don’t work because the disconnect between the music and the visuals are too large to ignore.

In terms of visuals? It’s artfully shot, a bit too much at times. There are a few moments where a scene starts with a soft fade from someone’s face, and it would be lit in a somewhat “fuzzy” way, making you think it was a dream sequence. Nope, actual thing that happened, so halfway through the scene, you need to adjust your mindset. It’s a small thing, but it KEPT happening, to the point where there are a few shots of which I’m still not entirely sure if they were dream sequences or not.

That all may be a bit mean. Whilst TUS isn’t the best movie of the year, it is still interesting. You may not want to watch it again, but it won’t be one you regret. It’s the kind of movie that would have KILLED back in the days of VHS. The body horror aspects are PAINFUL! The tapeworm moment does look a bit ridiculous, but only towards the end, most of that scene works. The foot chopping scene is one of the most viscerally disgusting things I’ve ever seen, and I’ve seen Piers Morgan’s face. It’s a smart choice to not have the step-sisters be completely terrible people. They’re not necessarily nice, but the Cinderella expy isn’t nice either; she starts off snooty and condescending. Every character is relatable and believable (although the other step sister would have benefited from being on screen more), except for the step mother, who is fucking awful, in a cinematically appealing way.

What is clear is that Emilie Blichfeldt is one hell of a talent, and couldn’t ask for a better debut feature than this. The world is set up for her to place her name alongside the likes of David Cronenberg and David Lynch. Now she just needs the opportunity, and a studio that trusts her vision.

The Rule Of Jenny Pen (2024) Review

Quick synopsis: Recovering from a stroke at an assisted living facility, a judge encounters a psychopathic patient who uses a hand puppet to abuse fellow residents.

There are not many horror films focused on the elderly. On the rare occasions those films exist, they tend to come in the same two flavours. One, the elderly as the villains. These generally boil down to “ewwww, old people”. The others are with the elderly as a victim, these are usually more interesting (so are rarer, because Hollywood hates interesting), and show the elderly as trying to survive. At the same time, they struggle against not only the villain, but also their limitations brought on by age. The Rule of Jenny Pen (TROJP, trow-jop) attempts both.

It mostly manages it. The director is good at shock. The death of Howie is particularly shocking, especially since it happens so early on and occurs mostly in the background of a scene. I imagine it was mainly done that way so that we wouldn’t focus on it, so it would be easier to do the effects for as you wouldn’t notice it’s actually a model being set on fire. It helps the scene, though. It makes it seem shocking and realistic.

It’s not always realistic. There are a few moments which make you wonder if the staff have had any training whatsoever in terms of safeguarding. It would be acceptable for one or two of them to not notice things, but none of them? It’s not as if they appear overworked or like they don’t care. Most of the staff seem like they genuinely give a shit and want to do their best; so it’s baffling to try and figure out how they can miss signs of abuse.

The lack of realistic safeguarding is not my main issue; that would be the pacing. TROJP is fifteen minutes shy of 2 hours, and it only has enough story for about half of that runtime. I know the characters are physically slow, but that doesn’t mean the film has to be. I’m not asking for an exhilarating action film, but I don’t want the film to pause because it doesn’t have a clue what it’s supposed to do. This would be a fascinating short, there’s no doubt about it. It has ambition, creativity, and solid performances.

More than solid, actually. Lithgow is a tremendous actor, and I’m sure he’ll be a fantastic Dumbledore in a tv show that I will actively try to avoid. He’s positively unhinged in his role as Dave Crealy; utterly menacing and creepy. Geoffrey Rush is great going toe to toe with him. The best moments are when the two of them share a scene and try to outperform each other.

There is one thing I absolutely loved about TROJP. Whereas most films would approach a story like this with a “Is it really happening, or is he just mad?” Jenny Penn takes a “why not both?” strategy, which is much scarier. He isn’t in full control of his mental abilities, so he (and the audience) has trouble working out exactly what is real. But some of it IS real. That mixture is terrifying to think about and to watch unfold.

As I said, there are moments where TROJP isn’t a fascinating watch. But there are also times when it’s (and there’s no other way of saying this), fucking dull. And the dull moments are just not good enough to get you through the rest of it.

Havoc (2025) Review

Quick Synopsis: After a drug deal gone wrong, a bruised detective must fight his way through the criminal underworld to rescue a politician’s estranged son, unravelling a deep web of corruption and conspiracy that ensnares his entire city

This is a difficult review to write. Not because I was so emotionally affected by the film that it left me speechless. Not because it was so magnificent that I’m lost for words. And not even because it has so many potential spoilers that I can’t discuss the film without spoiling plot points. It’s difficult to write about because it’s so incredibly bland. It’s almost noteworthy how bland it is.

This was actually on my list to see last year, but I didn’t get around to it because I was hindered by the fact that it wasn’t released last year, I know, just lazy on my part, I apologise. But it’s been on my radar for a while. I didn’t know the plot; all I knew was that Tom Hardy was in it, and it was directed by Gareth Evans. So I was looking forward to it. The Raid is a modern action movie classic. I can’t see Havoc reaching the same acclaim. In fact, I can’t even see it being remembered. I watched it yesterday, and I can barely remember it, and that’s with making notes.

There are some good action sequences, I’ll give it that. It has a unique visual style that didn’t really work for me as I felt I was watching it through an ’80s filter. I didn’t feel like I was actually watching something from the 80s, but a video game cut-scene designed to look like the 80s. I can’t explain it, but there’s something about the visuals that’s “off”. But I’ll give Evans credit for at least TRYING, which is much more than most Netflix movies seem to do lately.

It’s a shame, as it’s got a really good cast. Tom Hardy is (in my mind), one of the best modern performers, and I always love seeing Timothy Olyphant in stuff because he has an unmistakable charisma. They’re backed up by notable names: Forest Whitaker, Luis Guzman, etc. If you saw those names together in a trailer, you’d think you’re in for a good time. You certainly wouldn’t expect something quite as tofu-like as this.

The main issue is the script. Havoc hasn’t met an action movie cliche it didn’t want to use. Sometimes, it works, but there are a lot of times when it feels derivative. It’s like a good cover song: You recognise what they’re doing, but you know it’s so dependent on the work already there by others that it’s hard for it to have its own identity. Specifically, a cover song played live by a band who keeps winking at the audience, as if to say “do you recognise what we’re doing?”. There’s nothing about Havoc that stands out, nothing that makes you feel you NEED to tell people to see it. In some ways, this is perfect for Netflix. It’s a film that’s designed to be “content”; you don’t engage with or love it. You watch it once, it disappears in the fog of the algorithm, and you never come across it again.

This is a film starring capable actors, directed by someone incredibly talented, and yet with a poor result. The most offensive part about that is that that would also be how I would describe The Electric State, which I also only just reviewed (available here). The only other netflix film I’ve watched this year? Kinda Pregnant (as reviewed here). That’s three movies, and all of them have been duds. THAT is now netflix’s brand; disappointment.

The Electric State (2025) Review

Quick Synopsis: An orphaned teen hits the road with a mysterious robot to find her long-lost brother, teaming up with a smuggler and his wisecracking sidekick. I know, SOOOO original.

Many reviews for The Electric State (or TES) seemed unkind. After watching it, I can confirm that they are, in fact, quite kind. Simply describing TES as “a bad movie” is the kindest thing you could say about it. I like the Russo brothers; they’ve directed some of my favourite episodes of Community and Arrested Development. But they also directed The Gray Man, a film so forgettable that having watched it is almost indistinguishable from not having watched it. I just looked at my review for that, and I was genuinely tempted to repost that with a few names changed, because I could make the same damn points for this.

Now it doesn’t make the exact same mistakes. Nope, TES managed to make newer, dumber mistakes. Firstly, it’s more expensive. Secondly, it doesn’t have a charming, charismatic lead like Ryan Gosling; instead, it’s stuck with Chris Pratt, who seems to be continuing his quest to try to be Harrison Ford, and failing miserably (well as miserably as someone with millions of dollars in the bank can fail). The music is nowhere near as good. I can’t remember that much of the music in The Gray Man, but I don’t remember it feeling as post-Guardians as this does. I’ll explain what that means, since the success of Guardians Of The Galaxy, it has occasionally felt like film studios treat soundtracks (especially for action movies with a sci-fi element) as a way for the director to play their favourite songs. When it’s done well, it’s brilliant. But when it’s done badly, it feels like they’re picking the most obvious songs, doing the cinematic equivalent of recommending you a great new place for coffee, a Starbucks. I’m not exagerrating the obviousness of the tracks. Here’s a selection:

I Fought The Law – The Clash. I mean, it’s a good song, but a little on the nose, don’t you think? I LOVE The Clash, but I realise that some of their songs are overused in media (one day, studios will realise that Londons Calling isn’t the only song with London in the title).

Don’t Stop Believing – Journey. This has been overused since Glee.

Breaking The Law – Judas Priest. Again, so obvious.

Wonderwall – Oasis. Jesus, what are you, a guy at a party with an acoustic guitar?

The only thing with less creative vision than the soundtrack is the script. I’ve heard the source material is REALLY good, and completely different from the film. I look forward to reading it, so I can also be annoyed at the changes they made. Lets face it, I have to be annoyed at one adaptation now that Disney+ has deleted Artemis Fowl. The script makes some weird choices. For example; the entire robot/human war is skipped over. Not “the film starts after the war”, the opening of the movie is set before the conflict, then the entire thing takes place via montage. They should have started after the war, that way THAT’S the world we’re in from the start. The way they do it makes TES feel like a sequel, with the opening montage being a summary of the first movie.

It’s also not good with how it handles the villain. I’m gonna be honest, I saw TES a few weeks ago, and I genuinely can’t remember the villain. Which I think says it all. I just remember them not being there for most of the film, so nothing had urgency. It felt like the characters were free to just walk around doing side quests.

TES also suffers from having no idea how to handle emotion. The death of Amherst should be a huge deal, as it is, if you sneeze you won’t notice he’s dead. The characters don’t seem to reflect on the moment, there’s no sense that their motivations or situation is changed by the death. It’s just something that happens.

Now, on the upside, the robots look AMAZING. Some of the other CGI is a bit ropey, but the robots themselves are brilliant. They all seem to have individual personalities, too. Weirdly, they feel the most real out of everything in this movie. The reveal of what they did to her brother is also suitably horrific and belongs in a much better movie.

Oh, on the subject of the brother. I’ll give the film kudos for filming their interactions in a way that makes it seem like the brother and sister DO share a bond, that they are close to each other. But…….and I’m not sure how to put this. Erm, it’s the wrong kind of closeness. They seem more like lovers than siblings (a note to Alabama; those are supposed to be different things). It’s weird and creepy.

It’s not the only “wait, that feels sexual” moment. Okay, so there’s a moment where two robots are fighting, and one grabs the other by the hat and pushes him down. It genuinely looks like he’s trying to force a blowjob. That, and only that, got a laugh out of me. It’s the only section where TES tickles me. I’m glad about that because it meant I got to use the phrase “TES tickles”, which sounds like testicles.

Shut up, this movie is fucking shit, at least let me enjoy something.

Until Dawn (2025) Review

Quick Synopsis: Clover is on a road trip to find out what happened to her missing sister, she finds out. Her and her friends get trapped in a repetitive nightmare.

I’ve never played Until Dawn, but I have played some games by the same studio, which follow the same principles and guidelines. I genuinely love them, not just because I’m a fan of story-based games, but also because they’re interesting and have great accessibility options. A key part of those games is the notion that choices have consequences. Something as simple as “look at this poster” could be the difference between life and death. Importantly, you, as a player, have to live with the consequences of your actions. So it’s baffling that the main gimmick of the movie is that choices don’t matter because once you die, you reset into your original position.

Annoyingly, it doesn’t even do anything entertaining with that premise. When this has been done before, the characters die because of their mistakes, and learn from them to help them survive. Here, it feels like they’re being controlled to die, and there’s nothing they can do. For example, at one point, a character gets picked up by an invisible force and dragged into a building. What’s the lesson there? What can a character learn from that to avoid it? Similarly, there’s one set of deaths which is essentially “don’t drink tap water, you’ll explode”, which feels ridiculously unfair to the characters.

It feels like the movie itself gets bored of its own premise halfway through, with the characters waking up and realising they’ve died multiple times and can’t remember a lot of them (conveniently, the characters all forget the exact same ones). Why? How does this serve the plot? It seems like they only did that as an excuse to watch videos of previous deaths on someones phone, and cram in horror movie moments.

Which is another issue; this isn’t a story, it’s a series of moments from other horror movies that the filmmakers wanted to put in. It doesn’t settle on a tone or style that’s consistent throughout. It reminded me of Cabin In The Woods, but badly written.

The characters? They’re funny, I’ll give them that. But there are so many moments where they feel like movie characters instead of actual people. Some sentences uttered are only uttered by characters who are written; nobody responds as an actual human would respond. There’s also a weird sense of detachment. The characters quickly get used to the idea of dying and coming back, despite not knowing when their last life will be, so really, they could die at any point. There’s a moment when a character disappears, and I thought they were going to announce that she had died died, which would lead to everybody becoming less flippant with death, but nope, she’s just elsewhere. I’m not exaggerating when I say the characters treat death flippantly, at times they seem to welcome it. “fuck, stubbed my toe, guess I’ll die”. At one point, one of the characters flat-out murders one of her friends. That murder is never brought up again. If a friend drove a pickax into my stomach, I would find it hard to forgive them. Plus, can you imagine what it would be like if THAT life was the person’s final life? So their friend properly killed them and has to live with that knowledge, whilst also learning that their lives are finite.

Until Dawn is not completely terrible, though. The performances are fine, although it is hard to get past the feeling that they are discount versions of other actors; specifically, Rachel Weisz, Jenny Slate, Johnny Depp, and James McAvoy. It is weird how the film has objectively lesser-known actors than the game. The game had Remi Malek and Hayden Panettiere. Okay, this was before Bo Rhap, so Malek wasn’t a big name then, but it’s still strange.

Some of the kills are fun, and as much as I hated the explosion scene for what it did to the narrative, out of context, it was entertaining. There is a basis for a good idea here. But it needed more thought than it was given. I was really looking forward to this, and I can’t feel anything except disappointed.

Kinda Pregnant (2025) Review

Quick Synopsis: Lainey (Amy Schumer) pretends to be pregnant for reasons. This plan, predictably, starts to unravel.

Amy Schumer makes it difficult to trust her. Not in a “she’s gonna steal my wallet and use it to fund a trip to Legoland” way, but no matter how many brilliant films she’s in, I will never go to see a film based on her being in it. Her highs are high. Trainwreck is still an absolutely brilliant film. But her lows (Unfrosted, the bits of Inside Amy Schumer that aren’t shared on YouTube, her book) are low. Not just low, but embarrassing. It’s as if she can only do brilliant or shit, with no middle ground.

Kinda Pregnant is…..well, it’s not brilliant. Part of it (well, the whole thing really) is that the lead character is unlikable. Her motivations are so shallow that you could leave a small child in them and they wouldn’t drown. Assuming her character is supposed to be the same age as the performer, she’s in her 40s. Yet her reaction to her relationship ending makes her seem like a teenage girl. Don’t get me wrong, breakups hurt. But her reaction isn’t “here’s a woman pushed to the edge by sadness”, it’s “this woman is kinda pathetic and has zero idea how to act like an adult”. Her reaction is not based on realism; it’s based on “how can we make this movie comedic?”, but it’s too stupid to work.

It’s not just her that this affects; there are multiple scenes which feel too false to work. The break-up scene itself is painful in how fake it feels. Spoilers (for a scene at the very beginning of the movie). The relationship ends because she thinks he’s about to propose marriage, but instead, he asks for a threesome. This isn’t “oh two people aren’t on the same page”, it’s “this was obviously set up to look like a proposal”. It’s an anniversary, at a posh restaurant, with champagne and a romantic cake brought over. That’s not an understandable misunderstanding. It’s fake bullshit. You can see the narrative strings too much.

Now, the plot itself. It’s predicated on the fact that she likes the positive attention being pregnant gets her. That’s not enough. She goes from “someone complimented me” to “well, I’m gonna wear a fake pregnancy belly and go to prenatal yoga class” WAY too quickly. Also, I’ve been outside, and pregnant women aren’t treated with respect. Especially single ones. They’re told “that’s what happens to sluts. I expect you’ll be on benefits now, scrounging off MY tax money”. They’re shouted at on trains, denied seats because “the pregnancy was your own fault, so why should I sacrifice my seat because of your bad decision making? Get a job!”. The entire plot is based on something that isn’t true. It’s like that sitcom a few years ago where two men pretend to be women so they can find work. It’s a premise that’s too dumb to take seriously, even for a comedy.

The other characters aren’t any better. Some of the plot points only happen because characters are arseholes. Her scheme is unravelled when someone announces at a baby shower, “Hey, this person’s pregnant, and they’re thinking of having an abortion”. You can say it’s because “well, the character who announced it is a vapid idiot”, but nobody at the baby shower calls her out on it and tells her that she was wrong to announce it.

I suppose this could work if the jokes were funny. There are a few good moments, the bit where she gets the class to boo a small child is very funny. But those moments are too few. The attempts at humour are kinda embarrassing. Someone makes a joke about her having a moustache when she clearly doesn’t. It would be like making a fat joke about Margot Robbie; you can put it in the script, but unless you commit to the bit, it’s not going to work.

How about from a technical perspective? Again, not good. There’s a weird soft focus over a lot of the scenes, it feels like cheap 80s porn. It looks cheap. The director is the nephew of Adam Sandler, and the movie was produced by Sandler’s production company. I’m not saying those two things are related, but they definitely are. There is no flair to the shots, no creativity or attempt at visual storytelling. It feels like an Kevin Smith movie, but with a shit script.

Now onto the good. The central romance is actually really sweet. The meet-cute is cute because it’s actually believable, and it’s one of the first times we see her act like an actual human. Maybe that’s what she’s like most of the time. We just don’t know because before that, she’s always been in a state of high stress, so we have no idea what her default state is. But the moments where Lainy and Josh (Will Forte’s character) are just chatting and flirting are some of the best scenes. If the movie had a better premise, I would have loved to see this relationship in a different movie. But even the sweetest and most delicious chocolate wouldn’t be edible if you wrapped it in fried dog shit. The scenes between Schumer and Urzila Carlson are also entertaining, but in a different way. Carlson’s character is batshit insane and weird, which works well with Schumer who is insane but trying not to be.

If they got rid of the entire concept, simplified it down to a normal romcom with a mad work friend. This would have been…..well, not great, but it would have been entertaining. But the concept, and how the concept forces characters to behave, ruins any chance of this being entertaining.

The Amateur (2025) Review

Quick Synopsis: Charlie is a CIA cryptographer whose wife is brutally killed. He’s somewhat pissed about this, so decides to enact vengeance.

I never thought I’d say this, but sometimes big movie studios do know what they’re doing. Whether it’s editing Donnie Darko to make it coherent, making Woody more sympathetic in Toy Story, or changing the ending of Clerks, sometimes they do the right thing. I say that because it’s relevant here. The trailer for The Amateur featured a weird swimming pool death, with an explanation of what’s happening. Ordinarily, that would annoy me because it would feel like they’re giving away a key action setpiece in the trailer, but I actually liked it a lot. Mainly because in the movie itself, it was fascinating to watch it arrive. The build-up is superb, it’s like a horror movie, where you see the death coming, but the interesting part is seeing the tension build up beforehand. I guess now would be a good time to point out that this review is based entirely on this version. I have not seen the 1981 version, nor have I read the book. So I won’t make any complaints about stuff they’ve changed, and I won’t be able to talk about how it improved on certain aspects. I will be evaluating it based entirely on its own merits.

Out of the films I’ve seen directed by James Hawes, this is the most impressive from a technical standpoint, mainly because it has more of a visual style. I like the way he shot this; everything looks real and slick. It’s helped by some gorgeous locations, which actually feel like you’re travelling the world rather than just watching someone act in front of a green screen. The action sequences are unique; they’re not over-the-top fun like John Wick, they’re toned down, restrained. If this were a boxing match, it wouldn’t be a relentless series of punches to the face; it’s more like standing there, waiting patiently for the perfect time to make a singular knockout punch. I love that, as it means that the scenes that are supposed to have an impact hit HARD because they feel realistic, mostly. The realism is a big part of why I enjoyed The Amateur. Let’s face it, “a faceless cryptographer manages to outsmart the entire CIA” is a ridiculous premise when you think about it, but The Amateur makes you believe it.

Now, onto the downside, the background characters feel bland. They have enough foundations to be interesting, but a lot of those foundations are never built upon. Most of them don’t feel real; they just feel like machinations to help or hinder the lead character. My other issue is a bit harder to explain; I feel it wastes Rami Malek. I’m not saying he’s above films like this, but I do get the impression that the role isn’t showing him at his best. This wouldn’t be an issue, but there are a few scenes which could have allowed him to display his talents if the script were different. There’s one in particular near the end where he delivers a single line, and it’s a line full of emotion and pathos. But it’s also a line, and a scene, which you could easily imagine being extended, giving him a chance for a monologue that will truly break your heart.

Those are small issues, though. The Amateur is an easy film to enjoy. Unless it happens to be on TV as I’m trapped under a cat, I’m not sure I can imagine a situation where I will ever want to see it again. But that’s more to do with my lack of love for the spy genre as a whole rather than a comment on the film itself. It’s certainly not something I would ever discourage anybody from watching.

The Woman In The Yard (2025) Review

Quick synopsis: Grieving (and injured) widow Ramona lives on a dilapidated old farm in the middle of nowhere. They’re struggling financially when things are made worse by everyone’s biggest fear: a person nearby.

Long-time readers will know that I love horror movies, but when I don’t it’s usually due to one of two things: 1) Unlikeable characters. 2) Terrible ending. Usually, it’s specifically the final scene, where we find out the demon/ghost/haunted sandwich is still alive because the writers sacrificed ending the film on a scare over the narrative. Usually, that’s not enough to completely sink a film, but it will make a bad film even worse. I’ve yet to have a case where the final third has completely sunk my opinion of a film the way it did The Woman In The Yard (TWITY, pronounced “twit-tea”).

It cannot be overstated how much the final third absolutely torpedos any goodwill the rest of the film provides. For two-thirds of its runtime, TWITY is a tense, atmospheric family story set against the backdrop of a silent ghost; a tale of grief and guilt manifesting itself in unexpected ways. A display of the toll that motherhood can take, how it can seem like it takes over your entire life and leaves you feeling like you don’t have your own identity. I liked that film. I found it “spooky” without being silly, emotional without being overbearingly depressing, and slow-paced without being boring. It’s the kind of film I want to see more of, original and creative. It was up there in the top 50% of films this year.

Then the final third happened. Then it becomes the worst of Blumhouse, a visual and narrative mess which confuses deliberate confusion for scares, rapid cuts instead of tension, and a final shot “reveal” that doesn’t actually reveal anything going by online discourse which gives it two different meanings. It feels like the writer isn’t sure he’s going to get another shot at writing a horror film so crammed as many horror tropes and conventions as he could, regardless of whether it worked for the story he was trying to tell.

If they figured out a way to fix it, TWITY could be a classic. It has some truly great cinematography. Most horror movies utilise darkness, TWITY goes the other way, using intense sunshine and brightness to create mood. The shot of the woman just sitting there silently is unsettling as hell, and is PERFECT for marketing purposes. The performances are also good, Danielle Deadwyler is believable as a grieving mother who is trying to balance her grief and being a responsible mother to home-schooled children. Estella Kahiha sometimes falters, but she’s a child so that’s forgivable. I was really surprised by how good Peyton Jackson was. Jackson gives the kind of performance that you can imagine being looked back on in 10 years time and saying “THAT’S how it started, look at all the awards and acclaim he has now”. He’s the audience’s “in”, the level-headed character who points out how crazy the other characters are behaving, while trying to look after his younger sister. As such, a lot of the emotional labour of the narrative has to go through him, and with a lesser performer it would have sunk; Jackson does SO much with what he’s given; handling the role with a maturity beyond his years.

There’s also a lot to like about how damn good the opening two-thirds is. It sets up so many small details that pay off later. The titular woman is treated like existing folklore in terms of her actions and appearance, it would be easy to believe that in this world, the tale of The Woman In The Yard is told by teens at slumber parties and summer camps, a way to scare kids into behaving. The characters are believable, even when they do possibly abusive things. The setup is good too; we’re shown that the family are isolated and with their electricity cut off, so it really feels like they’re cut off from the rest of civilisation.

In summary; I am so disappointed with this. I loved seeing the delicate narrative house of cards built up into a magnificent art piece, only to see it knocked over by a fart of flat writing.