There are two types of movies. Mystery movies and “mystery” movies. The first type is your mystery murder stuff, ghost mysteries; you get the drill. The second type is “how did they manage to take something decent and totally fuck it up” mysteries. Take, oh, I don’t know… Deep Water, for example. Adrian Lyne was once considered one of the best directors for “sexy thriller films” came out of his… I guess retirement? Semi-retirement? Anyway, he hadn’t done a film since Unfaithful (2002). So Lyne came back to direct a movie for the first in 20 years, having one of the sex symbols of today in front of the camera (Ana de Armas) while having her partner at the time, Ben Affleck, there, too. And yet… Despite everything being there in theory, the reality of the situation is that this movie is terrible.

Deep Water has been out only briefly, yet it almost is a cliché to write “it’s neither sexy nor thrilling enough”. Unfortunately, every cliché is a cliché for a reason, and there is no better way to describe this film. You can tell the bones, the structure is there, as the film was based on a book from 1957 with the same name. I can’t comment on the book’s quality as I’ve not read it, but even from the film, you can tell something was there in the original story. But I can’t help to think this was misdirected to hell. Maybe there was some studio interference, and who knows, possibly a year from now, we will get the LyneCut (should we start #ReleaseTheLyneCut?) that will absolve Lyne from any blame. Until then, I could only comment on what I saw; and that something was… boring.

The main issue Deep Water had was the lack of ambience or an atmosphere, call it whatever you want. I believe that is one of those things that made other films by Lyne back in the ’90s so famous. They weren’t “high” cinema, but there is a reason people liked those films as there was some electricity between the leads (usually), and all those films had this atmosphere that (for the most part) works even today. Sure, it might come off as cheesy at times, and not everything will age well, but still, there was something about those films you could feel. And there is nothing like that in Deep Water. Excuse me, but how do you make a movie with Ana de Armas, and it doesn’t feel sexy; that’s an achievement within itself, but not the good kind.

I can’t even blame the leads, as I think they were doing precisely; what they were (probably) asked to do. Ana de Armas is perfect in this role, exuding the sexiness and confidence needed for this role because Ana knows she is sexy. Even when the movie wasn’t firing on all cylinders, she was superb by simply her being and carrying herself in an unbelievably sensual way. I know “sexiness” can have many definitions by many people, but for me, there is nothing sexier than seeing a woman carry herself as Ana de Armas does in this film. She isn’t shouting from the rooftops about how hot she is or bragging about it; it’s all in those eyes. The eyes; that tell you and everyone: “Look, I know how sexy I am; I own a mirror.”

Ben Affleck might be a bit broody and “meh” in this film, but I could imagine these were his directions. He’s supposed to be this “dark, mysterious, broody millionaire”. Speaking of that, is there any other kind? Because if you are only “dark, mysterious and broody” without the millionaire part, that’s a pretty boring movie, isn’t it? Anyway, I thought he was fine in this film. Not great by any means, as Ana “stole” whatever was worth stealing from this film for herself.

The reason I believe Deep Water is a misdirected film is simple. All parts to making a good, if not a great film, are present here. But this film feels “old”. It felt like Lyne directed this movie to see whether he still has it after 20 years of not directing anything. I would say, maybe try a different genre? For a thriller, this film’s mystery is pretty see-through where you are thinking to yourself: “No, that can’t be it. There will be a twist at the end.” So you spend the entire movie trying to come up with a twist, only to discover that… no, that is really it. That’s the story. And for “sexy thriller”, it’s nowhere near sexy enough. The fact we get to see Ana naked a couple of times is appreciated, but that doesn’t make this film sexy. And the sex scenes between her and Ben’s character… Jesus Christ on a pogo stick, don’t get me started on those. One of those was edited to fuck that you don’t know whether they are fucking or fighting and others (like maybe two?) aren’t worth mentioning. Deep Water looks new and has “new and modern” actors, but it feels old. The times have moved on; the audience nowadays has seen so much they will see through you in the first five minutes. And if you don’t evolve with the audience, then… you might end up directing Deep Water.

Overall, Deep Water is a film I went into expecting nothing, and that’s pretty much what I got. Affleck gives an ok performance, Ana de Armas shines just being herself (read: wins by default), and the story is intriguing because you expect more. You, the audience, effectively make it more intriguing by thinking about what else will happen because surely, that can’t be it, can it? Yes, yes it can. If you are a hardcore Affleck or de Armas fan, I would imagine you could give this a shot…? Otherwise, I can’t imagine most people having a good time with this film.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

Let me make something crystal clear from the beginning – The Heat is a great comedy that’s unfortunately buried inside a very long film. Both leads (Sandra Bullock and Melissa McCarthy) are funny in this film, and they worked so well together. I could even imagine some “reunion” of those two, where they could swap the roles, where Melissa could be the “straight” character, and Sandra would be the “wild” one. And you could even give it to Paul Feig, except this time, please assign him an editor who won’t be afraid to challenge him.

Because this is where The Heat frustrated me the most, almost every joke here works because of two of our superb leading ladies. Yet unfortunately, about 80% of those jokes are dragging on for way too long. Most of this film felt like when you are talking to somebody who makes a good point. So you agree with them. And then, they make another point. And you say: “Ok, I get it, you are right.” And then they go on a bit more, and you go: “No, honestly, I am being serious, I know you are correct, let’s drop it.” Only for them to say one more thing, where at this point, you are annoyed at them not for being right but more for not dropping it where they were “in the lead”.

The Heat 100% feels like that. The “not cutting after the punchline, just to get some improv to see whether we can improve upon it” feels counterproductive when it’s overused. Because it makes you look almost unsure as to what does and what doesn’t work in your movie. And again, the most frustrating thing is, the jokes worked! As it stands, this film is 117 minutes long. It doesn’t seem that much, but for a movie that is effectively a buddy cop comedy starring Sandra and Melissa, that is “a bit” excessive. I am not kidding when I say there is an excellent 90/95 minute comedy hidden in plain sight! If I had the time and energy, I would try and re-edit the movie since everything you need to make it hilarious is here. You don’t have to rearrange any scenes; you need to cut down the “endings” of most of the jokes, mainly by Melissa, and then the movie would feel better paced, and you might have one zinger after another. But in its current form, the film feels like they just let the cameras roll, captured everything they could and if it fit “well enough”, they left it in the movie.

That is a shame as I long for those days when Sandra Bullock was the comedy queen. Take Miss Congeniality (2000); it’s only about ten minutes shorter, but there is more of a story in that film, and most importantly, the movie never manages to bore you or make you cringe. We also know Melissa is a superb comedienne. I knew that for a while because I loved the show Gilmore Girls (2000 – 2007), and Spy (2015) is her best work yet. So putting these two together should have resulted in a comedy that would have been funny and remembered for generations. Unfortunately, not cutting out the end bits of the jokes (that mainly consist of why the joke somebody just said is funny or accurate) makes this film cringe at times and bloated. Even though I enjoyed both main leads, I thought the ending couldn’t have come soon enough.

But to repeat, I would love to see Sandra and Melissa in a movie again. I am not advocating for The Heat 2 or some version of #ReleaseTheWhoeverCut. Nah, let’s not do that. What if, instead, it was a semi-new idea, and this time the roles would flip – Melissa being the “straighter than an arrow, everything by the book” character, Sandra the “fuck you, my way is way better” character and just let them work. They don’t even have to be cops; I would watch them do pretty much anything, as long as there is somebody who knows that jokes don’t have to be over-explained and that improv works in small doses (in films anyway).

Overall, The Heat would be a cautious recommendation from me. It stars two funny actresses, both I’ve admired for a while now so I thought I would love this film. And I thought the movie was… just ok? Frustratingly, I will do what the film does and explain it one more time – there is an excellent cop-buddy film “hidden” inside this bloated mess. I challenge somebody to cut this movie to around 90/95 minutes, and you will see how much would this film be improved. As it is now, I will say watch it, and you will judge for yourself. It’s decent enough that you shouldn’t hate it, and who knows? Maybe, you won’t mind it’s almost two hours. Just don’t say I didn’t warn you when you keep checking your watch halfway through it.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

No matter how hard I try, I can’t imagine a movie that, on paper, looks less appealing to me than The Eyes of Tammy Faye. I am not religious, and to be perfectly honest with you, I despise televangelists. So I should hate this film, right? Well, that’s where I was so surprised. The Eyes of Tammy Faye is a film that understands the world it presents to you and looks at all the “players” involved… fairly. Of course, you never take your history from movies, so I would encourage looking up more information about the actual Tammy Faye. But, if I put that aside and focus solely on the story this film is trying to tell, it’s easy to see the rise and fall of not only Tammy but her husband. And (if the movie is to be believed) she was always trying to be her best.

As my title suggests, this is the part of my review where I will admire Jessica Chastain for a while. I had seen this film just a few hours before the Oscars, where she finally won her first one. Yeah, besides the slap, some people actually ended up getting awards; would you believe that? Anyway, it was between Jessica and Kristen Stewart, and it could have gone either way. And as much as I enjoyed Kristen’s performance in Spencer (2021), I was rooting for Jessica. And for two reasons – first of all, she carries the movie. In The Eyes of Tammy Faye, you have a stellar cast of actors such as Andrew Garfield or Vincent D’Onofrio, to name the biggest names. And Jessica somehow manages to overshadow them in the best way possible. Without appearing “screen-hungry”, she did it almost by default. To be clear, Andrew Garfield gives a superb performance also, but honestly? I don’t think anybody will mention his name after the credits start to roll, and there is a reason for that as Jessica is going off the chain, so to speak and gives one hell (or heaven in this case) performance.

The other reason I was rooting for her at the 2022 Oscars is simple – she has been steadily excellent for the past 11 years now. She is shaping to be the female equivalent of Denzel Washington. What I mean by that is Denzel is one (if not THE) of the best working actors we have and has been for a while. He might star in mediocre movies from time to time, sure, but he is always the best part of those films. He never “just” takes a paycheck, phones his performance and calls it a day. And Jessica has been the same. I saw her in many films now, some better than others, but I have yet to see her miss or be terrible. Yes, occasionally, she might only be as good as the film/role allows her to be but lately, I have been looking up her name in movies because she is my constant same as Denzel. If the film isn’t great, I know I can rely on her to deliver.

Now, let’s take Jessica’s stellar performance, Andrew’s superb performance and make-up and hairstyles (Stephanie Ingram, Linda Dowds and Justin Raleigh also deserved those Oscars) aside for a second. This film is your average “cradle to grave” biopic about somebody who is “controversial”, to put it mildly. I don’t think it’s a spoiler to say Tammy is no longer with us, as she passed away in 2007. But you might remember Jim Bakker (her husband, portrayed by Andrew Garfield) from not that long ago, as he was the televangelist who tried selling silver supplements against COVID-19. I have heard about that story, not knowing his history or who he was, as to be perfectly honest, I don’t care to know who’s the “new and hip televangelist some people love to send their money to”. And that would be my other point against this film (besides it being quite a stereotypical biopic as mentioned above) – showcase these people for who they are/were. The film managed to do it well enough, where every time we saw their better side, we would quickly be reminded that their actions had consequences, especially regarding Jim Bakker, still have. And we shouldn’t forget who they were, and again, we shouldn’t take our historical facts from a movie.

Overall, The Eyes of Tammy Faye was a surprise for me. Sure, I “knew” Jessica would deliver, but I didn’t know how well. I knew Andrew was a great actor but didn’t know he was that great (what a year he had, this film and his nomination for tick, tick…BOOM! (2021, my review here), talk about firing at all cylinders). And I knew I (probably) would not like this film, and I had ended up liking it despite my views about the topic. I have managed to put those aside and try to enjoy this film, and I did. Would I recommend it? For Jessica and Jessica alone, 100%. The rest of the film? I don’t think you will regret your time, but don’t expect anything mind-blowing story-wise; it is your cradle to the grave biopic. And once you see one of them, you’ve seen them all. This film is lucky to have Jessica and the make-up crew behind it, and they are giving it their all and then some.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

The Iron Giant. A film that is so beloved; it is a wonder it managed to flop so badly when it came out. On the $70 million budget, the movie only made $23 million. To put this into a perspective of how bad that box office was, this was back in 1999, so the dollar had more buying power. Also, the rule of thumb has always been for any movie to turn a profit; it needs to make roughly 2.5x its budget. So yeah, the studio lost a lot on this. Let that be (yet another) reminder that great films don’t need big budgets or can flop when they come out. I think the reason for The Iron Giant making next to none was simple – 1999 was such a strong year for films. There were so many great ones coming out it was easy for a few to fall through the cracks. And this film definitely was one of them.

If you know how/why this story came about, it makes it so much sadder, seeing this film flopping at the time. For those who don’t know, Brad Bird was partially inspired to make this movie because of his late sister Susan, who died when she was shot by her husband. His pitch was: “What if a gun had a soul and didn’t want to be a gun?” (source IMDb.com). And I believe knowing that only enhances your viewing experience as you can clearly tell this question is lingering throughout this entire film. The Giant himself acts almost like a curious toddler for the most part until he gets triggered to be the weapon he was designed to be.

What I loved about this film was how pure it was. It also achieved something not many films have done in the past – there was zero filler, and when the story is over, the movie is over. It might sound obvious, yet how often have you watched a film that you enjoyed, although you didn’t care for one storyline which had little to no impact on the main story? If you have been reading my reviews for a while, you know that’s my number one complaint, as lately it seems filmmakers believe they need to have many storylines, at least two-hour runtime etc. And sure, some films do need those things and can justify them. But more often than not, it’s not the case. But The Iron Giant should be the poster child of tightly told films. And I am not just talking about the runtime of 86 minutes. Just because a movie is short doesn’t mean it’s perfect. What I am talking about is understanding the film and what it wants to say, focusing on that aspect while not getting distracted. And that is something this film has executed flawlessly.

The story is so simple yet effective that we don’t need distractions, additional filler(s), musical numbers… I miss movies like this where you get thrown into a story that occurs over a couple of days, and you get to know the protagonists, possibly the community living there. You understand what the film is about; you get to know the protagonists, the era they live in because the movie focuses solely on one location and one community, back in the age when kids were taught to “duck and cover” as the nuclear war was looming around the corner. There is s strength in telling a simple story so well, which might lead you into thinking: “Well, anybody can tell a simple story”. Oh no, it’s not that easy, specifically, knowing when to end it; so it doesn’t overstay its welcome; that’s another level.

What I also find hilarious is how Vin Diesel is voicing the main character of the Iron Giant. He’s at the start of his career here, only for him to be known as the voice of Groot from the Guardians franchise years later while also being an action star. I find it fascinating how voice work (especially when you establish yourself as an action star as Vin has over the years) can impact your career, as many will remember him as Groot or The Iron Giant.

Also, do you know what I would consider a sign of a brilliant movie? If you know what’s going to happen and the film still gets you. Because The Iron Giant has been talked about so much over the years, it was pretty much spoiled for me. I knew everything that was coming. And yet, I might have teared up a bit at the end. And I don’t usually tear up that often. It takes an exceptional film to pull that off. I knew all the emotional beats, I knew what would happen next, and yet, the film still got me.

Overall, The Iron Giant is the little movie that might have failed on its initial run just to amass a massive cult following, whereas now, it is still considered by many to be one of the best animated films of all time. And rightfully so, might I add, as the story is so simple yet effective, the characters here work, and the Giant himself behaves in such a manner it’s hard not to fall in love. It took me a long time to watch this film. I know it won’t be too long before I re-watch it as it’s genuinely a delightful film.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

When I learned a sequel for Don’t Breathe (2016, my review here) was coming, I was confused. I understand we live in the age of sequels, prequels, cinematic universes and whatever DCEU is trying but still… this film? Then, I’ve checked how much it made in the box office and holy shit. On a budget of just under ten million dollars, the movie made almost 160 million dollars worldwide. Talk about a great return on investment. Now I am wondering how come it took them so long? Anyway, you did not ask for this film, but here it is. And… it’s pretty much the same yet slightly worse?

Don’t Breathe 2 has two significant issues going up against it. First, the novelty factor is gone. You can’t throw us into the same world with the same character and expect us to be vowed again. That “gimmick” (a blind man who isn’t as defenceless as he seems) no longer works here because we know him. And that takes me to the second issue – we know him. We know now what he has done. As stated in my review of the first movie, I don’t mind having complicated, even straight-up evil characters as protagonists; it doesn’t bother me not having anybody to root for. But many film fans did mind, hence why they had a hard time connecting with this film. And I can’t blame them. But, Don’t Breathe 2 is self-aware of these issues, so what do they do? They… introduce somebody even worse, to turn the complicated character/antagonist of the first film into a hero in this one.

Yep, that happens. Before going into massive spoilers, Don’t Breathe 2 takes place eight years after the first movie. We see the Blind Man (who has a name now, Norman Nordstrom) raising a daughter. In any other film, that’s fine, but knowing what we know about our character from the previous movie, that reality raises questions immediately. And some audience members might get the unfortunate turkey baster flashbacks. Everything gets explained eventually, and we get more into the story. And this is where the filmmakers had a choice. Either try to redeem the character or just introduce somebody roughly ten times worse where Norman looks “saint-like” by comparison. I don’t know, but for a series of films that try to explore the very grey area between right and wrong, that seemed like a bit of a cheap move. I don’t think I can discuss this any further without at least alluding to some scenes/characters that might give away a few surprises, so…

Beware, SPOILERS are coming!

If you haven’t seen this film yet, but you had seen the first Don’t Breathe, you are probably asking: “Who can possibly be morally worse than the Blind Man?” That’s a valid question because this movie felt the need to come up with villains who not only are junkies not only are the daughter’s actual parents (yep, Norman found her on the street when she was young and just took her) but also they only want her back so they can remove her heart. Her mum needs a new one because she needs to cook drugs for her crew. Yep, can you see the morality questions from the first movie disappearing? Me too, as Don’t Breathe 2 thinks it is still doing that but not really. The characters are more black and white here. And as mentioned before, Norman is now our hero.

I am sorry, but how dumb their plan is? The daughter (played by Madelyn Grace) is around 14 years. Now, I am not a doctor, let alone a surgeon, so I might be talking out of my ass here, but I am 99% sure her adult mum (a woman in her 40s) couldn’t take the implant from her daughter even if that operation was done in the hospital with a top-notch surgeon. Again, I might be completely wrong, but that doesn’t seem right. But I know movie’s gotta movie.

Also, I didn’t like how the people behind this film felt the need to make the parents and their group be “super evil”. Well, maybe except for that one guy who is against the operation. For example, there is a moment when the doctor tells them he can’t even put her to sleep. Something about the heart must still be fresh, beating, so he needs to cut into her while she is awake…? And the parents say yes, no problem. See what I mean by making them “super evil”? It’s almost like the writers felt the first film wrote them into a corner where they felt like: “Sure, he’s evil. But come on, there are much worse people running around want to see?”

What also started to annoy me was how good Norman was. I get that in the first Don’t Breathe, and even in the first half of this movie, he knows his surrounding very well. But the moment Norman breaks into the building the junkies occupy, I am sorry, but he should be dead within the first ten minutes. Sure, he’s a NAVY Seal; he is an incredibly clever person, I get that. That said… How can a blind person navigate a building he’s never been to where there are people around and in total silence? Where the previous film shined by not making him into a superhero too much, this film does the opposite, mainly in the movie’s second half.

But the movie still has things going for it; a couple of scenes were shot very well, I liked Madelyn’s performance, and the film never bores you. The runtime is a solid 98 minutes, so the movie is paced well, and I enjoyed the first half, even though there was no new ground being broken. The second half was where the cookie crumbled more and where the film felt like making him more likeable was the way to go. For most audiences, possibly, but honestly? I don’t know… Think about it for a second. Those who had a problem with his character wouldn’t bother seeing the sequel, so those who come for the sequel don’t need this “he’s better by a mile if you only compare him to these guys.” That is why it’s still so weird that this film got a sequel.

Overall, Don’t Breathe 2 is a decent enough sequel to a film that didn’t need a sequel in the first place. It’s a movie of two halves where the first one feels familiar yet different, and you are on board. And then, there is the second half that swings this film into the supernatural/superhero territory and makes Norman this unbeatable and (based on the very last scene) unkillable bad-ass. And it’s only up to you whether you are on board with a bad-ass with more than a shaky history, especially since we have seen it in the first film so well. If you liked the first Don’t Breathe, I would cautiously recommend this one.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke

We live in strange, online times. Because everything I’ve heard about Turning Red before watching it was “It’s the new Pixar movie, and OH MY GOD, IT’S ABOUT MENSTRUATION!” Some people seemed to be disturbed, shocked, and even disgusted by that fact. That is dumb as yes, this lovely film deals with this topic, but it also deals with so much more! Saying “Turning Red is a movie about menstruation” is like saying Dune (2021, my review here) is “a movie about sand and sandworms”. I mean… yes, they are part of the story, and there is a shitload of sand in Dune. But in both cases, those films are about so much more, and you are merely scraping the surface. Plus, in both cases, these movies are stunning to look at!

What I loved the most about Turning Red was how unique it looks. At times, I thought I was watching anime mixed with Pixar, in the best possible way, where it didn’t feel exploitative or out of place. Some action sequences were honestly breathtaking and confirmed to me that Pixar would keep pushing the limits of animation. I liked how over the past couple of years, we got Pixar films that felt different and explored different cultures. You can still tell it’s Pixar, but they aren’t afraid to change the animation (or its style) to fit the story narrative. Speaking of that, let’s delve into the story beyond the “it’s a menstruation film”.

I honestly hope people will see Turning Red for it is as a whole, rather than for one part. As I thought, this movie is more about growing up, going from that stage where you are no longer a child, but you are still so far away from being an adult rather than “menstruation only”. And how you get excited about new things, things that didn’t excite you before, and in Meilin’s case, how to combine everything she is going through with her family with what they stand for and the pressure to honour them and act a certain way. This film did a spectacular job balancing and portraying all these themes and making us understand them well enough to be invested in the story and characters.

What I also loved were the unconventional choices. For example, it wouldn’t be that long ago when a movie like this would have Meilin be the outcast with little to no friends. But in this film, she has her girl group. Is she the popular kid in school? No, but she’s pretty content with where she is. And the moment she starts turning into the red panda, it’d be so easy for all her friends to be afraid of her. But again, this movie takes a different route where some are taken aback at first, but there is that one friend who simply wants to cuddle her because she is so fluffy. There is a reason I related to that character so much was simple – that’s me. I am sorry, not sorry, but if one of my closest friends tells me she can turn into a giant red panda that looks fluffy, I am cuddling it. And like her friend in the movie moving onwards, I would too tempt her so she can turn into the panda more often. Oh, Pixar, yet again, so relatable.

Speaking of relatable, I have a confession to make. I have never been a 12-year-old girl. However, I still remember my classmates from that time, and although I suspect neither has been turning into giant red pandas (or maybe they were, and I just didn’t know…?), that was another aspect of Turning Red I adored. They nailed the behaviour of girls of that age. It was so easy for me to sympathize with Meilin immediately because I have known and will encounter girls like this (given my nieces are approaching this age), and they can be too much. But to be fair, I don’t think it’s just girls; I remember myself when I was around 12/13 and was too much at times… hell, I am still sometimes too much, so what gives, huh?

That saddens me a bit; many people have gone or will go into this film with the mindset of “that’s the menstruation movie”. Because it’s still taboo to talk about it, let alone show it on the screen. I mean, who are you? A monster wanting the children to learn about something important? Will somebody think of the children…? Oh, wait. Someone already has. It’s Pixar. Not only do they know what they are doing, but Turning Red is also much, much more than what some trolls on the Internet have tried to reduce it to. And it shouldn’t be taboo to talk about a literal body function more than half of the population experiences.

Overall, Turning Red is a delightful Pixar film that I unconditionally loved. I didn’t expect to love it as much, but here we go. It’s funny; the characters are relatable; it looks stunning, the soundtrack is awesome, and the message is worth discussing. It’s hard to balance everything, to honour yourself while honouring your family, but you need to be true to yourself; in the end. Maybe there is a giant red panda hidden inside of all of us, just wanting to be free? Pixar is still at the top, and it’s not even close. I love what they have been up to lately.

That’s all for this one! Did you see it? What did you think about it? Let me know!

Until next time,

Luke