Review Category: Movie

We should preface this review by saying that this writer has really enjoyed all the previous Expendables films and was excited at the prospect of more to come. Look, we can all agree, this stuff has never been in danger of having its scripts dissected in English Literature classes but seeing these impressive casts of action legends back in action, and together, has yielded many throwback joys and knuckle crunching fun. So, what could go wrong in seeing more legends back in action again…well, a lot as it happens.

This fourth outing sees the mercenary team, The Expendables, go on another mission, as they may be the world’s last line of defence in the face of nuclear threat, as a presence from Barney’s (Sylvester Stallone) past wreaks havoc, and one mission gone wrong changes the course of the team forever.

Expend4bles is not good as an action movie but as an addition to The Expendables series is so dispiriting. This new film has the overwhelming feeling of a straight to video/dvd/streaming sequel through the ages. The warning signs should have been evident with the initial confusingly lacklustre cast announcement, certain people’s exits and/or displeasure with the script, and then the iffy trailer, but even so a $100 million action franchise film should not be in such bad shape.

The effects resemble 20-year-old video game cutscenes, the visuals overall often reflect those low-res Facebook clips of a movie you’ve never heard of inexplicably shared on your feed, and the story is so misguided we cannot believe anyone did not call for a complete rethink early on. 

Jaa and Uwais are wasted, while Lundgren, Statham and Couture are left to try and save the show (and give it a damn good shot), while Stallone is preposterously relegated to backdrop. The casting is also so weird and ill fitting at best, and bloody stupid at worst, with by far the worst roll call one of these movies has ever had, as the action itself is equally tame by the series’ dream match like standards and even more so compared to other recent action cinema. However, and perhaps worst of all, this just does not feel like an Expendables film.

There are some things here that remind you of one but everyone seemingly focused on added CG blood and swearing to please people who felt the last one was grisly enough, and that is not enough to justify a movie that is ultimately a bootleg Expendables flick, and yet one that apparently cost more than any other instalment. What the hell gives? 

This is the barebones of the series, left to try and scramble a whole sequel together. Expend4bles betrays so much of the series’ comforts and pleasures, and the roster of action heavyweights (and their characters) that delivered them, that it was really a project not worth doing in the end. Especially if this was always destined to be the face palming chosen route.

“They’ll die when they’re dead” read the posters. Yes, it is indeed, a franchise killer folks, and that pains this writer to type.

Expend4ables is showing now in cinemas

John ‘Jigsaw’ Kramer is seemingly back from the dead in the latest installment of the Saw series, but how? Simply, this film is a prequel set between Saw and Saw II, which also allows the return of Shawnee Smith’s Amanda as his deadly apprentice.

In Saw X, we learn even more about John as he undergoes treatment for terminal cancer. Hearing of a miracle cure in Mexico, John heads there with a renewed hope of survival. However, he finds out it’s a scam to make money from desperate people. Of course, this is one person you don’t want to con, and so the games begin. Again.

Saw X is one of the strongest films in the franchise, giving us more of an insight into the man behind Jigsaw and his renewed purpose. Amidst the horror are a few self-referential laughs; most notably Jigsaw getting inspiration from some hospital machinery for his traps and a candid discussion about his career.

It does have its flaws too, mostly in the final third of the movie where there’s a bit too much fan-service muddying the plot. For those who want gore, innovative traps, and creepy puppets on tricycles, you won’t be disappointed. For Jigsaw, the end is the beginning, and his inevitable death is his rebirth. Maybe we’ll see a few more standalone adventures soon – Saw XI anybody?

SAW X is in cinemas now

 

With its box office prospects currently looking rather less than stellar, it’s probable that The Creator, the latest sci-fi extravaganza (and it genuinely is an extravaganza) from Gareth (Godzilla) Edwards will find its place in the cinematic history books because of the incredible economy of its budget (the film cost around $80m to make) and the fact that, flying in the face of current theatrical trends, it isn’t a franchise feature, a sequel, a reimagining, or even a superhero film. It’s an all-new, standalone sci-fi flick, albeit one that not only borrows fairly heavily from classic genre concepts but also, to its credit or not, plays around with recent/current growing concerns about the development of Artificial Intelligence and the threat it may (or may not) pose to mankind’s dominance of the planet. The Creator isn’t quite a masterpiece, but it skews pretty close at times, and if it doesn’t quite succeed as a ‘cautionary tale’ (it’s a bit too broad for that), it more than delivers as a refreshingly ‘new’ IP that doesn’t require years of audience loyalty and emotional investment to make its point. Ironically, in a year that has seen several established franchises and ‘Universes’ have crashed and burned, The Creator may well suffer from a lack of core familiarity; maybe it’s a year or too ahead of its cinematic time.

A brisk bit of info-dumping at the start sets the scene. From initially being heralded as a massive technological breakthrough, AI has gone rogue. A nuclear detonation has wiped out Los Angeles, and man is now at war with AI, which has been pushed back into Asia. The military is moving in to wipe out the threat once and for all with specific help from the formidable NOMAD military space station, which pinpoints enclaves of rogue AI and drops bombs to wipe them out. But the ‘Creator’, the architect of this advanced generation of AI – humanoid creatures with visible mechanical workings and malformed craniums – is still at large and has developed a superweapon that has the power to not only end the war but also to wipe out mankind. Our hero is everyman soldier Joshua (John David Washington), who severely injured himself in a previous battle and is now augmented by functioning prosthetics. He’s part of the elite military team tasked with journeying behind enemy lines to track down this new superweapon, but Joshua has his own demons as he is haunted by the brutal death of his pregnant wife, Maya (Gemma Chan), five years earlier. As Joshua and the team enter territory infested with AI soldiers, he makes a shocking discovery – not only about Maya but also about the nature of this elusive superweapon, which turns out to be a very human/AI child with the power to control technology itself.

At its heart, it’s a simple man vs machine storyline, the stuff of science fiction since the birth of the robot and the concept of machines with independent thought. But Edwards makes it feel fresh and new simply by the unique style of filmmaking he has brought to the project. Largely eschewing massive crews and studio sets, he opts to make his movie virtually guerilla style, filming raw footage at around 80 locations around the world without any of the usual time-consuming artifice of the medium and then allowing his FX gurus to build the world and the spectacle around the live-action. And what spectacle it is. We’re all used to the magic Hollywood can conjure up digitally these days, and it’s hard to be impressed by what we see on the screen. But when we bear in mind the budget of The Creator, what’s up there is beyond extraordinary. Battle scenes are powerfully visceral; drop ships hurtle through the sky disgorging soldiers ready for war; the NOMAD station is a forbidding and near-constant presence (and the setting of the thrilling, explosive finale), and huge machines roll across the countryside, flattening and sending terrified locals fleeing for their lives. Two sentient suicide robots evoke the cute droids of Star Wars as they stomp almost comically into battle before exploding in the middle of their targets.

The Creator is ultimately a very futuristic war film – many of the scenes perhaps uncomfortably recall shared memories of the Vietnam War, the conflict that still cuts a deep scar across recent American history. But it’s a film about humanity, too. Fighting to assert itself and retain its dominion over the world by fighting against an enemy of its own creation. The scale of its visuals inevitably leave its human cast a little swamped, but there are some good, gutsy performance on offer. John David Washington is more nuanced here than in the baffling Tenet, a tragic figure damaged both by war and personal loss. He quickly establishes a powerful and quite touching bond with the young superweapon Alphie (a demanding role pulled off winningly by Madeleine Yuna Voyles), and there’s good support from Gemma Chan, Ken Watanabe, Allison Janney, and the UK’s Ralph Ineson.

The Creator is a remarkable achievement that could and should be a salutary lesson for those over-indulgent directors who merrily spend 300 million dollars on films that can never really hope to make a huge profit in the current climate. Sadly, The Creator probably won’t either, but as an exercise in original thinking and filmmaking ‘outside the box’, it’s a triumph on its own terms.

 

THE CREATOR is on general release in cinemas now.

Natural disasters like wildfires are becoming more common, and this realistic action drama highlights the plight of both victims whose homes are razed to the ground and the stressed call handlers and first responders who have to do their best to save lives and get people to safety.

Dave (Peter Facinelli, Twilight), his heavily pregnant wife Sarah (Fiona Dourif, Chucky), and their teenage son Clay (Asher Angel, Shazam!) live deep in the woods. They also have Dave’s obstinate father (Lance Henriksen), who is struggling with health issues but sneakily continues smoking. Dave is struggling with bills, but something much worse is on the way in the form of an out-of-control wildfire that is uprooting everyone in its path. When the time comes for them to flee, they face multiple obstacles, not least Sarah’s waters breaking.

As an eco-survival thriller, On Fire makes its point well, if a tad heavy-handedly. Peter Facinelli (who co-directs with one of the writers, Nick Lyon) leads the impressive cast. His fraught struggle to get to his wife and son is gripping and believable. Everyone excels in their roles, with special mention to Ashlei Foushee as the emergency call taker who can’t help but become emotionally involved in the safety of others.

While some of the flame effects are a little too obviously CGI, On Fire keeps the plight of the characters exciting and gives us plenty to root for.

On Fire is in US cinemas from September 29th. 

When it comes to horror films, there are few things quite as gratifying as a genuinely really good alien horror film. A largely untapped sub-genre compared to, say, zombies, there are many particularly good stand-outs that go often under appreciated (Fire in the Sky, The Fourth Kind, Sputnik, Life), a select few that reach legendary status (Alien, Predator, The McPherson Tape) and so many others that fall into cult status (Critters) or crash and burn as disappointments (Skyline). 

So it has us beaming to see one literally come from nowhere in Brian Duffield’s (Spontaneous) No One Will Save You, which has just invaded Disney+ (over here in the UK) and Hulu, and is set to leave you spinning more than a flying saucer.

The film stars Kaitlyn Dever as Brynn, a reserved and somewhat isolated young woman, who lives alone and spends her time crafting, cooking and writing to her friend. Then, one night, she is awoken by strange noises downstairs, finding she has an unexpected visitor who is not of this Earth. What then plays out is a cat and mouse game of survival, whereby Brynn will have to face her past to have any hopes of a future.

No One Will Save You is an absolutely incredible alien horror/sci-fi, perhaps the best to come along in years. What starts as a home invasion thriller, slowly spirals towards a final act that delivers such a bold, potentially divisive, genre-bending delight, it catches you off guard completely. No One Will Save You is a suspenseful character-driven treat that at times blends the thrills of A Quiet Place with the wild story swings of The Twilight Zone, and the result is a Signs for the 2020s…albeit the film itself is a far different beast. 

Practically dialogue-free, writer/director Brian Duffield’s film is immaculately assembled, both physical and reliant on the details of its settings, and the sounds in the distance, it also carries an eccentric edge. Ultimately unfolding into a deeply personal story of loneliness, grief and remorse, and how the resulting anxieties of such human experiences can create a world alien enough already.

At its core, Kaitlyn Dever delivers an astonishing and captivating central performance, one full of heart, suffering and the power of sheer will. Her character proving relatable to many of us whom have felt the world has left us all alone, chosen to blanket ourselves in our own imaginary world, or who have been damaged by the destructive power of regret or the past.

The horror beats are tension-riddled and genuinely creepy or alarming, while the visuals are absolutely incredible, with one of the most impressive examples of maximising budget and resources to come along in a while. Seriously, this film knocks the spots of many mega budgeted fare that cost about ten times the price. The extra terrestrial creatures are proudly on show (and these greys are nasty) in a film that transfixes you in its unique light early and often, and continues to intrigue and expand as it plays out across its weird, breathless, and intense, 93 minutes. 

The assembly of its story is hugely impressive, just as the experience is so refreshingly unexpected, and when its final image and story conclusion arrives, it provides a strange sense of catharsis that stays with you in its unusual and yet perfect power. How unfortunate it is that we could not witness this on the big screen because No One Will Save You is hugely cinematic.

No One Will Save You is a close encounter you will welcome, a wild, outstanding, terrifically conceived marriage of big screen popcorn thrill and joyously independent cinema soul, all wrapped around a compelling central performance and surprising story that speaks to many of us that feel alone. 

No One Will Save You is showing now on Disney+

by Hayden Mears

A whodunit’s success hinges – at least partly – on how effectively it can create and contain atmosphere. A Haunting in Venice, Kenneth Branagh’s latest adaptation of Agatha Christie’s Hercule Poirot novels, is the filmmaker’s strongest stab at this material, mostly thanks to its emphasis on mood and atmosphere.

The plot shakes out something like this: Famed detective Hercule Poirot (again played by the multi-tasking Branagh) has retired. An old friend, self-important mystery writer Ariadne Oliver (a profoundly miscast Tina Fey), pulls him to Venice to attend a séance conducted by the medium Joyce Reynolds (Michelle Yeoh). Oliver wants to see if Reynolds can stump Poirot by proving the existence of the supernatural. The grieving mother who arranged the séance, Rowena Drake (Kelly Reilly), calls on Reynolds to determine if her recently deceased daughter was a victim of a centuries-old curse called the Children’s Vendetta. Poirot, a staunch advocate for more…tangible problem-solving tools, is sceptical. Cue 100 (ish) minutes of mind games and red herrings!

As with Murder on the Orient Express and Death on the Nile, the set-up is far more interesting than the actual mystery, which never feels as potent or surprising as it should be. Branagh and screenwriter Michael Green smartly shy away from explicit confirmation of the supernatural. Poirot isn’t here to liaise with spirits, and Branagh doesn’t want to convince viewers that ghosts of murdered children are behind the tragic death of the owner’s daughter. This is an old-school mystery in a horror movie’s skin, and Branagh is at his best when he toys with viewers’ expectations. Green’s script doesn’t fully commit itself to either camp; instead, it presents contradictory evidence to sow dissonance. Branagh spends most of the movie showing how this dissonance weighs upon Poirot’s psyche.

Like Christie, Branagh seems to derive great joy from pitting logic, reason, and process against superstition and emotion. This time, though, Poirot isn’t just tackling a seemingly unsolvable case. He’s contending with history and tradition, questioning ideas, beliefs, and stories – such as the Children’s Vendetta – that have spent centuries running rampant in the minds and hearts of locals.

Branagh again does a bang-up job selling Poirot as a likeable, brilliant detective whose fame weighs on him. The supporting cast is solidly serviceable, with the exception of Fey. She’s never able to shed her snark, even when the story demands more genuine reactions and interactions. She’s always a quip or two away from feeling completely out of place, and her performance never quite sells Oliver’s ever-present smugness as a worthwhile aspect of the story. It just ends up being annoying.

A Haunting in Venice doesn’t break any new ground, but it isn’t trying to. It’s a perfectly acceptable mystery with a mostly effective cast and a handful of creative jump scares. It won’t endure or endear itself the way its source material has, but it does make for a reasonably fun theatre experience.

A HAUNTING IN VENICE is in cinemas from September 14th