Death Of A Unicorn (2024) Review

Quick synopsis: Paul Rudd kills a unicorn, briefly.

Oh, this hurts, not quite as much as being impaled by a unicorn horn, but it still hurts. Death Of A Unicorn (DOAU, pronounced Dow, to rhyme with cow) has been one of the films I’ve looked forward to most this year (alongside the new Knives Out). The title, the premise, the cast, everything about it would lead you to believe it’s going to be incredibly fun.

It’s not. That’s the big problem, it’s so po-faced it’s practically a Teletubby. Maybe that’s my fault. I foolishly assumed that a Paul Rudd film about a unicorn killing millionaires would be fun, that’s on me. It’s far too serious. The seriousness isn’t quite as ruinous as it was for Night Swim, but it does leave a bad taste in the mouth.

Just because it’s not fun, doesn’t mean it’s not dumb, but that stupidity comes mainly from character decisions. Characters do things purely to advance the plot, with no call for logic or consistent characterisation. I did appreciate the satirical nature of it, even though the “the real monster is capitalism” message is as subtle as a brick with the words “message!” smashed into your face repeatedly. The rich people don’t come as real, and not in a way that actual rich people don’t, they appear overly written with every bit of dialogue feels like it was written solely to say “these people are dicks”, rather than “how would an actual human (or rich business owner), respond to this?”. As such, they’re too ridiculous to take seriously, more like caricatures than characters.

That’s not to say that DOAU is without its charms. The performances are great, Will Poulter, in particular, is quickly becoming one of the most versatile performers in the world. I’ve been a fan of him since I first saw Son Of Rambow, and no matter what role he’s given, he always manages to make you believe it. He’s next going to be seen in Alex Garland’s Warfare, and I have no doubt he will nail it. Richard E. Grant continues to be a lot of fun, clearly relishing every syllable he speaks or movement he makes. Ortega continues to do what she does, she’s got a real handle on that character and plays it well.

I also loved how shockingly violent it was. Yes, there’s one death that’s actually less effective in the finished film than it was in the trailer, but mostly? It’s violent fun. The horn deaths aren’t quick or painless, they’re slow and brutal, almost as if they’re being done for revenge rather than animalistic instincts. The unicorns themselves are great characters; they’re original, yet tie into the mythology that we already know. They’re not “We’ve taken these creatures and turned them dark and angry”, they’re “Yeah, these creatures have always been like this, they’ve got fucking horns, obviously they’re violent”.

In summary, it’s so mediocre that it’s disappointing. It’s also far too boring for a film with this premise. But it’s worth a watch at least one, maybe. Weirdly, I would watch it as a musical, and I have no idea why that is, I just think it could work.

Can You Ever Forgive Me? (2018)

No, Melissa McCarthy, we can’t forgive you for Tammy, or The Boss, or Happytime Murders, or, damn McCarthy, you’ve been in a LOT of bad films. I mean, also been in St. Vincent, and that film was fantastic. I do like McCarthy, but I don’t trust her. Like I will never go and see a film because she’s in it. She can be really good but occasionally falls into scripts which just seem incredibly lazy and one joke (that joke being: woman swears and is violent, HAH!”. Thankfully this is one of her good ones. Full of emotion, warmth, and great characters. This film has had so many awards thrown at it that it begins to feel like an assault. But it earns every single one. Not just McCarthy’s performance, but Richard E. Grant finally seems to be getting the mainstream attention he deserves with a beautifully broken performance. I really hope this leads to him becoming a household name. I mean, he is a known name among people who like films, but I don’t feel he’s yet at the “recognised by people who watch one or two films a year”, and he should be, he’s immensely talented (also, how great a horror movie villain would he make?).

The script is also brilliant. It’s about a woman knowingly making forgeries of letters by famous people. That doesn’t exactly sound fascinating, does it? It sounds boring as hell. It also sounds like it will be hard to make the main character likeable. This manages it though (but I think McCarthy’s performance is part of what makes the character likeable too), the story is incredibly riveting, but it does make one misstep. It’s not a problem with the film, but with the marketing, or maybe even the story itself. The trailer showed us how she got found out and investigated for fraud. This doesn’t happen until into the closing section, so it’s odd to watch a film about a plan and KNOW it doesn’t work. I mean, it is kind of fascinating in a way to watch with the knowledge that it all goes to shit, but it does take away from the drama somewhat.

I did like this film a lot, didn’t love it for some reason. Think it might have been because of the aforementioned lack of narrative surprise. It might have just been that the story itself felt inconsequential. I mean, it was incredibly charming and delightful to watch, and if it’s on BBC over Christmas I’ll give it a watch, but I don’t need to buy it. It deserved the plaudits though, without a shadow of a doubt. I must check out the book some time.