The Switch: Icky, Grim And Distributed By Disney

The Switch

1.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Romantic comedies have a strong tendency to be toxic, both in their characters and their messages this has both. Jason Bateman’s Wally, get jealous that his friend who he has a crush on is using another man’s sperm for her artificial impregnation, so he swaps out the baby batter with his own- and forgets to tell her. One could justify this icky behaviour by saying ‘oh he has amnesia because he is drunk’, but then even when he remembers he still doesn’t tell her right away. Wrong.

Is the character punished for his morally dubious actions, yes, but only briefly he still gets together with the girl at the end of the film, so it is okay to behave like the way he did? Trivialising if not justifying.

Both of the leads, Bateman and Jennifer Anniston have a lot of charm and are easy to root for, however, the very nature of the premise makes this almost impossible. The talents of the actors are ultimately wasted as you can’t get around the simply bad act.

Overall, what could have been a very promising romantic comedy is brought low by the plot and its warped morals.

Pros.

Anniston

Bateman

Cons.

The message

The fact that they end up together

Jeff Goldblum’s character is troublesome

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 and the ability for you to tell me what to review next. Check it out! https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Jakob’s Wife: Marital Problems With A Blood Red Tinge

Jakob’s Wife

4/5

Written by Luke Barnes

This film really is a testament to what one actor can do for a film. There are many moments, especially early on in the film, before the film allows itself to have fun, whereby the film loses you and starts to drift off into a sea of mediocrity. However, the performance from Barbara Crampton as the titular wife Anne manages to keep this film above water and singlehandedly makes the film what it is.

To get into its stride this film has to divorce itself from the serious, that is the problem of the opening half an hour, the film takes itself far too seriously and tries to pass itself off as a drama- this doesn’t work. Cut to later in the film and Anne is licking blood off the floor, whilst trying to tell her husband it’s not her who is a vampire or evil and all you can do is laugh; this is far more engaging.

In terms of vampire scares this film is a nice mix of modern and classic vampire lore and scares and there are a few scenes between Anne and her master that could have been lifted from Dracula itself. I thought the idea of not having the master be out and out evil, yes they do a lot of evil things but there is also a need on the films part to get us to feel sorry for the character or to see their side, was interesting and it did add an element of moral ambiguity to the film that I think really helped to enhance Crampton’s performance.

Overall, a film made by Barbara Crampton.

Pros.

Crampton

The sympathetic Master character

Merging vampire lore

The comedic moments

Cons.

The first act is painfully slow and takes itself too seriously.

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

We Broke Up: The Romantic Comedy Film For Swingers, Cuckolds And Anyone Else Of An Open Lifestyle

We Broke Up

2/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Why are romantic comedy films so toxic? Why can’t we just have one film without a needlessly nasty message? To wit in this feature the idea seems to be there is nothing hotter than your committed partner fooling around with someone else: as referenced by a scene where the supposedly broken up, but clearly not really, couple have a steamy session after the guy admits being unfaithful. What is this saying?

Moreover the leads, who are broken up for the purposes of the film and drama but are basically a couple; you know how it goes let’s pretend to still be a couple and then get back together at the end, are charmless and cliched. It is a shame as I like both the actors in other things, however here they just can’t do it for me, they have about as much believable chemistry together on screen as two paper cut outs would.

The ending is fairly predictable, and that is the case for the whole film. Though it is very watchable and not terribly bad, hence the 2, there is nothing new here it is the same old same old pumped out again to a vain and desperate effort to separate you from your money.

Overall, bland and disappointing.

Pros.

It is watchable

There are worse rom-coms out there.

Cons.

The leads have no chemistry

The cheating plot line

It is predictable and ultimately boring

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Courier: Been Here Before

The Courier

2/5

Written by Luke Barnes

I had heard good things about this film, prior to seeing it, and was looking forward to my chance to see it on VOD. However, when it arrived I was left perplexed, whilst it is by no means bad, it is in fact very serviceable for what it is in terms of setting and genre. Yet there is something of a formula to it, it is very predictable and samey and that raises wider questions about historical dramas as a whole- namely is the genre played out?

In historical drama films set during the Cold War the narrative tends to go one of two ways, either the character, with an assumed western perspective as most of these films focus on western characters, defects to the Soviet Union after growing disillusioned with their own government, or the character tries to break into/ commit some sort of mission behind Soviet lines and ends up getting captured- this film is the latter.

I understand that the film was based on real people and events so there is only so much they can do with it, but honestly we have seen this story before and as such know where it is going. Viewing the genre for what it is, I question if this film even needed to be made, yes the actual person this film is based on deserves to have their story told, but on the other hand this film has nothing new to say so what does it contribute to the medium?

Cumberbatch is as strong as ever and manages to anchor the film, quickly becoming the only reason to continue on. Jessie Buckley is strong too, but sadly she is only given a few thin scenes and is mostly wasted.

Overall, nothing you haven’t seen before.

Pros.

Cumberbatch

Buckley

Cons.

Wasting Buckley

The generic nature of the plot

It is ease to lose interest in

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Mortal Kombat: Cringe-ality

Mortal Kombat

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

A while ago I wrote that the images/ trailers we had seen from the new Mortal Kombat film looked like a fan film rather than a multi-million dollar Hollywood blockbuster, and now that I have seen the film I can say that this doesn’t just apply to the promo material but rather the whole film.

There is promise to be found here, the film clearly has a lot of love towards the games and tries to cram in as much as possible on that front. As well the film also boasts some quite well done fight scenes that are nice to look at, however the legendary fatalities of the games, that have inspired generations of shocked and outraged parents, here feel quite tame and almost gimmicky at times.

Moreover, the casting for a lot of the characters is off. I understand that the film doesn’t want to be a blatant copy of the games, but a lot of the characters here don’t look in any way similar to their game counter-parts sometimes to a distracting degree. It almost, to get back to that fan film angle, feels like a group of friends re-enacting their favourite scenes over one long weekend in early September.

Finally, and perhaps worst of all, the writing is far too try hardy and often falls into the category of cringe. Many of the classic lines from the games are featured here, but they do not feel organic to the story or the situation instead they feel forced in for the sake of fan service.

Overall, on the bad side of meh entertaining enough for a one off viewing, but it will be almost immediately forgotten afterwards.

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Spider-Man Homecoming: Iron Man Jr?

Spider-Man Homecoming

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

This will be a review that a lot of you disagree with, but ah well let’s get into it.

Recently I have been on somewhat of a Spider-Man kick and have been watching, playing and reading a lot of related things, in that effort I rewatched Homecoming again, having not seen it since I first watched it in cinemas, and it doesn’t really hold up.

The main pro I will say for this film is the twist, when Michael Keaton’s Adrian Tombs reveals that he knows Peter’s secret it is impactful and is genuinely surprising. I take my hat off to the MCU for being able to bury the lead to the point where I did not see it coming.

Also John Favreau’s Happy Hogan is a delight.

Now to get into all the reasons why I think this is a weak film, especially within the widely strong landscape of the MCU- justification incoming.

Firstly, the focus on Damage Control is odd, yes it is only a minor thing that was supposed to develop out into a TV series, that may or may not be happening now, but seeing it feature in the film felt oddly jarring to me.

Moreover, this film being in the MCU doesn’t actually help it, though most wont want to admit it, because they want Spider-Man and the Avengers to be together, having this film be in the MCU keeps it from really having an identity of its own. By that I mean rather than have this film focus on Tom Holland’s Spider-Man being Spider-Man, the film instead decides to spend most of its time focusing on him and Robert Downey Jr’s Tony Stark as a sort of father son comedy duo. Now I can understand why they did this from a business side of things, but it makes this film feel like less of a Spider-Man film and almost side lines the character within his own film, this has gone on to create the Iron Man Jr argument with regards to the character of Spider-Man

Adding to this, the film feels overstuffed with characters, not only do you have Peter and his high school friends, and family you also now because it is in the MCU have to have cameos from Avengers and other in universe characters which leads to the film feeling bloated and again not like a Spider-Man film.

Finally, in perhaps my most divisive statement in this whole review, I don’t like Tom Holland as Peter Parker, I understand this is a younger version of the character, but he feels too much like a goodie, goodie boy scout character, with the grit and tragic darkness that make up the character in the comics being gone. This blends into the MCU’s wider issue of favouring humour over everything else, and it feels like a watering down of the character. Garfield and McGuire were both better in the role.

Pros.

Happy Hogan

The twist

Cons.

Iron Man Jr

Too many characters

Tom Holland

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Vanquish: Possibly Ruby Rose’s Worst Performance

Vanquish

0.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Just when my faith has been restored in Ruby Rose, following her surprisingly good performance in SAS Red Notice, it is then immediately lost with yet another example of her inability to act. The failings of this film can not be simply dumped on Rose herself; the film is bad across the board.

The biggest and most obvious issue is the fact that the film is incredibly generic, there is nothing new about it at all and you have seen all of it done better before elsewhere. None of the characters or the drama captures your attention, and you are left bored for the majority of the film.

Rose can’t seem to emote, whether she is being forced back into her old life as a killer, is upset when her kid is in danger, or killing a room full of people she always has the same expression on her face. This could be seen as a brilliant portrayal of an unfeeling, indifferent sociopath, but she is supposed to be a character that audiences warm to and root for so that doesn’t really work and just cements the fact that Rose can’t act.

Morgan Freeman isn’t much better, he is clearly here for the money.

Overall, the worst sort of straight to video action film, no care, heart, or even basic consideration has been put into this film.
Pros.

It is short

Cons.

It is incredibly generic

Freeman is clearly just doing it for the money

Rose can’t act

It has no stakes as you don’t care about the characters at all

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Spider-Man Into The Spiderverse: The Power And Glory Of The Animated Medium

Spider-Man Into The Spiderverse

5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

For all those who doubt Sony Animation this film is undeniable proof of their talent on a huge scale. The animation is beautiful, the emotions and family dynamic are heart warming and complex, and there are enough easter eggs, nods and appearances from Elseworlds Spider-people to keep even the biggest Spider-Man fan happy.

This film shows what the animated medium can do, the story is powerful and moving and works both in a way to appeal to children who are drawn in by the bright colours and the name of the hero, but also as a reward for long time fans.
I enjoyed that the film was not a direct adaptation of the Spiderverse comic, but instead did something new with it. As a comics fan I enjoyed seeing all these different versions of Spider-Man interact on screen, Nicolas Cage’s Spider-Man Noir was of course my favourite, of those featured prominently; though that should not be a surprise to anyone who reads my reviews regularly.

My favourite moment of the whole film was of course the cameo at the end with Oscar Issac’s Miguel O’ Hara as he is my favourite Spider-Man, and I was glad to see him included.

Overall, a magnificent film.

Pros.

The animation

The cameos and nods

The emotion and the story

The ending

The originality

Cons.

None

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Nobody: Never Mess With The Man On The Bus

Nobody

4.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

As many of you know I am a huge John Wick fan, as whilst this film is different in a lot of ways it bares more than a passing similarity, but rather than be lesser I think both films are on a par with one another.

This film was slightly more tongue in cheek than Wick, there were moments where this film almost acknowledges the silliness of its premise and these are great as they do actually make you laugh and add to the wider charm of the film. I have not smiled so much at a film in a long time.

Bob Odenkirk excels in this film. I will admit I had my doubts about him in the role, but not only does he pull off the action hero role with flair he also makes the character likeable as well and gives him a personality. I enjoyed the duality of his character, how he was so conflicted trying to be both the family man as well as balance his nature as a cold blooded killer.

The action is very well handled, the early bus scene especially, but I would expect nothing less from the visionary director who brought us Hardcore Henry. The violence is brutal and visceral, and really does satisfy a gory whole in the heart.

Overall, a surprising gem.

Pros.

The violence

The humour

Odenkirk

The final fight

Cons.

A bit too familiar at times.

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Antebellum: A Lecture Disguised As A Film

Antebellum

0.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

This film came and went, with many having the good sense to avoid it as it tried to piggy back desperately on Jordan Peele’s new horror sub-genre. However, it can’t hope to match the inherent intelligence of Peele’s films or his uncanny ability to perfectly blend together social commentary and horror into one narrative whole.

Continuing on, the worst part of this film is its paper thin writing. The metaphor and message of Antebellum is stuffed into your face to the point of nausea, and to make matters worse it thinks it is being subtle and insightful with it- that is really not the case. This film mostly ignores the fact that it is supposed to be a horror film, and instead focuses on well worn social commentary: this quickly turns into a lecture.

The style is oddly jarring as the time travel elements don’t really work together, the clash is not outrightly terrible, but it does take you out of the experience and bothers you more and more as you think about it.

Likewise the acting isn’t anything to write home about, and for all those who said this was going to be Janelle Monae’s break out performance I think you can all see how wrong you were.

Overall, this film tried and failed to copy Jordan Peele, but it is nothing more than a pale imitation.

Pros.

The premise has promise

Cons.

Janelle Monae

The lecture

The two time periods clash

It doesn’t understand the word subtly

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer