Category: Movie reviews

Mary Poppins Returns (2018)

Rating: U

Length: 2Hr 10

Release: 21.12.2018

About: Now an adult with three children, bank teller Michael Banks learns that his house will be repossessed in five days unless he can pay back a loan. His only hope is to find a missing certificate that shows proof of valuable shares that his father left him years earlier. Just as all seems lost, Michael and his sister receive the surprise of a lifetime when Mary Poppins — the beloved nanny from their childhood — arrives to save the day and take the Banks family on a magical, fun-filled adventure.

The Good

  • The song in the China bowl was a highlight. It was as close to the original feel.
  • Colin Firth clearly had fun with his role and it brings a little joy to the bank.
  • Julie Walters as Ellen. I couldn’t think of anyone better to replace the original actress that played Ellen. Equally, David Warner does an excellent job as Admiral Boom.
  • Original Jane was a lovely touch and nod to the original. Not much fuss is made about the scene and doesn’t detract from the story.
  • Dick Van Dyke looks picture perfect in his role as Mr Dawes Jnr. His dancing brings cheers and tears. Such a wonderful nod to the man who made the first outing such a success.

The Bad

  • The skeleton plot is essentially a clone of the Julie Andrews’ outing, just given a spin. For example, the tidying becomes a bath, the chalk drawing becomes a china bowl and the Uncle becomes a cousin. It’s sad as it has potential and certainly could have surpassed the original, if only it broke the mould.
  • While the appearance of Angela Lansbury causes me to smile, it’s very obvious that the role was written for Andrews. It then becomes a little bittersweet. I completely understand why Andrews declined the offer; I just wish she hadn’t.
  • I wasn’t fond of much of the music. Although, in all fairness most of the original music would fit here too.
  • Michael and Jane: relationship feels flat and lacks any chemistry.

The Ugly

  • I’m afraid that, for me, Emily Blunt was not right for the role. The accent, the ability to flit between the firm and fantasy stalls and her flirtations with Jack feel a little groomy when you think he was a kid in the first movie’s storyline.

Darkest Hour (2017)

Length: 2hr 5

Release: 12.1.2018

Rating: PG

About: A thrilling and inspiring true story begins at the precipice of World War II as, within days of becoming Prime Minister of Great Britain, Winston Churchill (Academy Award nominee Gary Oldman) must face one of his most turbulent and defining trials: exploring a negotiated peace treaty with Nazi Germany, or standing firm to fight for the ideals, liberty and freedom of a nation. As the unstoppable Nazi forces roll across Western Europe and the threat of invasion is imminent, and with an unprepared public, a skeptical King, and his own party plotting against him, Churchill must withstand his darkest hour, rally a nation, and attempt to change the course of world history.

The Good

  • Gary Oldman. He’s always been a chameleon, but his portrayal as Winston Churchill made him almost unrecognisable and It’s not hard to see why Oldman took home the Oscar in 2018; he was fully immersed in the role and made the film what it was.
  • Ben Mendelsohn is, once again, earning his place within Hollywood. He’s an ideal fit for King George and his chemistry with Oldman is a delight to watch.
  • Lily James gives a fine performance and certainly feels at home in this period piece. She’s another fine actor who is able to hold her own and raise others as a result.
  • There are some beautiful scenes; ones in which you’d want to pause, print and display. The colour and focus all draws you in. It’s always a difficult one for me, watching a film at home, however it’s a good sign that my phone remained off other than for finding out who the snakes in government were.

The Bad

  • Owing to my lack of knowledge when it comes to political history, I did struggle with the people presented to the audience at the beginning. It’s a little busy and people heavy at the start and I couldn’t help but feel thrown in the deep end.
  • Lily James. As much as she gives a solid performance, I cannot help but feel she’s a character put in place to appease the critics and viewers waging war on equality. Without her imput and given Kristen Scott Thomas’ small role, this would be a ‘boy’s club’ movie, as it’s the way society was at those times ‘thems the rules’ as James’ War Room tour guide explains. The problem stands in the fact that the character is almost rolled in and out periodically and there’s large sections were I wonder if she’s left for good. Churchill letting her in on Dunkirk, while story-wise is a nice touch, seems too implausible to be believed.

The Ugly

  • My emotions watching this movie were largely based upon watching from a perspective of hindsight. I felt so very frustrated at the opposition Churchill faced and even the notion of ‘brokering peace’ with Hitler brought me to tears. Even knowing how it was to end and that Churchill is a celebrated political leader did not help; the writing and performances had me believing this could have been a possibility.

Final Thoughts

A powerful film that takes some artistic licence to tell a cinematic story. Some work well for me and others I’m at odds with.

As a woman, I do not want a lip service character for the sake of checking a box and being politically correct. Period pieces are one area in which it stands out more than others.

The Hollow (2004)

Rating: 15

Length: 1Hr 23

Release: 25.10.2004

About: The presence of Ichabod Crane’s descendant (Kevin Zegers) in Sleepy Hollow conjures the Headless Horseman, and slaughter ensues.

The Good

  • Kaley couco is a decent watch. While watching this I felt she was a little reminiscent of SMG in the early years of Buffy. I’d say she’d have been even better, had she been given a little more to work with.
  • It’s an alright plot and is certainly a good idea for an updated Sleepy Hollow without Ichabod being Steve Rogered into the modern age.
  • The death scene of the second couple is hilarious. Illogical, but oh so funny.
  • It’s a short movie, so while the bad and ugly might outweigh the good, you won’t be in celluloid hell for long.

The Bad

  • The character of Ian makes no sense. He has the vibe of Max from Hocus Pocus and I do don’t buy him commanding an audience within the month of arriving in town. I also don’t get why Brady has it out for the coach’s son?! That relationship would have worked well if they flipped it, made them friends but had that conflict of them both liking the same girl.

The Ugly

  • Guys, Game of Thrones has nothing on this! Even in the day time scenes it’s dark, dark, dark. I suspect it was to hide the fact it had a very little budget.
  • The sound mixing was atrocious. At its most basic, the score was too loud and the audio low and tinny. However, when you then consider the sound effects it’s simply lazy and wrong; a sound more frequently associated with a stab rather than a swipe.

The Cure (1996)

Length: 1Hr 37

Rating: 12

Release: 14.6.1996

About: Having just moved to a new town, Erik (Brad Renfro) is thrilled when he makes friends with his younger neighbor, Dexter (Joseph Mazzello), and his friendly mom (Annabella Sciorra). Despite the disapproval of his own neglectful mother (Diana Scarwid), Erik grows close to Dexter, who suffers from AIDS. As the disease’s impact on Dexter’s life grows more noticeable, Erik and Dexter embark on a quest to New Orleans down the Mississippi River, where hope may yet lie with a doctor there.

The Good

  • It’s a well made film that could easily sit alongside your Sunday afternoon classics; Stand By Me, My Girl and Forever Young. The two boys will draw you in, right before your heart is broken.
  • It’s a powerful look at the impact of HIV and the social misconception that surrounded the auto immune disease at the time.
  • I love the fact that Medicine Man gets a mention here. It was one of my favourite films as a kid. I do love how they initially try out candy bars as a cure, before moving on to plants.

The Bad

  • I think I needed a scene or two from the mothers while the boys were away. While there are a powerful scene or two including them, I feel as if I need to see the reaction to the letter.

The Ugly

  • You’ll cry. Fat ugly tears! There’s a reason why I referenced the films that I did. The moment of the first ‘cry wolf’, you’ll know how it’ll happen too.
  • If that bit doesn’t get you, the final scene most definitely will.

Pretty in Pink (1986)

Length: 1Hr 37

Rating: 15

Release: 25.4.1986

About:

Worst description of this movie was found on IMBD: A poor girl must choose between the affections of dating her childhood sweetheart or a rich but sensitive playboy.

The Good

  • Both Andrew McCarthy and James Spader are their 80s charming and bad boy selves respectively.
  • Annie Potts is just beautiful as the punk rebel who beats to her own drum.
  • The music is a glorious nostalgia trip.

The Bad

  • The film works around too many scenes in which Andie converses with only one other character. It feels very disjointed, slow and inanimate.
  • What happens to the best mate we don’t see after the volleyball game? I hate characters that are used as plot devices. Where was she at prom?

The Ugly

  • The dress! She had two beautiful dresses and made one extra ugly, shapeless one. Jesus! I loath the dress and that dress making scene.
  • Duckie. Fuck me, he takes up too much of this film, he’s a selfish fucker and a very bad friend. I spend every moment of him being on screen wanting to punch him in his toxic narcissistic face. When we get two, very lame, excuses for dates between Andi and Blaine it’s hard to not feel resentment for the extensive time spent with such an unlikeable character.
  • The lack of Andi/Blaine. Okay, so perhaps the film is more about a rite of passage for Andi, but the romance is a big part of it. I need to believe it and I just, well I just don’t.

The Dead Don’t Die (2019)

Rating: 15

Length: 1Hr 44

Release: 12.7.2019

About: In the sleepy small town of Centerville, something is not quite right. The moon hangs large and low in the sky, the hours of daylight are becoming unpredictable, and animals are beginning to exhibit unusual behaviors. News reports are scary, and scientists are concerned, but no one foresees the strangest and most dangerous repercussion that will soon start plaguing Centerville: the dead rise from their graves and feast on the living, and the citizens must battle to survive.

The Good

Its batshit crazy and beating to its own drum. It’s that confident awkwardness that brings charm to the gritty independent feel that also came with Only Lover’s Left Alive. With The Dead Don’t Die, it has a more mainstream ease to its plot that will ensure its enjoyed by all.

The casting is incredible and I certainly want to see more films cast Adam Driver and Bill Murray together. Driver has this ability to make the meta notes so seamless to the rest of the dialogue that you can’t help but be a little thrown at times: my advice is to just sit back and enjoy the ride.

It is, from the reading around the film I’ve done, a treasure trove of Easter Eggs for movie fans of the zombie genre. Me, having watched very few zombie films, didn’t not spot any of these. It didn’t detract from my enjoyment of the film and stands in its own right.

The Bad

  • Carol Kane needed more to do. I friggin love that woman and she just needed one or two more lines of dialogue.
  • There’s a storyline involving three kids that doesn’t quite connect with the other threads. It’s a shame because it just needed one thing to bring it all together.

The Ugly

  • I’m not sure what I make of Tilda Swinton’s story arc, if that’s what you can call it. There are certainly bits I liked and even bits I loved about her Scottish newcomer with epic swordsmanship. However her resolution gave me Crystal Skull PTSD, so I’m not sure I’m sold on that I’m afraid.

Final Thoughts

It’s certainly a decent watch and it has an amazing score, but you’ll either find it hilarious or extremely unfunny.

The Fly (1986)

Rating 18

Length 1Hr 36

Release 13.2.1987

About When scientist Seth Brundle (Jeff Goldblum) completes his teleportation device, he decides to test its abilities on himself. Unbeknownst to him, a housefly slips in during the process, leading to a merger of man and insect. Initially, Brundle appears to have undergone a successful teleportation, but the fly’s cells begin to take over his body. As he becomes increasingly fly-like, Brundle’s girlfriend (Geena Davis) is horrified as the person she once loved deteriorates into a monster.

The Good

  • The makeup and visual effects are incredible. Repulsive in some respects, but they certainly stand up to a modern viewing. From Seth’s mottled and sickly looking skin to his complete metamorphosis, it’s compelling and scary to see.
  • Jeff Goldblum and his ticks and twitches in particular. I do wonder if it’s his role here that put him up for consideration in Jurassic Park. There are similarities within the characters and the only difference being; Ian Malcolm would have predicted all this chaos. Goldblum has been long established as a loveable kook for me, that seeing him in this very different role helps bring the horror alive.
  • I love that Seth has a better outline plan of action than a Tory government. Something I thought right before he tells Veronica he wants to be the first insect politician. I giggled way too much at myself for that.
  • John Getz wins me over by the end of the film. I can’t remember what else I’ve seen him in, but the word ‘sleaze’ comes to mind and that’s before you consider the ‘Han’s buddy’ beard he has going on. Sleaze is actually right. He’s a knob to Veronica and I hate him for about two thirds of the movie. However, he really turns it around.

The Bad

  • There’s less Science and more about the relationship between Seth and Veronica. While it certainly makes for a better horror, I personally didn’t care for it.
  • The timeframe seems off, making the relationship seem overly toxic, without the whole spontaneously mutating into a psychotic insect. I know there’s a comment close to the end of the film about how a month has passed, but early on it seems like a day goes past and they’ve gone from bed buddies to an old married couple holidaying to Florida.
  • Not sure how I feel about the narrative commentary of Veronica having to tell Seth about her intended abortion. I know it’s necessary for the cause and effect to lead to the final act, but I’m very uncomfortable with it when he’s shown violent predator behaviour. Without getting bogged down in gender politics, I think it’s fair to say that if you’re beau has become a mutation that vomits over his own food and scared the bejesus out of you, you can wave the ‘conversation’.

  • I can see how the film is interpreted as a commentary of the AIDS crisis, however it is self evident that the commentary is much too broad for this to be the case. It’s a shame, as if they went in with intention, it could have made an excellent theme. That said, we have werewolves for that.

The Ugly

  • The gore was too much for me. Made me physically sick and it’s the first time during this advent I’ve had to look away from the screen.
  • The maggot baby birth! Holy fuck, that was horrific. Perhaps it has more impact on a woman but that was a visual I could have done without.

Final Thoughts

It’s a well made film that had proven my theory that I am indeed a pussy when it comes to gory horrors. It’s like Captain America gone wrong, way way wrong.

The Fly(1958)

Rating: X

Length:1Hr 34

Release: 31.7.1958

About: When scientist Andre Delambre (Al Hedison) tests his matter transporter on himself, an errant housefly makes its way into the transportation chamber, and things go horribly wrong. As a result, Delambre’s head and arm are now that of the insect. Slowly losing himself to the fly, Delambre turns to his wife, Helene (Patricia Owens), for help. But when tragedy strikes, Delambre’s brother (Vincent Price) and Inspector Charas (Herbert Marshall) are forced to pick up the investigation.

The Good

  • I love the narrative framing that’s used. The anticipation of discovering what happened to her husband then, as time goes on, the wish that you can stop it all from happening.
  • Vincent Price has a presence on the screen. Not one that shines while suppressing others, but a charm and persona that simple commands attention. I look forward to exploring his filmography beyond the few films I’ve seen him in.
  • The effects are brilliant, even for a film made today I’d been happy with what they presented. From the close up flies to the presentation of Andre’s mutation, they all allow you to buy into the situation. The ending, in which we see the mutated fly is an incredible visual.
  • In much the same way The Creature From the Black Lagoon had the historical Science lesson, The Fly contains a commentary about technological progression, playing God and the fear that brings. Science is at the heart of many horrors and it’s the beauty of them. Lack of explanation makes us feel uneasy, so bending or breaking Science to our will is a goal for many. The biggest fear being that it’ll fail. It’s a subconscious fear, but that’s where a horror is better at getting under your skin.

The Bad

  • There’s a scene or two within the flash-back framing that are impossible for the wife to tell, as it contains only Andre or the camera angle presents his view (however amazing that it). Yes, it’s a weak point and not something a viewer would perhaps notice, but I need a bad and I hope this shows the quality of the film if I’m being petty.

The Ugly

  • That poor fucking child! No one tells him his dad is dead, even though the Police are deciding if his mother should be hanged for murder or locked up in the looney bin for her explanation. Actually, he constantly asks when his dad is coming home… maybe he didn’t inherit his father’s genius.

Final Thoughts

An excellent film, but no fear factor due to perhaps knowing the outcome from the start.

The Terminator (1984)

Rating: 15

Length: 1Hr 47

Release: 11.1.1985

About: Disguised as a human, a cyborg assassin known as a Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger) travels from 2029 to 1984 to kill Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton). Sent to protect Sarah is Kyle Reese (Michael Biehn), who divulges the coming of Skynet, an artificial intelligence system that will spark a nuclear holocaust. Sarah is targeted because Skynet knows that her unborn son will lead the fight against them. With the virtually unstoppable Terminator in hot pursuit, she and Kyle attempt to escape.

The Good

  • As much as the arriving naked baffles me (and suffers from the sequels almost lampooning the process), I do love Kyle Reese’s Supermarket Sweep of what I could imagine being the ‘things’ everyone would go on to wear in 1985.
  • The gritty colourisation that is almost the definition of 80s movies. I feel at home with it and it hides some of the film’s ageing and instead gives it the retro feel that Stranger Things has painfully replicated.
  • The two dream sequences gives a better look at the post-apocalyptic future than any of the future movies do. While watching the first dream sequence I actually thought about how this franchise has perhaps kept hold of the time-travel assassin trope (fuck, they’ve over used it so much it’s become a trope!) for too long. What the franchise needs is a war movie. Show the audience these cyborgs in a different genre.
  • I remember being a kid and being scared by The Terminator. I still felt that apprehension and the key is in the lack of dialogue. There’s no reasoning with him; he’s a juggernaut computer with an ass you could bounce coins off.
  • Sarah Connor is one of the best female protagonists with one of the best character development. She stands among Leia, Ripley and others as a character who shows strength in a male dominated genre. What sets Connor apart is her development from traumatised to the bad ass she becomes in Judgement Day. It’s subtle but there’s a line and when you hear it, you know she’s no longer the same.

The Bad

  • There are some scenes towards the end in which Arnie looks like he’s in the French Revolution or a girl who has a heavy hand with a foundation that’s twenty shades out. It’s really hard to tell if this is something that hasn’t ‘aged well’ or a shit make up job so I have to write it up.
  • The stop motion sticks out in some parts and I put it in the bad, not because of it not ageing well, but because it is only about 5% of the footage that doesn’t look right, suggesting inconsistencies. It certainly looks better than, the opening sequence of Lockout (2012), for example. Plus, I personally would take stop motion over CGI any day. Except for Jurassic Park (Sorry, Phil Tippett).

The Ugly

  • “You’re terminated, fucker.” It’s strange that as someone who loves her puns and adores these sort of wise cracks in Buffy, I rolled my eyes and groaned at this death nell for the Terminator. Again, I feel it’s the sequels that actually harms this film more than the film in, and of, itself and what it perhaps just a line rings a little hammy.

Final Thoughts

A solid classic, only tainted by the tonal shift of the sequels.

Dracula (1958)

Rating: X

Length: 1Hr 22

Release: 22.5.1958

About: On a search for his missing friend Jonathan Harker (John Van Eyssen), vampire hunter Dr. Van Helsing (Peter Cushing) is led to Count Dracula’s (Christopher Lee) castle. Upon arriving, Van Helsing finds an undead Harker in Dracula’s crypt and discovers that the count’s next target is Harker’s ailing fiancée, Lucy Holmwood (Carol Marsh). With the help of her brother, Arthur (Michael Gough), Van Helsing struggles to protect Lucy and put an end to Count Dracula’s parasitic reign of terror.

The good

  • The acting is much better than my past experiences of watching Dracula. Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee provide that familiarity that you’d come to expect of Hammer Horrors. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone else take on Van Helsing in a better way.
  • It took me a while to spot him, but Wayne Manner’s resident butler Michael Gough is an absolute joy to watch as the father of Lucy. It’s at his introduction that the film is a smoother watch and he works very well with Cushing.
  • The defeat of Dracula is quite brilliant, even now. Yes, there was a slight difference in the colouration to the rest of the film, but the physical effects themselves really do stand up. Much better than so CGI counterparts ever could.

The bad

  • I’m unsure as to why Dracula speaks at the start but is reduced to growls and hisses. It does nothing for the narrative and having him speak. It’s not enough to make him disarming and it’s too much to allow him to be fearful.

The ugly

  • I think it might be the Dracula story itself, but I found this rather clunky and slow to gain traction in its lack of protagonist. Or rather, a protagonist who isn’t present from the start. Perhaps framing the film and beginning with Van Helsing receiving Jonathan’s diary. That way we’re with Cushing from the start.

Final Thoughts

A clunky but well acted version of the legendary Dracula that plays a little more like a thriller than a horror.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

Rating: 18

Length: 1Hr 35

Release: 7.5.2010

About: Teenagers Nancy, Quentin, Kris, Jesse and Dean are all neighborhood friends who begin having the same dream of a horribly disfigured man who wears a tattered sweater and a glove made of knives. The man, Freddy Krueger (Jackie Earle Haley), terrorizes them in their dreams, and the only escape is to wake up. But when one of their number dies violently, the friends realize that what happens in the dream world is real, and the only way to stay alive is to stay awake.

The Good

The 2010 offering takes what is an interesting concept, offers a polished script and gives a better explanation to the fate of Freddy and his supernatural motivations.

It’s most definitely a horror. There’s jumps and scares (even those beyond my cat jumping onto me as someone gets the Freddy knives to the chest). The music has some part to play in that, but the biggest sell for the fear factor is how possible some of it seems. Not the whole ‘slasher killing you in your dreams’, but the repression after trauma, sexual predators being brought to vigilante justice by an angry mob.

Krueger is visually better. He looks like a burn victim rather than a jazz hand muppet or Christopher Llyod in Who Framed Rogger Rabbit? While Englund is iconic, time has been unkind to his camp Freddy. Now we have a Krueger that you believe may have been wrongly punished. Not only do his motivations bring fear, every movement is slow, calculated and necessary. It’s the opposite of what the 80s provided and, even ten years on, it scares the crap out of me.

The Bad

Some CGI scenes are bad. I actually reported a ‘trivia’ note on IMDb that stated that GCI was only used when ‘absolutely necessary’ as I believe that to be utter bullshit. The two scenes in which Freddy enters the ‘real world’ through the bedroom walls did not need to be done through CGI. It looks flawless (and creepy) in the 1984 version while the CGI one detracts from the horror.

The Ugly

The final scene that suggests it’s not really all over. It’s not the only film guilty of it, but I am disappointed that in 2010 it’s the only way Hollywood can end a horror movie.

Final thoughts

It’s the best horror remake/reboot I know of and it certainly has the scares you want from a horror. I just wish it would have relied on practical effects over CGI.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

Rating: 18

Length: 1Hr 31

Release: 23.8.1985

About: In Wes Craven’s classic slasher film, several Midwestern teenagers fall prey to Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund), a disfigured midnight mangler who preys on the teenagers in their dreams — which, in turn, kills them in reality. After investigating the phenomenon, Nancy (Heather Langenkamp) begins to suspect that a dark secret kept by her and her friends’ parents may be the key to unraveling the mystery, but can Nancy and her boyfriend Glen (Johnny Depp) solve the puzzle before it’s too late?

The Good

  • It’s opening is quite interesting even if it feels like I’ve entered the industrial zone of the Crystal Maze. We’re thrown into a situation already in action. It’s full throttle from the get go and actually makes the audience a little off kilter. There’s nothing better than throwing you out of your comfort zone to bring the fear.

The Bad

  • Fred Krueger. Unfortunately, he’s a little too cartoonish to be fearful and as we see him within the first 30 seconds of the movie, I feel there’s an element of over exposure.
  • I’m not sure if the film was trying to keep the cast down, but the plot and motivation of Fred Krueger doesn’t quite match up with how the victims are picked. The mother’s revelation is a little hard to follow and I feel it implies she is solely responsible for Fred’s death.

The Ugly

  • Nancy, Nancy, Nancy! Why didn’t she die? Why was she such a shit actress who had two settings: monotone or SCREAMING EVERYTHING. In fact, there wasn’t really any acting (read: no facial expressions or responses to anything being said to her) at all. The best way to see the appalling acting is when she’s listening to her friend, Tina, recount her dream. Nancy reads a line that indicates Nancy has prompted her to remember her own dream. But nothing, LITERALLY NOTHING, about her body language suggests she finds the dream familiar.
  • I don’t even feel bad saying this, but I was rooting for ol’ Krueger. I felt, on irritation factor alone, she deserved to die. You know there’s something wrong when I’m rooting for a child slasher to win.

Final Thoughts

Little too small town Stephen King storytelling with a Sarah from the Labyrinth casting reject makes this an underwhelming watch for me.