Megalopolis (2024)

This film has gained a bit of a reputation because it was suppose to be really bad and I wanted to go and see it because I was intrigued by it and also wanted to see a Francis Ford Coppola film at the cinema. I had read in trivia about this film that he had to sell his winery to pay for this film because he didn’t want any studio interference and never has a film needed more studio interference as much as this film did.

GOOD POINT

Esposito, Emmanuel and Fishburne

Giancarlo Esposito, Nathalie Emmanuel and Laurence Fishburne are the ONLY three that give good performances. They seem to somehow make sense of this madness and deliver some good performances. Emmanuel is the weaker of the three but that's because the character wasn't the best written and I think to make her as good as she was is down entirely to Emmanuel herself and not Coppola. 

BAD POINTS

Terrible Performances

I don’t think i have seen a film waste a cast as badly as this since Cats. 

Jon Voigt looks like he was woken up from his afternoon nap and told to say lines into the camera. Dustin Hoffman looks like he was dug up from a cemetery which is ironic as he replaced James Caan who had passed away before filming. Aubrey Plaza is normally very good in what she is in even if the film itself is not and yet she was totally terrible as the terribly named Wow Platinum which must seem like a amusing name to Coppola but to me it was eye rolling and showed that the film isn't as smart as it thinks it is. Adam Driver is another who normally gives a good performance even when the film isn't great and he delivers one of the worst performances ever. If I didn't know better then I would say it was cry for help aimed at Disney.

Shia LaBeouf

No one is as bad as LaBeouf. I don’t think a word exists for how bad he is. I think he had an idea of what he wanted to do and the director just said yes because there is no other explanation that makes sense for why he did what he did. The Madison Square Garden scene is by far the worst part of a terrible outing and was the point where I thought the film had lost the literal and figurative plot. Even by his low standards, LaBeouf excels himself in being terrible and utterly slappable. 

Looked Cheap

This film reportedly had a budget of $120 million dollars and looks like it cost about $20 million. Most scenes seemed to be filmed in front of a green screen and looks terrible. According to IMDB trivia, Coppola fired most of his visual effects team cause Coppola wanted to use technology similar to what was used in The Mandalorian TV series. I was reminded of The Creator which has a budget of $80 million and yet looks like it cost $200 million.

Two People walked Out

There were five people in this screening (including me) at 7:15 on a Monday evening and two people walked out. I was considering it for a good 20 minutes but decided to persevere. I have never walked out of a film before but came pretty close. I had given up on the film after 15 minutes which was bad for me because I still had another TWO HOURS left.

Weird Directing & Editing

It’s a shame that the director of The Godfather directed this. This film has so many weird directing choices and also some poor editing choices. Scenes just happen out of nowhere then end and move onto something else. Normally this is so that the audience doesnt have time to think about what was happening but in this case I think it’s because they didn’t know what they were doing.

The Worst Vanity Project

This film has being in production hell since the 1980’s and Coppola has been trying to get it financed and struggled and to be honest, it wasn't worth the wait. I think vanity projects are fine if they cost less than $10 million but $120 million shows that he doesn't really value money because he wouldn't have spent that much money and be so lacking in quality control.

OVERALL

This is one of the worst films I have seen at the cinema since I started keeping track in 2016. Fantasy Island was the worst film that I had seen but this easily beats it. The reason is that it’s longer than Fantasy Island and at least I could see what they were aiming for in that film. This film doesn't know what its doing, the director doesn't seem to be giving his cast any instruction. This film isn't so bad its good, its so bad that it should be avoided at all cost. I spent £5 and still felt like I was robbed. Had I paid the full £12 then I would have been fuming. 

Shaun of the Dead (2004)

The first part of the Cornetto Trilogy is an ‘homage’ to the horror films that were made by George Romero. Having not seen the ‘of the dead’ series of films all the references that are littered throughout this film are lost on me. The setup of the film is that Shaun (Simon Pegg) and his friends are trying to survive a Zombie Apocalypse and get his girlfriend back who has recently dumped him. 

The film is funny because the film doesn’t take itself too seriously. There are plenty of references to George Romero films that most people would get and that is perhaps another reason why people would like this film. Having not seen these films, I still find the film entertaining and that shows why this film is so good. 

The performances are really good with Simon Pegg being a notable highlight. Even though he isnt the most successful person in the world. There is a likeable quality about Shaun, he does try to do the right thing but just seems to find being next to Nick Frost’s character as the easy approach. Nick Frost is funny in this film but he is one of those people that can be annoying at times. His character is suppose to be a stoner waste of space and yet becomes quite useful as the film progresses. When he turns into a Zombie it is handled quite well and nobody plays a monkey as well as Nick Frost. The other performances are all work and no one lets the film down.

Shaun of the Dead is a funny and entertaining film. Whether it’s the best film in the trilogy is something that is open for debate. Personally I think that Hot Fuzz is the better film but this is still a great film with great performances and shows that you can do horror comedies well. Admittedly the film hasn’t aged that well in some respects but in terms of humour and pacing, this film continues to be an entertaining film.

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

The final part of the Dark Knight trilogy is the weakest. This was the third part of the triple bill and by this point in the cinema experience, I felt like things were going well. I wasn't feel fatigue or getting uncomfortable with the seat I was in but I always knew that this film was going to test me. Set several years after the events of The Dark Knight and Bruce Wayne has become a hermit but a psycho called Bane is going to cause more damage to Gotham than anyone could imagine.

GOOD POINTS

Some good scenes

Despite the run time, there are some good scenes throughout the film.  The opening scene with Bane on the airplane immediately comes to mind but there are plenty which show that Christopher Nolan might someone who likes the big philosophical ideas but he knows how to put interesting scenes together. Also the scene at the football match when Bane launches his masterplan is also very good because its simple and not flashy but to the point and does what it needs to do.

Tom Hardy as Bane

Tom Hardy saved this film for me. Back in 2012, the headlines were that Bane's voice was hard to hear and I don't know if time has fixed that problem (I don't think its a restored cut) but I didn't have any problem hearing Bane. Tom Hardy gives a personality to what is a fairly one dimensional character. Back in 1997, he was just Poison Ivy's hired help but in this he is breaking things up because he believes to be right and doing things for the right reasons. The character and film would have been weaker without Tom Hardy.

Michael Caine is heart-breaking

Michael Caine has been brilliant throughout these three films but he really steps it up in this one. The way that Alfred feels like is breaking his promised to Thomas Wayne is one of the saddest moments in the film and its because we care about Alfred because of what Caine has done with the character. Some might argue that Michael Gough is the best Alfred but in my mind, Caine manages to make Alfred feel like a loyal but integral part of Bruce Wayne's life.

BAD POINTS

There doesn't feel much enthusiasm for it

The first film felt like it had a point to it and the second one also did. This one felt like it was being made because the previous one took $1 billion dollars and Warner Brothers. It feels like there is no real discipline to the flow of the story with Nolan allowing himself to let philosophy take centre stage of the film when it didn't really have any need to.

I don't care about Cat Woman

I think that Selina Kyle isn't a very interesting character. She worked when played by Michelle Pfeffer in Batman Returns but in this she just feels like an irritation. I think it isn't really Anne Hathaway's fault although I don't think she really helped. 

Too Long

At close to three hours, this film is too long. Plain and simple. The whole Gotham under Bane's rule goes on so long that it feels like the film doesn't really belong in the film. You could have cut a bit of this and it would have been a much better product as a result.

OVERALL

This is a disappointing film if you compare it to the previous films in the trilogy but on its own it is ok. The film is too long and the film feels like it has to be something it doesnt want to be. I have no problem with moral messages in a film but the film has to be entertaining for it to work and despite the best efforts of everyone involved, they never manage to pull it. off.

The Dark Knight (2008)

The second of the Dark Knight trilogy is the best. After the teaser at the end of Batman Begins, the most iconic villain in comic book history (probably) makes his first appearance in a movie since 1988. The plot sees Batman take on the Joker as he tries to dismantle the corruption and crime in Gotham whilst Harvey Dent is trying to clean things up in his own way.

Good Points

Heath Ledger steals the show

This has always been my opinion and is the case upon watching again. Every scene is great and its perhaps the biggest loss in this franchise that Ledger died. The face paint along with the manner in which he talks helps create a version of the Joker that is completely different from the version that Jack Nicholson plays. His best scene is in the interview room when Batman is beating him up and then he has that great speech with the detective about why he uses a knife instead of a gun. Every scene is great.

Bale is great as Batman

Due to the plot, there wasn't very much of Bale in the Batman costume and he makes up for that in this film. He has some great moments in the costume most notably with Joker but he is also more confident as Bruce Wayne. He has got the swaggering playboy part down quite well and it makes a clear distinction between the two sides of the character. 

Pace is better than the previous despite longer run time

The first part of Batman Begins was perhaps slower than it should have been but this version doesn't have a problem with pacing. Each scene has something going on and even when the Joker isn't involved the acting helps you forget that and everyone (almost) is on the top of their game.

Rachel 2.0 is a big improvement

Katie Holmes was the weak link in the performances in Batman Begins and Maggie Gyllenhaal is much better in the role. I think that she makes more of the opportunities the character is given than Katie Holmes would have done. The love triangle between Bruce, Rachel and Harvey worked very well and only lasted as long as it needed to. It's a shame that Gyllenhaal wasn't in Batman Begins because I think that she would have made that film just that bit more entertaining.

Much more enjoyable

This film shows what can be achieved when you inject a bit of thought into a film. At this time Marvel was just gearing up for Iron Man and so was what comic book movies should be aiming for. This film deals with many things but still has the action stuff that people would expect. Batman and the Joker don't meet each other too many times and that works for the better so that when they do it means something and those scenes are great. 

Bad Points

Boat scene is too much

There are some high stakes scenes and they work but the final one on the boats is one too many. It goes on too long and doesn't really lead to anything and in the final act this really slows things down and 

Aaron Eckhart not great

When a lot of the central performances are so good, anything not as good will stand out and unfortunately Aaron Eckhart does stand out but not in a great way. I think that he is fine but next to the Joker he isn't as good. I think that he is there more so that the Joker can prove a point that be there for anything good. 

Overall

This is a great movie with a great cast and a story that works very well. The directing isnt flashy but is still great and everything works perfectly. This film was great when I first saw it in the cinema in 2008 and its still great in 2024.

Batman Begins (2005)

For the first time ever, I have seen three films in one day at the cinema. I had seen two films in one day but there was a gap of a couple of hours between them. I have always liked the trilogy and saw them when they originally came out, but there was something about seeing them in one go that proved to irresistible to turn down.

The opening part of the trilogy is not as gritty as people think it is. It is gritty compared to the Batman films that have come before it but its not that gritty and perhaps feel more grounded than gritty. The film follows as Bruce Wayne goes away to understand the criminal underbelly to try and exact revenge on the person who killed his parents all while the corruption of the city tries to stop him and the League of Shadows tries to get Wayne to be one of them.

The horror of the neon campiness of the Joel Schumacher which nearly killed the franchise is consigned to the history books with a film directed by someone who has a vision and a plan for bringing this character back from the dead.

Good Points

Strong Central Performances

Christian Bale is very good as the caped crusader, we see him through all stages of grief and he is believable as Bruce Wayne and as Batman. This version of Bruce Wayne feels the most grounded out of all the versions that we have seen in the movie. Bruce Wayne in this movie has the playboy lifestyle that has always been there in the character but Bale makes it seem a facade and hiding his true character. Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman are great as Alfred and Lucius Fox respectively and are as awesome as ever. Gary Oldman makes the character of James Gordon feel a bit more important than he has in the previous films.

Good Action sequences

Despite this being a more grounded version of Batman, there are still the action sequences which are all very good. Christian Bale never stuck me as an action star or someone who could do them but he manages to pull it off. This version of Batman is a more talkie incarnation of the character but it is still lends itself to the action sequences that cinema-goers would expect.

Visuals are good

We have the dark gritty version of Gotham in the Tim Burton films, the camp neon light version in the Joel Schumacher versions and now we get a better version in this movie. It has a futuristic feel and yet current. It does feel like it was film in a real street in a real city that is doubling as Gotham which is a nice middle ground from the two previous versions. 

Bad Points

Villain could have been stronger. Scarecrow was a better villain

I liked that there was some personal backstory for the character of Ducard but I would have liked to see more of Scarecrow because I think Scarecrow was a more traditional villain for Batman and he was played brilliantly by Cillian Murphy. Liam Neeson is great don’t get me wrong but I think that he was overshadowed by Murphy. 

Katie Holmes is not a great Rachel

Trying to be kind to Katie Holmes but she isn’t very good as Rachel. Rachel is suppose to be this form of support to Bruce and yet there isn’t that connection with Bruce Wayne that there should be. This was her only performance and it was a good thing. 

Overall

This is an underrated Batman movie, it’s the middle of the trilogy in terms of quality but it zips along at a good pace. This being the first part of the trilogy at the cinema. It has a story which it takes time to tell but doesn't feel like there is any padding or rushing at the end. An enjoyable film which even nearly 20 years later holds up and should be a film that people watch.

Speak No Evil (2024)

Be careful of remakes. Especially if the remake is of a film that only came out two years ago. I saw the original when it came out and liked it very much so my eyes rolled into the back of my head when I heard this film was coming out. Also the fact it was a Blumhouse production didn’t fill me with confidence because they aren’t known for subtle horror. I rewatched the original to try and be able to compare the two which might be unfair to both but I felt it was needed.

In the original a Danish couple are invited to a Dutch couple house after they became 'friends' on holiday and things go wrong pretty much straight away. In this version, a British couple invite an American couple to their isolated farm and things go strange very quickly.

GOOD POINTS

Good Performances from the adults

The central performances were really good with McAvoy being the best of the four adults. Never thought he was great as Charles Xavier in the X-Men films but he showed another side in this film. Mackenzie Davis was good as someone who felt like she wanted to do the right thing but seemed restricted. Scoot McNairy was also good as the husband who didn’t want to rock the boat or stand up to McAvoy’s character. All four of the performances work well together and this adds to the tension that runs throughout the film even from the very first scene.

Fixing the Bunny Rabbit Problem

The reason for the family returning after sneaking out always bothered me in the original but they fixed it in this film. In the original it seems like it is a normal toy but in this version it’s the daughters emotional support so it can’t really be replaced providing a decent reason for returning.

Enough mix of original and new

I always think if you're going to remake something then do something different and there are enough different things in this film that make it feel new but enough of the elements from the original to feel like it has done something new but not rubbishing the original and that's not an easy thing to pull off. I was happy that there were things that I recognised but not too much. 

Isolated Setting

I’m always a fan of isolated settings and the change from the original is moving the story from a cabin to an isolated farm. Simple idea but it’s used effectively and felt very claustrophobic in the third act. Apart from the opening part in Tuscany (?) and a scene at a resturant, the film takes place largely in one location and there is always something tense about the country that this film uses well.

Nice Atmosphere

The whole atmosphere and vibe was really good. It wasn’t as dark and grim and the original (more on that in the bad points) but it still had the same atmosphere they you would expect in a horror film and that with the performances help create a film that stands on its own compared to the original.

BAD POINTS

Disappointed with the ending

The ending was too upbeat for me. Having seen the original which has the nice couple stoned to death and the daughter becoming part of the psycho family minus her toy he whereas in this version they all drive off into the sunset.

This is probably harsh on the film as most people probably haven’t or won’t see the original so on its own merits it’s a fine ending but I think that horror films work better when they have a more downbeat ending.

OVERALL

I was sceptical when this was announced as Hollywood remakes of foreign language films rarely turn out better than the original but I did like this more than the 2022 version. I still like the original but found things just worked better for me. James McAvoy is a bit of a hit and miss actor for me but I thought that he excelled in this role. I hoped that he would be good based on the trailer that I saw and he didnt disappoint. It's not been as good as year for horror films as I would have liked but Speak No Evil manages to be as of writing the best horror film of 2024. Well acted, well structed and well directed.

The Critic (2023)

This was a preview screening and the last time I attended a preview screening it was 'Fly Me to the Moon' which had a decent crowd. The number of people attending this screening at 7:45pm on a Tuesday night? 3. Not the best indication of how many people are interested in this film. The set up of the film is that Ian McKellen plays Jimmy Erskine who is a theatre critic and when he gets sacked from the newspaper he works at, he hires an actress who he has routinely rubbished to seduce the editor of the newspaper so he can blackmail him and get his job back.

GOOD POINTS

Good Central Performances

Ian McKellen is always worth the price of admission alone and despite my issues with the characters, I thought he was fun to watch. Gemma Arterton was perfectly fine as Nina but I do wonder what she saw in the role that made her agree to do it, The thing about Nina was that she was a likeable person but she could have put up more of a fight against Erskine. Mark Strong is another actor that can always be relied upon to deliver a solid performance.

Looks Very Nice

This film looks very nice and I believed that we were in the 1930’s. It feels like a lovely world to be in even though this time period has been done to death but the cars are lovely to look at, the costumes are very nice  the interiors are all very much of the period but this is me struggling to find things to add in the good section,

Alfred Enoch (almost) steals the show

He’s not one of the biggest names in UK film or television but Alfred Enoch gives a very good performance as Tom who is the secretary/lover of Erskine. He appears and then disappears for a while before coming back to be the person that almost steals the show. He works very well with McKell

BAD POINTS

Too Slow

The film has a slow pace and normally I don’t mind that but I have to feel like it’s building up to something and the film took way too long to get to that. The film had a running time of around an hour and 40 minutes and yet I don’t think it was until the hour mark that the film felt like it was heading to something.

Average Plot

Aside from the slow pace, the plot is the biggest weakness. The idea of someone blacking their boss and using an adversary as an ally could have been a good idea but it’s sort of used as sub plot to deal with the fall out. Again if the plot had been structured better then it would have worked out better and if the film had been given maybe another 10-15 minutes then things might have worked out better. 

Rushed End

I read in the IMDB that they reshot the ending and it shows. In no time at all, Tom admits what he and Erskine have done and Erskine is in a prison cell writing a letter to Tom saying that he is being left out of it and gets to live in Erskine’s house and become his beneficiary. There is no time to take in the downfall of a figure like Erskine and thats a shame. Again if the plot were better then we would have got a more satisfying ending 

OVERALL

I wanted to like this movie more than I did. I think that if this film were on at Christmas on TV then I would say it was very good but I found myself wondering just what this was doing in a cinema. I thought that it was one of the more disappointing films that I have seen at the cinema this year.

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (2024)

This film is easily my most anticipated movie of the year. This is also the third part of my ‘Film coming out in 2024 where the previous instalment came out at least 20 years ago. The previous films in this series are Beverly Hills Cop: Axel F and Twisters. It was nice to see the screening quite full with about 70 people in for a 1pm Saturday showing. Easily the best attended film I have sat through this year.

36 years after Beetlejuice, we see Lydia who is now a drug dependant TV star who presents a paranormal show when she gets word that her father has died and takes her daughter Astrid back home and things go strange from there. 

THE GOOD POINTS

Michael Keaton

Keaton feels like he is having the time of his life playing Beetlejuice this time. Having watched Beetlejuice the day before seeing Beetlejuice Beetlejuice it was obviously the same performance with the same enthusiasm but it seems like he is having fun playing it this time. There are a couple of musical moments from Beetlejuice which made me chuckle the first time and in the church it was a surprise.

Other Central Performances

Winona Ryder manages to make the Lydia we see in this film the older version of the one we saw in Beetlejuice. The relationship between Ryder and Ortega is a nice one as its believable that there is friction between the two but at least there is a relationship that doesn't feel too dissimilar to the one between Lydia and Delia. Jenna Ortega was perfectly cast as Astrid and she's written in a way that makes her sceptical to her mother's day job but doesn't make her come across as an unlikeable.  Ortega probably got cast because of Tim Burton's involvement in 'Wednesday' but I still think that she's a very good actress and there were a couple of times when she smiled and I thought it was a weird to see her not have a dour look on her face but she manages to hold her own with memorable characters and also Beetlejuice.

Catherine O'Hara is very good as Delia. Like Ryder, she seems to be playing an older version of Delia instead of a new interpretation. She's not quite as vain as she was in the first film but she's changed enough to still seem like the original Delia. When she is introduced she is in some horrible looking art gallery so has managed to carve out a career which didn’t seem likely in the first one. Justin Theroux is ok as Rory but does seem to be just there as people are running around. He has things to do but compared to other characters, he doesn't seem quite as good. Monica Bellucci is the villain Delores and while she doesn't have much in the way of dialogue, she still comes across as a decent baddie and something to drive the story. Willem Dafoe is always great in whatever he is in. I think this is the third time I have seen in 2024 and each performance is really different to the other and equally as impressive. He is one of those actors that can deliver a great performance in whatever he is in.

Practical Effects

I had heard that Tim Burton wanted to use practical effects instead of relying on CGI. This is always a good way of making movies because practical effects more often than not age a lot better than CGI. Rewatching the first film, it’s amazing how the effects stand up. The effects used in this film are really good and even though there are special effects used they are kept to a minimum (I suspect) and the practical effects have their day in the spotlight. 

Seemed like they cared

Sometimes when a film comes back after a prolonged period of time, it’s easy to see the film as basically a cash grab. Trying to squeeze a few dollars/pounds out of a nostalgic crowd but whilst that might be the case with the executives at Warner Brothers, it does feel like everyone involved in the production cared about what they were doing. Tim Burton cared about this world and that is whilst there are enough references and nods to the previous film, things have been updated for a modern audience.

Wedding Scene

The whole wedding portion of the film is probably my favourite of the entire film.  There have been a few films recently where the film just sort of ends and doesn't have a big final confrontation but we definitely get that in this film with all the main characters converging on the church. The use of MacArthur Park was used in a superb way. 

Soundtrack

Its something that has stood out to me more a lot recently and even though the songs used is kept to a minimum they are good enough for me to buy the soundtrack. Always happy to hear Tragedy in any form, Right Hear Waiting by Richard Marx is funny when it comes out of Michael Keaton's mouth and as I just wrote, MacArhtur Park is the best song in the film. 

Right amount of Beetlejuice

One of my genuine worries going into this film was whether they would overuse Beetlejuice. He was only in the first one for about a quarter of an hour in a 92 minute film. I feared that they would stick him in way too much just to please a new audience but thankfully even though I think he is in it for way longer than was in the first film, it always feels like he is there for a reason. 

Charles (a.k.a The Elephant in the Room)

The absence of Geena Davis and Alec Baldwin was to be expected because of Alec Baldwin's legal troubles and although I though that there was a chance we could get a Davis cameo. It was always interesting to see how they would deal with the absence of Jeffrey Jones. They deal with it in a creative way. They killed him off but they could have just had a throw away line but instead of this they went to animation to show the death happen and then his body appears throughout the film. Not sure who did the voice but I thought the fact they incorporated it into the story like they did was a big plus point.

Beetle Baby

This felt like vintage Tim Burton. Its fair to say that Burton hasn't quite been on the sort of form that he was on in the 1980's and 1990's but he is back in this film and the peak of this is the Beetle baby (not sure what the correct term would be). It's genuinely a creepy baby and the way its introduced into the story is nightmare fuel. The return at the end was unexpected and also reminded me of how creepy the doll was. The unexpectedness along with the appearance works to make it just as effective.

Bob

R.I.P Bob. I was quite sad when Bob has his souled sucked away. Despite not having any words, he is a likeable character and I wish he would have survived to the end.

THE BAD POINTS

Some plot strands didn't work

So there was the Astrid falls for Jeremy and there is his plan to use Astrid's soul so that he can get back to the living after killing his parents and slipping which led to his death. This plot end abruptly like it didn't really matter. There was the Delores plot strand which whilst it did seem the most important because it featured in the trailers. There was Beetlejuice trying to marry Lydia again and Lydia trying to rescue Astrid before she boards the soul train. A lot going on and it could have been cleaned up a bit. Maybe just having Lydia trying to rescue Astrid would have been the best singular plot.

Pace slowed a bit

There was a part in the middle for about 10 minutes or so where I felt the film wasn't working for me and it was just because it felt like it was plodding a little bit. My mind did wonder a little bit but thankfully it wasn't too long before my attention returned to the film.

Film sort of ends.

Perhaps my biggest issue with the film is that the film sort of just ends. After Beetlejuice is defeated there is a rushed montage of events where Lydia and Astrid go travelling, Astrid falls for some guy playing Dracula and then has a baby which turns out to a fake out and then the credits start. The previous one has a upbeat clear cut ending, this ending suggests that there could be another one. I think that the film would have been better had they come up with a clear cut ending.

OVERALL

I was so happy when this film turned out to be as good as I hoped. I tried to keep my expectations in check but when Beetlejuice is one of your favourite films then its hard to keep expectations at a reasonable level. The film delivers something that might be tipping over to nostalgia but I don't care. I think that despite the few minor flaws with the film, this is a very good Tim Burton film and I hope there aren't any more because I am not sure that they could get away with it.

RATING - 4 out of 5

Blink Twice (2024)

Today was National Cinema Day and like last year i took advantage of the bargain. This year its £1 more expensive but that's still pretty good compared to the normal price of a ticket. My options were more limited this year than in 2023. Most of the films I have already seen and there are a few kids films that would have been weird to see on my own.  To be honest, the trailer seemed quite interesting and there was another reason for wanting to see this and that is my parents went to see this earlier in the week and walked out so I wanted to see whether it was worth walking out of. 

The set up of the film is that Frida (Naomi Ackie) is invited to an island owned by Slater King (Channing Tatum) who a tech billionaire who has been ‘cancelled’ and is trying to improve himself. As the film progresses strange things start to happen.

GOOD POINTS

Central Performances

The performances from Channing Tatum and Naomi Ackie are really good. I thought that Ackie in particular was very good as Frida who manages to carry my interest when things went a bit slow. This is the third film I have seen with Channing Tatum in 2024 (Fly Me to the Moon and Deadpool & Wolverine) and this is a very different but equally as impressive. Seeing a manipulative Channing Tatum is fun to see in a strange way. 

Supporting Performances

Christian Slater seems like he is having the time of his life playing Vic. I must admit I didn’t stop laughing when he was laying down on the sofa after having his head bashed in. I would like to have seen more of Kyle MacLachlan in the film but he was fun for the brief time he was in. Haley Joel Osment seems to have agreed to do it so he could lounge around the pool and he is having fun doing it. Not sure why Geena Davis agreed to do this but I’m glad she did because its always fun to see her in a film and most of the time she’s in the background and doesn’t really add anything to the plot but I still liked her performance.

Soundtrack

There are some really good songs that are used in this film and they aren’t the sort that I would have expected when I saw the trailer. Given that they look like the sort of people that would appear on Love Island or some other reality trash, the soundtrack was surprisingly normal. Sadly as of writing, there doesn't appear to be a soundtrack available.

Twist

This is the sort of film I would have expected from M. Night Shyamalan because it has a twist that comes very late in the film. The twist in this film is that everyone is taking drugs to forget what happens during the night. It became obvious quite early on that they weren't remembering somethings when Frida was seeing dirt under her fingernails. I think they waited too long to show the flashbacks but when they did appear it was welcome.

A Good Directing Debut

Zoe Kravitz makes her directing debut with this film and she does a good job (she also co-wrote the screenplay which was originally called Pussy Island). She makes good use of the island even though all we really see is the pool, the dining area and a couple of rooms in the house. 

A good screenplay

The screenplay in general is rather good. Things are set up and paid off later on which sounds like a weird thing to put in the good section but is amazing how many films seem to find it hard to introduce things early in a film and have them payoff or mean something later on. The 

BAD POINTS

Too many annoying/underutilised characters

Despite their being some good actors in this film. A lot of them are either annoying or don’t get used enough. Vic (Slater) doesn't do much apart from take polaroid's and that's about it. Levon Hawke (Ethan Hawke’s son) literally does nothing and it even gets mentioned by Slater. Some are given a lot of dialogue and screentime and I barely recognise them because they hadn't done anything until that point. 

The bodyguard doesn't seem to serve much purpose apart from being in the shot every so often. There didn't seem to be an explanation as to why he was not getting in on the action or how he ended up their. He gets what he deserves at the end but he was given a lot of screen time for someone that didn’t have much impact on the plot

Way too long to get the point

The film is 102 minutes but about 45-50 of that is given to partying. The film follows a format. There is a load of partying and then something strange happens. So much focus is given to Jess’ cigarette lighter that it was clear that it was going to be part of the plot and it was. The film was probably about 15-20 minutes too long which is a shame because if it had been a little bit shorter then it would have worked much better. The women realise what is going on very quickly at the end of the film like they realised they were running out of time. I found it slightly distracting that there didn't seem to be anything that indicated why they would suddenly have seen the light. It felt like a scene had been cut.

Ending doesn't make sense

So the twist is that Frida has been on the island before and got her scar from hitting her head on a rock but I don’t get why Slater would run the risk of Frida remembering by letting her go back to the mainland. Also (unless I misunderstood), the drug that gets used to make Slater remember is in that bottle that was in Freida's room which seems a bit reckless. Also are we suppose to sympathise with Frida that she is the one in control over Slater who has seemingly had a personality change. She doesn't come across as a likeable person at the end and instead seems just as bad as Slater

Trigger Warning Not Needed

This was the first film that I have ever seen with a trigger warning. It uses the line “While this is a fictionalised movie, it contains mature themes and depictions of violence - including sexual violence”. Now I personally think this makes people think that the film is going to contain more than one scene of women being treated appalling. Truth is that the trigger warning isn’t necessary and should really be left to sitcoms and dramas from the 1960’s of 70’s not something made in 2024. There are some pro-feminist scenes which do feel a little bit forced and seem to have been put in there to show that this is a film about female empowerment. 

OVERALL

I am not surprised that my parents walked out because the film spends too long to get to the main point of the film but I still thought that it was a good film. It has some problems but its a good debut from Zoë Kravitz as director and has an interesting idea but with a more experience screenwriter or producer, the film would have tightened the film up and this would be a highly impressive film. Hopefully this leads to more films from Kravitz in the directors chair.

The Crow (2024)

The Crow is the 100th visit to the cinema since I started keeping track at the beginning of 2016 and the 29th film I have seen this year so a record breaking moment. This is a remake of the 1994 film of the same name which I watched for the first time a few days ago which was famous really for the death of its lead Brandon Lee. I suppose it was inevitable that they would try and give the film another chance. This time it’s Bill Skarsgård who plays Eric and FKA Twigs plays Shelley. The plot is that Eric and Shelley are killed by hired thugs (hired by Danny Huston’s Vincent) and he comes back from the dead to exact revenge on those responsible.

GOOD POINTS

CENTRAL PERFORMANCES

Skarsgård and FKA were quite good individually and worked well together. Danny Huston is really good at playing a villain. He doesn't seem to be trying too hard to come across as such a scumbag but he somehow manages it.

MOTIVATION OF THE CROW

The motivation of the crow is good because they spent a good amount of time making us care and because they work well together you understand why Eric wants to do what he does and why he trades his life for Shelley’s when he loses faith in Shelley

BLOOD AND GUTS

The film doesn’t look away from the blood and violence and one of the main things that this version of the film has over the 1994 version.. There is plenty of both with one shot of the crow pushing in his intestine. The action at the opera was by far the best part of the film because it is where Eric gets to show off his newly acquired skills and it does make all the disposable baddies look like idiots because they keep shooting at him and yet he comes back at them.

BAD POINTS VISUALLY ALL OVER THE PLACE

One of the main issues that I have with this film is that it doesn't seem to know what sort of film it wants to be. It takes little time for the Blade Runner vibe to come into this film. I say that because of how dark things are and also because of the rain. I don’t remember the last time I saw that much rain in a film. Yes it is atmospheric but I just think that it gets distracting after a while. The film never seems to go fully in on this and set it in the far future and have futuristic technology and graphics. They push the Blade Runner vibe enough for it to be noticed but not enough that it feels like what they intended.

MOTIVATION OF THE VILLAIN IS FUZZY

The main motivation for the villain is that FKA had a video on her phone that Vincent doesn’t want anyone to see because…..reasons. Unless I missed something then there is the bare minimum of plot motivation. I can only assume it's because he is an important figure and he doesn't want people to know the truth. The thing is that it's never really explained why he would be considered important and because no scene is created to explain why he should be feared apart from the fact he can manipulate people into killing themselves.

THE FINAL BATTLE DOESN'T HAVE THE WOW FACTOR

Normally the final battle should be epic and feel important but in this film it's over very quickly and its not really because of anything that Eric has done that defeats Vincent. It’s the creatures in the water that end up consuming him into the water and so Eric has managed to defeat Vincent but not really doing much. Eric does more damage in the Opera fight.

LACKS ANY SENSE OF IDENTITY

Despite my feeling that the 1994 version is overhyped, at least the film had an identity and it works to the film's benefit. The film seems to want to be a bit of Blade Runner, a bit of John Wick and it never seems to come together.

OVERALL

I wasn't expecting too much when I sat down at the cinema but I think that it's perhaps the most average film that I can recall seeing at the cinema and will probably go so far as to say that it is the worst film I have seen this year at the cinema. It’s not the worst film ever made but the worst I have seen this year and its probably worth waiting for it to come out on streaming in a couple of months.

Alien: Romulus (2024)

Alien Romulus is one of those films that seems to have attracted a mixed reaction which given how bad Covenant was is perhaps a win. The film is set 20 years after Alien with a line dropped that the company is still looking for Ripley. The Xenomorph from the first film that gets sucked out of the airlock ends up in a meteorite and they mine it for something to seemingly create a new breed of human. Meanwhile we meet Rain who along with her ‘brother’ Andy are trying to get off a planet with no daylight along with the Artful Dodger and his band of misfits who are trying to get stuff from a decommissioned space station but things quickly go wrong.

THE GOOD

The poster should tell you that the facehuggers are going to feature quite heavily and for the first part of the film they do in a way that they haven’t been before. They are an effective monster and keep the action going until the Xenomorphs appear. 

I also thought that Cailee Spaeny was really good as Rain. She was this film's Ripley and her character arc is similar to Ripley’s in the first alien film with her being a normal person just wanting to get off a planet cause it sucks and then becomes the hero. I last saw her in ‘Civil War’ and thought that this was definitely the better performance. I liked David Johansson who I last saw in ‘Rye Lane’ and I thought that he did a good job of playing two versions of Andy. He is perhaps the most likeable Android that the franchise has come up with although I don’t know if he’s as good as Lance Henrickson or Michael Fassbender.

The appearance of Ian Holm’s Ash was a surprise and after a bumpy few scenes the CGI worked and he became the menace of the story similar to in Alien which this film follows in chronological terms. I thought that he was just going to be in it for a brief moment or two but he was in it for at least 30 minutes. He is just as loathsome as he was in Alien. 

The scene where Kay gives birth is perhaps one of the most disgusting things I have seen for quite sometime if not ever. It’s done so well that I found myself looking away from the cinema screen. It wasn't on screen for an excessive amount of time but long enough to be uncomfortable.

They seem to have pulled off the Xenomorph hybrid that they messed up on in Alien Resurrection. With the advancement in special effects since 1997 it works much better. The film’s effects are very good. The space station’s interior is at times claustrophobic and  even though it seems vast from the outside it manages to feel quite small on the inside and Fede Alvarez manages to make us forget that the station is larger than we think it is.

I also thought that the film was the perfect running length. It's just short of two hours and I was never bored or felt like they were padding things out. It’s a rare thing in films nowadays that directors and producers seem unable to know when things should end and its builds things up perfectly and ends in the right way at the right time.

THE BAD

Bjorn was really annoying. In fact I don't think I have hate a character quite so much in a very long time. Not sure why every british character has to say f**k ever other line. Bjorn seems to say it to the point that it adds to the annoyance. Everytime he seemed to open his mouth it seemed to be angry at something that was quite over the top. When his death came I was relieved because I could enjoy the action.

The CGI Ian Holm belongs in the good section but the first few moments were quite rocky because it was a case of uncanny valley. Thankfully this quickly gave way to more reliable CGI. In the context of the series it might not make sense given that its been 45 years since Alien but in the timeline of the series, it works and it's always good to see and hear Ian Holm even though its been about 4 years since he passed away.

The nods to previous Alien films were plenty in Romulus but there was only one that didn’t work and it's when Andy says “Stay away from her….”. It was the only time that the references didn’t quite work. Everything else felt like fans of the series would get the references but it would make those unfamiliar with the references confused. 

Kay (Isabella Merced) does not have much to do for the first three quarters of the film because her importance doesn't show itself until for some reason she injects herself with the needle that has something that turns her baby into what was similar to the engineers in Prometheus. It’s a shame that she doesn't contribute anything until the very end because by that point it was late in the film and there wasn't enough time for me to be invested in her character.

OVERALL

I really enjoyed this film. It’s not as good as Alien or Aliens or even Alien 3. It definitely a huge step up from Covenant and definitely better than Prometheus so it's sort of in the middle in terms of quality. I don’t understand why people don’t seem to like this film. Yes it perhaps leans towards nostalgia a bit too much but I enjoyed this film and thought that it was the perfect running time. Fede Alvarez has done a good job of making an entertaining if slightly unoriginal Alien film. I do hope that we get more Alien films but perhaps lean less of recognisable references. We wouldn’t want this film to be turned into Jurassic World: Dominion.

Borderlands (2024)

Borderlands is a film that seems to be destined to make peoples worst top 10 and even a few top spots. I wasn't planning on seeing this at the cinema and instead waiting for it to arrive on streaming but because of the negative reviews it was getting I thought I would go and see if it was as bad as people were making out to be. For the record, I am not an expert on video games. I played the third one many years ago but I couldn't tell you anything about it in terms of how faithful it is to the games. 

This was the first film that I have ever seen that was directed by Eli Roth. He isn't a director known for making tasteful movies. I have no intention of seeing the Hostel films or Green Inferno so I am interested in seeing the one Eli Roth film that I would want to sit through. There was one red flag before I saw the film, the screenplay is written by Roth and Joe Crombie which is a pseudonym after original writer Craig Mazin asked for his name to be taken off the screenplay because of the changes that Roth had made who in interviews said he doesn't care if the characters in the film don't match the characters in the game.

Problems with the film don't just arise with the screenplay. The film was shot in 2022 with reshoots taking place in the summer of that year. Further reshoots were done in 2023 with Tim Miller taking charge. So to say that this film had a trouble production would be an understatement so the fact the film isn't a dumpster fire of a film is quite an achievement.

THE GOOD

Jack Black is funny in this. There is a fine line between love and hate when it comes to Jack Black and the humour that came from Jack Black worked quite well in the context of this film. I also thought that Ariana Greenblatt was fun as Tiny Tina. This character could easily have been annoying but I think it was played just right and she came across well. I thought that Kevin Hart was ok as well but his character didn't seem to have too much to do and I kept forgetting he was in the film when he was off screen. 

Visually it looked similar to the Borderland games. Like I said previously, my experience of Borderlands is minimal at best but from what I do remember about the visuals ring a bell and I quite liked the way this world looked. It could have gone down the route of mimicking Mad Max but they didn't do that and that showed restraint from a director that isn't known for restraint.

THE BAD

Jamie Lee Curtis looked like she didn't know what she was saying. She never seemed like she knew what was going on and so wasn't the big name lead that she was probably hired to be. Cate Blanchett is passable as Lillith but she seems somewhat miscast and I think that whilst she had moments like when she bonded with Tiny TIna, I couldn't help feel like this would have been done better by someone else. Also Edgar Ramirez is someone who I don't know why he keeps getting cast because I never find him believable and as the guy who put Lillith on her path it seems like he was lacking any menace or have something that would make me care about him getting his comeuppance. When he get dragged into the pit at the end of the film, I found myself not really caring because neither he or the film had done anything to make me feel something 

This one is a minor bad point but its that this film also owes a debt to Guardians of the Galaxy where it had a really good soundtrack but made me appreciate how natural in felt in those films whereas in this film it feels like Eli Roth just did it because it seemed fun to do.

OVERALL

So its easy to say that this film isn't terrible. The casting lets the film down but the visuals work quite well and I seem to like it a lot more than most people did. There is very little plot in the film but whereas the characters could do a lot to make the flaws in the narrative, it fails because with the exception of Hart, Black and Greenblatt, the casting was way off for what it should have been. Not sure this film would have been improved with a different director but any plans for a future film would appear to be non-existent.

Trap (2024)

This is remarkably the first M. Night Shyamalan film I have ever seen at the cinema. It’s also one that I have been intrigued with since I saw the first trailer. Set up of the film is the Cooper (Josh Hartnett takes his daughter Riley (Ariel Donoghue) to a Lady Raven concert (Lady Raven played by M. Night’s daughter Saleka) but the concert is actually a trap for Cooper who is revealed (in the trailer) to be a serial killer. It’s fair to say that M. Night Shyamalan has had an up and down career but I do honestly think that he has turned a corner since After Earth and hoped this would be another step in the right direction.

THE GOOD STUFF

All the stuff in the arena is quite good. There is a sense of claustrophobia in such a huge building and that's not an easy thing to pull off. The question is how is Cooper going to get out and that is what the film should have been about. Josh Hartnett is very good as Cooper showing both sides of his personality with the nice father fireman side and then the horrible person who traps people in his basement for no clear reason. Ariel Donoghue was also quite good as Riley although she is a bit too willing to ignore things when Cooper's behaviour gets more extreme.

The proper twist being that it was Rachel that tipped the police off and ultimately set the trap in the final act was quite good. Some people might not like this twist but given that it came in the final act then it worked quite well. 

THE BAD STUFF

Pretty much everything after they leave the arena. Trap proves that M. Night has great ideas but has no idea how to implement them into a good story. There are ridiculous moments after ridiculous moments.  Firstly the FBI are quite stupid in this film as the Dr (Hayley Mills) says at one point that they are using ‘Protocol 4’ and then proceeds to tell us what it is. I know this is to give the audience the information but in the reality of this film it wouldn’t be needed just in case the target is listening. 

The subplot with Riley and her ‘friend’ Jody and Jody’s mom and Cooper having their conversation in the foyer ultimately led to nothing and so I could have easily done without that. I know it was probably something to distract us but I think that the film could have afforded to lose it.

So there is a moment where a crowd is surrounding a limo where Cooper is dressed as a SWAT cop and Lady Raven escapes and somehow Copper manages to take his SWAT clothes off, changes into something else and escapes the limo without anyone seeing him or pointing out that the guy is running away. The last moment of the film sees Cooper break free from his cuffs as he is being taken away which raises questions such as how is he going to escape when he will presumably be under armed guard when the door opens. A mate of mine says that this might be part of the same universe as Split and Glass and so this makes sense otherwise is a stupid way to end the film.

OVERALL

This was a disappointing film. The trailer makes it look like we were going to get something in one setting which are the kind of stories I like and even moving it away from the area wasn't a bad thing but it got so stupid towards the end that I was kind of annoyed at Shyamalan. Trap isn’t at the same level of terrible as After Earth but its a disappointment and another reason why I should watch trailers.