Wine Country: You’re Going To Need The Bottle For This

Wine Country is a comedy drama film directed by Amy Poehler. The plot sees a group of old friends/ work buddies meet up for one of their 50^th birthdays. They try and have a nice weekend away but realise that they have become disconnected from one another and must air and work past their grievances to try and save their friendship.

Maybe this film just isn’t for me, I am not it’s targeted demographic; middle age women. The lessons and messages of the film that cover things like ageing gracefully and accepting your place in the world didn’t connect with me. Personally, I think this film thinks it is far deeper than it actually is, this film adds nothing new to the conversation; a lot of what it has to say is trite and played out, sometimes feeling more than a little out of touch.

The saving grace of this film for me is Jason Schwartzman. He is the only character that made me smile in this supposed comedy film; by shear virtue of his weirdness. Schwartzman feels like a breath of fresh air here and all of his scenes pop. The same could be said of Tina Fey, she is rarely featured but when she is it is usually one of the films better scenes.

As for the film’s lead Poehler she is just playing the same character she always plays, the one she has been playing for the last 20 years, the only difference is that it is staring to get stale and painfully unfunny.

That crucially was my issue with this film overall, it wasn’t funny. This is supposed to be a comedy film and yet I didn’t laugh once, if anything it depressed me and reminded me of my own mortality; I ask is that what you want out of a comedy film?

Pros.

Jason Schwartzman.

Tina Fey.

Cons.

Amy Poehler.

It is not funny.

It is depressing.

2/5

Reviewed By Luke

f r e d: Dancing Through The Pain

f_r_e_d is a drama film directed by Alexander Jeremy. The film highlights the grieving process and shows the different ways in which people grieve after the death of a loved one.

This one hit home for me, I have recently in these last few months suffered a death in the family. So, the idea of having to get on with your life without someone you care about being in it is something I am all too familiar with. I think this film is an emotional triumph. It perfectly captures grief and loss in a way you can relate to.

My favourite moments in this film are when it gets abstract. There are sequences that just come out of nowhere, there is one very early on that is almost like a musical interlude of a man dancing, it is surprising and shocking, and it throws you off guard. I think these segments work perfectly as a reflection of the unpredictable nature of death; one minute you’re here the next you aren’t.

Of course this film has fantastic emotional stakes as well. Susie Kimnell goes through all the stages of grief in this film and nails them all, I completely bought that she was in mourning every second she was on screen; she was terrific, a breath of fresh air.

Overall, this is one struck a chord with me it reminded me of the emotions I felt, it made me laugh, it made me cry, but more than anything else it made me grateful. I highly recommend you check this film out!

Pros.

The performances.

The emotion.

Capturing the randomness of death.

It spoke to me.

It will speak to you.

Cons.

None.

5/5

Ps. Bring a tissue.

Chips: A 21st Century Frankenstien

Chips is an action comedy film directed by Dax Shepard; it serves as a revival of the classic TV series of the same name. The plot sees two troubled officers of the law become entangled in a web of betrayal, lies and a surprisingly large amount of sex. The two mismatched detectives must find out who the bag guy is and stop them, but first they must learn to trust each other.

This film is somewhat of a head scratcher, not because it is deep or clever, no, the reason it is confusing is because the usually bad Dax Shepard is actually somewhat okay and enjoyable, and the always loveable Michael Pena is strangely hateable. A strange turn of events and one that may or may not have been deliberate.

I don’t think anyone was asking for this film, the brand was forgotten, but clearly the people behind the scenes thought this could be the next 21 Jump Street; sadly they were wrong, very wrong. Unlike the aforementioned cop comedy, there is no charm here, the jokes feel dated and juvenile; I think I might have laughed once in the whole runtime of the film.

All of the characters barring Shepard’s are deeply unlikable, you don’t care about them at all and when they’re endanger the outcome doesn’t really affect you one way or the other. The one positive thing this film does is it makes you like Dax Shepard. He was heavily involved in making it, so this is almost certainly intentional, but his is the only character in the entire film that we as the audience warm to.

Overall, this feels very needless, it has the sensibilities of a teenager, but isn’t shocking enough to capture their attention. This film really makes you question what goes through the heads of Hollywood executives.

Pros.

Dax Shepard.

One or two laughs.

Cons.

All the other characters.

The humour feels icky and a little over the top at times.

I just didn’t care in the end.

1.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Pixels: Gamers Save The World

Pixels is a science fiction comedy film directed by Chris Columbus. The plot sees three men who were pro gamers when they were kids go up against aliens from outer space, that have taken the form of classic 80s videogames. These men must rise to the occasion and save the world one boss battle at a time; this one is for all the gamers out there.

Adam Sandler gets a bad rap, yes, a lot of his films are lazy and has humour only a child could enjoy, but Chris Columbus was directing this so how could it be bad? I am pleased to tell you that it isn’t bad, despite what you might have read about it, it is in fact quite entertaining and enjoyable.

I think this film is very similar to Ready Player One in a lot of ways, both try and play on nostalgia from the past, specifically 80’s nostalgia and both have CGI representations of characters that were popular during that period. However, where I feel Pixels has the leg up on Spielberg’s film is that it actually has a heart. You can tell the people who made this film grew up playing these games, the love is there as well as the know-how.

The comedy I found surprisingly funny, not just one or two laughs, but consistent laughter throughout. I think though some people might think it is cringe I thought it was a laugh riot, Michelle Monaghan especially shined. Monaghan had all the best jokes and some of the best moments too; her on screen chemistry with Sandler was also quite strong, I think they should work together again for sure.

Overall, the reason why I loved this film so much was the joy, the kind od joy that comes from really liking something. As I have said it is clear to see that the people making this film loved these games, the attention to detail is fantastic. Every aspect of this film is perfect right down to the soundtrack which has a lot of great hits. A must watch, even if it does star Adam Sandler.

Pros.

Sandler is hilarious.

The film cares deeply.

Michelle Monaghan is fantastic.

It is fun to watch.

If you’re a gamer you will like it even more.

Cons.

None

5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Bronson: Fighting All Day Long

Bronson is a crime biopic film directed by Nicolas Winding Refn. The film recreates the real-life of Britain’s most notorious prisoner Charles Bronson (played here by Tom Hardy), showing his early life, his stint as a bear knuckle boxer and of course all the time he has spent in prison over the years.

This is a Refn film to its core, anyone who has ever seen one of his other films such as Drive, or The Neon Demon will know what I mean. There are many tense scenes in this film shot in striking red lighting to the backdrop of a techno soundtrack. If that sounds familiar it should do, these are the things that make a film a Nicolas Winding Refn film.

Refn, I find to be an acquired taste, you either love this work, or you don’t. Personally, I think he is one of the best directors working today and I think this film proves why. Rather than just have another bog-standard gangster biopic, this film pushes the envelope, it pushes it so far it falls off the metaphorical table and truly revels in its insanity.

Tom Hardy is giving it his unhinged all in the lead role, we both care for him, but also see that he is an incredibly dangerous, unstable person. He straddles the line of audience perception and acceptance masterfully well and has enough manic energy to keep you glued to the screen until the end of the 90 minutes. Hardy manages to capture such a wide variety of emotions with his performance, it truly highlights how he is one of the best actors currently working.

Overall, never before have I seen a crime biopic that is dipping in as much crazy, off the wall, wacky personality as this. Truly a sight to see. It easily places amongst the best of Refn’s work and would be a good start point to new fans of his directorial style.

Pros.

Tom Hardy is magnificent.

The manic unpredictable energy.

The score.

Nicolas Winding Refn’s distinct sense of style.

Hardy’s monologues.

5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Book Club: Shades Of Grey

Book Club is a romantic comedy film directed by Bill Holderman. The plot sees a group of women (played by Diane Keaton, Jane Fonda, Candice Bergen and Mary Steenburgen), read the Fifty Shades Of Grey novel and the book impacts each woman’s life, more accurately their love lives; what follows is an exploration into happiness and satisfaction in later life.

This feels like a knockoff Sex and The City, a less smart, less shocking, less risky version of it. I will admit I didn’t have high hopes when I put the film on, I was expecting it to just be a mindless easy ride, but instead I found it infuriating.

My issue with this film is how it address senior agency. Diane Keaton’s character is told how to live by her daughters, they tell her who she can and can’t date and tell her to move across the country and worst of all Keaton’s character listens. This kind of neurotic toxicity wouldn’t be that bad if the film actually portrayed her daughter as antagonists, but it doesn’t, it treats their behaviour as normal. Also there is a little bit of sexism in this as well as the narrative the daughter use to justify her moving is, that she won’t be able to cope since her husband, the girl’s father, has died; again another toxic message.

The humour made me laugh a few times especially the stuff with Steenburgen’s character and her husband. However, for the most part I found the humour to be quite flat and lame. Now I can’t be too critical of this as humour is subjective and just because it didn’t find it a laugh and minute doesn’t mean you won’t. For me it really felt like they were trying to draw on the same type of comedy as Sex In The City, but was afraid to commit to the bite.
Overall, I found this film to be irritating, it was good for a few sporadic laughs, but as the film went on my enjoyment with it lessened and lessened.

Pros.

A few good laughs.

Cons.

I don’t like the messages of the film.

The characters feel too passive.

The humour lacks any wit or bite.

It is instantly forgettable.

1/5

Reviewed by Luke

Terrifier: Pennywise Who?

Terrifier is a slasher horror film directed by Damien Leone. The film sees the return of Art The Clown (David Howard Thornton), who previously appeared in All Hallows Eve and was the breakout star of that film. Once again, we see Art go on a rampage, hacking up men, women and doors to satiate his supernatural bloodlust. This time targeting sisters Tara and Victoria (Jenna Kanell and Victoria Heyes).

This film is what All Hallows Eve 2 should have been! Just as you would imagine it to be, it is loud, gory and aggressive; which is just what it needed to be. The level of violence and the over the top nature of it won’t be to everyone’s taste, but if you can get past it you will find a great film. Personally I found the bombastic violence almost comedic in the best way, it horrified me, but also it made me laugh.

Other than Art The Clown, who still remains pretty mysterious, none of the characters are really developed, or explored, but again in this kind of film I wouldn’t expect them to be. This isn’t a deep character piece; this is a film about an evil clown with a bag full of tools cutting people up.

Art once again steals the show and single handily manages to make killer clowns cool again; breathing life into the genre. Despite being silent for the whole of the film, Art still feels like he says so much and we as an audience feel like we know him; even if the bit when he briefly pretends to be a woman does feel a bit bizarre and throw away. He is also of course super creepy and manic; he will haunt your dreams for nights after you have watched this!

Overall, this won’t be a film to everyone’s taste but if you do give it a go, you’re in for a good time.

Pros.

The manic craziness.

Art The Clown.

It makes killer clowns cool again.

The over the top gore.

Cons.

Some of it does feel a little too bizarre and could do with being developed more.

4/5

Reviewed by Luke

All Hallows Eve 2: Send In The Clowns

All Hallows Eve 2 is a horror anthology film directed by multiple people. The plot once again focus on a babysitter, this time played by Andrea Monier, who finds a VHS tape on Halloween. Once played the tape reveals several different tales of terror that the woman watches; while outside she is being stalked by a man in a pumpkin mask.

This film does not have a patch on the original. Nowhere near. Like many anthology films it is hit and miss, some of the segments such as the final one are good, even interesting, but some of them are awful. There is one about a kid that is scared of the monster under his bed and guess what the monster turn out to be real, it is dull, and it almost sent me to sleep. So as you can see it is a mixed bag.

A pro I will say about the film, is it kept consistent. By that I mean some horror anthologies will have one segment by light and jokey, another dark and brooding and then another comical one, the issue for me with that approach is that it feels jarring, it doesn’t feel connected and natural which a good horror anthology like Trick ‘R Treat understands is very important. This film for the most part kept a consistent tone, so I will applaud them for that.

The real issue with this film, the reason why it is such a lacklustre follow-up is because it is missing something? What? Why the clown of course. Art the Clown was the highlight and breakout star of the first film and his absents here is felt; it breaks the film. Not a single one of the new monsters or villains can hope to fill Art’s comically oversized blood-stained shoes.

Overall, it is passably okay, it varies in quality, but none of it is standout. Art the Clowns absents meant this film never really had a chance. Very unsurprisingly the film is lame.

Pros.

It is passable horror watching.

Some of the segments are cool.

Cons.

It is a mixed bag.

They really need Art The Clown back if they’re going to make another one of these.

A lot of the segments are dull and uninspired.

2/5

Reviewed by Luke

Greed: A Rare Misstep

Greed is a comedy drama film directed by Michael Winterbottom. The plot details the rise to power of self-made billionaire Sir Richard McCreadie (Steve Coogan). Part of the film highlights the set-up for his 60^th birthday bash, which is the main event of the film, with flashbacks showing moments from his life to paint a picture about the sort of person he is.

I was very excited to watch this film; I have been looking forward to it for a while. The cast is a who’s who of British comedic talent, aside from Coogan you have David Mitchell (Peep Show), Asa Butterfield (Sex Education), and Sarah Solemani (Him and Her); a stacked cast. With all this the stage was set for a great British comedy, however it was not followed up; it all feel apart.

The cast apart from Coogan is wasted, not a single one of them has anything interesting or meaningful to do other than tell the story. A lot of them are comedic actors/ comedians and they weren’t even funny. What makes this worse is that Coogan himself isn’t that good either, now normally I think the sun shines out of the man, but this is for sure a misstep. His character has no warmth, no personality, nothing. What he is, is a stand in for any number of big business CEO’s that this film goes out of its way to target.

That dear reader is the cardinal sin of this film, it preaches to you rather than entertains you. This whole film is an hour and a half on the evils of capitalism, I am not going to get into the topic too much, believe me I have no love for these cold corporate CEO’s, but I also don’t want to watch a film that reads as a list of base level talking points about how we all need to be better and stop people like this. This film feels whiney, all the way through, that is the best way I can describe it.

Overall, if you want a lecture on the evils of capitalism you might like it, if you want anything else like a fun film maybe look elsewhere.

Pros.

Coogan is doing his best.

The ridiculous ending.

Cons.

The preaching.

The lack of any kind of subtly.

Wasting talented comedians.

2/5

Reviewed by Luke

Assault On Precinct 13: Hold The Line

Assault On Precinct 13 is a neo-noir, action, thriller film directed by John Carpenter. The plot sees a group of local drug warlords swear a blood oath against the Los Angeles Police Department as well against the citizens of LA. This culminates in an intense shootout at the titular Precinct 13, between the police and the gang.

This film is John Carpenters take on 70’s era exploitation movies. It has a very urban, very lived in world, which is added to by the way it is filmed with it having a rough around the edges look to it. As such a lot of the scenes, especially the violent ones, feel eerily realistic; the scene when members of the gang are driving down the street looking for people to kill will send chills down your spine as it is all too real.

My one complaint about this film is that the initial 20 minutes are quite hard to follow. I don’t know if it is because a lot of things happen in a short space of time, or because of the way it is structured, but I found myself at the half hour mark not really having a clue what was going on. However, the rest of the film reminded that.

I think this film has a lot of iconic moments and characters that are destined to leave an impact on you after you have watched. The final showdown between the gang and the police at the end of the film is really well done and very tense, however I think the best scene in the film is the initial storming of the police station; Carpenter at his tension inducing best.

Overall a classic for a reason, though it might have a few storytelling issues especially when looked at through a modern lens; despite this it holds up.

Pros.

A great feel to it and sense of atmosphere.

The tension.

The final showdown.

Cons.

It is quite slow.

It is hard to tell what is going on in the beginning.

3.5/5

Reviewed by Luke