Category: Ramblings

A Dog’s Journey (2019)

Rating PG
Length 1h 49
Release 3.5.2019
Director Gail Macuso

The Good

  • Well, doesn’t Josh Gad make an adorable fury narrator?! It’s why I probably had so much difficulty with the deaths; Gad had me invested right from the start.

The Bad

  • The aged makeup on Dennis Quaid and Marg Helgenberger was a bit ropey there at the end. Little bit like how they always aged Patrick Stewart on Star Trek.
  • This is a sequel?! What the hell! How did I not know this? Not that I think I missed anything. I’m just curious as to how similar it was.
  • It’s rather twee, very predictable and much more like a film I’d expect from the Hallmark channel and not a cinematic outing. I know, I know…. after Marley and Me you’d think I’d learn my lesson regarding the health and wellbeing of a dog, but it wasn’t just that. It was all the plot points that not only where all present and accounted for, they all came at the expected time too.

The Ugly

  • Oh I cried so hard. I thought I could handle it, but nope. I balled like a baby so many times. Yes, it felt cathartic. However, who the hell thinks its a good idea to make these sort of films? I know its my own fault for putting the bastard on like, but do you know what happens when you try and hug a cat?!

Final Thoughts

There is no other reason to watch this film unless you need to cry. Literally, the only reason.

Molly’s Game (2017)

Rating 15
Length 2h 20
Release 1.1.2018
Director Aaron Sorkin
About Molly Bloom, who runs a high-stakes poker game for prominent stars and mafia, finds herself in trouble after the FBI seek interest in her profile.

The Good

  • Much like many other Aaron Sorkin products, Molly’s Game is fast talking, clever in its execution and able to surprise you in the final moments.
  • I like that Idris Elba’s character was fictionalised. By having that creative change, it allows the narrative to work slightly better for the screen. At the end of the day, changes had to happen. This choice streamlines them all.
  • Jessica Chastain. Bloody hell, she’s a little bit brilliant isn’t she? I don’t know why I’ve previously avoided her movies, but I most definitely will be taking a look at some of her other roles. In this, she gives us an evolutionary performance and her narration was impeccable.
  • Kevin Costner was another surprise addition to this film. While he doesn’t have much screen time, he certainly makes an impact not only in terms of the narrative, but on the viewer too.

The Bad

  • For me, it’s a little on the long side. While comfortable enough on a first viewing, I’m sure the episodic nature will keep it from being a repeated watch.

The Ugly

  • I’m not a mob girl. I don’t like gangster movies and I never have. Now while this does stick to the biographical and criminal side there are times were I worried in which way it was going to go.

Final Thoughts

An excellent biography that could be watched alongside I’Tonya or American Made. It’s not going to be top of anyone’s ‘favourite films’, but its certainly got the Sorkin seal of quality.

Coming 2 America (2021)

Rating 12a
Length 1h 50
Release 5.3.2021
Director Craig Brewer
About Set in the lush and royal country of Zamunda, newly-crowned King Akeem (Eddie Murphy) and his trusted confidante Semmi (Arsenio Hall) embark on an all-new hilarious adventure that has them traversing the globe from their great African nation to the borough of Queens, New York – where it all began.

First Thoughts

I absolutely loved the first movie. It was one of those that I’d put on if I woke up early and got the run of the tv to myself. I loved the idea of this Prince wanting to find love. I mean, it was awesome to see the the fairytale from the other perspective, you know?!
I haven’t watched it for years, but that can be said for any film I watch ad nauseam. I had totally intended to have a rewatch before catching this sequel, but it kind of fell away from me. When it came to watching this, I did consider watching them together but what if nostalgia got in the way and a rewatch of the first got in the way of enjoying this offering?

The Good

  • I found myself laughing, and laughing hard. That’s actually a pretty good feat considering I was watching alone. Whether it was a genuinely funny line, or a ‘I get that reference’, it didn’t matter. It hit my funny bone.
  • There was so much call back. It was amazing how much there was and how it was done in a way that didn’t feel forced. It felt like coming home, to my childhood and at a time when the world wasn’t so bad.
  • The cast is incredible. From bringing back original cast members, to new players and cameos. It is spot on.
  • Wakanda forever. Damn, this film has Black Panther pride. From the accents the daughters use to subtle (and not so subtle) nods it really does send up the Marvel movie in a heartfelt way. Something that is only intensified when you discover there was a love of Coming to America on the Black Panther set.
  • Jermaine Fowler is going to be one to watch. His portrayl of Lavelle was just charming.
  • The commentary on feminism and the story arc of the three daughters is quite empowering. Yes, there’s the vibes at the start that I was worried would lead to a very different review, but the film does show you early on and is clever in revealing the views of Akeem.
  • In the snowy world we live in today, noone would have blamed Murphy and Hall for dumping half their characters from the original. I mean, the boys at the barber shop skirted the line at the time but I was worried about their imput into the world of today. They won’t be to everyone’s liking, but i found it clever how they managed to keep them in the narrative while keeping them in-character.

The Bad

  • It pains me to say this, but Leslie Jones was horrific in this film. All she did was scream and over pronounce her words. It was a characterture through and through and everyone else was actually acting. Yeah, Wesley Snipes brought a bit of the Nic Cage House of Ham to the proceedings, but Jones was painful to watch.

The Ugly

  • Again with the rape of men in a comedy. I’m sick of this trope. Making it that he was drugged makes it worse, not excuses the behaviour. I’ll be honest, the reveal of this, really did have me reaching for the remote. I get that the film was trying to keep our protagonist a certain way, but when he’s getting daily blowjobs from the royal bathers, I don’t think the audience are too bothered if he saved himself for Lisa.

Final Thoughts

I’d say it was a case for me that everything just… worked. Will it be a rewatchable film? Time will tell, but I’m certainly glad I got to catch up with the Royal Family of Zamunda.

Batley Grammar School has Demonstrated How Little the UK Understands the True Meaning of Islam

The teacher at Batley Grammar School was, and is, in the wrong. I completely support the school in suspending him. Not only from the school’s standpoint, but in terms of the damage this man has undoubtedly caused to the subject. I say this as an RE teacher of 12 years, a person with an ounce of common sense and a person who values human decency above all else.
I do not know what I am more ashamed of; the teacher who not only thought it was okay and has since claimed he’s expressing his ‘freedom of speech’ by presenting the Charlie Hebdo cartoon, or the flag flying Brits who have flocked to Twitter to insist Muslims leave the country, mirror the teacher’s sentiment of ‘freedom of speech, innit’ while also demonstrating that they fail to understand that this freedom voids their ‘they have no right to be offended’ rhetoric.


Muhammad (pbuh)

For those of you not in the know, it is an offence for any Prophet to be drawn within Islam. This includes Moses, Noah and Jesus. I must point out that very few Muslim students I’ve taught over the years have taken any issue with the presentation of the image of Jesus, being the most discussed Prophet who appears in many religions (including Hinduism). Why? They accept the culture of the UK and the fact that it is still a ‘Christian’ country which has displayed Jesus in many forms of art for centuries.
It is blasphemous to attempt to recreate the Prophets. Not having a law in place does not stop it being so, as some seem to claim. It just means that it is not a ‘crime’ here in the UK. Does it mean it’s okay to put young Muslims through distress because our country no longer frowns upon the use of ‘oh my God’ and ‘Jesus Christ’?!


The Intent of the Image


Since this news broke on Thursday, I have maintained that the biggest decider regarding the image is the intent by the artist. To a certain extent, is does not matter what the intent of the teacher was because if the image was intended to offend Muslims, you can give all the disclaimers you want; they will still be offended. It has been revealed that these students are in Year 9, that is a very hard age and year group to be presenting a controversial piece of artwork. I can only begin to image how distressful it could be..
It has been revealed that the image shown was the Charlie Hebdo one from January 2015. The one that caused extremists to kill many who worked at the office. They also recently came under fire for an appalling cartoon of the Royal Family. The intent of that image is clear; it is meant to cause hurt and distress.

The Teacher’s Intent


This is where I really find myself angry. I have thought long and hard about this over the last few days and I cannot imagine a rationale that would ever allow me to use that cartoon. Nor can I come up with a justifiable value that makes the hurt caused worth it. Any RE trained teacher, worth their weight in gold will tell you that it’s inconceivable to use an image of Muhammad (pbuh) in a lesson.
There is an online petition that is believed to have been set up by students. It is explained on there that the image was used to explain racism. Well, that proves that either the teacher is incompetent or that he failed in what he was really tying to teach because that image is not an example of racism. It is, however, an example of Islamophobia or, in a broader context, xenophobia.
Is it really a big deal?! Well, in my experience, yes, it is a big deal. Over the years I’ve lost count of how many times a child has wrongly shouted ‘That’s racist that’, so I do believe it is important to make a distinction between the different forms of discrimination and make sure it is understood that ‘Islam’ is not a race. While the religion has foundations in the middle east, your ethnicity does not exclude you from being Muslim.
I would also question the critical thinking skills of 13- and 14-year-olds and their ability to understand the image within the confines of its context. My professional opinion would be that even a high ability sixth former would struggle to understand and be able to detach personal belief to critically evaluate the image as the teacher wanted.

Robert Jenrick has weighed in and said “In a free society, we want religions to be taught to children and for children to be able to question and query them.”
Students don’t need to see an image created my someone who isn’t Muslim in order to question the faith. Once again, the views of those in charge of our education system prove they haven’t got a clue what we as professionals do.
He has also stated that issues should not be censored. What issue Jenrick? What issue was so important to discuss that no other resource could have been used? What issue could not be explored and questioned without breaching a student’s right to their religious expression?
Oh, and while we’re at it Jenrick (and Williamson), could you please show me where in any RE Agreed Syllabus is it stated a Year 9 class should discuss whether an image of Muhammad puts Charlie Hebdo at fault or Muslims? That’s the conclusion I’m coming to. At no point is it professional to attribute the actions of ISIS to Islam, nor is it appropriate to expect students to evaluate blame when it comes to terrorist actions.
With all due disrespect, Jenrick and Williamson, you have no place in commenting, you are a plague on our industry and the sooner you are out of every single teacher’s hair, the better.


The Xenophobic British and the Myths They Believe


“Blasphemy isn’t illegal here.”
“Your rules don’t apply here.”
“Go back home if you don’t like it.”
“We’ll never be an Islamic State for your voodoo cult.”
That is just some of the outrage from the Twitter-verse I encountered on Thursday. Every stereotype and mistruth I have tried to challenge over the years spat out by those who believe ISIS represent all of Islam.
I am not saying any religion is perfect, I’m agnostic for that very reason. All have a past that is embroiled in violence, corruption and behaviour they would rather forget, but they are not condemned for them in the way Islam is.
Isis (and any other ‘Islamic’ extremists) is to Islam what the KKK are to Christianity. After the attacks at Charlie Hebdo, the hashtag #NotInMyName trended, and it is worth remembering now.
Extremists use extensive censoring and cherry picking to come to the violent conclusions they do. They practice selective interpretations of their Holy Texts to justify the horrific acts and autrocities we are all familiar with. And despite the voices to the contrary, the British public believe extremism to be the status quo.
When the Qu’ran instructs

“That is why We ordained for the Children of Israel that whoever takes a life—unless as a punishment for murder or mischief in the land—it will be as if they killed all of humanity; and whoever saves a life, it will be as if they saved all of humanity.”

Verse 5:32

,an instruction many extremists choose to ignore, you must begin to question the true purpose of Islam and the information you’ve been missold.
I know many Muslims, I’ve taught many Muslims. I also accept that what I teach of Islam is far removed from what the living religion is (and that is down to the sanitation of the religion through the exam specifications. Some things we teach are in direct contradiction of what some students believe.) however, it is not a faith or community to fear. Islam is derived from the Arabic word “sal’m” which. literally means peace. Muslims know this. So should you.
One thing that has certainly come out of this, is that there is still work to be done to develop our multicultural country and foster a culture of acceptance. Between this, Brexit and the hatred focused on Meghan Markle it is becoming harder to be proud. It’s hard to not acknowledge how much like America we are when it comes to all forms of xenophobia.


When the Xenophobes Miss the Point


“It is only a F@@@ing Cartoon”

Twitter

“Cartoons don’t do any harm”

Twitter


You need to read what I say here carefully.
I am certain they said it was only a cartoon when the Nazis started printing cartoons of the Jews in papers. That is all they were after all, and cartoons don’t do any harm, right?
Yes, teachers use the Jewish cartoons today, but it is in a very controlled way in order to teach how those images were wrong, hurtful and damaging.
My argument still stands; the Charlie Hebdo cartoon has the same impact the Nazi Propaganda images had AT THE TIME.
This one of Muhammad (pbuh) will never have that expiry. The crux of the issue is not going away any time soon. So if you have a Muslim demographic, it really is cruel to expect them to engage in a debate about a forbidden artwork inciting violence in France.

Finally, I think the best way to simplify this. The teacher was an adult and pausing for thirty seconds could have resolved this. Not showing the image will not decrease the value of the lesson and, most importantly, will not cause harm, or do I show an extremely offensive image that will cause harm and distress to even one of the members of my class due to background while not adding much in terms of value to the lesson?!


https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/islam-muslim-terrorism-islamist-extremism-quran-teaching-violence-meaning-prophet-muhammed-a7676246.html

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-56548667

https://news.sky.com/story/batley-grammar-school-is-prophet-mohammed-caricature-offensive-or-freedom-of-expression-12257603

https://inews.co.uk/news/education/teachers-show-images-muhammad-robert-jenrick-batley-grammar-protests-931939

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/mar/25/batley-head-apologises-for-teacher-using-charlie-hebdo-cartoons

Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure (1989)

Rating PG
Length 1h 26
Release25.8.1989
Director Stephen Herek
About High School best mates are on track to fail their History class, sending one of them to Military school and potentially changing the course of the future. That is until they meet a time traveller who offers to help.

The Good

  • The music is awesome. All the way through, the story is complimented with a most excellent rock soundtrack.
  • Considering how dumb our two protagonists are, this film is very clever. However, I never once feel like I’m laughing at them and I most definitely do root for them all the way through.
  • It takes the fish-out-of-water trope and puts it on acid. That scene in the mall is just epic. It’s my favourite part of the movie outside of Bill & Ted freeing all of their historical figures from jail.
  • The very thing that makes this movie, outside of Reeves and Winter, is George Carlin. He doesn’t have much screen time, but boy that man has presence and charm. I truly couldn’t imagine anyone else in the role and you do feel his loss in the third instalment.

The Bad

  • I’ve never liked the Napoleon B-plot. I think it’s more that he’s kind of a dick, but without him I’m aware the story would be very different.
  • Did they really have to ruin that hug with calling each other ‘fag’?!

The Ugly

  • Bill & Ted’s actual musical ability. However, I trust Rufus when he breaks the fourth wall and informs us that they do get better.

Final Thoughts

A favourite of mine for a long time. I can’t imagine that changing any time soon.

The Faculty (1998)

Rating 15
Length 1h 44
Release 9.4.1999
Director Robert Rodriguez
About Students suspect that their teachers are aliens after bizarre occurrences

The Good

  • That cold opening is amazing. It’s something many of us growing up at the time would be familiar with,having watched X-Files and Buffy.
  • I love that the film challenges the stereotypes. While some aren’t as convincing as others, I like that it tried. My favourite being that Zeke isn’t a flunk or a burn out. He’s really intelligent. In fact, flunking out to remain in high school with his best clients is probably the smartest move he could have made. Each of the Breakfast Club ensemble challenge their own identity throughout the movie. I frigging love it.
  • The dialogue is clever, fast paced and so much of it has a pay off.
  • Stupid thing to notice, but I love that all the girls have chipped nail varnish. The film isn’t trying to be visually polished and perfect. It’s grunge and totally more Kerrang than the gloss of MTV.
  • The deaths, the violence and the gore is on point for Rodriquez’ more adult offerings.
  • This has one awesome soundtrack. From a reworking of Alice Cooper’s I’m Eighteen, to the vocal stylings of Oasis during the credits; this is a 90s soundtrack of the highest order.

The Bad

  • Salam Hayek is utterly wasted in this film. Her nurse who is saving her sick days for when she’s feeling well all but disappears after the first 20 minutes. It’s a total shame.
  • The CGI in places is really ropey. If you emulate a film that still stands up today; you really do need to bring your A-game. I’m not advocating for better CGI either. I think both The Thing (which The Faculty has many references to) and American Werewolf in London prove, that nothing beats practical effects.

The Ugly

  • Famke Jansen is not right as Miss Burke. I’ve never found her meek, weak and vulnerable portrayals all that convincing, but its even more apparent in this film when she is having to then play the opposite. With both, she is at the very extreme and its all a little too much, too panto and, based on that final scene, a little too rapey.
  • Do all things that hire Robert Patrick have to make him do ‘the run’?

Final Thoughts

What is not to love? It’s the best of horror and sci-if, with nods and Easter eggs for the geeks.

Snakes on a Plane (2006)

Rating 15
length 1h 45
Release 18.8.2006
Director David R. Ellils
About Sean Jones, a witness, is a on a flight to LA to testify against a mob boss, Eddie Kim. However, Flynn, the FBI agent accompanying Sean, must save the passengers from a disaster.

The Good

  • Samuel L Jackson. This film doesn’t work without Samuel L Fucking Jackson. I briefly entertained what it might be like had Nic Cage signed on. Then I remembered he’s done Tiger King on a boat and it just wasn’t the same.
    Jackson is that sensible chaos you need in this sort of situation. One who will have fun and work with all of the players around him.
  • I love our introductions to everyone. From the two kids flying without their parents for the first time and the Paris Hilton complete with cabin dog all the way to the cabin crew member on their last flight before law school and the snotty Brit who is so put-out by first-class being unavailable. Of course we also get a sexed-up couple and much more reserved Honeymooners. By giving us such economical meetings with them all, you’re invested and also predicting who’ll make it to the final destination.
  • Bobby Cannavale and his B-plot of being the FBI agent in charge of anti-venom really impressed me when I first watched it and that still hasn’t changed. I think this was one of the first things I saw him in and he left me wanting a little more of his narrative in this film.
  • It’s snakes, on a plane. They fuck that shit up and the only person left to land the plane is a man who has logged flying hours on a computer game! What is not to love about that? Okay, it’s not going to win awards, you’re not leaving the cinema with some life affirming wonderment. But you’re going to laugh. I mean, a snake biting a tit or a penis is funny when it’s not you.

The Bad

  • The barely-there plot really is laughable when you even pause for a second to think about it. I mean, I’m no Ian Malcolm, but I can tell you that there’s no way you can predict those snakes would have anywhere near that sort of impact.
  • We get creature feature cam. I’m not sure I ever really picked up on it so much before, but bloody hell it bugs the hell out of me now. At least for this, it was used sparingly.
  • Nathan Philips as Sean; the target who triggers all of the snakes, on the plane. He’s just a bit wet. There’s nothing really about him that stands out and really, he’s just a walking talking plot prop.

The Ugly

  • Some of the CGI snakes and dead passengers haven’t aged well. This was a movie done on a budget, so it is understandable.
  • It is a fun film, but it does, at times, come across as ‘how to hijack a plane’ film. I mean, how many weapons did they fashion from innocent items?! It actually doesn’t hit as hard as it did watching it back in 2006, but the memory of thinking this still sticks with me.

Final Thoughts

It’s a well-made bad movie. You need to switch your brain off and not look too deeply because if not, it’s so stupid your brain hurts. If you do switch off, you’ll enjoy this for the bat-shit crazy ride this is.

Gun Shy (2000) <With Spoilers>

Rating 15
Length 1h 41
Release 6.10.2000
Director Eric Blakeney
About A seemingly calm and collected DEA agent is a nervous wreck on the inside. As he struggles to demolish a cartel, an incident lands him in the psychiatrist’s chair and, consequently, in group therapy.

The Good

  • The thing that really makes this film work, is the relationships Liam Neeson’s Charlie makes during his undercover work. I say that loosely given that I’m not sure Charlie is ever playing anything other than himself.
    He has obvious chemistry with Sandra Bullock, but the best relationship by far is the one between Neeson and Oliver Platt. Oh my god, the final act, you will feel for both of them. You’ll understand the decisions they each make.
  • Speaking of Oliver Platt, he’s incredible in this. I’m not so sure I’ve seen him in a “bad guy” role before and it really worked. To then have the film unpick the character and discover the root of his unhappiness. If you gave me a film just about Fulvio and Charlie, I’d have been very happy.
  • I was happily surprised to discover Mitch Pileggi had a much larger role in this than I anticipated. While the start of the film may have you thinking he’s in a type-cast role, but no one in this film is who they really seem.
    I must admit though, I had my suspicions, Pileggi himself speaks of his Italian heritage in interviews, so he feels like a bit of a red herring given the involvement of the Mafia. I reveal this, not to be a spoilsport, but because I can’t let this review sit without taking about the reveal. Not the one to the audience, but the reveal to Charlie. There’s a way that Pileggi can set his face whenever he’s in the position of a bad guy (Son’s of Anarchy, Shocker and Supernatural spring to mind) and it works well here.

The Bad

  • It’s a bit wacky. Like, you really do have to roll with it and remember that it was a product of the 2000s; the same era that brought us Mulholland Drive, Get Shorty and Analyze This. If you can stick with it until it really gets going, there’s a payoff.
  • For an Irishman, Liam Neeson’s accent in this is appalling. It’s so unbelievably inconsistent that I’m certain the line about him being Irish was put in during reshoots.

The Ugly

  • The plot threads are just not quite all there. It’s almost two or three very different movies in one. There’s attempts to connect the elements but they don’t all quite marry up the way that would lift this film up a little more.
    The biggest problem for me, is how little Sandra Bullock’s character is integrated into the rest of the narrative. There’s even a clear set up that goes nowhere.

Final Thoughts

You know, it wasn’t the best film in the world. I wanted three different movies out of it. I wanted a Neeson/Platt movie, a Neeson/ Bullock movie and I wanted a movie just with the group therapy guys. Instead, I got this bag of Revels when I really just wanted the Maltesers out of it.

The Bank Job (2008)

Rating 15
Length 1h 51
Release 28.2.2008
Director Roger Donaldson
About Martine approaches Terry, a car salesman who faces serious financial issues, to form a gang and rob a bank. However, things are not as easy as they seem.

The Good

  • It’s a heist movie and checks all the boxes. There’s double crosses, bumbling coppers and scandals a plenty.
  • It’s based on true events. There’s something rather exciting about the web of scandal and corruption in the UK. Okay, names aren’t mentioned in all cases, but you can work it out.
  • There’s a pretty decent cast involved. Jason Statham, Daniel Mays and Stephen Campbell Moore all bring there A game and Saffron Burrows isn’t as annoying as she usually is.
  • The Music is a pretty decent selection of 1970s tracks.

The Bad

  • There’s so much nudity. Like from the second it starts. I’m not a prude, but I do hate gratuitous nudity. I will say, though, gratuity in this film is subjective I guess, given the content of the security boxes.
    I just felt it was ‘hey, we’ve got to have one set of tits out, so we might as well have twenty’, and I just wanted to get to the heist.

The Ugly

  • It’s a rather complex plot as there are so many people involved. Even breaking it down to the three key groups; authority, villains and Michael X is head scratching and over simplified. If you don’t engage from the first moment, you can quite easily get muddled.

Final Thoughts

It was an alright movie, but if you want a decent London bank heist where some of the people got away with the goods, check out King of Thieves.

X Files – I Want to Believe (2008)

Rating 15
Length 1h 44
Release 1.8.2008
Director Chris Carter
About Though FBI special agent Fox Mulder (David Duchovny) and his partner Dr. Dana Scully (Gillian Anderson) once chased things that go bump in the night, his tireless search for the truth out there has led to his professional exile. However, a missing-persons case leads to the agents’ reunion, along with an encounter with a priest (Billy Connolly) who may or may not be experiencing psychic visions.

First Things First

Right now, I’m sat kicking myself for not seeing this in the cinema. I worked there, for Mulder’s sake. I actually have a vivid memory. An almost ‘Sliding Doors’ moment in which I was done for the evening and the last showing of the day was about to begin. I passed up on the opportunity.
Now, it’s at this point I should clarify, I was possibly one of the strangest ‘fans’. I was such a fan that I wore a Mulder and Scully watch for at least 4 years, even though I’d probably only seen a handful of episodes.
Yeah, I was 8 years old when Scully was sent to spy on Mulder, so I was only allowed to press record on the VCR and watch up until that distinctive theme song. It wasn’t until 1996 or so when it had moved to Saturday nights, that I saw my first full episode. Can you imagine it; being banned from watching the show, but being bought the merch by the same parent?! Then again, this was the same person who, without fail, would buy me a board game every Christmas and refuse to play it with me. Go figure.
Much like a lot of my teens fandoms; Buffy, Star Trek and Angel… I fell a little out of love with X Files. I’d not taken it upon myself to do a rewatch (or a first watch) and I just felt very disengaged in 2008.
However, it’s now 2021. I’ve spent the last few months watching all 9 seasons, and one movie, leading up to this one. I’d been dreading it, I won’t lie.

The Good

  • It’s X Files. Even with its flaws, I’m in. You’re giving me Mulder and Scully. You’re in theory giving me together Mulder and Scully. What’s not to love. It certainly has its moments that will have any fan happy. When they’re together on screen, its frigging awesome.
  • It’s a story that is that perfect middle ground. It’s the supernatural rather than the mythology that, at times, bogged the show down. I love the alien shit, but I think the fatal flaw of the franchise is that it wavered too much on that line of ‘are the aliens real?’. At least this keeps it conspiracy lite. Well, except for the priest with a taste for choir boys.
  • Speaking of the whole pedophilia subplot. It was a powerful thing to address considering this would have still been a rather raw subject, for American viewers in particular. The Boston sex abuse scandal was only exposed in 2002. I’m sure Carter was trying to say something profound about this dirty secret of the Catholic Church. I’m not sure it works completely, but damn I’m still impressed he tried.
  • The editing in the opening was excellent. It was unsettling and lacking context, but it worked. It was something very different to what we’ve come to expect of X Files and it really got my attention.
  • Billy Connolly, while giving me the creeps, was a delight to see on screen. Rather strange to see him without his beard, but given his character I was glad of that disassociation.

The Bad

  • I struggled with Scully’s B-Plot storyline. It felt a little too contrived and almost a plot device hiding in plain sight. The film needed a bit of a change in editing (Like, don’t give me shifty looks to the Father, when the other one was a convicted pedophile, and not give me a resolution to that either way). It’s a shame, because when Gillian Anderson’s scenes worked, it was powerful.
  • This is the ‘ship that coined the term ‘shipping’. So why the fuck does the film play them off against each other for most of the movie?! Why, after EVERYTHING Scully has seen, is she still a skeptic? Both the relationship, and Scully herself are completely devolved to fit the narrative. It does all fans a disservice.
  • Our new Mulder/Scully, Dogget/Reyes. I don’t get them and they’re booted out of the script halfway through. While I adore Amanda Peet and she does an amazing job, put Agent Monica Reyes in that role and it blows the whole thing open and adds investment.
    Then there’s Xzibit as Agent Drummy as the overly-aggressive skeptic. The biggest problem being that there’s no chemistry between him and Mulder…. so he just ends up shouting.

The Ugly

  • That fucking beard! What the fuck, man?! I get that the film was trying to show that Mulder was not the same, but did we really need him to wear such a bad joke-shop stick-on beard?! It was cheap, it was tacky and it lasted so much of the movie.

Final Thoughts

There are worse episodes that feel way longer than this outing. It is flawed and I did shout “Oh, fuck off Scully.” At the tv screen. Something I’ve not done since mid-series 3.
As much as this was made as a stand alone to bring in the uninitiated, I doubt the franchise would gain any fans from watching this first.

Educating Rita (1983)

Rating 15
Length 1h 50
Release 16.6.1983
Director Lewis Gilbert
About Rita (Julie Walters), a married hair stylist in her 20s, wants to go back to school. She begins studying with Dr. Bryant (Michael Caine), a professor using alcohol to cope with his divorce. Despite his personal problems, Dr. Bryant helps Rita realise her academic potential. In turn, her passion for learning revitalises his love of teaching.

The Good

  • I loved it from the very start. I’m a Scouser, so of course I’m going to be drawn in to a Willy Russell story that flirts with the original source material of Pretty Women and My Fair Lady (Pygmalion). Without naming them outright, this film takes on the class divide and gender politics that I’d hope not many people would stand for today.
  • It’s pacing and time span are perfect and allow you to stay invested. The creative team have added players and places in order to expand the story from the two person play Russell wrote. There’s no point in the film where I thought “Ah, that’s where the interval would be.” Something that can be rather obvious if a play is not well adapted.
  • Michael Caine. Bloody hell, I loved and loathed the character in equal measure. There’s not many men who could bring the charm that he did to the role and it makes the difference. The alcoholism is a difficult thing to portray on film and its something that can suck the humanity out of even the best of people. So to see the character of Frank come alive at the prospect of educating Rita… or rather Rita educating him, it allows you to invest in the character. More so than My Fair Ladys Professor Higgins.
  • Now, I’ve always been a bit bias when it comes to Julie Walters; she reminds me of my mum. So to have her in a film playing a Scouser, making those ‘ays’ and ‘tarras’, was a bittersweet dream for me. Not only that, but for me, it played almost like I was watching what could have been my mother’s life.
    Julie Walter’s in this film is incredible. Anyone who has seen her in anything, will know that she is a chameleon. However, in this we see her evolve the character and bring Susan/Rita from a state of turmoil and wanting to discover herself, to being an independent and confident woman who at least knows who she is in the moment.

The Bad

  • For me, the suicide attempt of the friend came out of left field. While it was very well handled and approached, I found it difficult to watch for the reality of it and the candour in which Maureen Lipman’s Trish speaks about her sadness that she hadn’t succeeded. It was the final line in their interaction that struck home for me “When I listen to poetry and music, then I can live. You see, darling, the rest of the time it’s just me. And that’s not enough.”
    I’ll forgive you if you scoff at first. I certainly did when she opened with the music and poetry; she has been set up as rather pretentious. However, the reveal opens up and and its certainly something that transcends class; the opinion we have of ones self. It’s often rather shit and a battle to challenge.

The Ugly

  • The synthesiser music seems to clash with the story being told. It seems more like music heard in BBCs Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (1981) or A Clockwork Orange (1971). It’s a shame really because it doesn’t match the tone of the movie and even goes so far as to make it feel like a TV movie.
  • Where the fuck is it set? It ain’t Liverpool. It’s really frustrating to know that the source material places it there, but due to bloody politics (Tories again, the bastards), production was moved to Ireland. Can’t help but feel thrown off by not recognising any of the locations.

Final Thoughts

I’m only gutted I’ve never thought to seek this film out before today. Walters and Caine could have quite easily filmed this in the one room without any other participants and I would have been just as enchanted.
That said, give me a budget and Jodie Comer in Liverpool and I would relish a remake. Yes, we’re seeing a lot of 80s vintage in movies, but I feel like this bit of Russell grit will give people something away from the neon and pop.

Flora & Ulysses (2021)

Rating PG
Length 1h 35
Release 19.2.2021
Director Lena Khan
About Flora, a 10-year-old girl with an imaginative mind, rescues a squirrel and names him Ulysses. She soon discovers that Ulysses is blessed with superpowers which help them embark on various adventures.

The Good

  • This is a heart-warming story about family and superheroes. It takes on an origin story, of sorts, but provides the viewer with enough charm that even those fighting the superhero fatigue will be won over.
  • Danny Purdi is excellent as the “villainous” squirrel catcher. Community fans will love that he gets to provide some excellent physical movies references throughout the film.
  • The film made the absolutely right choice when not giving Ulysses a voice. It kept him cute and Grogu-like.
  • It has a belter soundtrack. Almost GotG-lite.
  • Allyson Hannigan and Ben. Schwartz were adorable together and apart. The fact that they both reduced me to tears is a testament to them, their ability to demonstrate the hardships of a relationship, individuality and creative blocks.
  • Matilda Lawler is one to watch. She 10 year old Flora a delight to watch and her narration was perfect. She’ll bring any kid watching onboard straight away.

The Bad

  • The CGI of both Ulysses and Mr Klaus is a little disappointing. While all the actors work well with the furballs, I just found them reminiscent of the early 2000 CGI; almost too glossy and separate from the rest of the visuals.

The Ugly

  • I did not like the development of the character William. The actor did a fine job with what he had to work with, but I just really didn’t like the gimmick of him being blind. I most certainly didn’t like the usage of the outdated term “hysterical blindness”. With a film that has the charm that this does, the jokes feel forced and painfully gross.

Final Thoughts

Its definitely a film for families and one those young at heart will enjoy too. There’s some nice Easter Eggs for comic book and film fans alike. Its certainly on my list to watch again.