The Woman In The House Across The Street From The Girl In The Window: You’ll Need A Lot Of Wine To Get Through This

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A parody that forgets to parody and becomes what it sets out to mock.

What is this show?

It isn’t quite a comedy, it isn’t quite a thriller, what does it want to be and why do we have to witness it’s journey of self-discovery?

The only reason this gets half marks is because through it all Kirsten Bell is trying her hardest. Through every bad joke, through every dumb twist that the show thinks proves it is better than what it is mocking, and even through the incredibly predictable finale, Bell holds it all together and makes it bearable.

I understand that book based thriller films like The Woman In The Window are bad, but that doesn’t mean the parody of them will be good. No, for the most part this series devolves into simply copying these thrillers and thinking that for some reason it is above them and won’t fall into the same trap, this is obviously not the case and never was going to be.

Moreover, this series doesn’t seem to understand what parody is, admittedly maybe I am comparing it to the Movie films which in my mind are far better stand-ups of what they were trying to spoof than this. The knowing jokes in this show mostly fall flat and feel like the most baseline observational jokes you could write, they could have played up the camp, the strangeness, hell anything to make this better than it is.

Overall, it is watchable and watched as a binge it even has its moments, but it is average at best and if you stop watching it you are unlikely to return.

Pros.

Bell

Riley

Some of the sillier elements

Cons.

It becomes what it is parodying

It is not funny

It is deeply played out

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

Freddy Got Fingered: Proof That You Don’t Need Talent To Make It In Hollywood

0.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Proof that any old trash can become a film.

How did this get made? Who thought that this film was going to ever make money? I don’t care how popular the Tom Green Show was, this was always going to be a disaster and in many ways it seems it was sent out to die maybe as a tax write off.

Where to begin with why this film is a turd. I think probably it is best to start with the elephant in the room, the film’s name is a reference to a fake claim of male sexual abuse which serves as a catalyst for the film. This film uses this fake abuse as a joke, it is laughed at, when thought true and then later untrue, it downplays and downright ignores men’s suffering and uses it as a punchline. The fact that the lead, played by Tom Green, fakes claims of male sexual abuse to use to his advantage is all kinds of messed up and sends home a bad message to everyone that sees it.

Sadly, the bad taste doesn’t end there and the film goes out of its way to be as coarse, vulgar and needlessly offensive as it can be, as though by being provocative people will be tricked into thinking the film is something more than the desperate mess that it is.

Overall, a nasty film that shouldn’t have been made.

Pros.

If you close your eyes and listen to a podcast it really isn’t that bad

Cons.

It isn’t funny

It sends out bad messages on male sexual abuse

It also uses abuse as a joke

It is edgy for the sake of it

Green has no talent or business being an actor

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Pam And Tommy: Drilling And Pounding

1/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

An opening episode with all the depth and nuance of a puddle of sick, which often revels in its crass vulgarities thinking that simply by being shocking the series can be entertaining.

Honestly, I can’t understand why this show is getting good reviews? I am bemused by it. Within the first episode I found nearly all the characters to be so loathsome and unpleasant that I had trouble finishing it. If Tommy Lee, here played by Sebastian Stan, did indeed behave like that in real life he should be in prison, and if not he should sue this show for defamation.

Moreover, I am no prude, but this episode was needly vulgar every step of the way, I don’t know why it needed to be. Did the show think this would make it funny? Is it trying to make some kind of comment on the lifestyles of the rich and famous? Is it supposed to be shocking? I don’t know the answers to these questions dear reader, but I do know that after the hundredth ‘oh yeah do you like that’, that it becomes cringe and feels like it is trying too hard.

Also I have not seen the whole series yet so I can’t comment fully, but it seems to me that in the little we see of Lily James’ Pamela Anderson here, she is being sexualised. Which maybe they will do more with her over the course of the series and they will give her some nuance, but I doubt it. Objectification very clearly on display.

I also think it is worth noting that the real life Anderson, did not want this show to be made. So it is a show about a deeply intimate and embarrassing moment of her life being made without her consent. Ponder that.

Overall, I don’t think I’ll be returning for episode two.

Pros.

At least they didn’t have alleged sexual predator James Franco staring in it like they were going to

Cons.

Everyone in it is deeply unlikeable

It is trying to hard to be gross out and adult

It is vulgar

Lily James’s Anderson is being objectified

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Death Of A Telemarketer: Everyone Hates Sales Calls

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Telemarketer Casey, played by Lamorne Morris, meets his match when he gets on the wrong end of Asa Ellenbogen, played by Jackie Earle Haley, a hostage situation ensues.

I thought this was watchable but not much more. Honestly, my biggest issue with this film was how played out it was. Not only was the story been there and done that, though maybe not in the telemarketing guise but I have seen this same story done time and again in other films, but so too were the moral conclusions of the film. The lessons that Casey learnt at the end of the film have been taught to us by other better films in the past, this film has no new revelations about the work life balance or how we should all treat each other.

Due to the fact that it all feels so familiar the film really hamstrings it’s chances of success in any major way.

However, it does have two silver linings in the form of its hero and villain. Both Morris and Haley are in top form here and do deliver good performances, especially when you consider the dire nature of the script. Morris manages to be loathsome enough for us to know he needs to change but not loathsome enough for us to dislike him. Morris has a lot of charm and that is on show here. Haley manages to pull off threatening and menacing well and create a strong sense of tension during the midpart of the film.

Overall, nothing that you haven’t seen before but passable if you have nothing better to watch.

Pros.

Morris

Haley

The tension

Cons.

It is too familiar

It is not funny

It’s lessons feel simplistic

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Parallel Mothers: Always DNA Test Your Child

4/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Two mothers, played by Penelope Cruz and Milena Smit, become intertwined in each other’s lives after befriending one another on a maternity ward.

Spoilers

I found this film to be fascinating, they did so much with such a simplistic premise. To get right into spoilers I enjoyed the conspiracy angle to this film as Cruz’s character becomes more and more sure the child she is raising is not her own. I thought these ideas of paranoia and hormonal changes nicely lent the film a sense of tension that permeated it throughout.

Furthermore, I like the mania of the later film when Cruz’s character is forced to live with the knowledge of her discoveries and come to terms with what has happened, as she desperately clings to those around her looking for a life raft. I thought these later scenes were acted to perfection by Cruz and her performance on the whole was terrific and should be up for awards consideration this season. I liked Smit’s performance as well but thought she was totally outacted by Cruz.

My one complaint of this film would be that it had a number of very unnecessary subplots that led to nowhere, with these removed the film would have been phenomenal.

Overall, a very strong film and one to check out before awards season.

Pros.

Cruz

The tension

The conspiracy

The ending

Cons.

A few too many subplots, a little busy.

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Scream 2022: Death Brings New Life

3.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

Ghostface is back this time playing by the rules of legacy sequels.

Spoilers

In many respects this film is the best in the Scream series, it nails the tone between scares and laughs and manages to do both fairly well, it has interesting new characters that you end up caring about, and it does something meaningful with the legacy characters.

However, then you get to the third act and the film loses its way and loses several points from me. My first issue with the final was that it is incredibly obvious from the jump who the killers are, the film does little to subvert that and it all plays out exactly how you imagined it would. Secondly, the motivation for why the killer kills, that of them being basically an incel fan who can’t cope with changes to the franchise and so has to try and make his own film, the series of murders, in order to set it right felt insulting to me. I understand it may have been tongue in cheek but to me it came across as the film flashing the fans the finger, which shouldn’t be something the new franchise reviver film sets out to do.

If you put the third act in a box and ignore it then the film is much better. I enjoyed how the film developed Dewey, played by David Arquette, and gave him a fitting heroes’ death, though I think Gale, played by Courtney Cox, would have been a better fit for that plot beat. Speaking off this was the first time in the series I really bought the emotional connection between Gale and Dewey and I thought both actors brought a lot to their respective performances.

Overall, I would say a nice end for the franchise but we all know it won’t be the last film.

Pros.

Bringing back Skeet Ulrich

Dewey

The new characters

Managing to be both funny and scary

Cons.

The incel fan motivation

It is too obvious

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

The Cleanse: Wellness Is A Troubling Industry

2.5/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

After his life falls apart Paul, played by Johnny Galecki, decides to go away on a cleansing retreat to unexpected results.

This whole same plot line was done far better in a twenty minute episode of Rick and Morty. Basically, during Paul’s stay at the retreat he sicks up some form of parasite that is supposed to represent all of his bad qualities, and as part of the retreat he has to kill it so he can become the person he wants to be. The difference between this and the very similar plot line on Rick and Morty is in the latter it only lasts for twenty minutes and the resolution is infinitely better. I thought from the beginning it was incredibly obvious where the film was heading.

The acting is fine Galecki is serviceable enough, no one really stands out. The thing I would give the film props for is the design of the creatures especially as they aged and became more monstrous, I thought they were well designed and made the appropriate impact.

Tonally this film is a mess as it doesn’t seem able to decide what it wants to be, there are serious moments ruined by a poorly written joke for example. It should really either be a straight horror or a darker comedy and not try for both as the writing just isn’t there.

Overall, some good ideas and strong creature design is balanced by a contrived and easy to guess story with a poorly thought through tone.

Pros.

Galecki

The creature design

Some interesting ideas

Cons.

Rick and Morty did it better

The tone is all over the places and clashes frequently

It is incredibly predictable

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Deadly Cuts: Hairdressers Take On Gangland

2/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A group of Irish hairdressers kill someone and then enter into a hairdressing competition.

The marketing for this film is a lie. It markets itself almost as a thriller with comedic elements, I thought going in that these unlikely heroes were going to become vigilantes and face off against the Irish underworld in a Shaun Of The Dead esque dark comedy. However, that was not what we got, instead they kill one gang member, and the rest just conveniently leave until the end of the film when they kill one more all whilst competing in the most boring and cliched competition ever. Yeah not good.

I found this film to be a tonal mess and not really knowing what it wanted to be, on top of that it wasted most of its cast and gave them nothing to work with, as a result the central foursome feels at best bland and at worst cliched. The story is uninspired and feels like a retread of many better films, with the stakes and drama not coming together at all and presenting us with an ending that feels entirely unearned.

Overall, watchable but weak.

Pros.

It is watchable

It is short

Cons.

It is not funny

The competition angle feels played out

There is no drama or real stakes

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer

Silent Night: Perhaps The Worst Christmas Film Ever Made

1/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

A group of people spend one final Christmas together before they are killed supposedly killed by a poisonous gas in the morning.

Where to start with why I didn’t like this film? I suppose the most glaring issue with it was the fact that it preaches absolute faith in what the Government preaches and punishes the characters that dare to think contrary to that. I have read some reviews of the film that say that the message is the exact opposite to how I have taken it and that the point is a critique on mass panics/ mass obedience but I think if that were the case the film needed to do more to show that people were silly to take the pills,

Another wide issue with this film is its preaching. In many ways this can be viewed as an eco-horror as the gas that is coming to kill everyone is of course a result of man’s treatment of the planet. Frankly this rather obvious explanation felt irritating from the beginning, as we get it the planet is hurting but that doesn’t mean it needs to be stuffed into every piece of media as an easy plot point. I would have preferred it if the gas had been sent by some other foreign power.

Moreover, there is an argument to be made that this film is in bad taste. It tries to be a dark comedy horror film, but abandons any semblance of comedy early on and instead tries to become a horror drama film. The bad taste elements come in with regard to the pandemic that we are all living through, there are a number of things here that parallel where we are right now and these elements come across in bad taste at least to me.

Finally, this might be one of the most depressing films you will ever see, there is nothing fun or even really watchable about it and it is so unpleasant that simply finishing it feels like a herculean effort.

Overall, the only reason this film didn’t get lower is because Keira Knightly, Sope Dirisu and Lily-Rose Depp are all trying enough to give the film a few redeemable moments.

Pros.

Knightly, Dirisu and Depp are all trying their best

Cons.

The rest of the cast are not very good, especially Roman Griffin Davis who embodies everything wrong with child actors

It is deeply depressing

It has troubled and flawed morals

The preaching

The Sitter: Children Are Evil

3/5

Written by Luke Barnes

Summary

An unemployed slacker, played by Jonah Hill, takes up a job babysitting three kids little does he know just how much he has taken on and how much trouble it will be.

Okay I’ll admit it, every now and then I like a trashy comedy. I won’t sit here and pretend to be highbrow. My sense of humour is darkly juvenile and/or edgy for sure. As such I actually found this film to be quite funny, I wouldn’t say all of the jokes landed but about sixty percent of them did and that pushes the ratio in a positive direction.

I found the film to be surprisingly heart felt at times as well, yes it won’t win any awards for the more serious moments, but I thought when the film took a break to reflect it really worked well. I particularly enjoyed how Hill’s character realised slowly over the course of the film that he was in a toxic relationship; I thought these moments felt earnt and well done.

Sam Rockwell is a delight as the villain though I would say he is underused.

In terms of issues I would say this film is a little too reliant on gross out humour, or little kids saying bad words humour, neither of which land well and more often than not come across of quite desperate.

Overall, a funny trashy comedy film that won’t blow you away and is a bit too reliant on gross out humour.

Pros.

The heartfelt moments

A good number of funny jokes

Hill

Cons.

Too much gross out humour

The ending

https://www.patreon.com/AnotherMillennialReviewer