davidallenxyz Reviews

An Ideal Husband (I) (1999)

Watch for Rupert Everett's performance but little else

[5/10 · 21 June 2024]

Rupert Everett has a great time here as Lord Goring. He has the best lines and gets to deliver them with sharp humour, a raised eyebrow and a hint of viciousness.

Minnie Driver is great too, bringing a streak of passion and eccentricity to her role as Mabel.

But overseas stars Cate Blanchett and Julianne Moore are miscast. Neither manages to capture the right tone. Blanchett ends up being rather dull, and Moore seems to be concentrating more on the accent (a 9/10 effort) than the underlying villainy of Mrs Cheveley (a 3/10 effort).

Aside from the performances, it simply isn't a good enough story (or at least, not well enough told). The political intrigue is simply dull, and the romantic misunderstandings are so fleeting that they are easy to miss.

A very average production overall.

The Prestige (2006)

You want to be fooled

[7/10 · 20 June 2024]

I don't think it is a spoiler in any way to say that this film contains multiple twists. It's about magic after all, and what is magic beyond an elaborate "twist"?

But I happened to work out the twists before they are revealed to the audience - and once you've seen them, you realise that director Christopher Nolan is hiding them in plain sight.

Without the impact of the big reveal - the "prestige" as the film calls it - you are left with a high quality period-fantasy production with some good performances (Jackman, Caine, Hall), some average ones (Johansson), and some weak ones (Christian Bale hamming it up as usual, David Bowie disappointingly reserved).

It is a good film but I suspect it is only great for an audience that "wants to be fooled".

The Killing (1956)

Hints at what was to come but a B-movie at heart

[6/10 · 17 June 2024]

"The Killing" has its moments, but is dragged down by its B-movie roots.

It makes heavy use of narration, a bugbear of mine which really disconnects the viewer from the action on screen. It also presents the story in a non-linear way, re-telling certain scenes during the heist from different angles, but without particular success. The story of the heist and its aftermath is good - better than in many similar films - but would have had more impact if it was told "straight".

Sterling Hayden stands out as the leader of the gang, as does Marie Windsor as an untrustworthy femme fatale. But too many of the supporting cast are weak, flatly reading their lines to get a paycheck.

There is technical ambition here - long dolly shots as characters walk through apartments, careful lighting of huddled meetings - but also the clear constraints of a low budget, with repeated footage and gunshots happening off-screen, making key scenes confusing instead of shocking.

It's a solid 50s thriller. But it shouldn't be compared to Kubrick's later masterpieces.

Spider-Man: No Way Home (2021)

Crowd-pleasing moments disguise a pretty average superhero movie

[6/10 · 14 June 2024]

Here's the recipe for "No Way Home":

• A generous portion of fan service
• A heavy dollop of sentimentality
• Mix roughly with the multiverse
• Serve on a bed of CGI

There is a fantastic idea the heart of this. Universes collide and every nemesis of Peter Parker is searching for him. Which means that the villains (and heroes) from the previous Spider-Man films end up in the current world. Willem Dafoe and Jamie Foxx in particular are fantastic in their roles.

There is some unexpected tragedy in the film, and the heroes of the past spend a lot of time reflecting on their own misfortunes. This has an emotional impact but does slow the film down at key moments.

There is far too much CGI (as usual) so you end up watching something closer to an animation or a video game at times, with scant regard for physics. Doing so much work in front of green screens really impacts the acting as well.

The biggest issue is the superhero story itself - the bit where the good guy overcomes the bad guy. All the multiverse nonsense struggles for logic and takes a long time to set up, and Spider-Man doesn't really spend enough time fighting the bad guys at the end. The action sequences are good but they feel like an afterthought.

This is a film for the fans. The neutrals (like me) may not get so much out of it.

Here We Are (2020)

Touching story of a father trying to the best for his son

[8/10 · 10 June 2024]

"Here We Are" manages to capture both the love a father has for his autistic adult son, and the pressures he is under as he tries to give him the best care.

It's not a flashy film, but it is authentic and heartfelt. Shai Avivi is excellent as Aharon, the father who has spent over 20 years caring for his son, capturing every tension, every fear and every delight as he faces up to the estranged mother's desire to send him to a specialist centre.

Noam Imber is exceptional as Uri, creating an entirely believable portrayal of a young adult who will always need support in his life but who is still able to have moments of joy among the many challenges that the world presents to him.

The journey they go on is both touching and thought-provoking.

Last Exit to Brooklyn (1989)

A bold performance from Jennifer Jason Leigh in an otherwise weak film

[5/10 · 7 June 2024]

"Last Exit to Brooklyn" is one of those films you wouldn't choose to see more that once. Jennifer Jason Leigh's performance as the brutalised prostitute Tralala is brave and unsettling and will remained seared on your consciousness.

But unfortunately it's attached to a film that is rather weak overall. Many of the performances and settings are grey and lifeless. Stephen Lang is particularly wooden at the other main character, Harry, a union organiser who is also a closeted homosexual. It often feels like filmed dialogue, rather than a story with characters.

Keep your eye out for the late Alexis Arquette in a subversive role as the cross-dressing Georgette, and a young Sam Rockwell as a street thug.

A Perfect Spy (1987)

Takes a long time to say very little

[5/10 · 31 May 2024]

"A Perfect Spy" is clearly a high quality production by the era's standards, with good performances and an authentic seriousness.

But it is slow. Really slow. And more crucially, it doesn't have enough story in it to justify 6 hours of screen time.

The scope is epic. Three actors play Magnus Pym - as a boy, a young man, and an older man - over the course of 50 years of his life.

First we're introduced to his father, Rick Pym, a charismatic character who skirts around the edge of honesty. The younger Pym seems to have picked up his father's economical way with the truth. As a young man, he helps his father out, but ends up having to find his own way in cold-war Europe when things go wrong, making unusual friendships along the way. As an adult, he builds a respected career in the secret service. But all is not as it seems.

The story of a Pym's deception is interesting enough. But the big problem here is that you never get the sense of any actual spying being done. It's a sequence of conversations, and coded ones at that (British people of the era were bad at talking directly, so spies are almost incomprehensible).

As a drama it would have been so much more convincing if it had focused on the impact of the spying, the moments where there were breaches of trust, and Pym's motivation (which is never clear).

Instead it plays out more like a memoir of a man with a dodgy Dad who was a bit dodgy himself. This may be true to Le Carre's book (I haven't read it) - but it doesn't make for good TV drama.

By the Grace of God (2018)

Elegant direction and superb performances bring a scandal to life

[8/10 · 21 May 2024]

Child sexual abuse in the church is not an easy subject to tackle, but Francois Ozon expertly weaves the experiences together to create a compelling drama.

After one of the victims of a paedophile priest in Lyon goes to the church to make a formal complaint, word gets around among others who were assaulted, and momentum builds to seek justice, even though decades have passed.

The three main leads are excellent, and excellently supported. Melvil Poupaud's Alexandre is precise and remains close to his faith. Denis Menochet's Francois is angry and keen to capture the public's attention. Swann Arlaud's Emmanuel has struggled through adulthood and is deperate for something to go his way.

The first half is a little slow, with a lot of reading for those of us watching with subtitles, as most of the plot development is via correspondence between Alexandre and the church. But as more victims come forward, the subtleties of their relationships with their families and each other come to the fore, and the viewer becomes fully involved.

The film ends before the true story ends. The judgements came 2 years after the film was released. So check Wikipedia after the credits roll.

Astrid et Raphaëlle (2019– )

Interesting premise but a rather dull excecution

[5/10 · 17 May 2024]

Using autism as a way to tell a murder-mystery story is an interesting approach. But "Astrid" suffers from a serious problem as a result.

Having a "savant" on the team - who knows more about medicine that the patholgists, more about criminology than the detectives, and basically more about everything than everyone - means that solving crimes becomes far too easy.

Which is a shame, because the episodes I have seen go to great lengths to create unusual crime scenes that make you wonder what could have possibly happened. But then Astrid pops up and solves it instantly.

Sara Mortensen's portrayal of autism is not the worst I have seen, but it does get a bit "Rainman-y" at times. And for someone that is obsessed with following rules she does seem to break them rather a lot.

Lola Dewaere is good as the flawed Police commander Coste who takes Astrid under her wing - in fact she is much better when she is doing police work on her own. Her relationship with Astrid is strangely "motherly" rather than respectful as a colleague, which isn't how someone on the spectrum should be treated.

Although well made, there is a small scale to the early episodes - action is rarely outside the confines of the murder scene or the police offices. Episode 4 (the last I watched) uses the seaside town of Deauville as a key plot device, but they don't visit, they just use some "science " to prove it. In fact there is a general tendency for key developments in the investigation to happen suddenly, even when Astrid isn't involved.

If you're looking for a easy-going murder-mystery, Astrid will probably suffice. But it doesn't get the viewer's brain working. You know that Astrid has already got the answer, so you don't bother wasting your own energy in trying to work out whodunnit.

Operation Petticoat (1959)

Gentle comedy that sails on the charm of its two stars

[6/10 · 10 May 2024]

Cary Grant plays Sherman, commander of the Sea Tiger, a WWII sub that is rather the worse for wear after being attacked in port. He wants to get the craft back out to sea as quickly as possible, but in trying to pull together a skeleton crew he is lumbered with Tony Curtis' Holden, an officer with an unconventional skillset for the Navy. And later on he is burdened with a group of 5 female recruits that they rescue from a remote island.

This is a very gentle comedy of a type you rarely see now. There are plenty of jokes about how women and men can't be trusted to get along professionally in confined spaces, and various misadventures by Holden as he tries to bend the rules in his own favour. Lots of scenes involve women's underwear, which come across as very twee nowadays and are unlikely to have been sensational in 1959. And there are some unexpectedly accurate representations of the submarine in a war footing which adds some light drama.

But it is Cary Grant that holds this all together with his natural screen charm conveying a commander who has seen it all before but knows when to play along and when to keep his crew in line.

A pleasant 2 hour diversion.

The Man Who Fell to Earth (1976)

I do love this film but I have to admit it isn't particularly good

[7/10 · 7 May 2024]

I've watched this film several times in the last 20-30 years so the temptation is there to give it a 10. But I know it doesn't justify it.

It is packed full of haunting visuals, with a smattering of sharp dialogue and moments of good acting. But the storytelling is so rushed as to be almost irrelevant, the character development comes out of nowhere, and the second half in particular can be very, very slow.

Here's what I love about The Man Who Fell to Earth: the stunning imagery, especially of Mr. Newton's distant memories and the amazing technology he brings to market; Candy Clark's energy as a young hotel worker who falls in love with the mysterious visitor and gets frustrated and fearful when he won't give her what she needs in return; Rip Torn as a mid-life campus crisis cliche who is frustrated by the system and still thinks he can do something great; the haunting, elegant ending; and of course David Bowie, whose gaunt awkwardness is exactly what the lead role needed.

But most of the best moments are in the first half. The second half is slow, and the theme of betrayal is poorly explained. Clark and Torn become peripheral figures. Roeg falls lingers on a few too many fantasy sequences which look good but are better suited to an art gallery than the narrative. And the prosthetics used to age Clark and Torn don't convince at all, especially when the world around them doesn't change at all (it still looks like 1970s USA).

In a way it's quite impressive that Nic Roeg managed to make so many experimental films while in plain sight of the mainstream film industry.

If only a little more time had been spent on telling the story - and it is, at heart, a very good story - this could have been a truly spectacular film. But in the end it's just an artistic novelty - and I need more than that to give a high rating.

Cape Fear (1991)

Let down by the details

[5/10 · 3 May 2024]

If all you wanted from Cape Fear was an unsettling experience, it succeeds. It's certainly unpleasant to watch, but it rarely draws you in to the story or characters. It's a visceral experience rather than a psychological one.

Here are the good points. Nick Nolte is solid as lawyer Sam Bowden, who is revisited by ex-client Max Cady who has a bone to pick after an extended sentence. Juliette Lewis is disturbingly convincing as his teenage daughter who is both fascinated by Cady and fearful of the risk he poses to the family.

But the biggest negative - and I'm sure this will attract a lot of downvotes - is Robert De Niro's performance as Cady. I have never rated De Niro as an actor as 90% of his screen performances are just a combination of face-pulling and shrugging. This is one of them. He's threatening, he's unpleasant, but he isn't believable, with seemingly super-human abilities to travel through time and space that break the connection between the viewer and the story.

The plausibility of the film is shattered early on when Cady commits a crime that in any normal situation would see him re-arrested - but bizarrely that isn't the outcome.

Scorsese also throws in a few cinematic tricks that land awkwardly, often switching to the negative of certain shots, and doing his trademark zooms into the face far too often.

By the final confrontation, it's all started to get a bit too silly and you're waiting for it to end.

This could have been so much better if Scorsese had reined in its indulgences.

Croupier (1998)

Soaked with atmosphere but leaves a few too many loose ends

[7/10 · 29 April 2024]

"Croupier" takes you into the seedy world of London's late-night casinos where everyone is looking to get ahead and nobody can be trusted.

Clive Owen puts in one of his defining performances as Jack, a writer who is short on money and short on inspiration, and finds himself returning to his old job as a dealer behind the baize tables.

Jack isn't like the other characters in the casino. He doesn't gamble outside of hours, and remains a detached observer of everything that goes on around him - and he's seen it all before.

The return to the table gives him the inspiration he needs - but also gets him caught up in the scams that those around him are always trying to pull.

There is a decent supporting cast. Alex Kingston brings sensuality and a slightly dodgy accent as a South African femme fatale. Gina McKee is Jack's girlfriend and "conscience", who is in love with Jack the writer and doesn't want him to be lost to the dark appeal of the croupier. And Kate Hardie is the only streak of honesty inside the casino.

It has a cool sexuality and casual attitude to deceit that is very engaging.

Unfortunately it doesn't really bring the story together at the end. Some character arcs come to sudden endings, or simply aren't mentioned again. Even though there is a twist of sorts, it falls a bit flat.

Having said that, this is exactly the kind of space I'd like to see more British movies occupying - it's a shame that domestic noir thrillers have become such a rarity.

The Song Remains the Same (1976)

More than just a concert film

[8/10 · 24 April 2024]

This is a wonderful combination of a live performance by a band at their swaggering peak (filmed in New York in the mid-70s), and a series of fantasy scenes where each band member gets to share something of themselves.

Peter Grant fancies himself as a 30s gangster, John Paul Jones a highwayman, Robert Plant a romantic knight, John Bonham a petrolhead, and Jimmy Page as some kind of gothic nutcase.

But the indulgence of these scenes and the nascent visual effects used in them just add to the charm and are a great backdrop to the songs - which because they are live performances, go on for a VERY long time because Led Zep were known for doing extended jams on stage.

But even after the passing of half-a-century, this remains an awesome music film.

One Million Years B.C. (1966)

Iconic effects. Terrible story.

[5/10 · 23 April 2024]

One Million Years BC is all about the visuals. Ray Harryhausen's effects still look fresh after nearly 60 years. Raquel Welch is stunning in her fur bikini. There is a lot of visual creativity on screen and for the most part it succeeds.

But the story is weak, and rendered meaningless by the decision to remove any kind of script beyond a few simple words with unclear meaning. Grunting and pointing basically. Now this may well be in the interests of "prehistoric accuracy", but this is also a film when men and dinosaurs co-exist and terrapins are the size of buses.

Very few of the actors manage to bring their grunting to life - although funnily enough, Raquel Welch, who obviously wasn't cast for her acting reputation, does a much better job than anyone else. Martine Beswick is a bit crazy, John Richardson has lovely blue eyes, and if you think the tribe leader looks familiar, it's Robert Brown, who later played "M" opposite Roger Moore.

So sit back, switch off your brain, and enjoy the pretty pictures.

Naked Gun 33 1/3: The Final Insult (1994)

Drebin's third cinematic misadventure is still a good laugh

[7/10 · 15 April 2024]

It's easy to assume that sequels will be worse than the original. And although the Naked Gun 3 doesn't reach the brilliance of the first in the film series, it remains a very funny film.

The tone is a little different than the first two entries, with far more reliance on film parodies and pop culture references, most of which hit the mark (although 30 years on a growing portion of the audience won't get them). The opening tribute to "The Untouchables" gives you a good idea of what will follow.

The film suffers for momentum in the middle section, with the decision to focus on Frank's marriage problems with Jane resulting in too many weak and smutty jokes about male sexual performance and traditional gender roles. A man baking cupcakes wasn't funny in 1994 and certainly isn't funny in 2024.

Fortunately the star studded climax at the Oscars ceremony is on a par with anything else in the series with plenty of laughs as Lt. Drebin inexplicably saves the day (again).

Top Gun: Maverick (2022)

Good but not as good as the original.

[7/10 · 11 April 2024]

Have people really become so starved of traditional blockbusters that they think Top Gun: Maverick is something special? This genre was everywhere in the 80s and 90s.

It follows very closely in the footsteps of the original. In fact a couple of scenes are shot-by-shot tributes. But it rarely stretches itself.

The only scene that adds a new angle is at the very end, where dogfighting results in US airmen on the ground behind enemy lines, who have to find an unconventional way of escaping. This final mission is the best part of the film overall.

But generally speaking it doesn't have the charm or energy of the 1986 original. Top Gun focused on young pilots who were building their lives, finding their friendships, and facing up to rivalries. Maverick gives us an older Captain Pete Mitchell who doesn't really have anything to prove. And the younger cast don't really have enough screen time. Adding a female pilot to the mix, while more contemporary, drains all the crude machismo out of the situation. But that crude machismo was part of the charm.

By far the worst part of Top Gun: Maverick is the introduction of Jennifer Connelly as the love interest. Thankfully she is age-appropriate for Cruise, but her character is so obviously a substitute for Kelly McGillis' Charlie that it becomes embarrassing. She seems to be living in the same beachfront house, and even drives a classic silver Porsche (a 911 this time instead of a 356). It just isn't a convincing romance and could have easily been left out of the whole film.

Best moments are the flying scenes, with their slick combination of real footage and CGI. Again, these are clearly inspired by the formula created in Top Gun, but with an extra layer of slickness and complexity that makes them feel modern yet still suspend-your-disbelief realistic (take note, superhero movies).

There is a brief yet touching appearance from Val Kilmer (who has been battling cancer in recent years), and Glen Powell and Miles Teller both put in decent performances. But overall the cast just isn't as engaging as in Top Gun.

Top Gun: Maverick delivers what we should expect from a big budget production with a talented cast. But it doesn't deliver anything beyond that. It's good. But not THAT good.

The Wiz (1978)

A fever dream from Oz, New York.

[4/10 · 26 March 2024]

Don't watch this while drunk or high. There may be irreversible damage.

"The Wiz" is weird in so many ways. Visually it's very creative, but what is has created is a very unsettling world. One that could just as easily be the basis of a horror movie. The sets, costumes and makeup are freakish.

Sidney Lumet may not have been the right choice as a director. Very few scenes are cinematic, and it wears its origins as a Broadway production heavily, with the big song and dance numbers being filmed from a distance on giant soundstages.

Diana Ross is really poor as Dorothy. Her age isn't necessarily the problem, but the awkward nervousness of her performance is. Her acting is wooden, and her dancing is several steps below those around her. She's also burdened with a very unflattering haircut and dress (probably in an attempt to make a thirty-something look more naive).

The final disappointment is how little Richard Pryor is used in his role as the Wizard. In part this is because the film starts to rush in the last half hour.

There are a coupe of good things. The song and dance scenes are strong (despite my earlier criticism), and Michael Jackson turns in a great performance.

But considering the budget and the cast it's a missed opportunity.

48 Hrs. (1982)

Unrelenting aggression stops it from coming to life

[6/10 · 17 March 2024]

If you're a tough guy that likes non-stop violence and bad language in your films, then you'll probably love 48 Hrs.

Unfortunately the relentless "grittiness" makes it hard to fully enjoy.

Nick Nolte's Jack Cates is an a-hole from start to finish, which makes it impossible to actually care about his character.

The best scenes are where Eddie Murphy's Reggie is given a little space to show his charm. Singing "Roxanne" from his prison cell. Taking on a bunch of hillbillies in a bar. Trying to sneak guns and knifes into his pockets for later.

But it's never long before Nolte comes along with a bloodied face, punching, shooting and offending everything in sight.

The language is very racist, which will probably offend modern viewers, but let's not pretend that early-80s policing had any sensitivity about the colour of people's skin.

If director Walter Hill wound Nolte in a bit to make him someone you could actually root for, the film would be so much better. Instead you end up hoping that the bad guys will get a shot in and put the world out of its misery.

The Card Counter (2021)

Starts well but then meanders on to an odd ending

[3/10 · 15 March 2024]

The opening scenes of "The Card Counter" draw you in to the mysterious world of an obsessive casino player who travels the country to win small from rubes so he doesn't get banned by the owners. He's served time in a military prison because of what he did in Iraq, and the memories still haunt him.

Paul Schrader's direction does a great job of portraying the seedy glamour of gambling, and Oscar Isaac is well cast as the stoic William Tell.

We're introduced to Lalinda (Tiffany Haddish), who runs a group of high-stakes gamblers that play on behalf of secretive money men. And to Cirk-with-a-C (Tye Sheridan), whose father died as a result of what happened in Iraq, and who wants revenge on. Major John Gordo (Willem Dafoe), who is now working as a private security expert.

So we're set up for an interesting thriller.

Unfortunately that isn't what we get.

There are lots of issues. The main one is the relationships between the characters. Tell takes Cirk under his wing at great expense, but you quickly wonder why he has bothered. Tiffany Haddish seems to be a character from a different movie, and again you wonder why Tell joins her group so willingly, and why he gets so close to her so quickly, when it is the opposite of what he is naturally inclined to do. Willem Dafoe is massively under-used, and although his final scenes are not the ending you might expect, that doesn't make them satisfying, with too much storytelling happening off-camera.

If the film had focussed on the casino scenes (he's a card counter after all), and made the pursuit of Gordo the real focus, it would have been much better. Instead it wanders down a variety of disappointingly sentimental cul-de-sacs for an hour before a sudden ending.

Stalker (1979)

Slow and impenetrable

[3/10 · 14 March 2024]

A dystopian state. A group of misfits. A journey to a mythical "Zone" that might provide happiness. The theme has promise.

But my-oh-my, "Stalker" is so, so slow. And the conversations/meditations of the various characters are impossible to make any real sense of.

It's really hard to think of any scenes that work beyond the framing and the sets/locations. If you were to take a series of stills from the film you would think they were beautiful. But when you string them together, it simply fails as a film.

It lacks the spark of life and curiosity and surprise that is needed to engage a viewer. It's just a pretentious bore.

Funny Face (1957)

Singing, dancing, Paris and an absurd romance

[7/10 · 13 March 2024]

There's loads to enjoy in "Funny Face". Audrey Hepburn lights up the screen (are the audience really expected to believe that she is some kind of wonky-faced plain-jane?), and although she isn't a great dancer and singer, Fred Astaire and Kay Thompson are.

Particular highlights for me are Hepburn's "jazz" dance in a darkened Paris club, the opening "Think Pink" number in a fantasy fashion office, and Astaire and Thompson pretending to be beatniks as they perform "Clap Yo' Hands". And it's great to see so much on-location footage from 1950s Paris.

There is gentle humour throughout, sending up Hepburn's naivety, and the frivolous obsessions of the fashion world.

But the May-December romance between Hepburn and Astaire just doesn't work. He's twice her age. He's a great performer but I wish they had cast a more believable romantic interest. Combined with the sweet but schmaltzy love songs, it weighs down the second half of the film.

Solaris (1972)

An experiment that isn't entirely successful

[6/10 · 12 March 2024]

"Solaris" seems to attract lots of analysis that asks the question "what does it mean?". Not knowing what something means isn't a good thing.

The most engaging part of Solaris is the "what if" scenario - what if people from our past came back into our lives again? How would we respond? Would we remember them clearly? Would we treat them better? It's this scenario that sustains the interactions between "astronaut" Kris Kelvin and Hari, a woman who is also on board the space station he is sent to.

I say "astronaut" because the space station is the least "space-like" location you could imagine. It has it's selection of buttons and shiny surfaces, but essentially it is just somewhere that is far from home. This is sci-fi in the sense of asking otherworldly questions, rather than travelling to other worlds.

The scenes featuring Kris and Kari are by turns thought provoking and unsettling, and they are far and away the best part of the film. Kris trying to remove Kari's dress and Kari fitfully regaining consciousness are two highlights. Donatas Banionis and Natalya Bondarchuk are both excellent. But you really only see them in the second half.

The rest of the film is very, very slow. Some sequences are deliberately extended for no clear reason - for example a car journey along a (Japanese) motorway that lasts for much longer than necessary. There is also a stiff artifice to many of the supporting performances, which isn't helped by the use of dubbing (I assume there was no on-set sound).

There is a lot of artistry on display, but it's lacking in focus. As if every idea that Tarkovsky had found it's way on to the screen, including the ones that weren't fully formed.

A tight 90 minutes on the space station would have been a stunning film. But at nearly 3 hours, it drags.

Save Yourselves! (2020)

Quirky apocalypse horror comedy let down by a lazy ending

[7/10 · 4 March 2024]

Jack (John Reynolds) and Su (Sunita Mani) play an infuriating 30-something New York hipster couple who decide to detox from their phones and spend a week at a friend's cabin. But while they're offline some strange things start happening in the city...

"Save Yourselves!" has a really witty script that cleverly combines the obsessions of young, privileged urbanites with the tension of an unknown evil lurking around your cabin. By turns you are laughing at their conversations and sliding towards the edge of the seat, waiting for something to jump out of the shadows.

But in the last act it starts to become clear that writer/directors Alex Huston Fischer and Eleanor Wilson don't know how to end the story, so they just throw in an unexpected event and leave the outcome hanging.

"Save Yourselves!" makes the most of its low budget by focusing on good writing, engaging performances, wise use of locations and simple yet persuasive effects. But it would have been so much better if they had thought of a decent ending.

Dune: Part Two (2024)

A slow build up to an underwhelming finale

[5/10 · 3 March 2024]

After Dune 2021's bait-and-switch ("oh did I forget to mention it's only the first half" cackles Denis), I had high hopes for Dune: Part Two. I really, really wanted it to bring the story together and blow my mind.

Well, it didn't. It's more like Dune: Part One than I expected. And not in a good way.

Let's start with pacing. It's slow. Oh my word is it slow. The first 90 minutes are taken up with quasi-religious disagreements among the Fremen about whether the prophecy of a saviour is true or not. Most of this is in a non-English dialect so be prepared to read a lot of subtitles. Villeneuve can film an underground stone temple and scores of hooded followers like no-one else - but don't fool yourself that this is good material.

After a long wait, we are finally introduced to some of the new characters that are going to bring this chapter to its conclusion. A common theme is that the big names that came on for the second half are barely used. Austin Butler's portrayal of the unhinged Feyd Rautha is great. He is introduced in a striking visual setpiece. But I wanted more of him. Christopher Walken is well cast as the Emperor but it is a small role. Florence Pugh has very little to work with, and two-thirds of her scenes are essentially narration. Lea Seydoux must have shot her scenes in a day. Anya Taylor-Joy probably shot her scene in an hour after visiting Denis at his beach house a couple of weeks before the premiere.

The cast really misses the humanity of Oscar Isaac and Jason Momoa. There is far too much Timothee and Zendaya - and to be honest, they aren't strong enough actors to carry a film of this scale. Villeneuve spends most of his time doing slow and meaningful zooms into their lovely faces as they stand on windswept sand dunes.

Now in its defence I will say that a handful of the "action" scenes in the film are striking, in particular, an early Fremen attack on a spice harvester, Feyd Rautha's debut in the colosseum, and Paul Atreides' final contest in front of his rivals. Nobody can create a cinematic feast quite like Denis - it looks and sounds fantastic. But the large scale battles are disappointing, starting and ending suddenly, and with a level of destructive power that makes you wonder why the rebellion hadn't happened sooner.

I watched Dune: Part One at home the day before watching Part Two. One was a disappointment. Two is, unexpectedly, an even greater one.

PS I think this had a rough ride in the edit suite. Keep an eye out for strange continuity and sound anomalies in the last hour. I reckon the first cut was well over 3 hours...