DanLawson146 Reviews

Forrest Gump (1994)

Hanks is heartwarming, but it has big issues

[7/10 · 7 May 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) Tom Hanks really carries the film on his back with a brilliant performance that is well worthy of his Oscar win 2) The film has some very heartwarming moments that connected with me emotionally. I especially liked Forrest's relationship with Lieutenant Dan and also just how much of a sweet and innocent character he is. He's incredibly likeable as a lead character 3) The film has some very funny moments that made me laugh out loud and also some very iconic moments that have earned the film its permanent place in pop culture

NEGATIVES:

1) I think it's crazy how the film inserts Forrest into all of these iconic moments of history. Some of them, such as the Elvis dance moves, are just kinda silly; but others, like the civil rights movement and the JFK assassination, seem very problematic to just casually reference in quite a throwaway comedic way 2) Following on from my previous point about the problematic nature of the film, it's not just the historic references that are problematic, but also elements of Forrest's personal life as well. For example, Forrest's mother sleeping with the principal to get him a school place, or Jenny's father being abusive, or Jenny getting AIDS, are all insanely wild things to just insert into the film as minor plot points that are breezed over so quickly 3) The film certainly has an overdose of American cliché. Things like the schmaltzy music or the high school bullying are just very stereotypically American and quite cringey.

Love Lies Bleeding (2024)

Some good parts, just not my thing

[6/10 · 6 May 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are very good. The two female leads make their characters feel very complex and fleshed out, whilst Ed Harris is one of my favourite actors and is his usual intimidating self here 2) The film has some incredibly tense moments that had me squirming and gripping my seat. For example, moments like Lou having to hide in JJ's closet when her father enters the house were so gripping and nerve wracking 3) The film has a great soundtrack and it feels like the music choices actually add to the scene rather than just being there for the sake of it

NEGATIVES:

1) The film made me feel dirty and in need of a wash afterwards. I can't say I enjoyed watching the film because all of the smoking and the drug taking and the general messiness of everyone's house / car was simply filthy 2) I checked my watch several times throughout because I thought the pacing was too slow; especially in the first half prior to JJ's murder where things felt like they were going at snail's pace 3) I hated the ending so much. The film is extremely gritty and dirty for its whole runtime but then the ending just undercuts all of that by being so insanely silly. I actually think there would've been a way to make this twist work, like if she only grew to slightly superhuman size, like The Thing from Fantastic 4 for example, but instead she grows to the size of a mansion and the effects looked goofy and it just completely took me out of the film.

Challengers (2024)

Starts great but loses its way

[7/10 · 6 May 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The three central performances are great. They make the three lead characters feel really engaging to watch and I felt like you learned a lot about the characters from the actors' choices of facial expression in certain scenes 2) Following on from the above point, I felt the writing was really strong too. All three of the central characters are fully fleshed out and believable human beings and the narrative feels like a good balance of cinematic but still grounded 3) The score is fantastic. Reznor and Ross really know what they're doing when it comes to these kind of techno based scores and this is truly one of their best

NEGATIVES:

1) I felt like the film was trying too hard sometimes when it came to the tennis playing scenes. I should say that I am someone who plays and watches tennis, so maybe this bothered me more than other people, but I would've much preferred to just simply watch the characters play tennis, rather than constantly having an overuse of small motion or weird camera angles like first person POV or the ball's POV 2) I strongly disliked the ending. Obviously none of the characters are perfect, but I felt that they were all ultimately still likeable, up until the end where Tashi and Patrick have their affair and just immediately become completely unlikeable. I also thought the final scene of Art and Patrick embracing while Tashi screams from the sidelines was just ridiculous 3) Whilst I wasn't checking my watch or anything like that, I certainly felt like the film was too long and honestly the longer it went on the less I liked it.

Civil War (2024)

Politically engaging, without preaching

[8/10 · 2 May 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are brilliant. I really liked the dysfunctional family dynamic that our four leads have with each other, whilst there are also some barnstorming supporting roles for Jesse Plemons and Nick Offerman 2) The film certainly doesn't pull any punches. The violence and gore is really brutal at times and the action scenes are seat-grippingly intense. I felt that this really added to the power and memorability of the film 3) The film looks spectacular. Real credit is due for the director and cinematographer here because there really are some striking visuals, both in a beautiful sense and a haunting sense 4) With the fractured and divided political landscape that we have in 2024, this film felt so potent and like a damning indictment of where the world is headed. However, the most impressive thing was how it does this without actually passing any judgement. It's not specific to any political party or ideology, which I respected a lot

NEGATIVES:

1) Throughout the entire film, I was constantly unable to suspend my disbelief at the central premise that the press get so much access and respect from everybody in this war. There are soldiers and stone cold killers just happily allowing the press to accompany them on their missions for some reason? This was never more infuriating for me than at the end of the film when the Western Forces soldiers, whose entire purpose is to kill the president, actually wait to kill the president just so a journalist can get a quote from the president first?! Never in a million years would this happen 2) I wish we'd gotten to actually see so much more of the civil war that is unfolding, rather than just following our four leads for the entire runtime. To have Nick Offerman as the president only appear in two short scenes and nothing else was a mistake for me. I could've done with some scenes from the president's point of view or even some flashbacks to give deeper meaning to what is happening and why 3) There were a couple of tonal clashes for me that didn't work. For example, some of the song choices didn't gel with the visuals very well and the comedic scene of the two cars side by side while people climb out the window of one car and into the other felt like it was part of a different film.

In Bruges (2008)

Often great, but too silly

[8/10 · 20 April 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson have electric on-screen chemistry. They're both brilliant actors who give brilliant performances. Also, Ralph Fiennes steals every scene once he turns up for the final act; he's amazing 2) All of my favourite moments in the film are ones where the film is actually taking itself seriously. The fundamental story is about a naive young hitman who can't live with the guilt he feels after accidentally killing a child on a job, whilst his employer now wants to kill him for his mistake. That is a fantastic premise for a film and I wish these fundamentals were focused on more, rather than being cheapened by crude humour 3) By having the film set entirely in one town, especially a town as scenic as Bruges, it has the effect of Bruges really feeling like a character in its own right in the film. It makes you feel like you know the city even if, like me, you've never actually been there before

NEGATIVES:

1) As I have said before in this review, I just didn't appreciate a lot of the humour. It felt like the film was cheapening itself rather than taking itself as seriously as it should have 2) Despite being relatively short at 1hour 47 minutes, I still felt like the film was dragging itself out at times, rather than being focused on its narrative. Recurring characters like the midget, the guy who goes blind, and the Canadian guy are all completely unnecessary and just feel like the film taking unnecessary detours from its core narrative 3) The ending doesn't really land at all for me. Firstly because it feels like it goes on for far too long. Secondly because both of the main characters should die much sooner than they do. Gleeson gets shot twice and jumps from the top of the clock tower, but is somehow still able to speak for a bit when he lands; whilst Farrell gets shot 3 times right through the core of his body and somehow seems to survive??

Back to Black (2024)

It's good at times, but I didn't connect with it

[7/10 · 16 April 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are all very good. I thought it was a very sensible decision to get a virtually unknown actress to play Amy because it meant that she was able to completely disappear into the role and you feel like you're really seeing Amy. Also the fact she did all of her own singing is very impressive 2) The best moments in the film for me are the musical moments, watching Amy record / perform her most famous songs. These scenes were filmed very well and it was impressive how real they made things like the Glastonbury performance and the Grammy performance look 3) Eddie Marsan and Lesley Manville both bring a much needed touch of class to the film. I thought Mitch and Cynthia were pretty much the only two likeable characters in the film actually 4) I thought the way in which Amy's mental decline and deterioration was portrayed through her appearance was quite clever. We see her transform from a beautiful and natural looking girl at the start, into a girl covered in ugly tattoos and over the top hair by the end. I felt like the film was making a point of showing us every time Amy got a new tattoo or a new hairstyle, to signify to us that in each of these moments she is moving further away from the relatively angelic figure that she was at the start of the film

NEGATIVES:

1) I say in my last point that Mitch and Cynthia were the only likeable characters for me; and that is an issue. I found Amy and Blake to both be insufferable and I didn't connect with either of them at all. This is an issue because they are the two characters with the most screen time and when emotional things were happening to them I was struggling to care because I didn't like them 2) I struggled with a sense of timing throughout the film. It feels like it was really speeding through Amy's life, which meant that many moments struggled to feel impactful. I also feel like unless you're a die hard Amy Winehouse fan you wouldn't be able to really tell when months or years were passing by in the film's chronology 3) I felt like the film bottled it a little bit with its ending. It fairly abruptly cuts to black and just tells us that Amy had passed away, whereas I feel like a gutsier film would've actually shown that happen.

12 Angry Men (1957)

A masterpiece

[10/10 · 14 April 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are terrific. Fonda and Cobb lead the line tremendously of course, but really every single one of the jurors is perfectly cast 2) The writing is just sensational. Each one of the juror's feels like a fully fleshed out character, meaning you're never confused about who is who or about what motivations everybody has. Also, the way in which the narrative unfolds is truly remarkable because it's so engaging yet also feels so real. As the audience we see nothing of the actual trial or of the actual crime itself, we learn everything purely from what the juror's tell us, yet we never feel lost or confused because everything is presented so clearly, whilst also peeling back the layers of the different pieces of evidence in a very believable way 3) In this modern age of massively inflated film budgets, looking back to this film and taking lessons from it is something that I think could be really valuable. The film basically all takes place in one room with basically only 12 characters and is a tight 90 minutes long. It is the perfect example of the phrase "less is more"

NEGATIVES:

Honestly, there is nothing I'd change about this film. It's a timeless classic and an amazing achievement for all involved. It has themes like racism and classism which are still extremely potent to a modern audience, so I'd urge anyone who hasn't seen it yet to definitely do so.

Monkey Man (2024)

It's okay; I was expecting better

[6/10 · 14 April 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are very good. Dev Patel really breaks from the typecasting he has had previously, whilst Sharlto Copley also gives a very entertaining supporting performance 2) The action is very hard hitting and doesn't pull any punches, which is always fun to watch and respectable that it didn't shy away from things to try and appeal to a wider audience 3) I respected the film for exploring Indian culture faithfully and not selling its soul to be more commercially friendly to a western audience

NEGATIVES:

1) I didn't like the structure of the film for two reasons. Firstly, because having the protagonist fail, go away and do a training montage, then come back and succeed is just so cliche. Secondly, because the first time our hero attacks the chief of police the film hasn't really told us why yet or given us anything to really care about. The flashbacks to his mother being attacked should have been at the start of the film so that we can connect to our protagonist much earlier on 2) I just found the film to be very bland and generic. It doesn't do anything that we haven't seen a thousand times before. None of the characters other than our protagonist get any sort of depth to them, the villains are incredibly forgettable, and the fact that the film had the nerve to mention John Wick when it's so clearly a rip off of that series felt really eye rolling 3) I enjoyed the action scenes at times, but on the whole I thought there was far too much shaky cam and I think the film could've benefitted at times from having a more experienced head behind the camera.

The Irishman (2019)

What Scorsese does best

[8/10 · 5 April 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are all amazing. The leads are all veteran actors who put in their best performances in years and convey so much through subtle facial expressions and gestures, while the younger supporting cast all really bring their A game too 2) I thought the world building was terrific. It reminded me of Once Upon A Time In Hollywood in terms of how you feel like you're actually living in this time period with these characters; I was truly absorbed by the film 3) As the title of this review suggests, this film is right in Scorsese's wheelhouse and he knows exactly what he's doing in this crime genre and with these themes of corrupting your soul and losing yourself to greed. Watching the film was like watching a master at work

NEGATIVES:

1) There is definitely no need for the film to be three and a half hours long. You could take an hour out of the film quite easily without really affecting the main story at all 2) The de-aging was a big talking point prior to the film's release and I don't think it's terrible, but I do think it's noticeably wobbly at times. I also felt there were times it was quite obvious that characters were standing in front of fake CGI backgrounds rather than being on real sets / in real locations 3) Scorsese loves using narration and it's just not something I'm a fan of in any film really. Also, the way it's used for De Niro to frequently rattle off the names of dozens of bit-part characters made it hard to keep track of who was who.

Marriage Story (2019)

So emotional and engaging

[9/10 · 28 March 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The four central performances - Adam Driver, Scarlett Johansson, Ray Liotta and Laura Dern - are all really amazing. Dern was the only one that won the Oscar but all four of them would have been very worthy 2) Noah Baumbach does a really great job with the writing and the direction. There are lots of long dialogue scenes with very infrequent cuts and a lesser filmmaker would've made this become boring but Baumbach keeps it so engaging throughout the entire runtime 3) The film is so emotional and really feels like it earns the emotional reaction that it makes you have. I had tears in my eyes by the end and I felt like the film had earned that reaction from me by being so great and so real throughout

NEGATIVES:

1) This may sound harsh, but I did find the child actor playing Henry to be pretty poor. Henry comes across as very whiny and annoying and it kinda irritated me whenever he was prominent in a scene 2) I don't think the film needs to be as long as it is. A tighter runtime of under two hours would've prevented any hint of drag, which the film did occasionally have.

Rush (I) (2013)

My favourite racing film

[9/10 · 25 March 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) Everything about the portrayal of the rivalry between Hunt and Lauda is absolute gold dust to me. Hemsworth and Bruhl both give brilliant performances, the writing of both characters is extremely well done and I absolutely loved every interaction between the two 2) I think the racing scenes are truly some of the best ever put to film. You really feel like you are in the car with the drivers, especially when the film gives you first person perspective where you can actually see through the visors of the drivers; but even when it is in third person perspective it is still completely gripping 3) The film is a great technical achievement. The score, editing, cinematography, costume design etc etc are all superb, so credit needs to go to the whole crew that worked on this film

NEGATIVES:

1) Because of the fact that the Hunt and Lauda rivalry is the focal point of the film and is done so well, I did think that basically every supporting character felt sidelined and one dimensional. We don't really any character depth from any character other than Hunt and Lauda, which is a bit of a shame, especially given the complete lack of any strong female representation 2) I'm not sure if this is just because I'm British myself, but I did feel like the writing of Hunt wasn't quite as three dimensional as that of Lauda. I think his character is portrayed very well when it comes to his attitude towards racing, being very hotheaded and risk taking which makes him the antithesis of Lauda's approach. However, his friends at Hesketh are all so painfully stereotypically British and I thought seeing him just constantly drinking, smoking and sleeping around got a bit repetitive.

Late Night with the Devil (2023)

Low budget filmmaking done right

[8/10 · 24 March 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are brilliant. Jack is clearly the lead and David does a great job with him; it's quite a wide ranging performance in the sense that on the one hand he's this overly charismatic TV host, but on the other hand he becomes increasingly unnerved as the events of the film transpire. I also thought the young girl playing Lilly was really terrific and had the perfect balance between charming and creepy 2) As my title suggests, I was really impressed by how the film utilises its low budget. Setting the film all in one studio was a great idea as it adds a claustrophobic atmosphere to the film, and I also loved how the film is a tight 90 minutes as it means it never feels boring or like it's overstaying its welcome 3) I think this is a film that I'll remember very well amongst all the other films I see. I loved the theme of this TV host who is at heart a good person but has been corrupted by his lust for fame. I also found it pleasantly unique. Moments such as Carmichael hypnotising everyone in the studio, whilst also seeming to hypnotise us as the audience too, were very well done and the film in general is very well made

NEGATIVES:

1) There are certainly moments where you can tell that the filmmakers were struggling to capture what they wanted to show whilst working with such a low budget. I thought the special effects in general were very ropey. Moments such as the projectile vomiting or the worm infestations just looked really bad if I'm being brutally honest 2) I'm someone who's quite easily scared by horror films, but I have to say I didn't find this film scary at all. The hand appearing on Jack's shoulder was the only moment that even gave me the chills, and I never once felt genuinely scared. To me, the film felt like it was slowly building towards this great horrific climax, but in the end I felt that the ending was somewhat of a let down because it's more about Jack's psychological breakdown than it is about genuine horror.

The Godfather (1972)

Of course it's a classic, but not my favourite

[7/10 · 22 March 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are exceptional, especially Brando and Pacino. Brando gives one of the most iconic performances of all time, while the fact Pacino didn't win an Oscar for either this film or Part 2 is completely outrageous 2) The themes and messaging of the film are very powerful. It's so much more than just an average Mafia movie. It's a film about family and about how a good man can be corrupted by power, while also being a chilling indictment of capitalism. The downfall of Michael from a noble war hero to the Don of his criminal empire is a tragedy but is a character arc that the film handles masterfully, such as in scenes like the restaurant murders and the car bomb in Sicily 3) The film contains so many iconic lines of dialogue and iconic scenes. It's very impressive to have so many recognisable things crammed into one film

NEGATIVES:

1) I can't deny that the film is a slog for me. I understand that it's supposed to be a slow burn and I understand that films were generally a lot more slowly paced 50 years ago than they are today, but I really do struggle to keep focused on the film during some of the scenes, especially in the first half 2) There are times where it feels like you could do with having the novel or the script in front of you while you're watching. There were several moments where I think it was hard to follow what was supposed to be happening, or what characters were talking about, or actually who certain characters were and at what points we'd seen them in the film previously 3) I praised the performances earlier, and that is certainly true of the main cast, but I have to say that I do find some of the supporting cast quite one dimensional and not delivering great performances.

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)

I think it's Kubrick's masterpiece

[10/10 · 21 March 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The film is a masterclass in stripped back, low budget filmmaking. It only cost $1.8million to make, which is only around $18million in today's money, which is nothing by filmmaking standards. There are only really 3 settings in the whole film: the plane, the War Room and the military base; but the way Kubrick is able to intertwine these settings in his narrative is so impressive 2) I love the way in which music is used in this film. There's not a lot of it, but the constant marching theme playing during all the scenes on the plane was a brilliant decision, as was the use of Vera Lynn's "We'll Meet Again" at the end, given how this song is so strongly associated with war 3) The film is obviously a satire, yet it walks this line so cleverly because it never comes across as too silly. At the time it was made it was obviously a very powerful commentary on the Cold War, but even watching it now it still feels very relevant to what we have going on in the world today 4) The dialogue is razor sharp, which keeps you engaged, and the delivery from all of the actors was perfect. Kubrick helms every scene masterfully and got exactly what was needed out of each performance and out of each line of dialogue

NEGATIVES:

Honestly, nothing. Sure there are decisions the film makes which I wouldn't have made myself, but these are all things that make the film what it is, so aren't things that I would actually change.

Rear Window (1954)

A classic in low budget filmmaking

[7/10 · 21 March 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) James Stewart and Grace Kelly are both brilliant actors and the chemistry they have on screen is always great to watch. They really carry the film and keep you engaged as an audience 2) As the title of this review states, I think this film is a great example of filmmaking on a low budget. The budget for this film is listed as a million dollars, which equates to around 11.5million dollars in today's money, which is absolutely nothing in filmmaking terms. Despite this, Hitchcock manages to use the acting and the set and the camera work to create a really good mystery 3) The more that the film progresses, the more engrossed in the mystery that you become, I just wish that the start was as good as the finish

NEGATIVES:

1) I do find parts of the film, especially in the first half, to be a struggle to watch. It's very slow and plodding and I know that that's how films were during this period, but that doesn't make it enjoyable to watch in this modern day era. I really struggled to keep my attention span focused on the film when there is lots of unengaging dialogue scenes or shots of the scenery that really don't hold up in 2024 2) I think the film is very dated when it comes to its attitude towards women. Grace Kelly is hopelessly head over heels for James Stewart despite the fact that he treats her awfully and she is clearly so much more successful and out of his league, which is hard to swallow in 2024. Also, the ballet dancer is a completely one dimensional object who's only there to be leered at.

Drive-Away Dolls (2024)

Painfully lacking in nearly all areas

[4/10 · 19 March 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are as good as they can be; nobody is bad in the movie they just aren't really given anything good to work with 2) I was fairly invested in Jamie and Marian's relationship. I think they're two leads that carry the film as well as they can and had a good chemistry together 3) The film is mercifully short at only 83 minutes, meaning it wasn't painful to sit through despite lacking in quality

NEGATIVES:

1) The film is painfully unfunny. It's trying so hard to be funny but the humour just didn't work at all for me 2) I understand that Ethan Coen has built up a lot of credibility with his previous films and so clearly has a lot of famous friends, but the constant churn of famous faces doing tiny roles in this film was just distracting. Pedro Pascal and Matt Damon are both huge stars and literally show up for one scene each, so what's the point?

3) You actually have the basic outline of a good plot here. Two friends accidentally get given a car that wasn't meant for them which means they inadvertently stumble into a criminal conspiracy involving a famous politician. The problem is that rather than flesh out this concept and make it interesting, the film spends most of its time just being needlessly rude and outrageous, making it come across more like a desperate cry for attention than as any kind of serious filmmaking.

Ford v Ferrari (2019)

One of Mangold's best films

[8/10 · 14 March 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are great. Damon and Bale are clearly the leads and they make Carol and Ken feel really relatable and you definitely route for both of them to be successful, especially in the final act. The writing helps a lot here too by making these main characters so likeable and giving them an engaging story 2) The racing scenes are helmed really well. They're very cinematic but also still very realistic to how actual racing looks. I also thought the way in which the writing enables the audience to understand the technical aspects of the cars was really good 3) For being a two and a half hour film, I thought the film went along at a good pace. It kept me engaged throughout and I never felt bored, which is unusual because normally long films like this really test my patience

NEGATIVES:

1) As a Brit, I have to say that I really struggled with the British characters in this film. Not only do Ken and his family have such stereotypical British accents, but also the film frequently has them saying lines that are just so stereotypically British and it felt caricatured at times 2) While most of the characters feel very fleshed out and grounded, I felt that Josh Lucas' character Leo Beebe was painfully one dimensional. He's just such a stereotypical corporate bad guy, he may as well have been twirling a moustache the whole time he was on screen. I understand that he's supposed to be unlikeable, but it just took me out of the film whenever he was on screen 3) There were a couple of moments where I thought it was quite clear that CGI and/or fake backgrounds were being used. The visual effects during the driving sequences were really good but there were certain more lowkey moments, such as Carol getting off a plane at the Mustang launch, where it's quite obvious that most of the shot is fake.

American Beauty (1999)

I just don't get it

[6/10 · 3 March 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The two central performances are brilliant. Spacey and Benning are both on top form here and play their parts perfectly. I also thought Wes Bentley from the supporting cast was a real standout too 2) The film certainly makes you think as a critique of the uninspired suburban lifestyle that so many of us fall in to. The bleak ending that the film has also makes it more poignant and powerful 3) Some of the imagery of this film has become iconic. The shots of Angela covered in the red rose petals is one of the most recognisable film images of the past few decades

NEGATIVES:

1) I just found a lot of the film to be quite plodding and meandering, with no real dramatic weight being pressed down on the characters to keep the plot moving along 2) I get that part of the point of this film is that all of the characters are a bit unhinged, but I really didn't get on board with the awkward dialogue and stunted line delivery that this film has at so many points 3) What was the purpose of Alison Janney's character? She contributes literally nothing to the story. You could've just had the father be widowed and it wouldn't have changed the film at all.

Dune: Part Two (2024)

Shoots big and mostly hits the mark

[8/10 · 3 March 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are almost all great. Timothee Chalamet really carries the film with the amount of screen time he has and I really thought he was sensational in portraying Paul's turn to the darkness, as were the vast majority of the supporting cast 2) The size and scale of this film are truly remarkable. You should see this film on the biggest screen you can with the best sound system you can. Denis deserves a lot of credit for holding the reins here and delivering a film that is not only grand in scale but also grand in terms of its themes and messages. Whether it's the huge epic battle sequences we see, or the intense hand to hand combat scenes with Feyd, the film was gripping in all its action scenes 3) Hans Zimmer truly brings his A game and the score for this film will be hard to beat when the Oscars come back around next year. He is an epic composer and this is a truly epic musical achievement 4) For a film only just under three hours long, I thought it flew over. I checked my watch once just in passing and couldn't believe that 2 hours had passed already, which is a great sign because usually I say that films should be shorter

NEGATIVES:

1) I mentioned that I thought the performances were "almost all" great. The one exception to that for me was Dave Bautista. I really like him as an actor and usually think he performs great, but here I just felt that the performance was very one dimensional. I'm pretty sure he yells every single line of dialogue he has and it just got irritating after a while 2) The first hour of the film was a bit of a slog for me, because it focuses almost exclusively on just meandering around with the Fremen. In fact, I found the Fremen sections of the film to be by far the weakest part. Whenever the Harkonnens or the Bene Gesserit were on screen I was loving it, but the scenes exploring Fremen culture and their religious beliefs were just a bit unnecessary for me because there are soooo many of them. Lady Jessica becomes Reverend Mother almost instantly and all the stuff about Stillgar being convinced Paul is their saviour even when he says he's not was almost comical at times and has already been made the focus of several memes online.

Monster High: The Movie (2022 TV Movie)

Harmless fun for young children

[6/10 · 3 March 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The film actually does a pretty good job of fleshing out who all of the characters are; I was certainly never confused about who was who. The main three characters especially are all pretty strong female heroines I thought 2) Most of the songs are actually pretty catchy and the choreography that accompanies them was quite good too

NEGATIVES:

1) There's not exactly anything groundbreaking here. All the common tropes of films like this like the mean popular girl and the overbearing father are all present here 2) It's obviously been made with a low budget, but even so some of the special effects are truly terrible. I feel like there surely must've been a better way to go about it than what they did. Some of the awful moments are just pointless exterior shots of the school which could've been cut out and make no difference to the story anyway.

Avengers: Endgame (2019)

The MCU should've ended here

[9/10 · 25 February 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) I love how emotional and deep the film is. The first hour or so of this film floored me. I really loved how dark and serious they went in terms of showing the trauma and after-effects of what Thanos did. Then, scenes like Tony speaking to his father for the final time, or Clint and Natasha fighting to sacrifice themselves, really hit me in the feels, along with the obviously very emotional death of Tony and funeral scene at the end of the film 2) Everytime I watch the "portals" scene it completely gives me goosebumps. The film, and the franchise as a whole up to this point, really feel like they've earned this insanely huge climax and it's honestly euphoric seeing all these heroes we've came to know fighting alongside each other. It's also really impressive how the film gets to this point after about two and a half hours of runtime, yet it's kept itself going at such a pace that it never feels like a slog to watch 3) Being a superhero film, it's always going to be difficult for the snobby parts of the film industry to recognise the individual achievements, but this film really does have some. The performances from the likes of Downey, Evans and Renner are really sensational, whilst technical achievements such as cinematography and score are really great too

NEGATIVES:

1) Time travel in film is always a difficult thing for me to swallow because it always seems to throw up so many plot holes. In this case, I struggled to understand the film's logic behind saying that the past doesn't change the future, but then also saying that it's totally fine for them to steal the stones and then just go back in time and replace them with no consequences, not to mention how insanely difficult it would be for Cap to actually replace them all, but the film just skips over that like it's nothing and gives us Chris Evans in really bad old age makeup instead 2) I know the MCU is known for its humour, but it's one of my least favourite parts of this franchise. This film is one of the best in terms of keeping the unnecessary humour to a minimum, but there were still a couple of scenes in which humour ruined the moment for me 3) Again, this is something the MCU has kinda became known for at this point, but it's absolutely ridiculous that we're supposed to believe in the final battle that everyone is able to communicate with each other, even though there are no earpieces to be seen and even if there were it would be impossible for them to have equipped everybody with those earpieces before the major battle started.

Wicked Little Letters (2023)

Very funny and surprisingly impactful

[8/10 · 25 February 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are all very good. Colman and Buckley really carry the film, but the supporting performances from the likes of Spall and Scanlan are really good too 2) I really found the film to be laugh out loud funny. It's a very British level of humour and it hits that sweet spot really well 3) I was pleasantly surprised by how emotional and impactful the film actually was on top of the humour. Rose's relationship with her daughter and Edith's relationship with her father are both subjects that the film takes really seriously and it managed to juggle this seriousness with the overall humour in an impressively deft way

NEGATIVES:

1) There were certainly times where the film was a bit too quaint for me and I could've done with a bit more bite 2) I found the writing to be quite lazy at times. Basically every male character is evil or stupid or both, whilst every female character is probably fleshed out and three dimensional 3) The film wraps up a bit too neatly for me. I was quite impressed by the twist that Edith was writing all the letters all along, but the film didn't really do enough for me in terms of highlighting how essentially insane Edith clearly is - she literally causes the death of her own mother and doesn't seem to care?? Also I didn't really get how the invisible ink on the postage stamp was enough to convict Edith beyond any reasonable doubt?

All of Us Strangers (2023)

Abstract & artistic, but muddled at times

[7/10 · 20 February 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are brilliant. There are basically only four characters in the whole film and all four actors give really great performances. In particular, Andrew Scott really carries the film on his back by appearing in every scene and giving a beautifully emotional and complex performance 2) As the title of this review suggests, I found the film to be very abstract and artistic. It's a film really about emotions and about how something makes you feel, rather than a film where everything makes sense and has explanations. What this has lead to is a haunting film that I think will stick with me for a long time 3) I enjoyed the ending of the film a lot. It's certainly not a happy ending and I was actually impressed by how dark the film got in terms of Adam's parents leaving him and then the reveal that Harry has actually been dead since just after the first time we meet him

NEGATIVES:

1) As I've said in the title of this review, I did find the film to be muddled at times. It almost seems like two films mashed together. On the one hand, you have the film that's a love story between Adam and Harry. Then, on the other hand, you have the film about a man who's imagining seeing his dead parents again. There were certainly times for me where these two elements didn't blend together very well 2) A fairly small point given some of the outrageous age gaps we've seen on screen before, but I did find the age gap between Adam and Harry quite uncomfortable. There's 20 years between Andrew Scott and Paul Mescal, and personally I have to say that I think Mescal didn't really add anything to the film that an actor closer to Scott's age couldn't have done anyway. I also found some of the dialogue between the two to be really cringey and the scenes of them doing weed and ketamine together felt very unnecessary 3) I've stated in my "positives" section that the film is about making you feel something more than actually giving you answers. While this is good in a sense, it did still leave me confused at times and wanting some sort of explanation as to what is actually causing Adam to have these visions. Given the ending revelation that Harry has been dead for most of the film, it seemed to me that Adam is clearly insane and I could've done with the film coming out and stating this clearly rather than giving us a more poetic ending of the two of them in bed together.

The Iron Claw (2023)

Really powerful, but has pacing issues

[7/10 · 18 February 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) The performances are all superb; there's career best performances from pretty much everybody. In particular, Zac Efron is so emotional and empathetic, whilst Holt McCallany was absolutely terrifying and I felt on edge in literally every scene he was in 2) The wrestling scenes were really gritty, intense and gripping to watch. I also loved how the film used the graphics and camera style of the era in which it's set 3) The film could easily have been a boys only affair, and whilst the men are clearly the leads, I actually thought the two main female characters were actually two of the most engaging characters in the film. Credit to the actresses for that but also to the writers for really fleshing these women out

NEGATIVES:

1) As the title of this review suggests, I really did have an issue with the pacing. The first hour in particular really does drag and I feel could've easily trimmed itself down to under 2 hours and been much more manageable by doing so. I checked my watch at several points because I was wishing the film to speed up and keep me more engaged 2) I feel like the film could've done a better job of demonstrating when and how much time had passed. The film spans several years but it wasn't until about two thirds in that I even realised that. There's a scene near the end where Kevin takes control of the company and his Dad tells him he's "nearly 40", but I genuinely thought the characters were still supposed to be in their 20s because the film never demonstrated that significant time had passed and the characters had really aged.

Madame Web (2024)

I enjoyed it. Sue me

[7/10 · 18 February 2024]

POSITIVES:

1) I thought the chemistry between Cassie and the girls was really well done. I really bought into Cassie's older sister sort of dynamic with the girls. I also thought her chemistry with Ben was well done too 2) The film is short and goes along at a good pace. I have watched plenty of films recently where I've felt the pacing was too slow and that scenes could've been cut out, but here I never felt like the film was dragging 3) Look, I'm not saying it should win any Oscars, but I enjoyed myself while I was watching it and I found it to be a very likeable film with very likeable leading ladies; it charmed me in a way that a lot of films don't

NEGATIVES:

1) There's no getting away from the fact that the film is badly made from a technical perspective. The direction and cinematography are both pretty woeful and it feels almost like a student film at times 2) I can't believe they actually released this film without anybody fixing how terribly out of sync the dialogue is with character's mouth movements at several points. The scenes with the main villain in his apartment were especially terrible for this 3) The script could've definitely done with another draft or several. Some of the dialogue is really cringey and the amount of plot contrivances are insane (facial recognition on the girls based on a sketch from a dream that shows what they look like in the future???). Also, Cassie's random detour to the Amazon for all of about 10 minutes felt so out of place and unnecessary.