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.

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.

Woman Of The Hour (2023) Review

Quick Synopsis: It’s 1970 and Sheryl Bradshaw is so desperate for TV time that her agent books her on The Dating Game, unaware that one of the male contestants is harbouring a dark and disturbing secret: he’s from Texas. Oh, and he kills people. That’s bad too.

Woman Of The Hour (or WOTH, pronounced to rhyme with cough) is like a six-dicked Calydonian boar, a strange beast you can’t turn away from. It’s helped by a truly fascinating story. This actually happened. In 1978, serial killer Rodney Alcala made an appearance on The Dating Game, and he did win, which has to be a real kick in the teeth of the guys who were rejected. Everything else about the story is fiction. The entire story of the woman who went out with him? Fake. The woman in the audience who reports the killer and is ignored? Fake. The host of the show is a complete dick? Fake (for this one specific person). A producer making creepy comments about Anna Kendrick whilst pointing at her breasts? Fa-oh wait, that’s real, happened to her when she was 19, which sadly meant she was too young to drink, so she couldn’t go to a bar, buy a bottle of drink then use the bottle to slit the throat of that producer.

I’m okay with that kind of approach to historical accuracy. This is mainly because it never pretends to be anything other than what it is; it is a fictional narrative that occurs during a real historical story. If it was presented with a subtitle like “The true story” then I’d object. The reality isn’t important, the story and the setting is. The setting is significant. This was a time when, according to the letter of the law, women were mostly equals (sometimes), but the reality was very different. Men still felt comfortable being sexually aggressive with female strangers, who would then be told to “take it as a compliment” or “stop complaining” when they mentioned it. It’s very different from now, I’ve spoken to many men on the subject and they all agree women are treated equally now. The time is just as much a character as the serial killer (now there’s a sentence I’ve never said before).

The other essential half of the jigsaw of WOTH is Anna Kendrick. This is her directorial debut and it’s pretty damn impressive. She does have a tendency towards being overly arty and “oooo look at this” as opposed to using the camera to tell a story. There are no moments which are “bad”, nothing which makes you think “Ooof, I wouldn’t have done that”, and more experienced directors have done that (A Quiet Place: Day One, for example, featured one of my least favourite shots of the year from a coherence standpoint, and that was from a guy with experience). I hope Kendrick continues to direct, and I’m curious as to what her next move would be. I’m hoping she continues to do stories she has a passion and personal interest in (she donated her fee from this movie to charity, because she’s lovely and a badass). She’s about 2 movies away from making an INCREDIBLE feminist AF drama which I will absolutely LOVE.

Her performance is good too. The moment where she calls everyone out on their misogyny is glorious to watch. I’ve seen some reviews state she was the wrong choice, and that she feels too modern for a 1970s character. To those people I say, you’re wrong. I won’t debate this, I won’t explain this, but you are wrong.

The weakest part, for me, is the narrative. The fact he was on a tv show (you know, the whole selling point of the film) doesn’t matter. It’s not his appearance on TV that leads to his downfall, his downfall wasn’t until the next year. So really, the main crux of the film is entirely inconsequential. It’s still a good watch, but I do wish that more things mattered, that the timeline was more coherent, and that the side characters were memorable. So much focus went on the “serial killer on a dating show”, that it feels that not enough effort was put on anything else in the narrative, so it feels incredibly underbaked.

That being said, there is one BRILLIANT scene that’s not set on the show. The date. Specifically, the aftermath when she’s creeped out by him in the car park. It’s CHILLING, and makes the hair on the back of your neck stand on edge. It’s also (I imagine), a scene in which pretty much every woman alive has a “yeah that happened to me too. When? Well the first time was when I was 12, then the next time it was-” series of anecdotes which are similar.

In summary, an easy film to be impressed by. An easy film to be moved by. But also a film in which you can’t help but feel there’s something better from the creators in the future.

Don’t Move (2024) Review

Quick Synopsis: When a killer injects her with a paralytic agent, a woman must run, fight and hide before her body completely shuts down.

Did Netflix gaslight us into thinking their original films used to be good? I thought they were, but looking at the list, there’s a lot of shit there. Well, maybe “shit” is a bit harsh, but for every Glass Onion, there are about 40 Eurovision Song Contest: The Story of Fire Saga‘s, films which are so forgettable that they barely register as being watched. Maybe Don’t Move will be different?

It starts promising, it sets the tone very quickly, and it’s really interesting. The opening kidnapping is shocking, not just because of how sudden it is, but also how cold and calculating it is. You can really see how the killer lures his victims. He picks up character information so quickly, incredibly observant. He’s essentially a detective who uses his powers for evil.

I like how minimalist DM is. There are a few other characters, but it is mostly just Finn Witrock and Kelsey Asbille. Finn Wittrock is good, but he never really feels like an individual, instead coming off as a mix between Bill “Pennywise” Skarsgard, Casey “Not Ben” Affleck and Leonardo “No Don’t Turn 26, you’re so pretty” DiCaprio. Asbille does A LOT considering she’s paralyzed for the majority of the runtime. She has tremendous eye-acting, which is essential because that’s the only way she portrays emotion for most of it. The small cast allows the talents of the two leads to really shine. It also helps Asbille’s character seem more isolated. This could have been TERRIBLE if it cut to her previous life too often (as was done in The Mercy) in an attempt to examine her life. Because we only see her in the context of a kidnapping victim, we feel scared and isolated alongside her; all we know in this world is her and her kidnapper.

I do have some issues with the script though. Not that it’s bad, but I feel it wastes potential. Whilst DM is good, it could (née, should) have been great. Her losing her body autonomy (we call that “Being An American Woman”) should have taken place in real-time, it lasts 10 minutes onscreen instead of the (I think) 20 it was said to have taken. Adding the extra 10 would have made it so much more interesting. That’s the case for the whole film actually. It’s crying out for a gimmick. Maybe that’s real-time, so we get LONG shots of her being driven to the cabin the kidnapper hopes to keep her in, the longer the drive, the more we become aware of just how hopeless her situation is. Maybe it could have done the always impressive long take, making it seem like it was all filmed in one take (as in Boiling Point and 1917) with scenes of forestry masking cuts and time jumps. Maybe if it was all from her POV, so we are truly in her shoes, feeling her fear and helplessness. Any one of those would have made it a genuinely impressive feature and would have helped it stand out. As it is, it’s just pretty good.

It’s a shame to watch a film and get distracted by what it is instead of what it could be. But this isn’t quite refined enough to distract you, so you can’t really help but let your mind wander. It’s a great concept, but there’s not quite enough in the narrative it to justify stretching it out to feature length instead of just having it as a short. It’s not, but it does have big “based on a short story” energy. This is where a gimmick would have helped it, it would have hidden the narrative swamp of boredom.

Beverly Hills Cop: Axel F (2024) Review

Quick synopsis: Do you care about the plot or are you just glad to see Foley back? Exactly.

I will admit I was nervous about this. I will go on record as being one of the few people who actually thoroughly enjoyed Beverly Hills Cop 3, probably because I had it on VHS back in the day so I got to watch it a lot. That being said; that film was released thirty years ago, and there hasn’t been anything major since then. A video game was released in 2006 but was so poorly received that it was referred to in one publication as “the 9/11 of video games”, which feels a little harsh. In 2013, a pilot for a television show was produced, but it was never shown. Let’s not be too harsh; but let’s face it, Eddie Murphy isn’t the name he used to be, and this is a francwhise that, whilst loved, isn’t missed (mainly because the last one was so poorly received). So what’s the purpose of this being made? Those concerns were raised with the release of the trailer; which made it seem tonally inconsistent with the rest of the franchise. Gone was the lightheartedness and fun, to be replaced by family drama and large stunts.

So it’s a pleasant surprise that the final product is a lot of fun. There are a few new characters, but they slot into the universe effortlessly to the point you could assume they’d been there all along. The only character that stands out is Kevin Bacon’s Captain Cade Grant. The reveal that he is the villain comes too early to count as a twist, but also arrives too late to be the basis of the plot. It’s also far too obvious, to the point where you have to wonder why they even bothered pretending he wasn’t the villain from the opening. Just show him as the bad guy at the start, then have the late reveal be that he belongs to the police, then have THAT lead to the third act shootout.

It’s nice to see the returning cast, although some have been very rude and had the audacity to age in the last 30 years, which is very disappointing to see. I do get the feeling that Eddie Murphy has slightly aged out of playing these characters. At his age, that kind of behaviour just seems reckless and irresponsible rather than “wacky fun hijinks”, there are moments when you can’t help but think “you should know better”. There are moments where his behaviour works, where it is genuinely fun to see, and that is most of the time. But like I said, there are one or two moments where it just seems weird to see him act that way.

There are few occasions where it does seem like its resting on past glories, but they are rare. It mostly works. There are fun set pieces, creative action, and some incredibly funny dialogue and interplay between the characters. It’s ridiculous, but not “he just knocked a helicopter out of the sky using a car” level like other franchises reached. Even at its most ridiculous, it does feel grounded in the reality that this universe has created.

In an uncertain world full of gloom and doom (to the point where it’s effected champagne sales), it’s nice to have something as comforting and uncomplicated as a film like this. Watch, enjoy, then eat a pot noodle or something. It’s not going to change the world, and some of the satire feels misguided compared to the potential it has, but it would be a cruel vindictive heart that is not warmed by this.

Unfrosted (2024) Review

Quick Synopsis: A completely untrue story about the origin of Pop Tarts

The biggest thing Unfrosted (shortened to U, pronounced “chabatwangkluman for linguistic reasons I can’t get into) has going for it is that it is very very silly, and demonstrates how silly it is by playing it completely straight. The fact everybody takes all these things so seriously despite the fact it’s ridiculous just demonstrates how absurd a lot of this is.

But that’s also kind of its biggest weakness. Stoic reactions in a comedic world can work, Airplane is an example of that. But that requires ACTORS, everybody in this is a comedian, and they’re all playing the straight role. This feels like a waste of their talents. Jerry Seinfeld is the most affected by this. He’s known for his wit and comedic timing, so it’s weird he wrote himself a role in which he doesn’t get to display any of that. Especially since his acting skills could be improved. Don’t get me wrong, he is a tremendously talented comedian and writer, but he’s a bad actor, and always has been, even back in the days of Seinfeld.

The trouble with EVERY character buying into the silliness is there’s no real way to ground it, nobody is pointing out how stupid it is. As a result, everything feels disconnected, making it very hard to buy in. Without a reason to buy in, it occasionally comes off as a marathon of references and “Future popular thing? That will never catch on.” The story isn’t that compelling either. You don’t actually care about what happens. As such, there’s no reason to be invested. It doesn’t feel like a feature film, it has the air of an SNL sketch stretched out far far too long to the point where it seems a bit obnoxious and like it only exists so the cast can show off how funny they are, in other words, an SNL sketch.

This review may give the impression that I didn’t care about Unfrosted. Truth is; it’s one of the funniest films I’ve seen this year. The jokes are like a chronic masturbater who has just recovered from surgery which meant he couldn’t use his hand; they come frequently and with great satisfaction. You may not be invested in the story, but you’re never bored. If you don’t understand or like a certain joke, there will be another one in a few seconds that you will like. It’s not going to change the world, make you reassess your feelings about something, or make you forget that Seinfeld is now one of those comedians who complains about how “woke ruins everything”, but it will make you laugh, and sometimes that’s all you need. Plus, in a world where a biopic for a shoe genuinely exists (and is pretty good), is one about pop tarts really so far-fetched?

Spaceman (2024) Review

Quick Synopsis: Jakub Prochazka (Adam Sandler) is a Czech astronaut, six months into a space mission and starting to feel the effects of both isolation and the growing emotional distance between him and his wife. Also, there’s a telepathic spider called Hanuš

I have not been kind to Netflix movies lately. In my defence, they haven’t been good. I think 2023 was the first time since I started this site that every film in the “Amazeballs” section at the end of the year was a cinematic release. I can’t remember the last time a Netflix original movie excited me, and then delivered on that promise. Actually, I can, it was Glass Onion. My hopes aren’t that much higher for something that’s not only a Netflix original but also an Adam Sandler film. Don’t get me wrong, Adam Sandler is capable of doing great things. To the point where I don’t actually think it’s as much a surprise as people say it is when he gives a good performance. But his Netflix stuff has seemed to be an excuse for him and his friends to get paid vacations.

Sandler does give a great performance though. As I said, it’s no longer surprising when he does so. What is a surprise, is that his character is supposed to be Czech. We need a Czech actor. It’s not that he gives a bad performance, but it’s like if Michael Sheen played Martin Luther King, no matter how good he is, you can never fully buy into it. The other performers are all good, and it’s impossible for Carey Mulligan to not be great, Paul Dano gives an INCREDIBLE voice performance, to the point where you don’t realise it’s him. Really though, this is a showcase for Sandler. It’s essentially him screaming out “What the fuck do I need to do for you awards fuckers to take me seriously?”, turns out the answer, by the way, is “Don’t work with Kevin James”.

I’ve criticised isolation-based films for focusing too much on flashbacks, and how doing so means the characters don’t actually feel isolated because half of their screen time is spent with people (whatever that Colin Firth one was, Eternals etc). But here the flashbacks are shot in such a way that they are distinct memories, it does something rare in cinema; it makes us genuinely believe that he is remembering those things. The way they’re done, they feel like actual memories rather than long-distance not-instant replay. They’re slightly “off”, they’re shot differently from modern life, and there’s a sense of ethereal otherness to the whole thing.

Gonna give a weird criticism; the spider moves too fluidly. It looks fantastic, but it doesn’t have that slight jerky/hydraulic leg movement that spiders have. The limbs are more like a cat than a spider. Now this could be argued it’s because it’s a space spider, not a land-based one, but still. Jakub also doesn’t seem to respond to Hanuš the way you’d expect. He just kind of backs away, tries to kill it, then comes back and starts talking to it. He doesn’t view it like the horror he would think it is. Spiders are creepy bastards anyway, giant space spiders that can talk? That’s pure horror. Yet it doesn’t ever really feel like he believes that. He treats it more as a mere inconvenience.

In summary, if this was at the cinema I’d say you should probably see it, but because it’s on Netflix? If you have that streaming service, you should definitely watch it. Set aside some time on a Sunday afternoon after dinner, put it on, and then get ready to feel something (not yourself). I should say though, no matter how good it is, it’s never good enough to stop you thinking of the Babylon Zoo song.

Lift (2024) Review

Quick synopsis: A group of thieves plan to steal $500million a shit load of gold from a dickhead.

Palestine, Ukraine, economic turmoil, in these trying and confusing times it can be nice to have something to ground yourself, something that you can hold onto that you know is real. So thank Netflix for bringing us Lift and providing us with an undeniable truth; some films are utter shit.

F. Gary Gray has a weird history as a director. Sometimes he brings us Friday or Straight Outta Compton, and sometimes he brings us Men In Black: International. Lift belongs more in the second camp. It’s so by the numbers it’s basically a children’s colouring book. When you watch it unfold you’re not surprised or entertained by anything. There are moments where you can guess what’s going to happen, not just in terms of narrative, but also in terms of action scenes and dialogue. Everything has been done before, and done better.

Lift even copies the stupid things from action movies. They do that usual chase scene thing of using the “make go fast” lever/button when it’s dramatically convenient rather than when it would have been best to use it. It feels like the writer took a bunch of modern buzzwords like “NFT” and “hackers”, and then got AI to write the script. It has the “yes they’re thieves, but they’re the good guys” BS that’s prevalent in a lot of similar stories, but they’re not really good. Yeah, they’re stealing art from dickheads, but they’re doing it entirely for selfish reasons. Also, I’m calling BS on the “we’re the best thieves in the world” claim as the police know every single member of the crew. Not just names, but also their roles within the organisation, their addresses, and their contact details.

I’m also not entirely sure WHY it had to be this group of misfits who helped get the MacGuffin back. The movie states “We legally can’t get the gold because the transaction itself is legal”. But Interpol plans on taking the gold once it’s been retrieved. By doing that, they wouldn’t be able to do anything with it EXCEPT return the gold to the first person, who will then just make the deal again.

I don’t know enough about physics to call out the flight scenes as unrealistic, but even I know enough to doubt the scene where one of the planes flies upside down steadily for an extended period of time. I’m guessing there are more instances which will cause people’s heads to explode, but that was the most obvious. I do know enough to know that planes flying over the English Channel don’t tend to need to be wary of mountains. There’s not really an extended mountain range in Folkestone or Margate.

The worst thing for me about those errors is how unnecessary they are. Just don’t mention the mountains, say “high winds”. Make up a different reason for the crew being needed (maybe they used to work for the Big Bad so have inside information etc). Use a heist method which doesn’t involve flying a jet upside down. All of those are easy fixes for unnecessary problems. The fact that these problems are all over the film like Bill Cosby on an unconscious woman raises concerns. Concerns that the scriptwriter either didn’t realise they were problems, didn’t care, or was told to put these problems in by the studio. Neither of these scenarios is good. It just adds up to the feeling that nobody involved in this plane crash of a movie gave a shit about making it the best movie they could. Nobody went in with the intention of bringing 100%, they just did what they were paid to do, and then left. Nobody cared, and that’s evident throughout.

A plane heist is a unique idea, and one that could be interesting to watch unfold. As it is, it’s hard to recommend something as lazy as this. If nobody involved is going to care about a film, then why should the audience? Billy Magnussen is dope as fuck though.

2023 In Film: Day Five (The Okay)

All Quiet On The Western Front

Ups: Some beautiful shots.

The best use of silence in a war movie

There are moments where the sound effects, the turning wheels, the sliding doors etc, almost seem like beats accompanying the music. Phenomenal sound work.

Downs: Bit too oscar-baitey

Weirdly anti-French.

Not really the right time for a film like this.

Best Moment: The scene with the dying French soldier. Haunting.

Worst Moment: The bits which were invented for the film.

Best Performer: Felix Kammerer

Opening: A few shots which I was pretty sure were paintings when I first saw them.

Closing: He dies, JUST before the war is over. Utterly pointless, and very in keeping with the story being told.

Best Line: All that’s left separating us from an armistice is false pride.

Original Review here

Apocalypse Clown

Ups: So funny.

Makes the most of the premise

Utterly ridiculous, in the best possible way.

Downs: Loses its way a bit in the middle.

Most of the performers seem to be doing tribute performers to other actors.

Best Moment: The creation of Funzo. Provides a heartbreaking backstory to what could be a one-dimensional character.

Worst Moment: The conspiracy theory section seems a bit of a pointless detour.

Best Performer: Natalie Palamides. Her character, as written, is already the highlight of the film, but her physicality is tremendous. Even the way she eats ham is notable. She is never not on.

Opening: “They say you should never give up on your dreams, but what if you should?” A nice happy way to start the film off, over scenes of destruction. Considering it’s a relatively small budget the scenes of apocalypse look pretty decent. There are large fires, derailed trains etc.

Closing: It wasn’t the apocalypse, a Garth Brooks concert created a power surge. Hilarious ending.

Best Line: When discussing how they accidentally set fire to their friends: “I thought it said laughter fluid”

Original Review here

Cassandro

Ups: Interesting story.

Downs: The editing is a bit choppy at times.

He gets loved way too quickly.

Best Moment: When a fan on a talk show thanks Cassandro for giving him the courage to come out to his father. His reaction is perfect, you can tell he’s happy, but also slightly envious that his father didn’t react the same.

Worst Moment: The moment where his mother dies doesn’t quite hit as hard as it could do

Best Performer: Gael Garcia Bernal.

Opening: Character walks into a run-down gym. Lots of locker room banter which is pretty much just “wanna fuck?” stuff. Then a match starts. It’s good at showing the location etc. There’s no glamour etc, just a grotty warehouse and dirt. He then watches an exotico match and is entranced by the reaction, especially after the unsatisfying feeling he had for his match. A really quick way of getting character motivations over.

Closing: He has a frank and honest discussion with his homophobic father. Incredibly powerful.

Best Line: “I needed you, at a certain point in my life I needed you, but now I don’t. And that’s okay”

Original Review here

Dungeons And Dragons: Honour Among Thieves

Ups: More competent than you’d think

Clearly made by people who were passionate about the project

A lot of fun.

Downs: The characters don’t take the threat seriously

The big bad isn’t pushed as a big deal so feels inconsequential.

Best Moment: The swooping transformation.

Worst Moment: How it takes so long for them to realise the villains’ plan

Best Performer: Sophia Lillis

Opening: Narration

Closing: More narration

Best Line: “I don’t want to see you die. And that’s why I’m leaving the room”

Original Review here

El Conde

Ups: It leans into the weird premise brilliantly.

There’s a sense of music in the way it’s shown, the actions flow very well.

Some very clever nods to cinematic vampire lore.

Downs: The black-and-white appearance may put some people off.

Far far too much narration.

I get the fact they have an English language version, but was it necessary for them all to have very British accents?

A vampire Pinochet after power isn’t as interesting as a vampire Pinochet in or rising to power.

Best Moment: Carmen flying. Yes, it looks quite fake, but there’s a real sense of playfulness and beauty to it.

Worst Moment: The execution of Marie Antoinette. Only because the scene of her head being held up looks fake.

Best Performer: Paula Luchsinger

Opening: A rousing military march being played on a record player over a black-and-white scene. Instantly sets up the military theme. Then a Margaret Thatcher sound-alike talks about a vampire comparing blood tastes. This leads into the themes incredibly quickly. Then leads into how vampire Pinochet came to power.

Closing: Thatcher and Pinochet survive. Literally, as opposed to modern Britain where it’s just their ghosts and horrific ideas that survive.

Best Line: If you want anything said, ask a man. If you want anything done, ask a woman.

Original Review here

Haunted Mansion

Ups: Funny

Smart characters.

Good starter horror movie for kids

Downs: Poor choice of opening.

Needs more memorable music.

Weird choice to release it in summer.

Best Moment: The police sketch artist, genuinely laughed out loud.

Worst Moment: When it’s revealed that Travis’s dad is dead, mainly because it seemed really obvious and surely everybody assumed that was the case.

Best Performer: LaKeith Stanfield.

Opening: Ben meets his wife. Kind of sweet, but not really needed and might have been better as a flashback later on.

Closing: Halloween party. Here’s where the lack of memorable music hurts it most.

Best Line: I know this place isn’t as warm as I hoped. But I’m gonna light a vanilla candle, and it’s gonna be a game-changer.

Original Review here

Napoleon

Ups: Bloody

Some great battle scenes.

Downs: Everybody has an English accent so it’s difficult to tell people apart.

Long

Historically inaccurate

Terribly paced.

Best Moment: The Siege of Toulon. Does a decent job of showing his strategic side.

Worst Moment: The first exile, seems to happen too quickly.

Best Performer: Vanessa Kirby

Opening: Marie Antoinette gets beheaded by a guillotine. She’s not mentioned again but I assumed she died. A good way of setting up Napoleons’ motivations. Also lets you know how bloody the film is going to be, it doesn’t shy away from the gore but it’s never gratuitous.

Closing: He’s exiled. It doesn’t really do a good job of selling that he was there for years. It does tell you, but it would have been better to show so that you truly sense the isolation and despair his final years consisted of.

Best Line: “You think you’re so great because you have boats!” hard to figure out why it’s hard to take this film seriously.

Original Review here

The Hunger Games: The Ballad Of Songbirds And Snakes

Ups: Some good character work.

Looks dystopian

It has the balls to kill a disabled child.

Brutal.

Downs: Terribly paced.

Wrong choice for the protagonist.

Needs a sequel, but won’t get one.

Best Moment: The bombing of the games. Comes out of nowhere and is genuinely shocking.

Worst Moment: The entire final section. It cannot be overstated how much everything after the games just KILLS the momentum.

Best Performer: Rachel Zegler

Opening: General Snow dies. Not the most exciting opening.

Closing: Coriolanus becomes a full-on asshole. Doesn’t really feel deserved.

Best Line: Corals dying words.

Original Review here