Elemental (2023)

Quick synopsis: A fire girl and water guy meet and fall in love.

Pixar are one of the few studios I actively trust. If a film has already piqued my interest, then finding out it’s being released by Blumhouse or A24 might make me go see it slightly quicker, but their name being attached to something is not going to be the deciding factor in me watching it. But Pixar is different, if a Pixar film is released, I’m going to see it, because 90% of the time it’s going to be a really good experience (okay I’ve just run the numbers and it’s actually 84% of the time, but that’s still a really good hit rate). With the exception of Cars 2, even low-grade Pixar is still better than 90% of stuff out there. So where does this rank? It’s not up there with the best, but it’s nowhere near the worst. In terms of the bad; the plot is predictable. Sometimes when I say that I mean it in a “when you get near the final third you can figure out what’s happening next”, sometimes I mean it in a “by the end of the first act I can guess the ending”, for this? I could figure out what was going to happen just by looking at the poster. It’s incredibly predictable, you can figure out what will happen, how it will happen, and when it will. But that doesn’t actually matter, sometimes predictability is okay. It would be weird if someone remade Romeo and Juliet but changed the ending so that both characters ended up being 3 otters in a trenchcoat who were intent on stealing the world’s supply of fish. Yes, it would be a surprise, but it would also be shit and not make any sense. Sometimes you want a simple story about a guy meeting a girl and they end up together.

That only works if the audience buys into the central concept, and to do that, they need to WANT the two people to be together. I can’t speak for everybody, but I REALLY wanted the two to be together, the way they react to each other is adorable. They’re played by performers I’m not too familiar with; Leah Lewis was in How To Deter A Robber, and Mamoudou Athie was in Patti Cake$, but I can’t remember them too much, all I can remember from Athie’s performance in PC was how much he reminded me of the guy from Lightspeed Champion. It’s a really fresh cast in terms of how unknown everybody is, the only name most people will recognise is Catherine O’Hara. It’s a brave move to anchor so much on unknown performers, but it works. From a vocal performance, they’re absolutely perfect, the voices match the body types; Lewis has a firey voice which speaks in short bursts, whereas Athie has a vocal performance that feels more fluid and like it’s a continuous flow.

The animation is stunning. Two things are notably difficult to animate; fire and water. So deciding to have a film based on characters comprised of those two things is a display of either bravery or stupidity. It could have looked awful. Thankfully it looks astounding, everything works together to create a visual treat. All the characters have a weight to them which means they don’t just feel like 2-dimensional images on screen, but feel incredibly real and wonderful. The way the buildings are designed around the different elements is delightful.

Now onto the best thing; the emotion. Pixar are bastards because they know how to emotionally manipulate you. They know how to make you cry like a child who has lost their ice cream. It’s not sophisticated; it’s pretty basic in terms of how they signpost it and pull it off, but it’s so damn effective that even when you know you’re being manipulated you can’t resist it.

As I said though, it is predictable, and there are a few plot points which don’t get to be as important as you feel they could be. When it has a choice between the big and the personal, it goes with the personal. But still sets up the big thing. It’s a bit weird and feels slightly first draft. If they paid more love to the script it could have been great, instead, it’s just pretty damn good.

Asteroid City (2023) Review

Quick Synopsis: An alien lands in a city, steals an asteroid, then goes back home. There’s more, but it can’t really be done in one sentence.

I am a pretentious film watcher. I can’t hide that. I have genuinely talked about how much I loved a film’s aspect ratio before, and I’ve definitely used the phrase mise-en-scène in casual conversation. I also love films that have a unique look, something that visually stands out among the sea of bland visuals in modern cinema. Plus, I like weird character-driven pieces. So with that in mind; I should LOVE Wes Anderson. Yet for some reason, I’ve never liked Wes Anderson’s stuff. Some directors’ styles just don’t mesh well with my cinematic tastes. It’s not just Wes, I’m also not too big a fan of Paul Thomas Anderson, so it’s possible the only time I like an Anderson is if they’re investigating possible alien activity, or delivering Spinebusters to Dusty Rhodes.

I like his animated stuff though, I just feel his live-action feels feel a bit…..I dunno, a bit too Wes Anderson. Everybody speaks in a stilted and rigid manner. I suppose in this case it could make sense because the film is a 1950s play, so all the actors are speaking like 1950s American theatre performers would. This has the unfortunate effect of making it seem a bit like every actor is giving the same performance. Every male is a quick-talking emotionless person who feels like they smoke cigars and call people “sonny boy”, whereas every female is either a nervous “need a hug” or in a sexy French depression. There are also too many of them, multiple side characters seem to have no purpose or reason. That’s to be expected with the story though. They mention an on-ramp to nowhere, so it’s just a road that goes up and ends up nowhere. That’s what the story is like. So much nothing happens, but it’s not that interesting to watch. There are moments which go by and you assume mean something, and they probably do, but there is no attempt to explain or discuss them, so they’re just stuff that happens with no pay-off.

I’m sure there are some people who will love this, who will love all the references to obscure radio plays and stories gone by. But the idiosyncrasies are so prevalent that unless you’re fully onboard then you’re not going to be interested. I kept waiting for it all to come together, to be shown a reason for some of it, but none came. More importantly; I kept waiting for a reason to actually give a shit about what was happening, but it’s difficult when character deaths occur in narration, important characters too.

As to be expected, it looks great. Visually, it FEELS like the 50s. Normally, directors just play some 50s music, maybe adjust the colour a little bit, and then consider it done. Anderson has put SOOOOO much work in to make it look period appropriate. Importantly, there are important visual distinctions between the moments in AC which are the play, and the parts which are in real-life about the production of the play. Not just the colours, but the set layout and shot composition seems different too. As I said, Anderson is a very talented visual storyteller, and there are some absolutely sublime pieces of cinematic genius in here (the vending machine bit still makes me laugh when I think of it). I just don’t vibe with his stuff. To me, it’s the cinematic equivalent of a fancy deconstructed pie. It looks fantastic and it takes SO MUCH F*CKING TALENT to be able to pull it off, but after you eat it….well to quote The Menu; You’re still fucking hungry. If you like his stuff, you’ll like this too. But if you’re not already a fan, this will do nothing to convert you.

The Flash (2023) Review

Synopsis: The Flash breaks reality by running fast (despite running fast multiple times in the past and it never being an issue) ending up not only in the past, but in a different universe with another Barry Allen.

I went into this with one thought in mind: this is going to be a complete mess. I mean; it had an advertising campaign which consisted of trailers that would play in the cinema and then have “full trailer available online” at the end, and fuck that. At the very least they could have done something cool and released the whole trailer early but sped up so it goes by in a second. That level of laziness when it comes to marketing is never a good sign. I assumed it would be worse than Morbius and that I’d hate it, but it would at least be fun to complain about. That’s why I’m actually slightly annoyed that The Flash is *whispers* kind of good.

Don’t get me wrong, there are some serious flaws here. The CGI is shameful at some points, and there are some characters who are underused. None more so than Sasha Calle’s Supergirl. The restructuring at DC makes me worried that this will be her only appearance in the role; which is a shame as she’s really good. She has the screen presence needed for such a lofty role. Then again, she HAD to be great, because if she wasn’t then the online reviews would consist of unwashed masses insulting her. I mean, those kinds of people are still going to insult her, but at least now they’re not backed up by the general public agreeing with them.

The other downside was the advertising. There were rumours Michael Keaton was going to reprise his role as Bruce Wayne from the early 90’s Batman movies, these rumours were confirmed when he was put front and centre of the marketing campaign, to the point where it didn’t really feel like The Flash was the main character in his own movie. It would have been nice to have that as a surprise, as without that there are not too many “OMG” moments (with the exception of one near the end). I get why the studio did this; with all the controversy over Ezra Millers’ behaviour, they needed to find a way to draw people into theatres; and the only way they could think to do it was “Look, Michael Keaton’s back!”. I think it worked, it got people interested, but it did have the unfortunate side effect of making people expect more.

Don’t get me wrong; there are some great moments and cameos in the final section, but they’re not important to the story and are only seen briefly, to the point where it feels like they’re only there for fanservice. There has been some controversy about this section as it involves CGI use of dead actors in a way that some people might be uncomfortable with. It is a bit uneasy to think about the potential applications of deepfakes of actors, particularly at a time when streaming companies are trying to use AI to screw over writers.

Now onto the good: The performances are all great. Keaton crushes it as Batman, the aforementioned Calle could not be better. The main issue with some of the supporting cast is a lot of them aren’t given enough to do. Michael Shannon, for example, is underutilized despite being the main villain. The story itself is pretty good. The worry with a multiverse story is how you make it simple enough for the mass public to understand. It turns out the answer is spaghetti. It’s a bit weird how the character who mentions it would know of it, but as far as exposition goes, there are worse examples.

I did LOVE one moment. There’s a section near the end where he works out how to fix everything but at a personal sacrifice. It’s absolutely perfect. By which I mean; that is EXACTLY how I would I have done it. The unsaid heartbreak, the crushing weight of responsibility that decision leads to, the wonder whether the other person is aware or not. It’s up there as one of my favourite moments of the year, just a shame the rest of the film doesn’t come anywhere close. Overall; nowhere near as bad as you think it would be, but not as good as it needs to be. Plus, it is a bit weird that it’s ANOTHER Barry Allen story, no Wally West (Which would have been nice) or Bart Allen (which could have led to something fun).

Spider-Man: Across The Spider-Verse (2023) Review

Quick Synopsis: You know that meme of the two Spider-Mans pointing at each other? That.

Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse (or Smitsv; pronounced Smitsvee) is one of my favourite films of all time. Noticed I didn’t add a qualifier like “animated” or “superhero” to that. It’s genuinely a fantastic movie and the creativity and visuals are of such high quality. Since then, multiverses in cinema have become commonplace, especially in superhero media. Even the last live-action Spider-Man was a multiverse story, so what will can this bring to the table that’s new? Plus, it’s a sequel. So there was always a chance that this wouldn’t be as good. Then I saw early reviews, both from professional reviewers, and from people I know, and they all seemed to say the same thing: this doesn’t come close to matching the original, it surpasses it.

Spider-Man: Across The Spider-Verse (or Smatsv) has some of the most beautiful animations I’ve seen. Different styles too, there’s Lego animation, some parts resemble a watercolour, and some feel more like a ransom note made up of cut-out letters from magazines. The whole thing is a complete visual delight which is truly incredible to watch unfold.

But as defenders of video game designers would say; it’s not about the graphics. Doesn’t matter how pretty a film is, if the story is dogshit (as anybody who watched The Snowman can attest, the crime one, not the animated one). The story for this? Superb. There are going to be some people who won’t like the ending, and the way the whole thing concludes is going to annoy A LOT of people, but it worked. Fuck it, I’ll say it now; this is part one, with the story concluding next year. So it ends with a cliffhanger. Some people may see this as a waste of time, and view the story as incomplete. I loved it. I will admit that my immediate reaction was “Get the f*ck out of here”, but then I was excited. I am already hyped for the next one.

This does so much more than you’d expect. It’s not just “Spider-man vs. a different version of him”, The main villain (The Spot) is utterly terrifying. His motivations are logical, his arc makes sense, and his journey from nobody to nightmare is a horrific piece of brilliance. I’m really curious as to how his arc ends in the next one, but more intrigued by the new villains introduced in the ending sequence.

There’s also A LOT of emotion in this. This isn’t a standard “good vs evil” but includes themes of loss, guilt, responsibility, sacrifice etc. A central theme is about how loss and grief can shape you (themes which will later be talked about in The Flash movie). It goes a lot deeper than it needed to, and I will always appreciate a film doing that.

Don’t get me wrong though, it is also fun. Before he becomes a universe-destroying abomination, the way the universe reacts to The Spot is hilarious. Pavitr (the Indian version of Spider-Man) is adorable and is great at defusing tension without it being distracting. Hobie (the British Punk Spider-Man) also provides comedy, as well as defiant energy which helps the plot in some of its slower moments. Fans of the franchise will also love seeing the nods and winks to other versions, I think practically every iteration of the character is represented here (except for possibly the Marvel 1602 version). Yup, even the live-action and video game adaptations are represented here.

Now on the downside: there’s the aforementioned cliffhanger ending which is guaranteed to annoy some people. It is also slightly too long, with some moments which could definitely be trimmed down. The biggest issue for me? The music isn’t as good as the first one. I loved the soundtrack to the first one, which included many memorable songs. This? I can’t remember any music from it.

Do you know what it reminded me of? There’s a Batman comic called Whatever Happened To The Caped Crusader? It deals with the realisation that there are multiple universes with a Batman. The elements change slightly but there are a few constants; the deaths that form his character, his isolation, but also that he never gives up. That sense of “every version of you is built from suffering” is prevalent in this, and I absolutely loved it.

Hypnotic (2023) Review

Quick synopsis: Determined to find his missing daughter, Detective Danny Rourke (Ben Affleck) finds himself facing off against experts in hypnotic suggestion.

I’m not a casual movie-goer. I’m not quite in the “I can recognise this person from a five-second clip in a movie 20 years ago”, but I don’t think it’s incorrect to say I am more passionate about movies than a large portion of the population. Because of this, I am the type of person who listens to podcasts about movies. One of my favourites (and one I’m listening to as I write this) is Sequelisers, where they talk about fixing bad films (specifically sequels, hence the title). If they did a series where they moved from sequels to just fixing general films then the episode based on this would be the shortest ever. They’d be no recasting, no changing director etc, all it would be is “Make it 20 years ago”. If this came out in 2003 it would be a much better experience.

That’s not a crazy suggestion either, Rodriguez wrote the original script back in 2002, and Ben Affleck was just coming off Pearl Harbour and The Sum Of All Fears. This would have had another advantage; it might have stopped Affleck from making Gigli and Daredevil.

This isn’t a BAD film. It has one of the best “everything you know is a lie” rug-pull I’ve seen in a long time. The swerve actually fixed two criticisms I had whilst watching, it does bring up a new criticism but I can’t go too deeply into that without spoiling the plot point, and it’s more of an “I would have preferred if it was done another way” rather than “this decision makes no sense”. The way it puts everything you’ve seen before in a new context is exactly what a twist like that should do. It could be set up better. When it happens you don’t think “Ohhhhh, that explains so much”.

Now onto the bad; the key one (for me, anyway) is this feels too much like a Nolan film, just without the Nolan flair. Although to be fair, unlike a Nolan film, it does feature some human emotion, and you can actually hear everything clearly. But the way the story is scripted brings to mind not just Inception, but also Memento. But it’s not as smart as any of those, so it feels somewhat lacking. So much of it doesn’t feel like a blockbuster, but more like a straight-to-DVD piece. Even the action set pieces feel somewhat muted. There’s a moment that brings to mind the famous “City folding over into itself” sequence from Inception, but it’s not done anywhere near as well in this. It’s a shame as the idea of people being made to see a different version of reality could lend itself to some creative scenes. Really, you could have anything. The possibilities are almost endless, but the way that Hypnotic plays out, you never really feel that. The most you get is “woah wobbly screen” whilst two men lock eyes.

The other issue I have with this is the lack of reality. Because you don’t know if anything you’re seeing is real, it’s hard to get emotionally invested. Why should you care if a character gets shot if the base assumption is that it’s not real? That’s an issue which I’m not sure how to fix, but it does severely impact the level of satisfaction you can get from the final scene.

So in summary; it’s average. The best way I can describe it is this: it feels like an adaptation of a really smart book, but they’ve missed out on a few key plot points.

Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret (2023) Review

Quick Synopsis: Eleven-year-old Margaret moves to a new town and struggles to find her personal identity while growing up.

When I talk about Are You There God? It’s Me Margaret (or AYTG? IMM, pronounced Ayetagimamm) I feel it’s important to note two things: One, I’m an adult male. Two, I’m British. As such, I have zero personal history with the original Judy Blume book. I have no emotional connection to it, I haven’t built up an image of these characters in my head for me to be annoyed by when the film versions of them don’t match up to them. I know it’s a HUGE deal in America, but I have no preconceptions of it, and it’s clear the film is going to make ZERO concessions to appeal to someone outside of the target audience, so what’s in it for me?

Charm. That’s it. That’s what makes AYTG?IMM work. It makes you feel nostalgic for a time period which you never belonged to. This nostalgia helps fuel the innocence needed. There are moments here which could go sooooo badly. A group of pre-pubescent girls talking about how they want to increase their breast size? That could go very creepy and unsettling if done incorrectly. Kelly Fremon Craig approached it perfectly. I’ll just quickly mention Fremon Craig, she is why I watched this film. I would have normally avoided this out of fear that it’s so not me that I wouldn’t be able to approach it like I should and I would confuse “this film is not for me” with “this film is not good”. When I saw she was behind it, I decided I had to watch it, she wrote and directed The Edge Of Seventeen, which I absolutely love.

As I said, I don’t know that much about the original book, so I don’t know what was Craig and what was Blume. I think that’s a good sign though, it shows a good blend of writer and source material. The book was in 1970, and the film is set in that time, but is made with the benefit of hindsight into that decade, which sometimes means that the past is made to seem different than it actually was. But this all feels very real. The themes are still relevant today. Not just the worries about growing up, but also the shaming of young girls who develop before others. The fact that this film/book is mature enough to recognise that happens and that these girls are often slut-shamed before they’ve even done anything sexual is a depressingly relevant message for these times. On the one hand, it’s impressive that it recognises it’s a problem, but on the other, it’s bleak that a generation of people grew up on this book and didn’t seem to learn one of the main messages.

This is a very simple story; “girl grows up”. The ending is her having her first period. So really, it’s about nothing. Nobody dies, there are no huge stakes. But that’s approaching it from an adult point of view. From the POV of a child; the worries about growing up, getting your first kiss, your friendship groups etc, they ARE the most important things in your life. It’s really difficult for a film to show this and not have adults watching think “oh grow up you stupid child”. The characters need to express these worries without seeming melodramatic so that the audience knows how important it is. More importantly; adults REMEMBER how important that was growing up, they get flashbacks to those awkward times growing up. I don’t know how, but this managed it perfectly, and I think a lot of that is down to the writing.

Although that’s not just the talent of Blume or Craig, it’s also due to the cast. Abby Ryder Forston is absolutely perfect, I haven’t been this surprised with a child performance since McKenna Grace in Gifted. The supporting cast is great too, but there are issues with some actors not really given enough to do.

There is one burning question I have to ask; why did it take so long for this to get made? A lot of religious folks hate the honest and necessary discussion of menstruation, as well as the shock of a young child not being forced into deciding on a religion before they’re emotionally mature enough to fully understand the ramifications. So this film would not have been made in the 80s, and if it was it would not have been anywhere near as effective. So in a way, it’s a good thing this was delayed as it meant it could be approached with the sensitivity needed.

On the downside, the music could have been better. I can’t remember any songs from it, and since nostalgia and music are so heavily intertwined it feels like a wasted opportunity. In summary, I absolutely adore this film and highly recommend it. It’s an utter delight, and I can’t even think of a snarky way to end this review.

Your Place Or Mine (2023) Review

Quick Synopsis: A drunken hook-up leads to a lifelong friendship between Debbie and Peter. Twenty years later, Debbie is a single mother who is overly cautious regarding her son, and Peter is working hard at a New York job making dough but it makes him blue. They both end up crying a lot so they decide to move…….to each other’s houses for a few weeks.

So, a few years ago I transitioned this site from “occasional reviews/musings once a week” to “REVIEW EVERYTHING! (new)” where I mention everything I see at the cinema, as well as notable streaming releases. But therein lies the issue, how do we define a “notable” streaming release? There’s a lot of shit put on Netflix etc, so I need some form of internal quality control before adding it to the to-watch list. This isn’t a policy based on external reviews or budget or stars, it’s almost entirely on “Does this interest me?”. Sometimes what interests me is the plot, sometimes it’s a sequel to a film I loved, and sometimes it’s just because a lot of people have spoken about it and I feel I need to check it out.

Your Place Or Mine (or YPOM, pronounced Yup-pomb) was none of those things, it was led by two performers (Reece Witherspoon and Ashton Kutcher) who I feel ambivalent towards, the plot is a generic rom-com, and it’s received bad-to-middling reviews. So why did I watch this? Like all things in life, it’s because of Crazy Ex-Girlfriend. That’s one of my favourite sitcoms of all time, and yes a lot of that is down to Rachel Bloom, but it is also down to the co-creator, Aline Brosh McKenna. This is her feature directorial debut, and I was curious as to how it would be.

So, how is it? Well, the fact that I went on that long opening tangent gives a good indication as to whether I loved it or not. I wanted to like it, I really did. Despite my apparent dismissiveness of romantic comedies earlier, I do love a well-written one (my issue with the genre is that a lot of them AREN’T well-written and are just a bucket of cliches).

YPOM is doomed by its concept. The two characters engage in a quick house swap for a short while. It’s a good way to show the differences (and similarities) between the two characters, and provides some decent “fish out of water” moments, as well as allowing them to kind of explore each other’s personalities. But do you what it means we don’t get? The two interacting with each other face-to-face. With the exception of the opening 2 minutes, and the closing 5 or so, they only speak to each other via phone calls or through a third party. A romantic comedy depends on good chemistry between the actors, and this doesn’t allow us to see if they have any. This kind of approach (where you purposely keep them apart so that the audience is waiting for them to meet) can work. It’s the concept of the absolutely SUBLIME television series Love Soup. But it takes a lot of talent from everybody for it to work, it also needs a bit more time than this film gives it. If YPOM was a television series it might have worked, but tackling it one go makes the whole thing slightly unsatisfying. YPOM starts with a split-screen conversation between the two, and I would have LOVED it if THAT was the film. If the whole film was split-screen and we see both characters going through an individual story at the same time, then the closing is the split disappearing and the two appear together. It would have been incredibly difficult to write and perform (both characters would have to spend time “doing nothing” but making it look believable), but it would have been interesting and would have given the film a hook.

I’m not sure it’s helped by the performances, Witherspoon and Kutcher just don’t come off as a natural couple, and their presence together makes it feel weirdly dated. This is not the best work from either of them, with both performances feeling slightly phoned in. Witherspoon, in particular, gives a performance which isn’t bad but is painfully generic and not good enough for someone with the background and career she has.

Don’t get me wrong, there is a lot to like in this. The way it shoots phone calls is a creative way of showing how in sync the two characters are. The argument at the end taking place while the characters are on two opposing moving walkways provides a lot of creative and fun visuals, plus adds a weird physical dynamic nature to it. There are also moments where it seems to spoof generic romantic comedies, making fun of the tropes and conventions. The best example of this is the ending, where we see the following text:

“they lived happily ever after. Just kidding, marriage is hard, but they had a good life”.

It takes guts to end a romantic comedy like that, and moments like that show the potential this film had if it was let off the leash. But it’s too often trapped in the net of its own conventions.

So in summary, an ambitious attempt, but one that doesn’t quite work.

Operation Fortune: Ruse De Guerre (2023) Review

Quick Synopsis: Guy Ritchie spy shit, involving an arms dealer who is a fan of an actor.

I’ve been looking forward to this for a while. Operation Fortune: Ruse de Guerre (or OFRdG: pronounced Offradag) was originally supposed to be released in January 2022 before being treated like a member of the LGBTQ+ community in Russia, being randomly dragged away and hidden with no idea when they will ever be released, if at all.

That reference to Russia wasn’t just a subtle way to insult the country, there’s no way I’d randomly say that the Russian government is full of homophobic hate with supporters who are in as much denial as Vanilla Ice when he’s asked about stealing the music from Under Pressure. I mention it because Russia impacted the release of OFRdG. The villains in OFRdG are Ukrainian, and it was felt to be in bad taste to release a film with Ukrainian villains at a time when the country is under attack not just militarily, but also culturally from online sources claiming the country deserves to be invaded because they’re all Nazi’s. There’s an argument to be made that this is censorship and people aren’t stupid enough to use a film as a basis for reality. But there is another argument that some things just aren’t wise to make at certain times, and would be akin to Hollywood releasing a film called “Goldenstein The Filthy Jew Vampire” in 1943 (as opposed to just having Disney giving all their villains hook noses, an obsession with money, and many other tropes that just coincidentally happen to be anti-semitic tropes). That was a year ago, the film has been deemed safe to release now that there are fewer Ukrainian citizens still alive who can be offended.

I appreciate that was a weird way to start the review, by not really talking about OFRdG at all. That’s because there’s really not much to this. This does not feel like the Guy Ritchie who gave the world Snatch or Lock Stock. This feels like the Guy Ritchie that gave us Swept Away and Aladdin. It doesn’t feel like there’s any love in it. There’s nothing memorable about it. It lacks not only his visual flair but also the crowd-pleasing narrative twists and turns. There’s a real identity crisis about the whole thing. There are so many moments which if they were fleshed out could form the basis of a great film, even the “Hollywood actor” thing seems weirdly underplayed and not developed enough despite being the main plot point.

It’s a waste of a massively talented ensemble cast. Almost everybody is doing a good job but they’re not really given enough to do. I have no desire to watch this again, everything it does competently has been done much better elsewhere. You’d think “A comedy spy movie about a Hollywood actor being enlisted to investigate a criminal” would be a “once every 4 years” or so, but if this wasn’t delayed then it would have been the second film of 2022 with that plot and would have been the worst option out of the two.

I really wanted to enjoy this, I wanted it to be one of my favourite films of the year. As it is, I would fail a multiple-choice exam about the events of this film. I can only remember one of the characters’ names, and that’s only because it was mentioned in the trailers a lot. I certainly can’t remember the dialogue. The only thing about the dialogue that I can remember is that at some point I realised how much Jason Statham’s dialogue sounds like Garth Marenghi. Add a “fuck” and it works the other way around too.

Looking up those quotes and finding the best one provided more laughs for me than this entire movie. That says two things: 1) this isn’t a great movie. 2) I have too much time on my hands. But I have even less now I had to watch this. If it wasn’t for Hugh Grant then the entire film would be a massive waste of time.

Guardians Of The Galaxy Volume 3 (2023) Review

Quick synopsis: The Guardians struggle when Adam Warlock gravely injures Rocket, and they have to band together to find a way to save his life or risk everything falling apart.

Guardians Of The Galaxy Volume 3 (or Gotgv3, pronounced Gotgivthree) is exactly what you expect this film to be; for better and worse. The MCU (pronounced Mackyew) has felt like it’s been spinning plates for a while; as if it doesn’t matter what order the films get released in because they don’t connect to each other in any way. I remember before I watched Doctor Strange I made sure to watch Wandavision and the Doctor Strange episode of What If? so that I wouldn’t be lost. I have yet to watch The Guardians Of The Galaxy Holiday Special which was released last year on Disney+, and I wasn’t lost. Looking at the wikipedia page for that TV special and the first sentence is “The Guardians of the Galaxy have purchased Knowhere from the Collector and taken in Cosmo the Spacedog as a new member.”. That’s pretty much the only important thing and both of those you can kind of piece together anyway just by paying attention. They do mention Mantis and Quill being related in Gotgv3, but your brain kind of assumes they are anyway, and it makes no difference to the narrative so it doesn’t matter. I’ve said it before, and I will say it again if it doesn’t change; the MCU needs to start advancing the overall narrative, or people will start to think “I’ll wait to see it” and not feel they’re missing out on a cultural zeitgeist.

The last film James Gunn directed was The Suicide Squad, but this feels more like the other Suicide Squad movie. By which I mean the needle drops are too frequent and badly placed. It’s a shame as the other two Guardians films had iconic soundtracks, and this does too, but the songs are just badly used. Some of the choices are a little too predictable too, it’s not quite “We need to show this film is happy, so play Walking On Sunshine” levels of obviousness, but there are moments where it’s close. Like a lot of films in the MCU, there’s also a problem with tone. Bleak depressing moments of horrificness (that’s my band name) are followed by glib jokes or fun rock songs. It’s a shame as there are plenty of truly emotional moments that will kind of break you at times, but it could hit you harder.

Now onto the good, this features one of the best action scenes in the MCU, a single-shot sequence that encapsulates every character taking out a group of enemies in increasingly elaborate ways as we make our way down a hallway. It’s so beautiful to watch it all unfold in front of you, the delicate interplay between the characters and the moments making it feel less like a fight scene, and more like a highly choreographed ballet. It’s the closest the MCU has ever got to Oldboy.

Gotgv3 also features one of the most detestable villains the franchise has ever witnessed. A lot of villains so far have been sympathetic and tragic, or have been so cartoon-ey that it’s hard to take them seriously. The High Evolutionary isn’t justified or given a sad background like an X-Factor contestant, instead, he’s just a complete prick who you want to see fail. Unlike Thanos or Killmonger, you’re not likely to see swathes of people supporting him and wearing his face on t-shirts. What you will see is a large sense of cathartic release when he suffers, which is how it should be. Amazingly, Chukwudi Iwuji manages to pull off this character without seeming one-dimensional. It is strange to see Superstore’s Nico Santos as such an evil character too, I was just sitting in the cinema thinking “Mateo, you dick”.

It’s a good thing the High Evolutionary is as impressive as he is, as the eagerly anticipated Adam Warlock feels slightly underused. If he is in future projects then this can be forgiven as a set-up, but only if he does develop as a character. If he stays as he is, it will feel like a missed opportunity.

This is likely to be the last film with this iteration of the Guardians together as a group, and this is a fitting send-off. All the characters are given a chance to shine, and their fantastic chemistry continues to be a delight.

The real highlight in terms of characters though, is Rocket Racoon. He’s given a lot more to do in this and provides a lot of the emotional high points. It’s truly harrowing seeing what he goes through, and it actually helps explain his characterisation from previous films. This is what flashbacks should do, they should not just tell a story, they should also help provide context to things that have already happened and help flesh out the character. From the moment he meets his friend group, you know how it’s going to end, but that doesn’t make it any less distressing when it does, and it means his violent response feels warranted (even when you see the true extent of the injuries he doled out).

So in summary, I would recommend this. It’s exactly what you’d expect from a modern MCU film, I wouldn’t bother staying for the second credits scene though.

The Super Mario Bros. Movie (2023) Review

Quick Synopsis: Bowser wants to get married to Princess Peach, she would rather that doesn’t happen so enlists the help of a random plumber.

At the time of writing, The Super Mario Bros. Movie is the highest-grossing film of 2023, the sixth highest-grossing animated film of all time (already surpassing every Pixar movie with the exception of Incredibles 2), had the biggest opening weekend for an animated film, the first film based on a video game to gross over a billion dollars worldwide. That’s all well and good, but I’d be lying if I said it deserved those accolades. Fun fact; the highest-grossing animated film? The 2019 remake of The Lion King, that seems wrong somehow. This is a fun film, but that’s all it is. It looks absolutely gorgeous, the visuals (and the music) are full of interesting references and in-jokes, so you can tell the animators are true fans of the franchise. The writing? Not so much. A lot of the jokes don’t seem to be thought of specifically for this film, they could go into any movie. This means the whole script seems incredibly generic, nothing about it makes it stand out as either a very good movie or even as a Mario movie. There are a few plot points which are heavy references to the franchise, but they’re shoehorned in with all the subtlety and grace of a drunken elephant twerking. Yes, it is fun to see the karts appear, but they don’t really add anything to the narrative. That, along with many other moments, is just there for the sake of being there. Like they knew they needed to reference the karts so just threw them in where they could without an attempt to make it seem natural. There’s no attempt to be intelligent or appeal to anybody who’s not already expected to like it. There are too many moments where you’re acutely aware that you’re watching a kids’ film, with a few scenes which are (and this is not fun to say) kind of embarrassing. There’s no attempt to be anything better than a basic disposable kids’ film. It’s a shame. The Lego Movie has shown how films like this can and should be done; with wit and intelligence.

On the upside, Jack Black is fantastic. His singing the Peaches’ song is undoubtedly the best part of the whole thing. Most of the other vocal performers are fine, nothing special, they just exist in this movie. There’s nothing particularly wrong with wrong, but they’re all so generic that it’s difficult to remember who was who. It’s also much better than the previous attempt at a Mario movie (not that that’s difficult).

I imagine kids will like this, but it’s the kind of film which parents will be really annoyed about being forced to watch again and again. The best it will do for parents is remind them of playing the games as a youth. There are a few moments where tonally it might remind you of those terrible Friedberg And Seltzer parody movies where instead of jokes they just have references. Nobody wants to be reminded of those films, not even the people who were in them.

So in summary, it’s a fine movie. By which I mean, when someone asks how it is, all you can see is “It’s fine”. Nobody can doubt it’s a successful film, I just wish it was also a good one. I wish there was half as much love put into the narrative and dialogue as there is the animation.