The Night House: Nothing Is After You

4/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A woman, Rebecca Hall, learns, posthumously, that her late husband had a secret life. However, the further she digs the closer the threat gets.

When I heard that this film was by the same director who did The Ritual I knew I was in for a good time. By Jove I was right, Bruckner is on fine form here.

I appreciate the horror in this film as it is not always straight forward, as the credits rolled I was still left asking a lot of questions and trying to piece things together. I much prefer that to a film that is very clear cut and worse yet one that goes out of its way to explain everything. I found the film to uses jump scares quite effectively to heighten the threat posed by the entity in the house. The film uses them sparingly but to great effect.

I also enjoyed the fact that we didn’t see the entity or presence but did interact with it a number of times throughout the film. Though I am not saying that films that show the monster or demon are inherently lesser, as some use the look of the creature to great effect, I am however, saying there is something to leave the monster to the imagination.

I found Hall’s character as a horror protagonist refreshing. She was troubled and clearly burdened but that was not her defining characteristic. She had sexual scenes but was not overly sexualised or visually lusted after. Perhaps most importantly of all she solved the mystery and faced the villain on her own, she did not call in for help, she did not need a family member or friend to come round, no she faced it on her own. Though it may be a cringey thing to say I think there is something empowering about that.

My criticism would come from mild pacing issues, as there were a few scenes were the film noticeably slowed down and his worked against the tension and scares.

Overall, a strong horror film that is probably destined to be a sleeper hit.

Pros.

Hall

The monster

The scares

The mystery

Cons.

A few slow scenes

If you enjoyed this review, then please head over to my Patreon to support me, I offer personalized shoutouts, the ability for you to pick what I review next and full access to my Patreon exclusive game reviews. Check it out!

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Last Mercenary: Daddy’s Coming

2/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A mysterious secret agent, Jean-Claude Van Damme, must return to France after his son finds himself in some legal trouble.

I think a big part of the reason this one didn’t land for me is the humour. As I have said before humour is subjective, personally for me I didn’t find any of the jokes particularly funny, not only that but I found a few of them actively cringe. The issue with action comedies, is that often these sort of films do neither well and fail in both regards as a result of trying to incorporate the other, obviously there have been examples where it has worked but more often then not it is subpar.

I thought Van Damme was on top form here and he is clearly trying his best, sadly the film never fully uses his talents in a meaningful way. Van Damme gets all the best lines, and the film goes out of its way to make him ‘cool’. This is a good thing, but sadly one that has a knock on effect for the rest of the cast, as no one has anywhere near the presence that Van Damme has, and the rest of the actors simply end up fading into the background.

The action here is again fairly standard. You would think with a huge action star like Van Damme they would try to push the boat out a bit in what they have him doing, but this film takes it the other way and keeps things tame- much to everyone’s disappointment.

Overall, slightly below average. Watchable in a pinch.

Pros.

Van Damme is trying

It is watchable

Cons.

The action

The rest of the cast

The humour

If you enjoyed this review, then please head over to my Patreon to support me, I offer personalized shoutouts, one on one Q and As, the ability for you to pick what I review next and full access to my Patreon exclusive game reviews. Check it out!

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Liability/ The Hitman’s Apprentice: Driving A Murderer

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A young man, Josh O’ Connell, unwittingly becomes the assistant/driver to a hitman, Tim Roth, after angering his gangster step father, Peter Mullan.

In many ways this film is typical of the British crime genre, that is not a compliment. The biggest issue with this film is that it is deeply generic, it is not a bad film per say, it is just one that you have seen many times before dressed up in different skins. The plot unfolds in a way that you would expect it to, and it wraps up just the same, there are no surprises throughout you can accurately guess what will happen and when.

Moreover, I did not find Josh O’ Connell’s lead to be particularly likeable or even interesting. In many ways this film would be far more entertaining if Roth’s hitman had killed him and then the film followed him and his daily activities instead. As of right now I am struggling to see why everyone rates O’ Connell so highly as a performer, he is okay in some roles and perhaps miscast in others; maybe I am just missing that one outstanding performance.

I thought Tim Roth’s hitman was easily the best thing about this film, sadly he is mostly wasted and given a back seat to O’ Connell’s milk toast lead.

Overall, deeply generic.

Pros.

It is watchable

Tim Roth

Cons.

It is generic

It is predictable

The ending is weak

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Snake-Eyes: Working With Terrorists To Fight Terrorists, A Confused Film

1.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

We learn the origins of one of the founding members of the Joes. Snake-Eyes here played by Henry Golding.

I will open this by saying I admire what they tried to do. However, in their efforts to create a homage to Samurai films of yore, this film really doesn’t feel like a G.I Joe film let alone one that is supposed to be setting up a shared universe. In truth those elements feel like an afterthought.

Moreover, the fights, which are clearly the most important part of the film as they take up most of the runtime are not very good at all. This is because not only is the choreography bad, but the camera is all over the place often cutting away from the action only to return with the enemy on the ground and Snake Eyes looking vaguely irritated above them. Furthermore, and compounding these issues, the distinct lack of blood in this film is a major problem as it makes the fight scenes have far less of an impact and feel fake, which obviously they are but they are not supposed to feel that way.

Additionally the coolest aspect of this film is easily Samara Weavings Scarlett, another Joe, however she is given barely anything to do here and is often pushed to the background, which makes me question her purpose of even being in this film was it simply to recruit Snake Eyes at the end? Adding to, the Joes are supposed to be the good guys, at least that is what the film says, yet they are pretty cool about fighting alongside a terrorist, and recruit Snake Eyes even though he continues to work for Cobra even after learning who they are. The Joes don’t look so good here, they look morally bankrupt.

Overall, this was a waste of my time and money. A rare misfire for both Golding and Weaving.

Pros.

Weaving

It is watchable

Cons.

Golding is miscast

The action is poorly done

The Joes don’t really feel like the heroes

It is dull and overly long

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Green Knight: Someone Needs To Learn To Wash His Hands, Or At least Wipe Them

4/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Sir Gawain, Dev Patel, sets out to meet the challenge of the sinister and mysterious Green Knight in a reimaging of King Arthur mythos.

The biggest pro this film has going for it is that it is original. I have never seen anything quite like this before, it is not quite a fantasy film, not quite a horror film- it is hard to place. To describe the film in a word would be to say ‘strange’, however in the best sort of way.

I enjoyed the exploration of masculinity, heroism and religion, whereby the film questioned the value of and then further examined each. Furthermore, I liked that film did do much to explain or define what the Green Knight is, it kept things mysterious which works a lot better and allows our collective imaginations to have over and fill in the blanks.

Moreover, Dev Patel is perfectly suited to the role and the film itself extracts his best qualities as an actor and put them proudly on display. It plays off the idea that Patel may not be the traditional leading man, his character is often overlooked by the other knights and seen as lesser because he hasn’t been on gallant adventures, this need to prove himself will prove his downfall. Patel manages a full gambit of emotions here and his performance never fails to both shock and delight.

My only real issue with the film is that because of the artsy way it presents itself it can often be hard to tell what is going on. There were a number of scenes where I was slightly puzzled as to what was happening as it didn’t seem to line up with other parts of the film, this is a deliberate choice, but it wasn’t to my taste.

Pros.

Dev Patel

The Green Knight

The horror elements

The message

Cons.

The artsy confusing elements

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Don’t Breathe 2: Possibly The Worst Parents Ever

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The Blind Man, Stephen Lang, has found and adopted a daughter, Madelyn Grace however, her past catches up to her and it might spell doom for all.

As many reviews have pointed out this film does make the Blind Man the sympathetic lead character, now is this in good taste considering he is a monster in the first film? Probably not. However, this film achieves this task by having the villains of this film be incredibly evil, they are the daughter’s former parents who have been abducting people to try and steal their organs and now they want to harvest their own daughter. This realistically was the only way the film could have him be the lead who the audience is supposed to root for, the lesser of two evils.

The whole film basically acts as a redemption arc for the character with him taking a beating at nearly every turn and losing those close to him. The Blind Man even supposedly, until the third film, gives his life to save the girl as a final act of atonement, does this make up for keeping a woman prisoner and breeding her against her will? Not by a long shot. The character is in no way likeable, but he is pitiable and maybe that was the way he was always supposed to be.

This is a hard film to watch for a lot of reasons, chief among them is the fact that this film is bleak and oppressive at nearly every turn. If I had to describe this film in a few words it would be manically depressing. Nearly every horrible thing that could happen does and the film often lingers on these scenes for far too long. For example there is a scene where the Blind Man’s dog dies and he finds the corpse, now rather than have the scene end there it goes on and shows the man sticking his hand into the dead dogs innards to try and find a bullet. Needless. There are countless other scenes like this in the film that almost feel put in for shock value.

Overall, not an enjoyable film to watch by any means, however if you like the first film or bleak depressing fare than you might find something to enjoy here.

Pros

Lang

It is watchable

The tension

Cons.

It is depressing

A fair few scenes are needlessly unpleasant

A lack of a likeable lead

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Don’t Breath: You’ll Never Look At A Turkey Baster The Same Again

3.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A group of troubled youths break into the home of a blind man, Stephen Lang, expecting an easy pay day; what they get however is far more than they could have ever bargained for.

The issue with this film, and others like it, is that it suffers from a lack of likeable characters. There is no tension to a situation when both the ‘hero’ and the ‘villain’ are both bad people as you don’t really like either, so you don’t care who wins. Yes Jane Levy’s Rocky is as close to a good character as you get in this film, but even then she is hardly a character you root for.

I think the mid-film twist works wonders to recontextualise the situation, changing the robbers from the bad guys to the victims, and having the Blind Man be the real villain of the piece. What’s more this is the film that really made me take notice of Stephen Lang as an actor, he is terrific here this is his film, and he sells both the threat and the action hard.

Moreover, the most impressive feat of this film is that it manages to maintain its tension consistently throughout, with their being close to no lulls throughout. This is a strong asset of the film as it keeps you engaged and pardon the cliché, on the edge of your seat.

Overall, Stephen Lang is terrific, and the tension is well maintained. The issues come from a lack of any clear likeable lead which takes away from the impact of events.

Pros.

Stephen Lang

The tension

The mid-film twist

Cons.

No likeable characters

The ending is ridiculous in a bad way

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Avengers Age Of Ultron: Hawkeye’s Moment In The Sun

3/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The Science Bros themselves create an artificial intelligence with the goal of ensuring world peace, however rather unsurprisingly it becomes evil.

I don’t think this is near the top of anyone’s list of favourite MCU films. My issues with this film come from the way it is structured and paced. The film feels like it goes on for about an hour too long, and during the exorbitant runtime it sets up a million different things for future films, some of which don’t even end up happening. Truly, therein lies the problem with this film, it is trying to do too much. A lot of Marvel films set up things to come, but this film feels more focused on what is coming then it does on actually being a good film. This can be seen best in the end credits sting of Thanos coming to get the gauntlet, which whilst a cool visual has little to do with the MCU in that moment.

Moreover, the romance between Black Widow, Scarlett Johannsson, and Bruce Banner, Mark Ruffalo, is one of the most poorly thought out decisions in the MCU. Firstly, Winter Soldier gave us Natasha in a staring role where her merit is not decided on being someone’s girlfriend or her ability to have kids, yet here she is reduced to a supporting character and Hulk’s girlfriend. Ew. Secondly, there is a line in which Natasha refers to herself as a monster for the fact she can’t have children, despite being forcefully sterilised whilst in the Red Room program, pardon me what? What sort of message does this send? It also destroys Hulk as a character as he does not really say anything to reassure her after she says this, the whole scene is needless. Finally, the relationship existing at all devalues and basically nullifies Banner’s relationship with Betsy Ross, Liv Tyler, from his solo film, which was the heart and soul of that film, so that sucks.

There are things I like about this film such as the introduction of the Twins and Hawkeye, Jeremy Renner, getting far more of an expanded role. I think this is the best we have ever seen Hawkeye and likely will ever see him, here he gets a number of heroic moments and really does standout amongst the jacked line up. Moreover, the decision to blend horror into Wanda’s, Elizabeth Olsen, early appearances by having her movements be played backwards is a stroke of pure genius and as a creative choice really works for me.

Overall, it has its moments but is by far one of the weaker MCU films.

Pros.

Scarlet Witch’s early movement

Hawkeye

The final scene at Avengers Academy

Cons.

The Black Widow/Hulk romance

The scene where Natasha reveals she can’t have kids

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Rise Of The Footsoldier: The Worst Parts Of Britain

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

We learn the story of Carlton Leach’s rise to power in the Essex underworld.

The issue with this film along with many others like it is that it glorifies these loathsome and frankly evil human beings. These films try and make us relate or even root for the protagonist, as they rise to power, and though in some cases rooting for a bad guy can be fun with the real world implications of this film it just seems wrong.

Furthermore, unlike something like Vendetta that I reviewed recently, this film does not have a charming, if slightly goofy, performance from Danny Dyer to make it slightly more enjoyable. No most of the performers here are just trotting out the same collection of macho man, tough guy cliches and weak gangland tropes.

I found numerous scenes in this film hard to watch and thought that the film has a bad habit of overly indulging in grim and needless subject matter. I understand what sort of film this is, and yet this film often does go that bit too far, especially with how it treats and frames female characters that honestly not only feels needless but also feels quite exploitative.

Overall, watchable yet you will need a shower after it is over.

Pros.

It is watchable

The split choice ending/mystery is interesting

Cons.

It is overly grim

The way it treats women

It glorifies bad people

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Dirty Harry: A Troubled Classic

3.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Unorthodox inspector Harry Callahan, Clint Eastwood, tries to catch a sniper that is roaming the streets of San Francisco gunning down innocent people.

I have had this on my watch list for some time and now that I have I can see why people think it is a noir classic. All the elements of the film come together in such a way to really give this film a classic noir feel, the cinematography, the editing, even the colour choices are all very evocative.

Eastwood is strong in the role and has a number of memorable moments and catchphrases. I think his is the only performance that stands out of the film, and your feeling towards him are mixed. He can be both the cheer worthy hero and also the detestable villain, I’m talking about when he punches the jumper.

There are several lines that age poorly, and that would be offensive when viewed by today’s standards. I tried my best to ignore them whilst watching, but they did put me off it as it was fairly recurrent. Before you counter that by saying oh those were the times, racism has never been okay.

Overall, a slick film that looks a little more dirty when viewed in today’s framing.

Pros.

Clint Eastwood

A very memorable moments

It is slick

Cons.

The racism

The condoning of police torture

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer