MaXXXine (2024)

This is the third film in the X series after X & Pearl with MaXXXine taking place six years after the events of X. We follow Maxine as she tries to become a movie star in Hollywood whilst there is a serial killer in town. The film takes advantage of the type of horror films that existed in the 1980’s so this has a more more traditional plot like a lot of 80’s horror films have. MaXXXine is soon connected to the deaths of the women by the police and soon a private detective is following her to try and force her to meet his client. 

There is a portion of the film which takes place around the Bates Motel and House from Psycho II which was released in 1986 the following year this film was set and normally its a sign that the film has nothing left when it starts invoking better horror films (FYI Psycho 2 is a very good horror film and well worth your time), however this film manages to get away with it. The whole idea of having Maxine become a movie star helps create this atmosphere about the era of 1980’s cinema where it was clearly coming out of the gritty period of the 70’s but there was still some seediness to it. 

There was the subplot of the serial killer but there is a line that is bought up by either Michelle Monaghan or Bobby Cannavale (both great by the way) where they say that the women killed in the film aren’t being killed by the serial killer comes to be quite true when its revealed that the actual killer is Maxine’s pastor father who isn’t too happy about his daughter’s career choices. When this twist was revealed I didn’t see it coming and I usually take that as a good thing because if it were obvious then that would mean the film is not entertaining enough and there is time in the movie for me to put two and two together. When I am engaged in the story then I don’t stop to think about these sort of things. They might still be obvious to some or most people but to me this is how I can tell if a film is working for me or not.

Mia Goth is great as Maxine, she has consistently been good in these films and I never felt sorry for Maxine because she’s never written or portrayed in a way which makes her seem less than strong and determined to better herself. Kevin Bacon is chewing the scenery but is clearly having great fun as the shady and at times creepy John Labat. Giancarlo Espoito is clearly having fun as well as Teddy who basically helps clear up Maxine’s problems including squashing John Labat in a car crusher. 

MaXXXine is very different to X and Pearl but thats not a bad thing. I enjoyed myself a lot in the screening and you know a horror film is working when it makes you look away and I’m not ashamed to say that it did. The scene where Maxine gets the Buster Keaton impersonator to strip down and then she squashes his….erm…..little busters was something that i wasn't expecting but it was horrifying and that is what a horror film should do, produce something horrifying. We are currently in a period of TV and film where the nostalgia for the 1980's has been driven into the ground to the point where it just becomes obvious that its a cash grab and involves little effort but MaXXXine isn’t like that. It’s clear that time and effort has been put into making the whole thing feel authentic even down to the way the credits appear on screen with the slight flicker on it. Hopefully there is more because if its done right then this could be a franchise that is stronger in terms of quality than some of the greats like Halloween or Friday the 13th. Maybe.

Fly Me to the Moon (2024)

I’ll be honest that I wouldn't normally have gone to see a romcom with Scarlett Johansson and Channing Tatum but at the cinema I go to they had a special screening at a reduced price so I thought why not? Johansson plays Katy who is hired by Woody Harrelson’s Mo to try and put a positive spin on NASA after a series of mishaps and Channing Tatum’s Cole isn't pleased with the changes she is implementing just as he is trying to get Apollo 11 literally off the ground and Katy is then told to fake the film landing in case the real moon landing fails. 

The romance part of the story didn't bother me as much as I thought it would and thats because its not really a soppy romance film. There is a connection between Katy and Cole but its clear that this is going to thaw as the story progresses and it does so that means the Apollo 11 part of the story takes centre stage which I liked because that was the more interesting story as opposed to the Katy/Cole love story. Scarlett Johansson was quite good as someone who is confident but isn't flawless and that makes her a more interesting character than I thought she would be. Channing Tatum isn't the greatest actor in the world but he did impress me in this as he came across as someone who was serious about his work and wanted PR to be as far away from the attempt to land on the moon as possible. He’s believable in this role and he has good chemistry with Johansson. The rest of the supporting cast does well and there isnt a bad performance in the film with Ray Romano being fun to watch and Woody Harrelson chewing the scenery going from being likeable to the bad guy back to being likeable again.

Fly Me to the Moon isn't a groundbreaking film by any means but its a fun film with some good performances from the central cast and the Apollo 11 portion of the film is dramatic and tense and was very well shot. Not sure whether its the sort of thing that should be seen in the cinema. Instead wait for it to either come out on Apple TV or rent in on Amazon. It's worth the cost of renting it but not driving to the cinema in the middle of the working week. What I will say is that the film is the perfect running length. I was never bored and thought that it ended at the right time which is a rarity for most films nowadays.

The Bikeriders (2023)

The Bikeriders is a film that proves that whilst Biker gangs might seem fun and cool, in reality that isn’t the case. It suffers from having a trailer that makes it appear to be something that its not. The trailer seemed to suggest (to me at least) that it was going to be a Sons of Anarchy type film. I don’t know if its just because both feature bikes but that is what the trailer suggested which is one of the many reasons why I don’t watch trailers (except at the cinema).

The film is based on a true story about a motorcycle club lead by Johnny (played by Tom Hardy) and Benny (Austin Butler) as the biker gang goes from a few guys on bikes having fun to a Sons of Anarchy type group with drug runs, prostitution etc. The action takes place over the course of about 10 years with Jodie Comer’s Kathy doing a voice over narration that reminded me of Goodfellas or Casino. I think that with this being based on a true story meant that a potential rivalry sub-plot between Benny and Johnny didn’t happen when I think it would have immediately added some tension to the film which I think it desperately needed.

The thing is that when Austin Butler with anyone else but Tom Hardy then he comes across rather well. Whenever he has a scene with Hardy though then he kinds of becomes forgotten about and bearing in mind he is one of the three main leads it makes it more surprising. I don’t think that Butler is the leading man that most people seem to think he is. I know he won awards for playing Elvis but bearing in mind he was the best thing in that film, its not surprising that his performance stood out. He even gets outshone by Jodie Comer in some scenes. Comer has on the face of it a rather one dimensional character but manages to make a lot of it and show some personality to the wife of a biker. Hardy is doing the same accent that he does in pretty much every film where is he is playing an American that isn’t Bane but he does it so well that I don’t mind.

The Bikeriders is OK. It’s not the film that I thought it would be and so that was disappointing but it told a rather ordinary story and made it seem interesting and the performances from Comer and Hardy elevate it to something above average. One thing that i will say is a big plus point is that I was never bored. It didn’t drag on for longer that it needed to which bearing in mind is just short of two hours long is quite an achievement.

Kinds of Kindness (2024)

I have become a recent fan of Yorgos Lanthimos. Ever since Poor Things, I have been watching whatever Lanthimos film I can find. Normally when a director makes a film, it would be a while before we get their next film. It might be a year or even a few years but with Lanthimos its been four months and apparently Lanthimos made this whilst they were in post production with Poor Things. This film is a trilogy (or triptych if you want to be fancy) of stories which all feature Emma Stone, Jesse Plemons, Willem Dafoe, Margaret Qualley, Hong Chau & Mamoudou Athie in different roles. The set up of the three stories is the same. Someone has something and they then lose it before reaching desperate levels to get it back. That's not a critiscm by the way but just a quick outline of the film because I think that would be the simplest way of putting it.

The first story is called "The Death of R.M.F" (by the way I don't think its explained what R.M.F stands for). This one is more Jesse Plemons than Dafoe and Stone (she doesn't come into it until the final act of the story) and Plemons is really good and as the story progresses Robert's desperation gets more and more obvious and to the point where he purposefully smashes his toe against a wall just to get Emma Stones' Rita to notice him. Dafoe's Raymond is good but is overbearing by deciding what Robert should and shouldn't do. When he is rejected by Robert he isn't angry or upset. He just accepts Robert's decision and moves on. There is something ever so unnerving about the fact that it never feels like its building up to a conclusion but the tension is slowly being increased and that made this story interesting. We don't learn why Raymond wants this guy driven into but I suppose the reason isn't the point. 

The second story is "R.M.F is Flying" and sees Plemons play a police officer called Daniel who at the story of the story is searching for his missing wife Liz (Stone) and after she returns he is convince she is not the real Liz. This is basically the Lanthimos version of 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers'  and Daniel is more and more convinced that Liz is a fake to the point that he asks her to cut off her thumb and serve it to him. After she does this it doesnt change anything and he then gets her to remove her liver and once she does that then for some reason the real Liz turns up and the story ends. I liked this one as well although the reason for the sudden return is never made clear (again like the previous story). There is a great moment when Daniel wants to watch a video with his friends and it turns out to be a sex video of the four of them in probably one of the most awkward moments I have seen in a film for quite sometime. Despite Stone being in this more than the first story, it is another Plemons led tale and he like the previous story he does a good job driving it. I thought that Emma Stone was very good as Liz who was trying to convince her husband that she is the real Liz (even though she wasn't). Two stories in a so far this very strange film is still maintaining my interest and the initial concern I had about the runtime of nearly three hours was starting to disappear.

The third and final story was "R.M.F. Eats a Sandwich" and see Emily (Stone) and Andrew (Plemons)  trying to find a woman who can bring people back from the dead. They are part of a cult where they don't drink the water and Emily sneaks off to see her estranged husband and daughter. When they go back to the cult its clear that there is some sort of sex thing going on and if you have watched any documentaries about cult, the actions of the leader aren't that far off. This is by far the best performance from everyone. Dafoe is great and this is a great performance from Stone who has sort of been on the sidelines for two-thirds of the movie before taking centre stage in this tale. There is a part of the story where Emily is raped by estranged husband and this leads to her being thrown out of the cult and I don't like watching sexual assault in films or TV so this slightly ruined the film for me. Also the fact that this leads to her being thrown out despite it not being her fault seemed like a forced plot point like they couldn't find a better way to get thrown out the group. After being thrown out of the group, Emily purposefully hurts a stray dog (another minus point for the film) and uses this to meet Rebecca who is the one that can bring back the dead leading to the infamous dance that is in the trailer. 

Overall this was a very good film. Not quite as good as Poor Things but as its a very different film it was always going to be a tough ask to be better. I thought that the performances were all good and each actor gave three very different but very good performances with no weak link. I think this is one of those films that people are either going to love or hate and I think that people need to see this sort of film because otherwise all we are going to get at the cinema are more superhero and franchise films. 

 

Freud's Last Session (2023)

I will be honest that normally I wouldn't have seen this film at the cinema but rather have waited for it to come out on streaming but its been a few weeks since my last visit (Furiosa) and it was just nice to see something and this seemed to be the only thing on that a) I hadn't seen and b) was on at a decent time. Normally early on a Saturday morning is ideal for me. This was one of those rare instances where I was the only one in the screening, that's the first time since 'A Haunting in Venice' back in September 2023. This tells of a possibly true story where Sigmund Freud (played by Anthony Hopkins) has a discussion/debate with C.S. Lewis. We know that this may not be true because the text at the very end says that Freud met up with an 'Oxford Don' but there was no name and it possibly could have been Lewis.

The film largely centres around religion and faith with Lewis being a believer and Freud not. There are some interesting scenes where they discuss the points in each case but after a while it did feel like a lot of talk about things that ultimately didn't really matter. What I was more interested in was the dynamic between Freud and Lewis because its an interesting one but I think that the dialogue could have been made easier to understand and also I think that the a better job could have been done to make the flashbacks seem a bit more obvious as it took a moment or two for me to realise this wasn't happening in 1939.  The fact that Freud had mouth cancer was one that because a recurring point throughout the film and I think that this is where Hopkins does his best work because Freud is clearly a smart person but his willingness to accept his fate is something that doesn't seem to happen too much in stories. Matthew Goode is also very good as C.S. Lewis, the what would now be called PTSD of Lewis' experiences in the First World War are briefly touched upon at various points throughout the film but it never makes Lewis seem like a lesser character but adds the discussion and make him a perfect person to discuss faith and god.

Despite this effectively being a two-hander, Sigmund's daughter Anna is also involved in the story although at a slight distance because there is the subplot about her dependency on her father and what sort of relationship the two of them have and when a friend of Sigmund's wants to date her even though he is 20 years older than her, it suggests that the relationship is at best odd. There is also what would have felt like a tacked on plot point if it weren't true and that Anna had feelings for someone else.

Freud's Last Session isn't a terrible film but an average one at best. This is the second Anthony Hopkins film I have seen at the cinema (One Life) and that is a better film although I do think that Freud is a more interesting character because he is a more complex one and the role in One Life was written to be a much more emotional character but it does show that even at 86 years of age, he is still capable of delivering strong and attention grabbing performances. 

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga (2024)

I really enjoyed Fury Road when that came out in 2015. The film felt like being shouted at for two hours but not only was it a well directed film but it was well acted, a good plot and felt like a Mad Max film some 20 years after the last Mad Max film. It was strongly hinted in that film that there would be a Furiosa spin off but with each passing year that seemed less likely. Now, 9 years after Fury Road we finally get our Furiosa spin-off except we don’t have Charlize Theron but Anya Taylor-Joy who despite being a big fan, isn’t someone that I have considered for this role. 

This film tells how Furiosa became the Furiosa that we saw in Fury Road and this means that we get to see Immortan Joe again and he was one of the best things about Fury Road. It’s always a danger doing prequel stories because if a character appears and you know they are going to be in the original film then any peril or tension goes out of the window but thankfully they don’t really do that in this film. The main set up of the film is a civil war of sorts between Dementus and Immortan Joe but really is a vehicle to allow Furiosa to get revenge on Dementus. This leads to some really impressive action scenes which this franchise has become known for. I suppose the advantage of filming in Australia is that there are miles and miles of desert roads where you can do this sort of thing and not worry about running out of road.  

I mentioned how I wouldn’t have cast Anya Taylor-Joy as Furiosa and how wrong I would have been. She is amazing despite not having much to say (which before anyone starts typing a response is something I know that is common in Mad Max films). She is one of those people that can say a lot with just her eyes and every time she is on screen she manages to show broodiness and anger at….well mainly at Dementus really. Dementus is a very good character just as good as Immortan Joe was in Fury Road. The only real issue I have with the film is with Chris Hemsworth’s accent. Despite being Australian, he comes across as someone who isn’t Australian trying to do an Aussie accent. It’s what Dick van Dyke would have done if he hadn’t done a cockney accent in Mary Poppins. His performance is really good and when he finally meets his end, then I found myself satisfied with the story and thats because I was engaged with the story and the characters and Hemsworth deserves as much credit as George Miller. 

Speaking of George Miller, can we take a moment to appreciate how someone who is nearly 80 is producing a film to this standard where people half his age are more concerned with making films that have messages that feel like you're being lectured at. Miller knows what works and I honestly don’t know if he will direct any more Mad Max films but if he doesn't then this is a very good way to sign off. 

I really enjoyed Furiosa. I don’t think that its up there with Fury Road but I wasn't expecting it to be and I am fine with that. A film should really only be as good as it can be instead of being made to just be as good or better than what came before it in a particular franchise.

The Warriors (1979)

The Warriors is considered to be a cult classic directed by Walter Hill and sees a group of gangs attend a meeting helmed by Cyrus who is then shot dead and his murdered is falsely accused to be a member of The Warriors and the rest of the film sees the gang try and get back to Coney Island whilst avoiding the gangs and the cops.

Its a simple premise and it’s effectively done. This was made at just the right time. The streets look run down and probably required little to no dressing up in the same way that ‘Escape from New York’ did. The incidental music was excellent and added to the atmosphere of the film. There is something about music from this period that I feel is superb.

The gang’s are a bit cartoonish but I think that its probably an attempt to not make the film feel too gritty and off putting. There are several gangs that are trying to stop the Warriors from getting home and that includes the Orphans who are so far down the L chain of importance they weren’t invited to the meeting. Then there were the Baseball Furies who for some reason had face paint but seemed to be effective up to a point. Then there were Roller skating gang and that leads to what I think is the best fight in the movie which takes place in the toilets and I think that due to the confined nature of the room, its more fun. 

The film’s not perfect and its mainly because of the decisions that the gangs make. I think there are times when they clearly decide to make stupid decisions. Ajax deciding to chat up a woman on a bench in the middle of the night all alone does not ring alarm bells and to add the fact they are supposedly on the run does make him being caught by the police to be the thing he deserves. Also when the sub members come across the Lizzies and go back to their apartment for a party and they seem to have forgotten that they people are on the run and a group of women doesn't ring any alarm bells but mercifully one of them does and they are able to get out alive.

I really liked this film. It was one of those films that people talked about as being a great film and I was always meaning to watch it but when a showing appeared then I had to take advantage of this and I was glad I did. I thought the central performances were really good, the directing was equally as good and the soundtrack was amazing and made me go out and buy it. The Warriors is every bit as good as people say it is.

Transformers: 40th Anniversary Event (2024)

I learnt a valuable lesson with this ‘film’ and that is to make sure I read the title and synopsis to see what I am buying. I bought the ticket thinking that I was watching the 1986 animated movie, having never seen it on the big screen. What I got was the four episode first series that aired in 1984. ‘More Than Meets the Eye Parts 1-3’ and ‘Transport to Oblivion’.

The first episode was different to the rest in that they went to the trouble of bringing back all the surviving original cast members and had them read the script on one side of the screen and showed the episode on the left. It was quite fun seeing the actors read the same lines that they did 40 years ago. Once that episode was over the rest of the story was told and this was slightly distracting because the image isn't the full screen. It was slightly reduced and also there was a constant caption explaining the episode name and title number. 

Once I got over the bitter disappointment of this not being the 1986 movie, I actually enjoyed the experience. There were about a dozen people in the theatre and I would be surprised if I was the only one that made this mistake.

Challengers (2024)

I think that Challengers may go down as my most disappointing film of the year. It’s not terrible but it was so frustrating that I can’t actually remember the last thing I felt like this. The film sees Tashi (Zendaya), Patrick (Josh O’Connor) and Art (Mike Faist) engage in a weird love triangle with the backdrop of tennis just there to add some ‘excitement’.

There are many problems with the film. Mainly that I didn’t care about who won or lost in the love stakes as all three seemed horrible people that probably do exist in the tennis world but that would be another reason why I am glad I am not a tennis player. The performances are good but I just found all three loathsome. Art was the least terrible but that was more out of the fact someone has to be the least worst. Despite giving a great performance, there isn’t very much to the character of Tashi despite the best efforts of Zendaya (who is also a producer).  

Other problems include the dance music; they use the same 10 seconds of dance music throughout the entire movie no matter what context the scene was in. There was one point where art and Patrick were in the sauna where the dance music was playing so loud that I could just about hear what Mike Faist was saying. I was never a fan of dance music to begin with but this film has given me a new level of hatred. However the final scene was just about the most infuriating that I felt. So there was one shot which must have taken about 2 minutes to take place. There comes a point where slow motion loses any tension any for me that's about 20-30 in, this went on for at least another minute so i had to summon all my energy not to shout ‘TAKE THE F*****G SHOT’. Somehow I don’t think that was the director’s intention. 

Despite this being one of the most frustrating films I can remember seeing. I don’t regret seeing it. I think that the central performances are at least interesting even if its for the wrong reason. I can’t blame Trent Reznor or Atticus Ross because they were probably just doing what they were told and I have liked their work in the past so its down to the director who seems to think that the same dance track needs to be played repeatedly and at a distracting high volume. 

On the plus side….well Luca Guadagnino did make me find tennis enjoyable even if it was just for two hours.

Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes (2024)

This is the fourth film in a franchise I think has been weird overlooked. The three films that have come before have ranged from very good (Dawn) to slightly overlong (War) to ok (Rise). This is the start of a new trilogy which I didn't realise until after the film although it makes a lot of sense because there are plot points that wont be answered until later down the line.

The story takes place 'many generations' after Caesar dies although his shadow does linger throughout the film as Noa (played brilliantly by Owen Teague) who attempts to rescue his tribe/clan after there is an attack on it which leads to the death of his father. Along the way he comes across a human called Mae (Freya Allan) that can speak and she is of great interest to Proximus Caesar who is trying to get through a vault door because he believes he is entitled to it. William H Macy plays Trevathan who is the only other human in the main story although he seems to be unwilling to let Mae and Noa go through with their plan although I think that there was a large chunk of his story missing which would have fleshed out because we get a through away line from him but  that was in and I felt a little short changed from the character. It does feel like the apes are quite stupid because Mae and Noa seem to get into the compound with relative ease and not once did Proximus Caesar think about seeing if there was another way in.

Despite some slight mis-steps the film is an enjoyable one. The second half is where the story really picks up and I like how it feels like the human race is starting to get back on its feet again and this could potentially lead to another battle between humans and apes. The film finds the right balance of having the end of the world feeling that War and Dawn have and yet not as heavy like Rise. There is some more to Mae's story which will hopefully be explored further and Noa is a likeable leader.  

In my opinion, this is the strongest of the reboot series. I think that moving the story on from Caesar was a the smart thing as there was very little that could be done in that time period and moving things along makes the franchise feel fresher than most franchises that are four films in. 

The Fall Guy (2024)

I will admit that I wasn’t sure that I wanted to see this film from the trailers. It looked like it was a goofy comedy that seemed to be capitalising on the continuing popularity of Ryan Gosling fresh off his Oscar nomination. There were two things that made me take a more serious approach to this film. Firstly its based on the 1970’s US TV show which I remember being shown on ITV on a Saturday during the 1990’s. Another reason is because it was directed by David Leitch who is a director I like. I’m a big fan of Bullet Train & Atomic Blonde

The plot sees Colt Seavers (Ryan Gosling) taking part in a stunt for a movie whilst flirting with Jody Moreno (Emily Blunt)  when it goes wrong. The story moves forward when he asked by Gail Meyer (played in scene chewing form by Hannah Waddingham) to try and track him down. What the film ends up becoming about is Colt being framed for a death that the actor is is stunting for is responsible for. 

I really enjoyed this film. Not just because the stunts are amazing from the cars/trucks on the beach to the garbage truck tracking a skip along the streets of Sydney. All these action scenes look amazing and I would imagine most of the action was done in camera (meaning no CGI) but even after hearing ‘I was made for Loving You’ for what felt like the 100th time,  I still enjoyed the chaos that was on screen. 

The plot does take a bit of time to get going and also  at times come close to being convoluted but it manages to work. I think that this would have worked much better with a stripped down plot and let the stunts and the chemistry of Blunt and Gosling keep people engaged. The main reason why the film works is because of Gosling and Blunt. Blunt’s character isn’t the strongest but works when she is with Gosling’s Seavers. It doesnt feel like Gosling is acting as he natural personality seems to come through the rather normal character. 

I was genuinely impressed with The Fall Guy. I thought that it worked really well and was a rare thing in modern day movies in that it wasnt too long. It was just the right running time. 

Monkey Man (2024)

This is a more in depth review. The trailers made this film look like the Bollywood John Wick. I think that this film is Bollywood John Wick but that isn’t a bad thing. The plot sees Dev Patel plays Kid who loses his mother who is killed by an army guy who wants to turn the land that Kid and his mother are on into some holy ground which is basically a scam as its really more of a cult. 

The film sees Kid take part in fights wearing a monkey mask. The thing that works for John Wick are th fight scenes and this film manages the fight scenes really well. I would say that the fight scenes are on par with what i saw in ‘The Iron Claw’. I also like that Kid isn’t the perfect fighter from the very beginning, he starts off ok but as the film progresses his skills get better and he becomes a better fighter so come the final scene you feel he’s earned the right to be that good. It’s good character development which a lot of characters in movies don’t seem to go through. 

This is a classic example of Army of One where its Kid against the people responsible for his mother’s death. I don’t think that Kid says that much in the film but then he doesnt need to. His fighting does the talking and Patel is believable as a tough guy. I hadn’t seen Patel in a film since ‘The Personal History of David Copperfield’ and that is a very different performance but shows that he can do very different characters very well. 

The film isn’t perfect and one problem there is with the film is perhaps the most important. The shaky cam shots are distracting and there was at least two instances where it was shaking so much that I actually could see what was going on. Shaky cam has its purpose but if you can’t see what’s going on then how are you suppose to be emotionally connected with what’s happening. Another issue that the close ups are bad. Literally the first shot of the film is of Kid’s mother and all we see are her eyes, nose and face. It was too close and there more instances where the camera work let the film down. I’m not sure whether this was because they didn’t have time to set things up better or whether they chose to do it like this but i think this was definitely in the minus column. 

Monkey Man is a good film that’s only let down by technical issues. I think the performances are all really good and it clear from start to finish that Dev Patel cares about the film and also about the story. Hopefully he continues to direct because I think that he has a good eye for this sort of thing. He just needs to control the shaky cam shots and learn that cameras have zooms on them.

Civil War (2024)

Civil War is set in the near future where the U.S is at war with itself and some of the states have seceded from the union. Kirsten Dunst plays Lee who is a war photographer who along with Joel (Wagner Moura), Jessie (Cailee Spaeny) and Sammy (Stephen McKinley Henderson) try to go to the White House to interview the President and that’s the plot with the characters encountering people along the way. 

I like these type of stories. I’m not sure when they are done well then they work really well and you end up feeling like you know these characters which is a really weird thing to write but bearing in mind connecting with characters is part of the point of films, it perhaps shouldn’t feel weird writing it. There is something weary about Lee as she feels like she has seen too much of it and almost looks at Jessie with envy and jealousy at the same time. I always get distracted when Wagner Moura is on screen because when I see him he reminds me of Narcos when he played Pablo Escobar (brilliantly I might add) but that’s not really his fault and Joel is perhaps the nice character that Lee needs in her life. Cailee Spaeny does well with what is a rather flat character. I think she has her moments but I always found the dynamic between Lee and Joel to be more interesting even though there was a passing of the torch thing going on with Lee and Jessie. Stephen McKinley Henderson is as dependable as ever and his death scene was sad to watch. It did seem like mobility was an issue as all his scenes involved him sitting down or standing still.

Jesse Plemons did steal the show even though he was only in it for about 10 minutes. He’s such a good actor that he only needs 10 minutes to show how good he is. That scene was probably the best in the movie and was by far the most dramatic and tense. According to trivia I have read, Plemons’ involvement was last minute as another actually had to pull out and being married to Dunst meant that he was able to jump in at the last minute and deliver a film stealing performance.

The final 10-15 minutes let this film down badly. It feels extremely rushed and when Lee is killed, there is zero time given for her death. We have just spent over an hour with her and got to know what she is like and dare I say it, care for her and yet she is treated like she is a background extra who doesnt matter to the story. 

Also the showdown with the President is thrown away like it didn’t matter even though it's the motivation for the entire movie. I usually over play what the scene might be like in my head but there can’t be anyone who thought that this was how the final scene was going to end. It felt like a waste of time.

Despite Alex Garland not sure how he was going to end his own film. I still enjoy everything up until the White House stuff. I thought that the film was tense and despite it being essentially a road trip movie, the characters all feel genuine and the whole feel of the film feels real especially with the chaos the world seems to be in at the moment. I think that Civil War is definitely worth seeing but don’t go in with hopes of a satisfying resolution.