imaxxing Reviews

Challengers (2024)

Love triangle drama without a proper ending

[7/10 · 1 May 2024]

This was relatively unchallenging. Higher-order thinking and meaning was somewhat lacking in this film. Director Luca Guadagnino offers a love triangle tennis drama where the leading lady, Tashi Donaldson (Zendaya) seems to personify the ugly side of sports, ego, and competition. There's sexual tension, competitive tension and the riveting heat of the moment; but no real pay-off to be found in the end. So, is all fair in love and tennis?

The film seemed to draw in teenage girls in their droves, and I can see why; it's pretty downstream of Emerald Fennell's recent Saltburn phenomenon. The film certainly encapsulates the darker visceral truths about sexual selection and the eroticism surrounding status and the sinister social ills that can fester because of it. It's perhaps ultimately an examination of the male and female gazes, through the lense of competitive sport; an arena of physicality and prowess that has held sway over women's hindbrains since forever - and driven men to vigorously compete for it. In tennis, "love" means zero - and maybe that's quite telling.

Excellent performances from the main trio keep the film gripping, but the story lets the side down as a befuddled timeline runs amok to repetitive discotheque bursts of a synth drum machine. The film rides the coattails of softcore explicit scenes, which it uses to some excess. As a hot and heavy examination of human nature and sexuality, this is a reasonable portrayal. As a fully-fledged film with a satisfying pay-off? It misses. The characters and their status went without enough contextualisation. The main trio of characters rarely interacted with characters outside of themselves, which negatively affected the world-building going on. Despite numerous flashback scenes for character development - there was a shortage of real definition and sense of place.

Abigail (2024)

An uninspired take on the vampire subgenre

[5/10 · 25 April 2024]

Abigail is vampiric only in the sense of bleeding dry any semblance of intelligent and creative filmmaking. From a technical and production standpoint it holds up more than nicely; but from a plot perspective it's a nonstarter. This was touted as a "Dracula's Daughter" reboot with a comedy twist; but is far-off the mystery and allure of classic gothic literature that first bore the name "Dracula" - and the purported humour is lukewarm at best.

Inconsistencies, plotholes, plot armour, and half-baked writing all undermine this uninspired film. Dan Stevens as Acteur and Giancarlo Esposito as Lambert were strong points. Actress Alisha Weir at thirteen (now fourteen) years old - delivered an admirable performance with the script she had, but her talents were wasted on this lackluster story. Good horror works on the psychological; it works its way around everything, using physical horror as only one tool in its broad repertoire. This film is quite the opposite, it's physical horror without almost any tantalising or guesswork left to the imagination. Because of that it's more of an action film masquerading as a horror film.

The characters as a whole are of the stock variety, as if hurriedly thrown together. Their screenplay reads in exactly the same manner. Splitting up to their detriment and acting like bozos; usually minus the part where that's supposed to translate as funny.

This is closer to "Abysmal" than "Abigail".

Fallout (2024– )

Should have stayed in the vault?

[6/10 · 17 April 2024]

This latest in a recent trend of videogame adaptations is lacking the edge and wit of the Fallout titles.

Bethesda's famous IP could work on the small screen; but the "how" is something I feel is still, as of yet, unanswered. Porting a videogame to a TV show takes work because those are two very different mediums with different aims. Splitting the story between three characters isn't necessarily a bad idea (GoT did brilliantly on multiple subplots) but it can be hard to properly pull off. The sprightly Ella Purnell as the vault-dweller female protagonist Lucy MacLean has a face that fits the brand and a geniality and greenness to match, but is just missing something.

The through-line and recycled "brand" is shaky, and I feel the show is unsure of its desired identity (at the moment). Original Fallout is hilariously unhinged, comical, with dark humour that simply flows between scenarios - across the different factions it challenges notions of conventional ethics and philosophies too, so there's always food for thought. But the challenge for the writers here is to find a story that can work cohesively on TV that feels like Fallout but takes it in the new direction of a plot-driven live action production.

The dialogue in the games is outstanding and engaging, but here it's merely okay. Every word should entertain, develop, or expand. But I can't say that here it really does. We get a lot of camera panning into facial expressions and filler speech; but not enough meat and potatoes.

The story lacks suitable structure. It feels too "sandbox" without enough linearity and purposeful direction. Where's the show going? What does the viewer have to look forward to? Where are the cliffhangers? On many occasions the show is absorbed in the scene of the moment and forgets about introducing the next chapter, the fluidity is missing. Where are the characters' driving motivations? Are the characters investable... or just expendable? The producers perhaps assume that the strength of the Fallout brand can compensate for mediocre writing. It doesn't.

Shōgun (2024–2026)

An outstanding historical epic

[9/10 · 2 April 2024]

"Shogun" has clawed back some pride in television series production, presenting a truly compelling and intricate historical period-epic offering that has clearly done its homework in getting the accuracy and details spot-on. Shogun sports astonishingly good colour grading, mesmerising performances, and excellent costuming throughout.

Depicting the feudal period of the saber-rattling Japans, political crossfire abounds as the far-flung Christian world meets the isolationist honour-bound Japanese, the culture shock depicted onscreen is oftentimes revelatory, sometimes funny, and occasionally chilling. It is a title that evokes an age when Japan was separated from the rest of the world, not just by the roiling East Asian seas, but by religion, economics, and, most importantly, culture.

This is a clinical, mature, and sober outing from Disney, and most certainly a world-class effort in exploring the rich world of feudal Japan through period dramatisation. Retaining dialogue in Japanese with subtitles and casting Japanese actors are hallmarks of its faithfulness to representing an authentic setting. This thrillingly realises James Clavell's bestselling book for the screen.

There have been justified complaints about Shogun not featuring the lingua franca of that era (Portuguese) with English being oddly referred to as "Portuguese". At that time, Portuguese was used for communications between Europeans and Japanese (the Portuguese were the first to arrive in 1543). However, a fully accurate portrayal of the story would be entirely in Portuguese and Japanese, and all of Shogun would have to include subtitles. I think they were mistaken to not have some characters speaking subtitled Portuguese, but clearly made the decision on grounds of accessibility for English speakers. I don't feel it undermines the story enough to be a major issue.

8.5/10.

Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire (2024)

A Hollow Earth For A Hollow Film

[4/10 · 2 April 2024]

Godzilla x Kong is undeniably vacuous and as hollow as the imaginary world it portrays. It's essentially a very forgettable monster mashup that aims for the heights of the epic and terrifying; but instead serves an OTT nonstop chest-beating slugfest, smothered in tawdry CGI. It's overpowered monster WWE seemingly presented as something the filmmakers *believe* or estimate an audience will like; as if it were the product of a soulless spreadsheet.

These tired titans of bygone cinema have been pulled back into the limelight as the viewer suffers a nowhere-plot aimed at the lowest common denominator. The Kaiju terror is here, but in a very watered-down state.

No dialogue because it's just senseless roaring beasts? Don't need to pay anyone to write a good script. Excessive closeups of the beasts all the time? Well that handily means they didn't need to animate higher-budget complex scenes from a more interesting POV. Sensory overload to distract the viewer from the complete lack of actual substance? Check. The corner-cutting is so apparent the more you look; the buck is passed onto the consumers who continue to accept this poor standard of filmmaking time and time again.

4/10.

Wicked Little Letters (2023)

The trailer overpromised massively

[4/10 · 13 March 2024]

Wicked Little Letters' trailer was really enticing, but unfortunately it was an overpromising highlight reel of the few funny snapshots stowed away from the film's full 1 hour 40 minute runtime. What we're presented with is a lot of underdeveloped filler, not to mention revisionist history spoiling it.

The essence of the film (loosely based on a true story) is that a series of offensive letters are posted, and, owing to the period in 1920s Sussex, the dastardly poison-pen cannot easily be traced - leading to an ensuing investigation. The farcical insults themselves were banal and short of wit or creativity. Yes, people of that time would probably be shocked or rattled by any such combination of words, given all the god-fearing and preoccupation with social decorum going on. All the on-screen gawping attests to that being acknowledged. In the 21st century, however, scattered strings of unfunny swear words aren't outrageous zingers, they're just tepidly cliché.

The film is hardly faithful to its historical setting either (assuming that's even what it wanted to do), which is perhaps its biggest blunder. Policewoman Gladys Moss was not Indian, yet was cast as such. A black judge would have been virtually impossible, yet one was cast. Among several other people of colour being selected for roles. I wouldn't depict the Zulus with a caucasian man or asian man leading the vanguard, yet here we suffer historical revisionism trashing a promising setting. Every white male was depicted as a flawed buffoon. Women and people of colour were given a far more favourable image. The result is dull, spiritless imbalance.

4/10.

Dune: Part Two (2024)

People have a fight on a sandy planet somewhere, part two

[1/10 · 2 March 2024]

After several years, here it is. It's better than the first film and carries on Villeneuve's undeniable knack for phenomenal visuals and sound design, but the substance of the story itself was about as boring as you'd imagine a featureless desert planet to be. Not to mention it's weirdly orientalist.

Many scenes have abstract and overbaked cinematography that borders on downright self-indulgence. Despite a few epic highlights and eye-catching shots, the story itself boils down to several fights and explosions that amount to an upmarket Michael Bay flick. Premonitions of divinity and tedious ceremonial rites hog swathes of the runtime as we're ushered into forced reverence of an unremarkable Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet). It feels like an intentional plot-building film, an interlude-steppingstone, which is not a good thing because it's relying on your interest in a future film (Messiah), not this one.

Unlike Sci-Fi greats, George Lucas's Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back comes to mind, this film nearly entirely lacks a complex ensemble of vibrant and interesting characters with engaging interplay, repartees, and intelligent dialogue. Lucas took some inspiration from Frank Herbert and (most importantly) formatted the genre for the big screen; making a watchable, likeable and memorable Sci-Fi epic that is now beloved by millions, with a lore that has incredibly rare profundity; even spawning a religion (Jediism). Dune's lore *is* interesting too, it's just poorly represented here.

This film is humourless and flat. The characters had very few interesting things to say. Entertainment was thrown out in exchange for drearily over-serious solemnity. When many costumes are point-blank laughable, I cannot take the film unironically seriously. Various themes are often too obviously borrowed from elsewhere; Harkonnens from the Soviets (the Baron is called "Vladimir"), or the Fremen from Muslim North Africans resisting a colonial force. Earthling motifs take you back to Earth, not to Arrakis.

7.2/10.

Bob Marley: One Love (2024)

Overly Reverential And Lacking Complexity

[7/10 · 1 March 2024]

In the latest biopic of the biopic trend, this is neither a balanced nor independent biopic. Biopics don't get more authorised, sanitised or anaesthetised than this. As something approved by Marley's family, partial controllers of his estate; these are people with a vested interested in his posthumous good reputation and therefore you simply cannot expect to see the famous reggae icon here in a 100% honest light. Bob's extramarital indiscretions and paternities are barely acknowledged. Though offensive to the Western world, with many reviewers putting forth an outcry of righteous indignation, polygamous behaviour is natural and acceptable for certain cultures. Most Jamaican men, married or single, tend to have multiple women at the same time in a de facto polygamous culture.

Blemishes and gripes aside, this shouldn't take away from enjoying this film on its own merits. Great visuals, authentic Jamaican patois galore - rather than generic English accents - and generally first-rate acting from a relatively strong cast. Standout performances include Lashana Lynch as Rita Marley, the estimable Kingsley Ben-Adir as a Messiah-like Bob Marley simulacrum, whose voice is layered with Marley's own in many singing scenes. Huge crowds of extras feel alive and brimming with all the reverence and enthusiasm for Marley's time in the limelight of stardom.

The filmmakers ought to have utilised Marley's music in a more allegorical and activist sense. Taking Bob's music out of the four walls of the recording studio and into the world of action and change, as backing tracks for peaceful action; just as Marley intended for his music. Instead, we see a lot of routine band rehearsals which don't offer much variety, perspective, or meaningful comment.

The story also lacks conflict, rising action, and pressure groups. Preferring instead to present itself as a rolling slideshow of Bob's music. Besides Bob's cancer, the 1976 assassination attempt, and a few heated arguments, there isn't a lot to keep you on the edge of your seat during the intervening time. This is, by all accounts, a cursory and omission-heavy version of Bob Marley's life. Several brilliant one-liners do surface, such as when Marley is being told to not tour in Africa due to a lack of infrastructure for concerts, he simply suggests 'building it'. Or when Rita Marley asks how long he'd taken to write Redemption song, he awe-inspiringly replies, 'all my life'.

Marley's religious identity as a Rastafari, his support for Pan-Africanism, his devotion to peacemaking, and his demand for marijuana being legalised made him a standout icon of contemporary culture. But this film treats these very central themes rather cursorily.

His return to Jamaica in 1978 and performance at the political concert, the One Love Peace Concert was left to a mere credits mention. Near the end of that performance, Michael Manley and his political rival Edward Seaga joined each other on stage and shook hands at Marley's request, yet another symbol of unity left out of the main plot.

Opportunities were missed, but this is still an interesting snapshot into Marley's persona and outlook, despite its obvious limitations.

6.8/10.

The Iron Claw (2023)

Strong First Half, Poor Second Half

[7/10 · 18 February 2024]

The Iron Claw was a top-notch film production in its first half, sporting the right pace, the right intensity, the right dialogue, the right sound design, and the right editing. The physical prowess on display is downright impressive. The acting was excellent throughout, Zac Efron put on one of the best performances of his career as Kevin Von Erich and should deservedly be given more major parts in future. Jeremy Allen White delivered a brooding and intense Kerry Von Erich. However, the rest of the film devolved into inconsistency after the halfway point. The second half felt almost like watching a different film; the good pacing evaporated and the film struggled to concisely and satisfyingly finish the engaging story it had started. The devilish bombast of that era was also inconsistently applied.

The film follows the dysfunctional Von Erich family falling apart in pursuit of wrestling greatness where most of the critical pressure piled onto the Von Erich brothers was bizarrely left off-camera and left to the abstract. The audience instead just sees a tragic procession of consequences; but isn't given the context to make emotional sense of these outcomes when they arrive. Holt McCallany plays a sublimely complex Fritz Von Erich as owner of the electrifying Dallas Sportatorium, but his underpowered part as the family's obsessed ringleader-patriarch lacks the dramatic force it really needs.

All in all, the Von Erich family are so blinded by glory that they attribute to superstition what should only be attributed to themselves. It's a cautionary tale about living in moderation, a commentary on masculinity in Western culture, and a way to share the story of this famous wrestling family. Maybe the real "Iron Claw" was Fritz' own suffocating relentlessness (a metaphor I'm sure they were going for).

7.3/10.

Once Upon a Time in the West (1968)

A Mythical And Definitive Western

[8/10 · 11 February 2024]

Sergio Leone's "Once Upon A Time In The West" serves remarkably elegiac and ahead-of-its-time filmmaking for 1968 with a Morricone score to boot. Leone captures the harshness and drudgery of the scabrous, hardy and calloused gunslingers and desperados of the Wild, soon to be tamed, West during the 1880s; with a signature use of low shots with drawn-out and melodramatically extreme close-ups; but with a slight dearth of dialogue. His work here encapsulates the spirit and theme of several different grand westerns rolled into one, as if a hazy fairytale backed by that now famous crooning harmonica. Ingenious elements like this are an apotheosis of the genre and an operatically parodying pastiche of that fabled and legendary stretch of American history.

It's no question that these depicted men are surely accustomed to action over words; but the apparent selective mutism leaves a little too much to the viewer's imagination and too little to their charming, stirring, and regaling; as wincing and piercing blue eyes locked in staredowns are often the preferred language, buttressed more by a slew of slow pacing, spitting, smoking, wry smiles, and the flexing of crow's feet. This laconic language of the cutthroat survivalist's Wild West is Leone's preferred, and carries over from the Clint Eastwood 'Dollars' films, with it being a project initially offered to Eastwood - but turned down, with the part of No-Name 'Harmonica' going to the steely Charles Bronson instead.

The film has an intermission so should be seen as two parts. Its 3-hour runtime, if seen in one sitting, is lengthy, but perhaps needed for Leone's ambitiously complex story involving killers, land rights, railroads, long-delayed revenge, mistaken identity, love triangles, double-crosses and shoot-outs. The allegory of the laying of the railroad signals the transition from a wild frontier to an organised civilisation. With Henry Fonda's character Frank acknowledging his partnership with a crippled railroad tycoon is also an abandonment of his outlaw lifestyle and an admission that his times are over.

Jill McBain (Claudia Cardinale) as the leading lady is caught in the narrative's crossfire but captures the hearts of all sides, epitomising the woman-as-survivor part women undertook. She's an almost mythical feminine force, grounding the loose cannons around her. Perhaps it's evidence that Leone was giving thought to the roles and sufferings of women in the grandiose, death-and-glory landscape of the American west.

In 2009, the film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant". The film is regarded as one of the greatest Westerns of all time and one of the greatest films of all time.

7.7/10.

Argylle (2024)

Henry Cavill? Nowhere To Be Seen

[2/10 · 8 February 2024]

Argylle is once again a film that rests its value and dignity as a cinematic production on the back of parading a literal fluffy cat to drive positive ratings and views; just look at the film's posters! Cinema-goers are in a feline frenzy, apparently. The square-haircut donning albeit dapper Henry Cavill was effectively nowhere to be seen; he was literally (and quite laughably) a figment of imagination in this film, a spectre of perhaps a better film haunting this one, Cavill is reduced to a window licker, an outsider looking in with the audience frustratingly powerless to give him a more prominent part. I, and I'm sure many others, went into this expecting Cavill to play the main character; this is not the case at all despite a trailer giving every impression it would be Cavill playing a debonair Argylle-patterned spy.

The film's premise isn't all that bad, it's about a female author, Elly Conway, of the "Argylle" books, who has a special connection to her literary works that's revealed in a later plot twist. That twist is based on audience expectations of who and what a "spy" should actually look like in reality. A suavely suited Henry Cavill? Well, maybe, although not necessarily. The meta-narrative concept that unfolds from there is scattered, jarring, and unfocused.

The cast is absolutely stacked. Bryce Dallas Howard, Sam Rockwell, Bryan Cranston, Catherine O'Hara, Henry Cavill, Sofia Boutella, Dua Lipa, Ariana DeBose, John Cena, and Samuel L. Jackson. But it really felt as if this was an amateur film and these talents were wasted in the absence of a strong through-line.

2/10.

Top Gun: Maverick (2022)

A soar... and a dive

[7/10 · 21 January 2024]

Top Gun: Maverick is certainly excellently shot and cinematically impressive, and no doubt one of the current leading examples of spectacular military aviation in modern film. However, the plot itself is the equivalent of a himbo-fest with (generally) shallow characters glossed in a sheen of eighties rock cuts. The ace lineup of the "top gun" (top 1%) of fighter jet pilot graduates are expectantly wry, hubristic, and engrossingly overconfident. The film seemingly attempts to bridge the jingoistic 1986 with 2022; creating warm-blooded eighties sensibilities crossed with cutting-edge 21st century accoutrements.

It's a popcorn flick through and through - and Maverick (Tom Cruise) puts it best; "don't think, just act" (or better put; don't think, just watch)! Let this polished Top Gun sequel-homage exercise its brazen bravado, and you might have a blast. Don't let it fly over your head!

7.4/10.

Spartacus (1960)

An Allegory on Life, Freedom, & Humanity

[8/10 · 13 January 2024]

Spartacus is a sprawling historical epic conveying important lessons on freedom, morality and humanity's aspiration to a higher order. A story told literately by Kubrick through the classical Roman period setting, exposing its storied and insatiable use of slave labour. Here, the Romans are at an existential crossroads between Republic and Empire, and Roman future is cast in the shadow of slavery. It is an important flashpoint in human history.

The laconic Spartacus (Kirk Douglas), like a maverick Dickensian spectre, gives Laurence Olivier's dictatorial Crassus (aka "the richest man in Rome") a lesson on humanity and the irrepressible drive for individual freedoms that comes not just from Spartacus, but from the groundswell of anyone subjected to repression. The materialistic and power-hungry Crassus, try as he may, could not simply kill Spartacus and see the slave revolt die with him; rather, the slave revolt was (and is) a state of mind; a state of human spirit that transcends Spartacus. Summarised as Spartacus numerously declares; "I am not an animal," setting himself spiritedly apart from the banal machinations of tyranny.

The film's long runtime allows a gradual tale of emancipation, feeling figuratively as long as the history of slavery itself. Or perhaps the long history before mankind reached its latter freedom of the mind in the Enlightenment. First, humanity needed to break free of the shackles of physical slavery and subjugation. Spartacus was a major figure in this process; honoured here in motion picture form.

7.9/10.

Next Goal Wins (2023)

A Wholesome Feelgood Movie

[8/10 · 3 January 2024]

Taika Waititi has created a post-Lasso football comedy feel-good story that explores Samoan culture based around a true story. Does it feel derivative of Ted Lasso? Sure. Does that necessarily matter? Not really. It takes the blueprint and does good on it. Waititi has jumped at the opportunity to comedically share Samoan culture through this theme, being of part Polynesian descent himself.

The story follows a riled up and downtrodden football coach, Thomas Rongen (Fassbender) who ends up in American Samoa to manage their national football team; in need of an overhaul in time for the world cup qualifiers. Once there, he embarks unwittingly on a journey of self-discovery. Nods are made to key aspects of Samoan culture and economics, such as tuna exports, acceptance of transgenderism, its intense religiosity, and the omnipresence of U. S. military enlistment for Samoans looking to make a livelihood. Football is seen as a sort of respite for a politically disenfranchised and isolated community of islanders. Waititi shows the warmth and soulfulness of the Samoan people alongside the timeless suspense and entertainment of football. There's a lot to love here, even if character development of the team itself was lacking, with the exception of transgender character Jaiyah (Kaimana), and arguably Nicky Salapu (Uli Latukefu).

7.5/10.

Die Hard (1988)

A Quintessential Action Flick

[8/10 · 25 December 2023]

"Die Hard" is perhaps the quintessential action film for the Christmas season. Where most Christmas films had opted for the predictably warm and fuzzy, and still often do; director John McTiernan had introduced a landmark infusion of action to the monotone Christmas genre, whilst still managing to keep the Christmas spirit well intact, in its own way. It's become a household classic ever since and conveys the importance of fighting against all odds, even when others doubt you. And that situations are felt most clearly by those with their feet firmly planted on the ground; John McClane's barefooted ordeals reflect this message. It's a celebration of the streetwise and the grounded underdog.

Bruce Willis's breakout role as the irreverent and muscled NYPD copper John McClane was eminently career-defining, and quite possibly one of the most strikingly masculine chainsmoking protagonists of film history. A triangle of witty repartees between McClane, Sgt. Al Powell (Reginald VelJohnson), and Alan Rickman's flamboyant classically-educated West German villain, Hans Gruber, creates both tension and levity at the film's close-quarters setting, Nakatomi Plaza; as a high-octane game of cat-and-mouse unfolds. You'll also be graced by one of the most iconic one-liner catchphrases; "Yippee-ki-yay..." part of cinema lore's lexicon, and for which no caption is needed for further explanation. However a reviewer at the time of release had backhandedly suggested it as a "nearly perfect movie for our time", yet designed to appeal to audiences they'd described as "kidults"-adults with the mindset of children. Nonetheless, McTiernan masterfully combines brains, heart, and brawn in thrillingly explosive action sequences and soulful character development whilst not granting any character the privileges of infallibility or invulnerability. The film combines three subplots to form the overall plot meaning there's plenty going on at any one time and a lot of reasons to stay invested in this film for its full runtime, and to prompt repeat viewings. Deemed "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" by the United States Library of Congress, Die Hard was selected for preservation in the National Film Registry in 2017. An all-round blast.

8.1/10.

Doctor Who: The Giggle (2023) Season Unknown, Episode Unknown

Bi-generation, Tri-generation, Quadri-generation?

[6/10 · 11 December 2023]

"The Giggle" is a 60th anniversary jolt of déjà vu. The 1960s era antagonist "The Toymaker" returns, and the Doctor supposedly (and mindbogglingly) "bi-generates", a bit like Janus; the god of transitions and dualities, who is portrayed with two faces-one facing the past, and one facing the future. The face of the Doctor's future is Ncuti, who is introduced towards the end of the episode. Tennant's Doctor is given closure, yet I can't help but feel Tennant's story with Donna should've been left unapologetically as-is; as a poignant and bittersweet tragedy. This is bending over backwards to change that, despite the appreciable glory lap for David Tennant.

The villainous Toymaker is somewhat transfixing and beguiling. But the overdone German accent quickly becomes grating. Aimed more at children? Most likely. But nonetheless, very cheesy. Many "chaos" scenes are the Toymaker boringly flinging around cliché "scary" toys (mannequins, dolls and the like) in a thoroughly clichéd manner. The repetitive giggle.mp3 did not instill any fear whatsoever, and a ventriloquist dummy called Stooky Bill was also underwhelming. Sadly, this version of Dr. Who doesn't cater enough to older Whovians and Sci-Fi aficionados, who are left behind in the midst of all the fun-loving cheesiness.

All in all, bringing back the most popular actor to ever play the part before handing over to a brand new Doctor, played by a rapidly rising talent, is a smart move to get Dr. Who back in the public eye. The Spice Girls segment was also a calculated move to get the episode making the rounds on social media. Gatwa's tenure now begins. Yet, a bi-generated, Doctor-in-emeritus Tennant remains in the backdrop, might he return at a later time? Can the BBC just keep really profitable Doctors on the side for emergencies? Is a tri-generation on the cards?

Wonka (2023)

Wonka, or Plonker?

[7/10 · 9 December 2023]

Paul King, the director behind the enchanting Paddington films entered the fold to direct a prequel to Gene Wilder's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Unfortunately, this outing is overproduced and overdone. And just like chocolate; some things are best had in moderation. Roald Dahl's work in recent times has regrettably been tampered with to remove language related to race, gender, weight, and mental health that today's readers might deem offensive. This film feels like a continuation of that craven desire to be inoffensive. The result is a slightly safe and garden variety end-product which isn't much of a tribute to Dahl, if it even wanted to be.

For me, all things Willy Wonka should be almost like an experiential hallucination; self-contained, a bit mysterious, and open to interpretation, without the need for any elaborate backstory spelling things out. Wonka should be an experience, not a storyboard. He ought be unpredictable, a one-off. In the book he is innovative, flamboyant, stubborn, arrogant, and authoritarian. We saw the innovative and the flamboyant, but none of the rest. Or how those latter qualities might have taken, or were taking, shape. Timothee Chalamet's portrayal, for all its innocent charms and trinkets, simply did not have the comedic and deliciously unpredictable edge of either Wilder or Depp's Wonkas; the dimensionality just wasn't there. That "edge" would have bounced off the sassiness of the stubborn Oompa Loompa perfectly, helping the audience to see how Wonka wins them over (besides just a paltry supposed bribe of chocolate tasting). Here, it's Hugh Grant outsmarting, outshining, and outwitting a bumbling wide-smiling, bright-eyed and bushy-tailed Wonka in most of the scenes they share. The musical genre of this film wasn't a bad call, given the iconic hit of Wilder's "Pure Imagination," why not try out a musical style? The original songs here could have a little more oomph, though, lyrically and musically. The trio of main villains were excellently cast, with Matt Lucas, Paterson Joseph (stealing the show), and Mathew Baynton. All three were a treat to see on-screen.

Overall this film is relatively unchallenging for children compared to Wilder's 1971 work under the original source material, or Tim Burton's satirical 2005 outing. Imagining Willy Wonka as sweet, cloying and one-toned as he's shown here with Chalamet doesn't quite hit the sweet spot.

6.8/10.

Saltburn (2023)

Slowburn: Murder on the Dancefloor

[7/10 · 3 December 2023]

Saltburn is a crazed caricature. Absurdist to the nth degree. It's punctuated with the allure of witty, pithy dialogue and outrageous characters, but the plot doesn't pull its weight through to any real finality. The shock-value is cranked up to the maximum, an overplayed hand; with only anticlimax to show for it. The payoff only lands softly as the film slowly meanders to Sophie Ellis-Bextor's iconic early 2000s "Murder on the Dancefloor" backed credits. Saltburn is a publicity stunt, it desperately wants to rile and provoke, to be talked about by urgently grabbing the viewer's attention by means of shock-value, and secondly allowing the director's more subtle commentary on class to be discovered after the fact. In its open-endedness, it struggles to justify the point of its own existence in the midst of its attention-seeking rhetoric. It tries so hard to be idiosyncratic that it at times becomes somewhat overexposed, and errs to state the obvious.

The film's director, Emerald Fennell, hails from the same upper classes she targets. We are offered her insider's take; her ace in the hole that populates the script with hilariously classist opines, jabs, and devilish quips. Fennell satirically imagines both halves of society; one half envious, clamouring, coveting, pining, self-conscious, and scheming, the other half decadent, proud, sneering, prideful, and detached. But nothing said here hasn't been said elsewhere in the "eat-the-rich" discussion. Nonetheless, the issue is less the originality of what is said overall, but instead *how* things are said. I would say this could be the most intricate exploration and representation of class behaviour, at least in British culture, ever put to the cinema screen. This is a story of the haves and the moth-like want-mores. Even despite it being quite clearly derivative from the likes of Mr. Ripley.

Saltburn's cast is a strong point, with standout performances from Barry Keoghan, Jacob Elordi, Rosamund Pike, and Richard E. Grant. But Keoghan's character is ultimately a maniac without a cause. However, seen as a black comedy caricature through the lense of Marxian class theory, Saltburn's value can be truly felt.

7.4/10.

Napoleon (2023)

Bonaparte, but not Bonafide

[7/10 · 30 November 2023]

Ridley Scott's latest historical epic and biopic is a lot to unpack on-screen, not to mention in the scope of this review. France's rebirth and the many decades of one of the most eventful, dramatic, and impactful figures in world history are tightly packed into a mere two hours and thirty-eight minutes of limited runtime. There was no slack to work with. This easily could have (and possibly should have been) two parts, a trilogy, or even a miniseries.

Joaquin Phoenix, extraordinarily accomplished acting aside, aged 49 is arguably too old to depict Napoleon's earlier life as an upstart French general. More broadly, Scott should have chosen a mostly French cast and insisted on English spoken in a natural French accent throughout, including holding Phoenix to the requirement of a Corsican or French accent also. Phoenix should have coopted the role: With a second younger actor playing early Bonaparte. A gamut of Southern English accents coming from French characters undermined Scott's setting.

Overall, where Scott is consistent in set design, extras, and costuming, he is inconsistent in accents, concise plot building, and casting. One casting decision that is disputed is that of Bonaparte's most undeniably intoxicating love; Josephine (Vanessa Kirby) whose name he mentions in his dying words. Screenplay sought to show this head over heels infatuation, but ended up just showing slightly goofy softcore porn. Napoleon "the lover" was heavily juxtaposed and cast against the backdrop of Napoleon "the mastermind general" and Emperor of the French. But Scott didn't have the runtime to do it properly. There was too much on his plate. If a longer director's cut does exist the film could easily be leagues better.

A number of historians and pedantic film reviewers have myopically rallied against the film for "historical inaccuracies," forgetting that the point of this film, by Scott's own admission, is an aesthetic, romantic, and abstract account of Napoleon's personal life with Josephine, his deeper inner motivations. His character behind the scenes first and foremost, and secondly the historical events that surrounded, and were a downstream result of, that. History doesn't see enough of the politics of the bedstead, the behind closed doors, the powerful string-pulling women behind the curtain. Like Helen of Troy. Scott astutely hones in on this fact of women as the soft but hugely influential stakeholders behind many famously visible figures of world history.

Throughout the film, Scott did take some liberties with how to interpret Napoleon. For example, we know that Napoleon was in Paris at the time of the Revolution, but have no evidence he saw the guillotine come down. The point is that we could imagine Napoleon was there anyway, a man of the moment. Other similar small touches are used by Scott to articulate Napoleon's character to good effect. If you allow yourself the right to imagine Napoleon in a metaphorical sense, rather than solely focus on historicity, you'll enjoy this more.

Overall this is a beautiful, well-shot period piece and biopic held back by the limitations of its runtime and the daunting task of its gargantuan subject matter. Ridley Scott is one of the most qualified directors to do a historical military epic on this scale, but some opportunities were certainly missed.

6.9/10.

The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes (2023)

Ballad, Or Crass Karaoke?

[5/10 · 18 November 2023]

"The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes" is about as overlong as its title might suggest. It's a prequel origin story about the tenth Hunger Games and the character of President Snow of Panem; also known as Coriolanus Snow, played here to rousing effect by actor Tom Blyth.

Another standout performance comes from Peter Dinklage as Casca Highbottom, whose character helps to explain how the games came into their early fruition.

The film's story, based on the author Suzanne Collins' source material, pursues the humanising angle of exploring a younger and less hardened Snow as an empathetic figure - it's sort of like his Anakin Skywalker phase, pre-Vader.

He partakes as a "mentor" to games contestant Lucy Gray Baird (Rachel Zegler). She's essentially an itinerant member of the Covey people who make their living travelling around and playing music; now settled in District 12 after the war.

The story centres around Snow's fraught decision as to whether to pursue power, status, or love based on his connection to the Hunger Games, his strained social standing in the capitol, and his relation to Lucy Gray as her mentor.

The film goes wrong when we hear far too much of Lucy Gray's singing. It feels like Hunger Games feat. MTV.

She's a free-spirited character but this persona is driven home far too intensely for it to come off as natural. Her music is supposed to give her a spellbinding aura, but it's way overdone. Her jarring southern accent tries too hard to show her as that archetypal practical country belle filled with the warmth of her folkloric aphorisms. So, while she does have a certain warm charisma to her character, this heroine scarcely could hold a candle to Jennifer Lawrence's Katniss Everdeen.

In other key plot points we encounter plot armour and plot holes. The plot moves along too easily because Coriolanus conveniently pulls off a cunning move or trick on more than several occasions. These are oftentimes things that would never slide in reality.

The world itself is flush with sepia and monochrome. It feels like a good amount of retro, whilst keeping some technologies in the mix too. Sadly, the tenth Hunger Games themselves were an incredibly bland watch without anywhere near the suspense of the sequels.

5/10.

The Marvels (2023)

Marvel Schmarvel

[2/10 · 17 November 2023]

"The Marvels" is a cute kitten showreel with some superhero cosplaying served on the side.

It truly felt as if they had plucked several random actresses off the street and asked them to do a superhero impression for 105 minutes. This girl-power group was, unfortunately, very wooden. Bar possibly Brie Larson as Captain Marvel, but even she looked a bit bewildered and gormless.

Visuals were good, but an over-reliance on CGI was self-evident. The antagonist (Dar-Benn) felt straight out of a cheesy Sci-Fi from the seventies or eighties and the joke-to-serious ratio was (as usual for Marvel), off kilter.

Saw X (2023)

X marks the spot

[8/10 · 10 October 2023]

Kramer's (Tobin Bell) notorious rough justice and hellish contraptions return for a tenth Saw instalment, with a reframed examination of Jigsaw's moral code, tempting moments of conflicted empathy with Bell's infamous character. Some may say the franchise is hackneyed, but the hellbent revenge angle and refreshing direction of this installment proves otherwise. This film is not just brutal, it's smart too, with a genuine plot and dialogue to boot.

Kramer's terminal brain cancer is an enclosing trap of itself that has ensnared him, and he has only months left to act. Cancer doesn't discriminate, it strikes, and malignancy saps the life from the human host whether intervention happens or not, but acting sooner is advisable as the stages march on and one's life expectancy drops in rapid proportionality. It is no surprise that those who struggle with cancer are often said to be fighting a battle for their survivability.

Perhaps, then, it is a fitting allegorical symbol for the indiscriminate nature of Saw X's ingeniously themed traps and Kramer's notion of justice and second chances, here in particular from the angle of his unease as a desperate cancer patient. Not to mention the redemption for those who fight for their lives, the survival instinct, against stoically indifferent forces closing in. Kramer's proclaimed personal separation from the effects of his machinations is a brilliantly twisted notion about an omnipresent karmic force acting consequentially; "you have no choice but to play the game". His ethical thought experiments are made real, and here more brutally and viscerally than almost ever; "...what I have in store for you is very real". The clinical exposure of the less savoury parts of human nature comes in full force. Kramer probably saw the philosophical trolley problem and thought, "why not make that a reality? That would be interesting."

Set between the first and second films in 2001, it is here we see for the first time how, on death's door, Kramer's survival instincts of his own kick in and the effect this has. It would be almost unthinkable that the mastermind himself is beholden to the instincts he's long preyed upon , but here we see that, unmasked, he is as human as anybody else, however briefly. Subject to the force majeure of nature's vice, even he is not above that, and he cannot play God forever.

Where the film suffered was, in part, its lack of enduring mystery. Kramer is the unmasked, bona fide, cold-blooded Jigsaw, that's well-known by now. But because of that there's less room for the imagination to participate and fill in the blanks. Fortunately, imaginative plot twists do keep things suspenseful. Yet that absence of deep and pervasive mystery and anonymity is lingeringly felt throughout. Kramer is perhaps too much of a known entity; yet in finally knowing him we can (at least somewhat) explore the inner world of one of horror's most enigmatic characters.

Synnøve Macody Lund as Cecilia Pederson brings a callous and vindictive intellectual force to compete with Kramer. Her narration during various scenes adds an interesting medical perspective that otherwise simply wouldn't be there. Her character brings textural enrichment to the Saw formula where otherwise we'd rely on Kramer alone to solemnly explain his machines. Steven Brand as an expressive Parker Sears excels. Shawnee Smith as Amanda Young was a throwback that cramped Kramer's style a bit and made her seem like a bit of a lackey henchwoman accomplice. Yet in other moments her reactivity provides a more emotive side to the partnership.

Overall, this is probably the second or third best film of the franchise. And to do that ten films along is a testament to the series.

X marks the spot, and they did hit the spot.

7.6/10.

The Creator (2023)

The Creator, Sans Creativity

[6/10 · 27 September 2023]

The Creator is very much a "could have been" and a "should have been" Sci-Fi flick that attempts to (unsuccessfully) capitalise on the hot topic of AI; at least cinematically as the coherent motion picture epic that it sets out to be. Gareth Edwards, director of Rogue One, was on the mark here with his vision, but poor dialogue and flat world-building held things back. Despite spectacular visuals and Hans Zimmer's musical input; it's a pretty face with little to say. The film puts forward a slightly pedestrian account of potential AI-related conundrums that doesn't give it much of an edge in the current year; where everyone and their nan has heard about what AI is and its basic supposed dangers. If this was released ten years ago, it might have kept an edge in the box office.

What we have here is a spread of Sci-Fi, thriller, and action, but to truly round things off best would have been to bring onboard eldritch horror elements; that's spooky, sharply delivered expositions of AI's darkest and unexpected dangers that may lurk in the near-future that pry on our nagging "what-ifs" regarding artificial intelligence. It did feel a bit like Skynet's less scary, less compelling sequel. With a tame dose of uncanny valley to boot.

The plotline was rather glacial and generally weak, but poignant in places on the lofty subject of creator and created; think the Story of Adam and Eve, God's creation gaining free will and full sentience. Despite these biblically epic pretensions, the plot crescendoed with more of a whimper than a bang. The film best redeems itself by imagining humans as the bad guys in the AI ethics debate. We've spent a long time thinking that AI could only be a threat to us, when actually humanity might grow to dread a creation that (at some potential point) arguably should have autonomy and be regarded as sentient and equal to biological life. This is a refreshing premise that just needed more polish to really make its point, as the screenplay just didn't match up with the vision here. The ending may well have borne a sinister aspect; had AI faked neoteny, a great weakness of human empathy, to deceive humankind in a pinch? But again, even if this was the case, it was unclear what the film wanted to really get across there.

6.4/10.

A Haunting in Venice (2023)

A Boring In Venice

[4/10 · 19 September 2023]

By 1930, Agatha Christie was fed up of the highly storied, but by-then "insufferable" Hercule Poirot. Yet her audience clamoured for more, prompting a reluctant Christie to churn out more of Poirot's cerebral, holmesian outings. It would seem history has repeated itself, people still want Poirot; but what we really need is something completely new from the drawing board. Christie would (probably) grimace to think that Poirot is getting a "Poirotverse" for-profit film series quarter way into the 21st century. Maybe the hunky, eccentric Benoit Blanc is a better sleuth-in-vogue or, dare one say, give the limelight to a fresh faced, budding whodunnit author. Instead, Branagh is eagerly sinking his teeth into what looks like a long dreary commercial march through 33 novels and 51 short stories of source material.

This film sets out to combine the whodunnit with the horror genre and misses the mark on both. The meticulous, verbose, people-focused nature of the Christie-style whodunnit struggles to pair well with the timely, atmospheric build-ups of horror. Both needed time to deliver their respective punchlines. Neither had the scope to do it, and the waters became quickly muddied. The musical score (snore) is notably absent; sometimes using gaps of silence can be eerie and build tension, but here it's so overdone that the effect falls flat. The Dutch angle is used excessively and jarringly, and the film's direction just feels overall disjointed as Branagh both acts and directs. The screenplay is lifeless, the setting is dark and lifeless, the plot's culmination is lifeless. No joie de vivre, no buoyancy. One highlight would be Michelle Yeoh.

If you're a Christie fan or devotee, you'll likely be pleased just seeing a depiction of Poirot on-screen, I'm sure. But for most people, I'd imagine this may disappoint.

Dear Evan Hansen (2021)

You Will Be Found

[8/10 · 26 August 2023]

Dear Evan Hansen follows the story of the lead played by the very talented, albeit older-looking for the part, Ben Platt. The film reflects upon the topic of suicide and psychoses from a full and expressive range of complex emotions, conflictions, and longings that such a tragedies often thrust upon people in the aftermath of such incidences.

Almost every character is unremittingly real and fallible, whether on the surface or on the inside, we see human vulnerability, concealment, and moral ambiguity brought into the looking glass of the film's honest examination.

In the film's opening scenes, we see the brief moments of connection between what is effectively Evan's cri de coeur mirror-image of sorts all along, Connor Murphy (Colton Ryan). Evan writes a letter to himself wondering whether anyone would notice if he disappeared ("Waving Through a Window"). The premise follows the old adage about a tree falling in a forest by itself, would it therefore make a sound? Of course it would, but superstition would have us think otherwise. It's an incredibly fitting expression to summarise the film's examples of mental health struggles, anxiety, and low self-esteem. Figments in the mind that can create false premises and warp the sense of self and reality. That is the paradigm the film sets out to break.

The film shows us that Connor's situation is the only thing Evan Hansen has some agency over and one of the only things he has a real and apparent connection to; as Connor effectively mirrors Evan's own life circumstances and sentiments. Evan's later fictitious outpourings are the projected tributary paint of a self-portrait upon the canvas of the complicated martyrdom that Connor Murphy's absence leaves behind. It's Evan's desperate way of finding connection to people and a version of himself where he otherwise would seemingly not.

Evan's manifestations and pinings for a different story are an allegory for his mental health condition and rich inner world. Yes, it causes socially reprehensible or illusory (masked) outcomes - which is what at we may see presented on the surface of those fighting a mental health battle and the fictional narratives they may present themselves and to others (psychoses), but it's an appeal to the audience that there's ultimately a deeper and less obvious root cause to address and understand. "You Will Be Found" summarises the need for Evan, embattled by his mental paradigms, to "find" himself, and for others to search for him, too.

Director Stephan Chbosky, when asked what Dear Evan Hansen truly means, said, "The thing is, it's like the song says: you are not alone. It's that simple." And while Evan's lies are appalling, his complex redemption and later treatment by those around him shows that such actions were seldom needed all along. Evan had felt profoundly alone. He has no one to talk to about his struggles. Yet, slowly, he sees that others are suffering silently alongside him. They are all human. They all face grief, loss, loneliness, and their own struggles. That journey of realisation is the key message.