If there are two genres I love, it’s action and sci-fi. By that logic, if you combine them and do them well, I tend to enjoy myself and have a blast with those films. So when I heard of this movie, I was hopeful going into it because I remember seeing it when it landed on Amazon Prime, but I never clicked on it as I’ve always had “better things” to watch. Well, one day, I finally pulled the trigger and pressed play on this movie, and I will say there are some decent ideas here. But it’s packaged, paced and told in such a way that nothing will ever surprise you.

The idea that humanity semi-masters the time travel and must go back in time for people to help them win a war against aliens is fascinating. There were sequences that were also done well (like the first landing in the future and the 20 minutes that followed). And there are some fun cast members this movie wastes. But unfortunately, everything else failed for me.

Let’s start with the idea – it’s solid. Sure, you need to accept a lot of stuff for it to make sense (like how they only semi-mastered the time travel, so they can’t go back as much as they want etc.), but it was intriguing. However, as the movie progresses and takes shape, I wondered what it would look like in the hands of someone more capable. I like Chris McKay, but I am not sure this was the best material for him to tackle because this story is so ambitious, and the ultimate message is pretty important, but if you don’t know how to sell it to us, it will sound cheesy and cheap. And that’s what ultimately happened with The Tomorrow War. Without going into spoilers, everything that happens and gets revealed in the third act is questionable, and with that, this movie found itself in this weird category where you may agree with its themes and message, but you don’t like how everything gets told. Well, at least I found myself there.

The cast is another thing. I don’t know what happened to Chris Pratt, but his charisma no longer works for me, and it’s been like this since about 2016. I used to love him, mainly as a comedian, and now, he is trying to do this almost Ryan Reynolds thing, and the thing is, he isn’t Ryan. And by having him try it, it proves that Ryan isn’t just being himself, but there is more to his performances, and he gets short-shrift by many fans. I hope Chris can turn this around and maybe take a step back, do a comedy or two and maybe try again…? J.K. Simmons is here and plays this absentee dad to Pratt, but for most of the movie, he isn’t there at all. When the movie needs him, he’s got some moments that should make us care about him, but I didn’t, mainly because of how this movie brought him back in the third half when he was in there for about two minutes before that.

Who I thought did an underrated job and might be one of our most underrated actresses (especially comedy-wise) is Mary Lynn Rajskub. In everything I have seen her in throughout the past several years, I thought she was sneakily one of, if not the best thing about that movie, TV show or scene. In The Tomorrow War, her character doesn’t get to do much, but she makes her scenes memorable; she is funny, and it never feels cringey. For example, we have the brilliant Sam Richardson here also playing this comedic relief for the most part, and his character didn’t work for me at all. I love Sam; I have seen him in many other films and shows, so I know it wasn’t him, but there was something about his character that never made him funny to me and, for the majority of this movie, he was supposed to the main comedic relief of this film.

But even that wasn’t my main issue with this movie. My biggest problem was how convenient everything was when the movie needed to move the story along. Again, without going into major spoilers, I will simply say this – Chris Pratt’s character is a teacher before this future war starts. And we get introduced to this one, a very unique student who is passionate about volcanoes. When I tell you this will be important later, I won’t blame you for not believing me. But it is, and I was kinda mad that it was that important and how they based the entire third act on this random piece of knowledge. Sure, many movies have clutches to move forward, but this clutch felt the “clutchiest” I have seen in ages.

What also doesn’t help anything is the runtime of almost 140 minutes. Yes, a lot of stuff happens in this film, but also, there are definitely sequences that could have been cut down a bit, and ultimately, if you manage to get it to around 110 minutes, I think it would have flown much better. The pacing felt very awkward, again, mainly in the third act.

This movie also wants to have a big reveal in the future (technically two reveals), but… The first one is obvious, and the second is a bit less obvious but almost given, accounting for what we have learned from our exposition dump about the future before they go into it. It always makes me laugh how movies try to do these “shocking” reveals only for most of the audience to react like: “…Okay? Wasn’t that given?”

And ultimately, that’s how I would sum up this movie. It’s not bad by any means; I even contemplated giving it a middle-of-the-road, average rating. But then, I started to think about my rating, how much I have actually enjoyed this movie and whether I will remember much about it a couple of weeks or months down the line. I realised I won’t remember much about it because everything is just… okay-ish. And the more movies I watch, the more I forget these movies that don’t stand out in any way, shape or form, mainly if there isn’t at least one excellent or awesome thing to remember. The Tomorrow War has some cool things about it, but they never managed to make those things pay off.

Overall, The Tomorrow War is a great concept, with decent actors and average execution. Unfortunately, the execution becomes below average when the third act happens as there are way too many “Oh come the fuck on now!” situations for me to swallow or ignore. I would, however, love to see it remade by someone who likes to play with big ideas. For example, if you told me that Christopher Nolan or Alex Garland wanted to remake it, I would be the first to say: “Yes, please!” as I would trust both of these directors to take this concept, not changing a thing thematically, and/or narratively and arrive at the destination much smoother than this movie did. And I write this as someone who again agrees with everything this movie says.

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

Until next time,

Luke

This review might be a bit different than the ones I usually write. I saw the movie, and yeah, it’s bad. But then I read the IMDb trivia (some great gems there) and began to understand how this movie was doomed to fail from the beginning and in a much worse way than I would have anticipated. So, part of this will be talking about this movie, but the other will be me talking about the current studio system and, specifically, Sony.

One thing that Madame Web tried to be is an origin story of somebody who is quite popular and powerful in comic books (that was all I knew about her, as someone who has never read any comic book in his life). Unfortunately, every beat of this origin story is not only boring, it’s also shot poorly, edited horribly, and many things don’t align logically. I will give one example for many – Dakota Johnson is a suspect in kidnapping our main heroines (Sydney Sweeney, Isabela Merced and Celeste O’Connor) and drives off with them in the middle of nowhere. Then, she leaves them, so they wander off to get food at the nearby dinner, and there, a guy spots them and calls the police. And how did he know it was them? We see the guy reading newspapers with no single image. Not only did this “kidnapping” only happen a couple of hours ago (very late newspaper edition, I guess), but also, he just saw three random girls walk in and thought: “Yep, that must be them, better do my duty!” And this one scene is just one example out of many.

Regarding the technical side, this might be the first blockbuster film in ages where you can spot sound being properly off. Especially with Tahar Rahim‘s character, many of his lines are shot with his character either facing sideways or straight-up from the back, so we don’t see his mouth. And it’s very distracting, but knowing now about all the various re-shoots, it makes so much sense why this had to be shown like this.

That brings me to my last point about the actual movie – the performances. Everyone is weird and awkward and seems off in Madame Web. Now, I won’t blame any of the actors, as I know all of them are talented, given I have seen their previous work, so I know Dakota, Sydney, Isabela or Celeste are great actors. But they are misdirected and often seem confused as to what is happening. There was a portion of this film towards the end where we see them in the future with their powers. And for those scenes, I was kinda into it because they seemed like they could kick ass. However, we really get those scenes, maybe for two minutes tops. The rest is just an origin story that puts everything on the right track. Unfortunately, though, that track is dodgy, not well-oiled and also set on fire whilst constantly being changed.

And this is where I must address the IMDb trivia. Specifically, one struck a nerve with me:

According to Dakota Johnson in an interview with The Wrap, the screenplay underwent extensive rewrites to the point that it no longer resembled the film that she signed on for. The original screenplay, which was described as darker and “very ‘Terminator’ inspired,” would have seen Madame Web and the Spider-Women trying to protect a pregnant Mary Parker from Ezekiel Sims, who wants to kill her to prevent the birth of Peter Parker.

Source: IMDb.com

Imagine being an actor, signing on to do a film based on this intriguing screenplay. And as you shoot it, it changes on you to something incoherent, messy and not resembling anything that intrigued you about it in the first place. Especially when that premise sounds awesome, I would totally watch that movie! The studio system has always been like this, and Madame Web is hardly the first movie that had this done. However, when the story and script changes are so obvious that you can’t showcase your villain that much because his words don’t match his lips, and your main star literally changed her agency after the first trailer came out (yep, that’s real), you know you’ve done fucked up. In 2023, we had both writers’ and actors’ guilds striking for better conditions, better pay and all that any sensible movie-loving person supported. I hope part of those terms the actors and writers negotiated was for the screenplay not to change as drastically once everything gets green-lit. I understand changes will always happen, and that’s fine, but if you green-lit a movie, surely you should “leave it” and supervise it from a distance rather than actively mess around with the screenplay and the story… It just doesn’t make sense.

Sony seems to be the unfortunate “king” of these, especially since their comic book movies aren’t… Well, let’s just say they haven’t had the best response (looking your way, Morbius (2022, my review here). I know there must be some weird sense of: “Oh well, we will nail the next time!” and that’s why they haven’t sold everything to the MCU yet, but… Sony, guys, enough is enough. Yes, the MCU has their issues, and its track record isn’t flawless, especially in the last couple of years, but… I would still trust them more. I would still trust the MCU to do reshoots better (they have done them in the past) and to actually get a better grasp of these characters.

That is why I am torn on this movie, as yes, I didn’t enjoy it, but I didn’t hate it as much because, in some scenes, you can see the “what if” potential. Imagine if this movie was good; I feel like the sequel (given they all had their power by then) would have been great. And the more I think about it after reading more about this film and its behind-the-scenes, the more I refuse to talk shit about anyone involved here, especially the actors. Yes, nobody comes across as capable in this film, but I genuinely believe they are giving what they can and what they have been told to do. It’s hard to talk about movies sometimes, especially when you can tell there was so much behind-the-scenes stuff that set this movie on the wrong path from day one.

Overall, Madame Web is not a great movie. However, I didn’t think it was as bad (for me, it’s slightly better than Morbius, but that ain’t saying much), and what’s more, this one seems like it was set to fail the moment they started to move away from that intriguing, Terminator-like premise. Madame Web is like a ship without a captain that is sailing towards the harbour. The anchor still hasn’t dropped, the crash is imminent and on top of that, that ship is on fire, and its crew was powerless to do anything about it. I feel bad for all the actors and creative people involved and hope those who aren’t A-listers will recover from this. It’s rare for studio pictures to fuck that badly, and Sony, you managed again. Here’s your trophy. Now, go fuck yourself.

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

Until next time,

Luke

I was one of those “lunatics” unironically looking forward to this sequel. I liked The Meg (2018); despite its flaws, it was a fun shark movie with decent CGI and charismatic Jason Statham. Again, I judge movies on their own merits, so it objectively was a B/C movie at best, but, in its genre, it did its job. But Meg 2: The Trench… How can someone miss so badly?

I hate to do this, but I am not sure whether someone like Ben Wheatley was the best choice for this sequel. I have only seen one of his movies (High-Rise (2015)) but even judging by his filmography, he’s never done a movie that was as CGI-heavy as Meg 2. And that was my biggest issue. Those scenes that were supposed to be the highlight of this film ended up being badly edited, all over the place and mostly shot in such dark that you can’t hardly see anything.

The perfect example of this was the scene of our heroes being stranded at the bottom of the ocean and having to go “for a walk” to save themselves. Now, I won’t go into the practicalities of whether they would survive such an amount of pressure for so long. Meg 2 is a movie about pre-historic sharks coming to the surface, so I will give them some wiggle room in that department. But that scene (that, in my opinion, should have been the “key” scene of this film) was executed so messily that it quickly lost all of its impact. Why? Because you are supposed to be afraid for our heroes, they are out in the open; there are multiple Megs around and other deadly creatures. But since you can’t really see anything, the movie goes the expected route of “audio horror”, where we get jump scare sounds, but many times, I couldn’t see what I was supposed to be afraid of. Some scenes felt like the “jump scare” sounds were one or two seconds too soon before the image on the screen got enough light for us to see either a shark or some other creature going after our heroes.

The rest of the film is also weird, as we spend quite a lot of time on company takeover…? Yeah, in a movie that should have been about: “Hey, we have multiple Megs!” we have this generic plot of “profits before people” and backstabbing we have seen before done better. It almost feels like the producers behind the first movie took all the wrong lessons, why the first movie was received fairly well (again, for the type of movie it is) and most importantly, it made over half a billion dollars at the box office! But this sequel seemed like they wanted to “ground it” in reality, and no, this is not why we (or at least I) liked the first one. We need silly movies having some resemblance of a story to get us to Jason fighting multiple Megs, the end. But we can’t have most of the film (called Meg 2) not being that.

The other thing that also didn’t work as well is the humour. Most (if not all) jokes felt forced; the only one who stood out comedically was Page Kennedy. I really hope this man got paid handsomely, as he was the reason some of the jokes worked, and he (alongside Jason) seemed to be the only other individual who understood what movie they were making. Everybody else felt out of place. I don’t think everyone else was awful, they all felt off, weird and out of place; the same as this entire movie felt off. What was supposed to be a “fun time with monster sharks, take two” became a “not-so-fun time with a bunch of bad-lit CGI”. But at least the last 20 minutes were ok…?

Overall, Meg 2: The Trench was a disappointment. I am often quick to defend these silly movies because I don’t mind when films are just that, dumb, silly and fun adventures. That is as long as you give me something to defend. In this film, the suspense felt artificial, the humour was almost non-existent, the CGI was okay at best, and what was supposed to be one of those “big, dumb fun” films turned into just dumb. I guess you could say it was big, but it definitely wasn’t fun. And you need “fun” when you decide to make a sequel about a pre-historic shark that survived at the bottom of the ocean for millions of years.

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

Until next time,

Luke

The new trilogy nobody asked for reaches its peak with Dominion. And how better to conclude a trilogy nobody asked for than with the worst Jurassic movie ever made? I had little to no faith in this, even watching the trailers, so when the first reviews came out, and literally every single person I follow (and some liked either Jurassic World (2015) or Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom (2018)) disliked this movie, I knew this must be something exceptional. But not in a good way, more in the “how do you fuck up so royally?” way. Let’s try to break it down.

I have many strong opinions, but most of them I am open to discussing and changing my mind. One of the exemptions that confirm the rule is this new trilogy started on an awful foot the moment it tried to convince us that you could train velociraptors, you could domesticate them even! I know we have done it to many other modern creatures, and honestly understand why they thought it was a great idea, but no. Let’s put the fact that they are dinosaurs from a long, long, long time ago aside. We would still have no way of knowing/learning so much about them to do anything remotely close to that, considering they were brought back to life not long ago, according to these movies. But ok, let’s say we have somehow managed. The other issue with this, and this was more important to me, is the creators are taking these smart, killing machines from the original “trilogy” (even though the Jurassic Park films aren’t trilogy per se) and effectively making them into “confused” wolves that won’t hurt you as long as you lift your hand up.

Another thing I also don’t understand is how Chris Pratt, somebody I loved in Parks and Recreation (2009 – 2015) and I still like in the Guardians of the Galaxy films, can be so bland throughout this trilogy he is supposed to be leading. I remember thinking back in 2015 that he was on track to become this generation’s Harrison Ford, leading two popular franchises and skyrocketing to the ultimate stardom, yet somehow, I don’t think it happened. And I also don’t believe this is me showing my bias against this trilogy; he just kind of exists in those films. Especially in this one, we had so many characters that it was hard to say there was any lead. That on its own isn’t a strange thing per se, ensemble movies exist and have existed for a while, but it seemed like his character got from the evident lead in the first film to “just a part of this group” in the last one. It almost felt like even the studio and/or people behind this film didn’t trust him enough. Weird.

One of the biggest selling points was that all your favourites from the previous movies would come back in this movie. And they sure have Laura Dern, Sam Neill, and Jeff Goldblum returned, and they are… serviceable. I thought their characters felt out of place, especially Sam Neill’s character. I had no idea why he had to be there. Don’t get me wrong, I was happy to see a familiar face, but from the story perspective, the movie justified both Laura and Jeff being there, but he came with Laura because… she needed a witness? Really? And when you have a film full of flimsy excuses just to get our “old favourites” and the “new generation” finally together, you know they stopped caring about logic and want you “just to switch your brain off and have fun”. Ok, let’s try it then.

Arguably the principal selling point of Jurassic World: Dominion; was the dinosaurs are finally living amongst us. No matter whether it makes any sense (no, it does not, and I could write a couple of paragraphs about the ending of the previous movie and how it made zero sense but let’s not), they are. So what fun is in the store for us? No island, fences, and dinos of all shapes and sizes roam freely, so we should undoubtedly get lots of tense moments. Wait, what? We get one decent action sequence on Malta, followed up by going back to some island where the movie takes place?!?!?!??!?!!?!? So the whole “how will we live together, species separated by evolution” plotline and idea were just scrapped? And I know the movie tries to have some nice sentiment about it in the last five minutes, but that was laughable. If all “bad, bloodthirsty dinosaurs” we see are on that island and not outside of it because we must have the locus plotline about evil big corporations controlling the world’s food supply, your theme no longer makes sense. And you can show us all the footage about “animals living together alongside dinosaurs”, but I am not buying it as that’s not how anything works.

The sad part is I understand and believe something similar might happen; in the future. Some giant organisations might think it would be neat to control the food supply, and I believe there is a decent thriller to be made with that idea at its core. But not in the third movie about dinosaurs where you keep promising people “dinosaurs are now roaming free”, and then we get three, four scenes max with the last five minutes saying: “Trust us, every single animal is living in total harmony with these prehistoric creatures that are crushing their territories, all good vibes and chills here, peace.” I believe that is where Jurassic World: Dominion fell short it tried to be so clever, but it lost the plot. If you delivered what you promised and explored the theme of dinos living freely amongst us, you might have had something there, like a fun movie. But in its current state, the film felt like a mess that doesn’t know what it wants to be with people who are just “kinda” there. Almost nobody stands out.

The only good thing about this film was the Maltese action sequence mentioned prior, and only because I was there in Malta a couple of years ago, therefore I recognise some of the streets. The only two people I thought did a good job were Jeff because he was just himself and DeWanda Wise, whom I haven’t seen anything else, but now have to because she seemed like she had fun and some funny lines. She seemed like the only person who had fun in this film; everybody else felt wasted; either wasted potential or their performance was “ok”.

I think that is how we could summarize this whole Jurassic World trilogy – wasted potential. There were nuggets of good ideas here and there and some great visuals, sure. But tonally, story-wise, or even character-wise, everything always felt off from the first movie, and it only cumulated in this last piece of the dino puzzle. It’s starting to manifest clearly, that nobody can replicate what Steven Spielberg did with the first two Jurassic Park movies. In the same way, nobody could reproduce what James Cameron was able to do with Terminator (and boy, did various people try several different times). And yeah, the second Jurassic Park film isn’t as great as the first one, but in my eyes, it is head, shoulders and one constant arm lift above any of the Jurassic World films.

Overall, Jurassic World: Dominion managed to surprise me. I went in expecting nothing and got even less than I imagined. The film has some brief moments of decent action and two fun characters, but it ultimately fails to deliver on its titular theme and fails to deliver on promises made not only to itself but, most importantly, to the audience. I don’t think I will ever rewatch any of these films, I would much rather rewatch even Jurassic Park III (2001), which is an objectively bad film, but at least it’s “funny bad” and still has some memorable moments. Dominion is just a bad movie.

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

Until next time,

Luke

Mamma mia! Where to even start with this one… I tend to defend Ridley Scott with my every breath. The man reached the “legend” status a long, long time ago, so I give him all the benefit of the doubt regarding what he wants to shoot next. And when I heard he is behind House of Gucci starring Lady Gaga, Adam Driver, Al Pacino and Jared Leto, I was half excited and half sceptical. I will show my cards early; I love me some Driver and Pacino, I like Lady Gaga (even though I don’t think she is nearly as talented of an actress as others believe), and I still wonder how people take Jared seriously. But I had hoped that Sir Ridley would give us something unforgettable, unique and all-around fascinating. Well, House of Gucci is 100% unforgettable and unique alright, except for all the wrong reasons…

House of Gucci got me in the first half when the story was developing between Gaga and Adam’s characters, when we saw some of Gucci’s history and how even somebody named Gucci was sick and tired of all the pretentiousness around it. But even throughout the first half (and let’s face it, more like the first hour rather than half, because this film is way too long), there was a problem with the tone. The film felt uneven and unbalanced, almost as if you were to play two movies at the same time. At times, it felt like your stereotypical biographical drama and other times, some elements came off like the most bizarre SNL sketch during “Italian week”. And that was before Jared’s character showed up for the first time, as that was the moment; this film started to lose me.

See, there are actors and “actors”. There are great actors that could overcome a truly awful choice of everyone having an Italian accent and somehow give a decent performance. And then, you have “actors” who like to talk about how they studied all these books, methods and everything there was ever written about acting, and it shows on the screen. But not in a good way, because you can almost see the “wheels turning” as they do it. In House of Gucci, we see both groups in an almost equal split. I always said somebody like Driver or Al Pacino belongs in the first group. And somebody like Jared or even Lady Gaga in the second group. I would say I like Lady Gaga much more than Jared, that’s for sure, but even with her, there is always something “behind her eyes” when she is on the screen where she seems so ‘technical’, almost ‘robot-like’ I struggled with her in this film. But at least with her performance, you could kind of see what she was after… But we need to talk about Jared.

Holy shit, choices were made here. And nobody tried (at least it doesn’t seem like) to stop him. It seemed like Jared created this character in his mind. But instead of “possibly slightly eccentric Italian man”, he went with full on: “What if Mario and Luigi fucked, had a son who ate nothing but a pizza day and night, dripped Olive oil and felt like a walking stereotype of what your stereotypical American thinks is a stereotypical Italian?” Look, nobody truly “shined” in this film, mainly due to the accent decision (we will get there shortly) but when Jared arrived, this film took a dive. I think the only thing he could have done even worse would be, had his character been a full-on, CGI character of walking pizza. Yes, everyone would treat him the same, but instead of Jared in the heavy make-up, his character would play a pizza slice. That would have been the only worse decision he could have made, but given this film’s tone, even that wouldn’t feel that out of place.

I already hinted at the two biggest problems with House of Gucci – the length and the accents. I believe the runtime is self-explanatory, but the accents… Why, oh why. Why did nobody on the first day, after the very first take, raise their hand and say: “Look, I know we are supposed to be Italians, but maybe we just bin the accents altogether and focus on the acting?” For all I know, maybe somebody had done that and was executed immediately for not thinking “Italian enough”. Throughout the film, even the most competent actors felt out of place because they seemed too focused on their accents rather than on acting. I can honestly say I have never seen a film where it seemed like every actor in every scene was trying so hard to stay in their ridiculous-sounding accent. I genuinely believe that had the film been the same; same actors and director, they would simply drop the accents, and the film would instantly improve.

And that is the main issue with House of Gucci; you can tell there is some “meat” on these bones. There is an interesting story about what seems to be “an interesting” family, to put it mildly. But don’t do it as an almost three-hour film. This script should have never been too long of a movie; this should have been a five or six-episode miniseries. Yes, I can hear you saying how confused I am – earlier, I complained about this being too long, and now I am arguing it should have been longer. Well, yes and no.

Because traditionally, miniseries don’t have to be watched all at once. Sure, we all have gotten used to “binging” shows, but that does not mean we must do it. And something as intriguing and complex (what should have been much more complex than a bunch of Italian accents and one walking Mario stereotype) as this story should have been given “proper” treatment. The film feels long because it tries to compact a lot at once. But, had this script been given time where we could understand the complex relationships between Gaga’s and Driver’s characters more while focusing more on, you know, the Gucci stuff and less on “Imma Italian-a!” stereotypes, we could have had something here.

The film lost me in the second half, and I could not wait for it to be over; I was so done with the story I could not care less about what happened. I can (kind of) see what Ridley was trying to do, balancing the “Commedia dell’arte” style with drama, and I applaud him for trying. But I can’t in good conscience applaud the result.

Overall, House of Gucci is one of those films that proves that Ridley Scott is now, more than ever, hit or miss director. And even though you could argue this movie was a delightful disaster (and I have seen people who claim they genuinely enjoyed themselves), for me, it was just a disaster with a promising start and more than capable people in front of and behind the camera. Most importantly, this film didn’t understand the assignment because if it had, it would have been an epic miniseries with no accents (or radical idea incoming, Italian actors?!) and no Jared. Please, just no more Italian Jared.

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

Until next time,

Luke

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

You don’t put on a movie titled Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and expect anything remotely resembling a masterpiece; let’s get that straight. At least that’s what I did one evening, when I wanted some “mindless” fun, and I remembered seeing trailers for this film and thinking it looked ridiculous enough to be entertaining. So I stumbled upon this film and gave it a chance, hoping for something “dumb but fun”. Little did I know the trailers were, by far, the best part.

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter falls into the same “vein” of literature as other gems of this weird sub-genre, where all you have to do is take a property or a person people know and add “and X”. Where X needs to be something outrageous, like Pride and Prejudice and Zombies (2016), to grab your attention, and yes, by the way, that’s a real movie based on an actual book. That film, by the way, is only a tad better than this film. There might be more books like these two, but I don’t know any, and these two are the most known examples of this weird sub-genre. And as with Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter suffers from one thing – it’s taking itself way too seriously, despite its name!

There is a scene in this film that broke me mentally. I will try to describe it to the best of my abilities. Our main hero (Benjamin Walker) is fighting the main baddie (Rufus Sewell) while the stampede of the worst, most awful, blurry CGI of horses is running around them. So what do our protagonists do? They jump on those horses and continue the fight. Ok, cool. And then, they both fall, and through some major bullshit, Rufus lifts a horse (he’s a vampire, so I guess extra strength?) and throws it at Babe Lincoln (because he’s dreamy as fuck), who not only survives the impact but manages to MOUNT THAT HORSE AND RIDE IT?! Like almost in an instant, no injuries, nothing…? Did I mention this movie is not great?

But funnily enough, at least this scene was one of the rare ones where they tried to embrace this nonsense and have fun with it. Unfortunately, in this 105-minute film, someone decided they would play most of it dead straight. And this is what I will never understand – you have a bonkers idea that Abraham Lincoln was, in fact, a vampire hunter before he became the president. Why not fully embrace it and go balls-to-the-walls crazy with it? Rather than trying to do what this film tried and play it as a drama about him, his family, friends…?

What hurts more than anything is the fact the cast is decent enough. On top of our two main protagonists, we have Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Anthony Mackie and Dominic Cooper, all capable actors who deserve to be in something much better than this. Or for their talent to be at least fully utilised by this film. But that didn’t happen.

Also, for a movie that has “Vampire Hunter” part of its title, it could really use a bit more vampire hunting. As mostly, Abraham isn’t hunting any vampires, more like getting surprised by them and then needing to fight them. But I guess “Abraham Lincoln is Surprised by Vampires” doesn’t have the necessary ring. And even the fight scenes are mostly cut to death.

I know this sounds like I expected too much from a movie called Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, but honestly, I didn’t. I just wanted a film where I could switch off my brain and have fun watching one of the presidents killing vampires. What I wasn’t prepared for was the fact of how dead-serious this film would take itself. I am not suggesting they should’ve made a parody or anything like that. But some occasional wink or nod to the audience, telling them: “Just relax, nothing in this film matters, and we know.” That would have been appreciated, knowing we (the filmmakers and us, the audience) are all on the same page. But the movie, for the most part, plays it pretty seriously. Which makes the fights and jokes it throws at us look weird in comparison. Not to mention; that God-awful CGI “throwing the horse” fight scene.

Overall, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter could have been a balls-to-the-walls fun movie. It could have been something like Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters (2013) that understood the assignment and played it in such a way you felt safe to have fun. (Speaking of that, I have to rewatch it.) But it wasn’t. The movie never finds that balance between serious and funny, and that might be the biggest mistake a film titled Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter could make.

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

Until next time,

Luke

I need to show my hand pretty early on here – I didn’t enjoy The Power of the Dog. I am writing this review right after the Oscar nominations for 2022, where it collected impressive 12 nominations. And I watched it only a couple of days ago, so it’s freshly in my mind. And I will try to explain as eloquently as possible my reasoning behind this hugely unpopular opinion, so bear with me.

The Power of the Dog felt to me like a character-driven film you need to feel. If you were to tell me that Terrence Malick directed some scenes here, I wouldn’t be shocked because, at times, this film feels really “Malickien”. And I don’t mind character-driven films where you need to be in a certain mood to watch them, quite the opposite; I tend to love them. That’s why I am still surprised by how much I didn’t enjoy my experience with this film.

Let me start with some positives first. This film is a performance piece first, and it shows. Every single person who got nominated hugely deserved it. Everyone from Kodi Smit-McPhee, Jesse Plemons, Benedict Cumberbatch to Kirsten Dunst all played their parts well. You understand where every single one of them is coming from, what they are going through and see that deep down, they all are, to an extent, broken people. So even though I didn’t enjoy this film as much as others have, I wouldn’t be miserable to see Benedict or Kirsten getting the Oscar.

What I also appreciated was the camera work. And here is where my first major issue with film appears. I thought it was stunning camera work for a movie that shouldn’t have it. What I am trying to say is this. The movie tries to make us believe everything here (including our often unwashed characters) is dirty, muddy, rough. Yet, the stunning shots don’t correspond to what we are seeing. I know this might sound like a weird gripe with this film, but it often pulled me out of the movie.

Another thing that pulled me out – the character never seemed that dirty. I know, I know, yet another weird detail, but I think it matters, especially in a movie like this, when you can see your main characters and they strike you as somebody who’s had a rough couple of days. But most of these people should have had most of their life rough. And they still look almost pristine, like nothing a quick bath/shower wouldn’t fix.

My biggest problem with this film and it will make me sound bad… Look, I am no expert. I have no formal movie education; I am just a film fan who has seen way too many movies, so take the next part, I am about to write with a pinch of salt, but I didn’t like the direction. And that was shocking to me, given I don’t mind Jane Campion, I have only seen one other movie of hers (The Piano, 1993) and that one I liked. But this must come down to a personal preference, as I am not saying she did a terrible job. Not by any means. I just thought for this particular narrative and characters, a vast majority of the wide/medium shots didn’t work. The movie felt too pretty, too “nature-porny” for me to get into these characters. It’s weird to write “I didn’t like the direction this movie took” only a few hours after Jane Campion got nominated for directing this film. It shows you what do I know, right?

I think I get what she was trying to do here. I believe she was trying to find some beauty in the “ugliness” of things, and I think that’s admirable. And for most people that seemed to click with them (even though on IMDb as it stands, it’s “only” 6.9/10), so obviously, I am in the minority here. But films are mainly visual mediums through which you get information about everything. And I haven’t felt like this in ages, where I knew what the movie was trying to do/say, I was enjoying all the performances, and yet, I was bored because the direction simply didn’t click with me. I can’t even remember the last time this happened.

The main thing I’ve gotten from listening and reading about this movie was most people liked the ending as they didn’t see it coming. And again, I am in the minority here, as that couldn’t have been clearer what needs to happen. I am talking about the relationship between Benedict’s and Kodi’s characters and the “final” result of that relationship. I won’t spoil anything, but for me, this shows the brilliance of this screenplay. The fact I knew what would happen doesn’t prove that somehow I am a genius (obviously I am not, I just slandered an Oscar-nominated director, shame on me!); it shows the actors did superb work making the characters their own. Where we, the audience, could see what is about to happen and why it’s inevitable.

Overall, The Power of the Dog is a strange one for me. Given everything I’ve heard about it before watching it, I went in expecting to at least like it, if not love it. But what happened was the more the movie played, the more I was getting “unplugged” from being in the film. And this is, unfortunately, a film where you need to be sucked in for its entire length to enjoy it. I will definitely re-watch it sooner rather than later to see whether it might click with me better because I need to repeat it – this is on me. I would still recommend for most people to watch it, if for nothing else, the performances by our main protagonists. See, this is why movies can never get old or boring to me – I thought I had “a type” of films I liked and here comes The Power of the Dog, something slow-burning, full of great performances but for reasons I can only sum up as “direction”, it didn’t click with me. But, there is always the next time. It will be interesting to re-visit this movie, whether anything will change.

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

Until next time,

Luke