Tag: Review

Clerks 3 (2022)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: Randal Graves, after surviving a massive heart attack, enlists his friends and fellow clerks Dante Hicks, Elias Grover, and Jay and Silent Bob to make a movie about their lives at the Quick Stop Convenience store that started it all.

Could this work? I don’t really think it’s a secret that the Kevin Smith who made Clerks is very different from the Kevin Smith of today, and it could be argued that he’s a different Kevin Smith than he was when he made Clerks 2. The original is almost 30 years old and will it still be entertaining to see these characters? There is a point where the characters reach an age where their humour and pop culture obsessions would just seem kind of depressing. Thankfully these characters do use this film to move on in their characterisation.

I’m going to get the negatives out the way first; the most obvious one is that this will be impenetrable to those who haven’t seen the first two, but if you’re going into the third film in a series without watching the other two then that’s on you. People who see this will know what they’re getting. It didn’t get a wide cinema release over here so it’s not as though there’d be many people wandering into the cinema to kill time and see this.

Now onto the other negative, and this is a lot bigger for me. The first two films primarily took place over two separate days, years apart. These seem to be the only days that mattered to these characters, as they only ever reference people and situations we’ve already seen. There are no other running jokes from the over 30 years these two have worked together, nothing funny has happened in that entire time. I know it wouldn’t be fun to have this filled with orphaned references, but we could see them via flashbacks or them describing the events. As it is, the only times these characters refer to are the two days we’ve seen, so it makes it feel like the characters aren’t real people. They haven’t lived outside of these films.

There is one notable exception to this, where we find out a character died between films. I’m normally opposed to that thing happening as it feels lazy, but here it works. If we saw it it would have wasted time.

It is a comedy, but it is at its best when it’s not trying to be funny. This has more emotion than Smith has allowed in any of his films before. But there are moments where he feels scared of showing that. When it’s getting emotional and heavy, so he decides to pull back to comedy and pop culture references. It’s a shame as when he lets the emotions continue it’s genuinely heartbreaking.

So if you loved the first two, you’ll love this. If you’re the kind of person who listened to the audio commentaries and watched the DVD special features on the original, you’ll enjoy seeing the behind-the-scenes moments work their way into the script. I’ve missed these characters, and I’m glad to have them back, but the ending means if I ever do see them again I’d be kind of disappointed. The ending to this is so perfect that any attempt to add to it will just ruin it.

This has been a somewhat more dry review than usual, in my defence this film made me feel so many things that it’s hard to get back into normal review mode. That says more about this film than me raving about how much I loved it will.

Broadcast Signal Intrusion (2021)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: In the late 1990s, a video archivist unearths a series of sinister pirate broadcasts and becomes obsessed with uncovering the conspiracy behind them.

To start, I should clarify the title, it refers to when someone hijacks a television or radio signal to broadcast something. So when I refer to an intrusion, that’s what I mean. For a real life instance of it, look up the Max Headroom incident. I mentioned that to both explain the concept of signal intrusions, and also to explain the “Max Headf*ck” excerpt I used. It wasn’t just me being crude, it was actually a super pretentious reference.

That’s not better is it?

These reviews are personal opinion. They always have been, and I’ve made no attempt to hide or deny that. That’s why some films which aren’t technically great get worse reviews than others. It’s why stuff like Table 19 (Rotten Tomatoes Score: 26%) receives a more positive review than Don’t Breathe (Rotten Tomatoes: 88%). There are some films which I just don’t gel with. Movies are all about preference, there’s no point in me recommending a film to someone if I know they won’t like it, just because “it’s directed really well”. I say all of that to preface this: there are some people who absolutely love this film and consider it one of the best horror films of the year, but I’m not among those people.

I get what the film is going for, and it has moments of true greatness. Everybody involved is obviously incredibly talented, it does a lot of things better than most horror films. I particularly like how it displays the film title on colour bars on-screen within the film. I don’t know why but I like when films make the title card exist within the film itself. I’m also a fan of how it used sound, particularly in the intrusions themselves, where there’s almost a wall of sound that the audience is banging its head against. The intrusions themselves are genuinely creepy and disturbing, which is always good. This film also creates a really compelling story and mystery that you want to find out.

That’s where it let me down. It is so concerned with being mysterious and asking questions, that it doesn’t answer those questions. You can get away with that if it’s a weird and esoteric film, but this is mostly normal (with the exception of intrusions). If it went into weirdness more then the lack of a cohesive narrative would have been acceptable. I’ll clarify what I mean by “lack of cohesive narrative”, it’s possible to describe this plot in a way that makes sense, but it involves missing out on a lot of the details. Details like “who made that phone call?”, “Where did that character go?” etc. So the synopsis makes sense, but the plot does not. I know some people like mystery, and I do at times, but not when it’s like this. Mysteries should enhance a film, not be used as an excuse to not answer questions. I recently watched the rerelease of the classic John Carpenter version of The Thing. That ends with an unanswered question: are both the characters still human? That’s a question that people have discussed for years. But if the film started with that question, and had a spooky voice stop the characters from making progress in answering it, then it would be annoying.

It’s not helped by how reminiscent it is of last year’s Censor. It’s not close enough that it feels like the same movie, but it is close enough that comparisons are inevitable. It’s a bit like someone took the script of Censor, played Chinese Whispers with it, and then made a film of the resultant script. It’s bad luck as I think they were developed around the same time, so there’s no way they influenced each other, it’s just bad timing on my part to have seen that first. I do feel bad about comparing the two, but I think part of that is due to how disappointed I am with this film in general. I love the unique idea of it, and the performances are all fantastic. Harry Shum Jr will get the plaudits, and rightfully so, but I feel you can’t ignore how talented Kelley Mack and Jennifer Jelsema are when they’re on screen. Mack, in particular, has a very bright future if she can pull off more performances like this. That’s what this film is to me, a possible footnote in a future favourite film. Jacob Gentry directs it wonderfully, and his choice of jazz music for a lot of it instead of a more traditional horror movie score is inspired.

If you’re a fan of more esoteric, dreamlike cinema, then you’ll appreciate this. If you prefer more straightforward watching, then I’d say avoid this as you’ll find it frustrating.

The Menu (2022)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: A group of rich dickheads attend a specialist menu arranged by celebrity chef Julian Slowick (Ralph Fiennes). They’re disturbed when the dining experience is less Amuse-Bouche and more Abuse Douche.

I knew what was going to happen in this, I knew what was going to happen to almost all the characters throughout. It seemed to spend a lot of time catching up with its own trailer, and I always hate when that happens. It was also slow, filled with unlikeable characters, and unbearably smug.

So why did I like it so much? Everything indicates I should dislike this. But it was so well done. It’s a film that lingers with you long after you watch it. Not just in a slightly “that was horrific” way, but also in a way that you come out with a genuine appreciation of cinema. I’m not sure if it was deliberate, but it’s easy to see the parallel between film-making and a chef; both creating art which is supposed to be for everybody, but there is still a general notion that the more people like it, the worse it is, and the only proper form of it is if it’s incomprehensible.

I like food (as anybody who has seen my stomach can testify), but I dislike food culture. I think food should be eaten and enjoyed, so I dislike it when it’s overly pretentious and fancy, more focused on atmosphere than taste (like the kind of restaurants that serve foam on a shoe). This film seems to have the same disdain for it, lampooning how ridiculous the whole thing is. The satire is not subtle but is brutal. Whereas some targets seem a little unfair, once you think it through it makes sense. The couple whose only crime is not remembering what they ate last time? Seems petty at first, but think of it like this: the chef has put his all into creating memorable food, the kind people will remember for the rest of their lives, and then you have two people who see it as standard, not treating it with any sense of importance. Related; a performer who made something bad for money. Yes, petty, but the chef sees it as someone who doesn’t take pride in their work, that’s a personal insult to him. Yes, some of the other targets feel easy, but they’re targets who won’t realise they’re idiots until they see this film, it’s the lack of self-awareness of the characters that make the whole thing work.

It looks fantastic, most of it takes place in a singular room so there’s not really that much you can do in terms of creative visuals for sets. There are a few island shots which show the beauty of the location, but it is mostly a film made of space, creating a sense of weird emptiness to the whole thing. It works though, the fact that the room is so wasteful and sterile, yet it’s a place that these people pay thousands to eat at, says a lot about who these characters are, and really helps set the mood. If everything else, the story, the cast, etc was the same, but it was set in a diner or a cosy village pub, it would change the mood completely. The food? It looks impressive but not like something you’ll want to eat (with the exception of that burger). It’s food for visuals rather than purpose, which is kind of the point.

The performances are all pretty much perfect. Ralph Fiennes would make a great horror movie villain, he’s unsettling and terrifying to watch, but captivating. You can’t turn away from him, even when he’s in the background your focus is on him, just because of how good he is to watch. Nicholas Hoult is fantastically hateable, although he didn’t need to be American. Anya Taylor-Joy continues to be among the best part of any film she’s in. I think this may be my favourite performance of hers, it’s the first one where her character is the beacon of normality. She’s the audience surrogate in this, and her caustic barbs are a great tone leveller. Her pitch-perfect delivery of pointing out to people how the food they’re being served is actively mocking them makes that line work. I don’t know much about Christina Brucato but her small moments in this made me want to see more of her (although there was a small part of me that thought she was Gillian Horvat at first, which may be why I was paying so much attention to her).

So in summary, this isn’t a film that’s for everybody, but it was certainly for me. I don’t think people will think of it as “just okay”, there will be some people who love it, and some who hate it. There will also be those who miss the point entirely and think of it as a film that’s against the upper class. It’s not, it’s against people who lack passion and pride. If you think that’s an attack on the upper class, that says a lot about what you think of the upper class.

Black Panther: Wakanda Forever (2022)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: A bluefish with achilles wings tries to protect his homeland, by invading another.

This was always going to be a curious watch. How exactly would they deal with the death of Chadwick Boseman? It was going to need to be handled delicately, not just because of what happened, but who it happened to. Boseman was regarded as one of the nicest people in Hollywood, and the circumstances of his death, where he went to children’s hospitals to meet fans even whilst he himself was dying, which could not have been easy for him. Often the goal with watching a film is to forget the external influences and review it on its own merits. It’s why I didn’t watch Don’t Worry Darling, because the on-set conflicts overshadowed everything about it and it would be difficult to watch it and not analyze everything for hints of the backstage drama. It’s like how you can’t read old lostprophets interviews without looking at every sentence for clues of the singers misdeeds (polite way to put something horrific). But this is different, you CAN’T go into this blind, you know the circumstances of Boseman, and it’s too big for the film to ignore.

They don’t ignore it, they have the character die of an unspecified illness off-screen. I’m glad they did that, if they just had him disappear there would be the worry he’d be recast in the future, and if he got killed by the villain it would seem a bit cheap. His death hangs over the film and defines the characters, you feel that this, more than any other film in the MCU, was one that was needed. It was needed as a tribute, and it was needed for the cast (and to a lesser extent, the audience) to help them grieve and get through it. None of this would matter if the film itself wasn’t good though. Phase Four has been divisive, some of that has just been due to people complaining that it’s not the Infinity Saga again, and some of it has been because “too many women”, but when the phase has also included its weakest film to date (Eternals), and a general lack of focus, it’s hard to get the same level of excitement as you used to get. Especially since lately they’ve eschewed plot and instead gone with “surprise cameos”. This doesn’t really have many surprises, it focuses on good storytelling. This is probably the most mature Marvel has been in a long time. I hate that saying “mature comic book movie” because it usually means (ironically) that it’s just full of blood and swearing, in a way that only really appeals to 15 year olds. This is actually mature. It deals with themes of loss and legacy. It’s genuinely heartbreaking at times and is well done.

The script is helped by the performances, Tenoch Huerta Mejia probably needed more to do but he does brilliantly and I’d like to see him return in the future as there’s a lot that could be done with his character. Letitia Wright looks a natural to lead the franchise going forward (if she stops making enemies on set). But the best performance was Angela Bassett, who gives a tremendous performance, thre’s one scene in particular where we see all her characters pent up rage and emotion, it’s the kind of scene which makes you wonder if she could get an Academy Award if given the right script. It’s weird that in an action movie the best scene is one which is just dialogue, but it has so much power that it’s hard to deny that’s the case. Although I’d be lying if I didn’t say a part of that is how pedestrian some of the action scenes are. There’s a running theme in Phase Four of overly busy final fight scenes. Shang-Chi is the best example of something that should have ended with a small one on one fight scene full of emotion, but instead they went with a multi-person CGI one. They do the same here. If this ended with a hand to hand fight between Namor and Shuri it would allow it to not just be a fight, but be a scene with emotion and character work. But it keeps cutting from that fight to another scene where blue creatures fight people dressed in blue in the middle of the ocean against a bright blue sky. This makes it hard to maintain momentum. Plus, personally I hate when films cut away from fight scenes then cut back a few minutes later; either the audience missed some of the fight, time stood still and the two timelines now aren’t concurrent, or they just stood around doing nothing. A fight between two hardened warriors should have an air of “any mistake will be punished” and like it could all be over in an instant. But when you cut between two seperate fights, film-making rules determine that usually those two fights end at the same time (or follow the same momentum), so you can tell the one on one isn’t going to end early when the multi-person scene is only just starting. There also multiple “that should have killed them” moments, there’s one in particular that stands out as being especially egregious.

A big downside for this is that it, even more than most Marvel films, will lose A LOT if you haven’t seen the previous entry in the series. Say what you want about Black Adam, but it works as a stand-alone film (I know people for whom that’s the only superhero film they’ve seen this year, and it made sense to them). The same cannot be said about this, it’s so dependent on you knowing who people are, and who they are to each other too. The continuity lock-out is strong, and that’s a shame as this deserves to be seen by people who wouldn’t watch this genre normally. It would do well with them, IF it wasn’t for the lockout.

So in summary, the best possible way for them to end this phase, and they achieved it by aiming small. It’s not about the end of the universe, or the world imploding, it’s smaller, and because of that, it’s much better.

Joyride (2022)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: Joy is on a journey to abandon her baby when the taxi she’s in is stolen by a teen in this coming-of-age comedy-drama.

Does Olivia Colman know she’s a star? She’s probably one of the best performers in the world right now, yet she’s still in films that people at a similar level would see as beneath them. She is so without ego that it’s actually impressive, and it can only be a good thing for filmmakers. I’m not sure I would have watched this if she wasn’t attached. I’m sort of glad I did. I mean, it’s not the greatest film in the world, but it’s not the worst. It’s a film that shows great potential for everybody involved. Neither the director (Emer Reynolds), the writer (Ailbhe Keogan), nor the male lead (Charlie Reid, playing Andrew) even has a Wikipedia page at the moment, but on the evidence of this, that should change for all three of them.

It is a fun script, but it could do with being both more subtle, and more in-your-face. Andrew is too good, he’s introduced stealing money, but it’s from his dad who stole it from a hospice collection, so Andrew is planning to return it. It means there’s no ambivalence toward him, you know he’s always going to do the right thing. So when, later in the film, he comes to a moral crossroads; chosing the right thing to do, and going back to his nefarious dad, you already know what he’s going to do so the moment doesn’t seem as powerful as it would otherwise. It’s supposed to be an ethical dilemma, but it never feels like one because the film hasn’t shown the chance of him going the other way.

On the subject of his dad, he’s supposed to be feared and violent, but we’re not really shown that. I’m not saying we need a scene of him smacking a kid, but it would have helped build him up. Also, he shouldn’t have been in it so much. If you keep him as an unseen threat, then, ironically, it would make him seem a bigger threat.

Now onto the good, it has some very good moments. Olivia Colman’s flashback is incredibly powerful. I also respect how well it uses time. The entire plot is kicked off within 4 minutes (that’s including the opening logos and credits). It moves at such a pace that while watching it, you’re never going to feel bored or look at your watch. There’s also a scene on a plane near the end which is genuinely hilarious and has some great one-shot characters.

In summary, I feel this is destined to be included in a “oh, you liked this film the director made? Well one of their earliest ones was Joyride” conversation. An early oddity in a future career of greatness.

Emily (2022)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: A biographical film about Emily Brontë, and the writing of her most famous work, a shopping list. No, wait, Wuthering Heights.

It’s weird, this film is supposed to be about the writing of Wuthering Heights, but it doesn’t feature Kate Bush at all. Plus it’s set in the 1840s instead of the 1970s. Such a basic lack of fact-checking. Oh, it turns out Wuthering Heights is not just a banger of a tune, it’s also a book (Books: they’re like television shows for your eyes), huh, the things you learn.

I’m not that familiar with Wuthering Heights, or the work of any of the Brontë sisters truth be told. I worried this would hinder my enjoyment of it. There was a high chance that I just wouldn’t vibe with this film, not just because I don’t know much about the sisters, but also because I tend to not like period films that much. And for a lot of this film’s opening, I was uninterested in this film. It felt like the characters were taking some things far too seriously and ignoring obvious truths which would reduce their anxiety. My fears were justified, I was bored, and I had started to tune out.

Now I’m about to say something I wish wasn’t true. The Brontë sisters are important in a literary sense, and are among the most famous female writers of all time, coming from a time when women were legally second-class citizens. So any story about them has to be feminist AF for it to work, which makes the following sentence make me feel shitty for saying: the film gets a lot better once her brother enters the spotlight more. There’s a turning point where he and Emily are talking and it tells you so much about who Emily is. It’s the first time you see the dynamism and excitement that she has. It’s the first time that she feels like an actual human instead of a character. The two actors have undeniable chemistry and I hope they work together in the future.

I have no idea how historically accurate this is, so I can’t judge it based on that. I can only judge on what I see, and what I see is slightly frustrating at times. As I said, the opening doesn’t do a great job of drawing you in, and the main romance that’s central to the plot feels lacking. Hard to explain why, they have good chemistry, and the way it ends is heartbreaking, it just doesn’t feel quite as real as it should. I think it’s because the meet-cute moment doesn’t land. As I said, the way it ends is brilliant, but the way it starts feels a bit rushed and forced. The performances are great though, the only time I’ve seen Emma Mackey in something was Death On The Nile, where I described her as “distractingly like Lucy Hale, but better”. None of that here, she is completely different and knocks every moment out of the park. Fionn Whitehead has a good energy to him, although I did spend a lot of the film wondering where I knew him from, I thought I was just getting him confused with Matthew Baynton, but now I know he was in possibly the best episode of Inside No. 9. I’m really looking forward to seeing what the two of them do next.

This is the first film directed by Frances O’Connor, best known for her performances in Mansfield Park, Importance Of Being Earnest, and Madame Bovary. I would not have guessed this is her first film as a director. It’s very ambitious, she doesn’t approach it as a standard period film, she uses handheld shots, dynamic camera movement during chases, and very dark colours to give it a slightly modern feel. It doesn’t always work, the scene where characters are getting drunk feels very poorly edited. I get what she was going for, but it didn’t really work. There are some moments when the visual language is unclear and it can be frustrating and difficult to watch. But when it’s good, it’s very good. Although I do have the feeling her future is not in period dramas, but in horror. There are a few scenes in here which are directed as if they’re in horror movies, and I’d love to see her do one. Not a modern slasher, but a retro-style ghost story.

It’s strange, I’m not sure I learnt any facts about Emily, but it did give me great insight into who she was. I’m not sure I could pass a multiple-choice exam on her, but this did give me an understanding of her character to the point where I could probably BS my way through an essay on her. Worth a watch, but not essential.

The Bubble (2022)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: The cast and crew of a blockbuster action franchise attempt to shoot a film while quarantining at a posh hotel

I don’t think I trust Apatow as a writer anymore. The last thing of his I really enjoyed was Trainwreck, and that was something he directed, didn’t write. Other than that, lately, his stuff just seems like it’s all just deleted scenes from other movies. Funny People was far far too long, This Is 40 just seemed kind of cruel, and a lot of times his characters are unsympathetic. Plus he casts like he’s still a young up-and-comer, casting his friends and family whenever he can. I do wish Apatow would stop casting his family members in major roles. I get he wants to see them in it, and he can trust them easily. But I don’t think Iris Apatow was the best choice as one of the main cast. I’m not saying that being Apatow’s daughter is what caused her to get the role, but I have a feeling it was. I really don’t get how she was the best option for the role. Especially when Maria Bakalova was cast in the film in a smaller role. An ensemble-cast film like this means you can’t have any weak links, and having someone as inexperienced as her alongside performers like Karen Gillan, Pedro Pascal, and Keegan-Michael Key just makes her inexperience stand out even more.

But maybe Judd Apatow’s writing saves this? Nope. The whole thing feels like a first draft. It’s really weirdly paced. You’ll have a two-minute scene set during the day, then a short one set at night, and then another one set in the day. It’s just weird and means you don’t get a good grounding of time passing. Time passes so quickly that you don’t really get that feeling of suffocation. It also repeats itself, as well as repeating itself, and worse of all; it repeats itself. There’s a montage of the characters in the second quarantine where some are just drinking and doing drugs, some are going crazy with the quarantine, and some are learning lines. It kind of feels like it should have been shown during the first quarantine section. Would have been a good introduction to the characters, as it is, it’s just confirming personalities we’ve already seen. It’s a repeating of a situation we’ve already seen, and it’s not entertaining to see it again that long into the film. It’s like the whole plot has been brought back to the start. The way that montage ends is weird too, it doesn’t have a definitive end, just cuts to a scene of characters talking, so it makes it seem like those characters are breaking the isolation bubble. It would be very in character for them to do so, and they actually do that, sneaking out (in a scene which either didn’t happen or if it did, was very forgettable).

That’s not the only montage btw, there are quite a few of them, and most of them are pretty bad. It feels like the film is trying to aim itself at the TikTok crowd. It’s trying SO hard to be young and “hip”, that it just comes off like it’s as old-fashioned as someone in their 30s who still uses the word “hip”. Maybe that was done because montages are good ways to show characters quickly, and this film has so many characters that juggling them is difficult. It fails at that, btw. Most of the characters are ridiculously underdeveloped. It doesn’t help that we only see them at their worst, so we don’t really get a sense of who they are. They’re not helped by the dialogue they’re given. “you remember the reviews from your last film Jerusalem Rising”. That is a terrible sentence because it just feels really fake. I don’t think you’d mention the film title, or you’d mention just that. You’d say either “you remember the reviews from your last film”, OR “you remember the reviews from Jerusalem Rising”, it’s weird they mention both. Feels fake. It’s just blatant exposition, and it’s terrible that it’s one of the first lines in the film.

The film also starts with the hotel staff being briefed. They’re the best parts of the film, and if it was focused more on them it would be a better film. It would allow us to see the Hollywood lifestyle from the outside, and get a better view of the madness. As it is, the Hollywood stars are the main characters, so it feels too much like rich people watching other rich people. It’s incredibly toothless as a satire of film-making. It’s the film equivalent of government-approved satire. It doesn’t have a point to make, it’s just surface-level jokes.

On the plus side, I did get a kick out of a character being called Bola, mainly because I called a character that in a script and it’s nice to see a name like that used by actual filmmakers. Most of the cast are good, and the central idea is fine. It also does a good job of setting up the fictional franchise. It has moments where the potential shines through, but they’re quite rare. Really the main issue is one bad piece of casting, and a bad script. So that’s ALL Apatow. If he was replaced, and everything else the same (the casting, the concept etc), it would have the potential to be one of the best of the year. As it is? Bitterly disappointing. Oh, it also has a really awkwardly funny moment with Beck singing a song about dinosaurs. And a Miley Cyrus cover of Blondie.

See How They Run (2022)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: A depressed alcoholic and bitter Inspector (Sam Rockwell) works alongside an enthusiastic new Constable (Saoirse Ronan) to solve a *adopts accent* MURDAH!

I absolutely adore a good WhoHasDoneThis? (which as B99 fans know, is the grammatically correct way to refer to films in the Whodunit genre). A great whohasdonethis film contains my favourite things to watch: great ensemble cast, a stylistic look to them, and a clever script. I love being surprised in films, and whohasdonethis films provide those in spades. Well, good ones do anyway. Bad ones are far too obvious, the audience should never reach the correct conclusion of the reveal before the film itself does, but the reveal has to make enough sense that when it does happen you feel kind of stupid for not getting it.

The person who is generally referred to as being the best when it comes to this genre: Agatha Christie. A lot of modern stories in the genre are heavily in her debt, and invite comparisons. The smart thing to do in this situation is to lean away from it, remove anything that can cause people to compare it to Christie. Especially if you’re a director (Tom George) making his first feature length film, and a writer (Mark Chappell) who has mainly made television. You want to keep it fairly safe and do something very un-Christie, to avoid comparisons to one of the greats. That’s the smart and logical thing to do.

They decide to go “fuck that” and lean so far into Christie comparisons that they’re basically shunting her work. It’s a very brave thing to do, and one that runs the risk of being a spectacular failure. Somehow it’s not. This film has an uphill battle to work, and climbs that hill admirably. Everything about it just works. The story is one you’re invested in, a believable case could be made for any of the characters, all who are fleshed out enough that if they were revealed you wouldn’t sit there wondering “who’s that?”. It has a visual style that’s reminiscent of the LA Noire games, some truly beautiful use of focus in some of the shots. The script is clever, keeping you entertained throughout. I mean, there’s one point where it literally tells you the ending, and when it happens you can’t help but laugh and be impressed. It’s also really funny, getting a lot of genuine laughs from people in the screen I was at. The performances are perfect, everybody is at their best. Saoirse Ronan, in particular, needs highlighting as a ball of energy who you love to see, her joyous outlook is infectious and every moment she’s on screen is a delight to watch. Sam Rockwell is good, and make no mistake, he’s a huge get for a film like this, but, I dunno, part of me feels it should have been David Tennant and I have no idea why, he was never linked to it at all, but it feels like the kind of role he’d do well in.

On the downside, there is a slight loss in momentum as it heads into the final third. The final section itself is brilliant, but the lead into it is a little forgettable. It’s not helped by a dream sequence which doesn’t seem to add much except make me want to watch The Shining. I also thought the opening was strange. This is going to seem very picky but I can’t ignore it. It opens with a shot of a theatre sign, pans down and we see someone. But because the focus is on the person, the background is out of focus. This would be fine but it means that the opening is a blurry shot of a sign, just seems a bit weird that they wouldn’t have that in focus and then just change it as they panned down. Picky I know, but it bugged me, especially the second time I saw it. But the fact I’ve seen this twice says enough about how highly I regard this film. A great watch, and a much better Whohasdonethis than the rather lackluster Death On The Nile. Does make me think that I really need to watch The Mousetrap though.

Three Thousand Years Of Longing (2022)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Alithea (Tilda Swinton) is a scholar who specialises in mythology. Whilst in Instanbul she purchases a bottle and accidentally unleashes a Djinn (Idris Elba) who offers her three wishes. Given her knowledge of this subject, she’s aware of the pitfalls and is unsure whether to wish. The Djinn tries to assuage her worries by telling her three stories of his past.

George Miller is quite strangely wonderful, isn’t he? He’s made some huge movies, but still has the passion and weirdness of a hungry young director. He never feels like he’s phoning it in, whether he’s doing Babe: Pig In The City, Happy Feet, Mad Max: Fury Road, or Witches Of Eastwick. This is an adaptation of a short story (The Djinn In The Nightingale’s Eye), and somehow stretched it out to 110 minutes. Under most directors, this would be a recipe for disaster, but Miller kind of makes it work.

In terms of visual style, this is much closer to Fury Road than it is to anything else he’s done: it’s psychedelic and hauntingly beautiful in a way that entrances you as you watch it. If it turned out this film was actually just a way to hypnotise you into, I dunno, buying more yo-yos or something, you wouldn’t be surprised. It’s all so colourful and wonderful, accompanied by eerie strange music that compliments it perfectly.

I never knew I wanted Tilda Swinton and Idris Elba together in a film, but it makes a lot of sense. They bounce well off each other, and the chemistry they have is electric and I’d love to see them work together again. They’d make a good romantic couple in a film.

We know this because of the film’s weird third act. Most of the film consists of the Djinn telling stories about his past, and those parts are full of magic and wonder. After hearing those stories, for some reason Alithea decides that she wants her wish to be for him to be in love with her. It’s really weird and comes out of nowhere, especially since she’s only known him for a few hours. They then move in together and complications ensue, involving a small sub-plot with racist neighbours that is introduced and ended within a few minutes. The rest of the film is so good but the final third severely lets it down. It feels very disconnected from the rest of the movie, and feels like it has come from a very rushed script. It’s a real shame, as it means you leave the cinema not with a feeling of amazement, but with a sense of disappointment and frustration.

So, maybe see this, but paying full price almost guarantees you’d feel you have wasted your money.

Nope (2022)

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Aliens

Time changes a film. Despite the fact I have only watched it once, my opinions on IT: Chapter 2 are very different now than they are when I left the cinema after seeing it. Now I’ve had time for the mistakes of that film to bounce around my head a bit more, the inconsistencies in plotting have made themselves known. I have the opposite feeling with this film, I came out thinking “that was okay”, and if I reviewed it immediately, or even that day, this review would mostly be about how disappointed I was with it, how I’m worried Peele has slightly lost it and the lack of a big twist and that special “something” let it down, that the film veered off into strange diversions that just slowed the plot down.

But I just couldn’t forget about certain parts of this film, and then I realised certain things. My brain recognised thematic continuity, it realised the diversions weren’t really diversions, they were character explanations that said a lot about humanity and how they exploit things for entertainment purposes. It’s ironic that this film is about being watched, as it seems to be spending its entire runtime staring back, judging the audience for their participation in cruel acts. Once this film had time to breathe and spread itself through the recesses of my mind I realised this is actually genius. I’ve heard of a film being described as a slow burner, but “a week after you leave the cinema” is taking the piss a bit. A lot of people won’t like that, you don’t want to have to sit there and analyze a film to enjoy it. You shouldn’t have to delve deep into the themes to enjoy a film, but I think you do for this. An alien invasion film should be mass-market, and though Peele’s previous work has been highbrow, they’ve also been instantly accessible in a way that I’m not entirely sure this is.

I mean, it makes sense as a film, but if you watch it and don’t think about it, then it’s just going to be “okay”, if anything it’s going to seem too simple. It’s only when you think about it that the complexities reveal themselves. It’s kind of frustrating that that’s the case because it means it’s hard to defend this film without sounding like an obnoxious prick “no no, that was there because it’s about how that animal was being watched by a room full of people showing their teeth and it interpreted it as a violent gesture and lashed out. This ties into the main themes because humans feel they can control things when they can’t, they forget basic animal instincts and get cocky which leads to their destruction, it led to the deaths on set, and to the mass deaths in the theme park, it’s ALL CONNECTED”.

It’s a shame as this VERY smart and deserves plaudits. It looks fantastic, there’s a lot tension when there needs to be, and the performances are amazing. I do highly recommend this, but there is a chance you just won’t like. It’s one of those “1 or 5 star” films, I don’t think there’s an in between. But I’d rather that than a “meh” film.