The Monkey (2025)

The Monkey was another of the Mystery Screenings that my local cinema has been putting on and this is one of the films I was looking forward to in 2025 and after enjoying Longlegs I wanted to see what Osgood Perkins was going to do. Sadly the signs were not great when I saw that Atomic Monster were involved and James Wan is involved so it's not going to be clever or atmospheric but instead it's going to appeal to the lowest common denominator whilst thinking it was being clever.

GOOD POINT 01 - THE KILLS WERE VERY GOOD

Considering this is a horror film, the kills are as good as they should be. Like Heart Eyes, the inventive kills happen very early on with the owner of a shop being the first victim after he is harpooned and then the harpoon is pulled out along with the owner's internal organ. Unlike Heart Eyes, the kills keep coming including the woman who explodes after diving into an electrified swimming pool or a guy who shoots a hornets nest through the car window and the hornets fly through the bullet hole and into the guy's mouth. The kills are very big highlight of this film

GOOD POINT 02 - THE MONKEY’S MOTIVE SEEM UNPREDICTABLE

Some people might see this as a problem but I think that it works in the films favour. Being unpredictable means that as a viewer, we can't really guess with any certainty what the Monkey would do. The film does a very good job of highlighting this when Lois dies after Hal asks the monkey to kill his brother Bill.  

GOOD POINT 03 - THEO JAMES AND TATIANA MASLANY ARE THE HIGHLIGHTS

Theo James is good as both Hal & Bill and enough was done to make them seem different and even when they eventually have a face to face towards the end of the film they look different and the versions are also different. Tatiana Maslany takes what is really a basic role and makes it much more. She brings some warmth to the family of the younger Hal & Bill and it's a shame when she gets killed off. 

BAD POINT 01 - THE MONKEY CAN TELEPORT

Ok I am willing to admit that I haven't read the story that this film is based on but I hope that it is explained why the monkey can teleport. Unless something was mentioned that I missed, there is no explanation given why the monkey can move. This is shown at the beginning when young Hal & Bill go to the restaurant and the monkey goes from being on the back seat to the front seat and you could argue that this was moved in a deleted scene but when it's thrown down the well and then disappears its just accepted that it can teleport instead of coming up with some reason like somebody came along through a tunnel and took it home. That would have worked better than a teleported monkey

BAD POINT 02 - THE BROTHER REUNITE AT THE END

This might seem harsh since Bill ends up with a squished head but the way that the reunion is done poorly. So they spend all the time leading up to the end with Bill blaming Hal for their mothers death and the following dialogue is said

Bill: You killed my mother.

Hal: She was my mother too.

Bill: Oh yeah, i never thought of it like that.

A moment later they shake hands. If you're going to have them reunite then do a better job that doesn't come across as lazy.

BAD POINT 03 - WASTING ELIJAH WOOD

I was quite excited when I saw that Elijah Wood was in this film. Sadly it's more of a cameo. He comes in early on as the new husband to Hal’s estranged wife and wanted to take sole custody of Hal’s son Petey and I thought that it would have led to more scenes with the former hobbit but sadly that's it. One scene that probably only lasts for 4-5 minutes and I think if you're going to feature Wood then it should have been in a better role or give him some more screentime.

OVERALL

This was a major disappointment. I thought that whilst the deaths were creative and the central performances were very good, the whole film felt like a major step down for Osgood Perkins. I think if you haven't seen any of Perkins’ other films then this film might not be the disappointment that I thought it was but after Longlegs, this film seemed like there was a creative battle between Perkins and James Wan. Perkins knows how to make creative horror and Wan has no interest in being creative. It feels like the kills were Perkins and everything around them was Wan. Not worth going to the cinema for but maybe when it appears on streaming around Halloween then……maybe.

Heart Eyes (2025)

 Heart Eyes was another mystery screening which I had pretty much worked out and this is another film where I probably wouldn't have gone to see it normally. This is a horror film which sees some co-workers stalked by a serial killer who thinks they are a couple. That is pretty much the plot.

GOOD POINT 01 - VERY GOOD OPENING

The film wastes no time in setting its stall out with the Heart Eyes killer attacking a pretentious social media couple who are staging a marriage proposal in a vineyard and get killed (along with the cameraman filming it all). It's relatively short but it does end with the woman being squashed to death in some wine making contraption. Its gory and not what I was expecting. It is probably the most gory death in the film but its 

GOOD POINT 02 - GOOD CHEMISTRY BETWEEN ALLY & JAY

One of the key things you need in a romantic film (even a horror) and that is chemistry from the main couple and we get that in this film. Olivia Holt and Mason Gooding work well together and there is a nice evolution between the two as they go from two co-workers who don't get on to two co-workers who fall for each other and ride off into the sunset. Holt plays Ally as someone who isn't the most confident person and doesn't like that someone comes in and does her job better and Gooding plays the smooth talking person that Ally isn't supposed to like but finds it hard not to. Thye play the roles well.

GOOD POINT 03 - COMEDY WAS PITCHED JUST RIGHT

There were comedic moments sprinkled out throughout the film and it wasn't over the top but pitched just right there was one moment where Devon Sawa’s Detective Hobbs, looks angrily at Jay in an interview room, is escorted out of the room by Jordana Brewster’s Detective Shaw and the door is closed but it has a glass window in the door and it placing is perfect as his funny face is still looking at Jay. That may not make the joke sound funny but trust me it is and there are plenty of funny moments which work to create the right mood for the film. 

GOOD POINT 04 - GOOD KILLS

One thing you want in a slasher horror is that the kills need to be good and that is one thing the film does very well. The first kills happen within the first 5 minutes of the film and sees the self indulgent girlfriend meet her end in some sort of wine making machine which squashes the grapes and berries and its literally an eye popping scene. The rest of the kills might not be quite as graphic or original but they are what you would expect and they are effective.

BAD POINT 01 - DIALOGUE MUST HAVE BEEN WRITTEN BY AI

Whilst the chemistry of the two leads and the deaths make this film enjoyable, the script is terrible and sometimes its ear scrapingly bad. It's bad to the point that I wondered at one point if the screenplay had been written by AI. I know expecting the script in a horror film to be anything above average was asking a lot and was probably not going to happen, it still would have been nice to have something approaching decent. 

BAD POINT 02 - KILLER REVELATION WAS A BIT RUBBISH

The question of who the killer was is another thing that slasher films are known for and sometimes they work but other times they dont and unfortunately in the case of Heart Eyes its the latter. It’s revealed that Detective Shaw and her boyfriend/lover are the ones responsible and it felt a bit of a disappointment. It would have made more sense for it to be Ally’s ex-boyfriend or someone else. Instead we get a cop and the IT guy we encounter in one scene halfway through. Not the best revelations.

OVERALL

I didn't have too many expectations for this film but despite that I enjoyed this film. I thought it did what it was supposed to rather well and its a fun 97 minute horror film. Will it be one that I will want to watch again. Maybe if I see it on TV but I don't know. The central performances and the kills are worth your time and it would work as a nice double feature with one of the recent Scream films.

September 5 (2024)

I was aware of the terrible events that happened on September 5 1972 although I can’t say that I am an expert in it. This tells the story of that tragedy from the point of view of an American sports crew. The action takes place largely in the studio where they are directing the action and over the course of 95 minutes we see what happened mainly from the perspective of the crew but we still learn what is going on from seeing other interviews.

GOOD POINT 01 - LACK OF STAR POWER BUT STILL STRONG PERFORMANCES

There aren't any familiar names although I have probably seen the actors in things before and yet the lack of starpower doesn't hurt the film. In fact I would say it does the opposite, it means that you aren't spending your time thinking that a particular person looks like somebody they haven't seen for a while or why a particular actor has been cast in this role. The closest I came to recognising someone was Leonie Benesch who starred in The Teachers’ Lounge which I enjoyed very much last year. Everyone else was someone I had never seen before or didn't recognise and I think when you have something that is supposed to be as realistic as possible then lack of starpower is good.

GOOD POINT 02 - DOES NOT RECREATE SCENES INSIDE THE HOTEL

The temptation must have been there at sometime during production where they wanted to move action to inside the compound and thankfully they resisted. Everything that the characters learn comes the same way we learn about them and so there is no misinterpretation and another reason why I liked the fact there was no cutting to other locations is that it increases the tension and the claustrophobia and it is gradually increased as the film progresses and you don't realise it until quite late in the film.

GOOD POINT 03 -NICE MIX OF RECREATED FOOTAGE AND NEW FOOTAGE

The way that we see what is going on outside the gallery area is by seeing what is on the screens and there is a mixture of original footage and newly recorded. It was genuinely difficult to see what was newly recreated for the film and what wasn't. The attention to detail has helped make the footage a huge part of why the film has worked the way that it does. I cant imagine that this film had a big budget but they spent it where it mattered and the whole of the exterior footage was brilliantly put together and mixed in with the story.

GOOD POINT 04 - PERFECT RUNNING TIME

It’s a rare thing to be able to say that a film has the perfect running time but the film works perfectly well at 95 minutes. There is little fat and no time is wasted in getting things up and running. Once the situation is over the film takes the appropriate amount of time in winding down before the credits roll. The film was an hour and a half long but it felt a lot longer and that is a compliment because time flew by because my attention was completely on what was happening and that is such a rare and refreshing thing to experience in a modern film.

OVERALL

There are no negatives that I could take away from the film. Nothing even coming close to nitpicking when it comes to bad points and that shows how good the film is. It is currently my favourite film of the year and even though we are only in February it is hard to see a film beating this. The film is cast perfectly, had a great script and is directed really well and its hard to make something that is quite restrictive work as well as it does. Its nice to see that in 2025 there are still films that see they don't need to rely on theatrics to tell a great story and it feels like it does the real situation and casualties justice and deals with them in a respectful manner.

Saturday Night (2024)

Saturday Night tells the story of the iconic comedy show Saturday Night Live which celebrates its 50th Birthday this year. The story follows the 90 minutes before the show went on the air. This is directed by Ghostbusters: Afterlife director Jason Reitman who co-wrote the screenplay with Gil Kenan. I don't know much about Saturday Night Live and haven't really seen anything of the shows so this was a great opportunity to show what made it so special.

GOOD POINT 01 - VERY GOOD IMPRESSIONS

This might seem like a back handed compliment but I thought that the truth is that the impressions of Chevy Chase, Dan Aykroyd, John Belushi, Andy Kaufman and Jim Henson were perfect and it was easy to see who they are supposed to be and that due to the performances. Nicholas Braun deserves special praise because he plays both Andy Kaufman and Jim Henson and gives two very different performances and it's only because he has some recognisable eyes that its clear he is playing both people.

GOOD POINT 02 - GOOD SETUP

The idea of following the events of the show going to air might not sound like the most exciting idea in the world but credit to Reitman and Kenan, they manage to keep it relatively straight forward and don't try to add things to make it seem like more happened than actually did. The entire film takes place in one location and even though there are the occasional moments outside, its good that the plot is contained to this one place.

GOOD POINT 03 - DAFOE AND SIMMONS STEAL THE SHOW

Willeem Dafoe is always dependable and this is the second film I have seen with him at the cinema in 2025 and he has been one of if not the best thing in each film (Nosferatu being the other). In this he plays David Tebet who is basically the network executive who gets to decide whether Saturday Night Live goes on the air or whether they show a rerun of Johnny Carson. He pops up every so often, gives a great performance and then leaves for 10-15 minutes and this is perhaps one of the more restrained performances I have seen of his recently and yet its still a great one. JK Simmons also gives a great performance as Milton Berle who is someone I have heard of but don't know too much about and in this he comes across as a horrible person but Simmons is capable of playing a horrible person and still being likeable.

GOOD POINT 04 - GABRIEL LABELLE IS GOOD AS THE STAR OF THE FILM

Playing Lorne Michaels, the film basically follows LaBelle from one scene to another as he tries to get this show on the air despite all the chaos that seems to be following him. LaBelle was really good in The Fablemans and manages to make Lorne Michaels seem like a nice guy. I don't know how close this is to the real Lorne Michaels but the film version works because as the film progresses and problems seem to be mounting up, we want to see things work out because he comes across like a nice guy and when the show does air you are happy for him.

BAD POINT 01 - WHAT TYPE OF FILM IS IT???

The main issue with this film is that it doesn't know what it wants to be. Does it want to be a comedy or does it want to be a drama? The whole thing takes place 90 minutes or so before the show starts and yet there never seems to be any urgency or tension and the comedy never really gets to shine. There are a couple of moments which are funny but if the entire film had a comedic vibe to it then it would have worked much better. If it was a straight drama then they could have worked on the pacing and thing would also have worked better.

OVERALL

This was a good film but it wasn't a great film. The central performances work very well and cover up some of the cracks such as tone and the fact that Lamorne Morris’ Garrett Morris seems to be in the film so he can ask why he’s there. The film is worth your time but I get the feeling that there is a better story about the start of the show. This isn't it though and probably worth your time when it's on streaming.