Coffee & Kareem: Give This Film The Chair

Coffee and Kareem is an action comedy directed by Michael Dowse. The plot sees disgraced, demoted police officer James Coffee (Ed Helms), become targeted by a recently escaped gangster as well as a corrupt police force. He goes on the run with his girlfriend’s teenage son Kareem (Terrence Little Gardenhigh): together they must stay alive and bring the guilty to justice.

This is a mess of a film, the tone of the film is family friendly, there is a large empathises placed on the relationship between Coffee and Kareem, however the humour of the film is r rated. The two don’t go together well if anything they clash horribly; it feels weirdly at war with itself.

The humour, or lack thereof, is proof of everything wrong with this film. The humour is not funny in anyway, it is painfully unfunny at best and cringey and awkward at worst. The worst offender here is Taraji P. Henson, she plays Kareem’s mother and Coffee’s girlfriend, her character is a stereotype and every time she is on screen, you’re begging her to just go away, as each line she delivers is worst than the last. The same can be said for Betty Gilpin who plays one of Coffee’s fellow police officers, she is so much more capable than this and deserves better than this.

This film tries at every turn to prove how relevant it is by constantly spouting current world events or politics. The film seems to think that this is funny, but it really isn’t, whenever the film excretes one of these lines it takes you out of the film and makes you cringe; this film will feel incredibly dated in just a few months.

More than anything else this film makes me lose any respect I ever had for Ed Helms. It is clear at this point that he is not even trying anymore, he is just taking lazy role after lazy role just for the money. He has long since stopped being funny and really should stop appearing in comedy films, as his presences indicates a bad film.

Overall, this film is the worst of the worst, it proves everything wrong with the Netflix greenlight process, and personally I think this is a career low for Ed Helms.

Pros.

It isn’t offensive.

Cons.

It is boring.

It tries too hard to be relevant.

It is not funny.

Ed Helms is terrible.

Why was this made?

1/5

Reviewed by Luke

After Life: Life After Death

After Life is a British black comedy-drama series created by Ricky Gervais. The premise for the show revolves around a man who has recently lost his wife and is trying to find a reason to not kill himself and to carry on. Through the season Tony (Ricky Gervais), comes to terms with what he has lost and tries to find the ability to be happy again.

Tonally this show is pitch dark, almost uncomfortably so at times, but that is the point. If you’re previous expose to Gervais was in something like The Office or Extras then you will be familiar with the style of comedy this show aims for, though I would say for the most part this program is more of a drama then a comedy. As the subject matter is quite extreme it won’t be for everyone, but if you stick with it, there is something wonderful being said.

This show approaches the character of Tony as having already died, not in a literal sense, the worst possible thing in life has already happened to him and he is just waiting until he can die for real, as such he has no cares left in the word and sets out to tell it like it is because what does anything matter. There is a good example of this early on when the character is mugged and he says he won’t give them his wallet and when the mugger threatens to stab him he says go on then or something to that end, this shows a man with nothing left to lose, just trying to think of a reason to carry on.

The first and last episodes nicely juxtapose each other, as in the last episode, for reasons I am not going to say for the sake of spoilers, he finds a reason to be happy again. He falls out of the all-consuming depression he has been in and does something to make himself happy again. I love the tightness of the writing, his arc is wrapped up in a season; obviously he is not fully moved on from his wife, but he has grown a hell of a lot as a character since the beginning of the show.

All of this makes me beg the question why are they doing a second season? There is nothing left to tell.

Overall, if this sounds like the sort of thing you would enjoy then I recommend you check it out as there is a lot of good on offer here, do I think there is no need for a second season and that it will inevitably be worse? Yes, a thousand times so, but I will just have to wait and see on that front.

Pros.

Asks some important questions.

How it deals with loss.

The heart.

The comedy.

Cons.

It can be quite hard to watch at times certainly not for everyone.

4.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Narcos Mexico (Season 2): Once Upon A Time In Mexico.

Narcos Mexico (Season 2) is a crime TV series which focuses on the war on drugs. More specifically how it all started, the rise of the Mexican Cartels and the fall of of Miguel Gallardo (Diego Luna), the fallout from the kidnapping of Kiki Camarena and the US response to capture those involved.

Well done! That is what I would say if I could talk to the creative team behind this season, not only have they laid to rest all my fears about this show from the first season, but they managed to create a genuinely tense throughout excellent to watch crime show. Each episode the stakes get raised higher and higher as the DEA and the Cartel, go to further extreme lengths to get what they want. My one complaint with this side of things is that I would have liked to see them to a little further with things sink further into extremes, though I suppose they are hamstrung by real life history.

The performances are top notch here as well, I had issues with Michael Pena’s performance last season, I think his character is incredibly dull and as a result you don’t really care when he dies. However, season 2 remedies this by giving us Walt (Scoot McNairy), a morally complex character who is far more engaging and interesting than last season’s protagonist ever was.

The best thing this season does in my opinion is set up the war to come. One of my issues with season one is that it felt drawn out, season 2 however, feel just long enough: it shows us Gallardo’s last year on top and then teases us with the coming war between Tijuana and Sinaloa cartels. Anyone who keeps up to date on the war on drugs/ or watches Netflix’s El Chapo series will know of the madness to come and the ending monologue of this season ties it all together nicely, “the animals are out of their cage now”.

Overall, a huge step-up in my opinion, a thrill ride through which is helped greatly by a new and better lead and the promise of something big to come. This should definitely be your next Netflix binge.

Pros.

Scoot McNairy.

Diego Luna.

Perfect pacing.

Thrilling throughout.

The tease of wars to come.

Cons.

None.

5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Locke & Key (Season 1): Do Doors Need To Be Opened?

Locke & Key (Season 1) is a supernatural horror drama TV show developed by Carlton Cuse, Meredith Averill and Aron Eli Coleite. The show is based off the Joe Hill comic series of the same name. The premise is that a family move back to their ancestral home after their father is murdered, once they arrive they begin to find a series of keys that grant magical and dangerous abilities, however, all is not well as a demon is also trapped on the property and it too is looking for the keys to open the Black Door.

As someone who is quite a big Joe Hill fan, when I heard this series was announced I was very excited for it and for the most part it met my expectations. I have not read the comic series so I can’t say how well this works as an adaptation of those books, or how accurate it is.

I think at it’s core this show has some good horror bones, there are quite a few menacing and scary moments scattered throughout, although something to note is that this isn’t the same kind of horror you would find in something like The Conjuring, this is more child friendly horror; think a cross between the previously mentioned film and the Jack Black Goosebumps film. It is because of this that I personally didn’t think this show is scary.

Moreover, this TV show is defiantly aiming at a younger/teenage audience: because as well as the more family friendly scares, you also have a lot and I mean a lot of teenage angst and high school politics thrown in for good measure. For the most part these sections are used sparingly and spread amongst the horror elements well, however, sometimes we get one really long bit of relationship drama and it made me groan every time. I think it is this focus on teen angst that stops this show from being great.

My big complaint with the show is that you can’t have you cake and eat it, by that I mean it can’t be a good horror show if every 5 seconds we need to cut away to a will they won’t they relationship and by the same token we can’t have a good teen drama if it plays too much into horror, this show needs to pick a side and stick to it, it needs to decide what it wants to be.

Overall, it has potential to be great, but it needs to commit to the horror and get better writers.

Pros.

Solid concept.

Some interesting mythology.

It has potential.

Cons.

Paper thin characters.

Too much teen drama.

3/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Stranger: One Little Lie

The Stranger is a British mystery thriller series released on Netflix based on the novel by Harlan Coben. The plot follows a group of people who are all approached by a stranger (Hannah John-Kamen), who tells them a secret, either to expose a lie or for blackmail purposes. From there the lives of these towns people descend into a mixture of chaos and a search for answers.

This series is one of the most underrated new releases on Netflix, it is both an excellent drama series and an excellent mystery series. The reason for this is because there are so many levels to the mystery just when you think you understand it another layer gets added, it keeps you guessing right up until the final 5 minutes. Moreover, there is a moral ambiguity to this series that adds to the overall story, the characters have good and bad qualities, Detective Katz (Paul Kaye), is an objectively bad person he kills a woman in cold blood, but when he finds out that his wife has been poisoning their daughter you feel for him.

There is a wide cast of characters, but very much to my surprise they all feel well done, developed and interesting. Richard Armitage’s Adam is the main character and his search to find his missing wife is the central plot line, but all the other characters are given a moment to shine and have great sub-plots of their own. Particularly Hannah John-Kamen’s Stranger, she is easily the most intriguing character in the series and when her identity is finally revealed it is genuinely surprising and a great twist.

My issues with this series are only very small, firstly I didn’t like that the stranger just left again at the end, when it turned out that Adam was her brother, I was hoping she would become a part of his family, but sadly she didn’t. My other issue is that there is a lot of stuff going on at the same time, which can be hard to keep track of at times, but it is handled very well and never becomes confusing so I can’t complain.

Overall, this is a great thriller/crime series to binge on Netflix the next time you’re looking for something, it has endless amounts of tension and suspense and a great mystery that keep you guessing right up until the end. A surprisingly solid show!

Pros.

Hannah John-Kamen.

Richard Armitage.

Paul Kaye.

Great mystery.

Hard to take your eyes off.

Cons.

The ending could have been better.

4.5/5

Narcos Mexico Season 1: A New Era Of Narcos

Narcos Mexico Season 1 is a crime drama series and spin-off to the Netflix series Narcos. The new series as the name would suggest shifts the focus of the program from the cocaine fields of Columbia to the weed fields of Mexico, though some familiar faces do make a return. The series chronicles the rise of the Guadalajara Cartel and Felix Gallardo’s (Diego Luna), kidnapping of American DEA Agent Kiki Camarena (Michael Pena).

To briefly describe this series, it is more of the same, if you liked Narcos and enjoyed seeing the DEA slowly busting drug dealers over a period of years than you will enjoy this. As usually there are some cheer worthy monuments (in this season it is the burning of the weed fields), some sad moments (Kiki’s death), and a hell of a lot of frustration as the corrupt system gets in the way of these agents doing their job.

As someone who loved all of that in previous seasons, I fully enjoyed Narcos Mexico Season 1, I found it to be both captivating and thrilling and it proves the creative team behind the show still has it.

Michael Pena plays against type here, he has done some dramatic work before (End Of Watch, Fury), but he is mainly known for his more comedic work. He played Kiki as a man on a mission, much like characters of past seasons his whole life revolved around bringing the drug lord to justice. My one issue is that the character could be annoying at times and do reckless and dangerous things without thinking about his family, who had moved down to Mexico with him.

I thought Luna’s Gallardo was a villain on the same level of Pablo Escobar (Wagner Moura), this is exactly what the series needed and was the issue the final series of Narcos was disappointing: because the villains were lacking. My one issue on this side of things was that I would have preferred to see Gallardo’s rise and fall within one series as opposed to two, it just feels more dragged out. A lot of episodes have plot points that go nowhere and feel put into pad out the 50+ minute runtime.

Overall, Narcos Mexico Season 1 is good, the characters are working and that is what made the first two series of Narcos feel so special, I still have a few issues with it, such as I feel like it didn’t need to be spread over two seasons and that I found Kiki’s character annoying at times. Ps. Don’t even get me started on Raffa or more adeptly the worst character ever written.

Pros.

Back to basics in a good way.

Interesting new villain.

It feels fresh again.

Cons.

It is too dragged out.

Some of the characters are annoying.

3/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Good Place: In Memoriam

The Good Place is a fantasy comedy series created by Michael Schur, of The Office, Parks And Recreation And Brooklyn 99 fame. The series follows Eleanor Shellstrop (Kristen Bell), a woman who awakes in the Good Place/Heaven even though she doesn’t deserve to be there. The first series sees her try to blend in and not be discovered, taking ethics lessons from her assigned soulmate Chidi (William Harper Jackson), who eventually finds out that she does not belong in the Good Place as well. Then there is a masterful reveal at the end of the first season that they are in the Bad Place/ Hell and the events of the first season have been an elaborate form of torture. The following seasons see Eleanor and the others try and earn entry into Good Place, become better people and reform the afterlife system in general.

The reason why this series became such a successful phenomenon is because it is so well written, it has it’s finger on the pulse of pop culture and has characters that you can see grow on screen. The Good Place works because it is such a novel take on the sitcom genre, the show’s approach to morality and ethics make for some great laughs and also some scenes and decisions that really make you think.

What’s more just like Parks And Recreation before it The Good Place has an incredibly loveable main cast of characters. Along with Chidi and Elanor who I have already mentioned, we have Tahani (Jameela Jamil), Jason (Manny Jacinto), Janet (D’Arcy Carden) and Michael (Ted Danson), all of these characters are unique and interesting, they have distinct types of personality and comedy styles. For me either Michael or Eleanor are the funniest and consistently make me laugh across all the series.

Overall, The Good Place was a landmark for comedy and sitcoms in general, it was consistently funny across its run and had some of the best characters on TV. It will be a shame to see it go, but hopefully the ending will live up to the rest of the series and it will go out on a high note. As of the time of writing I have not yet seen the final episode, so these are just my thoughts on the series so far, but unless the ending is terrible this series will always be 4.5/5 for me. Some of the seasons are stronger than others but, overall it is a hell of a show!

*Edit, I loved the ending it was terrific.

Pros.

Strong characters.

Interesting ways of storytelling.

Characters that you can see grow.

Very Funny.

Cons.

A few weaker moments across the seasons.

4.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Chilling Adventures Of Sabrina Part 3: Abandon All Hope Of A Good Season

The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina Part 3 is a supernatural horror TV Series. The show revolves around a young witch called Sabrina Spellman (Kiernan Shipka), she is half witch and half human and is unlike her peers on both sides on the supernatural vial. The series sees her learn more about her powers and herself and go on various adventures with her friends. Part 3 sees Sabrina go to hell to get her boyfriend back, thereby becoming the new Queen of hell, as well as battling against a horde of pagans that worship the Old Gods and want to see the destruction of Sabrina’s coven.

Before I get into this review I just want to say I genuinely enjoyed the first 2 parts of this series, there were plenty of great horror moments to keep me interested, despite being linked to the Archie comics and therefore to Riverdale this show had avoided most of the terrible pit falls of that show. At least it did for a time.

Part 3 is by far the worst so far, The Chilling Adventures Of Sabrina always had a distinct sense of identity, but it loses it this season. It basically becomes a more out there slightly scarier Riverdale which is the worst thing I could ever possibly say. The supernatural horror takes a back seat to relationship drama and teenage angst, I understand this is the main market for the show, but the other parts still had good horror elements mixed in to make these moments bearable. What’s more there is a musical interlude every 5 seconds, which feels very Riverdale, these songs feel like they have no natural place in the show instead feeling like plot padding and a chance to show off their licensed music.

Another thing that makes this part the worst for me is Sabrina herself. She has always been brash and impulsive following her heart rather than her head, but this season is ridiculous. She repeatedly does things that put everyone she cares about in danger just because it is what she wants to do. When she is trying to become The Queen Of Hell, she won’t take souls unless she thinks they deserve it, which is baffling as they sold their souls to the devil in the first place. What’s more her whole holier than thou attitude quickly becomes grating as she seems to think she knows better than everyone else on screen; proving her to be the embodiment of every self-entitled, self-important arsehole ever; what makes this almost comical is that she is near always wrong.

Don’t even get me started on her friends, they literally exist to further the plot and fill-out the near hour runtime of an episode. In a supernatural horror show, I don’t want to watch a 10-minute cheer leading sequence. This series is going down the toilet fast.

Pros.

A few good horror sequences.

Lilith continues to be great.

Cons.

Sabrina is hateable.

It feels pandering and Riverdale esque.

It’s vapid and self-involved.

1.5/5

Reviewed By Luke

Dracula: How To Destroy Potential In One Episode

Dracula is a three-part horror TV series developed by Sherlock creators Steven Moffat and Mark Gatiss. The story is yet another retelling of Bram Stoker’s seminal novel Dracula this time with a twist. This time around the Harker family take up a new position in the narrative, and the struggle between Dracula and Van Helsing is shown to exist across multiple lifetimes and members of the Van Helsing family.

This series left a bitter taste in my mouth. I love Dracula and I’ve read the book several times and consumed most media related to it and my issue with this iteration of the story wasn’t the changes or the fresh take, but how they chose to end it. That third episode was woeful, and that seems to be near universally accepted. Not only do they have Lucy Westenra, and the rest of the characters as 20 something club goers, which is painful to see, and informs me that Moffat and Gatiss haven’t ever actually talked to a young person in their lives. It is beyond cringey. Worse so, they decide to have Van Helsing and Dracula die together almost as lovers, which is not only a slap to the face, but also a kick in the balls.

It is such a shame that the third episode is as bad as it is, as the other two episodes were nothing sort of terrific. I liked the changes to the established story in the first few episodes as they made sense, and the direction the story took was fresh and interesting. I liked most of the stuff they were putting down, it had just the right amount of good horror mixed in as well. What’s more the new Dracula Claes Bang is magnificent; he is my favourite on-screen iteration of the character so far. He plays the character with just enough humour to be likeable and just enough menace that you never want to let your guard down. I would love to see more of his interpretation of the character, but sadly we will never get that.

Overall, the first two episodes of this show had it set to be something special, but the horrific, cringey mess that was the third episode not only shot the series in the foot, but also put a stake through its heart and set it on fire. The first two episodes would have been 5/5, but that third episode ruins it all.

Pros.

Claes Bang Is Great.

The First Two Episodes Are Magnificent.

Some Of The Changes Work.

Cons.

The Cringe Inducing, Lore Destroying, Baffling Third Episode.

The Idea Of Having Dracula and Van Helsing Romantically Linked.

3/5 and that’s being generous.

Reviewed By Luke

Mascots: Life Behind A Costume

Mascots is a mockumentary film directed by Christopher Guest. The plot of the film revolves around several mascots who are competing for the World Mascots Association championship’s Golden Fluffy Award; hilarity and hijinks ensue.

I have had this film in my Netflix que for quite some time, there has always been other films that have got in the way of me watching it, that should have told me something.

Mockumentary films for me are incredibly hit and miss, for every What We Do In The Shadows there are thousands of others that are either middling or bad. This I would say is on the better side of middling, but only just.

For me, the idea of people who dress up as mascots and have that be a big part of their life is an intriguing concept. There is a lot to mine from this topic as a lot of people, myself included, only have a very surface level knowledge about this subject. To an extent the film does dive deep into the topic albeit in a humorous way.

That was my main issue with the film, the comedy. This is a very quirky film and a lot of the comedy steams from that, however, for me 98% of it didn’t land. A lot of the time Mascots may have got a weak smile out of me, but that was it. I found a lot of the jokes to either be hitting low hanging fruit or incapable of delivering. The film did make me laugh once though, when one of the characters was explaining to the other about Furry culture; that amused me greatly. Take all of that with a pinch of salt of course because as we all know comedy is incredibly subjective and personal.

I thought a lot of the characters were unique and memorable, especially Chris O’ Dowd’s Zook. In my opinion this is one of this film’s greatest strengths; it’s originality. The characters are all very different to one another and have different motivations and drives, as such it is interesting to see them interact on the big screen. The wide variety of different characters helped to keep my interest spread across the whole ensemble.

Overall, this is a quirky and deeply original film, however the comedy really didn’t land for me, which meant in the end I didn’t feel much for this film. It is nice to see Chris O’ Dowd give a good performance for a change.

Pros.

Novel and Original.

Interesting Characters.

Chris O’ Dowd.

Cons.

The Comedy Didn’t Land.

It Was Mostly Forgettable.

2.5/5

Reviewed by Luke