Review Roundup – June 2024 – The Speed Run!

This month I’m doing a speed run. I’ve got four movies and two documentaries for you. It’s a lot to cover so I am giving each two paragraphs only. I’ll have more content for you in July including some major reviews. For now though, I’m looking at four low budget horror movies: “Project Dorothy”, “Sting”, “I Saw the TV Glow” and “Arcadian”. Don’t worry, I’ll still have plenty of horrors to review in October! As strange bedfellows to those I’m looking at a pair of documentaries, namely “Brats” and “Jim Henson: Idea Man”. Let’s get started!

Sting

Sting is a tale of an alien Spider creature that is briefly befriended by a young girl (Called “Charlotte”, naturally), but then goes on a rampage in an apartment block, slaughtering the residents. It’s also about the relationship of that girl with her Step-Father who she both idolizes and resents. Jermaine Fowler, Ryan Corr and Alyla Browne star. The movie is the brainchild of writer/director Kiah Roache-Turner, the man behind cult classics Wyrmwood (2014) and Nekrotronic (2018). This is a simple horror movie that had a lot of promise… But doesn’t quite live up to that. Very much a case of: Close, but no cigar.

The movie begins with a clever little scene and leads into a stylish intro. Roach-Turner is pretty good at adding a little class to a generic horror, so no surprise here. The rest of Sting however plays through largely by the numbers, though competently and with some charm. It has an interesting concept that ultimately has no impact on the rest of the story, which devolves to a straight forward monster in a building affair. The cast is decent, the characters are reasonable and the monster doesn’t look terrible. But outside the intro nothing really stands out. This hits a strong 5.5/10. Not quite enough to be a recommendation, but if you have nothing better to watch and like horror, it’ll do.

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.

Arcadian

I often say you can’t go too far wrong with Nicholas Cage these days. When he wants to he can bring it as an actor, but mostly he just seems to be doing things that are fun and many of his more B-Movie releases in recent years have become instant cult classics. This is an actor that is just having fun with his career in his later years and long may it continue. Here though he has a smaller role with his character Paul’s sons taking center stage. It works though and the two actors, Jarden Martell (As “Joseph”) and Maxwell Jenkins (As “Thomas”) do a solid job. Benjamin Brewer (Who directed Cage previously in 2016’s “The Truth”) helms the film. Mike Nilon provides the script. Nilon is mostly a producer (And has worked with Cage several times previously), this is only his second writing credit.

The film doesn’t waste much time with explanations. Indeed the creators of this seem to have quite deliberately left things a mystery. Mostly I think this was a good idea, but it does mean the movie just sort of throws things at you. The monsters are actually pretty cool, decently scary and original looking. The move well and seem to have a lot of lore behind them that the film barely touches on. That said, we’ve seen all this before. Arcadian is similar to any number of Monsters-Take-Over-The-World films and we know what to expect from them. The result is a film without any real originality but well made and relatively compelling. If you’ve never seen “The Quiet Place” or the horror/comedy “Love And Monsters” watch those instead. But if those movies are your thing, you’ll enjoy this too. This is a 6/10 and a recommendation.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Brats

Way back in the 1980’s and early 1990’s I was aware of the term “Brat Pack” and that it applied to a group of young actors that were making waves in Hollywood. It was never entirely clear who was in this pack, but I liked their movies and that was all there was to it for me. For those actors however this was a whole different matter. The term came from an article by David Blum, originally an interview with Emilio Estevez, but Blum changed the article to talk more broadly about that entire generation of actors. Those actors reacted badly to this label and in many ways have carried around resentment about the label throughout their careers. Now one of those actors, film maker Andrew McCarthy has decided to meet up with the rest of the gang to look back on that article and how it impacted them.

This is a mildly interesting documentary mixed with a chunk of 80’s nostalgia. Primarily this is a documentary about Andrew McCarthy and how he felt about the article that labelled him and many of his peers “Brats”. We see a bit of how others felt and a small amount of talk about the impact of the movies themselves. If you grew up watching these actors you will get something out of it, but ultimately the question of how they felt about being labelled as the “Brat Pack” didn’t need an entire documentary to cover and while their reactions are interesting they are about what you would have expected. Where they cover the movies it becomes a bit more interesting but that aspect is almost an afterthought. If you didn’t grow up in the 80’s this likely won’t be of interest to you. For me, an 80’s kid, it just about hits a 6/10.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

I Saw The TV Glow

This is a small cast surreal horror from Jane Schoenbrun centered around “Owen” (Ian Foreman/Justice Smith) and his total obsession with a TV show which may be more than it seems. The focus on a single character with almost no personality and the very slow build makes this really drag until that halfway point, at which stage the message gets confused. It is a very obvious allegory and while it never names the topic, it wears it on its sleeve. Despite that, the creators clearly wanted to be artistic with it and for me the most interesting thing was to see the conflict between their desire to push a specific message and the artistic need of leaving things to the viewer to interpret.

That’s not to say all art has to be open to interpretation but the truth is if you want to deal with a really specific issue and the message is more important than being creative you should probably stick to drama. Genre entertainment works better with broader messages that can resonate with everyone no matter how they interpret it. From about half way through up until the ending this seemed more of an allegory for drug abuse and the impact of media on young minds. Only with the very on the nose ending was I certain my original read of the message was correct. At which point I realized the film may not be saying what the director thinks it is. While that is interesting, the film itself is not. Despite a little bit of style and flair this is a 4.5/10.

Rating: 4.5 out of 10.

Project Dorothy

A very low budget B-Movie horror that attempts to make the most of it’s limited resources but is ultimately too bland and with too many plot holes to be any kind of cult classic. The movie is from relatively new director George Henry Horton and starts Tim DeZarn and Adam Burdon as a pair of thieves hiding out from police in an apparently abandoned warehouse after stealing a valuable piece of technology. The warehouse though houses a psychotic AI from the 1980’s that is looking for a way to escape her confines. The AI, named “Dorothy” is played by horror scream queen Daniel Harris (“Jamie” from Halloween IV and V), who takes top billing despite having the smallest role of the three.

Major plot holes surround the main premise, from not thinking there was an internet in the 1980’s, to not understanding how WiFi dongles work and of course the idea that an extremely dangerous AI would be cut off from the world by an easily broken padlock and no other security. This would be fine if this was a horror comedy, but unfortunately it takes itself a little too seriously. It’s also lacking in style, there’s no cool imagery or clever scenes that stand out here. The two main characters do a reasonable job, especially given how little they have to work with. The AI mostly chases after them with fork lift trucks and turns the lights on and off. There’s definitely been more terrifying and more interesting AI’s. Still, the movie isn’t boring, it is however below average. 4.5/10

Rating: 4.5 out of 10.

Jim Henson: Idea Man

How doesn’t love the Muppets? Come to think of it, what 80’s kid doesn’t love The Dark Crystal or Labyrinth? Jim Henson is a cultural legend for sure, with a great positive influence on the world of entertainment. Despite dying relatively young at 53, he was a giant for two decades and his legacy still stands. Indeed the Muppet’s still occasionally make movies (2014’s “Most Wanted” being the most recent), Sesame Street is still running and Dark Crystal had a TV series relatively recently. A ill advised sequel to Labyrinth is apparently in the works too, without Henson or Bowie. None of these things would happen if there wasn’t still a lot of love for Jim’s work.

This documentary covers Jim’s entire career and gives a solid amount of time to each stage, providing something of interest not matter what era of Henson’s career is of most interest to you. The Focus though is on the man himself and the documentary has a real personal feel to it, through the interviews with all those close to the man and their thoughts, inter-cut with interviews with Jim from over the years. There is nothing ground breaking here, but it is a very moving tribute to a truly creative man. We see his struggles, his relationship with his wife and kids and how he impacted everyone he worked with. The documentary makes it hard not to feel a lot of affection for this driven, funny human being. This is a 7/10.

Rating: 7 out of 10.

Review Roundup – May 2024

This month we’ve got a bit of a mixed bag to sort through. We have one horror film in “Abigail“, previously known as “Abducting Abigail” (As listed in my January preview for this year); We have an over the top action comedy in “Boy Kills World“; and the most indie of indie movies, the story of a family of Sasquatches “Sasquatch Sunset“. No clangers this week, but two that didn’t quite land for me. Although only one of these ended up a recommendation, all these movies have positives and something to offer someone. Let’s dig in!

Sasquatch Sunset

This is a film that didn’t entirely work for me, but I can see where some may find it appealing. It treads the ground between artistic vision and gross out comedy. In my view it relies a too heavily on the latter, making it hard to enjoy the former. If I’ve learned anything about these fictional creatures it is that they are basically just grosser versions of humans. This is in some ways endearing and in others… Well, just unpleasant. This is the Sasquatch cycle of life. We witness mating, death and birth. In between we seem aggression, we see tenderness, anger, fear at the unknown, curiosity and uh, body excretions.

Despite featuring very emotional scenes, I struggled to feel empathy for these creatures. This all felt very mundane to me. Part of the problem is that the heavy makeup makes it difficult for the actors to emote. As Sasquatches of course they don’t speak either and instead just grunt. They compensate for this with a lot of body acting and it works to some degree. But I didn’t feel especially connected. Fun fact: One of the Sasquatches is actually Jesse Eisenberg. Of course he is unrecognizable and doesn’t talk, so you’d be forgiven for missing that.

Cryptid Writing

When you have cast that will struggle to emote, you really need the music to do the heavy lifting. However, instead the soundtrack is understated and ethereal with a dream like quality. To be fair, I actually liked the soundtrack quite a lot, but it didn’t drive the story emotionally. It’s possible it was intentional to give the film a dream like quality, these are mythical “Cryptids” after all. The soundtrack release for the movie actually contains a cover of one of the actual songs from the film, but with the lyrics replaced by grunting. Really, that sort of summarizes the features art meets silliness approach!

Conceptually this is interesting and it is why I watched the film in the first place. I was especially interested in the lack of dialogue (I’m a big fan of the series “Primal”). What I wasn’t aware of was how much the movie would rely so much on body excretions to entertain. That isn’t my thing, but if you like an artistic concept paired with gross out humour this may be for you. What I will say is the Sasquatches did look great. Visually the film worked really well and this was made for around $1m, so that is in itself very impressive. For me though on entertainment value it is a 5.5/10.

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.

Abigail

Abigail tells the story of a group of criminals that have been given a high paying job abducting a young girl. They don’t know who her father is outside of them being wealthy. However, it turns out things are not as they seem and one by one they are being eliminated while they await news of the ransom. It turns out it really does matter who you kidnap. The movie comes from Matt Bettinelli-Olpin and Tyler Gillett and stars Melissa Barrera, Dan Stevens and Alisha Weir. SPOILERS for this one. Suffice to say this is a visually entertaining movie but full of cliches and heavily reliant on all the characters being stupid. If you still want to stay unspoiled, skip to the last paragraph.

The film gave away the nature of Abigail both in the trailer and many early synopsis’s. Hell, I knew she was a monster late on in 2023 back when this film was still going to be called “Abducting Abigail”. Child Vampires are not new and the movie even references Anne Rice, so I guess little Claudia was the inspiration here. She is done reasonably well and definitely the movies highlight. The visuals are in the “Fun horror” category where things are pushed to such extremes as to be sort of funny (Lots of “Red mist”). While the visuals are fun, I can’t help but find a lot of similarities between this movie and “Ready or Not” by the same directors. But that movie had something this does not: Characters.

Red Mist

Every character here is a hollow shell and everyone other than the final girl is mind-numbingly stupid. Joey (Said final girl), could not be more of a cliché. Her single flaw is that she is a recovering drug addict. She recently got clean. As a result is incredibly competent, a master of hand to hand combat, able to read every person she meets instantly and figure out their back story and is afraid of nothing. Yep, sounds like the kind of recovering drug addict who would be in on a kidnapping scheme…. Of the rest of the team only a couple even verge on competence, but ultimately fall short. Even with Joey, the group collectively make repeated dumb mistakes (Such as constantly splitting up).

Ultimately, this by-the-numbers horror features barely outlined characters who need to make constant stupid decisions to drive the story forward. It has some decent cinematography, generic but fun effects and reasonable pacing. If you want a popcorn horror it may suffice but it is a long way from “Ready or Not”, which was this directing duos one good movie. Most recently they made two bad scream sequels. This is better than those but not by much and I’m starting to realize how much “Ready or Not” relied on the talents of Samara Weaving to make it work. Unfortunately Melissa Barrera (Who was also in those bad Scream sequels) is not quite good enough to prop up a movie by herself. Anyway this is a 5/10.

Rating: 5 out of 10.

Boy Kills World

For the final movie is this months review roundup we have the directorial debut of Moritz Mohr with “Boy Kills World”. The movie is written by Mohr, Tyler Burton Smith and Arend Remmers and stars Bill Skarsgård as the unnamed “Boy”. Bill is playing a deaf mute here though, but his character has a constant voice over representing the voice in his head and H. Jon Benjamin (Bob’s Burgers/Archer) provides that voice over. The rest of the cast split fairly evenly in their supporting roles, but Famke Janssen stands out as the film’s big bad, “Hilda Van Der Koy.” This is a martial arts revenge film set in a dystopian future, but played out very much as an action comedy.

“Boy”, grew up in a Dystopian city ruled over by the brutal authority of the Van Der Koy family. The family has an annual tradition of rounding up 12 dissidents and executing them on live TV in an event dubbed “The Culling”. As a child, the Van Der Koy’s killed his mother and the families matriarch Hilda Van Der Koy personally shot his sister in front of him. Boy himself was to be executed via hanging, but was rescued by a mysterious Shaman (Yayan Ruhian). Since then the stranger has trained the deaf and mute child to be the ultimate fighting machine and given him a single task: To kill Hilda Van Der Koy. The child though never got to experience growing up naturally and so despite his skills maintains a certain childishness to him. He also is haunted by visions of his dead sister. Eventually though he must take on the evil family on the night of “The Culling”.

Smart But Stupid

This is a movie that I expected to be fun both for outrageous action and a bit of comedy. That was really all I expected and yet it managed to pleasantly surprise me. The story is both darker and more interesting than I first imagined and provided a solid twist towards the end that turns the entire story on it’s head. Meanwhile, I did indeed gain a lot of entertainment from the action and comedy. Most of that comedy (That landed with me anyway) was down to the deaf protagonist not being able to read the lips of one character properly, which ended up not just providing a few quick (Hilarious) laughs but actually became a pivotal part of the story. This is a clever film packaged as a dumb movie and it does both parts extremely well.

I don’t have a lot of criticism for this one. One issue is the film focuses so much on the protagonists’ point of view that we don’t really get to know the other characters well. This also means the world building is somewhat minimal. To be fair some of this is because the film relies heavily on mystery. You know this is some kind of dystopian future but not much more than that. While this is a flaw, it doesn’t really harm the film that much so it’s not a big one. We don’t spend much time with the supporting cast, but they are all without exception larger than life and feel straight out of a comic book. This means they are at least memorable. We learn everything we need to know about them, but nothing more. The over-the-top video game style voice-over may put some people off. However you will find a lot of entertainment value if you can get past that. This movie does just about enough to earn a 7/10 for me. Definitely recommended.

Rating: 7 out of 10.

Thanks For Reading!

Review Roundup – April 2024

This months review roundup is a little on the late side (Narrowly making April) but hopefully worth the wait because I have three solid recommendations for you this time around. Not even a hint of a clangers. To be fair some of these are higher profile films than I usually cover in the round up. That’s no guarantee of quality though, especially these days. So this month I am reviewing the Shudder surprise hit “Late Night with the Devil”, Dev Patel’s ambition action/revenge movie “Monkey Man” and the heartwarming man-and-a-dog film “Arthur The King”. Since these are all recommendations I’ve avoided spoilers, so read on and enjoy!

Late Night With The Devil

For our first movie I’m looking at the the hot new movie from Shudder, “Late Night With the Devil”. Colin and Cameron Cairnes share duties on both writing and directing this one. The duo have a handful of films to their name, the best received probably being 2012’s horror comedy “100 Bloody Acres”. David Dastmalchian stars as struggling late night talk show host Jack Delroy. Laura Gordon, Iam Bliss, Fayssal Bazzi, Ingrid Torelli and Rhys Auteri provide support. The movie is presented as a lost recording of a notorious Halloween special on the late night talk show “Night Owl” from 1977. Unseen” background footage supplements this along with a documentary like intro explaining Jack Delroy’s backstory. During the show we are introduced to various guests including a medium, a profession skeptic/magician and a young girl suffering an apparent demonic possession.

Right from the start you know this is going to be a fun and somewhat unique movie. It reminded me somewhat of “WNUF Halloween Special” from 2013. That movie pushed the comedy a bit more, while this is a little more serious and a lot more polished. Fake “Recovered footage” movies are quite rare. A lot of what makes them work (Or not) is how well they convince you they could be genuine. Obviously no one is going to think this was real, but you want it to at least provide a decent illusion of reality. They achieved this and more. Now to be fair, I was only four years old by the time 1980 rolled around. However, I have seen enough TV from the 1970’s to know what it should look like. In my view they nailed it. The cast is solid with everyone putting in quality performances. Dastmalchian is especially worthy of note though and it is his performance that ties the whole story together.

Abracadabra

The plot here is fairly straight forward but extremely well put together. The movie seamlessly sets up a number of story beats that all get paid off in meaningful ways, which is quite refreshing for a modern movie. The story builds organically throughout the (In movie) evening, with hell breaking loose in the last few moments. The movie wouldn’t have required a large budget because it is mostly talk, with well spaced out events that help build to the inevitable crescendo. It is really masterfully done. This is a movie partially about the originality, but mostly about the execution. The plot itself is sort of silly on the surface and could easily have been the bases of a truly terrible B-Movie, but instead we have a true cult classic on our hands.

It’s not hard to see why this has become somewhat of an overnight hit. I wasn’t even aware this movie was coming at the start of the year. Of course I did say when I wrote my article of upcoming movies that the best films of the year may well come out of nowhere, so here is the first example. This is a strong 7/10 and a definite cult classic. If you are into horror you will like it. If you are into imaginative horror comedy you will love it.

Rating: 7 out of 10.

Monkey Man

Monkey Man is an melee based action and revenge thriller hybrid and the directorial debut of Dev Patel. Originally he intended his friend and past collaborator Neill Blomkamp to direct. Blomkamp declined but encouraged Patel to try his own hand at directing and this is the result. The movie is set in India and see’s Patel play “Kid” a somewhat mysterious character who is on a one man mission of revenge. His targets are a despotic cult leader and a corrupt and murderous chief of police. Kid works as a masked fighter in fixed fights at an underground boxing club, giving him some fighting skills and some cash to put towards his revenge plans. When the time is right he gets himself into a position to be hired as kitchen staff at a luxury brothel where his targets reside. Things do not quite go to plan however.

The movie is a hybrid between a neo-noir revenge thriller and outright action. In regards to the latter, these action scenes are quite spaced out in the movie with the vast majority in the second half. The momentum certainly builds up and once the hero passes the “Death and Rebirth” point of the heroes’ journey the movie provides solid edge of the seat action all the way to the finish. Speaking of the “Heroes’ Journey” it is clear that Patel has studied Joseph Campbell’s work on the subject. This is mostly a positive, though the movie wears the journey on it’s sleeve to the extent that becomes somewhat predictable. It also really makes it feel like somewhat of a superhero movie as well. The grittiness of the thriller side is mostly presented through the environment and the heroes flashbacks.

Future Promise

Patel puts in a solid performance as the lead and shows promise as an action star. His support does well too, but the characters themselves did not really interest me. Indeed the only character that was interesting was Patel’s “own.”Kid”. The setting itself is interesting and there is a definite feel of India to the movie, but not much is done to build up any of the characters outside of the lead. The villains especially come across as feeling somewhat generic. The protagonists backstory and the cause of his vengeance begins as a mystery and is slowly revealed through flashbacks. This can work in some movies, but here it also shrouds the antagonists in that same mystery making them seem distant and vague.

Monkey Man is somewhat of a mixed bag. It certainly has flaws and perhaps most of them stem from the movies ambition. The action, comedy and neo-noir elements tend to operate in a disjointed way, usually working against each other. It’s like a superhero origin story randomly merged with a Japanese style revenge movie. A lot of the time the movie doesn’t seem entirely sure what it wants to be. I suspect that Patel really wanted to create something unique, but unique is not always good. That’s not to say the film isn’t without merit. Overall I liked it, I just feel that it had a lot of room for improvement. Patel clearly has potential as a writer/director and is one to watch in the future. For now though, we have a solid 6/10.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Arthur The King

The final movie of this month’s review roundup is a heartwarming true story about an adventure racer, his team and a special dog. You can’t go too far wrong with that kind of story, in some ways perhaps it is a bit too easy, but easy doesn’t mean bad. The movie stars Mark Wahlberg who is supported by Ali Suliman, Nathalie Emmanuel and Simu Liu. It is directed by Simon Cellan Jones, written by Michael Brandt and based on the true story/novel “Arthur: The dog who crossed the jungle to find a home” by Mikael Lindnord.

Arthur the King tells the story of Michael Light, a professional adventure racer that has struggled to win gold all his career and is determined for one last shot. To get there he assembles a team of individuals with their own goals and points to prove and they head to the Dominican Republic for a grueling multi-day race across all kinds of dangerous terrain that will test their abilities to the peak. Along the way though they make an unexpected friend in a local stray dog that bonds with them and becomes their fifth member. Their journey captures the imagination of the races audience, but the team must risk everything to come home with what they truly desire.

Crossing The Jungle To Find A Home

Looking into the true story it seems the adaptation takes some creative liberties in regards to the protagonist (Now American and not Swedish), the makeup of the team (Adding in backstory drama and diversity), the location (Moving it from Ecuador to the Dominican Republic… Much to the chagrin of Ecuadorians) and a few minor details. The important part of the story though, the relationship between the team and this determined dog remains and seems pretty close to the real life events. The changes to the protagonist and his team allow them to build in a lot more general drama to the story, but not so much as to distract from the core story. It is enough that every member has a reason to be there.

The key character though is of course the dog “Arthur”, a very beaten down but determined dog that after a simple act of kindness pretty much decides to adopt the team and look out for them. It will definitely pull at the heart strings of every dog owner out there and I think everyone else will be moved as well. Outside of the emotional stuff, the film actually provides some solid action on top. Not really a shock given this is about adventure racing. Lives are at risk here several times throughout the journey. The risks are diminished somewhat though in that the film never really has the tone to make you think any of the team are doing to die, but it’s still a good spectacle. This is another film that proves the value of a simple story done well. This is a 6.5/10.

Rating: 6.5 out of 10.

THANKS FOR READING

Review Roundup – March 2024

This month I’m looking at three lesser known movies from 2024 and giving you a double dose of science fiction (sort of) and a horror comedy to chew over. Heads up though, none of these movies did much for me though I appreciate certain elements of all three and the best of the bunch is probably not going to be a lot of peoples cup of tea. I will cover positives and negatives though so you can decide for yourself if you want to give them a chance. The movies in question this month are “I.S.S.”, “Spaceman” and “Lisa Frankenstein”. Let’s dig in.

I.S.S.

I.S.S. is directed by Gabriela Cowperthwaite (Black Fish) and penned by Nick Shafir (In his debut script). The name refers to the International Space Station, the permanent manned orbital platform that has become a central hub of scientific study and international cooperation in space. One of the most notable things about this station is that it is usually manned by a mixture of Russian and US astronauts along with a few from other nations. In this story however it is basically 50/50 between the two main countries and for a good reason since the story asks the question: What would happen on the I.S.S. should Russia and the US have a nuclear war?

The lead character in this story is Dr. Kira Foster (Played by Ariana DeBose), a new arrival to the station. She is joined by five others making up a full cast of just six. Adding a layer of complexity to the situation two characters, American Gordon Barrett and Russian Weronika Vetrov are in a relationship. Things begin friendly but when they witness explosions on Earth both groups get a directive from Earth “Take control of the I.S.S. by any means”. Each crew member must decide where their loyalties lie and what their duty truly is.

Concept Vs Execution

The first thing to say about this movie is I love the concept. What really would happen at the international space station if nuclear war broke out on Earth, that’s an interesting question. The problem is the execution is just sort of uninspiring. It is the kind of premise that in the hands of the right director and cinematographer could win Oscars, but in the hands of anyone else it basically becomes a glorified TV movie and that is pretty much where we land with this one. This is more of a case of missed opportunities than doing anything disastrously wrong. The first act is fine, but nothing special.

The second act is easily the strongest and showed a bit of the potential this concept could have had and then the third act just fails to deliver on any kind of level. It’s the second act that you get the paranoia on both sides, the moralizing over what the right thing to do is and the mystery of what has happened on Earth. But the final act really fails to do anything interesting with that. Still, it could easily have been worse. There’s not really much else to say on this. The movie is the very definition of “Adequate”. 5/10.

Rating: 5 out of 10.

Spaceman

Spaceman is based on the novel “Spaceman of Bohemia” by Jaroslav Kalfař and is the feature debut of director Johan Renck. Adam Sandler stars (Continuing to prove himself as a capable serious actor) as Czech astronaut Jakub Prochazka. Prochazka has been sent on a one man mission to Jupiter to investigate a strange dust cloud called “Chopra”. This is a bit of a space race between Czech and South Korea, but Prochazka’s shuttle is a few days ahead and as such he has become a bit of a celebrity back at home. Jakub’s mental state though is strained by the journey and by his difficult relationship with his wife back on Earth.

Things take a turn for the unusual when he is greeted by a giant talking spider. After deciding this wasn’t a figment of his imagination he begins to talk to it. It turns out the creature is somewhat of a kindred spirit, another explorer far from home that had become curious about humanity. Over time they develop a bond and Prochazka is forced to examine his own life and what is important to him.

Looking Outward To Look Within.

This is a weird movie for sure. The vast majority of it is Adam Sandler having a philosophical conversation with a giant spider. Chances are just reading that you have already decided to skip this or watch this and in my view whichever way you are leaning is almost certainly right for you. The movie has a lot of flaws and opening up with faster than light communication via quantum entanglement (Which is not possible), despite the movie clearly being set in the near future was an odd choice. With the movies themes of isolation and loneliness and with a lot of the communication being done by recorded message anyway, it just seemed unnecessary.

That aside, this is not so much a science film as it is a philosophical one and it did pull on my heart strings at times. By the end I found I did care about this giant talking spider and so job done there. The movie removed a lot of the thriller based elements from the novel, lightening the tone a bit and giving it a heavy focus on the philosophical aspects. The problem here is it can be quite boring in places. Still, this is a strong 5.5/10, just a little short of a 6/10. If you like surreal philosophical movies you will probably enjoy it, otherwise chances are it’ll bore you.

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.

Lisa Frankenstein

Lisa Frankenstein is the feature length directorial debut of Zelda Williams. The movie is written by Diablo Cody and stars up and coming youngster Kathryn Newton (Star of the surprisingly good “Freaky” from 2020). In what is designed as a subverted take on Frankenstein the movie tells the story of orphan Lisa Swallows, whose mother was murdered in a home invasion while she hid in the cupboard. Her father remarried. Lisa has a strained relationship with her stepmother but a fairly supportive step sister who tries to get her open up and be more social.

Lisa though prefers to hang out in the graveyard and fantasize about one of it’s residents who she has become infatuated with. After declaring that she wishes she could be with him one night a bolt of lightning strikes the grave and resurrects an apparently lovesick corpse. One thing leads to another and uh.. yeah people die and she starts sewing bits them onto the corpse. I guess you aren’t meant to think too much about this one.

A Frankensteinian Abomination.

This is the weakest of the movies I’m reviewing this month but it’s not totally devoid of positives. I liked the aesthetics, which have a very Tim Burton quality to them. The visual style is quaint and I especially liked the animated intro. Unfortunately those are all the positives I can give you. The movie is effectively a cross between “Heathers” (1988) and “May” (2002), with a little bit of “Corpse Bride” (2005). The problem is it absolutely fails to deliver the charm of any of those movies. The characters are, excuse the pun, lifeless and the script is disjointed and bland. You can see what they are trying to do, but none of it works.

At no point did I find myself rooting for or having sympathy for the protagonist and the events surrounding her lack any kind of consistency. Effectively most of the characters have no personality, but occasionally do things because the plot needs it or they need to vaguely justify killing them later. Random over the top humour is inserted haphazardly and is doesn’t fit with the rest of the movie. None of it is funny. It simply doesn’t work. This is a 4/10 at best. If you want a subverted take on Frankenstein do yourself a favour and watch “May” instead, it is a far better movie.

Rating: 4 out of 10.

Thanks For Reading

Review Roundup – February 2024 (Oscar Bait).

For this month’s review roundup, I’m looking at a couple of Oscar-nominated movies and one that, in my view, should have been nominated but was snubbed. All technically from 2023. Specifically “The Holdovers”, “American Fiction” and “The Iron Claw”. I will be back to more recent movies next month.

The Holdovers (2023)

The Holdovers tells the story of three people forced to spend Christmas together at a 1970’s boarding school. One student, one teacher and the cook. Initially more students have to stay behind but after one of their rich parents offers to take them all to a skiing resort all but one student departs. The unfortunate “Angus Tully” (Dominic Sessa) remains as the lone holdover, as his parents were unable to be reached. Classics teacher “Paul Hunham” (Paul Giamatti) and “Mary Lamb” (Da’Vine Joy Randolph), the school’s cafeteria manager, join him. Lamb has recently suffered a tragedy due to the death of her son, a former student at the school, in Vietnam. Paul and Angus meanwhile each have their own issues and a major clash of personalities between them.

This is about flawed characters dealing with past trauma and finding ways to grow past them. Standard Oscar bait, but done with a well paced story that develops naturally. Tully and Hunham are the main focus of the story, while Mary Lambs journey of a grieving mother is somewhat removed from that. The three of them together provide a theme of moving on from past traumas. This is something Tully and Hunham have in common with Lamb. From the second act onwards the cast effectively shrinks down to just those three. Fortunately they all nail their roles with good performances all round. This isn’t a ground breaking movie and it’s the kind of story you have undoubtedly seen before but it is very well done and a great example of how plot and characters are both important in character driven stories. This is a 7/10

Rating: 7 out of 10.

The Iron Claw (2023)

This film was snubbed for the Oscars. In the case of Best Picture, it doesn’t meet the new diversity standards introduced this year. To qualify you have to satisfy two criteria, one for for story/characters, the other for the crew. Of the cast of 45, four are women and two are non-white so it doesn’t meet any of standard A. I’m not bringing this up to be political, it is simply a fact. Now, why it was snubbed from Best Actor is a question beyond the scope of this review. It is however the kind of film that would normally get nominations. The movie follows the real life story of the Von Erich family, a famous family of Wrestling brothers. It follows their rise and then the many tragedies that struck the family and how the brothers tried to cope with it all.

The truth behind the story is more tragic than is depicted on screen. The director felt there was only so much misery he could inflict on the audience and that was probably wise. What we do see on screen is tragic enough. As a wrestling fan I knew the story from a distance, but seeing these tragedies on screen is an emotional experience. This is a story about family, the ambitions of a father for his sons and the bonds of brotherhood. It is also about Wrestling, but you don’t need to be a fan to understand or enjoy it. Honestly it could have been any sport and the story would work the same. The best thing about the movie though is the performance of Zack Efron in the lead role and the incredible total body transformation required to play the role of a bulked up professional wrestler. This is a 7.5/10.

Rating: 7.5 out of 10.

American Fiction (2023)

The film tells the story Dr. Thelonious “Monk” Ellison, an author and lecturer on literature. Monk wants to be able to tell stories without having to make them about being black. He’s published several books in the past but has struggled in recent years and has grown frustrated with the success of other authors pandering to white guilt liberals that want the stories to be “More black”. Eventually he decides that as an F you to the publishers he’d write something deliberately over the top, trashy, cliched and stereotype laden as possible, just to prove his point. Of course what ends up happening is it becomes wildly successful. In between all this he must deal with family tragedy, an out of control brother and a romantic interest.

American Fiction is a fascinating film, largely thanks to its very original approach to dealing with race issues. My guess is both the left and the right will claim the film as some sort of victory for their side and yet the truth (as is often the case) lies somewhere in the middle. What the film effectively is, is a critique of racial pandering in fiction. That’s one hot topic, but the thing here is it looks at it from a black perspective and while doing this, it manages to tell a story that itself on occasion appears to be pandering, but the whole time is in truth making a point. It’s one of the smartest films out there and I particularly like what they did with the ending. No spoilers though on that one. This is an 8/10.

Rating: 8 out of 10.

Review Roundup – January 2024

Welcome to the January 2024 review round up. This is a new feature where I put together multiple, shorter reviews of recent releases on one page. I will still do full reviewers for larger releases, so these will mostly be smaller movies you probably haven’t even heard of, but may come across on streaming and wonder if they are worth your time. For January, I’m looking at the action movie “The Bricklayer”, the thriller “Wanted Man“, the comedy “Self Reliance” and the horror comedy “Destroy All Neighbors“. Because I’m keeping all these reviews brief, there are no major spoilers to worry about. Let’s get started!

The Bricklayer (2024)

Based on a novel by Noah Boyd, “The Bricklayer” is directed by Renny Harlin and stars Aaron Eckhart. This is the story ex-CIA operative Steve Vail (Eckhart), called back into the fold to deal with old friend, Victor Radek (Clifton Collins Jr.), who has a vendetta against the CIA. Radek has been framing the CIA for a series of assassinations. Vail is assisted by CIA agent Kate Banon (Nina Dobrev). Vail retired from the agency and became a bricklayer, hence the name of the film. You may recognise Harlin’s name as he was the director of a few classic action movies back in the day, namely: “Die Hard 2”, “Cliffhanger” and “The Long Kiss Goodnight”. Though he also directed “Cutthroat Island”, one of the most infamous movie disasters of all time and Nightmare on Elm Street 4 which was in my view the first bad Nightmare movie.

The movie is fairly true to form to Harlin’s strengths and weaknesses. The action is decent and reminiscent of late 80’s action films. That is where the good ends though. The basic premise is okay and has a bit of complexity to it due to the source novel, but it’s pretty much by the numbers and all the twists are highly predictable. The biggest problem though is the dialogue which is just painful. There is an attempt to work in a lot of action movie tropes, but they often don’t seem to quite fit in to what is going on and it makes the whole thing awkward. The relationship between Vail and Banon runs every cliché in book of buddy cops and frankly the Bricklaying gimmick and Vail’s love of Jazz is just sort of there for the sake of it, adding nothing. This is a 4/10, skip it.

Rating: 4 out of 10.

Self Reliance (2024)

Directed by, written by and staring Jake Johnson, “Self Reliance” is a comedic take on the Hunting-People-TV-Show trope. (Think: “The Running Man”, or more recently”Guns Akimbo”). The twist here is that this is a character based comedy and not an action movie. “Tommy” (Johnson) is a fairly washed up loser, who lives with his mother, works a boring office job and is still pining for his ex girlfriend (Who left him for being boring). One day he is greeted by Andy Samberg in a limo who gives him an opportunity. Take part in a dark net reality TV show where people try to murder him for 30 days. The loophole is they can only kill him if he is by himself. The prize is a life changing million dollars. Feeling he can use the loophole he agrees, but it turns out not to be as easy as he thought.

This one is pretty good. The concept is an original take on an established trope and the story provides a good mixture of character based comedy and outright wackiness. There’s no real action or horror to it though. People do occasionally try and murder Tommy, but these are all firmly comedic encounters. To help his chances he writes a cryptic post on Craigslist to try and find other contestants to team up with and through this meets “Maddy” (Anna Kendrick). The pair instantly have chemistry and this brings a lot of heart to the story and helps to nudge Tommy’s character growth in the right direction, despite things not quite working out. Overall though while it may not be quite as entertaining as Guns Akimbo was, either for action or comedy moments, it is still a solid pick for a movie night. This is a narrow 6/10.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Destroy All Neighbors (2024)

Now we go right past “quirky” and all the way to “Utterly insane” with “Destroy All Neighbors”. This is a Shudder original, directed by Josh Forbes and staring Jonah Ray and Alex Winter. The story follows “William Brown” (Ray) who is an assistant engineer at a local music studio. He lives in a low cost apartment with his girlfriend Emily, surrounded by eccentric neighbors. The building manager is nice enough, but a total cheapskate when it comes to maintenance. William has been working on his prog-rock album for years, but is struggling with the ending and has become obsessed and neurotic. Into this enters “Vlad” (Winter), a beast of a man that spends his days listening to loud EDM music, lifting weights and grunting. William reaches breaking point after being fired from his job and returning home to a particularly annoying Vlad. The result is a series of accidental murders… a few zombies… and perhaps the ending to his album!

This is a true B-Movie, so don’t expect top level special effects. The gore on display is far more comedic than terrifying, but it works perfectly for the movie. On the surface this reminded me of another Alex Winter B-Movie comedy Horror “Freaked” from 1992. However a lot of the funniest moments here actually come from the films send up of Prog Rock. The movie has a fairly slow start, but when it kicks off the pace and comedy picks up rapidly and by the final scenes I was rolling around laughing. If you want a funny movie, with comical gore and musical references, this could be for you. It won’t be for everyone though. Chances are you are already swaying one way or the other and your instincts will be correct. For me, thanks to the hilarious final act I rate this as a very strong 6/10.

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Wanted Man (2024)

“Wanted Man” is written, directed by and staring Dolph Lundgren. He’s actually made a few movies like this in recent years, but this is the first one I decided to check out. Dolph plays “Travis Johansen”, a veteran cop close to retirement with a very 80’s action movie cop attitude. He has a somewhat xenophobic attitude towards Mexicans, bordering on racism. It’s clear though that Travis is not actually a bad person as such, just a little ignorant. His cop and ex-cop friends though share his attitude and perhaps take it further. Johansen is sent to Mexico to look into the fatal shooting of some DEA agents, but stumbles into something far more dangerous than he was expecting. He will have to face conspiracy and betrayal while he tries to protect the last remaining witness.

This is a short, fairly straight forward story that we’ve seen similar versions of before and from far more capable actors/directors. It’s not terrible, it’s just very bare boned. Dolph was never the best actor even among 80’s action stars and while many of his peers have been able to transition to playing older, more character drama based variations on their old archetypes, this seems to be something Dolph may not be quite ready for, at least not as a self-directed lead. The ideas here though are pretty reasonable, but as I said, very familiar. Most notably it can be compared to “Gran Torino” (2008) and “Rambo: Last Blood” (2019), both far better films. Outside the character growth the plot is very straightforward, leaving little else to say about it. Not a total waste of time, especially given its short running time, but you can easily skip it. 5/10

Rating: 5 out of 10.