A Viking prince devises an elaborative plan to avenge his father’s murderer.
Vicious, challenging, and visually compelling! Whoever follows Robert Eggers’ films, The Witch (2015) and The Lighthouse (2019), knows he’s famous for surrealistic acting, expressionistic photography, protracted shots, and idiosyncratic vernacular. And The Northman is no exception.
The first thing that needs to be mentioned is that Eggers worked closely with historians and archaeologists to meticulously visualise the medieval Scandinavian legend, namely Amleth. And if you are aware of Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”, I’m sure you can put two and two together. The Northman is Eggers’ first studio-level film, and, reading the interviews he gave, one can tell that it is not the film he initially had in mind, but its final cut is not a result he is disappointed with either. That old story in Hollywood’s book where the studios always interfere with the creative processes…
The dialect used, even though not easy to write or speak, will not blow your socks off like it did in his previous films. The reason is that the gore and the violence take the torch and lead your senses to a medieval spectacle where the slaughter of men, women, and children was the way to resolve differences and show superiority. While the film represents a specific historic era and should serve as a reminder that civilisation has evolved, today’s far-right decided to perceive it as a reminder that this is how things should be. Maybe, let them be the reminder that comparing two totally different eras and peoples is a historical fallacy, and their way of thinking is a representative example of unfathomably bottomless buffoonery.
Alexander Skarsgård, Anya Taylor-Joy, Nicole Kidman, Claes Bang, Ethan Hawke, Willem Dafoe, and all the rest of the cast give stupendous performances! Give it a go, it is an amazing cinematic experience you will not regret!
Please, don’t forget to share, and subscribe. If you enjoy my work and dedication to films, please feel free to support me onhttps://www.patreon.com/kaygazpro. Any contribution is much appreciated and valued.
The son of a poor tailor grows up to be a visionary who risks everything to become the greatest showman on Earth.
The dream to make it in life… The ambition to embrace who you really are and to be finally accepted and rewarded for it. That’s what The Greatest Showman is about. Based on actual events and on real people, the film’s narrative is accompanied by, arguably, the most moving songs you’ve ever listened to in a musical. They lack neither the political statement nor the social message while they make you want to sing and dance to their rhythm. Eleven out of these songs were written by lyricists Benj Pasek and Justin Paul who won the Oscar for La La Land (2016). No matter how much I praise them and the songs, I will not do them justice.
The visuals are as amazing, they are gripping, and they mesmerising. Everyone gives a stellar performance and works amazing with one another as if they were all meant to work together. Hugh Jackman, Michelle Williams, Zac Efron, Zendaya, Rebecca Ferguson, Keala Settle, Yahea Abdul-Mateen II, and the rest of the cast purely shine and dominate the screen, and months of preparation, finally, pays off.
Michael Gracey’s directorial feature debut makes The Greatest Showman the Rocky (1976) of musicals. Call it however you wanna call it, praise it to the best of your abilities, listen to everyone else telling you how great it is… the audiovisual outcome of the thousands of people working on it can be only fully appreciated only by watching it. It spent years in preproduction with all studios fearing that an original musical of that budget [$84,000,000 (estimated)] might not perform well, but against all odds, and against ferocious competition, it made $436,949,634 worldwide.
Watch it while thinking where you are and where you want to be or where you were and where you are now and you’ll find your heart skipping a beat. More than once.
Please, don’t forget to share, and subscribe. If you enjoy my work and dedication to films, please feel free to support me onhttps://www.patreon.com/kaygazpro. Any contribution is much appreciated and valued.
When a creature of unknown origins terrorizes a small village in 19th-century France, a pathologist with certain skills is invited to explain and give an end to the horror.
Fantasy and reality blend in a great atmospheric, period horror. WWI: The atrocious, yet mysterious opening sequence will get your attention. Cut to the two interweaving stories after that, the mystery increases and the foundation of what is about to happen is built on both the story and character development. The clash is established in a 100”-shot of massacre, followed by, a brutal amputation and an undeniably daring burial. From then on, the inevitable hell is released through oneiric (dreamy) and realistic sequences that will make you want to avert your eyes, but you’ll feel obliged not to.
From start to finish, writer/director Sean Ellis creates an atmospheric supernatural horror, delving in superstition, religion, science and reason, but also into the deepest fears lurking inside our unconscious mind. Furthermore, Boyd Holbrook, Kelly Reilly, Alistair Petrie, Roxane Duran, and the rest of the supporting cast do an incredible job in front of the lens. The Beast of Gévaudan is something that, indeed, happened in a village in rural France, but without being 100% sure, I think it happened a century prior the era depicted in the film. Regardless, it is an over-celebrated and potentially inflated story that culminated in an urban legend that we are still speculating about today as no sufficient evidence explained what it really was or where it came from.
Definitely, a must-watch for every horror fan! Sean Ellis is the genius behind films such as Anthropoid (2016), and my two favourites Cashback (2006), The Broken (2008) – reviews will follow soon. These are absolute cinematic experiences for every filmgoer, and mark my words: Ellis will use his brilliance and make a film in the near future that will make everyone wondering where that came from.
Please, don’t forget to share, and subscribe. If you enjoy my work and dedication to films, please feel free to support me onhttps://www.patreon.com/kaygazpro. Any contribution is much appreciated and valued.
A mother goes above and beyond to save her child after a horrific event that forced authorities to place a small town on lockdown.
Suspenseful and thrilling, despite its small faults. The first act, the set-up, manages in fifteen minutes to effectively provide all the necessary background info about the family and the surrounding environment. Even though I found it a bit too American at times, maybe you won’t even notice. In parallel, it lays a solid foundation for the second act’s suspenseful sequences.
As the film’s trailer and IMDb’s logline don’t disclose what the predicament is, I’d rather keep it under the wraps as well. The incident refers to the plague that wreaks havoc in the US, and I’m sure hundreds of families who have been through that will not be able to watch it no matter which side of the fence they stand.
I’ll say no more about the plot, so you get its full force when you come across it. It’s only an hour and twenty minutes and it’s definitely worth your time. Naomi Watts is incredible and she carries the whole film on her shoulders. She is a powerful actress and she hasn’t stopped proving it. Other than Watts, the film’s strong suit is the off-screen and restricted narrative. You constantly know as much as the mother does and the facts you don’t know are replaced by dark imagination, hair-raising speculations, and terrifying thoughts.
Somewhere down the line it gets somewhat far-fetched, but don’t let that prevent you from watching it. Chris Sparling, the writer behind Buried (2010) and Sea of Trees (2015) and director Phillip Noyce, the man behind Sliver (1993), The Quite American (2002) and The Giver (2014) bring to life a lockdown film that will cut your breath short despite the script’s minor wrinkles or its filmmaking techniques. I hope it gets your attention.
A young woman visits the workplace of an older man, and the encounter reveals dark secrets that neither of them can put behind.
Unsettling theme, uneasy pace, and an uncomfortable watch. It becomes obvious from the very beginning what the premise is but David Harrower’s script (and original play), Benedict Andrews’ camera, and Nick Fenton’s editing use “predatory” techniques instead of just tackling what you already know is going to happen. Psychologically, it is like when anticipating someone to die but not being ready at all when they actually do. If the comparison seems unfair, this is what happened to Una; she died on the inside.
Fenton’s editing keeps this steady pace from beginning to end, offering neither excitement nor boredom, but maintaining a realistic sense of time for the story to unfold and disclose information that the audience is not sure if they want to know (until they know for sure they don’t). Benedict Andrews and director of photography Thimios Bakatakis mount the cameras over the shoulders and follow Una and Ray down a rabbit hole that depresses and divides our feelings. Cinema, by its nature is, intentionally or not, a form of voyeurism, but Andrews’ directing wants to make it obvious that this is the intended purpose. He wants you to be this omniscient voyeur of Una and Ray’s story and make sure you are uncertain about casting the stone you are holding. It is one of them films where you can’t wait to end, it doesn’t, you want to turn it off, but, simultaneously, you cannot not know the end. And as if the plot is not utterly stomach twirling enough, the subplot makes it even worse for Ray who, in the meantime, has been forced to announce to some of his employees that they are fired… while Una is there.
The moment I really wanted to put an end to both of their suffering (and mine) and turn it off, was about an hour and ten minutes into the film, where after Una’s particular line you know that this abhorrent situation is gonna go to hell. I could hear my heart pounding and felt like sweating. And I put a full stop here just in case you decide (after all that) to watch it. What’s important to do at this point is to praise Rooney Mara and Ben Mendelsohn for their performances on an individual level and their tough chemistry on a collective one.
Harrower and Andrews put their audience into a very tough spot by not distinguishing who is the prey and who is the victim when in a case like this it should have been pretty obvious. I do not condemn that, if anything it is remarkable, but it is not a film I can recommend to anyone.
New to the city of London, a young female student mysteriously connects, through dark and haunting visions, with a young female aspiring singer from the 1960s.
Impressive visuals and sounds in an unnecessarily convoluted story. Didn’t really feel like an Edgar Wright film, to be honest. No particular lengthy tracking shots, no editing with invisible cuts that extend an unnatural continuity… but then… after the first plot point… upon Eloise’s/Sandie’s entrance to the club… there are some daring shots and filmmaking techniques to be talked about, namely the dancing sequence between them two ladies and Jack.
From then on, it starts becoming transparent what’s going on, in a visually interesting and intricate way. Yeah, but is it transparent? Is it her mother’s condition and now her? There is a difference between “misleading” and “manipulating” and I’m a bigger fan of the latter because it requires preparation and, in the end, if done successfully, it can leave the audience mouth agape. If not, the result might be just… meh! Regarding misleading the audience though, if the reason for doing it is not solid, and if not done successfully, it can cause aggravation and it can be perceived as cheap and insulting. So, in my humble opinion, unless the filmmakers have that solid reason, it should be avoided.
Without spoiling it for you, Last Night in Soho is misleading when it could have been avoided. Eloise and Sandie could have been something more feasible, something more real that even when you know what it is, it is still terrifying. I wish I could elaborate on that more, but for more, please, have a look at (the not without flaws) Sucker Punch (2011): https://kaygazpro.com/2019/06/30/sucker-punch-2011-action-adventure-fantasy/.
Don’t be discouraged to watch it though. The visuals and sounds may not compensate completely for what I just mentioned above, but are rich and challenging. Writer Krysty Wilson-Cairns and writer/director Edgar Wright manage to recreate an amazing 60s London atmosphere that is not easy at all. The photography, the costume designs, the make-up and hair styles, the editing, and the soundtrack are beyond impressive and offer the intended cinematic experience. Furthermore, Thomasin McKenzie (who I couldn’t stop comparing her looks and acting to Abigail Breslin’s), Anya Taylor-Joy, Michael Ajao, Matt Smith, Terence Stamp, the late Diana Rigg (this was her last film), and the rest of the cast shine in front of the camera.
Losing oneself in the pursuit of happiness will always be more than one has bargained for. And insightful writers and directors have limitless ways of expressing that haunting journey. Of course, the same can be said for the broader sense of paranormal. See and decide for yourselves which one could have been more dominant scenario here.
P.S. My worst experience working in Soho was, upon finishing at 03:00, walking to Trafalgar Square, waiting for the night bus for half an hour, and then being on it for another hour (amongst a variety of characters) until I make it to Northwest London.
Following her father’s death, a woman returns to the farm she grew up on after 15 years, but the reunion with her brother will have nothing but dire consequences.
The hand-held camera and close-ups on Alice after the opening sequence speak volumes from the very beginning about her esoteric world. Upon her return to the farm, and the siblings’ reunion, Ruth Wilson and Mark Stanley do a great job as estranged brother and sister, but the moment’s awkwardness, as well as the rest of the film’s pace and rhythm are well controlled by the editors Luke Dunkley and Nick Fenton. Writer/director Clio Barnard, Yorkshire lass born and raised, works with the excellent cinematographer Adriano Goldman, and delves into the personal drama Alice and Joe have to endure while developing simultaneously the tribulations of owing a farm nowadays. On one hand, their personal suffering seems impossible to be dealt with. While we get glimpses of the past, we can only imagine how hard it is for Alice to be back there. What we don’t know, until much later on, is how much Joe knows and how he positions himself in this predicament. Thus, we cannot fully comprehend the animosity between them.
On the other hand, owing that farm along with its innumerable troubles, only escalates that tension. What ideally could have happened, what did happen, as well as with how it could have been dealt with and how it was actually dealt with creates a family disaster of galactic proportions. That intensity is what describes the film. If I were forced to pick on something, that would be the fact that the tone is, from beginning to end, gloom and doom. As Dark River is mainly a drama, I would expect from it to give some hope before it takes it back. Instead, it just keeps on slowly and steadily taking it, leaving you bereft. Hence, the narrative’s element of surprise is lost there as, from a certain point on, you know that every new sequence you are about to watch is going to be a yet another calamitous encounter between the siblings.
Don’t be discouraged by that though. Dark River is the poster child of British indie cinema that only evokes emotions from relatable stories and characters and surfaces real dramas that take place in the world that you and I live in. Watch it and get to know an England so much different to the films that open with an aerial shot of London, shot wherever else after that, and dive into banalities that allegedly describe England. Dark River combines the cinematic realism and the English countryside, free of stereotypes and clichés.
A nurse is called to an old mansion in Italy to aid a boy that stopped talking after his mother died.
As they say, you can make a bad film from a good script, but you can never make a good film from a bad script. Even though I’m not going to claim that the script is bad, I’m going to claim that its flow is substantially problematic. From what I read, the script’s development was stuck for years and Verena’s role passed from Maggie Gyllenhaal, to Olga Kurylenko, to, eventually, Emilia Clarke. As you can see, if the script solely relies on beauty to evoke the desired feelings, it is doomed to fail. Emilia Clarke, besides her striking beauty is a fine actress. But her character is flat and despite Clarke’s decent efforts, she cannot save it. Unfortunately, the same applies for everyone else involved.
Speaking of flat, that’s what the story is too. Nothing’s happening for the most part of it no matter how hard you want to. Michael Wandmacher’s beautifully composed suspenseful music accompanies a narrative that is anything but. While rendered mostly in monotone, Peter Simonite’s haunting photography offers a cold, foggy and mysterious atmosphere throughout most of the film, and, cautiously, ‘warms’ it when the narrative dictates. Be it as it may, unfortunately, chances are that you’ll be let down by Eric D. Howell’s film. Shame really, as the potential is there, in Italy more specifically, adopting European filmmaking standards and neglecting the influences from overseas.
As much as I enjoy watching Clarke naked – every time – I believe that she needs to have a word with her manager about how many films she is going to appear naked in. I repeat, I am not complaining, but for her career’s sake, she may need to reconsider. Films like Voice from the Stone are, as aforementioned, doomed to fail as their target audience is unspecified and so are their appealing criteria. To clarify, other than Emilia Clarke as a beautiful woman and Marton Csokas as a constantly intriguing villain, the film appeals to no one. Hence, projects like this keep changing hands over the years and they end up like a creative purée where everyone has stuck their fingers in.
After suspecting that his son has been kidnapped, a father does everything in his power to find him.
A parent’s worst fear depicted in a sorrowful, yet mysterious way. For starters, James McAvoy could not be a mediocre actor even if he tried his best. The guy is phenomenal! His acting is out of this world. Writer/director Christian Carion, who adapted his own homonymous film My Son (2017), applied the same technique he did back then: Everyone but McAvoy had received the script so his reactions to every stimulus of the story is genuine. On to that story, then…
The first act is about the missing boy, the parents’ tribulations, the mother’s new boyfriend, and their triangle. Somewhere there you get the odd questions from Inspector Roy that start complicating the issue further but the focus, rightfully, stays on the parents and the missing boy. Until then, the drama and the mystery are well-balanced and one can only feel for the both of them and hope for a happy ending. Imagine I hate happy endings and I most certainly wished for one.
The second act is taken over by mystery where McAvoy, like Liam Neeson without a plan, but hell-bent on finding his son, applies some basic investigating skills. The outcome of his actions is natural and believable as he has not previously displayed any similar skills whatsoever; just a dad willing to do anything to find his son. Eventually, it turns into a nail-biting thriller that in the end… confuses with the turn of events. There might not be a narrative twist, but there is an emotional one. Personally, I found myself wondering how the ending is befitting and even though I understood it to some degree, it evoked mixed feelings inside me. It seemed somewhat rushed and even though throughout act I and II bothered to explain what was going on – which you might find unnecessary – it abruptly ended giving away nothing. Again, I understand open endings, but I struggled, and still do, to find meaning in that one. But that is just me.
I hope you enjoy the thrill it has to offer and yet another stupendous performance from McAvoy. Quick note: I’ve praised Claire Foy in everything she has been in before, and her acting here is nothing but remarkable too. I just think that she deserved more screen time.
A wooden chest full of gold and greed initiate a chain of events that leads to the disappearance of three lighthouse keepers.
Intense, dark, suspenseful, unpredictable, and superb performances! Knowing that it’s based on the mystery of the Flannan Isles’ actual lighthouse keepers and their controversial logbooks, The Vanishing becomes the absolute thrilling treat. The film’s beauty is that even though you know what will happen in the end (the title and tagline imply it) it makes you want to know the speculation of what will become of them. The “when” and “how” alone intensify the suspense and overshadow what we think is obvious. Furthermore, the shockingly realistic performances make you want the resolution to be delayed so you can see more of Peter Mullan, Gerald Butler, and Connor Swindells on screen. Special mention deserves the editor Morten Højbjerg who knows when to cut and, more importantly, where not to. His editing focuses on the performances and let’s the shot “breathe” enough so you can get the full experience of the thespians. My only objection is the ending which, I believe I speak for all us when I say that, we were really looking forward to it. I found it anticlimactic when so much could have been done with it. Even though the script is the most obvious candidate to take the fall here, director Kristoffer Nyholm should have been the one to expand further and give the open ending the film deserves. Unfortunately, this is not the case but that’s what I think anyway. Maybe, you’ll feel otherwise.
Maybe, we’ll never find out what became of them 120+ years ago, but upon watching it we can tell with certainty that films like this showcase Butler’s true talent without having to water down his amazing Scottish accent. Hollywood should have been utilising his skills a lot more in films such as this rather than in typical cash cows. Having said that, Greenland (2020): https://kaygazpro.com/2020/11/30/greenland-2020-action-drama-thriller/ was realistically terrifying and him and Morena Baccarin were excellent leads. The same applies to Mullan who’s versatility is undeniable – see Ozark (2017) – and he’s breathtaking in everything he’s in.
Definitely worth the shot for an intriguing night full of mystery and a show-don’t-tell lesson that everything comes with a price.
A film censor starts investigating a video nasty that awfully resembles the case of her little sister’s disappearance.
Hauntingly realistic psychological horror that crawls under your skin. And so does the dramatic subplot that drives the story to its unexpected turn. What is it that we see? What it is that we want to see? How do we perceive what we see? Why do we perceive it the way we do? What is actually real? Keep these questions in mind… but not just throughout the film.
For those who are unfamiliar with the logline’s term, “video nasty” is a colloquial British term regarding, mostly, low budget films that include, among others, explicit gore and pornography. Even though they did have quite an impact in the UK, the impact was not as severe as the film makes it to be. Having said that, Censor will have an impact on you. For a film that deals explicitly with gore, it becomes the definition of psychological horror. Adapting her short film Nasty (2015), in less than an hour and a half, writer/director Prano Bailey-Bond fully develops Enid’s obscurity, deliberately misleads you using restrictive narrative – Enid’s perception – and presents to you the darkest side of cinema that becomes cult for the hardcore fans and appalling taboo for the masses. I’m not going to divulge anything about the narrative, watch it and pay attention to the minor details that explain what happens in the end. It makes it somewhat obvious but not overly obvious and, to a certain extent, open to interpretation.
From a filmmaking point of view: the Dutch angles, the transitions between locations, but also dark reality and nightmare, and the match-cuts that signify/betray that dark, distorted reality… reveal the behind the curtains (unconscious?) side of our lives that we fail (or choose to) not to look. Ultimately, the film tackles the way we perceive films and the role they play in our society. Is it film imitating life or the other way around? Are films to blame for the release of our darkest side? What about for what we do to one another? I guess the answer can be also found in the role of art in our lives. Other than Bailey-Bond, my round of applause goes to all cast and crew who believed in her project, and especially to Niamh Algar who nails her part, Annika Summerson’s cinematography, and Mark Towns’ editing who has been behind equally amazing horrors, such as: The Ritual (2017) https://kaygazpro.com/2018/10/26/the-ritual-2017-horror-mystery-thriller/ and St. Maud (2020) https://kaygazpro.com/2021/03/01/saint-maud-2020-drama-horror-mystery/
An ordinary businessman is approached by MI6 and the CIA to help them prevent the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Shockingly brilliant! The first act’s light mood raises suspicions as to how can a horrific historic event, such as that Crisis, be approached in such a manner. The suspicions fade away in warp speed though as Benedict Cumberbatch is thoroughly enjoyable and no one can moan about his performance. Rachel Brosnahan, on the other hand, plays her part equally amazingly and together they create the illusion that thrill, British phlegmatic humour, and action will entertain you for the rest of the film… Wrong!
The light mood is replaced by a genuine Cold War thriller that, if you weren’t around at the time, it will make you feel its threat to humanity and how close our world was to be devastated (again) by a third World War. Both character and story development move the story forward, intensify the suspense, and keep you on the edge of your seats by brilliantly pacing and unfolding actual events that shocked everyone when they saw the light of day.
As Greville Wynne’s story is not well-known though, and for most people remains to be seen what will become of him, Cumberbatch makes sure not to betray that, and succeeds in doing so. His performance becomes a shock to the system, following the turn the narrative takes towards the worst. Merab Ninidze’s presence is also captivating, putting the viewer in Oleg Penkovsky’s shoes and imminent danger he’s in.
What I also found shocking upon reading about it is the fact that, on IMDb, The Courier has 1 nomination… 1 nomination! That’s it! I have been reading, writing, and researching on this industry for so many years, and I still find myself scratch my head regarding who’s getting rewarded and under what criteria. Weinstein is gone (good riddance) but it seems that the gatekeepers and/or festivals still have ambiguous criteria of selecting their nominees and winners. Don’t let that put you off though. The film opened all over the world on Greville’s birthday and Tom O’Connor’s script gives justice to the relationship between the two men. Ultimately, Dominic Cooke’s The Courier is a masterpiece and it is definitely worth your time. An absolute must-watch spy thriller!
While a pandemic has swept across the world, a scientist and a park ranger venture out into the woods to find a fellow scientist who may have had a significant breakthrough.
Brutal, psychedelic, relatable, but overly intricate horror that defies Hollywood’s conventions. From the very beginning to the first plot point one gets the feeling that the editing choices – the jump cuts – are eager to move the story forward. Move it towards where, is a good question. In the meantime, Martin’s secrets and, somehow, obvious dishonesty seem to be preparing the ground for something that will play a role when the twist reveals itself.
Scenes like the “stitching” and the “ritual” turn the sci-fi from torture horror into something more… folklore! As the psychological drama keeps blending with the gore, the suspense intensifies and one can only wonder how can this possibly have a happy ending. Before you find out what kind of ending the film is gonna have, the experimental chase sequence reveals more information and, in an intricate way, the combination of utterances and actions up to that point start making sense. Due to the film’s nature, it is difficult to go into it further without spoiling for you, so this is where I am going to stop.
Ever since Kill List (2011), writer/editor/director Ben Wheatley has been one of my favourite filmmakers of his generation. Kill List was his first and massively successful effort to switch from a realistically gritty thriller to a cult horror that defies reason. In the Earth is not far off, but its experimental, hallucinatory and psychedelic nature, at times, gives a whole new different vibe. The film’s photography (Nick Gillespie) and 80s music score (Clint Mansell) become assets to a convoluted, and head-scratching narrative that ultimately confuses, but I’ll dare say that it does not disappoint. I’ve heard a truck load of awfully negative comments and I believe that this is the result of false expectations. Small things that influenced me a tad negatively are sequences that involve the aforementioned secrecy and dishonesty that didn’t really lead anywhere therefore, it was just misleading for no apparent reason. Other than that, Joel Fry, Ellora Torchia, Hayley Squires, and Reece Sharesmith have a great chemistry between them and deliver amazingly convincing performances.
What you’ll make of it, depends on your understanding of the narrative. Pay close attention to what is said in all three acts. Our current pandemic is obviously the film’s source of inspiration, but its development is a Ben Wheatley original film with twists and rich visuals.
An old man who refuses his daughter’s help feels like losing the earth under his feet when his home and his people around him keep constantly changing.
A soul-destroying cinematic realism when your life comes crashing down. Based on the homonymous play by writer/director Florian Zeller, and co-writer Christopher Hampton, the cinematic adaptation does indeed resemble a play and the interchangeable locations 1 and 2 confuse as much as the restricted narrative dictates. The Father‘s suspense is not caused by the nature of Anthony’s condition; it is caused by the way it affects him and the people around him. What’s more, as it is an extremely sensitive subject, it is also caused by how it will be approached by Zeller and how it will be delivered by Sir Anthony Hopkins. Ultimately, as the narrative unfolds, the nail-biting suspense is caused by the heart-wrenching drama that raises the question, what will become of him?
The Father‘s full force hits you on two levels: One, on the level of having a beloved person suffering from it. In this case, you are the one experiencing their transition from one of the most dynamic person in the world and, maybe, your true inspiration in life to someone you wish they never become; someone who doesn’t recognise you anymore and… you don’t recognise either. Two, on the level of suffering it yourself. In this case, whoever you may have been in life, are not anymore. Disheveled, helpless, or “losing all your leaves” may be ways to describe it, but no one has or ever will be prepared for when it, unfortunately, happens.
Either way, no one should ever wish it to their worst foe but, fortunately, word has it that, around the date of this review, certain scientists may have had a significant breakthrough. I truly believe that all of us, no natter where we are in the world, however we look like, whatever we believe in politically or religiously, regardless of our sexual orientation… are keeping our fingers crossed and our hopes high. Remember, no disease has ever discriminated.
Excellent music by Ludovico Einaudi! Feel free to listen to the film’s soundtrack over and over again. Extra credits go to Cinematographer Ben Smithard, Production Designer Peter Francis and editor Yorgos Lamprinos. “Anthony”, is named after Hopkins himself who was the first and only choice for Florian Zeller. If it wasn’t for him, he would have adapted it for the French audience and even though I’m positive the experience would have been equally shuttering, it would definitely be different. Olivia Colman, Olivia Williams, Rufus Sewell, and Mark Gatiss have a great chemistry with each other and deliver powerful performances. They are absolutely amazing. Sir Anthony Hopkins’ performance is the one though that in the end will break you, take your breath away, and, maybe, make you reevaluate your life’s journey from the moment it started to where you are now, to where (you think) it’s heading.
A mysterious man gets a job at an armoured vehicle company that transports money just to find the people responsible for a crime that cost him dearly.
Crowd-pleasing and entertaining, Wrath of Man makes a decent remake of the French thriller Cash Track (2004). Fourth collaboration between the actor Jason Statham and director/producer Guy Richie that proves to be time and time again a recipe for success – at least financial. What you need to keep in mind before or while watching it is that the film is not to be taken very seriously by any stretch of the imagination. It probably represents the exact opposite of the cinematic realism that film theorists argue about (for decades). Let’s start with with basics: No one heals and reaches peak condition that fast from multiple gun shots – if they survive. Also, no one achieves so many headshots that easily. Furthermore, no one would come up with that plan as it is likely to fail in more ways than I can count. So, deliberately ignoring the film’s unrealistic scenario, let’s focus on the positives.
Statham is still kicking a$$ which makes him the right man in front of the camera. Richie still finds intriguing, non-linear ways to develop the plot from the story which makes him the right man behind the camera. Holt McCallany, Josh Hartnett, Scott Eastwood, Andy Garcia, and Niamh Algar make great a addition to the cast (comment to follow on that). Finally, what everyone was hoping to be decent is actually more than decent: the action. Wrath of Man is a series of action-packed sequences that satisfy the neurons and neuroglia of the animalistic part of our brain.
I will never mind Statham not changing his accent. I live in Derby and he’s from Derbyshire so, I wouldn’t want him to speak any other way. I actually love it! Generally though, and that’s probably because I am not a kid anymore, I do mind the hero/ine not to have a decent antagonist or people surrounding him. Which is the case here. The film’s great cast (not just the ones mentioned above) is massively overshadowed by his presence, making him look he’s leagues above everyone else. His crew, the enemy’s, and the security company’s have nothing on him, something that exponentially reduces the suspense. Eastwood’s character had a lot of potential to be a great psycho and, consequently, great villain. That is not the case though. Having said that, the guys guarding the safe are tough as nails but their role is limited. Something else that would potentially make us empathise with ‘H’ a bit more is the underdeveloped drama he had to endure. Unfortunately, it took the back seat. As a last and trivial note, it’s interesting to listen to British humour, in American accents.
To sum it up, it’s very enjoyable, don’t get caught up in the details (like I do), and spend a couple of hours watching a funny and thrilling heist with a lot of shooting and punchlines.
A young religious nurse moves to a remote town to treat a housebound terminal patient, making her mission to save her soul.
Feature debut for writer/director Sophie Glass who, so far, directs only what she writes. Using a flashback in the opening sequence is not uncommon but Glass’ shots are, admittedly, impressive. The first half-hour is spent on Maud’s character development and her relationship with Amanda. The confrontation with Carol and Joy’s comment indicate how much we don’t know about Maud but should have suspected in the first place.
The moment she cannot pretend anymore… the moment she unleashes her true self… Glass’ lens pays tributes to Hitchcock and DePalma, while adding her own personal touch. She infiltrates Maud’s mind, dissects her martyrdom / schizophrenia, and restricts the narrative to only to her interpretation of signs. Consequently, this raises the question: How should I interpret those signs? Religion and mental health had been interchangeable terms for centuries, something that Glass manages to sink her teeth in, but mostly provoke, in less than an hour and a half.
Saint Maud is a phenomenal psychological horror that aims to shock you to your core and, Morfydd Clark, fully understanding Glass’ vision, goes the extra mile with a breathtaking performance. Jennifer Ehle plays also her part beautifully, resembling a younger Meryl Streep. Extra credits go to A24 that invested in the film, Ben Fordesman for the haunting cinematography, Mark Towns for perfectly controlling the pace and rhythm, Adam Janota Bzowski for his hair-raising soundtrack, and every member of the cast and crew who strived for perfection.
Saint Maud becomes a proud addition to the British horror genre where you don’t know what’s gonna happen until it happens. Turn off the lights, throw the phones away, and get ready to be blown away.
Producer/actor/director George Clooney has put his heart and soul to it. He might not be appearing enough lately – his last feature film was Money Monster (2016) – but in front of the camera he is as great as he meticulous behind it. Suspense’s favourite narrative technique is “delay of resolution”. The journey of Augustine and Iris to the weather station will make your heart skip a lot more than a beat as will the meteor shower’s sequence in space. Extra credits go to the sinking container scene. Both the journey on Earth but also in space, go through various tribulations and the dramatic parts in between will give you the time to bond with the characters. Felicity Jones, David Oyelowo, Kyle Chandler, Demián Bichir, Tiffany Boone, and introducing Caoilinn Springall, give amazing performances and enhance both the drama and the suspense.
But I believe the film’s strongest suit is the narrative structure where the fabula and the shyuzet are organised in such manner that reveal only what you need to know, when you need to know it. Keep postponing what you want to know. What has happened will not be revealed to you that easily and will you definitely need to read between the lines. The levels of knowledge vary throughout the film. You don’t know exactly what Augustine knows but you still know a lot more than the crew does. On the other hand, you know almost everything that is happening on the satellite when Augustine knows nothing but you know as much as they do when it comes to the global disaster. No matter what the narration remains restricted at all times and you are not the omniscient spectator you would like to be.
After most of it is said and done, it all comes down to what your expectations are prior to hitting ‘play’. It is not an action film. It is a cosmic journey to finding a place to start anew and it an esoteric journey to remorse, redemption, and our deepest regrets. Yet, people found the ending… unfulfilling.
It is not the ending that is unfulfilling. It is the connection with ourselves, and, consequently, the connection with the people we love and they love us back.
The once-infected world by a disease that was turning people into zombies has now been cured, but those who had turned face now society’s discrimination and wrath for all the things they did.
Reinstatement, remorse, forgiveness, redemption, tolerance, stigmatisation, and family are the exceptional qualities that separate The Cured from the mainstream Hollywood post-apocalyptic zombie outbreak calamity.
I have to thank my mate Gary for reminding me of this one, commenting on #Alive (2020) https://kgpfilmreviews.com/2020/12/12/alive-2020-action-drama-horror/. Acting as a social commentary and fragile post-postapocaliptic metaphor for the real world we currently live in, without getting into historical or sociological analyses, The Cured is indirectly associated with the Irish modern history but also the whole world’s rehabilitation system and the stigma one carries trying to reinstate.
Writer/director David Freyne has done a brilliant job behind the camera, and Sam Keeley gives the justice broken Senan deserves. Actor/producer Elliot Page has always been amazing in everything he’s been in and his acting is a force to be reckoned with.
On Christmas Eve, Ebenezer Scrooge gets three visits from spirits that show him the error of his ways.
Unarguably, the darkest adaptation of Charles Dickens’ classic Christmas tale to date. Right off the bat, poisonous truths are coming out of Ebenezer’s mouth, almost impossible to argue with. Why be nice to each other only once a year, indeed… But its darkness doesn’t solely lie in the writing’s truths. It lies in the acting, and above all, the haunting photography. A constant darkness from the opening sequence to the end credits. Keep these elements in mind for what comes next.
The Ghost of Christmas Past takes him on a journey that leaves some… eerie details to the imagination. Excellent storytelling that will get your undivided attention in an attempt to process if the story you’ve read and watched repeatedly in the past is currently taking the direction you suspect it does. And it does, indeed.
The Ghost of Christmas Present shows him the consequences of that past; a past that seems ostensibly irredeemable. It picks on nineteenth century’s socioeconomic problems that could not be a better fit for the present day (massively pounding on capitalism!). The emphasis on that family’s love and what he had been deprived of, and consequently never knew it existed, smoothly shape Ebenezer to what the spirits hope he will become.
The Ghost of Christmas Future is meant to be the real treat; the relentless. But here, unfortunately, the TV adaptation starts losing ground and the role of the Ghost of Christmas Future is cut short. The mini-series becomes too explanatory for an audience that is by now clear is not kids. Thus, certain explanations are not needed, but they are given nonetheless. Then, everything happens too fast as if the filmmakers suddenly realised that the mini-series’ runtime is coming to an end and they must hurry. But then, more explanations are given, forgetting the “show, don’t tell” rule. Furthermore, in the end, the story feels incomplete as the denouement does not address certain issues, i.e., “redemption” from his nephew or the coal miners’ families.
Guy Pearce, Andy Serkis, Stephen Graham, Jason Flemyng, Johnny Harris, and Charlotte Riley are but a few of Britain’s finest actors who perform brilliantly in front of the camera. Joe Alwyn and Vinette Robinson make excellent additions to that cast and play a significant role to the story’s development. Behind the camera. Steven Night, Ridley Scott, and Tom Hardy, among others, put on the producer’s hat and – in my humble opinion – must have done some serious pitching to the BBC to take on such distribution. I guess, if you are about to adapt a classic that has been adapted numerous times before, you may as well do it in a way that it has never been done before.
A young female detective starts suffering from a dream-reality confusion while investigating a series of ritualistic murders.
Right, I’ll be quick. I couldn’t take it seriously from the opening sequence. It’s meant to be ‘horror’ but the British humour overshadowed every chance there was to scare me – and I’m talking slim to none. Writers/directors Andy Collier and Toor Mian are obviously David Fincher fans, but the budget, story and character development, photography, editing, acting, but also the profound understanding of a serial killer’s psychosynthesis are hardly evident in the film.
But hey… Charismata is a British low budget indie horror that took time, money, and effort to get made and had no intention to fool you or undermine your intelligence. Should you decide to watch it, it’ll take your mind off things for just over an hour and a half, and actually, entertain you a little. Plus, it does have a couple of impressive shots.
Two brothers, in an attempt to score big, travel across the country for a bare-knuckle boxing match, but the way they see their journey end gradually gets in the way.
Jungleland… the type of American indie that makes your heart race, wondering from the opening sequence what on earth will go horribly wrong. That said, Jessica Barden (who for some reason reminded me of Maggie Gyllenhaal), and the magnificent duo Charlie Hunnam and Jack O’Connell are all British doing a great job posing as Americans – how about producer Ridley Scott?
Despite the great acting though, Jungleland‘s strong suit is the blur line that doesn’t distinguish ambition from greed. Writers Theodore Bressman and David Branson Smith, and writer/director Max Winkler (son of legendary Henry Winkler) bring to life a beautiful story that will make you wonder, how far would you go to make your dreams come true? And make you think how far you have gone so far…
Does it actually go horribly wrong though? That is for you to decide. The long-awaited moment has finally arrived and Hunnam with O’Connell are on screen together and reveal about their lives whatever you need to know and not necessarily what you want to. Would I prefer to see them in a British film as a Northerner and a Midlander respectively? Sure. Does it matter though that they put an accent and they are overseas? Not really. Remember, a film that lets you in halfway through and lets you out at a not expected point in time is a reminder of Ithaca; it’s not about the destination, but the journey itself.
P.S. On a personal note, as I have been living for years in the city that Jack O’Connell and Michael Socha were born, I have met them both, and I must tell you that, other than great actors, they are both great human beings.
A refugee couple escapes Sudan in a time of war, they arrive in England, only to have to adjust to a whole new reality and face a ghost that followed them all the way to their new house.
Welcome to a journey that no one is welcome. A soul-wrenching and haunting experience that no one should ever have. Yet, hundreds of thousands, unknown to us people do. To this very day. His House, feature debut for Remi Weekes, is a drama with horror elements whose natural drama is more horrifying than its supernatural horror. Sope Dirisu and Wunmi Mosaku carry the film on their shoulders and manage to pass on to the viewer all the survivor’s guilt and immigration’s hostility but also the sense of having nothing left! Matt Smith always adds flavour to everything he’s in.
It is not a “haunted house” horror film. It is a haunted conscience film and an introduction to a different set of beliefs and norms to the “civilised” world. Well written and brilliantly shot. Jo Willems’ cinematography deserves an extra credit.
Keep your mind open and expect nothing beforehand. Brave attempt from both Netflix and BBC Films that gives a taste of how it feels like to be a stranger and struggle into a world that sees you as a piece of s*it or a laughing stock at best.
P.S. You can enjoy a lot more of Dirisu in Gangs of London (2020) and Mosaku in Lovecraft County (2020).
When Count Dracula comes to London from Transylvania, a series of ungodly events follow him, and a group of men unites to stop him from claiming his future bride.
Which Dracula is your favourite? I guess your answer depends on how old you are. I grew up with Francis Ford Coppola’s and, admittedly, it is my favourite. And how could it not be… Gary Oldman, Anthony Hopkins, Winona Ryder, Keanu Reeves, Cary Elwes, Richard E. Grant, and Tom Waits. The late Michael Ballhaus’ haunting photography and the team’s meticulous editing synthesize one of the greatest Gothic fairy-tales of the 90s. Two years before that there was Edward Scissorhands (1990) – once again with the one and only Winona Ryder. See how shadows are cast, how the match-cuts stitch the sequences together, and how the narrative patiently unfolds. Also, what is not to be discounted is the amazing costume design and the brilliant makeup (Oscar winners).
There is an enormous amount of information regarding the film’s production, revealed at the 2007 Collector’s Edition DVD audio commentary. One of the most interesting information is the fact that, other than the blue inferno, NO digital visual effects were used in post production. Coppola was adamant and his vision paid off (it also paid for his production company’s debt and saved it from bankruptcy).
In all honesty, of course, I am not posting this to actually review the film. I am doing it for two reasons: Its brilliance lies in the storytelling and I really want to bring it to the newer generation of moviegoers or film lovers’ attention; to appreciate and understand that visual effects should be used only as a means to enhance the narrative rather than overshadow it or compensate for the lack of it. Also, to remind mine but also older generations that films such as Dracula still exist and, hey… it’s Halloween time, why not dust the old scary DVD’s and enjoy something from the past. For nostalgia…
A young traumatised American au pair is hired to look after two orphan kids living in a mysterious manor, in the English countryside where reality is nothing but deceitful.
As I was watching, I couldn’t help but think ‘how am I supposed to write about it without giving away spoilers’? I have tried to avoid hearing or reading anything about it but sporadic negative whispers managed to find their way to me. I would presume that the audience that has, is, and will be watching the Bly Manor is the same audience that has already adored the Hill House. Thus, a line must be drawn between the two.
Mike Flanagan, who once more proves to be a great filmmaker, as well as Amblin Entertainment and Netflix are still behind the mini-series – even though, past the first episode, Flanagan is not wearing the director’s hat. The same applies for most of the cast who we get to see in different roles. Also, both of them are parts of the same anthology, marking Bly Manor’s 35th adaptation for the film or TV of Henry James’ novella The Turn of the Screw – Flanagan pays a lot of tributes to The Innocents (1961). Due to the similarities, please don’t think or try to find connection between the two. The producers have announced more series and they have stated that there is no link whatsoever – if they go down the American Horror Story (2011- ) road or not, that is a different story.
Bly Manor’s directing, photography, editing, costume design, and make-up department win the impressions from the first episode and you’ll get no grief about their quality. The Newton Brothers have also done an excellent job with the film’s score and I guarantee you, you won’t be able to shake off the “O Willow Waly”; it will be humming in your ears for days. Furthermore, all actors deliver top-notch performances that will knock your socks off. All of them get enough screening time to unfold and develop their characters and make sure that each and every one of them will make your heart, one way or another, skip a beat. I mean, how can Amelie Bea Smith act this way is totally beyond me.
The narrative is left deliberately for the end because it is the source of comparisons, contrasts, controversies, and contradictions. I can understand all four of them but imagine if the Bly Manor was like Hill House. What would be the point? Some might prefer the latter because behind the ghosts there is a strong family drama that pins you down. And Flanagan’s protracted shots are giving that drama the justice it deserves (that’s why I missed his directing on this one). But here’s what I think it happened…
Convoluted narrative that will end up to a mind-blowing resolution requires hiding clues and overall information BUT, even while misleading with the fabula and syuzhet’s timeline, the filmmakers need to make sure they don’t leave their audience completely bamboozled. Because this is where they lose interest and even when something big happens in the end, they will have already missed a lot and, eventually, will not understand it or not care about it. That’s my two cents anyway. I highly recommend it and look forward to the next haunting.
Oh, before I go, there is actually something connecting the two; love or the lack thereof…
P.S. Victoria Pedretti shone as Nell Craine, shines as Dani Clayton, and she very much reminded me of Piper Perabo when I first watched her in Coyote Ugly (2000).
P.P.S. My beloved Ioanna, as promised, this one goes out to you!
Having recently lost her husband, a young mother is trying to protect her children from poverty and her little town’s underworld.
Goddamn poverty! Goddamn misery! Goddamn drugs! Regardless which triggers which and in what order, the defining opening shot somehow is immediately understood by the shots that follow it. Or is it?
Writer/director of Road Games (2015), Abner Pastoll, directs a gritty Irish thriller with a realistic plague, a surrealist villain, and a down to Earth heroine that has to put up with both while protecting her children. And what a heroine’s journey that is…
Pastoll creates a dark for the audience yet healthy for the actors environment to showcase their chemistry and shine in front of the camera. Sarah Bolger, Edward Hogg, and Andrew Simpson lead the way but the rest of the cast follows and supports them as they should to create this thrilling crime/drama. Much respect for the whole crew that managed to bring this low budget, indie film to life.
Now… I cannot not comment on the dildo… probably the weirdest use(s) I’ve seen outside comedy. One is, unintentionally funny. Or dramatically funny – is there such a thing? Stealing your kids’ batteries from their toys to put them in your vibrator because you are a recently widowed young mum with urges isn’t funny… just funnily portrayed. Come on, I mean, I am sure they knew the mixed reactions the scene would stimulate. On the other hand, stabbing someone’s eye with the same vibrator you satisfy yourself to save yourself from rape is nothing but ironic (but relieving nonetheless).
Despite your feelings towards it, at least, you’ll witness a security system that uses VHS, and you’ll learn what a metaphor is…
A group of immortal mercenaries is been set up and hunted down, but together they’ll take down anyone who stands in their way.
Well-shot! Good job by Gina Prince-Bythewood as international films, especially of that magnitude, can never be easy. Too many locations, too much cast and crew, too many permissions to shoot, and too many visual effects. I believe it’s her most ambitious film to date so, well done! Charlize Theron and her multinational/multiracial team of mercenaries create great chemistry in front of the camera, offering plenty of action but also laughter when they take out and wield their weapon of choice.
Now, I would say that the film’s score is not a perfect match. Maybe I kept having the graphic novel in mind while watching, and, while reading the comic back in the day, that’s not the music I had in mind. I can understand that the film’s target audience is not me so, for younger people maybe it makes more sense. It is very well edited though (on that music), so the rhythm and pace compensate.
Before hitting “play” remember: This is a Skydance & Netflix production. The Old Guard follows the standard, New Hollywood narrative, aiming at an audience that has no interest in Italian neorealism. It is entertaining though and I enjoyed all the effort put from everyone in front and behind the camera. I hope you do as well.
The impending apocalypse finds a mother and her autistic daughter spending their last moments together.
Silence is one of these short films that you watch and the first question that comes to your mind is: “What is happening?”. Upon establishing that, the question that follows is: “Why is this happening?” The answer to that lies in the hands of the filmmakers and their effort to get the funding they need to turn it into a feature. Official selection at the Los Angeles Film Festival, so I keep my fingers crossed to be seen by the right people who can add a solid setup and confrontation. Something along the lines of Knowing (2009)?
While discontinuous editing has proved to be innovative and effective in the past – see Breathless (1960) – in Silence this is not the case. I believe though that the strong message, the impressive photography (observe the changes as the doom is nearing), and the great performances by both Louise Rhian Poole and Riann Mutlow will win the impressions and writer Rachael Howard, director Lee Burgess, and producer John Ninnis will come out of the festival with a signed deal that will answer the “why”. You can watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16Gwlb2-gw0
A man’s mind is playing tricks regarding when and how his relationship took a turn for the worse.
Did you ever wake up one day asking yourself, “what happened”? Struggling to put together the where, who, why, what, and when? A Case of You is exactly that! John wakes up in his apartment one morning and, in real time, he wanders from room to room trying to figure out what went wrong between him and Emily. Why he is alone. What happened.
The one 18-minute shot is impressive. It takes a huge amount of preparation in preproduction where EVERYONE in front and behind the camera gets to know EXACTLY what they need to do when filming starts. The beauty though in Jack Davie’s creation is the marriage of his directing and writing which provides practical answers and raises existential questions. No spoonfed drama here. The mind works in mysterious and, more often than not, incomprehensible ways. Try to keep track of how John and Emily’s relationship deteriorated. It’s a non-linear jigsaw and every event, every utterance, and every action is part of it.
A mother and her little girl go on a picnic but the past resurfaces, bringing nothing but pain.
Vague yet intriguing development from writer/director John Ninnis whose inciting incident in the first act stealthily forewarns about the second act’s conflict and intensifies the denouement’s mystery. Mummy Fell Asleep falls under the category of shorts where filmmakers purely rely on solid script and acting as money is not an option. And in this case, both pay off. Ninnis’ narrative is a reminder of Sean Ellis’ intriguing first shorts – and brilliant later features. Speaking of, imagine a feature version where characters are fully developed and you get to know the preexistent, obscure events that lead to breaking the camel’s back. Proud winner of:
The 2010 Heart of England Film Festival: Best Short film Internationally
The Irish International Film Festival: Best Short Film under 10 mins
The chronicle of a girl who decided to become a transgender man and learned to express himself and overcome his tribulations through art.
Show me a person who claims they have no skeletons in their closet and I’ll show you a liar.
Writer/director James Land follows his fellow Devonian Kay Jane Browning who got mocked, bullied, and beaten up as a little girl only to grow up a proud young man who transcended both genders’ limitations, and became a person of his own; an artist.
It doesn’t take money to tell your story. It takes to be truthful to it. It takes to say it out loud to feel liberated. Let haters laugh at you, among others, they are only shameful, dishonest, and deceiptive. Because the rest of the world will follow you, engage with you, and give you a standing ovation for who you really are. Hats off to both James and Kay for bringing this story to the surface. You can find it here: https://www.facebook.com/TheArtofMyScars/
Watching Kay’s story, I couldn’t help but wonder, is it our generation who’s gonna put an end to discrimination? Against people who just look different than we are. Against people who are physically and/or mentally attracted to whoever they choose to? Against people who just happen to believe in something different than we do? Is it gonna be us who’s gonna make this world welcome to EVERYONE?
Show me a person who found the courage and strength to reveal their skeletons in their closet and I’ll show you a hero.
Trying to find their ideal home, a young couple is lured and trapped in a suburban neighbourhood where every house and street is identical and seemingly no way out.
Entirely allegorical, Vivarium joins the club of independent mind-bending films such as Triangle (2009) and Coherence (2013). Does it hit the mark though? It starts by trying to but halfway there it seems that it abandons the idea itself. Based on the short film Foxes (2012), also written and directed by Garrett Shanley and Lorcan Finnegan respectively, its feature adaptation gives the impression of “surrendering”, flattens out until the end of the second act, then it picks up until the end… but the viewer is already “gone” by then. Third collaboration between Imogen Poots and Jesse Eisenberg, showcasing once more the undeniable on-screen chemistry between them.
Personally, I did like it and it did kill some time but when it comes to “Sisyphusean” films, killing some time is just not enough. The end of the second act is worth watching so the toughest part is to try and keep track until then. Maybe not the best film during the quarantine days but if, like me, you are a fan of one-location allegorical thrillers, don’t have any high hopes and give it a shot. You might find yourselves relating to the protagonists more than you expect.
A young boy who struggles in Hitler’s Youth finds out that his well-respected by the Nazi party mother is hiding a Jewish girl in their house.
Unwillingly, I was informed that an archipelago of 10/10’s swarm across IMDb about JoJo Rabbit. So, I thought to myself, ‘interesting…’ Having been familiar with the plot, I thought that it would be The Pianist (2002) meets Top Secret! (1984) – weird, I know! Well, it wasn’t. So, I am partially to blame for this as I prepared myself for something that was simply not. The first hour or so made me smile on a couple of occasions but I struggled to find it funny. Then, due to the particular type of satire, I struggled to find it dramatic. 30 wins and 142 nominations, including Oscar win for Best Adapted Screenplay, and I couldn’t make my mind until about an hour into the film whether I like it or not.
But then the last half an hour the film found a balance that, me personally, I think it lacked before. And Roman Griffin Davis, Thomasin McKenzie, and Sam Rockwell made this last half an hour a proper gem. This last half an hour got my undivided attention. If you’ve watched it or if you intend to watch it, let me know what you think. Rebel Wilson, Alfie Allen, and Stephen Merchand are brilliant additions to the cast. Scarlet Johansson’s two Oscar nominations this year must have a put a yet greater smile on her (lovely) face. In the Marriage Story (2019) she definitely deserved that nomination. Here, once again, I struggle to see why. Shame that Sam Rockwell wasn’t heard much, he makes all the difference in the world.
Regardless of what I think of the film, Taika Waititi is a true artist so, I really hope you enjoy it.
Men in Black, the secret government organisation with the cream of the crop agents and the advanced technology from all over the known Universe is now having a mole who threatens to destroy the Earth.
The reasons are obvious as to why it didn’t perform well. Barry Sonnenfeld, director of Men in Black I (1997), Men in Black II (2002), and Men in Black III (2012) gave MIB an appealing character to men, women, and children of all ages. F. Gary Gray and the studios decided it’s a wise choice to ‘devote’ Men in Black: International to millennials and, as a result, it was turned into something unfulfilling for everyone else – even them evidently. To be more specific:
Online childish slang (?) such as ‘you had one job’ and ‘that happened…’ were only put there just to have these lines heard by their favourite actors/actresses.
Both men and women, we acknowledge that Chris Hemsworth is attractive. Fair enough, but to make him look like he just finished a fragrance photoshoot or an underwear ad throughout the whole film kills the vibe, throws the fans of MIB off, and ultimately depreciates the franchise’s value.
I know it’s an action/comedy/adventure but the main hero comes to realise something he never expected about himself (no spoilers). Do we feel like he is really affected by it? No. That kills the drama. And as a whole, I didn’t really feel anything about anyone as it was all…
Fun! Comedy works in mysterious ways and what makes people tick varies. BUT… having a punchline for everything that happens for almost two hours creates one emotion for every situation.
Men in Black: International became a lose-lose situation for studios and audiences alike. Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones (even Josh Brolin) became MIB by earning their stripes. F. Gary Gray is an amazing director. Friday (1995) and Straight Outta Compton (2015) are brilliant examples of his work but Matt Holloway’s and Art Marcum’s script didn’t do any favours to anyone. If you also want to admire Chris Hemsworth as a presence but also a thespian, watch Rush (2013), In the Heart of Sea (2015), Bad Time at the El Royale (2018), and of course, the Thor/Avengers franchise.
I’m not even gonna go into production details and I feel sorry for not having something good to say (except that Tessa Thompson is always mesmerising).
Having gone missing for seven years, spaceship ‘Event Horizon’ reappears having come back from a darkness beyond human understanding.
One of the best psychological, sci-fi horrors you have ever watched: Alien (1979) meets Hellraiser (1987)! The ‘tragedy’ with Event Horizon is, as usual, the studio. When uncreative people in high places interfere with art, art always suffers the consequences. Paul W.S. Anderson’s 130′ original, ‘graphically violent’ cut forced Paramount to cut 30′ and water it down. Both the studio and Anderson regretted doing it! Twenty years later (2017), Anderson stated that the year after the film’s release he and a producer started looking for footage that due to bad archiving had gone missing. Most of it was destroyed, some of it was of poor quality and some of it was found as far as a Transylvanian salt mine!
From cruciform shapes to spinning tunnels and rotating interlocking circles, Event Horizon marries the antithesis between religion and science, showcasing the man-playing-God hubris, and offering us the results in an entertainingly, bloody way. The film has become a cult for both sci-fi and horror fans alike. The Making of ‘Event Horizon’ (2006) is a documentary that whoever liked the film MUST watch. The production details give away the great lengths Anderson went to, to bring this film to life. Philip Eisner’s script is solid, Laurence Fishburne and Sam Neill are brilliant, and the Production Design is Oskar-worthy. Unfortunately, the studio forced the editing to damage the film’s unimaginable potential. It is wishful thinking that the series in development will live up to the film’s expectations and include the ‘Old Testament Speech’ and the ‘Dimension of Pure Chaos’ analysis.
The detailed, infamous captain’s log ‘orgy of death’, the ship’s return, and the extended black hole’s Bosh-influenced ‘visions from hell’ have made all our imagination run wild over the years, hoping that, one day, the film’s re-release will re-surface missing footage, and will re-appear to us to reveal what it has seen…
A British Intelligence whistleblower decides to leak information about an illegal NSA spy operation that would force the UN Security Council to authorise the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Based on the book by Marcia and Thomas Mitchell “The Spy Who Tried to Stop a War: Katharine Gun and the Secret Plot to Sanction the Iraq Invasion”, the script of Sarah and Gregory Bernstein, and the directing of Gavin Hood (also co-writer), make Official Secrets as one of the most realistic espionage films of its time. The fiasco of the “weapons of mass destruction” that led to hundreds of thousands of people dying is seen through the eyes of Katharine Gun, showcasing her enormous courage and the incredible risk she took (both personally and professionally) to disclose the truth to the public. Subsequently, it stirs the focus towards the brave journalists and lawyers who backed her up, reinstating our faith that not all of them are government puppets and leeches respectively. All of us who served in the army at the time or were glued to the television, and saw the live footage were disgusted by both the war itself, but also our governments. I feel sorry for the ones who were actually there – fighting for either side. Here is an interesting fact: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5431890/trivia?item=tr4849190
The story is solid and the editing is beautifully crafted. Every actor pours their soul into their characters and Hood, side to side with cinematographer Florian Hoffmeister do a brilliant job behind the camera. Keira Knightley, Matthew Goode, MyAnna Buring, Matt Smith, Ralph Fiennes, Indira Varma, Rhys Ifans, Conleth Hill, and all cast and crew deserve a round of applause for their achievement in front and behind the lens.
Highly recommended for all filmgoers as it will definitely rock your boat. Especially, in times like these where both the US and the UK suffer from the twin buffoons. Apologies for delving into politics.
A translator in Japan becomes a prime suspect after her friend goes missing and her utterances and actions only worsen the situation for her.
Enigmatic, slow-burn, awkward. Mystery surrounds not only what Lucy Fly says and does but what everyone says and does. Interestingly enough, there is no character development as all characters are already developed. The amazing is how we get to wonder throughout the film how everyone got there. As for the story itself, the fabula and the syuzhet create a storyline that balances between the generic – the life as an ex-pat in Japan, and the specific – Lucy Fly’s paranoia in her world of sadness. If, eventually, the ending is to your liking or not this is up for you to decide.
Meticulously written, brilliantly acted, masterfully directed, and very carefully and patiently edited. Last but not least, this is arguably the best photography of the year. Netflix keeps the surprises coming, firstly because its Marketing is non-existent (I’ve said it before and I’ll keep saying it), and secondly because it dares once more to invest in diversity, quality, and the different.
Let the ‘mystery’ bring out the best of the genre. Let the film fill the gaps whenever it’s ready. Let your mind work it out in its own way.
For Ben! How could this not remind me of you mate? 🙂
After years of imprisonment, a man manages to escape and heads straight for the people responsible that made his life inside a living hell.
Fifth collaboration between Jesse V. Johnson and Scott Adkins with this one and Savage Dog (2017) being my favourite ones. Originally from Sutton Coldfield, only a few miles away from where I live, Adkins is the man for the job. He trains hard and, once in front of the camera, he pours his soul out for us to sit back, relax, and enjoy the show. I have a recommendation though and I address it to Johnson: With the protracted tracking shots being used more and more all over the world, I would really love to see Adkins in longer, uncut shots doing what he does best. Films like Ong-bak (2003) and Yip Man (2008) have raised the bar sky-high and I have the ultimate confidence that the Brits can do it as well. I really want to see it happening; longer shots = less editing = more continuous action. Avengement has these gritty fights that Johnson’s previous films lacked and Adkins, regardless, always delivers. Craig Fairbrass, Thomas Turgoose, Nick Moran, Kierston Wareing, and Leo Gregory are, as always, brilliant.
I hope The Debt Collector 2 (2020) adds something even more to the equation and that their successful collaboration keeps improving. Adkins needs more spotlight as he has the talent that makes martial artists half his age weep.
Straight after the raid’s massacre, Rama goes undercover to expose the corruption within the police force, no matter how deep the rabbit hole goes.
There have not been many sequels that were expected to be better than the first installments. Especially, when the ones that spawned the sequels were shockingly good. Well, “The Raid 2” is one of these exceptions with Gareth Evans and Iko Uwais pushing the bar to the limit.
Starting two hours after “The Raid: Redemption” (2011), ending up two years later, “The Raid’s 2” uncut violence almost tripled the body count, got banned by the Film Censorship Board of Malaysia, was censored in the US, got an audience member faint at the Sundance Film Festival world premiere, and mesmerised millions of martial arts fans, and action junkies all over the world.
With the first cut being around three and a half hours long, the final cut is still almost 50 minutes longer than the first “Raid”. 150 minutes of gory deaths, phantasmagoric car chases, extreme martial arts, over 60 types of guns, police corruption, mob hits, Rama going berzerk, and… “Hammer Girl”, “Baseball Bat Man”, and “The Assassin”.
Directing, Editing, DOP, Choreography, Stunt coordination, and all cast and crew deserve a standing ovation. An amazing opening sequence, with a stunning second act, and a grand finale fight scene which took 6 weeks to prepare and 8 days to film. An ABSOLUTE MUST!!!
P.S. If you are interested, this is how Gareth Evans shot the “how-the-f@!#-did-they-do-that” car chase scene: (IMDb, 2019)
When a S.W.A.T. team raids a 30-storey building run by a drug dealer and his army, the tables turn and the hunter becomes the prey.
After Merantau (2009), Indonesian-born Iko Uwais collaborates for a second time with Welsh-born Gareth Evans and a low budget action/thriller turns into a high octane, brutal, fast-paced, bloody massacre. The Indonesian, indigenous martial art style Pencak Silat faces numerous other martial arts from all over the world. Combining fists, elbows, knees, kicks, ground techniques, locks, and more, people fly down the stairs and go through doors, walls, and windows. To top it up, they get chopped up by knives, machetes, and swords, and have their brains blown up by pistols, shotguns, machine guns, and grenades in “30 floors of chaos”. Another day in the office…
Highly recommended for the action-packed film lovers and example to follow for the big-budget, nonsensical blockbusters. Also, Yayan Ruhian and Joe Taslim will make your jaw hit the floor!
Mercenaries unite in order to protect the daughter of a billionaire who becomes the target of an elite assassins’ group.
Triple Threat is NOT, I repeat is NOT to be compared, contrasted, or associated in any way with Ong-Bak: The Thai Warrior (2003), the Undisputed franchise (2006-2016), The Raid: Redemption (2011), The Raid 2 (2014), The Night Comes for Us (2018), or any other film of that level.
It’s a real shame to have names such as Tony Jaa, Iko Uwais, Tiger Hu Chen, Scott Adkins, Celina Jade, Michael Jai White, and Michael Bisping in one film and get that result. But the film’s duration warned me even before watching it. So, I was pretty sure this was going to be a disappointing one, I just didn’t know how badly disappointing.
In about an hour and a half, we have:
Undeveloped characters that no one really cares about.
Bad acting / No chemistry between the actors.
Obvious difficulty from the non-native English speaking actors to express themselves.
Mediocre action / inconsistent fighting skills.
And the biggest problem that begets all problems: Horrible writing! I mean… Horrible!!!
As it is not in my idiosyncrasy to write negative comments just for the fun of it or to attract an audience so, I’ll stop here. Prachya Pinkaew, Gareth Evans, and Timo Tjahjanto have raised the bar to a level that newer directors and even themselves will have to go the extra mile to keep delivering the jaw-dropping action/thriller films they have been delivering so far.
Convicted for a murder he didn’t commit, Henri Charriere is sent to the Devil’s Island where, along with a fellow inmate, they plan an escape of a lifetime.
Based on Charriere’s memoirs, directed by Michael Noer – “R” (2010) and “Northwest” (2013) – and written by Aaron Guzikowski, “Papillon” didn’t get the publicity it deserved. Was it because people (or critics) thought that Charlie Hunnam and Rami Malek couldn’t replace Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman respectively? Was it because the story wasn’t known to today’s era audience? Or is it maybe because classic films should be left alone and be remembered for what they achieved when they were made?
Directing, Acting, Script, Photography, Soundtrack, Costume Design, all work as one and fulfill their purpose. The editing is disruptive though which unfolds the story intermittently. There must be an “Editor’s Cut” or “Director’s Cut” version, surely. It seems as if scenes, even sequences, have been omitted from the final cut. Crucial to the story elements that would make the audience engage more with “Papillon’s” suffering.
Overall, it is a very decent, intense, and gritty remake and cast and crew deserve to be recognised for this effort.
In times of war and reason, Baron Munchausen shows up to inspire with a story of a lifetime that bypasses reality and goes down the rabbit hole of evocative fantasy and mythical adventure.
From Constantinople to the moon, to the centre of the Earth, to the belly of the beast, and back, Baron Munchausen travels towards fabled worlds encountering heroes and deities. Nostalgia, love, dreams, childhood innocence and hope rise up through Munchausen’s escapades. A social commentary inspired by the Odyssey… delineated in a British aristocratic manner.
As one of my first cinematic experiences, Terry Gilliam makes me reminisce about my childhood years and the way I used to see the world. Where, like in the film, reality and imagination blend into one and shape a harmless world where even the abhorrent tragedy of war can be a lot easier to swallow and man’s cruelty be tolerable.
John Neville, Eric Idle, Sarah Polley, Jonathan Pryce, Uma Thurman, Robin Williams (unpaid and uncredited) and the rest of the cast shared Gilliam’s vision of a better world than ours and supported him to see it through as the unfathomably humongous production complications wouldn’t stop appearing.
But reality’s misfortunes were defeated by prevalent, mythical will that projected it eventually to the silver screen.
Eight chosen contenders competing for the same position are locked in a highly respectable company’s exam room for the final test which is nothing like they have seen or experienced before.
A one-location, British psychological thriller that delves into the human psyche, and infiltrates man’s darkest thoughts. A prime example of a low-budget thriller that keeps the viewer wondering from the opening scene to the end credits what is the meaning of this test, what the question is, who truly everyone is, why were they chosen, and what is the company getting out of it.
Mysterious, entertaining, and claustrophobic, “Exam’s” storytelling relies on actual character study experiments and utilises Hitchcockian approaches that go back as far as “Lifeboat” (1944). Low budget / high standards! Hats off to cast and crew.
I say no more. Lights and phones off, and pay attention to the details. Enjoy!
Four women who are left with nothing but debt after their husbands died in a heist are pulling a heist of their own to reclaim their lives.
Based on the homonymous 1983 British series, Widows (2018) takes the fight from London to Chicago. Astonishing performances from the ensemble cast with Viola Davis and Robert Duvall standing out. Then, the powerful opening chase sequence promises an action-packed drama to keep you on the edge of your seats. A promise that doesn’t deliver though…
It is not first and certainly will not be the last when a European or an East Asian director goes to Hollywood. See, for example, actor/director Mathieu Kassovitz and Babylon A.D (2008) or Jee-woon Kim and The Last Stand (2013). One way ticket back… Even though “Widows” is nowhere near as bad as the aforementioned films (by brilliant directors) or the reviews surrounding it, it lacks the Steve McQueen, fine art training, personality, and idiosyncrasy.
It lacks the suffering of 12 Year a Slave (2013), Shame‘s (2011) internal struggle, and Hunger‘s (2008) brutal realism. Maybe his first cut (around 3 hours long) offered all of the above and more. Regardless, I really look forward to McQueen’s next film, European, American, or otherwise.
The infamous computer hacker Lisbeth Salander teams up again with journalist Mikael Blomkvist but also NSA agent Ed Needham to take down cybercriminals and Stockholm’s worst called “The Spiders”.
When the trailer was initially released, the first comment was: “The film no one asked for…”. Sony, to secure the rights for the film, acquired the rights for the fourth book which was not written by the late Stieg Larsson. A direct sequel to “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” (2011), the film bypasses two books and here’s what happened to both character and story:
Salander here is not a victim anymore but a vigilante. If there was a batsuit anywhere you would be watching “Batgirl”. She knows how to fight and how to shoot, and race on a WRC level. She knows how to hack your phone, your computer, and your car from a Nokia 6110 while beating chess Grandmaster Garry Kasparov. She can find in time dozens of dildos and use them to turn an airport upside down to free an NSA agent that she doesn’t know where he is. What can I say? It makes me look my uselessness in the eye, and jump out of the window.
Story-wise, it gets better… Wanting to keep a low profile she steals a brand new Lamborghini. She deals with a computer program that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. All clues are placed conveniently in plain sight where they can be found by anyone, yet no one finds them except the right person at the right time (it’s called gimmick). The villain doesn’t show any qualities to match Salander’s (superhuman) level. Other than she has suffered, we never find out anything about her capabilities other than she can put together and lead the toughest and remorseless criminals who wouldn’t hesitate to chop off your face.
Claire Foy is an extremely charismatic and diverse actress that does a brilliant job here. The story though and the character development don’t give her much to work with. If you are Lakeith Stanfield’s fan, watch “Sorry to Bother You” (2018). As for Fede Alvarez, I highly recommend “Evil Dead” (2013) and “Don’t Breath” (2016). Gory!
A gang of lowlife crooks called the Wild Bunch, with the help of an accountant, steal money from a Russian developer that was meant for a London mob boss who has a drug addict, troubled stepson.
What could go wrong, right?! Storytelling like Guy Ritchie only knows how to deliver! RocknRolla makes it to my list of the top 3 Guy Ritchie films, followed by Snatch (2000) and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels (1998). The editing controls the information exactly as it should have and enhances the humorous side of a British action/crime. Gerald Butler, Tom Wilkinson, Thandie Newton, Idris Elba, Mark Strong, Tom Hardy, and Toby Kebbell work brilliantly together and clash with each other adding 100% A-list British quality acting.
In a different context now… What could go wrong, right?! People! People didn’t bother. I can only assume that one reason is “seen it all before”. But it isn’t. It is snappy, surrealistic, stylish, quirky, Cockney, and adds to the formula. Yet, what was meant to be a trilogy will never be. Our loss. Favourite scene: Robbing the Russians for the second time. Priceless!
Join me in filing a petition for the “Real RocknRolla”!!!
With no one to turn to and no one to trust, a female bodyguard must protect a rich, young heiress in Casablanca when kidnappers go after her.
A female version of “Man on Fire” (2004) taking out most of the Hollywood aspects in regard to character and story development. With no cheesy lines or slow-mo for dramatic effect, “Close” is loosely based on Jacquie Davis, a world-class bodyguard who, in the last 30 years, has been “stabbed, shot at, and thrown through a window” protecting from the Beckhams to the royal family.
The editing controls the pace, balances action and drama, moves the story forward, and reveals the information when it needs to be revealed. Also, amazing cinematography and Vicky Jewson’s directing gives the opportunity to Noomi Rapace and Sophie Nélisse to unfold their amazing acting skills. Needless to say that given the right training, project, and budget, Rapace can prove herself being top-notch action heroin as (among others) Charlize Theron and Uma Thurman have in “Atomic Blonde” (2017) and “Kill Bill” (2003) respectively.
Netflix productions can go either way. “Close” went the right way and we can only hope that they produce more heartfelt action/thriller films and humanised heroes and heroines like this one.
“Combo: Men have laid down their lives for this. For this… and for what? So people can stick their fucking flag in the ground and say, “Yeah! This is England (pointing to the ground). And this is England (pointing to the heart)! And this is England (pointing to the mind)!”
Danny Cohen’s ’80s grainy cinematography and Ludovico Einaudi’s heartbreaking soundtrack accompany Midlander Shane Meadows, who creates a tear-jerking, life drama based on his childhood experiences, that debuted and elevated actors who were introduced to the world. Thomas Turgoose, Joseph Gilgun, Jack O’Connell – whose part was written specifically for him, Andrew Shim, Vicky McClure who, as the years pass by, she turns into a more and more magnificent actress and woman, Rosamund Hanson, Chanel Cresswell, Michael Socha, and Andrew Ellis get into the role and truly become the everyday heroes you see on camera. The both amazing Stephen Graham and Johnny Harris need no introductions.
Straight from the kick-off, the opening credits, archive footage, montage spanning from the Falklands war to the “Knight Rider” (1982) pretty much sums up the story of the sociopolitical situation in England but also the world in the ’80s. Shaun, Milky, Lol, Woody, Smell, Gadget, Trev, Kelly, Lenny, Pukey, and Bully all go through a rite of passage; the inescapable process of becoming men and women. And share the story of a lifetime. The references are from both the film and the mini-series and start from ’83 until ’90. I believe I’ve kept all spoilers out. If you haven’t watched it, I hope they pique your interest. If you have, I hope you see where I’m coming from.
“Woody (to Milky): You are a fucking snake in the grass… We were brothers… I would have died for you… I would have fucking died for you… I fucking loved you!!!”
“This is England” is a state of mind that divides a what would have been an otherwise carefree, bonded, random ragtag bunch of skinheads and ska lovers living in ‘Thatcherland’. A mentality that consists of politics, economy, race, generation gaps, and religion and can be may as well translated as “This is [YOUR COUNTRY OF ORIGIN]”.
There are some astonishing cinematic moments that make both the film and mini-series be a league of their own.
The detestable Combo whose brutal, cowardice attack leaves a young, black kid half-dead.
Mick (the brilliant Johnny Harris) who, whenever shows up, makes your guts twirl.
The dramatic moment where Lol confronts Mick.
Combo’s brass balls, ultimate sacrifice for love.
The intense moment when Woody confronts Milky and the gang on the street.
Woody reuniting with the repentant Combo upon the latter’s release.
The house dinner’s revelation (Chanel Cresswell is simply mesmerising).
Milky putting the final nail on the coffin facing, the hero in our eyes, Combo who strives to keep a stiff upper lip.
“This is England”…
Is the domestic violence that knocks on the door of every single household that has faced it.
The decency of everyday people you probably have never met and maybe you never will who always had next to nothing, yet were always wealthier.
The pride of every English football fan has over the national team making it to the World Cup.
The genuine British humour that has always been part of but also characterised British society.
The vast diversity of accents that make this island unique.
It is the everyday struggle to keep the head above water.
It is the everyday struggle to keep the head above water and, against all odds, somehow, find the courage to move on.
It is the English responses, reactions, idiosyncrasies, and mannerisms that you’ll find nowhere else, exhibiting England to the world with the purpose of understanding rather than judging.
It is the forgiveness some people never gave and some people never received.
“Combo: I forgive you… I just hope one day you’ll be able to forgive me…”
“This is England” pointing to the ground, to the heart, to the mind starts off as a racist interpretation at the beginning of the journey only to become the harsh realization of life when it remorselessly pins you against the wall. Combo’s (Stephen Graham) monologues and outbursts are phenomenal and his path is the cornerstone of this journey. You will hate him with a passion in the beginning only to feel for him wholeheartedly in the end.
There are innumerable moments of English realism throughout the film and series where you will find yourselves confused as to which utterances, actions, and reactions are a scripted, and which ones aren’t. “This is England” could as well be a sociological docudrama on Thatcherite England and life itself.
An unknown journey of happiness drowning in sorrow…