The Electric State (2025)

Some people will roll their eyes when people comment about the budget but its so big it cant be ignored. The question is WHERE DID THE MONEY GO?. I always think back to Gareth Edwards’ The Creator which cost $80 million and looks like it cost double that. It’s not how much money you have but where you spend it that shows how good a filmmaker you are.I will give the film credit that the special effects look quite good but thats it as far as positive things for the film.

Millie Bobby Brown and Chris Pratt have no chemistry and its shocking how poorly they are together on screen. They might be contenders for worst double act at the Razzie’s next year. Brown is also not a convincing lead and is quite forgettable. Pratt also looks like he is phoning it in by playing the Chris Pratt that he always plays but without any of the charm that he usually plays. Where did that go? This is the second film within two weeks that I have seen that has wasted Giancarlo Esposito (Captain America being the other one). It also wastes Ke Huy Quan & Stanley Tucci which should automatically get this film a negative score.

So the idea of whether the robots are real people is a tired cliche and one that the film runs into the ground and the rest of the screenplay is dull and feels like it was written by AI. The directing is lifeless and shows that the Russo’s best work was in the MCU which is where they should go although they will have to work with a much smaller budget then. This has to go down as one of the worst films of the year and someone needs to have a word with Netflix because you could have used this $320 million and made 32 $10 million films and they would have potentially been some gems that came out of it.

Mickey 17 (2025)

Mickey 17 is the first film from Bong Joon Ho since the amazing Parasite and is based on the novel Mickey 7. The story sees Mickey Barnes who joins a program that will clone him to do the grunt work and when he dies there will be another one but when he survives and the company think that he has died they create a new one and there is a rule about duplicates and the film then becomes a battle between the two Mickeys and the company.

I went into this film not thinking that this film would be as good as Parasite. Parasite is a perfect film and this at best was going to be a close second. There are things to like about this film including Robert Pattinson. Pattinson is very likeable in this film and it's hard to believe how far he has come since the Twilight days. Here he has to play two different versions of himself and make them work. The horrible version of him is likeable enough so that when he ends up dying it does feel like a sad moment. His nicer version is the one that we want to see make it to the end and get the life he deserves. There is a nice aspect of the plot that his life is a result of a bad decision when he pressed a red button that led to his mother’s death. Naomi Ackie is also very good in this as the only person that seems to care about Mickey. Last time I saw Ackie was in Blink Twice which she was good in and here she continues to show what a good actress she is. 

The film isn't perfect as they do waste Steve Yeun who pops up every so often and does contribute to the story but I would have liked to see more of him. The biggest problem with the film is Mark Ruffalo. I can remember how impressed I was with his performance in Poor Things and yet it seems like he has gone backwards with this. It’s undeniable that he is doing what I think he thinks is a Trump performance and it's just boring now when people do a parody of Trump, even if he hadn't won the election in 2024, it would have been an eye rolling performance. There was potential to make him a decent villain but either the director or Ruffalo himself thought this was ok. Even Toni Collette is a bit of a let down as she is just there to be the one that is pushing Marshall to do certain things but she is never presented as being the main villain but she gets overshadowed by Ruffalo’s performance.

Despite these few issues, the film is as good as I hoped it would be. There are things that are very Bong Joon ho and these add to the quality of the film. The effects of the creepers is very good and the fact that they are portrayed as not being terrorising monsters works very well. The film has hints of Starship Troopers and Moon which are good films to include in this film and overall the film works because of the central performances from Pattinson and Ackie. I think the way that the film is pitched might put some people off but I think that it deserves people’s time as it's a fun two hour film and shows that Bong Joon ho is a very good director.

Captain America: Brave New World (2025)

When it was announced that Marvel were effectively hitting the reset button with the Fantastic Four it meant that two films were already pointless. The other film is Thunderbolts but Captain America 4 is the big casualty. Coming six years after Steve Rogers handed over the shield and four years after Winter Soldier and the Falcon TV show which I admit that I haven't seen, this film shows Sam Wilson walk from one scene to another saying things while grumpy pensioner Harrison Ford who is now President (playing the role previously held by William Hurt) from going Red.

GOOD POINT 01 - ESPOSITO & FORD SAVE THE FILM

There are very few standout performances in this film but the only ones that stayed in the memory are Giancarlo Esposito and Harrison Ford. Esposito is wasted in this film but he still gives it his all and if I were involved in production I would have told Esposito to do the role he did in Breaking Bad because that would have made him much more valuable to the plot. Ford might be getting grumpier by the day (something thats probably been happening since 1982) but it was good seeing Ford get that sweet sweet Marvel paycheck.

GOOD POINT 02 - NICE CONNECTION TO ETERNALS

Nice is probably stretching it but I thought it was unexpected that they referenced Eternals which came out 4 years ago and to the best of my knowledge has not been referenced since. So it is a bit random that they did this now but at least it was on screen for more than a split second and was the backdrop behind one of the best scenes in the entire movie.

GOOD POINT 03 - NEVER BORED

Whilst it's not the greatest film ever made, I was never bored at any point during the film. It was just under two hours long and the film never felt like there was any padding. Admittedly it wasn't very good but it still managed to maintain my attention for the entirety of the movie.

BAD POINT 01 - ACTION SCENES HAVE NO ENERGY - I DIDNT CARE

It didnt take very long for me to come to the conclusion that the action sequences were going to be disappointing. The very first one in fact helped me draw to this conclusion. The ultimate problem is that while things are happening, nothing is really happening and there doesn't seem to be any energy to what we are seeing. Action sequences should be entertaining and at best the strongest one in this film were passable. 

BAD POINT 02 - SAM WILSON IS CAPTAIN BLAND

It’s alluded to in the trailer but missing from the end film but there is a line about Sam Wilson not being Steve Rogers and this normally wouldn't be a thing but Wilson is very dull and whilst Rogers was never the most charismatic person in the world, he did have a charm and this is missing from Wilson. Whether this is Anthony Mackie’s fault or the writing, I never felt like he could be a leader and would have made a substandard deputy. Wilson seems so wrapped up in clearing some old person’s name that he never shows us why he would make a good avenger.

BAD POINT 03 - VILLAINS MOTIVATION IS RUBBISH

So Giancarlo Esposito’s Sidewinder would have made a good villain but he’s the secondary villain for some. The film decided that Samuel Sterns is the villain to show people the reason President because he’s a bit grumpy. Not only is Sterns a terrible villain but his motivation is mediocre at best. I just didn't care. I think I miss the days when the villain would want global domination instead of getting a tiny bit of revenge. Marvel has always had this problem and it shows no sign of being sorted out.

OVERALL

My expectations were low for this film and they were met. The film isn't terrible but it felt like a film that cost a lot of money but never felt like it had been spent on any important areas. The performances are ok at best and pointless at once and the directing is fine but never felt like it has any vision behind it or anything that would ever make me want to watch this again and I think even the Marvel shills will not be rushing to recommend this anytime soon. Hopefully this is the last time that Sam Wilson leads a film because I dont think Disney/Marvel can afford many more films like this especially the way their films have been received at the box office since Endgame.

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 kiler 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.