Tag: Reviews

Fackham Hall (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Downtown Abbey meets Airplane, but not in a plane crash way.

We’re beginning to reach the end of 2025, which means it’s soon time for me to write the annual awards. So I’m starting to think of the best movies of the year. Among the obvious candidates are a film about the power of music mixed in with a gothic tale of racism and American history, a personal drama about trauma and family via a visit to a concentration camp, and a tale about the existence of the afterlife and all the implications of eternity. All very serious topics, all very “big”. Despite how that might make me look; I adore silliness. I like silly, fun little films, of which Fackham Hall is one of the best of the year. Really, the only comparison lately is The Naked Gun, which had the advantage of having an established style.

So, how does this compare? It’s not quite as joke heavy as TNG, with a distinct lack of sign-based jokes which aren’t signposted. There are also fewer background jokes. Basically, I don’t think there are any jokes that I missed that I’ll catch on a second viewing. So I didn’t laugh as often as I did during TNG, but I did laugh louder. I can remember more jokes from this than I can TNG, although that might be down to me having seen it more recently.

But does it stand out on its own? I’d say it does. There was a surprisingly full screening when I went, and everybody seemed entertained. Nobody walked out, which for a film barely advertised and which from the poster you could mistake for a period drama, was a pleasant surprise.

The performances are exactly what’s needed. I’m not familiar with Ben Radcliffe, but he does seem like he’d be perfect in an actual period drama. Thomasin McKenzie is building a weird filmography, which makes it hard to pin down her niche: JoJo Rabbit, Last Night In Soho, The Justice Of Bunny King, and now this. All of those are completely different films, and her roles are very different, yet they’re all somehow still “her”; she’s one of the most chameleonic (is that a word? Is now) performers around. Katherine Waterston is quickly becoming one of my favourite performers, which is odd as I’ve never intentionally seen a film because she’s in it; she just happens to be in films I watch, and happens to always be REALLY good. She has a face that feels like its come straight out of the 1940’s, so she’s perfect for films like this. She also has surprisingly perfect comic timing.

On the downside, the plot is muddled. The murder of the lord feels weird in terms of pacing. The arrival of the detective investigating it turns it more into a Hercule Poirot pastiche than a period parody. That feels like a genre rife for parody, but we’re not given enough time to fully explore that. I would be fully up for a sequel with that concept, by the way. If the murder was cut out, then it would leave a hole that needs fixing (and you’d lose one of the funniest sequences), but I’m sure it could be replaced with something more suitable. It feels like Jimmy Carr wanted to put those jokes in, not realising it might have been smarter to save them for a different film; now he can’t use those jokes and scenes in a more suitable film.

The reveal at the end is a bit too obvious, but not obvious enough that it seems deliberate and is, as such, a joke. Similar to the reveal of the murderer. But I think that if you go into a film like this expecting to be wowed by the plot, you’re in the wrong movie.

Really, the biggest negative of watching this is how it affected my viewing experience of another film. You know how, when you play Tetris or Guitar Hero, it changes the way you see things briefly? All you can see is falling circles and bricks for a while? I went through a comedic version of that. My brain watched the next fil,m and it took about 20 minutes for it to adjust and try not to see a joke in every single action or moment. That’s the biggest compliment I can give this film; It broke my brain with comedy.

Eternity (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: In an afterlife where souls have one week to decide where to spend eternity, Joan is faced with the impossible choice between the man she spent her life with and her first love, who died young and has waited decades for her to arrive.

As we approach the end of 2025, my mind is starting to wander; what will the films of 2026 be like? How have I reviewed over 100 films this year? What will the awards be this year? I was discussing the awards with someone last week, specifically the “best film”. I had it narrowed down to four: Sinners, Last Breath, A Real Pain, and one place reserved for the new Knives Out. I looked at the films still to come and could only see sequels (Avatar), films which could be way too meta (Anaconda), and films I’m not even sure will get a local cinema release (Eleanor The Great, Sentimental Value). So there was nothing there I could see making a push for best film. Then I watched Eternity, which instantly shot to near the top of the pile.

As I watched, I was waiting for it to fall apart, waiting for a reason for me not have heard a rumble of excitement about this. It never came. Yes, the ending drags slightly and could be shortened by a few minutes, but that doesn’t take away from what is truly a majestic piece of filmmaking. From the opening, where an elderly couple complain whilst taking a car journey, to the closing, where the cinema usher shines a touch on me and tells me to please leave as the next film is about to start, I was fully onboard with what this film was selling.

It feels like this film was needed by two of the leads; Miles Teller still needs to recover from Fantastic Four, despite that film being released 10 years ago. Top Gun helped, but that film has a specific audience. Similarly, Elizabeth Olsen needs to step out of the Scarlet Witch shadow. I’m not that familiar with Callum Turner, but he matches the other two well; playing off them well. He has great chemistry with Olsen, which is essential to making you believe that she’d still be into him.

In a year full of openly feminist horror, silly parodies, and subversive comedies, it’s strange that it’s Eternity that is most in line with my sensibilities. Everything about this was something I would want to write. It’s funny when it needs to be, the characters are well-written, and you’ll spend most of the time on the verge of tears. I’ve not seen a film like this in a long time; a film that reminds me why I love writing; writing gives you the ability to explore ideas and concepts, worlds that may or may not exist. Eternity is a film that, if it gains a big audience, could launch a thousand fan-fictions. It will inspire long discussions that will go long into the night. It is at its heart, a romance story; and the “let’s discuss this” nature of it means that this could be the perfect date movie.

This deserves to be one of the biggest films of the year, but it won’t be. It’s too weird a subject for mass-market appeal. There are some scenes which are mostly subtext. Plus, it openly says there’s no heaven or hell, which severely impacts its chances of hitting middle America without being called anti-Christian. It’s not anti-Christian, by the way, it’s anti-all religions.

This has been a difficult review to write. It’s hard not to just repeat the words “this film is amazing, go see it”. It’s not perfect; like I said, it drags a bit towards the end, there really should be better music choices, and The Void isn’t as nightmare-inducing as it could be. Those are minor issues, though. Eternity is magnificent, I’ve already put it on my Christmas list for 2026

Five Nights At Freddy’s 2 (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Zootropolis/Zootopia 2 (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

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

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

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

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

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

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

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





“

Clown In A Cornfield (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now You See Me, Now You Don’t (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: The Four Horsemen and a new generation of illusionists join forces to steal the world’s largest diamond from a South African mogul who heads an international crime syndicate.

I’m a huge fan of this franchise. I mean, they’re clearly bollocks, with some of the moments (particularly when they were passing the card around in the second movie) defying physics. But that doesn’t mean they’re not enjoyable and well-crafted. It’s weird how all three movies in this franchise have a similar style despite being directed by different people. Now You See Me, Now You Don’t (NYSMNYD, pronounced Nice-mon-yad) is directed by Ruben Fleischer, best known for Zombieland. Now You See Me 2 was by Jon M Chu, who has since moved on to the two Wicked movies (as in, the two movies based on the stage show Wicked, not two movies I think are wicked), and the first one was brought to the world by Louis Leterrier, who gave us Fast X (which should have been called Fast X Your Seatbelts). It feels like Fleischer understood the world better out of the three; he’s really good at staging action sequences among crowds, making them feel dynamic and not like everyone is just standing there watching instead of running away.

I like the script for this more than I did the others; there aren’t as many obviously unrealistic moments. My biggest issue was one which I’m not sure most people would notice. I’m aware I watch more films than most people (I’m one film away from 100 new releases seen this year), so I don’t think it’s too pretentious to say I pick up on things more than most people would, especially verbal foreshadowing. Like a verbal Chekov’s Gun, if a character in a cop movie talks about how their former partner died mysteriously, odds are that character isn’t really dead and will come back at the end. In this, a character is explicitly introduced with “I couldn’t find out much about your past”, so its obvious his past will be a plot point. Added to that, there’s an unseen mysterious character, with nowhere near enough side characters as potential suspects for who they are. So it’s not as mysterious as it should be. Yes, the way the reveal is pulled off is incredibly satisfying, but they could have hidden it a little better. It also would have been nice if the villain was a bit more cruel.

It’s been almost ten years since the last movie, so it would have been understandable if they assumed people didn’t remember what happened and opened with a flashback. This doesn’t do that, it jumps straight in, no explanation of what happened before, no reintroductions or summaries. I like that. It treats the audience as adults rather than spoonfeeding them everything. The way it introduces the new characters could be slightly more subtle, but it works. They slot in with the established crew without overshadowing them. I may not have been too impressed with him in I Saw The TV Glow, but Justice Smith is growing on me with performances like this (I’ve also been playing The Quarry lately, which may explain it). Dominic Sassa is impressive enough that you forget he’s only been acting for a few years.

Is this among the best movies I’ve seen this year? Nope. It might make the top 25% but that’s it. Am I going to buy it on DVD/Blu-ray? Almost definitely. I won’t gush to everyone about how incredible this movie is, about how everyone should see it, and it will change your life. But I will watch it again. If anyone asks whether it’s worth it, I will say yes.

The Running Man (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Desperate to get the money required to get his family luxuries such as food and healthcare, Ben Richards enters The Running Man, a TV show where people must survive 30 days being hunted by assassins.

The existence of this movie has annoyed a lot of people. People who are complaining, “They remade the Arnie movie. Be original! And they’ve changed aspects of it”, seemingly not realising that it’s not a remake, it’s another adaptation of the book, and some of the changes have been made to make it more faithful to the book. I watched the original a few weeks ago; it’s a VERY loose adaptation of the source material, removing a lot of the central themes. So in that sense, the 2025 version is better; it’s a lot more faithful, keeping not just the basic plot points but also the world-building required to make the story more than “muscle man kills everyone”.

As good as the first version is, it never truly felt dystopian or real. This feels real. The characters are clearly financially suffering, and living in a world where most of the media shows glamorous lifestyles that are beyond the reach of most people. A world where people are constantly watched. A world where the divide between corporations and government is wafer-thin. In short, a world which can either be described as “one we’re heading towards” or “one we’re already in”, depending on whether you view your glass as half full, half empty, or missing because some fucker stole it. The world has changed since the 80s, when America was led by a psychopathic manchild brought to the world by his appearances in the media, and Britain was determined to crush the rights of the poor, disabled, non-white, and members of the LGBTQ community. The proliferation (big word, go me) of AI and surveillance means that certain parts of this now ring very true. It does make things easier for the filmmakers; characters don’t have to say “they edited it using artificial intelligence based on pre-existing recordings” We’re all so familiar with deepfakes that we automatically know.

So it’s a good adaptation, but is it a good movie? I mean, the Tim Burton version of Charlie And The Chocolate Factory is clearly more accurate than the Gene Wilder one, but is clearly inferior, partly (but not entirely) down to Depp’s decision to play Wonka like Michael Jackson, but more creepy. I liked it. The political satire is on point, the action sequences are fun, and there are no sequences where you’re bored. Also, it’s fun. Action movies can make a political point and still be fun.

That being said, it could do more. Edgar Wright is known for certain things, mainly his editing and his music choices. It feels like The Running Man doesn’t showcase his skills. There are some very good music choices (especially in the opening), and like I said, some of the action sequences are fun. But there are no scenes which stand out as particularly impressive compared to his other works. There’s nothing which you can point to and say, “That! That is why we love cinema”, like the opening chase of Baby Driver.

The performances are fine. It’s still weird to see Glen Powell as an action hero, but I suppose that’s kind of the point. Colman Domingo is great, bringing to mind Carl Weathers’ performance as Apollo Creed with the energy and charisma he has.

There’s been some negative talk online about this movie. Those people are wrong. The Running Man is one of the most fun experiences you can have in a cinema without risking being thrown out. There’s a delightful energy to the whole thing, and the action scenes actually make sense. There’s not much suspension of disbelief required for it to make sense, no requirement to leave your brain at the door and “stop nitpicking and just start enjoying”. That doesn’t mean it’s overly pretentious and serious, though. You can just watch it at home (when the DVD/Blu-ray is released) with a couple of beers and some friends (sadly, friends aren’t included with a dvd purchase, I’ve checked) and cheer at the sequences, you’re not going to be have to be like “shhhh, you’re missing important plot points, concnetrate!”. Essentially, this movie is what you make it; if you want political satire, it’s got it, if you want bang bang blow up shoot shoot action movies, it’s that. So while it’s not an easy film to declare the best movie ever, it’s a very easy movie to enjoy.

I like that.

The Hand That Rocks The Cradle (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: Afluent attorney Michelle brings a new nanny into her home, shit gets creepy.

The original movie is one of my non-childish childhood favourites. I think everyone has those movies you watched growing up that you have fond memories of, that weren’t kids’ movies. Movies that aren’t stupid and cheesy. These are “proper” films. Your first introduction to nuance and mature themes. I’ve watched it again recently, and it still holds up. It’s a tense drama, led by some fantastic performances, especially Rebecca De Mornay, winner of the “Actress whose name sounds most like a Hitchcock character” award. If I heard this was being remade, I would have been deeply offended but curious. I only ended up hearing about its existence roughly two weeks before the release date, so I didn’t really get enough time to draw up strong opinions about it.

I’m not as opposed to remakes as some people; I won’t dismiss something purely because it’s a remake. So I was going into this with an open mind, but with the knowledge that it could suck. One advantage this has is that Maika Monroe isn’t as inherently unsettling as De Mornay. That’s not an insult to De Mornay, by the way, but she’s very easily believable as a creepy person, so it’s difficult to build her up as a creepy person because that’s her baseline. It’s like watching an action movie where you’re expected to be surprised that the mild-mannered janitor played by The Rock turns out to be a former soldier; it’s kind of obvious.

This does what a remake should do: sticks to the spirit of the original whilst changing the specifics so that you are still surprised. As good as the original was, Mrs Mott’s motivations always felt a little too caricatured evil to be as compelling as it could have been; “I’m annoyed that this woman reported my husband for sexually assaulting her” is a weird motivation. I won’t spoil it, but the villain’s motivation in this version is much more believable and personal. As good as Annabella Sciorra was in the original, Mary Elizabeth Winstead exceeds her in some aspects; it helps that she’s great at being frightened.

On the downside, the husband’s role is even more of an afterthought in this than it was in the original. I can’t remember his name, what he looks like, or any aspects of his personality. That’s a small complaint, though, as the core relationship in this story will always be the one between the two women.

In terms of visuals, this is overly artsy at times. Sometimes it works; the house fire is beautifully cinematic. But on others, it’s a little much; we don’t need a shot of her blood on the road the way it’s done. Truth be told, it feels a little pretentious at times. It’s definitely more cinematic than the original, for better and for worse. There’s one shot which I’m definitely not a fan of; when Rebecca kills someone with a baseball bat it lacks impact due to how it’s shot; it needs a split second or two

The story? I mentioned before how I preferred the villain’s motivation in this version, but how it’s revealed feels a little weak. There’s also a sex scene that doesn’t feel necessary. In a lesser movie, that would be a random sex scene made for titillation, but because this movie is obviously trying to be good, cheap moments like that hurt it more than they’d hurt others. If this weren’t trying to be so good, it would be a better movie. Which is a weird thing to say, I know. But the story is cheesy and over exaggerated, but the directing and performances are mature and sophisticated, which causes a weird style clash.

In summary, an interesting watch, and not one I regret. But I won’t hold it with the same love and reverence as I did the original.

Die My Love (2025) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick synopsis: Grace is a writer and mother. One of those things is ruining her life.

This is going to be a difficult review to write. Not for personal reasons, the emotional moments didn’t cause PTSD or flashbacks to similar events in my life. It’s difficult because it’s going to be tricky for me to talk about this and not make it very similar to my review of Urchin. I also went into that with high expectations, which weren’t met. Both films seem to have a disconnect between reviewers and audiences; with multiple high scores in professional reviews, yet audiences (at least the screenings I was in) met them with silence at best, and derision at worst. They both suffer the same flaw: making a straightforward and potentially emotionally compelling piece “artsy” to the point it’s incomprehensible.

Die My Love (DML, pronounced Dimm-ell) has noble intentions; showcasing how postnatal depression can cause women to feel isolated and gaslit by their own brain, how damaging it can be to their mental and physical health. The issue is that it’s clear that some of the film takes place inside her head, but you’re never sure quite how much. It’s the kind of film which, if it ended and you found out everything except the opening scene was all a dream, would make sense. There’s no indication of what’s real and what’s imagined, so it’s difficult to feel fully invested. It also makes it difficult to learn anything from it. It doesn’t say how you can help your loved ones who are dealing with similar issues, and no indication of how women can help themselves through it. The character does go to a psychiatric institution, but that doesn’t help. If anything, it just widens the chasm between the two leads, with her being angry at him for attempting to get her help. So the main message seems to be “you’re fucked”. The lack of audience investment also means that there is zero emotional resonance. This should be deeply emotional; instead, you’re left cold because you don’t give a shit about anybody in it.

Jennifer Lawrence gets some slack, but she is the core to what does work; the few moments which have emotion are all down to her. Robert Pattinson is fine, but there were many scenes where I couldn’t tell if he was angry and frustrated or just drunk. The two have great chemistry as a couple. The opening moments of them as a happy couple are delightful. The wordless foreplay feels real; they feel like a couple at play, completely comfortable with each other. Most of the other cast aren’t really in it long enough to leave an impact. I love LaKeith Stanfield, but his character adds nothing except raised questions. If you removed him, it would leave no hole in the film. That’s partly because a lot of the film goes from moment to moment, with things happening and then not being referenced again. You’d think somebody headbutting a mirror until they bleed would be mentioned, but nope. They rarely mention a character killing a dog. In fact, they don’t bring up the baby as much as they should, with multiple scenes where it feels like they just leave it at home.

On the plus side, the choice of music is good. With some songs you’ll know, and some you won’t. They are all tonally perfect for each scene, usually played at the perfect volume. I am aware that’s a weird thing to say, but sometimes films struggle to show music being played, with there being a disconnect between the music and the scene, with it clear that the music isn’t actually being played on set. DML, you can almost feel the beats of the music as it’s played, and she dances around the house.

In general, DML is a deeply uncomfortable watch. The constant noise and narrative disruption mean the audience never feels settled; they always feel tense and frustrated. I get it, that’s the point, it means you feel what the character feels. But if something is designed to be deliberately off-putting, it’s not an unfair criticism to not like it because you find it off-putting. I can watch films about death and loss without the requirement of the cinema staff murdering the person sitting in front of me. It feels like a film you’re supposed to analyse, dissect, discuss, think about, pore over. There are very few moments where it feels like a film you’re supposed to watch and want to see again. It’s a thesis, not a film.

Relay (2024) Review

On By troubledproductionsIn ReviewLeave a comment

Quick Synopsis: A bribe broker facilitates deals between corrupt companies and their threats. His new threat is a woman who has some dangerous leverage against a multinational conglomerate.

I was in a weird position for this. I’m not entirely sure how, but I had heard the “twist” ending for this. So I couldn’t be fully invested because instead of wondering where it was going to go, I spent my time trying to see the crumbs that would eventually come together into the sandwich of narrative completion. I’m going to admit, I did wonder if I had heard incorrectly. It felt like there was no way the ending I heard could be correct. If it was, surely they’d have set it up somehow? Put clues which don’t make sense until a second watch? Nope. It’s unpredictable, but not in a good way. It feels like it’s a twist for the sake of a twist. The annoying part is how unnecessary it is. If you changed it and made it more straightforward, it would work much better.

Remove the unnecessary moment near the end, and it’s a very solid thriller. I’m sure there are some plot holes that emerge if you think about it, but none that are so glaring that any idiot (by which I mean, me) can see them. I’m unsure of the opening. On the one hand, it is nice to have a film that doesn’t treat you like an idiot, but on the other, it takes longer to give you context clues than it should. One thing I am sure about is that Lily James’s character repeated her motivation. She explains it to a lawyer, who advises her to contact the relay service. She then explains it to Ash (played by Riz Ahmed). I understand why she would need to explain it twice, but I don’t understand why we had to see it twice. It would have worked if we started at the end of her meeting with the lawyer, so we just see him say “we can’t deal with this, but unofficially, here’s someone who can”. As an audience, our tension will be heightened, and we’d be wondering what it is that she’s so desperate and in danger. Although that does remind me of one plot hole that does need explaining, but I can’t explain it without ruining the twist. So I’ll just say this: the characters are INCREDIBLY lucky their plan went as it did.

This is all sounding negative. Which is a bit mean. Relay is one of the tensest films of the year. When it works, it’s remarkably old school and Hitchcockian; a tale of an ordinary man caught up in something much bigger than him, surviving on just his wits and local knowledge. The central premise is actually genius; a messaging service keeping anonymity by using deaf messengers and teletypewriters is perfectly suited for tense dramas. It reminded me of John Wick, how it set up its world visually and trusted in the audience to buy in.

It’s anchored by a great performance by Riz. That really shouldn’t be a surprise, I mean, he’s an Oscar-nominated performer (losing to Anthony Hopkins, which is nothing to be ashamed of). I think he may be one of my favourite British performers, and has been ever since I saw him in Four Lions. He has a nervous energy in this, like you can imagine that he jumps twenty feet in the air every time someone taps him on the shoulder. But he also seems like someone who’s really good at his job and is confident in doing it. It’s a strange dichotomy that is tricky to pull off, but he does it brilliantly.

In summary, this won’t be in my list of best films of the year. But it will join the likes of Bridge Of Spies, The Post, etc, by being a film that in a few years’ time will be added to a streaming service, and I’ll think “oooo, I really enjoyed that, I’ll watch it”, and then think “yup, that was certainly a good movie”.