ExpendableMan

I really wish this was better. Exterritorial promises to be so much more than it is; a more action-oriented, German alternative to Flightplan, but it turns into a plodding and dull, conspiracy-brained thriller.

Jeanne Goursard stars as Sara Wulf, an ex-soldier applying for a visa at the US Consulate in Frankfurt alongside her six-year-old son. She turns her back for five minutes and he disappears, but when she speaks with the staff, they have no record of him showing up with her. There's also no sign of him on the security cameras. Has she been the victim of a sinister plot? Or is she experiencing a post-traumatic delusion, caused by the deaths of her colleagues in Afghanistan?

It's a classic Hitchcockian set-up, but Exterritorial never fulfills its potential. Sara is a determined heroine, but the film is more concerned with delivering a twisty-turny plot involving kidnapped Belarussian dissidents and drug smugglers, than delivering a string of bone crunching setpieces. Bizarrely, it even takes a few minutes to criticise influencer culture. You find yourself patiently waiting for Sara to unleash her fury and batter her way through dozens of henchmen a la Liam Neeson in Taken, but it never happens. There are a few sporadic fisticuffs, but the focus is mainly on sneaking past cameras and spying on people in canteens.

By the time it reaches the big anticlimax, Exterritorial has felt significantly longer than it actually is. This is very much an old-school thriller, in love with genre pieces of years gone by, but it also commits the worst possible crime for a suspense film; it's boring. Goursard is a likeable heroine but good lord, this one dragged.

Aside from the infuriating culture-war nonsense that crops up whenever an actress makes a relatively inoffensive remark and enrages right-wing commentators, Disney's live action remakes have faced a couple of significant hurdles; how do you make new versions of beloved movies that are close enough to the source material that they don't alienate people, but also not so identical that there seems no reason for existing in the first place? And all of Disney's 'reimaginings,' there's an argument to be made for Aladdin being the most successful.

The 2019 version is a movie that was clearly made by people who adore the original, but has enough of an identity to stand on its own feet. It's not as good as the animated film, but that film had the advantage of an iconic Robin Williams at his peak, and he casts a big shadow. Taken on its own merits though, this Aladdin is an enjoyable adventure movie with a likeable cast and a genuine sense of fun. That being said, it also can't escape a plot hole that was easier to overlook back in the nineties: how come Jafar doesn't recognise Aladdin?

This was a much easier problem to ignore when the characters were animated, but when the film's arch villain looks the lead character square in the face only a short time after he supposedly died and doesn't realise who the mysterious Prince is, you begin to question how much of a 'genius' he really is. This Jafar is a malevolent, scheming, power-hungry tyrant-in-waiting, but he accidentally comes across as an utter moron purely because of the medium. You can suspend your disbelief when they're cartoons, but when it's actual people, it's unavoidable.

That aside, Aladdin is a pretty decent romp through an idealised Arab world. As the titular character, Mena Massoud is perfect. He's effortlessly charming but also awkward enough that you can believe entirely why his first attempts to curry favour with the royal family falls utterly flat ("jams?"). Why he didn't become an A-lister after this is a mystery, especially when he's not overshadowed by Will "Most Charming Man In History" Smith's genie. Coming across like the Fresh Uncle Of Agrabah, this genie is less of the hyperactive clown portrayed by Robbie Williams and is more like a smooth, charismatic focal point.

Naomi Scott's Jasmine meanwhile is also excellent. It's easy to forget that the original Jasmine was no shrinking violet, and Scott does a bang-up job portraying her. She also gets her own song this time and while it's not a show-stealer, it does sound like something the original Jasmine would have sung too.

Elsewhere, there's a nice bit of fleshing-out for the character of Hakim, the Captain of the Sultan's royal guard, a thrilling climax involving a giant parrot and the welcome addition of Nasim Pedrad's Dalia, a new character who plays a comic-relief role and soon becomes a love interest for the genie. Her friendship with Jasmine seems genuine and the romance subplot is sweet too, and she gets a few opportunities to show off her comic skills to good effect.

So, why only a 6/10? Well, it still can't help feeling like a bit of a cash-grab. This Aladdin is decent but it's also relatively inessential. It is a good movie, but it's only because the original Aladdin was. It has plenty of charm and is very easy to enjoy, but it also has a sort of 'assembly line' vibe. And the fact that Jafar looks Aladdin right in the eye, immediately after involving him in his masterplan to take over the country and doesn't know who he is, is very hard to ignore...

The live action version of 101 Dalmatians is something of an anomaly among Disney remakes. Made all the way back in 1996, decades before the Mouse House decided to churn out new versions of their classic material, it's a fun and spirited family adventure that feels a lot less cynical than their later 'reimaginings.' This one doesn't come across like a soulless cash-in and is arguably better than the animated version, even if it does have a few glaring flaws.

It's also a movie with John Hughes' fingerprints all over it. The powerhouse director was not in overall charge of the film (Stephen Herek gets the directing credit), but this is full of Hughes tropes and charm. There are cheesy romantic meet-cutes, a whimsical soundtrack and the second half is full of villains being subjected to painful pratfalls. The London and Suffolk depicted in 101 Dalmatians is noticeably more cinema-friendly than the real life versions, but it adds to the sweet, fairytale vibe.

Plus, there are two wise decisions that contribute to this being an underrated gem; the animals don't talk, and the casting of Glenn Close as Cruella De Vil. The former means the dogs seem more like...well, dogs, than anthropomorphic denizens of an uncanny valley, and the latter was simply inspired. Close plays the role in fantastically over-the-top style, her Cruella is a thoroughly unsympathetic villain without a single redeeming quality and she's brilliant. She's a short-tempered, uptight, patronising boss from hell and she vamps her way through the entire film, stealing every scene. To her eternal credit, Close is also game to let herself go through the ringer to entertain and the glamorous, Oscar-winning, Hollywood icon gets pulverised in this one! She gets kicked by horses, gets pigs dropped on her, and catapulted through roof windows to land in manure piles.

That said, the film has a few problems. The gender dynamics of the two human leads is...iffy, at best. Their relationship is nice enough but why does the successful fashion designer essentially surrender her career when her husband is struggling to make ends meet? It's also impossible to overlook the fact that Herek and Hughes have no understanding of the realities of British life. We don't get racoons and skunks here, that coffee machine is suspiciously American too.

Those complaints aside, 101 Dalmatians is one of the more enjoyable Disney live actioners. It bears enough similarities to the original to satisfy lifelong fans, while the 'Home Alone With Dogs' vibe should ensure that most kids love it. What nine-year-old wouldn't want to see a load of cute puppies subjecting Hugh Laurie and Mark Williams to a succession of bone-breaking slapstick?