If you read my review for the previous gem of this franchise (I won’t even bother to name the film; my review can be found here), you know I was not a fan, to say it mildly. But I have heard that Fast X has improved slightly and have also heard wild tales of Jason Momoa‘s acting performance, so I had to check it out for myself. Maybe I will at least not hate it, I thought to myself. Unfortunately, the difference between the previous movie and this one is like me asking whether you want to get cancer and die within a week or just die within a week. There is no good option, and it’s a shitty question to begin with.

I think there is one clear distinction between the previous film and Fast X, and it’s Vin Diesel‘s saviour/hero complex. Maybe I am misremembering the other movies, but in this one, it honestly felt like the script was doctored by Vin himself, as everyone is waiting for his approval or to be rescued by him. If there is somebody in distress, he appears to save them, often saving perfectly competent people to begin with and making himself look silly in the process. There were several scenes where other characters were describing Vin’s character and talked about him like this demigod, and again, maybe I do not remember these movies well, but this felt like almost a parody of itself as if he is the best thing to happen since sliced bread, the invention of the wheel and the discovery of fire combined.

Also, in the review I posted almost two years ago, I made a joke about how every dead character will eventually return. When I tell you, I am so mad that I was right… But when this movie finished, we were only missing Paul Walker. Everyone you have ever… liked? Cared for? Saw? Yeah, saw in these movies is back. And here, I will make another prediction – they will bring Paul’s character back as CGI. No shame, no regrets, they will talk about how they need to finish these films with him in it, but nah… If they truly wanted to honour his legacy, they would let him rest in peace rather than keep him alive all these years later. I am calling it and have been for a while; he is 100% coming back, and it will be awkward to watch, and we are all to blame.

The thing is, this movie is a mess. No matter how you cut it, narrative-wise, CGI-wise, plot-wise, logic-wise, life-wise… Nothing matters anymore. Nobody is in any real danger; everyone who has ever died is back, and we all keep on coming back and watching these movies, rewarding this nonsense with our hard-earned money. I didn’t go (purposefully) to watch this in the cinema, but my curiosity has gotten the better of me. Therefore, I am part of this crowd that is keeping this franchise alive, and that’s the part of me I don’t like but have to acknowledge is there. The thing is, I want to love these movies! I am a sucker for a great B/C/Z films that don’t take themselves too seriously and only exist to be fun. But I have never gotten that vibe from these films, mainly the last four or five.

Because even those “it’s just a dumb and fun movie” have to have their grounding in reality or work on some emotional level for me to like it. And if I like it, I am willing to forgive many things. But these films don’t have that and haven’t had it in for a while now. The action is mostly all CGI, so there is no sense of urgency, excitement or anything remotely close to that and the emotional side… Don’t make me laugh. This film ends on a cliffhanger, where it tries to tell you how everyone is dead, but you know nobody is dead. That is why I am not marking it as a spoiler, because is there such a thing as a spoiler in a movie with no stakes? Almost like the forest and the tree, does it make a sound? The tree, of course, makes a sound; don’t be self-centred, and no, this cliffhanger is one of the most infuriating and laughable ones of all time.

And even that Joker-like performance by Momoa wasn’t enough to justify the 141 minutes of CGI fuck fest this movie spews all over you. He obviously understood the assignment and was having a blast, but unfortunately, his enjoyment never really translated into my mood. Did I enjoy the movie slightly more when he was there? Yes. Was my mood improved that much to give this movie a slightly better rating? No.

And that’s the problem with Fast X. The cast is impressive and has some of the best action stars, some of the best actors and actresses, but they are all wasted on Diesel’s ego/power/saviour trip… is he planning to run for a president at some point? Is that the plan to use all the scenes where he saves people and has characters talk positively about him in a supercut when he inadvertently runs for president in 2028? Honestly, at this point, everything is possible. And it’s not one of those great “Everything is possible!” motivational speeches. It’s more like Trump becoming a president again, that kind of “Everything is possible!”

Overall, Fast X is everything you’d expect from a franchise that’s running on fumes, goodwill and some charm and charisma of decent people in supporting roles. For the most of it, you will experience “Vin saves the day, for 17th time in a row!” scenes alongside the “Oh boy, isn’t Vin’s character just the best person ever?” moments that will make you question everything, including the timeline you live in. Because in this timeline, there are many people who love these movies. And look, I am honestly happy for you. These are not for me, and I don’t understand anyone who loves them, but if they make you happy, watch them. I can’t recommend Fast X to anyone but the hardcore fans who have already decided how they feel about this movie before they’ve seen it.

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

Until next time,

Luke

If you scroll through my ratings (for example, on my Letterboxd account) and reviews, you will see I have an affinity for action movies. I grew up on 80s and 90s action, and for the longest time, my favourite actors were Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone and Bruce Willis. This fact alone should tell how much I adored (and still adore) the action genre, and I might or might not have rated a few of their movies much higher than they deserve. The Expendables franchise therefore meant a lot to me as I loved the concept of the “old guard” coming together and kicking some ass. But, this one… Where shall we start with this movie?

Let’s talk about the title first. It’s The Expendables 4. I implore all the studios who do this nonsense, for the love of anything and everything that’s holy to you (read: money), stop doing this shit. Expend4bles is such a cringy title. It may look cool on a poster, but if you talk about this movie to anyone, you will never say this title. Because it doesn’t roll off the tongue, it is simply The Expendables 4.

You might think to yourself: “That’s weird; he usually doesn’t discuss movie titles.” And that’s true, but in this instance, it’s almost like the title foreshadows the quality of this film. Or, as it happens in this case, the lack thereof. I went to the cinema ready to forgive the mediocre The Expendables 3 (2014) and with some hopes that this fourth movie will bring this franchise to some level of quality. I know, how naive of me, but what can I tell you… I love action films. And this movie kicked me in the balls and pissed on me while I was down. That’s how it felt. And if you think I am being too gross, just wait until you hear some of the dialogue in this film!

I don’t mind crude dialogue; I am not a shy sunflower who needs to be shielded from “foul language”. Therefore, I don’t mind swearing in movies. Was I expecting dialogues about golden showers in this film? I would be lying if I answered ‘yes’ to that prompt. And yet, we have them here as Jacob Scipio, who is supposed to be the son of Antonio Banderas‘ character from the previous movie, was given the ungrateful role of being a quippy young guy who only seems to be there to bring down the age average of the group under 60. Almost everything his character says in this film feels like he is in an entirely different movie. I purposely write “his character” as I don’t want to blame the actor; I think he did everything he was asked to do to the best of his abilities. I think that’s entirely the script’s issue. Speaking of those issues, let’s talk about Megan Fox.

Talk about a character that was written to fail. Megan gets introduced as someone in the midst of a heated argument with her boyfriend (Jason Statham) and comes across as bitchy, unlikable and hard to root for. Again, I need to make the distinction here; I am not talking about Megan Fox, the actress. I am talking only about her character, Gina. Gina was (I guess) potentially supposed to be the “leader” of this franchise moving forward. But since she is written by three men who don’t know how to write her, the audience is against her from the second she appears on the screen. What makes this even worse is that in the movie, Gina is quite literally useless. She leads the team, and they get captured almost instantly. And in the final showcase, she kills maybe two people…? You have Megan Fox; she has the third billing in this movie, and this is how you treat her character. The fuck? Make it make sense, anybody!

Wasting or mistreating characters should be this movie’s tagline. They got Tony Jaa and Iko Uwais, two actual martial arts Gods who would destroy anybody in the fight, and they… Give them little to nothing to do. Iko is the main villain, who tries his hardest to villain “as hard as he can” but ultimately has one pretty decent showdown against Statham, and that is it. Jaa was by far the best part of this film; he even delivered some comedy, but… those “highs” should have been higher. Even his character and I will repeat myself, the best part of this entire film, still felt underused, half-cooked and wasted. I don’t understand this; you get these two martial arts legends and then give them such average action sequences… what a waste.

I must mention the CGI, as that might have been one of the worst CGI effects in a big-budget Hollywood movie ever, and this film had an estimated budget of around $100 million!?!?!?!?!?!!! There was a plane landing scene in the first half that genuinely managed to take me out of the film. I am not even kidding; I was watching it in the cinema, and those effects looked so bad that I wondered whether the CGI artists had no money, time or all of the above to render it properly. And that wasn’t the only problem, just the most glaring one. I know I start to sound like a broken record, but make it make sense… please?

The last point I will make is the main plot. I will discuss it without any spoilers, but it will be tough. The movie spends most of its runtime convincing you one of the core members is dead. Everything that has happened since then has to do with his death, and by the end, that character might or might not come back alive. I was not sure whether I was more mad about him coming back alive or that was the plot they decided to go with in the first place, as it never worked for me. The whole thing felt unearned, stupid and honestly hollow.

And that is, unfortunately, the best way to describe The Expendables 4. The comradery we got to know and appreciate from the previous movies is gone. The group (or what’s left of it) felt weird, tired and out of gas, but not because of their age; most actors came across like they didn’t want to be there and did it for a paycheck only. Everything in this movie felt tired, empty and done in the most generic way possible. I rarely do this, but whilst writing this review, I changed my mind and will re-rate this retrospectively, but you won’t see it. When I left the cinema, I rated this film 4/10 on IMDb and 2/5 on Letterboxd, so I was ready to give it this rating here too. And now, whilst reliving the movie through this review, I will knock it down a full star. There were some “okay” moments in the end, but this film doesn’t deserve a better rating. It may be time to let this franchise die, and I don’t think you understand how much it pains me to write this. The Expendables 4 was supposed to start a new era for Expendables, but I think this movie alone managed to bury this franchise.

Overall, The Expendables 4 might be one of the biggest letdowns of recent years. I wasn’t expecting a masterpiece; I was hoping it would be better than its predecessor, and in a world of John Wick movies, the people behind this sequel would understand that they have to evolve too. Instead of that, they’ve gone backwards, and this movie made the previous one look like one of the most sophisticated action movies of all time. It pains me to write this, but avoid this film that doesn’t know what to do with either of its characters, how to shoot action around people who know some stuff (like Iko Uwais and Tony Jaa) and has one of the worst CGI of the recent Hollywood history.

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

Until next time,

Luke

Holy shit. One does not expect much from a film called Moonfall. You might be surprised, but I expected a fun disaster movie where, not such a spoiler alert, Moon is falling towards the Earth. And as long as you make it campy yet fun, I was on the board. Except this film decided on two things, first it will be over two hours long (why?!) and second, let’s take ourselves way too seriously. And those were definitely… choices.

Moonfall is yet another creation of Roland Emmerich, the master of disaster. Maybe it hurts me more than usual because I tend to find ways to have fun with his films. Most of his movies I like, some I even love more than your average film person. For example, I might be one of only a few people who unironically loved his film 2012 (2009) because it is just loud, dumb fun with unhinged characters who are fun to be around. In more than one way, 2012 and Moonfall are similar; both are about something that is total bullshit, both rely on CGI too much, and both are more than two hours long and feel grand. The one major difference is the fun aspect – I was able to have fun with 2012 because no matter what you think of that film, it takes itself seriously, but never too much. The movie lets you in and allows you to have fun while watching it. Moonfall does not.

And this is where the cookie crumbled for me the lack of levity in this film. Sure, we have the KC character here, portrayed by John Bradley. But since he is the only one who is allowed to have any fun (given the fact he is this film’s comic relief character) and the rest of the story and characters around him are playing it so straight, it feels like he is in a very different movie. And this is something I don’t get. Roland has made his name making spectacular disaster films full of levity and humour, and for some reason, he decided to go straight. Why? It is not like this specific story demanded it. It was hard taking this film seriously, given how some elements unfold, for the movie to play it straight almost at all times.

Another thing that dragged the film down was the runtime which is 130 minutes. Yes, Moonfall is a disaster film made by Emmerich that takes itself way too seriously and is over two hours long. Those three things should never be in the same sentence one has to go. But with the runtime, it would be easier (than ever before) to establish what should have been cut – everything related to their families getting to safety. I could not care less about either of those characters. If we were to cut them out from the film, suddenly the movie becomes 40 minutes shorter, at least. I am not saying that would save everything, but it would definitely help.

How would cutting them out of the film help, you might ask? Well, I am glad you asked. The last big issue this film has is it takes too long to, you know, Moonfall. It takes more than an hour before we start with the CGI spectacle we all came in for. And by cutting the unnecessary weight out of this film, we get to the action sooner. That would 100% help, and maybe this film would have been accepted more by not just the critics but movie fans too.

The only redeeming quality Moonfall has to offer is the decent CGI and Halle Berry, whose character might seem like she is in a different film, but at least it is still Halle Berry. What can I say; I have a weakness for this ageless beauty, and she is one of those that light up the screen for me, no matter how bad the film is. But everything around her is just awful and dumb. I am usually one of the biggest proponents of big dumb movies, and I have defended many of those because they have a place in cinemas. But with Moonfall, I can’t think of anything else I haven’t mentioned already. The movie is just that bad.

Overall, Moonfall is a misfire of gigantic proportions. I don’t know whose idea it was to make a movie about the moon falling and make it into a “message” movie (technology might turn against us!) that takes itself way too seriously. Whoever that person was, he; or she shouldn’t have a say in any movie ideas for at least a couple of years because Jesus, man. This film could have been a big, dumb, fun movie. And to give Moonfall some credit, it managed to be two out of those three. The only problem was that the “fun” was supposed to be the largest element of this movie. And without that element, everything fell apart quicker than this film at the box office. Yes, on the presumed budget of $150 million, this film made $44 million WORLDWIDE. Talk about a failure bigger than… the moon?

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

Until next time,

Luke

It’s been a while since a movie came out that was so universally panned and hated as Holmes & Watson. I remember hearing quite literally no positive opinions about this film. So naturally, I have avoided it, but there was a part of me that became morbidly curious about this movie. It is kind of like when something terrible happens, like a car accident, and you are passing it. You know you shouldn’t look, but you just can’t help yourself. When Holmes & Watson landed on one of the streaming services I subscribe to, my curiosity got the better of me, and I watched it. One of the single worst decisions I have made in my life… yet.

On the surface, the idea was solid, and some fun could have been had with the premise: “What if THE Sherlock Holmes wasn’t as brilliant?” Sure, it’s not the most groundbreaking idea of all time, but for a comedy starring two brilliant comedians, Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly, you think this might be something decent. But boy, you would be wrong, same as me. Holmes & Watson dares to ask you: “How much can you endure?” And then, it gives you ten times more cringe than you would ever suspect. How the mighty have fallen.

I honestly believe the biggest issue with this film was the premise because there is nothing more to this film. Sometimes, you can build a movie based on the simplest of premises, sure. But those films are rarely comedies, and even less often do they stay as one-note as this film. Remember when I wrote the premise was simple? Did I mention they literally repeat the same joke throughout the entire movie? The joke, of course, is: “Look what an idiot Sherlock is.” After the third or fourth time, I was thinking: “Surely, this won’t be like this for the entire movie, right…?” Nope, it was. Many variations on Sherlock being idiotic or people in this film referencing modern-day pop culture. This movie felt like a long, unfunny SNL sketch.

But you know what’s even worse than a comedy with an unfunny premise? A comedy with an unfunny premise that is full of talented performers. The already mentioned Will and John have been amazing before, but there are many more great people here, from Rebecca Hall, Ralph Fiennes to Hugh Laurie and Kelly Macdonald! And since they can only work with what they were given, literally all of them are wasted in this film. I wish I could say any of these performers stepped up and “saved” this film, but I can’t. It felt like this film was a curse that didn’t allow anybody to escape or, in this case, be funny. I can’t blame any of these talented people because I understand there is only so much any performer can do.

And this is Holmes & Watson in a nutshell. You watch a rejected SNL skit that somehow got stretched into an hour and a half movie that could be “mildly amusing” had it stayed a two-minute sketch. But it didn’t; we got 90 minutes of suffering while talented performers are making fools of themselves where you are embarrassed for them. I genuinely hope they at least got paid very well; imagine having this movie on their resume, making it for next to nothing, only to see the final result. How devastating would that be?

Overall, Holmes & Watson is an awful movie that should be avoided at all costs. For one “alright” joke, you get 23.358 others that simply miss, the plot is predictable, and you can’t believe your eyes. If you are like me and your morbid curiosity is telling you to check this movie out because surely, it can’t be that bad, can it? Yes, yes, it can. Be smarter than me, and even if you enjoy awful movies; avoid 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

I love films. I love clever films, but at the same time, I love “dumb” films. I strongly believe in judging any movie based on its merits rather than comparing a comedy to an Oscar-winning drama. For this reason, I tend to rate movies higher than your stereotypical movie critic because I am not a movie critic. I have always called myself a cinephile, a movie lover. With that being said… fuck this film. I can have fun with “dumb” action movies (after all, I grew up on those cheezy action films from the 80s and 90s). But if the ninth film in a franchise becomes “all bets are off” kind of a movie, and there are LITERALLY no stakes to any action happening on the screen, that just infuriates me.

Fast & Furious 9 (or F9) embraced the ridiculous premise of fans all over the world, who were pointing out how this franchise evolved from fast cars and racing to heists and “family” and asked: “Well, what are they going to do next, go to space?” And filmmakers behind this movie went: “Hold my Corona.” And they did. Look, I know you wanted to be cheeky, but Jesus… As with everything, too much of one thing can kill you or make you not like that one thing. Take pizza; I often think how I could eat pizza every single day, except when you truly think about it, that’s dumb, it wouldn’t make sense, it wouldn’t be healthy for me, and also, after some time, it would no longer be my favourite food. I’d get sick by just looking at pizza. And that’s how I felt about Fast & Furious 9. Where I could have found fun with the first three or four movies, the moment Dwayne ‘The Rock’ Johnson joined this franchise, it officially jumped a car, a helicopter and then a submarine. With each new episode, I found myself having less and less fun. But holy shit, was he helping to keep this franchise afloat as this film without his charisma struggles. Yep, as much as I like Vin Diesel and admire what career he’s made for himself, he isn’t as charismatic as Dwayne. But the lack of Dwayne isn’t the main issue, no. The main problem is the lack of any stakes. You could rent the world’s best and most advanced microscope, and you would still struggle to find at least any hints of something remotely resembling stakes.

Some of you might be thinking: “Damn, it only took you eight films to realise there are no stakes in these films?” And to those people, I would say, no. I always knew the stakes were low to minimal in this franchise, but they existed. What F9 has done differently from its predecessors was it turned into a full-on telenovela and removed those tiny stakes which existed. I won’t even mention that we have yet another “long lost family member” in this film again. That has been spoiled even in the official trailers, but just in case you haven’t seen those, I will put the spoiler tag because we need to talk about this…

Beware, SPOILERS are coming!

This franchise has been dealing with one thing on a pretty consistent basis – its hatred for The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift (2006) as that was, what I would argue, the last “proper” Fast & Furious film. Because that movie is mostly about racing, there are no international problems that somehow only a team of racers can solve. Racers who somehow can pull off anything they put their minds to. Well, that’s the American way. Anyway, another reason this franchise hates Tokyo Drift – they killed Han. How dare they kill that one character we didn’t know would be so… crucial to the story previously? As they, of course retcon him to the movies after the fact, making Tokyo Drift (for the longest time) the future one. That is already bit too convoluted for a franchise whose sole focus should have been fast cars, but ok. Anyway, when it seemed that we were finally over it, this #JusticeForHan thing started, and yet again, filmmakers decided: “You know what? That character WAS the heart of this franchise; we need to bring him back.” And they did. Han lives. After being dead since 2006, but appearing in some films since then because they were technically in the past… he’s officially back and alive as they YET AGAIN go back and retcon Tokyo Drift so effectively that film no longer matters. And why would it? What do you want for choices to matter? Get the fuck out of here…

See what I mean by Fast & Furious 9 killing even that last bit of stakes? Now not only you don’t have to be afraid about anybody dying in these films ever again but even if they somehow do, don’t worry, they will be back again! Well, except for Paul Walker because he is literally dead. But guess what? That doesn’t stop this film from talking about him and even making somebody pretend to be him in the last scene, where his car shows up. I swear, I wouldn’t be surprised if, for the next sequel, they actually bring him back using CGI. Because that seems like the respectful thing to do, rather than… I don’t know, maybe retire his character where he is living the life or something like that. No, we need to dangle him in front of the audience because of… family? Money? Yeah, it’s money.

Do you feel despair? Because this film made me honestly desperate. What makes me the saddest/maddest about this situation is how they were talking about Fast & Furious 7 (2015), how that was for Paul and all that, and they actually somehow managed to give him a pretty sweet send-off in that film, despite the odds. But now they literally waiving his name and car in your face again cause “family”? And I wasn’t a big Paul Walker fan, but I thought he seemed like a chilled dude, and of course, I was sad when he died.

To be fair, it’s not just this Han/Paul Walker stuff that bothered me, no. The movie was irritating to me before that as all the set pieces are so unbelievable, it’s genuinely hard for me to “switch my brain off and have fun”. When all the stunts are CGI because they must be CGI, it’s hard for me to feel any excitement. Or where people use literal cars to break somebody’s fall, more than once. Yes, you can break someone’s fall using a car but not without breaking their spine, bones; you know, the entire body in the process. And that’s just one example of how lazy this franchise has gotten. A movie with no stakes is where any tension goes to die.

The only thing I semi-enjoyed was the sequence in Edinburgh, as I’ve been there on a few occasions, so it was fun seeing the streets I walked on being in a movie like this. Because as much as I didn’t enjoy this film, it’s still a Hollywood blockbuster, no doubt about that. And it made money too less than what was probably expected but still enough to warrant a few more sequels until they go… where can they even go next? The moon? The sun? All bets are off for this franchise, and in this case, it’s not a compliment.

Overall, Fast & Furious 9 is a film I didn’t enjoy at all. It didn’t work on any level for me. For a “dumb” action film, it was too dumb and wanted me to suspend my disbelief way too much; for an “end of the world” film, the stakes were non-existent to start with, so of course, that aspect and the entire plot of this film is boring. Yep, for a movie about fast cars, double-crosses, and people going into a space, I was bored. And that’s “probably” not a good thing, being bored while watching an action film. I wouldn’t waste my time on this film if I were you.

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

Until next time,

Luke

It’s been a while since I have seen The Wicker Man (1973), but I remember liking it. Yes, it was weird, creepy, and slightly all over the place, but there was this almost hypnotising beauty to it. Well, this movie seems like it was ahead of its time (a bit) and took it as almost a challenge to remake this film into something much weirder. Do you remember, a couple of years ago, there were (and to a point, still are) challenges for everything (cinnamon, planking, knife etc.)? It seemed like this movie went ahead and challenged itself that they could do a film that’s much weirder than its predecessor. Even though nobody wanted it, needed it or even challenged them…? And that’s how we got The Wicker Man. The myth, the legend of a film… for all the wrong reasons, unfortunately.

First of all, let’s address the Cage in the room. I mean, eleph… never mind, we all know. Even if you have never seen this film, you have probably watched the infamous “Not the BEES!” scene on YouTube. I know I had. And imagine my absolute disgust when I realised the awful version of this awful movie DID NOT have that scene? Yes, there are apparently two versions of this film, and somehow I have seen the one without that glorious scene? How is that even possible?

The Wicker Man is, to put it mildly, a terrible movie. And not because it’s weird or hilarious at times when it doesn’t mean to be (the flashback scene Nicolas Cage keeps having, mainly on the boat, is the most I’ve laughed in a while), no. It’s a terrible movie, because and I don’t say this lightly – nothing works here. The story drags on even though it’s supposed to be “mysterious”. Everybody’s acting dial is turned to 11, when the movie required maybe six, possibly seven at times. The dialogue is wooden. The camera looks off. And then we have Nic Cage. We need to talk about Nic Cage.

Look, I like him. I am one of those people who admires the choices he makes, even though they are often unconventional. I 100% agreed with him winning the Oscar for his performance in Leaving Las Vegas (1995) because I thought that even though, at times, it might have been “out there”, I believed him. But in this film, it’s like he’s not on the same planet anymore. It’s like he took some new drugs that transported his soul onto a different, parallel universe, and he made all the choices based on that skewed universe, where they might have made sense. But in our universe, his performance stands out so much movie fans often talk about Cage being awful, resulting in this movie being rubbish. But I would argue the film might be even worse, but somehow, Cage’s performance is so distracting we (the viewers) often forget how awful everything around Cage is, so he is the final nail in this coffin of a movie.

I go into every film trying to find something positive, to like it. You might have noticed that I often rate movies higher than other film people. But in this instance, I can’t do it. The only “good” thing I can say about The Wicker Man is, at times, you might find yourself laughing. But unfortunately, even that is wrong, as what you will laugh at wasn’t meant to be funny.

Maybe one more thing before I sign off – this movie made me realise how much I miss seeing Leelee Sobieski in films. As with everybody else in this film, she wasn’t great. But she’s always had this presence about her in every movie I’ve seen her in, and there is something mysteriously charming about her eyes; I simply can’t get over it. I know she’s retired from acting, but I hope she might reconsider and come back. There is simply something about her, even in this abomination.

Overall, The Wicker Man is a disaster masked as a film. If you want to see something unique, do yourself a favour and watch the original instead of this remake. And I am not saying that as somebody who would be “crazy in love” with the original either (it was a solid 3.5* for me). But this film… it’s honestly spectacular how every choice they’ve made was somehow wrong.

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

Until next time,

Luke

Ok, let me set the scene. One evening, I am browsing through my Amazon Prime, looking for a movie to watch. I am in the mood for something light, possibly an older film I haven’t seen. And I stumble upon a movie titled The Torture Chamber of Dr. Sadism, with a poster similar to this one below.

You need to understand, I am but a simple man – if I see a title like this, poster like that, I am in. Plus, if you see names like Lex Barker (Czech people are really into Winnetou films) and THE Christopher Lee (!!!) are among the main stars, you bet your top dollar, pound, Bitcoin, whatever currency you use that I am watching that film. Honestly, I wasn’t hoping for much, just some light, cheesy, cough, naked, cough entertainment for a Saturday evening. What I got was… everything but that.

First of all, Amazon sure knows how to market these films. Because this film’s original title is Die Schlangengrube und das Pendel (yes, The Snake and the Pendulum). Also, this movie has a couple of alternative English titles – Blood of the Virgins, The Blood Demon, Torture Chamber… are you sensing a theme yet? Even the distributors knew they needed to hype this film up because it’s so boring…! And no, I am not saying this just because there is no nudity (even though the way this film is paced it wouldn’t have helped).

I will try to retell this film to the best of my abilities. There is a count Regula (I am not joking, that is how Christopher Lee’s character is called in this masterpiece) who gets killed at the beginning of this movie. He promises that he’d return. Cool. Then, 35 years go by, and the people who charged him to die have had daughters and sons, who look EXACTLY the same as their parents. Those offspring are invited for the longest ride in cinematic history (I swear just that ride took like three hours) to arrive at the Dracula’s… I mean Regula’s castle. Who, surprise surprise, IS BACK! And this time is personal, they need to fight him, they win and John’s your uncle or whatever.

I have seen some of the Dracula movies Christopher Lee’s made, and I managed to have fun with them, despite their cheesiness. But this film felt like a cheap knock-off somebody made with a budget of $1000, where 80% of that money went to Lex’s and Christopher’s salaries. So they had to do a lot with what little they had left, and it shows. Believe it or not, I don’t mind cheesy, low budget films that don’t take themselves too seriously. But this one, unfortunately, does. Everybody here plays it so straight it’s hard to take them or the movie seriously.

I am almost 100% sure that some producer had an idea to make a cheap knock-off of Dracula films. But he knew he couldn’t get the name because of licensing issues. But he either had some dirt on both Lex and Christopher to make them appear in this film, or he paid them so well, they just couldn’t resist…? Either way, I can’t see it any other way. This movie has basically nothing going for it.

Both our main stars seem to be done with the film halfway through. And I don’t mean Lee, I mean Karin Dor alongside Lex, as they attend the longest carriage ride. That fucking carriage ride, I can’t get over that. It felt like most of this film we spent there, and the movie is trying to “build up” some atmosphere, the emphasis on “trying to”, as it doesn’t work. Even the end at the castle, where our heroes finally face Dracula… shit, I mean Regula, is as boring as it gets. Because they don’t fight him per se, he manages to tie Lex’s character to a pendulum that’s swinging for so long you might actually die of old age before that pendulum would hit him.

As I said before, I honestly like cheesy, old films that are trying to be scary. I can have fun with them. But there are these films, and then there is a film like this one, where nothing works. Sure, you get one A-lister and one actor, who at the time was fairly known throughout Europe. But nothing else is working in this abomination of a film. Karin Dor is great to look at, sure. But even she has much better movies on her resume.

Overall, The Torture Chamber of Dr. Sadism is one of the rare films whose title describes accurately what it will feel like for you to watch this movie. You will feel like being tortured by Dr. Sadism. That is another thing, how does someone go from Dracula… fuck my life, I won’t ever remember this, Regula to “Dr. Sadism”, I will never understand. But in a way, I totally get it. You can say this film was well ahead of its time, as this is as close as you get to a “film bait” definition. You are promised excitement, horror and possibly some nudity by the poster and the title, and you get… exactly none of these elements. This movie honestly reminds me of those clickbait articles like “10 Actors You Won’t Believe Are Dead” or “This Is What Your Doctor Is Not Telling You! CLICK HERE To See What Can YOU Do to Prolong YOUR LIFE”. Then, you click the article, and after clicking through roughly 104.286 ads, it’s something like “Make sure to drink a lot of water” and “Eat more vegetables” kind of advice. I can’t recommend this movie to anybody. Even the people, who enjoy bad movies, I think they would truly suffer from boredom through 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

Oh, Jesus-tap-dancing-Christ. Where do I start with this? Ok, first things first – whenever I find out that a movie is a remake, I try to watch the original first, to see what has been done where, what was improved, what wasn’t, you know. So I went into this film right after watching the original Black Christmas (1974, my review here). And I have praised the original movie for being a gem that helped establish plenty of rules for horror movies to come while having a great, albeit not-so-subtle feminist message. This remake is, unfortunately, the exact opposite of that. The clichés are used in such a lazy way, you can see every single twist from a mile away (except for the dumbest twist, but I will get to that), and the feminist message here was… let’s say more than in your face. A lot to unpack here…

I can’t discuss much without going straight to spoilers, so I do apologise, as usually, I try to sum up a film at least a tiny bit before going into the spoiler territory. But plenty of things that are bad with this remake are so intertwined with the main plot I need to jump there pretty much straight away. Let me just say that the only thing this remake has in common with the original from 1974 is the name and the setting (sorority house). Everything else is different. That might make you think something like: “Hey, that’s great, at least the remake is trying to say something different and isn’t copying the original!” Sure, but where the original helped establish the horror clichés, this one felt like they gave in to them, focusing solely on the message. That would be fine if the message wouldn’t be so black and white. Ok, without further ado…

Beware, SPOILERS are coming!

Black Christmas starts like your stereotypical horror film. We have a murder within the first five minutes. Fine. Except this is where the movie shows its hand for the first time – the killer is not “a shadow” we never see, like in the original, but a masked, hooded figure. And since it moves way too quickly, you realise almost instantly – ok, there are multiple killers.

Which is fair enough; after all, plenty of horror films made that work, albeit they didn’t tip their hand in the first five minutes. But ok, moving on. The movie consists of plenty of cheap jump scares (something the original managed to avoid), but I understand that unfortunately is the “norm” nowadays, so I can’t hold that against this film too much either. But there is no underlying tension, no horror atmosphere whatsoever, as it gets overshadowed by this movie’s “in your face” feminism and the (men) characters being so black or white you swear you are watching a film from the 1920s.

Look, a lot of great horror movies comment on political issues. But, and this is huge but, they do it subliminally, via allegories or metaphors. They don’t do it by effectively taking a megaphone and shouting at you for an hour and a half. Because that is what I remember most, and that is how I felt while watching this film. The men characters here are either really useless/weak or the worst possible men you’ll ever meet. The thing here is I could even understand why if there wasn’t the supernatural element. I know what you are asking: “Wait, what now? What supernatural element are you talking about?” Oh well, that was the only “twist” I didn’t see coming because it was so dumb.

In a nutshell, the movie mentions in the beginning how the school’s founder was this awful guy who might have been involved with some dark magic. He was so bad they removed his bust someplace else, so it wasn’t as visible. And while moving the bust, somebody noticed there was a black goo leaking out. Someone also discovered (how?) that black goo “unleashes the alpha male”. Yep. And that infects you (aka fraternity guys) so much, they don’t bleed blood anymore; they bleed the black goo. And the founder is also alive, somehow, or his spirit…? Yes, this is something that the movie hints at towards the end; there is this massive (boss) hooded figure in charge, but never explained how, why, who…?

And here’s the thing – I don’t have a problem with “supernatural” elements. Or black goo that turns people evil. But in your horror/political movie, that’s all about how men are evil creatures – doesn’t the existence of black goo go against it? As the fraternity guys are infected by the black goo, how are they responsible for what they do under its spell? To me, that’s a massive misstep in the film, as it almost shifts the blame from the men to “they were only evil because of the magic black goo, that was somehow preserved in this bust of the evil founder of our school”.

I know, there is a trivia on IMDb trying to give us an insight into this:

The black goo that the fraternity brothers bleed is meant to represent literal toxic masculinity and how it affects men and changes them from humans into monsters. It was also used because they were not allowed to show red coloured blood in a PG-13 rated film.

Source: IMDb.com

But for my money, the film is trying to be too clever for its own good. Sometimes, the clearer your point is, the better it works. This movie is a prime example. It would have worked much better as a movie, let alone a horror movie if there wasn’t any evil black goo. Whether it represents something or not.

I swear this movie went from “average, slightly more in your face movie” to “batshit insane” with that supernatural element. I wish the people behind this film would have just left it out completely, and that would have improved the movie instantly. And better yet, maybe don’t make the main villain (Cary Elwes, who is much better than to be in this film, but I could say that about any actor/actress in this) the obvious one. How great/unexpected would it be if Madeleine Adams (who plays Helena, who is revealed as a traitor to her sisters) would be the “main boss” behind this? How more interesting/nuanced the story/the message could have been?

From the main cast, I need to talk about Imogen Poots. She was perfectly fine in her role. But same as Cary Elwes, she is much better than to appear in this film. I “liked” (the quotes are there because it’s hard to say that I liked a rape story) how her storyline was dealt with and how the “sexy dance” routine turned into this fuck you to the frat guys. If only the movie had more genuinely surprising scenes like this.

And to prove I am not some “not all men” or some sour person, I will give you a perfect example of what this movie could have been. But it’s not based on my views (because I do need to admit, I am but a white, straight male), no. If you want to see a movie that is out there when comes to these issues and knows how to portray characters well, how to tell a story in a superb way, where it stays with you for days to come, please do yourself a favour and watch Emerald Fennell‘s Promising Young Woman (2020, my review here).

The more I think about it, the more I am sure both of these movies are pretty much identical. Except one is superb, and one just “is”. One portrays very well how it is to be a woman in the man’s world while not being condescending but, at the same time, giving zero fucks. The other film shouts at you. One has characters (even some male ones, so it’s not that difficult) who are complex and all in their core flawed to some extent. But some are more flawed than others. The other film has a “girl power, fuck yeah!” thing going on that doesn’t work because it doesn’t feel like part of the story. And I could write like this for days, but instead of wasting your time and mine, I shall repeat – please, do yourself a favour and watch Promising Young Woman. It might not be a horror movie per se, but it’s so close to being a horror film it’s that much scarier than this movie.

Overall, Black Christmas fails on all accounts. It fails as a horror, as it can’t scare you without cheap jump scares. It fails as a political movie, as there is no depth to almost any characters, beyond “girl power!” for most of the women and “I take ages to invite a girl out” or “I will fucking rape/murder you” for men characters. It fails with its many twists, as most you see coming from a mile away (if you ever seen a horror movie or two). And the one that you don’t see coming is just so dumb you are left to wonder, why does it have to be there? But, most importantly, it fails as a remake of Black Christmas. A movie that helped defined the genre and actually had something to say when comes to feminism. And it didn’t need to shout at you.

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

Until next time,

Luke