The Christophers (2025)

The Christophers was a mystery screening (my 8th of the year) and one that I genuinely didn’t see coming. I had seen the trailer but it wasn't one that I would probably have gone to see normally.  Amusingly, this is the second Steven Soderbergh film I have seen like this. The last time was Prescence which was about a ghost but seen from its POV. This time two kids of a famous artist (James Corden & Jesse Gunning) hire forger Lori (Michaela Coel) to complete their estranged father’s unfinished work so they can be sold after he dies which we are told is close.

I thought that Ian McKellen (Julian) and Michaela Coel worked well together. The relationship naturally starts off a little bit prickly. Whenever Julian asked Lori a personal question, Lori would answer in what a typical Gen-Z way and I was worried that the film was going to be like this and be totally alienating to me but thankfully thawing improves but to the point where it betrays either character. Julian doesnt feel like its a million miles away from Ian McKellen.  I did find it amusing when we first meet Julian and he is doing Cameo videos (which unexpectedly become relevant right at the end of the film). The last time I saw Ian McKellen was in The Critic where he played an aging Theatre Critic and in this he plays an aging artist who in his spare time does the videos to try and earn some extra money. I suppose when you are the age that McKellen is then you can stop doing Gandalf roles and do what are more interesting and more grounded roles and its nice to see.

Michaela Coel is good in a role that is relatively hard to like. There isnt a lot of room for range and Coel manages to drag as much as she can out of it. The film at times wants to make he appear to be some talented forger but then they try and input motivation as to why she is in the same room as Julian and its because of a meeting on a TV show years earlier but she seems to want to stick it to Sally and Barnaby and yet seems to want the money so her motivation is mixed and not very well thought out but during the more lucid moments in the plot, Michaela Coel manages to make you happy that she has made a career by the end of the film.

Normally I find James Corden (Barnaby) to be totally insufferable. He comes across as a totally unlikeable person in real life and his performances have been average at best. The only time I haven’t completely disliked his performance was in Cats and that was because the quality bar was so low. Jessica Gunning (Sally) or the woman from Baby Reindeer was fine, her performance was always secondary to Corden’s. Not because he was stealing the screen time but because her character seemed to be secondary to Barnaby.

I did find myself asking one question and its comes towards the end when Barnaby and Sally are trying to buy Lori’s services and say that they can only give her £20,000 even though they have already been pre-paid £1 million. How have they only got £20,000? What have they done with it?

I enjoyed this film but I can’t say that I loved it. There was something stopping me from loving this film and I honestly can’t put my finger on it. I think that its a bit too slow and its lacking something that could just zap some energy into it. I think that its a film that people will struggle to enjoy and it will struggle to get an audience. Like I said at the beginning of the review, I probably wouldn’t have gone to see this film at the cinema if I had the choice but at least there weren’t any walkouts which feels like a rarity.

Power to the People: John & Yoko Live in NYC (2026)

Having enjoyed EPiC: Elvis Presley in Concert, I thought I would embrace the chance to watch another music documentary. I have never been the biggest Beatles fan and only knew a couple of John Lennon’s songs so I went into this film as pretty much an outsider. The documentary follows John and Yoko as they play at Madison Square Garden during two concerts.

Unlike EPiC, there isn't any build up beside watching them walk towards the stage. It seemed a bit strange at first that there wasn't some sort of introduction to the events but in the context of the entire documentary it worked. The songs are well performed and there is something enjoyable seeing songs performed live because you get it in a slightly different way to how they would be on vinyl or cd or whatever. Having never seen Lennon perform, especially solo, it impressed me how unflashy he was and how self-deprecating he was. 

I also like the way that the film was essentially in three blocks with the images constantly changing but I didn't find it distracting. I knew that my attention could switch to any of the blocks and I wouldn't miss what was happening and still got a great sense of the whole concert. Despite this there is a massive issue with this documentary and it is with Yoko Ono perhaps not that surprising. I didn't think I could find someone worse than Gal Gadot’s attempt at singing in Snow White but up steps Yoko Ono. I had never heard her sing before and was told by a friend that her singing is terrible but this was on another level of terrible. By about the third song I said ‘Oh No’ loud enough that my friend heard me and it made him chuckle. The only time she made any sense was when she was reading the words supposedly said by Hitler. John Lennon really must have loved Yoko Ono because that is the only reason that he would have allowed her to be within a mile of a microphone. She seems to play the keyboard well enough but singing was a big fail.

I don't think that this was as good as EPic but I still think that it was enjoyable. It seemed like it was a great concert to be a part of and obviously it was done for a good cause but this is the first time that I can genuinely put the negatives of a film down to one person and that in this case is Yoko Ono. These sorts of documentaries are becoming more popular because they allow you to see and hear your favourite artists and bands on the largest screen and on the best sound system around and far better than any of us have at home. Even if I am not a fan of their music, if it gets people into the cinema then it can only be a good thing. Especially with the way cinema is in 2026.

The Sheep Detectives (2026)

The Sheep Detectives is one of those silly films that I feel the world needs right now and whilst everyone was going to see The Super Mario Galaxy Movie or The Devil Wears Prada 2, I was sat in a quiet cinema on a Sunday morning wanting something that wouldnt change the world but would make you forget for 110 minutes. The film stars Hugh Jackman as George Hardy and a great cast list of voice actors including Bryan Cranston, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Chris O’Dowd, Regina Hall, Patrick Stewart, Brett Goldstein (twice) and Bella Ramsey. When George is found dead, the police want to write it off as a heart attack but the sheep decide to use the skills they have acquired from benign read detective novels by George to discover whodunnit. As well as the murder there is the wannabe journalist Elliot, George’s daughter Rebecca (Molly Gordon), the butcher Ham (Conleth Hill), the neighbor Caleb (Tosin Cole) and a host of other characters.

The film does play out like its trying to break the fourth wall, using all the known cliches to try and throw us off the scent even though we know that they are red herrings because we are told them at every opportunity and yet despite this fourth wall breaking, I found that it played into the vibe of the film perfectly.

Hugh Jackman is quite good despite being killed off relatively quickly and then popping up again every so often in flashbacks. It isn't the best performance from Jackman but given that he mainly interacts with CGI talking sheep, I think he does quite well. It’s hard to dislike Jackman because he comes across so likeable and as George he only seems to care about one thing and that is his sheep. Emma Thompson is in this as Lydia Harbottle, the lawyer who has such disdain for Officer Derry. The character is so unlikable and yet because it's Emma Thompson she still manages to come across with a weird amount of charm. Nicholas Braun is good as Tim Derry who seems to be the only police officer in this tiny little village and manages to solve the case in spite of himself. He is helped at pretty much every stage and despite being completely out of his depth, I still found myself liking his character. Nicholas Galitzine is good as Elliot but it was a little bit obvious that he would have something to do with it because he stood out like a sore thumb because he basically looks like he stepped out of a YA story. 

It probably was just to add something bright to proceedings but there are a lot of neon signs in pretty much every shot of the film. It’s never explained why but when the local butchers has a neon sign then it is worth noticing. Another thing that has to be commented on are the sheep. They manage to get around the fact that they can't pick things up or interact with the humans but they still manage to help move the story along and they all have their own personalities and are the main reason why the film works as well as it does. 

There is a lovely idea that sheep don't die but become clouds and there is also a running thread that one of the lambs is an outcast because they are a winter baby and they are considered less than compared to the spring lambs. This is the closest that the film gets towards melodrama but manages to show restraint in this area. Overall The Sheep Detectives is an enjoyable film but not quite on the same level as The Magic Faraway Tree. That came across as magical and yet this doesn't quite go as silly as the trailer seemed to suggest that it might. I still think that the film is a good family film but it might get lost in the shuffle especially when we have just had the Super Mario movie out and we have a Minions movie coming out. I think that this is going to be something that people might watch when it comes out on streaming. 

A perfectly fine and fun family film.  

Hokum (2026)

 Hokum was a film that I didn't know a whole lot about but I did hear it advertised on the radio and they called it ‘a near perfect horror film’ which did put me on edge because its one bar below ‘the greatest horror film since The Exorcist’. I had hopes that it would be very good because it's directed by Damian McCarthy who previously directed Oddity which was an enjoyable and equally atmospheric horror.

There are Stephen King vibes throughout this film. The frustrated writer, the isolated hotel and the room that no one is allowed in. Now I am not comparing this to The Shining because that would be foolish but the hotel is a big part of the film and the film benefits from having a great sense of atmosphere. The film utilises the darkness quite well although there were a few times that I wished the brightness had been turned up a little bit but McCarthy showed in this film just like he did in Oddity that he understands how to create an atmospheric film that isn't just style over substance.

I did feel like the honeymoon suite layout was designed by James Wan. He loves his houses to be oddly large and it seems just a little too big but having never been in a honeymoon suite I don't know if this is too big or too large but it is something that I noticed in the middle of Ohm running around. The film does have a decent number of jump scars but unlike most horror films, these felt earnt. They felt like they had been worked into the story because they didn't take me out of the story but just kept me interested in what was happening. 

I did like the scenes from the book. It would have been nice if they were peppered in throughout the film but I suppose they served their purpose in the two parts that we got. 

Adam Scott is good as Ohm. He starts off as a typically unlikeable and possibly pretentious writer. He has a trauma which sees his mother killed by a gunshot wound and his father resenting him. I thought that the twist that he was responsible for his mothers death is something that might have been obvious to some but it led to the end of his time in the hotel. David Wilmot was good as Jerry. Jerry was styled as the weird guy in the story but by the end of the film he became one of the few dependable characters that Ohm could rely on (arguably the only one). I thought that Brendan Conroy was good as Mr Cobb the hotel owner but sadly he only has one scene which probably lasted for a minute and it would have been nice to have him feature more but that’s just the way it is.

I think the fact that Ohm is still unlikeable means that the ending isn't a good as it could have been. The last meeting between Ohm and Alby was a great opportunity to show some warmth and development on Ohm’s part but the fact that he is dismissive shows that he hasn't really grown despite what he has been through. He got some closure over the death of his mother and seemed to get the ending to his book that he was searching for but he still hasn't softened to a degree that I would have been happy with.

This was a very enjoyable film that shows that Damian McCarthy understands horror and understands that you can use atmosphere and use it well without relying on cheap jump scares. The only real issues with the film are with character development (or lack of it) but if you dont get the chance to see it at the cinema then this is perfect viewing during the Halloween season. 

Michael (2026)

Michael is one of those films that had the potential to be a total train wreck and the negative reviews that came out in the days after it was released made it seem like this was doomed to be one of the worst films of 2026.  This film tells the story over 20 years from Michael’s early days in Gary Indiana to performing at Wembley Stadium in 1988. Michael and the rest of his brothers form the Jackson 5 led by their domineering father Joe and as the years pass, Michael tries to form his own path much to his father’s annoyance.  

The film has involvement from the Jackson family including Jermaine, Tito, LaToya and Prince and they clearly didn’t like their father because he does not come out of it very well. It was fairly common knowledge that Joe wasn't particularly nice to his kids. I thought that Colman Domingo was very good as Joe. He almost stole the show because even though what Joe does is terrible and when Michael has his accident, Joe’s first response isnt asking about how long his son will take to recover but when he will be back on stage. Jaafar Jackson is very good as Michael. Usually you either look like the person you are supposed to be or have the mannerism but rarely both but Jaafar Jackson manages to pull off both. He comes across as a likeable if slightly immature talented musician. The dance and singing scenes were really well done and the attention to detail is something that should be applauded.

The general response seemed to have been negative because the film doesnt cover the controvesies that plagued his life in the 90’s and 2000’s. I think that in the years to come with the sequel that will be made that this film will be seen for what it is, a fun if somewhat flawed film. I think that Rocketman is the gold standard of music biopics and Bohemian Rhapsody is the low bar to clear and Michael is more in the Rocketman territory. The back story to the film is that it was supposed to be a three hour film which featured the allegations in the final third of the film but when it became knowledge that they couldn’t use character featured in the story meant that restricting was needed and whilst they could have padded things out to give the film a longer runtime it might be in the long run a brilliant idea to keep the two sides of his story separate. Antoine Fuqua has done a good job in making this a film that was fun and told a story that felt close enough to be being true and yet clearly cherry picking what aspects of his story they wanted to tell and for the most part got it right. 

Exit 8 (2025)

Exit 8 was a mystery screening at my local cinema and I thought that based on the clue that it was going to be Passenger but Exit 8 was definitely on my watchlist so it was a win win as far as I was concerned. The premise is simple a man simply called The Lost Man tries to reach Exit 8 but if he ignore ‘anomalies’ then he goes back to Exit 0. Along the way he comes across a little boy (simply called The Boy), a man walking towards and past him called The Walking Man and they all have the same goal which is to reach Exit 8.

The Lost Man is the one that we are introduced to as he is on a train and observes a woman being shouted at because her baby is crying. He then gets a call from his ex-girlfriend who tells him that she is pregnant and wants to know what to do. The Lost Man is the smarter of the two men we meet. He is describing every little thing that he sees whereas The Walking Man doesn't seem observant, missing a key detail (a door handle in the middle of the door) and as a result misses the anomaly and seems to then be destined to stay in this situation.

Mystery films are a risk and this is the second mystery film of the year where someone has walked out. In fact three people walked out before the film was five minutes old. I’m guessing that they didn’t want to spend any time watching a film with subtitles. I can understand their reluctance but I think they are missing some absolute gems and this is definitely a film worth seeing. Considering that the film takes place in a bland white corridor it still manages to find interesting ways to keep the story going. 

I will be honest, as much as I enjoyed this film, I found the ending confusing. After reaching Exit 8 and seemingly about to make a decision with his ex-girlfriend, he decides to board the train from the beginning of the film and encounters the shouty man. Are we supposed to assume that he is going to try and put right the wrong of not standing up to the guy but the ending is too ambiguous to make sense.  

Despite the confusing ending, I really enjoyed this film. I would have seen it anyway even if it hadn’t been a mystery film but it was a nice surprise. It’s a singular setting which always works well for me and there is enough of a mystery to stay intriguing and the film progresses at a good speed and at 95 minutes the film doesn't outstay its welcome. 

The Wizard of the Kremlin (2025)

 The Wizard of the Kremlin tells the story of Vadim Baranov played by Paul Dano as he talks to Jeffrey Wright’s Roland about his rise in Russian politics as he helps Putin go from head of the FSB to President. This is apparently based on a book and crucially sees Putin played by Jude Law which wasn't on my bingo card for 2026. 

The story is told mainly in flashbacks and shows Baranov go from trying to form some theatre director to a powerful ally of Putin. How much of this is true and how much of it is fiction isn't really the point because it's not told in a particularly interesting way. Unfortunately the film is directed by Olivier Assayas who directed Wasp Network which came out in 2020 and frankly that film had some good stuff but it wasn't told in a particularly interesting way. 

What does work are the performances. Paul Dano is always dependable and does a great job of maintaining what level of interest I had once I realised that only 40 minutes had passed when it felt like 90 minutes. Jude Law does a relatively good impression of Putin although it was his mannerisms that seem quite good. It was like Anthony Hopkins in Nixon. He looked nothing like Nixon but the way he carried himself came across like the former U.S. President. I also thought that Jeffrey Wright was very good as Rowland. There isn't a huge amount for him to do but he manages to at least make the most of it which is exactly what Alicia Vikander does with Koenia. It’s not a great role but Vikander brings some humanity to the role. 

Honestly this has to be one of the dullest films of the year. I think that at 2 and a half hours it is severely outstaying its welcome and if it lost an hour then it might have been much better to sit through. It’s only because of Paul Dano and Jude Law that kept me watching. The film thinks that it is Nixon but doesn't have any of the whit or ability to pull it off.