Presence (2024)

While he has tried his hand at a wide variety of movies throughout his career, there was something that made me roll my eyes and say “of course he would do that” when I heard that Steven Soderbergh was directing a haunted house movie that was apparently presented from the POV of the spirit.

A family move in to a house. Some things start to move around, and some sensations are felt by the new occupants. Other things start to happen, complications in their lives and moments that create more danger for people, which makes it only a matter of time until we find out whether the presence is a friend or foe.

There is a screenplay here, and it’s one written by David Koepp, but you could be forgiven that this was an improv exercise used by Soderbergh to firm up an idea that would later be more fully developed. The biggest problem here is that it feels incomplete, it’s a schematic drawing that needs detail and colour added. None of the characters are interesting enough, the plotting is too little stretched too far, and it all leads to a finale that feels like some kind of parody of the genre. Maybe it is, and maybe that is what drew Soderbergh to the project, but it feels like a bit of a slap in the face to those not looking for the filmic equivalent of a shaggy dog story with a weak punchline.

Callina Liang and Eddy Maday are the teens at the heart of the story, Lucy Liu and Chris Sullivan are the parents, and there are roles for West Mulholland, Julia Fox, and Natalie Woolams-Torres, but they’re all asked to do little more than wander around the scenery until the gimmick is focused on them. There is no way to properly judge the performances that seem designed to simply fill the time in between specific camera moves.

No scares, no tension, not even any drama to feel invested in, Presence is a big bundle of nothing. It’s the kind of thing I would expect to come from a first-time director with misplaced confidence in his own skillset. The fact that it is helmed by Soderbergh is astonishing. He has made other movies that I haven’t liked, but I have always been able to appreciate his intentions. Not this time though. This time around it feels as if he has tried his hand at something he views as being a bit beneath him.

3/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

 

Mubi Monday: Caligula: The Ultimate Cut (2023)

Originally released in 1979, Caligula is not a film I would have seen back then. I know I seem old to many now, but I would have been three years old for most of 1979. It is a film I soon became aware of though, somehow. Pretty much damned by both the critics and those who acted in it, considering how displeased they were to see their performances surrounded by what was essentially a lavish and expensive bit if porn, I can only assume that it became something that people felt they had to see for themselves, in the comfort of their own home. And that is why they rented the VHS. Which is how I ended up seeing at least some of it at what was still a very young age. I don’t remember much, except a man being made to drink lots of wine before being killed and lots of bare breasts, but I remembered enough to keep interested in it over the intervening decades. I own a lovely multi-disc set, and now I have paid for a digital copy of “The Ultimate Cut”. But maybe it is telling that this is the first time I have watched any incarnation of the film since those VHS days.

Malcom McDowell plays Caligula, a Roman emperor who spends time coveting his sister (Ann Savoy) and his horse in equal measure. He is a dangerous manchild, made ruler by underhand means, and anyone he seems to have wronged him is often dealt with publicly and sadistically. This film shows his rise and fall, but it also shows a Rome far too easily swayed by the temperament of whoever is in the position of greatest power.

Written by Gore Vidal and directed by Tinto Brass, though who knows how much credit they want to take for it, even in this attempted restoration and repair job, Caligula is a messy and sprawling work, sometimes taking time with exploring Rome, and the ways in which the power moves through it, and sometimes determined just to wallow in the decadence and depravity of Caligula’s rule.

McDowell isn’t bad in the central role, although his performance feels wildly uneven (perhaps due to the chaos on the set), and Savoy works well as the sister happy in their incestuous coupling, but the real treats come from elsewhere. Despite his small amount of screentime, Peter O’Toole is a lot of fun, and a portent of everything to come. John Gielgud is wasted, but elevated one or two moments with his presence. And then there’s Helen Mirren, very believable as the woman who catches the eye of Caligula, and the one chosen to give him an heir to the throne. Everyone else is onscreen to bow, laugh, cry, and/or be mutilated and murdered, and their performances are often defined by their fates more than their actual acting talent.

It’s a shame that I cannot remember the original cut of this, because it would seem to be essential to compare and contrast this to it, but I can tell you that this doesn’t feel like the entirely new film it is being sold as. It may have more of a focus on the drama and acting, but that doesn’t make it much more interesting. In fact, dare I say, there’s a chance that a lavish and expensive porno is just as appropriate a way to present Caligula as this is. At least that feels like a bolder artistic choice, even if others would argue that artistry was the least of the concerns of those who delivered it to audiences back in 1979.

Occasional treats notwithstanding, this is a dull and rambling slog. But I won’t deny that I still want to revisit other edits to see how much more entertaining it might be with a greater sense of chaos and transgressiveness out front and centre.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Netflix And Chill: Champions (2023)

We’ve all seen this kind of thing many times before. This is a film that has someone being forced to coach a team he initially has no interest in. The team don’t seem destined for greatness, but there’s a chance that the players may actually provide some valuable life lessons to their new coach. It’s all very predictable. It’s also very enjoyable and entertaining when done well, and Champions is done well.

Woody Harrelson plays Marcus, a man who ruins his career with the double-whammy of a big argument with his boss (Ernie Hudson) and then being caught for a DUI. Forced to do hours of community service, Marcus ends up coaching a basketball team made up of youngsters who are, well, quite different from your usual basketball players. Most of them have disabilities to deal with, but they can also work together to show Marcus that his negativity and stubborn attitude is just as big a problem for the team as any on-court aptitude. 

The first solo directorial outing for Bobby Farrelly (MUCH better than his second go, the odd Dear Santa), this is a remake of a Spanish film, “Campeones”, adapted into this screenplay form by Mark Rizzo. Although I am unfamiliar with the original, it’s easy to see what would draw Farrelly to anything that was close enough to this material. He has worked on a fantastic sports comedy before (and that also featured Harrelson as some kind of coach) and the Farrelly brothers have spent most of their careers trying to make room for disabled individuals, both behind and in front of the cameras. Champions has a lot of heart, and a good message being delivered, but it also doesn’t forget to be funny, and a large part of the humour comes from the supporting cast being given chances to shine around people who either underestimate or just want to ignore them.

Harrelson is great in the lead role, doing the kind of thing that he can do in his sleep. He is there to teach others, but only until he realised that he is the one being taught. Kaitlin Olson is equally good, playing the sister of a team member, as well as being someone who once hooked up with our main character for a one night stand. Hudson is underused, but good enough, as are both Matt Cook and Cheech Marin. It’s hard to resent them being sidelined though, because that just means more time to enjoy the company of James Day Keith, Kevin Iannucci, Madison Tevlin, Alex Hintz, and all of the other team players. They may not be familiar stars, but Farrelly allows them all to improve every scene and show how well they work with the material.

You get standard soundtrack cues, very obvious plotting, and moments to warm the coldest heart, but you get it all in a package that is so expertly constructed that nothing seems like a negative. This is fantastic stuff, likely to please anyone after some good cheer and constant laughs, and I highly recommend it to everyone seeking a break from watching the hands of the doomsday clock creep ever closer to midnight.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Shudder Saturday: Daughter (2023)

It may not always seem obvious, but I am always rooting for a film to do well. Always. There may be someone I really dislike starring in it, there may be a budget that could barely cover one day of catering on the last Christopher Nolan movie, and it may be about a subject I have no interest in (or even, very occasionally, find distasteful or repugnant). I'll still root for the film to do well though. It takes a lot of people to get a film made, and those people are often battling against overwhelming odds. 

I decided to watch Daughter because it had Casper Van Dien in a starring role. That made it easier to root for. I have been a fan of Casper Van Dien for some time. He has never been one of the best actors in the world, but he has been putting the work in for a good few decades now. Writer-director Corey Deshon, on the other hand, is quite new to feature films. And it shows.

What you get here is the story of Father (Van Dien) and Mother (Elyse Dinh) kidnapping a young woman (Daughter, played by Vivien Ngô) to be a worthwhile sibling for their beloved Son (Ian Alexander). That's it. Daughter doesn't want to be stuck in this new family, however, and needs to figure out ways to create some division that may afford her an opportunity to escape.

Deshon does well to keep things simple here, focusing on the one claustrophobic location, the mind games being played between the characters, and a selection of relatively still and lengthy takes. If he did better with the writing then this could have been a winner, but there's a disappointing lack of quality here, both in the dialogue and in what is unsaid. There's nothing that actually holds your interest, making the 95-minute runtime feel like quite a slog.

Van Dien tries his best in the pivotal role (the film could have arguably been called Father with one or two extra tweaks made to put him at the centre of a few more scenes), but he is unable to spin gold from the thin straw that he's given. The same can be said for Dinh, Ngô, and Alexander, although the two women have some moments that allow them to remain more intriguing and watchable than either of their male counterparts.

I want to say that I can at least praise Deshon for trying to give us something a bit more original, but even that isn't true. Yes, this is different from many other thriller or horror movies in the past couple of years, but there are many other movies that cover similar ground (whether it's the disturbing Bad Boy Bubby, The Bunker, or even, to some degree, The Baby, to name just a few that came to mind as I considered better options while this played out). You should check those out ahead of this, and then feel free to ask me for some more recommendations along the same lines.

3/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

The Brutalist (2024)

I can easily pretend that I am able to keep an open mind when going into every film I watch, but it's just as easy for me to admit that I didn't expect to enjoy The Brutalist. A serious movie, a seriously loooooong movie (it's 214 minutes, and includes an intermission), and a serious amount of Adrien Brody being all serious just doesn't thrill me. The Brutalist is REALLY good though.

Brody stars as László Tóth, a man who has to try and start his life over again after fleeing post-war Europe in the late 1940s. He wants to get everything back on track as quickly as possible, keen to reunite with his wife, Erzsébet (Felicity Jones), and the young niece she is raising (Zsófia, played by Raffey Cassidy). Things don't go well, initially, but the passage of time allows at least one man (the wealthy Harrison Lee Van Buren, played by Guy Pearce) to see László for the talented individual he is. Will that talent be enough to keep him safe and welcome though, or is László destined to be perceived through a filter of preconceptions and prejudices?

Working on a screenplay once again with Mona Fastvold, director Brady Corbet here helms his most impressive feature yet (even better than The Childhood Of A Leader). It's still going to be too slow and sedate for some people, but there's something important in every scene here, whether it's obvious or not, and Fastvold and Corbet justify the hefty runtime of the film with a density of thought-provoking material, as well as the ever-widening scope that viewers are presented with.

Nobody really puts a foot wrong when it comes to the acting side of things (although Jones is just a little bit weaker than the others, due to her performance feeling more like a full-on performance at times). Brody fully deserves the second leading actor Academy Award that this gave him, Pearce is as good as he's been in anything from the past decade, and Cassidy, Isaach De Bankolé, Alessandro Nivola, Joe Alwyn, Jonathan Hyde, and Stacy Martin all do well in smaller roles that could have seen them easily overshadowed.

There's also some beautiful cinematography by Lol Crawley and a superb score from Daniel Blumberg, as well as many other positives I could mention from the technical side of things.

It's the ideas that will stick with you for a long time though. We've seen this kind of thing before, but not necessarily being viewed from these new angles. The Brutalist looks at the upheaval and losses caused by war, and it serves as a reminder that a genocide reverberates far beyond the list of those murdered by their oppressors. People change who they are, deliberately or not, and artists and tradespeople end up seeing a lot, if not all, of their work consigned to some historical dustbin. We lose people in a war, physical bodies broken and destroyed, but we also lose many minds and souls. It's hard to come up with some kind of ultimate total cost, but it's inevitably always a lot more than it might appear to be on paper. 

9/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Fight Or Flight (2025)

There have been a pleasing number of films lately that feel like a showcase for member of the stunt team community, and Fight Or Flight is another one. It's all about a mercenary (Lucas Reyes, played by Josh Hartnett) who is assigned to track down a terrorist target on a plane. Nobody knows what the target looks like, although people are working on it, but the plane is full of other people also looking to catch them. There's a big bounty on their head. There's also a big bounty put on the head of Lucas. And everyone knows what he looks like.

Director James Madigan and writers Brooks McLaren and D. J. Cotrona may be relative newcomers to their roles, but you wouldn't know that from the final result onscreen. Fight Or Flight is a hugely entertaining way to spend 101 minutes, making the most of a simple premise to deliver fights and bloodshed that will amuse, entertain, and make you wince in equal measure. This is not for the faint-hearted, particularly in a third act that brilliantly escalates both the comedy and the kills.

While the film feels as if it has been string together between a number of inventive fight sequences (which, for all I know, is how it was constructed), it's worth noting that McLaren and Cotrona still do plenty to make you root for our desperate "hero". He has some past error or transgression that has to be fixed, and that also gives us an idea of his moral compass, and the style of the comedy mixes some great dialogue with physical gags in a way that works much better than us just being alongside someone ready with a quip after every kill. The script and direction also have enough style and energy to distract you from the factors used to work within what I imagine was a relatively modest budget.

It helps enormously that Hartnett brings his not-insubstantial charisma to the main role. He's having a lot of fun once again (as he did in the otherwise-disappointing Trap), and he feels very capable when it comes to the fight moves. Katee Sackhoff is the one delivering the mission parameters and instructions via telephone, and she's enjoyably ruthless, while other notable people on the plane are played by Charithra Chandran, Hughie O'Donnell, JuJu Chan Szeto, and Sanjeev Kohli. Julian Kostov is also very good, stuck alongside Sackhoff for most of the runtime, trying to manipulate the whole situation towards the most favourable outcome, which doesn't necessarily mean any good for the survival of our lead, and the majority of other performers look very ready to deal or receive some fatal battery.

There are times when you may want to catch up on all of the movies nominated for the Oscars, there are times when you just want something simple that aims to entertain. I've done the former already this year (well . . . almost). Then I was ready to watch Josh Hartnett punch a lot of people in the face. If only they'd managed some kind of crossover promotional campaign during the long and self-serving speech that Adrien Brody gave when he won the Best Actor award this year then it could have been a glorious blend of both worlds.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Prime Time: Magic Mike's Last Dance (2023)

I like Magic Mike. I also quite like Magic Mike XXL, although it's a lesser film. Magic Mike's Last Dance is an example of seriously diminishing returns. While I can understand some people returning to the series (Channing Tatum, writer Reid Carolin), it's strange that director Steven Soderbergh agreed to helm what is essentially a feature-length promo for the live stage show of the brand.

A lazy voiceover introduces us to where Mike (Tatum) is right now. He has lost his business, he's working as a bartender at various functions, and he's generally just trying to get by, in the same way as so many other people who took a financial hit during the global pandemic. Mike meets Maxandra Mendoza (Salma Hayek Pinault) while bartending at an event she is hosting, eventually gives her a sexy dance after saying that he no longer sexy dances, and ends up being employed by her to head to London and put on a show that will hopefully enable other women to feel what she felt while being gyrated upon and straddled by a hunky man.

Equal parts ridiculous and tedious, Magic Mike's Last Dance is also extremely lazy. I wouldn't mind it being so predictable if I cared about the main characters, but I didn't. Mike is defined by the fact that he keeps saying he no longer sexy dances . . . and then does a sexy dance (seriously, this is used to essentially bookend the main narrative arc of the film). Maxandra AKA Max is defined by wanting to get revenge on the husband she is due to divorce, as well as the glow she is meant to have gained from one night with Mike. Jemelia George has to roll her eyes as the teen daughter, Zadie, until the third act requires her to be completely on board with everything, and supportive in a way that is uncharacteristic, but that's what is in the screenplay so that's how it just is. Ayub Khan Din is fun, playing a butler/chauffeur/assistant named Victor, perhaps because he's only required to make minor alterations to his amusing grumpiness, and Juliette Motamed works well as an actress who jumps at the chance to move from some staid and old-fashioned fare to something much sexier, but the rest is a big shrug of a film, although I am sure many viewers will be pleased enough by watching some hunky men learn some choreographed routines.

Maybe I'm way off here, but it didn't even seem as if the leads had any chemistry together. Okay, their first main encounter starts well, but it all fizzles out as soon as it's supposed to be heating up. Tatum still has skill, no doubt about it, but his character is taken on a journey that no longer feels worth being invested in. It's a silly fairytale, which would be all well and good if it wasn't bolted on to that lengthy reminder that there's a stage show wanting to keep those ticket sales high.

I wanted something distracting and slick. What I got was horrible writing from Carolin (that intermittent voiceover is shocking), flat direction from Soderbergh, a seriously mixed bag of acting performances, and a potential love story between two people who don't feel as if they have any strong connection to one another. So many scenes end up being completely inconsequential, including a preposterous sequence showing the performers spying on a woman who deals with regulation paperwork that could seriously affect their prospects, and the 112-minute runtime seems to stretch out forever. But maybe it's fitting that a Magic Mike movie feels lengthier than it actually is.

3/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Companion (2025)

It can be very frustrating when a film comes along that a lot of people start praising, but also advising everyone to see before finding out anything about it. They tell you that there are some good twists and turns, and one or two are even given away in a trailer that should be avoided at all costs. So you end up trusting people you generally tend to share movie opinions with. That worked out well for me with Companion, but it could have been a different story.

Sophie Thatcher is Iris, the titular companion, accompanying Josh (Jack Quaid) for some time away with his friends. There's Kat (Megan Suri), Eli and Patrick (played by Harvey Guillén), and a gregarious Russian named Sergey (Rupert Friend) who made his fortune by getting his hands dirty. This isn't just a cheery get together for some friends though. There's a plan to make themselves quite wealthy. Iris is a very important part of the plan, but she doesn't know that yet.

The first feature written and directed by Drew Hancock, the important thing to clarify about Companion is that, contrary to how some people might have you believe, it's not a horror movie. I know that genre labels are flexible things anyway, and various individuals can have various interpretations, but I wouldn't like people to come away from a viewing of this feeling disappointed just because it ends up being something it never intended to be anyway. This is a subversive neo-noir with a fine vein of dark humour running all the way through it and some sci-fi touches to help it feel a step away from the many other movies it comes closest to. Hancock makes use of some cool tech to move the plot along, and the construction of the screenplay allows him to deftly hop around a number of interesting and timely thematic strands.

All of the cast do great work, but it's worth highlighting Thatcher, Quaid, and Gage, all excelling in different ways. All of them get to present more range than expected, and they all add to the fun and escalating craziness in different ways. And, yes, to say any more than that might spoil things for anyone yet to see the film, which means I have to join the ranks of people being frustratingly vague about the whole thing. Suffice it to say that Thatcher moves from passive to very non-passive, Gage likewise, and Quaid knows how to twist his sweet nature and megawatt smile into the all-too-familiar "nice guy" who genuinely believes that he is a nice guy, even as his actions start to contradict that description.

A film more about the dialogue and ideas than any gorgeous visuals or major set-pieces, although there are a number of shots that are impressively composed, Companion is smart and witty throughout, and it makes great use of some potential near-future tech to put a new coat of paint on some refurbished classic furniture. As long as you're not too squeamish when it comes to the occasional moments of bloodshed, this is fun, fun, fun. And, yes, you should see it before you find out too much about it.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Mubi Monday: Pepi, Luci, Bom And Other Girls Like Mom (1980)

I think I first saw Pepi, Luci, Bom And Other Girls Like Mom about 20-25 years ago, back when I wasn't quite so familiar with the filmography of writer-director Pedro Almodóvar. I thought it was a funky and odd film, quite the mix of melodrama, sex, and something enjoyably spiky and punk. I know that you could say the same thing about many other Almodóvar movies, but it's good to know that he seemed fairly fully-formed when he began to direct features. This is only his second full-length film, but it's standard Almodóvar through and through.

Carmen Maura plays Pepi, a young woman who we see quite early on being assaulted by an abusive policeman (played by Félix Rotaeta). Pepi decides to get revenge, but her initial plan doesn't work out as expected. So she sets her sights on Luci (Eva Siva), the wife of the policeman. Luci is quite the masochist, which makes it easier to lead her further and further down a path of hedonism and sexual freedom, much to the initial amusement of Pepi and her friend, Bom (played by Alaska, AKA Olvido Gara Jova). Things soon start shifting in the balance of the group though, and maybe it's not a great idea to try and hit back at someone by degrading a masochist. 

There doesn't seem to be too much to say about this though, although I accept that my lack of words may be down to my lack of critical thinking while being entertainingly bemused and distracted by the antics of the main characters. I know one thing I need to comment on first though. Some viewers may dislike the way Almodóvar seems to use sexual abuse so flippantly, especially if you've not seen any other movies from him, but there IS something being said about boundaries, control, and what different people seek from sexual encounters. I don't think it all entirely balances out, but the conversations and many other pairings throughout the film at least go some way towards showing some of the damage and consequences stemming from abuse.

Maura almost floats through the entire movie, despite being the one person who is treated in such an awful way that she ends up setting off the entire chain of events. Her indefatigable spirit is another reason the film works better than it otherwise would. Alaska is a lot of fun, scowling at many around her, but always ready to be right by the side of those she actually cares about while life keeps throwing mud in their eyes. Siva doesn't need to stay too quiet and prudish for long, and she's very good at portraying someone who throws herself into a new and exciting life while still feeling that strong pull to her old self. Rotaeta isn't allowed to soften any edges of his character, making his acting job easier as he moves from one victim to the next, always eager to bully and use people just long enough for him to get his kicks. The character is loathsome, the performance is great.

I still think that Almodóvar has done all of his absolute best work in the 21st century (well, from the late '90s and beyond), despite some other titles scattered throughout his filmography that many people like a lot more than I do, but this is a hell of a sophomore feature that encapsulates a lot of what he does so well. It doesn't have the polish of his later films, of course, but that works to his advantage, with the energy and aesthetic easily distracting from any of the potential negatives.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Netflix And Chill: The Machine (2023)

A star vehicle for Bert "The Machine" Kreischer, this comedy may be appreciated more by people who were aware of Kreischer's existence before watching it. I am not one of those people. To be fair, an opening sequence sets up both the character and the details that will set the main events in motion, but your reaction to it will still mainly depend on your reaction to Kreischer, who plays a fictional version of himself onscreen.

Having some problems with his family, largely stemming from a night when he got his daughter into some big trouble and live-streamed the whole thing, Bert is at a point when he knows that he needs to calm things down a bit. He needs to leave his past fully behind him, which makes the timing all the worse when his past, in the shape of a dangerous Russian named Irina (Iva Babic), comes to bite him on the ass. Whisked away, with his ever-critical father (Albert, played by Mark Hamill) also caught up in the mess, Bert has to delve into some hazy memories to find a way to make things up to some people he wronged twenty years ago. Are they right to feel wronged though, or has Bert just been exaggerating and lying about some of his drunken exploits for the sake of entertaining the crowds who enjoy his comedy?

I'm not sure how much faint praise I can keep laying on this before it collapses under the weight of it all, but The Machine was perfectly fine. It was better than I expected it to be, but I also know that I'll have forgotten all about it by the time the year ends. It works best when putting Bert and his father in serious trouble (there's a pretty great gag about an accidental gunshot that takes out numerous enemies), but it fails to maintain any consistent momentum, and 112 minutes is far too long for something built on so slight a conceit.

Director Peter Atencio has some great stuff tucked away in his body of work, and he's done action comedy material before with a great bias towards the comedy, but it seems as if everyone here is slightly hampered by having to keep everything on-brand for Kreischer. There's also attempts to have moments that are slightly more serious and heart-felt, which is all well-intentioned stuff, but doesn't work as it unbalances the movie even further away from the lighter tone it should have throughout. Writers Kevin Biegel and Scotty Landes pack in a lot of unnecessary extra flashbacks (at least allowing Jimmy Tatro to have fun as a younger incarnation of Bert), but these mis-steps would have been easier to forgive if there had just been more big laughs.

Kreischer is fine in the main role, shoe-horning his persona into something made to accommodate him, and Hamill has a few really good moments, although they are too few and far between, but it's Babic and Robert Maaser, as well as Martyn Ford, who end up being more memorable. They're enjoyably ridiculous villains written in a way that feels amusingly old-fashioned and over the top, as if we're being told this story, yet again, from someone who is keen to exaggerate the details and turn it from something major into something epic. Tatro is someone I like seeing appear in anything (I've been a big fan since his turn in American Vandal) and his inclusion here, despite being part of the extraneous scenes that strip away the ambiguity of just what happened on that big drunken night, is another plus point. Stephanie Kurtzuba does a good eye-roll as the long-suffering partner, LeeAnn, and Jess Gabor follows suit as the older daughter, Sasha, who has had her life negatively impacted by the antics of her father.

Fitfully amusing, helped by the fact that Kreischer is self-aware to know what people like about his persona, and what can be twisted as he moves towards some kind of redemption, The Machine will never be a top viewing choice for anyone, but I am sure there are some fans out there who will enjoy it a hell of a lot more than I did. The rest of us can forget all about it and focus on the many better comedies available to take up 90-120 minutes of our time.

4/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Shudder Saturday: Little Bites (2024)

This isn't the first feature film from writer-director Spider One (aka Michael David Cummings, brother of Robert Bartleh Cummings, who you may know best as Rob Zombie), but it's the first feature from him that I've managed to see. That's no comment on the quality of his work. It's just my busy schedule. And, after this, I'm keen to check out his previous films, Allegoria and Bury The Bride (both also featuring his partner, Krsy Fox, in a lead role, as is the case here).

There's quite a simple plot here, but it's one loaded with plenty to dig into. Fox plays Mindy Vogel, a woman who appears to be in the middle of a bit of a crisis. Her young daughter, Alice (Elizabeth Phoenix Caro), has been living with Mindy's mother (Bonnie Aarons), but it's clear that Mindy wants to be capable enough in the role of mother to have her daughter back home with her. That's made difficult, however, by a monster that also resides with Mindy, and the monster uses Mindy as his main food supply. 

Small in scale but pleasantly full of ambition, Little Bites is another fine genre film that makes use of the tropes to examine and subvert something much more grounded. This time around it's what mothers will do to keep their children safe, but there's also some intriguing hints at how easy it is to stretch out holes in the safety nets of society, and how much more difficult things can be when you don't have the full, or any, support of close family members.

Fox is excellent in the main role, managing to be both weak and strong, held captive by a beast she chooses to placate in an ongoing attempt to keep her daughter as safe as possible. Jon Sklaroff cuts an impressive figure as that monster, helped by some excellent makeup work and an audio mix that allows his voice to cut through almost everything else onscreen. Despite not having too much screentime, both Caro and Aarons do well, and there's room for a couple of cameos from horror legends Barbara Crampton and Heather Langenkamp, who are both used brilliantly instead of, as can sometimes occur, just being asked to show their faces so that their names can be added to the cast list and used in the marketing.

This really surprised me with how much it seemed to layer throughout it. I had an idea of what I was getting into from seeing a very brief plot summary, but the monster at the heart of it is only really half of the equation. The other half, arguably the more interesting half, is the responsibility of parenthood. It's about the sacrifices made to keep children safe, it's about the toll that can be taken on your mental health as you keep gritting your teeth and doing what simply has to be done, and it's about knowing the right time to allow youngsters to be informed and see the full picture.

The ending is a slight disappointment, enough to knock a point or two off my final rating of the film, but I certainly recommend Little Bites to horror movie fans who don't mind a slow burn.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

I Saw The TV Glow (2024)

While I wasn't as big a fan of We're All Going To The World's Fair as some people, there was no doubt that writer-director Jane Schoenbrun had put forward a case for them being well worth keeping an eye on. A unique and intriguing new voice, I was keen to see what they would do for their second narrative feature (and I should also remember to head back and check out A Self-Induced Hallucination, a documentary about the very real horror and tragedy stemming from the internet legend of the Slender Man). I Saw The TV Glow is a huge step up, in my view, and shows a film-maker who is using their platform to deliver impressively unique thematic content wrapped up in some familiar genre trappings.

Ostensibly the tale of Owen (Justice Smith) and Maddy (Jack Haven) forming and navigating a friendship that is then interrupted by one of them being absent for a number of years, this is also about people being strongly attached to a TV show that speaks to them, bonding with others over that shared interest, and then looking back on everything with an adult perspective that shows it in a slightly different light. It's also about the "egg crack", according to Schoenbrun, which is a term given to the moment in the life of a trans individual when they realise that their exterior body doesn't align with their gender identity.

Schoenbrun does a very good line in subtle and unnerving horror, easily creating and maintaining an atmosphere that will have many viewers sitting uncomfortably (or, as mentioned just above, seeing their own past or present discomfort and pain presented in a way not often seen onscreen). Allowing the plot to focus on something that so many of us can identify with, that TV show you found at the time in your life when you needed it most, one that felt as if it was speaking directly to you, allows it to have that paradoxical kind of specificity that also seems universal. Some people will feel as if this is uncanny in how it captures their feelings, but everyone should at least take something meaningful away from it.

Smith and Haven are both very good in the lead roles, but it's the former who will linger in your mind long after the credits have rolled, thanks to a third act that allows for one of the most heart-breaking and raw depictions of despair I have seen in a long time. Fred Durst is effective in his supporting role (playing Owen's father), and the casting of Amber Benson is a double bonus, considering how good she is onscreen and how she was a part of the beloved cast of Buffy The Vampire Slayer (a major influence on the film, and the fictional show within it).

I watched a full movie here, something with a real journey and emotional arc for the characters, but I also fell under a spell. The visuals, the music, the building sense of oppression, it all made me think back to those nights when I was young and sometimes feeling lost within the familiar surroundings of my own bedroom. I Saw The TV Glow is disorientating and discombobulating in a way that is impressively unique and powerful. It gave me the feeling that I was hoping to get from Skinamarink, and I don't know if anyone else will read this and understand what I mean.  

How do you release a full-blooded primal scream when your own body is working to keep you gagged? That's what I keep wondering when I think about I Saw The TV Glow. And I think about it more often than I think about many of the other movies I have watched throughout the past year.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Paddington In Peru (2024)

I do try to avoid listening to too many other opinions and/or reviews before checking out films for my self, but it's sometimes very difficult, especially when it comes to a big release like Paddington In Peru (the third film in a series that has proved to be both delightful and hilarious so far). A lot of people seemed to say the same thing. This wasn't as good as the previous two films, and part of the reason for that stems from taking Paddington back out of London. I would have to agree. The joy of watching Paddington in movies has been the joy of watching him seem confused about British life while also managing to embody the kind of pride and good nature that we should all aspire to.

Having received an alarming letter about Aunt Lucy and her health, Paddington and the Brown family embark on a trip to visit her at her retirement home in Peru. Unfortunately, Aunt Lucy has disappeared by the time they get there. There are one or two clues pointing to where she might have gone, and Paddington knows that he must do whatever it takes to find her. The Brown family will help, of course, and they might also be assisted by Reverend Mother (Olivia Colman), a not-suspicious-at-all nun who keeps clarifying this by mentioning how unsuspicious things are, and a riverboat captain named Hunter Cabot (Antonio Banderas), as well as his daughter, Gina (Carla Tous). 

Dougal Wilson is now in the director's chair this time around, someone who seems to have spent a lot of time over the past two decades making music videos and short films for the likes of John Lewis and Apple (I say short films because they are sometimes a bit precious about their adverts, but they're adverts). And it's Mark Burton, Jon Foster, and James Lamont responsible for the screenplay, with the latter two having spent some time writing for Paddington in his TV adventures. Nobody does a terrible job. They're just not great. There's nothing here that comes even close to rivalling some of the set-pieces or laughs from the previous two movies, and that's a real shame.

While things are weakened by the relocation of the main characters, they're also undermined by some strange casting choices. Emily Mortimer has taken over the role of Mary Brown from Sally Hawkins. I like Emily Mortimer, and she does well in the role, but I think it's particularly odd to recast such a central character in a film aimed at younger viewers, especially when everyone else manages to return. It may lead to parents being asked a few questions as children learn about the fickle nature of scheduling and movie roles, whereas a better screenplay might have been crafted around some premise that had Mrs. Brown absent (a journey through loss and/or grief could have been an interesting parallel with the physical journey through jungle environments). Bonneville puts on his Henry Brown persona like a comfortable sweater, and he's very good, while both Madeleine Harris and Samuel Joslin portray the now-young adult Brown children. I have nothing against Harris and Joslin, but if any characters could be recast without anyone really noticing then they were the most likely candidates. It might even have made sense to keep the children at a younger age, allowing them to seem more vulnerable and ill-equipped as they joined Paddington on his Peruvian adventure. As for the titular bear, it's hard to think of anyone other than Whishaw voicing him now, which makes his return to the role essential, and every line of dialogue that he speaks is a comforting little hug. Colman is fun, if a little underused, and Banderas is also a welcome addition, and especially entertaining when he also portrays a number of his ancestors who plague him in spirit form.

It doesn't feel right to spend too much time being critical of a Paddington movie. There are good intentions throughout all of them, it's just that this time around those good intentions aren't matched by the dialogue and plotting. There's still enough here to enjoy though, especially when you get around to a speech in the finale about the idea of home, family, and being able to embrace the idea of being firmly British and being a Brown. And the end credits provide one or two delights that ensure most people will have one last chuckle.

Worth a watch, and maybe a repeat viewing will see it grow on me, but I doubt anyone will revisit it as often as either Paddington or Paddington 2. Part of me hopes, and assumes, that this is the final part of a two-thirds-brilliant trilogy. Part of me also knows that I would still be optimistic about any fourth outing for our marmalade-sandwich-loving little pal.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Prime Time: Elevation (2024)

Set three years after a world-altering event, Elevation is the story of humans surviving in a new position on the food chain. They're safe if they stay over 8000 feet, but some supplies are required. In fact, Will (Anthony Mackie) knows that he must explore beyond the safety zone in order to get a filter for oxygen filters that are necessary for the health and life of his young son, Hunter (Danny Boyd Jr.). Will convinces Nina (Morena Baccarin) to join him on his journey. Nina is a scientist who has spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to destroy the seemingly-indestructible predators that turned their world upside-down, and she was on a previous expedition that involved the death of Will's wife, Tara. Joining this duo is Katie, a good friend who refuses to let Will head off on such a dangerous mission with only Nina alongside him. And so begins an illogical distraction that should at least keep most viewers mildly distracted for 92 minutes.

There are some ways in which I cannot help but think of Elevation as something truly terrible. Unless we're supposed to be able to figure out all of the science for ourselves, there isn't enough information given for a couple of key points. One major detail, the reason for the safety zone of 8000 feet, is so ridiculous that even one main character asks about it at one point and is answered with a simple "I don't know". It feels as if this wants to be another A Quiet Place, or at least something very similar, but that film had enough excellent moments to help you overlook the plot holes and implausibilities. This does not. What it has is a couple of very watchable cast members in main roles.

Mackie is always very good onscreen, and I'm always happy to see him make the most of any opportunities that allow him to sneak out from under the looming shadow of his Marvel employer,  but he really needs to start making some better choices. A quick look at his filmography over the last five years doesn't paint a very pretty picture. I could say something similar about Morena Baccarin, but she has a knack for picking projects that at least feel a bit more eclectic, even if they're not actually very good. As the third wheel, Hasson does well alongside the two bigger names, even if she's only there to help give viewers someone else to be placed in peril as and when some more tension is required.

I've seen at least one other film directed by George Nolfi (that was The Adjustment Bureau way back when), and I've seen a few films written by John Glenn, but nothing, as far as I'm aware, from his co-writers, Jacob Roman and Kenny Ryan. That seems about right, considering how this feels strangely competent and slick, but also quite amateurish at times. It's a film made by throwing together elements that have worked better in many other films, but there's no real attempt made to then make it all a bit better. Pardon the pun, nobody seems to elevate the material.

That's the thing though. This is perfectly okay. If you have nothing better to hand. It's very standard content, and it feels like very standard content. I would have just preferred to have it feel like an actual movie though. Because movies are more than just content.

5/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Heart Eyes (2025)

Christopher Landon has made a name for himself in the past few years by figuring out fun ways to blend slasher movie tropes with other sub-genres (e.g. timeloop movies, bodyswap films). He has written with Michael Kennedy before, and this time around both are joined by Phillip Murphy to deliver a film that places some bloody kill scenes in the middle of what is essentially a standard rom-com. Josh Ruben is in the director's chair, which means it's up to him to ensure that the dialogue and set-pieces are couched in something that comes close enough to that rom-com style, but can he manage to do that?

A killer is on the loose, the Heart Eyes Killer, and they're targeting couples. This has been happening for a couple of years now, every Valentine's Day, which makes it a big problem for those in a relationship. Ally McCabe (Olivia Holt) isn't in a relationship though, so she should be safe from the killer. Her biggest worry concerns trying to keep her job. In need of major guidance, and a way to overhaul her latest ad campaign that disastrously uses romantic tragedy at the heart of it, Ally ends up forced to work with Jay Simmons (Mason Gooding), a bit of a whizz drafted in to save the day. Ally and Jay need to spend some time together to brainstorm and plan, which leads to the Heart Eyes Killer viewing them as a couple, which leads to them being pursued, even as they try to explain to those around them that they really aren't a couple.

Heart Eyes works fairly well as a slasher. The pacing is decent for most of the runtime, aside from a third act that just has one or two scenes more than necessary, the kills are entertaining and bloody, and Holt and Gooding are very appealing leads. The most pleasant surprise, however, is just how well some of the rom-com moments work. There's a great meet-cute, a fun sense of external factors ensuring that our leads are destined to pair up, and stay paired up, some very fun cute klutziness that adds some non-lethal injuries to the onscreen catalogue of pain, and even the scenes of attempted murder often show a romance blossoming under unusually difficult circumstances. There are times when it tries to be too cute though, particularly when name-checking other movies and painfully winking at viewers, but nothing is bad enough to unbalance the whole thing.

Aside from Holt and Gooding, who are absolutely as enjoyable and likeable as they need to be in their roles, the cast also includes Devon Sawa and Jordana Brewster as a pair of cops named . . . Hobbs and Shaw, Gigi Zumbado as the standard protective bestie, and Michaela Watkins as a demanding boss, as well as a number of people who make enough of an impression in their first few moments to make them plausible suspects as the killing spree starts to feel a bit more personal.

Despite the lighter touch, this is still a film aimed mainly at slasher movie fans. As long as you can enjoy the strange clash of sub-genres then you will be rewarded with some laughs, some entertaining bloodshed, and a killer working with some nicely-personalised deadly accessories.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Mubi Monday: The Taste Of Things (2023)

While internally debating my next viewing choice, I was drawn to this, a drama starring the fine Juliette Binoche that would also apparently make me very hungry while watching it. I love films that can strongly affect more than just your sight and hearing, and I hoped to be salivating as I watched this recipe being cooked into filmic perfection.

Binoche plays Eugénie, a cook who seems to be one of the very best. She has certainly impressed her fellow chef, Dodin (Benoît Magimel), who loves Eugénie and her cooking in almost equal measure. Eventually proposing to become more than just two people sharing cooking knowledge and kitchen space, Dodin has to be patient while Eugénie gently rebuffs him, wanting to maintain all of her focus on the cooking that she treats as an almost religious experience. The one main addition to the kitchen is Pauline (Bonnie Chagneau-Ravoire), a young girl who has some natural talent and a real willingness to learn. Dodin continues to hold a candle for Eugénie, but will she ever want to view him as anything other than a cooking colleague?

Based on a novel by Marcel Rouff, this is written and directed by Trần Anh Hùng, a film-maker who has already built up a small filmography of some acclaim. I have only seen one other film from them so far, Norwegian Wood (2010), but I see a lot that I like in their delicate and unrushed handling of material that explores human nature in the mix of some enjoyable onscreen characters.

As expected, Binoche is as wonderful here as ever. She always seems convincingly enthralled by the skill and care required to get the best out of every ingredient going into the dishes she is preparing, and her character manages to convey that sensation to others while managing to avoid seeming egotistical. Her meals are the best because everything she does is in service of the meal. Magimel is also very good, and it's easy for viewers to believe that he could fall so much in love with Binoche after spending so much time in close proximity to her work and her aura. Others appear onscreen, many discussing culinary highs and lows that they've experienced over the years, but Chagneau-Ravoire is the perfect complementary ingredient to the main course, allowing viewers to see the kind of innocence and real interest that Eugénie sees as possibly leading to a life-long vocation/passion.

I wish there had been a few more grand meals shown (sadly, I did not salivate), and the whole thing is actually a fairly slim premise to be dragged out to 135 minutes, but this was a sweet and effective melodrama. The leads are wonderful, the cinematography is lush, and it's another fine example of how careful and tender Hùng is when it comes to allowing us a peek into the lives of some fictional characters.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Netflix And Chill: Something In The Water (2024)

As Mark Kermode would have you believe, Jaws is a film not actually about the shark. I strongly disagree with him on that point, although it's about much more than just the shark, but it's an interesting view. Something In The Water, on the other hand, is very much a shark film that seems not to be about the shark. That works well, until the moments when it becomes about the shark.

The whole thing starts with Kayla (Natalie Mitson) and Meg (Hiftu Quasem) on a night out. They encounter a group of teens who start throwing homophobic slurs at them, and then they attack Meg so viciously that she ends up hospitalised. One year later, Meg heads to the West Indies for the wedding of her friend, Lizzie (Lauren Lyle). Also present are Cam (Nicole Rietsu Setsuko) and Ruth (Ellouise Shakespeare-Hart). And Kayla. The friends know that Meg and Kayla have things to work through, which is why they take a boat trip the day before the wedding, dropping the two off on a beach and forcing them to spend some time together, in the hope that they can properly reconcile, and maybe get back together. Then it's time for everyone to become aware of a shark in the water. They get back to the boat, but things don't go as planned, soon leaving them looking out for fins as they figure out how to get themselves back to the safety of land.

With two relative newcomers behind the camera, director Hayley Easton Street and writer Cat Clarke, although Street worked for a number of years in the field of VFX, Something In The Water is an enjoyably ambitious thriller that at least tries to blend some more relatable problems with the cinematic thrills of avoiding becoming shark food. It doesn't quite come together in a completely satisfying way, but that's due to those involved remembering that they need to show a shark every so often, and bring it to the fore in a third act that would most probably be improved by us not actually seeing any more than the suggestion of the hungry predator(s).

The cast are also far from the most experienced lot, although they prove more than capable of carrying themselves through the many character moments and conversations that prove to be more interesting than many of the shark sequences. Quasem and Mitson are excellent as two people unable to see a way to repair the massive sinkhole that now keeps them distant from one another, Lyle is the kind of placid central figure who just wants everyone to get along and keep the peace, and both Shakespeare-Hart and Setsuko have energy and strength that may help the entire group, or may cause them to be further demotivated if either of them get dragged away by the shark.

Something In The Water starts off strong, then it settles into something full of great potential as our leads meet up and start to have conversations that were avoided for far too long. It continues to impress when the shark first appears. Sadly, things start to go downhill from there. Everyone is on a countdown as you start to see who is most likely to be left until the end, the set-pieces have to be shot and edited in a way that covers up the many shortcomings, leaving them far from thrilling, and that final sequence is so bad that it feels as if it was lifted in from an entirely different movie.

I'll still give it plenty of goodwill for trying to be a bit different, but the negatives almost outweigh the positives. 

5/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share

Shudder Saturday: The Dead Thing (2024)

The first solo directorial feature from Elric Kane, who also co-wrote the screenplay with Webb Wilcoxen, The Dead Thing is a decent little horror movie that I believe has something to say about some very old and constant problems, albeit ones given a modern twist.

Blu Hunt plays Alex, a young woman who is used to finding some male company for a while by swiping her way through multiple candidates until she matches with someone. This is how she meets Kyle (Ben Smith-Petersen). Kyle seems very nice, but there's also something about him that hints at, well, something not being quite right. That feeling grows stronger as Alex moves on with her life, and on to other random connections. Maybe she had something a bit more with Kyle, or maybe she just starts wanting more from that fleeting connection because it seems impossible to recapture.

The Dead Thing has some obvious points to make about dating in the modern age, where many sexual relationships can start with a simple swipe, but it's also very much about what people are willing to overlook as they consider the possibility of a real and meaningful chance at what might turn into love. This is shown in the problems that face Alex, but also the problems that face her friend, Cara (Katherine Hughes). And, aside from anything she is looking for, Alex has to spend a lot of time batting away unwanted attention, from co-workers and people she regrets hooking up with in the past. It's not a constant barrage, but you can certainly get the feeling of how difficult it is sometimes for a woman to be allowed to make decisions that don't always flatter the men who flutter around her like moths hitting against a bare lightbulb.

Hunt is decent in the lead role, and Smith-Petersen does well at being someone who is a bit of a blank slate until more details start to appear upon him, but I'd have to say that better performances come from Hughes, John Karna (as a co-worker who tries to shoot his shot, in increasingly uncomfortable moments), and others making up the rest of the small supporting cast.

While Kane stays focused and on point throughout the film, he doesn't always keep things consistent when it comes to the central characters and what they will or will not accept. There's no real sense of proper danger until it all needs to be there in time for the finale, and our two leads are irritatingly unbothered by a major revelation that is dropped in about a third of the way into the runtime. That means that viewers end up feeling just as unconcerned, which lessens any potential impact the film may have.

That's a minor quibble though, and the positive aspects of the film make up for the negatives. This is interesting and fairly intelligent in how it mixes the full-on horror movie elements with the commentary, although it reminded me of a few titles I would easily recommend ahead of it (one being an iconic classic, the other being Nina Forever). It's a shame that it didn't quite perfectly nail down the right tone, but I'll take a flawed and intriguing work ahead of something more polished and dull.

7/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Wolf Man (2025)

Why can the modern movie landscape somehow not give us a great new werewolf movie? We've had some very good ones, but it's an archetypal monster that seems unable to be redefined and refreshed in a way that gives it a place in modern pop culture alongside the many vampires, zombies, and even bandage-swathed mummies. Thankfully, here's Leigh Whannell to put things right. Or not, as the case may be. I don't want to beat around the bush here. Wolf Man is awful.

Christopher Abbott is Blake, a man who ends up heading back to the family homestead with his wife (Charlotte, played by Julia Garner) and young daughter (Ginger, played by Matilda Firth) in tow. The property is in the middle of nowhere, and most of the locals don't venture outside after night has fallen. So the family getting a bit lost and trying to continue driving after sunset isn't a great idea. There's soon some trouble when they encounter a wild humanoid creature that seems intent on putting the bite on them. Eventually trapped in a house, it soon becomes obvious that at least one member of the family has been wounded. And the wound is starting to change them.

While Whannell is the director here, it's maybe telling that this is a screenplay co-written by himself and his wife, Corbett Tuck. The latter is a first-timer in that role, which would explain a lot of the inherent weakness of this. It wouldn't explain it all, and I'm sure both Whannell and Tuck thought they had stumbled upon a great new hook when they decided to let everything basically play out over one long night, but this feels like a sorely under-developed piece of work. There's no solid lore, which means no way to use or break any rules established within the confines of the film, there are too few characters, meaning very few moments have any real sense of danger, and, most damningly, the third act simply serves as a reminder of the last time someone tried to reinvigorate this IP (in a film that was much better than this one, in my opinion).

I don't want to completely dismiss Abbott and Garner, but it's worth noting that Firth, the youngest cast member, seems to do the best work. That may be down to the adults being weighed down by the screenplay, or maybe I was just put in such a sour mood that I was unable to enjoy anyone onscreen, with the exception of the innocent child. Sam Jaeger, Ben Predergast, and Benedict Hardie also have some screentime, and I'm equally loathe to give them any praise (although none of them are bad, they're just trapped in this mass of awfulness like the bug in the amber at the start of Jurassic Park).

The music from Benjamin Wallfisch isn't bad, but the people I really want to praise are those working in the sound department. The one real strength of Wolf Man is the soundscape; all rustling branches, bass-heavy growls, and strange frequencies showing the difference in hearing between some of the main characters. That's offset by the embarrassment of the creature effects and make-up though, which delivers viewers a werewolf that is one of the very worst to be put onscreen. Seriously. Look, I HAVE seen a lot worse than this, of course, but not in a film with some actual money and studio resources behind it.

Inept in almost every way, even (especially?) in the final scenes, this is a huge disappointment for fans of Whannell and/or his cast. It's a huge step down from his work on The Invisible Man, although it's clear that he wanted to emulate that style of blending the archetype with some relevant social commentary. Maybe he should have been clearer on what he wanted to comment on (masculinity, perceived emasculation, family bonds, and communities maintaining dangerous secrets are all in the mix), or maybe he should have just forgotten about that to focus on something that would have been entertaining and satisfying for those wanting loud howls and hairy scares.

3/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

The Gorge (2025)

I am not sure how often I use the word derivative to describe movies, but it may be quite often. It certainly seems that way lately. I should emphasise that I'm not always using the word as a criticism though. It's just a description. So when I start this review of The Gorge by mentioning how derivative it is I don't want you to think that I'm about to give it a kicking. I had more fun with The Gorge than many other star vehicles I have seen in the last few months. And, whatever you think of Miles Teller and Anya Taylor-Joy, this IS a star vehicle for them, even if you only realise that as the end credits roll and you find yourself wanting to spend more time with the main characters.

Teller and Joy are Levi and Drasa, two very talented sharp-shooters. They don't know each other, but they end up inhabiting a tower on either side of the titular gorge. In the kind of summary that makes for a great trailer line, they soon find out that their job is not to stop anything from entering the gorge . . . but to stop anything from coming out. While they're not supposed to have contact with one another, Levi and Drasa soon start communicating via dialogue written on whiteboards. And they soon start to like one another. There's a huge gorge between them though, and something in it that seems to be eager for them to make just one small mistake.

I'm not going to pretend that writer Zach Dean is someone I am a fan of, you can check his fairly limited filmography to see a few films that nobody would ever rush to view, and the filmography of director Scott Derrickson is certainly a mixed bag, but this has the two men working together on something that ends up being a pleasant surprise, despite the obvious influences throughout. Anyone who has played The Last Of Us, Resident Evil, or Silent Hill will find some of the visuals and production design here very familiar, and there are sections that certainly feel like videogame levels, but the fact that it feels constructed with care, and takes a decent amount of time to flesh out the main characters before putting them into serious danger.

Teller and Joy, despite the distance between them for a lot of the movie, have great chemistry together, and it's more than enough to make up for their characters being a clumsy mix of clichés. The script develops their relationship nicely, using a nice sprinkling of humour to show them growing closer as they deal with the isolation and strange nature of their assignment. There are very small roles for Sope Dirisu and Sigourney Weaver, but the film basically rests on the shoulders of the two leads, which is perfectly fine when they're able to carry it so easily.

It's all silly nonsense, and there's even room for fun nods to both The Queen's Gambit and Whiplash, but it's pretty great silly nonsense. There's decent cinematography from Dan Laustsen, another worthwhile score from Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, and some decent set-pieces that help to make the 127-minute runtime fairly fly by. I really enjoyed this, and I would quite happily watch it again any time. Which is more than I can say for the other films that Zach Dean has helped to write.

8/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Prime Time: You're Cordially Invited (2025)

I'm not a big fan of writer-director Nicholas Stoller, but I always tend to forget this when I prepare to watch another movie from him. I'm not sure that I even noticed his name here while I was being distracted by the fact that it was a comedy pairing up Will Ferrell and Reese Witherspoon in the lead roles. The fact that the supporting cast included Geraldine Viswanathan, Meredith Hagner, Jimmy Tatro, and Jack McBrayer also seemed to bode well.

It's a simple premise, ripe with comedy potential. Ferrell plays Jim, a doting dad who is hoping to oversee a dream wedding day for his daughter, Jenni (Viswanathan), and her partner, Oliver (Stony Blyden). Witherspoon is a successful TV producer who wants to oversee a dream wedding for her sister, Neve (Hagner), and her partner, Dixon (Tatro). Their worlds collide when the island resort they have hired for the wedding celebrations has accidentally booked them both in for the same weekend . . . when they only have the ability to host one wedding at a time. And so begins a disappointingly unfunny series of spats, with both of our leads trying to shoulder one another out of the way as they make the most of the big wedding weekend.

I don't want to spend too much time going over how much this gets wrong, especially when I am already depressed by the memory of the movie and the memory of how I fooled myself into thinking that it wasn't TOO bad. It's bad, very bad, and it's a waste of the talent of pretty much everyone involved.

Stoller directs as if he's just sleepwalking through the whole thing, but maybe his own script had already knocked him unconscious. The plot beats feel tired and unsurprising, the running gags (including use of a very famous song) don't land well, and there's also an annoying lack of bite. Both of our leads swither between rolling up their sleeves to fight one another and then just using each other as a shoulder to cry on. And as for the very last scenes . . . I won't spoil anything, but I cannot think of a Ferrell comedy that has been so wildly misjudged in trying to make everything and everyone wrapped up in a neat bow.

There were times when I laughed at this, and those laughs were all caused by Ferrell blurting out some inappropriate insults. He's at his funniest in those moments, and you want Ferrell to be funny in a comedy movie that gives him one of the lead roles, but they are very few and far between. Witherspoon does the kind of uptight thing she has been doing for decades, although she is allowed to soften slightly here in a way that allows you to eventually warm to her character a bit more. Viswanathan and Blyde are fun, as are Hagner and Tatro, and there are moments that try to make the most of McBrayer, Leanne Morgan, Rory Scovel, Keyla Monterroso Mejia, and Celia Weston, as well as a few others. Everyone is far too hampered by the weak material though, sadly, and even a potential set-piece involving our leads in the same room as an alligator fails to prompt even a mild chuckle.

It's really hard to argue against people who see streaming movies as inferior alternatives to cinema releases when Amazon put their money into something like this. This has the stars, it has familiar songs on the soundtrack, and it at least has a runtime of under two hours (clocking in at about 109 minutes). It doesn't have any soul or artistry to it though. More importantly, it doesn't have many laughs.

3/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing, and ALL of the links you need are here - https://linktr.ee/raidersofthepodcast
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share