The Day Shall Come: Behold Your Messiah Is Here

The Day Shall Come is a dark comedy thriller, written and directed by Chris Morris, of Four Lions fame. The plot follows Moses Al Shabaz, (Marchant Davis), as a preacher who hates the way society does things and voices idea of rising against the Government. Throughout the film, we are shown that Moses thinks he is on a divine mission and believes that God is on his side; though everyone else thinks he’s delusional. The events of the film begin when Moses community centre is closed, and his landlord asks for radioactive materials to keep it open. Meanwhile, the FBI is looking for new targets, people they can lock up for terror charges, and they set their sights on Moses thinking him unstable.

The beauty of a Chris Morris script is that even though Moses and his crew do things that would make anyone else the villain in the narrative, like buying guns off Isis, here we see it twisted. Moses and his friends think they’re getting one over on both sides and it’s all one big trick. Because of this, we still root for Moses throughout, because, in his own manic way, he is incredibly likeable.

On the flip side of this Morris criticises the processes of the FBI showing how they would go to any length to arrest someone for terrorism so that they can get a promotion; even literally giving them a nuke. The FBI character we follow is Kendra Glack, (Anna Kendrick), who unlike her superiors starts to see throughout the film just how ridiculous the whole process is.

If you have seen Four Lions or, any of Chris Morris’ other work you know that he likes to cover important real-world topics and draw out the absurdity in them. Taking narratives that would otherwise be very dark and heavy and making surreal comedy gold.

Davis does a fantastic job making Moses likeable and sympathetic despite being a terrible person; we can see his good intentions. He is equally as terrific delivering serious dialogue as he is having a conversation with his horse; that he thinks can talk.

Kendrick, on the other hand, plays the same character she always does, you can picture in your head what I mean, but she is still likeable all the same; if a little bland. A lot of her FBI colleagues outshines her, particularly her boss Andy Mudd, (Denis O’ Hare), who gets all the best lines and steal the last third of the film.

Overall this isn’t a film for everyone. Some may not like its subject matter. Some might not like its breed of comedy. However, if this film appeals to you, then it is a blast of surreal comedy at its finest and the stuff of indie filmmaking legend. You won’t see anything else like this I can guarantee you that.

4/5

Reviewed by Luke

Official Secrets: What Is the Price of the Truth?

Official Secrets is a docudrama film, based around the life of whistle-blower Katherine Gunn, (Keira Knightly). The plot follows Katherine as she leaks secret government documents in an effort to stop the invasion of Iraq, and the after-effects following that decision.

Official secrets makes you question a lot of things, your ability to see right and wrong, your love of country, the very nature of whether all truths should be made public knowledge. The answers it gives aren’t good; they’re if anything troubling. This film shows that sometimes you need to take a stand and do what you think is right even if it puts you and your loved ones in danger; even if it makes you a traitor to your country.

The film and Knightly’s performance do a great job of investing you in Gunn’s journey; you root for her in this seemingly hopeless situation. There is even one incredibly well-crafted sequence that uses the tension of unannounced deportation so masterfully you can’t tear your eyes away.

What’s more, the film acts as a commentary on the state of the modern world, where governments can no longer be trusted and actively hold back the truth from the public, whether for good or, ill reasons. This film is significant as it shows how one person can stand up to a seemingly colossal institution and come out on top in the end.

Knightly’s performance isn’t the only excellent bit of acting on display in Official Secrets, as it also features a who’s who of famous British actors. Everyone from Matt Smith, of The Crown and Doctor Who fame, to Rhys Ifans and Ralph Fiennes bring something to the table; adding to the talent on hand. The performances of all four of these actors are great, but Smith and Ifans are the ones who stood out to me. Smith’s Martin Bright brings some levity to what is otherwise a very dark film, and he is also very likeable and a well-deserving secondary protagonist. Ifans’ Ed Vulliamy steals the scenes he is in, bringing a presence and charm that is hard to forget.

Overall the film is very timely and relevant, with the likes of Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, sometimes other lesser-known whistle-blowers slip through the cracks. So it is essential to watch this film and realise what Gunn sacrificed for us all, she stood up and tried to stop something she thought was wrong, and that is commendable and something we all should do in this modern world.

This is an important film made all the stronger by an engaging narrative and superb acting throughout. Very much a must-see.

4/5
Review by Luke

Ps. Remember,” The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”.

The Shining: Kubrick’s Horror Classic

With the release of Doctor Sleep soon upon us, I thought I would rewatch and review the film that started it all the Shining. The Kubrick version, not the straight to TV version that King prefers.

The Shining is a psychological horror film released in 1980, based on the Stephen King book of the same name. The plot follows Jack Torrance, (Jack Nicholson), as he becomes the caretaker of the infamous Overlook Hotel, moving his family to the hotel for its off-season. The hotel is of course not what it appears to be, and soon all sorts of horrific happenings begin, with Jack and his son Danny at the centre of it.

The Shining is directed by one of the all-time great Film Auteurs Stanley Kubrick, and his fingerprints are all over this film, both stylistically and thematically. Kubrick’s direction help to tie together the human threat with the supernatural elements, creating a delightfully ambiguous narrative.

The horror of this film comes more from a sense of building mystery rather than, the much more prevalent these days, jump scares. I think this adds to the fear-inducing nature of the film, as nothing is presented out-rightly to you, so you have to use your imagination to piece together the blanks and figure out the truth; this allows the film to be far scarier than one that just shows you the monster.

What’s more the performances from the entire cast are electric, Jack Nicholson is wonderfully deranged from the off, but sinks further and further into madness as the film progress. That may perhaps be the one criticism I have of this film, Nicholson’s performance was manic from the beginning, rather than starting out standardly and then getting increasingly more menacing. This makes his endgame performance when he has fully devolved look less impressive.

Danny Lloyd as Danny Torrance is also amazing, being both sympathetic and creepy simultaneously, from the start of the film Danny’s conversations with his little finger are distressing, more so when he starts to lose time. To the credit of Lloyd, he manages to do all of this while still being likeable and a character you want to see survive. To be a child-star and be able to do both of these things is something that deserves praise.

Shelly Duvall, who plays Wendy Torrance, Jack’s Wife and Danny’s Mother is best of all. As she perfectly captures the fear being in a situation like that would create in her performance. We see this real sense of desperation on her behalf to try and save Danny in the film act of the film. As well as to try and help and later stop her husband. Kubrick’s actions towards Duvall have been well documented elsewhere as such I won’t go into them here today. Instead, I try and look past them when I watch the film.

My final point is that this film deviates from the book in several significant ways, such as questioning whether the supernatural elements of the story are real. Contrastingly, in the source material, they most certainly were. This adds a new layer to book readers who may think they know where the narrative is heading. In the same breath, it might annoy them. It’s just something worth noting.

Overall the Shining is still a chilling horror classic and one that still holds up almost 40 years later. A must watch for all fans of horror, and I hope Doctor Sleep can live up to the standards set by this film.

5/5
Reviewed by Luke

Slasher Horror: The Genre That Refuses To Die

A ‘Slasher’ film for those of you who don’t know is a type of horror film usually focusing on a group of people, in most cases teens, who are hunted down one by and one and killed. Sometimes this can be done with the standard escaped lunatic trope, Halloween the original, or sometimes the killer can have more of a supernatural bend, like Freddy from the Nightmare on Elm Street series.

The Slasher sub-genre has been around in one form or another for decades, stretching all the way back to the 1960 release of Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho. The film’s villain, Norman Bates, is the first example we see of what would become the horror staple slasher. Following on from this we had the release of Black Christmas, which is getting a 2019 remake, and the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, both released in 1974; this kicked the sub-genre off, and proved that these sort of films was where the horror was heading.

The film that would go on to solidify the identity of what a Slasher film can and can’t be, as well as bring about the trope of the ‘Final Girl’, was John Carpenters Halloween; this is seen as the first of the modern slashers and would become the template for what other horror movies and franchises would do down the line.

The 80s were the prime time for Slasher horror, with the release of Friday the 13th at the end of the 70s going into the 80s as well as more from the Halloween franchise, and a little film called Nightmare on Elm Street. All of these films put their spin on the slasher formula, with the 1980s release of Child’s Play being the most novel making the evil slasher a doll. However, franchise fatigue was beginning to set in.

Over the 1980s the market had become saturated with Slasher horror and audiences were starting to get sick of it. The big franchises had become more and more silly, as a way to try and keep the concept new and exciting; here’s looking at you Friday the 13th. As such, when the 1990s rolled around, a film was released which exposed as well as poked fun at all of the sub-genres rules and tropes; this film was Wes Craven’s Scream.

Scream was released to massive applause and praise, with it almost being a parody, but still remaining scary, and most importantly innovative. The release of Scream helped to breath new life into the Slasher genre, but this was only short-lived. With more schlocky slasher films like Wrong Turn and Hatchet being made in this brief window, but all of this was not enough to save the genre; as we reached the end of the 90s, the Slasher horror was on its way out. Another contributing factor in this decline was the late 90s release of The Blair Witch Project, which pushed horror cinema in a completely different direction, found footage.

Throughout the 2000s the big Slasher franchises continued to release films, whether reboots or, sequels no one asked for and a lot of them came out to minimal fanfare and even fewer ticket sales. All hope for Slasher movies coming back to the forefront of horror cinema seemed lost. Then the news was announced that Danny McBride, know for his comedy roles, wanted to write a new entry for the Halloween series, this film would ignore all the terrible sequels that followed the original; when the movie came out it was met with praise at every turn and made a large amount of money for the studio; naturally two sequels to this film were announced thereafter. Now at the time of writing there is talk of a new Friday the 13th film as well as a Nightmare on Elm Street film, and though there still are terrible Slasher movie sequels being released, 2019’s Child’s Play and the Leatherface origin story, the Slasher genre still has one last gasp in its lungs and, one last scare to give.

Hustlers: Proof Jennifer Lopez can act!

Hustlers is a 2019 crime thriller film, about a group of strippers that after the 2008 financial crisis decide to start drugging and robbing their clients to make some extra cash; apparently based on real events.

First things first, the film is handled tastefully, others who have reviewed it says it shows life as a stripper accurately, rather than overly glamorising it; which some movies do. At no point did the film become vulgar, or pervy; which is something that this film if done differently, could have been in danger of.

The main plot of the film revolves around Destiny, (Constance Wu), as a new girl in this particular strip club, who needs to make some money to pay for her grandmother’s debts. Enter Ramona, (Jennifer Lopez), a seasoned pro who knows how to make money and get what she wants. What then follows is a dive into the extreme as the girl’s actions become more and more sinister, and Ramona and Destiny become more and more at odds. On the whole, the film’s plot is quite novel as there haven’t been many crime films from the woman’s point of view.

Hustlers is Jennifer Lopez’s movie, as though she isn’t the main character, she is the most interesting and compelling. Lopez gives a hell of a performance and can switch between a caring mother and friend, to someone who will do whatever it takes to get what she wants. There has been talk comparing Lopez’s role in this to Matthew McConaughey’s character in Magic Mike, and if this is true than Hustlers might mark the beginning of a renaissance in Lopez’s acting career; she might even win an Oscar.

That is all the positives I can say about the film.

Other than Lopez there are a large amount of other supporting characters, such as Annabelle, (Lili Reinhart of Riverdale fame), all of these characters aren’t fleshed out or, developed beyond one or two memorable traits. In the case of Reinhart her gimmick, and that truly is an apt choice of word, is that she is sick whenever she is stressed and that she has a bad home life, those are the only two things you know about her character; so a developed supporting cast is something you can’t find here.

In my opinion, the main issue with Hustlers is Constance Wu; she is incredibly unlikable and doesn’t work as the main character we are supposed to root for. She is given various traits to make her more sympathetic, but all they seem to do is reinforce just how unlikable she is. I don’t know if she is just upstaged by Jennifer Lopez’s electrifying performance, but to me, Wu was incredibly miscast.

What’s more and it needs to be said, the film doesn’t view men in a good light at all, even one in the third act who is supposed to be sympathetic he is still treated with contempt; that said, though in the context of the film it makes sense why they have this view. At no point does it feel forced in, it makes sense from the character motivations; it just something that needs to be talked about in regards to this film.

Overall the film is worth seeing for Jennifer Lopez’s fantastic performance alone; it is just a shame the rest of the cast can’t live up to her. An average to good crime film.

3/5

Reviewed by Luke

Angel has Fallen: What makes an Action Hero?

There is an art to being an action star; it’s something only few can do; fewer still convincingly. Therein lies today’s topic I want to talk about what makes a convincing action star, and how all that can and will change over time. When you imagine an action hero, you imagine a tough person in the prime of their life, ready and able to do whatever it takes to save the day. Keanu Reeves is believable in John Wick because he trains incredibly hard and has excellent stunt coordination. The is true of Sigourney Weaver in Aliens as well; she is a believable badass, due to a well-developed character and great set pieces/ stunt work. This brings us to the meat of what I want to talk about today the recently released blockbuster Angel Has Fallen.

Angel Has Fallen is the third film in the Fallen series, carrying on from the events of Olympus Has Fallen and London Has Fallen. The third film focuses on Mike Banning, (Gerard Butler), as he faces off against the Government when he is framed for murder. A big part of the film focuses on the effect being a Secret Service agent is having on Mikes health, as he is not the man he used to be anymore. Despite that being a theme, the action in this film comes off as some of the laziest and most uninspired of recent history. I understand from a plot perspective Mike can’t be doing the same things he was doing in the first film, but other than some shooting and running he doesn’t really do all that much.

Maybe I have been spoiled with well planned out, well-executed action movies like this year’s John Wick, but in any case, I don’t see a reason to release an action movie, when it is clear that no one really cares, cookie-cutter in the extreme might as well be this films tagline.

What makes this all the more troubling is Gerard Butler himself. There was a time at the start of the 2000s where Butler’s name was being said in the same breath as Jason Statham and Arnold Schwarzenegger when it came to action stars; this was mainly due to the release of 300, which catapulted Butler into action superstardom. Cut to now, and the performance he gives in Angel Has Fallen is one of tiredness, it is clear he doesn’t want to be there anymore; crucially he isn’t believable as the character in this film. I know Butler can do better than this, he proved he can still be a viable and menacing action star in last year’s Den of Thieves. However, none of what made his performance good in that film is carried over.

To conclude, I think the Fallen series needs to be taken out back and shot; it is the merciful thing to do. We are a long way from the heights of the first film and, the longer it goes on, the more unbelievable Butler becomes as an action star, which is a shame. My final thought is that Butler needs to think carefully about the roles he picks, focusing more on films like Machine Gun Preacher and Law Abiding Citizen, where he shone through as a relatable action star.
What’s more, for the love of all of us when Fallen 4 comes a-knocking, Gerard, don’t answer.

1.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Creature Design and Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark

Across all of Horror Cinema, there have been a collection of creatures that have not only captured the imagination but, also terrified. These creatures have all been practical, not CGI. When you think of monsters like The Creeper from Jeepers Creepers, their looks sticks out because of how well designed and realistic it is. Creature design and attention to detail can mean the difference between a terrifying horror movie villain and a joke. It’s on that note I talk about the subject of today’s review Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark.
Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark is a horror film; based on the children’s books of the same name. The plot of the film revolves around a group of teenagers that find a book in an abandoned house, the curious leader of the group Stella, (Zoe Colletti), decides to take the book home; a decision she will regret forever. Once she takes it home and looks through it, stories start to appear on their own; targeting her and her friends.
Going into this film, I was expecting something akin to the Goosebumps film of a few years ago; with the stories coming to life and running amuck; how wrong I was. The stories that come to life feel personal and precisely tailored to each character, as the book plays off each one of their fears, whereas, in the other film, it was merely random. The scares work well and, though there are a few jump scares peppered throughout, there is also a keen scene of atmosphere and dread which permeates the film. However, the most praiseworthy aspect of the film’s horror is by far the creature design. Now there are several creatures in this film, as it is broken down in a collection of short stories, with a broader narrative to bind them all. Each separate creature is unique, and it is plain to see how much care has been put into them down to the smallest detail. This is no doubt the influence of producer Guillermo del Toro, who is known for his love of practical monsters. I believe these villains are the films greatest strength and help it to stand apart from the 1000 other generic horror films with forgettable monsters and demons.
The characters, unlike the monsters, are all rather one-note, being dull and nonmemorable. The group of kids never really graduate from the teenage outcast stereotype and, are more caricatures; you won’t remember who any of the characters are 5 seconds after the film ends and, you won’t remember their names during it. That said, the film is on the whole incredibly well done and impressive, even the low age rating doesn’t take away from the film, as it does in some cases, the horror and the deaths are all well-executed and chilling without the need for excessive gore, and I think that says a lot to the film’s credit.
Overall this was a horror film where you can tell the people making it care, the creature design speaks to that, it masters the subtle art of scares so entirely that you will be thinking of the film’s monsters long after you’ve gone home, shame the same can’t be said for the characters; this may well be the horror hit of the summer, and I for one can’t wait for more scary stories to tell in the dark,
4.5/5
Reviewed by Luke

Searching

Searching follows a father after the disappearance of his daughter; as he frantically realises, that he didn’t know his daughter very well at all. The film plays on the themes of family and, the effect grief can have on the parent-child relationship. It does this through the lens of modern technology, having a similar layout to Unfriended; with social media messaging and live chats being pivotal.

However, unlike Unfriended were this all-digital format added to the overall film, here the opposite is true. The need for everything to be on a phone screen or webcam is limiting, sometimes frustratingly so; with it even becoming a detriment at times.

The writing for the film is solid throughout with twists and turns that you won’t see coming, is it on the level of something like Gone Girl? Well no but few things can be, but a lot is done to make the mystery intriguing.

Main protagonist David Kim, (John Cho), is believable but unlikeable, particularly in his early film relationship with Margot with it feeling awkward, but I suppose that is the point. He isn’t supposed to be likeable instead he is supposed to be the embodiment of the desperation, a man that has had his whole world taken from him and will do anything to get it back.

The character of Detective Vick, (Debra Messing), is superbly done, with her development meaningfully adding to the third act twist.

The film does suffer from pacing issue, many times I felt myself losing interest, these moments are few and far between, but are still present throughout.

Overall it is a solid thriller mystery, not one I would say rush out and see, however, the writing and, the strong performances stop it from being mediocre. Ultimately better than meh, but certainly not worthy of the Hitchcock comparisons.

3/5.

Reviewed by Luke.

Yardie

Yardie is a crime film focusing on Dennis “D” Campbell, (Aml Ameen), as he deals with his brother’s death and begins a quest to find those responsible; so far so generic. I wish I could say it gets better from there– it doesn’t. Yardie marks the direction debut of Idris Elba; this prospect made the hopeful for the film.

However, though the film itself is well-directed everything else is just bland, making this film a huge disappointment. Narratively the film is contrived with there being a plethora of redundant character choices. Namely shown when D has to leave Jamaica because he is about to start a gang war, how, is never really explained. The same applies to other parts of the film, such as when one of the rival gangsters kidnaps D’s daughter, only to then give her back; maybe 10 minutes later. Ultimately the narrative leaves you going, “wait what”, a lot more than it should.

Furthermore, from the trailers of Yardie, I believed there was at least an element of character study to the film, but that couldn’t be further from the truth. The characters are all incredibly underdeveloped, with there being nothing to set them apart from characters in any other crime film. Even the protagonist D is boring, easily replaceable and not so easily remembered.

The most egregious flaw of the film is that it has no edge, it plays it safe, perhaps too much, even being overly sentimental at times. I believe the film tries to use this sentimentality in place of actual emotional resonances which, if true, shows almost a misunderstanding of the genre.

Furthermore, the constant slip in accent that some of the characters have is laughable, but it is not meant to be.

To conclude, the problem with Yardie is just how boring and forgettable it is, though there are some small positives, Yardie is a film that you would turn off halfway through if you were watching it at home.

1/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Happytime Murders

The Happytime Murders is a crime comedy film featuring puppets. That is all you need to know. The main plot focuses on former partners, Philips voiced by, (Bill Barretta) and Edwards, (Melissa McCarthy), who have to work together again to solve a series of murders. The film’s main aim seems to be to disprove the idea that puppets are synonyms with family-friendly fun, why it wants to do this is anyone’s guess. Does it work? Well, that I can answer for you, no it most certainly doesn’t.

Before I carry on, I want to say that I had low expectations for this film; in that regard, the film did manage to surpass my ideas about it, even making me laugh a few times. However, it is not a good film or one I would recommend, simply put, when compared to McCarthy’s other 2018 work, Life of the Party– it is merely a small step up.

First, this is a film no one asked for, throughout the film’s entire runtime it never gave any justification for its existence; beyond being solely for the money. Feeling needless in the worst way.

The plot and story feel like a rehashing of genre tropes, with nothing new added to them, lacking all the charm of other genre films such as the Nice Guys. The screenplay places an emotional significance on the fallout between Edwards and Phillips, even having flashbacks. These are to little effect as each emotional beat of the arc feels played out and predictable. This is not helped at all by the fact that Edwards and Phillips have no chemistry, none, watching their back and forths is often painful and unfunny.

Melissa McCarthy is forgettable and mildly annoying here, she brings very little to the role; with her jokes feeling straight to DVD quality. Conversely, Elizabeth Banks’ portrayal of Jenny, Phillips old flame, is one of the highlights of the film; though she is in my opinion sorely underused. To me, that is the criminal issue with this film, the good elements, such as Banks’ character and the world building, are ignored in favour of the formulaic, generic buddy cop cliches that have been done a million times before.

Finally, the humour of the film is needlessly profane, feeling done just for the sake of it rather than for the comedy. A lot of the jokes in the film will not make you laugh; with it being the serious moments that are often the funniest.

Overall this film fails as it tries overly to be edgy, being bland and boring in the process; nothing more than a collection of the Pulp Detective genre’s worst tropes. Not worth your time or money.

1/5

Reviewed by Luke