Only Murders In The Building: Here’s Looking At You

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Charles’ sort of step daughter, played by Zoe Colletti, arrives and adds some further layers to the mystery.

I will give this episode props it was certainly better than the last and it did, to a small degree, get me interested in the murder mystery again. I think adding in Colletti’s character helped to give the episode a new perspective and helped things to feel a little bit fresher than they had previously been. It will be a huge shame if the character doesn’t return.

Likewise I thought the return of Teddy Dimas, played by Nathan Lane, was also quite welcome as it presented the group both with a threat, something they have been sorely lacking this season, as well as with the consequences of their actions. I thought both brought new dimensions to what in my mind is a struggling second season.

Despite my praise so far it is by no means a perfect episode and there is a lot of filler on display here to pad out the runtime. Moreover, I remain resolute in my belief that the central trio seem to have lost most of, if not all, of the charm they had last season and come across more as angry passive aggressive jerks a lot of the time.

Overall, better than last week’s episode but still far from the previous season.

Pros.

Returning faces

New characters

It livens up the mystery a bit more

Cons.

The central trio still feel unlikeable

Filler

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

365 Days: Netflix Should Be Ashamed

0/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A film that romanticises sexual abuse.

This might be one of the grossest films Netflix has ever released. The fact that despite all of the controversy and calls for Netflix to remove it from their platform that they instead pushed ahead with a sequel is honestly sickening to me. I don’t believe in media censorship and feel like everyone should be able to make the art they want to make, however, I do think there are limits, I do think that some films are so vile they deserve to be sued and they deserve to be taken down in disgrace. This is one of them.

The basic plot for this film is that a mobster kidnaps a woman, played by Anna-Marie Sieklucka, and then proceeds to torture her sexually and abuse her, yet the film wants you to think that all this is fine and that it is some hot kinky sex. The film goes out of its way to have you not think too much about the darker implications here, or to suggest notions of Stockholm Syndrome, no it abandons any trace of that to try and have this film rival Fifty Shades.

Honestly if Netflix keeps producing trash like this I am done. I hope someone sues them over this.

Overall, Netflix should be ashamed of themselves.

Pros.

None

Cons.

It made me feel angry throughout

It glorifies sexual violence

The characters are awful

It feels like a rip-off of Fifty Shades

It shouldn’t have been made

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Only Murders In The Building: The Last Day Of Bunny Folger

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The last day in the life of Bunny, played by Jayne Houdyshell.

Honestly I am not really digging this season of Only Murders In The Building, and I think that it is just being stretched out for the sake of stuff to put on Disney +. As I have said in earlier reviews the mystery this time around is not particularly interesting and unlike with the first season you don’t care about what is going on. To be frank I could stop watching this show right here and not miss it at all.

However, something that I will give this episode credit for is that it at least takes a chance and tries to do something new. Rather than focus on the central trio we get to see a day in the life of a fairly important side character, and not many shows would dedicate a whole episode to a supporting character in this way so that was pretty cool as it helped to flesh out the wider world of the show.

Although through this focus on another character this episode highlights our central trio in a less than stellar light. I do understand that the point of this episode’s shifted perspective is to reframe things, but it does this a little too well and clearly illustrates all the worst traits of our lead characters and makes them unlikeable. The charm of the show is really gone after this episode.

Overall, I might stop watching as I don’t want to continue watching a once promising show continue to drag itself through the mud.

Pros.

Be brave enough to focus on a smaller character

It is watchable

It makes you care more about Bunny

Cons.

It is fairly dull

The mystery doesn’t seem to be leading anywhere

The leads are unlikeable

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Only Murders In The Building: Framed

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

The mystery continues but honestly I am starting to lose interest.

I am not saying this is a terrible episode, as by all accounts it is watchable. However, it is also far from good.

As I mentioned in the previous review of this latest season the mystery is feeling more and more needless and forced and this episode did nothing to change my mind on that front. All of this jazz around the painting just feels like clutching at straws to try and give this season a purpose. Moreover, Amy Schumer is once again forced into the episode as even though she is just a guest character they have to get her overly involved the plot as the producers of this show seem to be the only people on earth to not understand how unpopular and disliked she is.

However, it is not all doom and gloom. Much like the first episode had the Brazzos’ remake, this episode explores Mabel, played by Selena Gomez, and her artistic side. I think it is apparent that Cara Delevingne’s character will be the villain of the season, however, despite this rather obvious direction I am glad to see that this season is exploring Mabel more as she is the most interesting of the three characters by a long stretch and also the one we know the least about.

Overall, not without some enjoyable aspects but the mystery really needs to get into gear, and they need to get rid of Amy Schumer if they want to keep me around.

Pros.

Exploring Mabel’s character

It is watchable

There is still some fun to be had

Cons.

It is still struggling to justify its existence

Schumer

The mystery is boring

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Only Murders In The Building: Persons Of Interest

3/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

After being hauled in for murder the trio try and prove their innocence and begin to find themselves staring down another mystery.

I find this show to be good comfort viewing, you aren’t really watching it to see something you have never seen before or to be challenged you are just watching it to be casually entertained. In that view I enjoyed this first episode well enough it was very easy to watch and the central trio all had great chemistry, as they did last season.

My question for this season which the first episode made very more crystal clear, is why did it need a second season, where is there to go from here? Honestly, I feel like the mystery this time around feels a little forced, but who knows maybe they will go somewhere interesting with it and justify why the show needed to come back for a second season.

I liked that the Charles, played by Steve Martin, storyline had him return to his former role as Brazzo’s, and in doing so pointed out and made fun of the idea of legacy sequels wherein the previous main character is only kept around for nostalgias sake and the show or film usually tries to reinvent itself to mixed results.

I won’t spend long talking about the Amy Schumer cameo as a lot of you will know my thoughts on Schumer, though I will say here scene sucked all of the life out of the sequence and certainly was a low point of the episode. The fact some of the characters are in awe of seeing Amy Schumer in a lift is laughably up her arse, also if it was true to life she would be angry for being recognised.

Overall, an enjoyable first episode but not one that justifies why this show needed to come back for season two.

Pros.

It is watchable

The leads all still have great chemistry

I like the meta commentary on legacy sequels

Cons.

Schumer

It doesn’t justify its existence

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Warriors: Shirtless Street Gangs

3/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A street gang from Staten Island must get back home after a get together of all the New York gangs goes awry and they become hunted.

To many this is a classic cult film and whilst this didn’t hit me in the same way something like Battle Royale did in that regard, I did find a lot to like about this film.

To get the negatives out of the way first I didn’t like the pacing off this film, it felt far longer than it actually and does drag in places. Moreover, the performances are a deeply mixed bag some of them are good but some are laughably bad, to the point where there is no way you can imagine them as gang members.

In terms of what I enjoyed, I liked the style of the film I thought it was very distinctive and had almost an apocalyptic feel to it that I thought worked really well. Furthermore, I also thought the film communicated great threat during its runtime, as such you were worried for the fate of the characters as danger seemed to lurk around every corner.

Overall, not perfect but very much a snap shot of a point in time.

Pros.

The style

The ending

The threat

Cons.

The pacing

Some of the performances were quite bad

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Gangster No.1: More American Psycho Then Lock Stock

3/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

An east end gangster, played by Malcom McDowell, recounts the story of his rise to power.

I thought this film felt very original and had a voice entirely separate from the early noughties gangster fare put out by the likes of Guy Ritchie. In many ways this film has more in common with American Psycho then it does Snatch and is all the better for it.

I thought the philosophy of this film and its comments on what it means to have it all where interesting and McDowell does a good job playing unhinged, although Paul Bettany who plays the younger version of McDowell’s character does out stage him on a number of occasions in terms of sheer fright factor.

Where this film was weaker for me was in the few instances wherein it was trying to replicate Ritchie’s style and have that same sort of tongue in cheek irreverent tone, that I think didn’t work. I think this film could have been better if it had played itself more straight and been more of a character study into the mind of a crime boss. Ultimately, I think the film should have leaned into its own voice more and stayed away from what was popular at the time.

Overall, a fun and interesting film when it is leaning into the warped psychology of a gang enforcer, less so when it is trying to rip-off Lock Stock.

Pros.

Bettany

McDowell

The physiological spin

Cons.

The ending doesn’t land in a dramatic sense

It is trying to hard to be like a Guy Ritchie film at times

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Peaky Blinders: A Fundamental Misunderstanding, Perception Vs Reality

Written by Luke Barnes

In this piece I want to talk about why I believe the final series of Peaky Blinders was not only a great series in its own right but also how it was a fitting end point for the program, as well as how some of the criticism on social media seems to lack a fundamental understanding of what the series was as well as the style of its creator.

I watched the most recent series of this show through a number of trips to a friend of mine’s house, we both enjoyed it, but after most of the episodes I would check online and see a lot of negative buzz and hate, with the finale being the only real exception. The criticism would all say base things like ‘oh remember when this was a gangster show’, or ‘when did the show become so boring’. To these complaints I would say you were watching a different show altogether, Peaky Blinders did have gang aspects to it, but the fundamental drive of the series was Thomas Shelby, played by Cillian Murphy, as a character and exploring his psyche. For every street set gun battle, there was a quite conversation done to execute a subtle social twist.

The shows broad themes are a huge reflection of that, with the ideas of the pursuit for power and the supernatural steering the series towards more philosophical fare. Yes, within this drift the series featured a gun battle or two, but I would never say it was just a ‘gangster show’, or even that that was the show’s main focus, some people it seems got far too hung up on these aspects.

To further prove my point one needs only look at the series creator Steven Knight who is known for introspective fare like Locke and Hummingbird, which in the latter’s case does feature some action thriller elements, but is front and centre a drama, as is Locke. Fundamentally, I think many thought of Peaky Blinders simply as a badass action show that gave them a reason to wear a flat cap in real life to try and be a part of it, when it reality it was always a drama series that featured action elements. In that vein I can’t see how the final series was anything other than a fitting conclusion as it delivered on all aspects of what it was striving to be as a show.

If you enjoyed this piece, 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

Ambulance: A Return To Form For Michael Bay

3.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Criminal brother Danny and Will Sharp, played by Jake Gyllenhaal and Yaya Abdul-Mateen II, end up hijacking an ambulance after a bank robbery they are involved with goes down the pan.

In many ways I thought this was a return to form for director Michael Bay, it was tense, thought provoking and totally nailed its action/chase scenes. There were a number of times were you could say I was on the edge of my seat, and I thought Bay did a good job of racketing up the stakes, there is a surprising amount of action for a film where most of the characters remain in the titular ambulance for most of the film. I thought the best scene was most likely the cartel attack which brought the crazy manic violence to a whole new level.

I also thought the performances across the board were strong, Abdul-Mateen II and Eiza Gonzales both gave great performance and brought a lot to their respective characters, likewise Garret Dillahunt seemed to be having a lot of fun in his role too. The one bad apple in the bunch, however, was Gyllenhaal, that is not to say he gave a bad performance but rather that it was incredibly limited. I don’t believe that this is Gyllenhaal’s fault more so I think the character is written to be very two dimensional and then because of that Gyllenhaal has little to work with.

My main area of criticism would be the pacing, the film is on for way too long and there are a lot of unnecessary sub-plots that add nothing to the film. For example why did we need to see the marriage counselling session of Keir O’ Donnell’s FBI character? We didn’t. Maybe the film included it for a bit of levity within an otherwise quite dark film, but even in this case it comes off as needless.

Overall, the best film Michael Bay has made in a long while.

Pros.

Abdul-Mateen II

Gonzales

The action and stakes

The ending

Cons.

The pacing

The needless sub-plots

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Windfall: Netflix Needs To Stop Giving Lily Collins Work

2/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

An ode to Hollywood that really didn’t understand the assignment.

This film did the impossible, it gave us a rare bad Jessie Plemons performance; a thing until recently I thought impossible. However, I will contextualise that point as no one is really good in this film as such how can anyone be bad? More so it is shades of average in terms of performance. Jason Segel is the most palatable, and it is nice to see him giving a straight dramatic performance without making dumb jokes. Lily Colins is just playing herself, it would have been more interesting to have cast Plemons’s real life wife Kristen Dunst in the role and played it that way but hey Colins is married to the director and that has to have some perks right? Plemons just seems tired here, there are a few scenes where it looks like he is going to give it his all but then he seems to run out of steam.

As I mentioned in the summary this film opens like a classic Hollywood picture and has the ego to think that it is the modern incarnation, but the noir esque sensibilities quickly get lost along the way as the film devolves into a very basic crime/ hostage film. Moreover, if the ending was going for shocking then it failed at that too as almost everyone must have seen that twist coming from a million miles away.

Overall, more drab fare for Netflix soon to be forgotten about.

Pros.

Segel is palatable

It is watchable if dull

Cons.

Colins

Plemons

It feels derivative