Widows: Elizabeth Debicki Out Acts Every Single Person In This Film

Widows is a crime thriller film directed by Steve McQueen. The plot follows a group of women who find out posthumously that their husbands were highly successful thieves, however now with their husbands gone local mobsters are seeking to collect their debts and its up to the widows to pay.

I thought this film was good and well done to a point. I enjoyed seeing the women have to carry out a heist with little experience, it was interesting to see them progress and become stronger together. I thought 2 of the lead actresses gave good performances and that one was underused and maybe even miscast.

Viola Davis was a strong anchor for the film and played the no nonsense with an emotional vulnerability type very well, Michelle Rodriguez was fine, but was certainly the weakest member of the cast, she had very little to do and the film wasted her for the most part. Finally you have Elizabeth Debicki, who for me was the strongest member of the ensemble, her storyline was harrowing and Debicki conveyed that well.

The supporting cast also helped boost this film up, with a lot of the wider talent adding nicely to the central three characters and fleshing out the world as whole. In this regard Daniel Kaluuya was terrific, being a very menacing side villain.

My issue with the film came when it revealed that Davis’s characters husband was still alive. This is a second act twist that I find undermines a lot of the film and takes away from the character motivations. Is the twist shocking? Yes, but does it do anything more than that, no not really.

Overall, a potentially strong crime film that is let down by a miscast and underused Rodriguez and a silly twist that adds very little to the narrative beyond a cheap shock.

Pros.

Debicki

Davis

Kaluuya

The tension and the transformative journey

Cons.

Rodriguez

The twist

3.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Mulan: Remove The Dragon Remove The Heart, A Superhero Story

Mulan is a fantasy action film directed by Niki Caro. The plot sees young woman Mulan (Yifei Liu), defy Chinese society by riding off to take her fathers place in battle, thereby becoming a solider and later a legend.

So before I get into this I want to again address my bias. The lead actor Yifei Liu defended the police’s brutal response to the Hong Kong protests, which is a sickening fact, but one I nevertheless tried to remove from by mind while watching so I could stay objective.

On the scale of Disney live action remakes this felt comfortably along side the Lion King. The reason for that is though there are a few changes, that are mostly insignificant and hurt the film, it still feels very familiar to the original animated version.

By removing Mushu and the songs from this film, you get a very joyless experience, that tries to go for realism and sticking to the source folk tale, until it gets bored of that and puts in magic and shape shifters just for the hell of it.

Furthermore, the film totally undermines Mulan’s personal journey by having her already be quite competent right from the off. In the original animated version, Mulan was terrible when she started off and got gradually better over the course of the film, here she starts off already quite a good fighter and then becomes a superhero by the end. I am not kidding with the superhero thing, when she becomes herself, she is cutting down groups of men twice her size in seconds and hitting people with arrows who are incredibly far away with ease; it is deeply unbelievable and laughable when you consider the realism angle.

There is also quite a bit of China pandering throughout, where they will randomly say how great the country is and how honourable and proud its ways are. I found this to be as off putting as bad product placement, but I am not hugely surprised Disney did it as they’re clearly aiming this one more at China than anywhere else.

I found Liu to be a likeable enough lead, the jokes they kept in from the original still worked for a laugh and she had enough charisma to keep the film afloat.

Moreover, the villains were improved from the original, we get a new secondary antagonist introduced, who seems very interesting, but the film does very little with her. The reason I say they’re more improved this time around is because they’re far more imposing and threatening.

In that same vein the action is also well done and is easily the standout point of the film, the battle scenes are well done and well-choreographed, with a clear martial arts inspiration. They were the saving grace of the film.

Overall, a deeply needless film that fails at being realistic and ends up as a pandering joyless experience with some cool fight scenes.

Pros.

Yifei Liu is a likeable enough lead

The villains feel more scary

The action is well executed

Cons.

The failure at realism

It is joyless and hard to get through

The pandering

Ruining Mulan’s arc

2/5

Reviewed by Luke

New Mutants: The Poor Man’s Chronicle, Potential We Will Never Get To See

The New Mutants is a superhero horror film directed by Josh Boone. The plot sees a group of young people have to come to terms with their mutant abilities whilst inside a secure facility. Each has emotional scars from their past that they need to overcome in order to move forward.

So before I get into this I will just announce that I may have a slight bit of bias of this one, because Josh Boone has recently revealed himself to be a terrible person, look up his disastrous io9 interview for more information, as such I don’t like him, but I tried my best to stay impartial with the film.

This film is not as terrible as you have heard, it is by no means the worst X-Men film. There are strong parts to it, such as the horror, however there are also a lot of problems. It is a very mixed bag.

First the positive. I thought the horror elements of the film were really compelling and worked well, it was actually scary at times. Personally I thought this film would probably work better as a straight horror film, as when the superhero stuff happened it did not seem to fit with everything else. The CGI battle at the end of the film, is proof of this, it stood out for all the wrong reasons and felt jarring.

I enjoyed seeing each of the characters on screen, I think for the most part they nailed the look and feel of them from the comics, I had never seen anything like it before (in terms of powers). The acting was patchy, as though the characters were enjoyable and fun to watch, for the most part the ones who were doing accents were doing them badly. Charlie Heaton was the only member of the cast who pulled his accent off, Anya Taylor Joy’s Russian accent came and went and was not maintained and Masie Williams’ Scottish accent was awful.

I would like to see more from these characters, sadly we never will.

There is a scene that I would like to talk about that I found to be questionable. The shower scene early on in the film between Masie Williams character and lead Danielle Moonstar (Blu Hunt), felt a bit icky to me. There was something about it that I didn’t like, and it felt off, especially considering the actors ages when it was shot.

Overall, there is some fun to be had and it is definitely worth a watch, not in cinemas (its not that urgent), however the problems it has are significant. It would have been better as a horror film.

Pros.

The characters are all likeable

It was cool seeing the powers pulled off well

The horror

Cons.

The superhero stuff felt like it clashed

The shower scenes

Taylor-Joy and Williams’ accents

3/5

Reviewed by Luke

Iron Man: The One That Started It All

Iron Man is a Marvel Comics superhero film directed by Jon Favreau. The plot sees billionaire weapons dealer Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.), get captured by terrorists who use his weapons. This leads Stark to rethink his business model, it also leads to him becoming the superhero known as Iron Man.

This is were it all began, this was the first film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and likely without it, said universe might not have happened at all. This film was responsible for setting up one of the most complex characters in Marvel’s shared universe as well as for setting the tone for future adventures.

Personally, I enjoy that this and other early MCU films, pre full Disney, had more of rough around the edge’s kind of charm. A bit more adult and far less of the incredibly safe content that would come later.

Downey Jr. gives the performance of his life, resurrecting both his career as well as the character of Iron Man who had fallen out of mainstream popularity long ago. The life and energy that Downey Jr. brings to the role is truly extraordinary and would very hard to replicate with a different actor.

Overall, a very enjoyable film, the best Marvel film to some, and in my top 10 for sure.

Pros.

Establishing the world

Robert Downey Jr’s performance

The humour

The rough around the edges feel of it

Cons.

A weak forgettable villain

4.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Extraction: All These Netflix Action Films Are Starting To Feel The Same

Extraction is an action film directed by Sam Hargrave. The plot sees mercenary Tyler (Chris Hemsworth), charged with saving a hostage and then safely extracting them, as you can imagine things don’t go quite to plan.

I have said it before and I will say it again, whoever Netflix has in charge of green lighting these action films needs to be fired, not because the films themselves are terrible, no because they all feel and look the same. This film could be so many different action movies, with the only difference being the actor and the location and a few minor plot details, it is so samey it is boring.

The story, I found to be incredibly dull. Maybe the Russo’s should stick to directing? I didn’t really care about what was going on and often lost interest. The worst bit of writing in the whole film comes when this kid early on in the film clearly wants to kill Hemsworth’s character, so you think ‘oh the showdown between those two will be a pretty big deal’. No, he just shoots him in the back of the neck with no pomp or circumstance, and it just feels lame and disappointing.

The two things I will credit this film for are both Hemsworth related. The first is that Chris Hemsworth actually gives quite a good dramatic performance, one that made me sit up and take notice. Before this I had not taken him seriously as an actor at all. Secondly, the action scenes are well done and well-choreographed, not John Wick level but still.

Overall, more generic action fare form Netflix

Pros

Hemsworth’s performance

The action itself

Cons.

The showdown

The writing

It was so so dull

2.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Captain America Civil War: The World’s Most Bloodless War

Captain America: Civil War is a superhero film in the MCU directed by Joe and Anthony Russo. The plot sees the Avengers become torn as the US government wants to bring in new legislation that will force heroes to register with them and be subject to government oversight. So, rather than move to a different country that didn’t have said legislation, the superheroes get angry at one another and have a fight.

I think this is probably the worst of the three Captain America films, mainly because he is side-lined in favour of an ensemble and this is basically just an Avengers films. Many people have a soft spot for this film as it was the first film to introduce Spiderman (Tom Holland), to the MCU, but upon rewatching said introduction feels gimmicky.

Baron Zemo (Daniel Bruhl), is one of the weakest villains in the MCU, yes he has strong motivation, but his character is ignored for the most part in favour of superheroes battling in the street, so he feels underdeveloped. It is an interesting twist to see a villain’s plan work, before Infinity War obviously, that helped the film to feel fresh.

My main issue with this film is how bloodless it is. It is called Civil War, my question to you is it a war if no one dies? I know they like to play it safe but come on, you couldn’t even kill off one of the pointless side characters, to make matters worse they tease a death with War Machine (Don Cheadle), and then don’t follow through.

Overall, more spectacle than substance, a bloodless waste of a potentially good Captain America film.

Pros.

Watching the superheroes fight is cool for 10 minutes

It introduces some fun new characters

Cons.

No one dies

The villain is forgotten about and barely used

It is dumb, so very dumb

2/5

Reviewed by Luke

Tenet: What Is In A Word

Tenet is an action science fiction thriller film directed by Christopher Nolan, the plot sees The Protagonist (John David Washington), try and prevent the end of the world, whilst also dealing with events happening backwards and forwards in time.

So before I get into this one, I would be remiss if I did not mention, that during the pandemic I have come to dislike Christopher Nolan quiet a bit, as he has had no regard for the ongoing corona virus and how his film may act as a super spreader event, he just cares that it is out and that he can lord himself as the ‘saviour of cinema’, so some bias, but hey if you’re still with me let’s get into it.

The concept is novel and inspired, I enjoyed it very much. Though the timey whimey stuff could have felt gimmicky it never does. I enjoyed seeing the same scene play out twice, one forward in time and once backwards, I found that this approach cleared up a lot of plot holes along the way.

The acting was all superb, with John David Washington proving that he is more than capable of leading a blockbuster film and of giving his dad a run for his money in the charm department. Though his co-stars give good performances as well, really this is Washington’s film and will be the one you walk away taking about.

The plot I had a few issues with, I found it to be overly obtuse and deliberately confusing, throwing in random science things from left field in an effort to seem smart. Some of the dialogue comes across as feeling a little try hard in that regard, and as I always say making something pretentious doesn’t make it clever or deep; it makes it smug.

Furthermore, in my screening of the film I had a lot of issues with sound mixing, I have talked to other people about it and they have experienced it as well. There will be a quiet conversation and you won’t be able to hear it because there will be a loud boowom in the background and you will be like wait what.

Overall, is this film worth seeing it cinemas right now? Maybe, maybe not, it is good, but I don’t really think it would be any worse on streaming, the cinema experience seems to work against it in the sound department. I think this film will be quite niche, you will either enjoy it or you will walk away bored and frustrated; there is no in-between on this one.

Pros.

The acting

The premise and the time effects

I enjoyed it far more than I thought I would

Cons.

It reeks of smugness and is deliberately confusing

The sound mixing is awful

3.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

6 Underground: Bay’s Explosions Have Lost Their Boom

6 Underground is an action film directed by Michael Bay. The plot sees a team of highly skilled covert operatives try and overthrow the brutal dictator of a far away country.

So, at this point I am starting to see a lot of similarities with Netflix’s action movies, they aren’t all exactly the same, but they have a very distinct feel to them that makes them all kind of blend together. The issue with this almost formula is that it gets repetitive and feels done before, this film definitely suffered from that.

Bay is not really known for character or dialogue, so I won’t go on about how standard if a little subpar it is here, but he does waste the comedic talents of Ryan Reynolds. Reynolds does have a few jokes here and there that mostly fall flat because the film takes itself far too seriously. That raises another issue, the film doesn’t take itself too seriously all the time just some of the time, sometimes the film will be silly and Reynolds will play it straight and then the film will be serious and Reynolds will be silly, it is a strange off kilter kind of thing that leads to a very jarring experience.

The explosions and action that I would expect from a Bay film are here, but again they feel run off the mill, I feel like I have seen better elsewhere he needs to up his game.

Overall, a very by the numbers kind of film that doesn’t do much of note beyond being incredibly tonally inconsistent.
Pros.

The action is serviceable

It has a few cool moments

Cons.

The comedy doesn’t work

Ryan Reynolds isn’t funny here

The tonal mismatch

2/5

Reviewed by Luke

Run All Night: Neeson Will Kill Anyone

Run All Night is an action crime film directed by Jaume Collet-Serra. We are introduced to aging mob enforcer Jimmy (Liam Neeson), a man who’s past has long since caught up with him. He is shunned by his family and his only friend in the world is the boss of the crime family he used to work for Shawn McGuire (Ed Harris). That all changes when Jimmy ends up killing Shawn’s son to protect his son, the two men then have to face off and only one can walk away alive.

The post Taken action film of one Liam Neeson have become something of a guilty pleasure of mine in that vein I greatly enjoyed this film. I knew exactly what was going to happen before I had even seen it of course, but that is the same with all these kinds of films, I wasn’t watching it for the story of the plot I was watching it to see old man Neeson gun down a room full of people without even pausing to reload.

The acting was okay, nothing more than that, everyone acted exactly how they normally would in these sort of roles, Liam Neeson’s character and performance could have been from any number of movies. The one thing I will say on the characterization front is that the father son stuff in the film, shifts greatly by the end of the film and it does not feel earned. I understand that Neeson’s character final action is to save his son’s life, but does that make up for all the horrible things he has done throughout his life, including murdering his own family?

Overall, a schlocky action film that is as predicatable as they come, if like with me that is what you’re looking for then you will enjoy it.

Pros.

Solid action

Liam Neeson is fun

Its good schlock

Cons.

It is very predictable

It is dumb as hell

3.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World: The Film Of A Generation

Scott Pilgrim Vs The World is a comedy action adventure romance film directed by Edgar Wright based on the comic of the same name by Bryan Lee O’ Malley. The plot follows Scott (Michael Cera), a young man who falls under the spell of Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead), however in order for the two of them to be together he must defeat in battle her seven evil ex boyfriends.

So, the fact that this film was not a box office smash and universally beloved when it came out is nothing short of a crime. Over the course of the last ten years since it came out I must have watched it at least 10 times if not more. There is just something so pure and so joyful about this film that is really hard to capture in words, but I will give it a try.

Not only are the leads of this film terrific, but it also boasted a wide array of secondary characters and unlike other films, each of these feel like real people in their own right even if they only have a few minutes on screen. They are each given their moment to shine and shine they do.

The fights are madness incarnate, reminiscent of classic video games and thrilling through and through. Each of the seven evil ex’s feels memorable and Scott’s struggle to defeat them feels genuine. When he eventually gets the ending he deserves, (no spoilers here), it feels earned and is also a cheer worthy moment.

Overall, a modern classic that should have been recognised more for the sheer brilliance that it is.

Pros.

Having a great world

Incredibly likeable and compelling leads

Having well realised secondary characters

Incredibly memorable and quotable

Fun to watch

Cons.

None

5/5

Reviewed by Luke