The Matrix: Resurrections - Cheap Thoughts

It’s not often a director is cornered and forced to make a movie that it comes out well. The studio was set on making a 4^th Matrix film despite the definitive ending of the last one, and Lana Wachowski coming onboard to try and make something of it is hardly the ideal circumstances you’d want, and yet…

Lana Wachowski has yet again proven her talents for visually enchanting films and the stubbornly anti-subtle messaging all her prior films are known for, and no that second point is not an insult, subtlety is optional, not necessary to telling a good story. The Matrix Resurrections is at times a bitter film, a film that wishes it did not exist and is very adamant that you-the audience-know that. It is critical of the production, the fanbase and even its own creators. It stares into the abyss of “content creation” and just before it falls into it, the film is saved, much like how Neo is saved, by reminding them what they stand for. Wachowski refuses to fall into that pit, she loves these characters, and she loves this franchise, she would never corrode them with the cynicism of Hollywood.

While the prior films became obsessed with their own mythology, the wisdom that comes with age and separation reminds you of what’s important. Neo & Trinity, not just symbols, not just roles, but two people who love each other, who fight for each other above all else. Yes, true love does in fact save the day, and if you find that too corny or on the nose then good god what franchise were you watching? This is a series that has embraced sincerity and style since day one, in the past that may have been aimed towards philosophy, these days they’ve changed direction to be entirely about love. The romance of Neo & Trinity was never the strongest element of the original trilogy, it was mostly side-lined to allow the world-building to take over, but looking back, a decent portion of Reloaded and Revolutions was showing that these two view each other as more important than any war, any philosophy or any duty, this film just allows that element to take centre-stage, and with the beauty that is Keanu Reeves and Carrie Ann-Moss – Two people who have aged like the finest of wines – we have the most emotionally expressive film in the series.

All of this is with barely touching upon the visual component, and that’s what Wachowski is best known for. At this point in her career making stylish & comprehensive action scenes are her bread and butter, she makes it look easy. One of the best living directors to put their money to good use in making gorgeous blockbusters where everyone has unique looks under gorgeous lighting with badass action, making everyone look like the coolest person on the planet.

Resurrections is not a subtle movie, nor does it want to be, it refuses to compromise, to withdraw or to change itself for your sake. It is a visual delight and earnest down to its bones. It is aware of its past and what is has to prove and yet it does not care, it would throw all that away for the two people it loves and will not apologise for it.

-Danny

Spider-Man: No Way Home - Cheap Thoughts

Spider-Man is important to me. Let’s clear that up straight away, because to discuss this film without knowing my connection to the character feels like leaving out important context. I love Spider-Man, he might be the first fictional character I ever loved, all the way back to the 90s animated series and the original Raimi films. Heck, I’m a big defender of the Webb films, always have been, always will be, and yet I am one of the spoilsports who has to say I have never enjoyed the MCU Spider-Man films, on almost any level, they are poorly produced, bland looking and bad adaptations. So now we’ve reached a point where all these adaptations are clashing together and to break it down is still somewhat a behemoth of a task, let alone avoiding spoilers, but these are the cards we are dealt.

Spider-Man No Way Home is the first time I have ever truly seen Tom Holland as Spider-Man, as a person who puts others before himself, who has to make great sacrifices expecting nothing in return, who certainly stumbles and faulters but always gets back up and always does the right thing. This is no longer Iron Man Jr who inherits wealth, technology and prosperity from others, but one who has to fight and save others using only what he has to offer. He is put through the emotional ringer, but this is a story of Spider-Man trying to save everyone, and do the right thing, to understand the moral with great power must also come great responsibility.

If you’re aware of the returning characters from other films then you’ll be happy to know they are all wonderfully handled, it never feels like pure fanservice, but instead to offer a chance of closure to those who never had it before. Both the Raimi films and Webb films ended on disappointing notes but they also weren’t meant to be where those stories ended, this is where those characters get to finally have the proper goodbyes they always deserved. Even as I attempt to be a cynical critic, I can’t help but feel joy from what this film offers me.

Course that still won’t stop me from being said cynical critic, because boy does this film still look bad! Watts as a director has certainly improved his visual sense with each passing film, and there are certainly big special effects moments where the pre-vis team developed some entertaining and creative choreography mixing characters with different powers fighting each other, the conveyor belt release schedule of these films means the CGI just becomes worse and worse, no effect looking complete, everyone is rubbery and weightless, they move as fast or as slow as a computer tells them to with no consistency. It’s amazing that it’s reached a point where they achieve an uncanny valley effect on basic backgrounds because it’s all shot on greenscreens and never real locations. Even worse when it comes to the more intimate fight scenes Watts has no sense of editing or where to place the camera. When it’s real, you can’t get a good view of it and when it’s not real, it’s never felt hollower.

Glad I got that out of my system, but truth be told I enjoyed this movie, it’s the first of the MCU Spidey films that I enjoyed while watching it, and I am genuinely excited about where they’ll take this character in the future. I may be a cynic but even I couldn’t stop my heart growing three times while watching it. Tis the season.

-Danny

West Side Story - Cheap Thoughts

How does he do it? How does Spielberg make it look this easy? It’s hard to say West Side Story is doing much new - after all it is an adaptation of a 1961 movie based on a 1957 stage show based on a 16^th century play – And yet, somehow it feels like we now have the perfected version of that story, future versions can rest before they try, they’ll never make a version this visually beautiful, perfectly cast or tonally impeccable. It’s times like this where the obvious flaw of trying to discuss a visual medium via text is totally inept, as just saying every single frame is truly a painting is not something that can be easily backed up, you just have to take in on faith, but it’s true, this might be the best looking film of the year, each shot made to look as beautiful as can be, exploding with colour, depth and movement.

None of this is to say the original film was lacking in this, but it is hard to compliment this film without slightly feeling like a back-handed compliment to the original, so consider this review a glowing recommendation for both films, they’re great. Though that being said (Here we go) there are some areas of the original that had clear room for improvement, the main one being a predominately white cast in a film about the racial tensions between a white gang and a Puerto Rican gang, anyone who argues that’s not an issue with the original is being intentionally ignorant. Secondly is the tone the films strive for, it’s not an easy balance to hit, trying to be a story about violent gangs who metaphorically express themselves through ballet, it can come across as silly, and while your mileage may vary on the original, don’t be surprised if some find it tonally confused, this one strikes a much finer balance between the two. It never feels jarring when it goes from bloody assault in poverty drenched streets to colourful dance numbers is seamless, again, it’s baffling how easy Spielberg makes it happen.

Aside from that there’s not that much more to discuss, most of what was good in the original is still present here, the songs are wonderfully varied, catchy and poignant. The story is layered and one of social injustice, dealing with racial discrimination as well as the abandonment of the disenfranchised with two sides of victims being manipulated into viewing each other as the enemy rather than the system as a whole. It even carries over the same flaws of the original, though to be fair it’s more of a burden from the original Romeo & Juliet than it is the musical, that being the big climactic fight happens and then you realise there’s still 30-40 minutes left of the film and that third act can drag in contrast.

If there’s still some ambiguity from this review on whether or not you should see this film? Once more to make it clear: Go see this film!

-Danny

Encanto - Cheap Thoughts

Not to turn this into a recurring theme of Disney films being stifled under their corporate overlords, but between this and Eternals there is certainly a pattern forming across these reviews. Encanto’s heart is a story of people wanting to break the mould of what is expected of them. A family of people with unique super powers all with the purpose of helping the community around them. This leads to them all having certain roles to fulfil in that society and in a fun turn of events we now have a film of a lead protagonist wishing to change themselves to fit the mould while the supporting cast around them tries to break free. Two of the songs in this musical are about the protagonist’s sisters wishing to change their own narrative, Luisa the strong one who can carry any burden and Isabela, the perfect child who can do no wrong, and yet in secret the two are crumbling from the expectations of others and feel unallowed to live the lives they wish to.

This may be one of the most fleshed out supporting casts in a Disney film in recent years, and yet because it is a Disney film, there is only so far they are allowed to break free. The Mouse is the mould, and the characters can only break free as far as The Mouse is willing to let them. They still have to be appealing to audiences, marketable as toys and admirable to children. The fact the creators had to fight to have Luisa be muscular due to corporate fear that might make her less appealing says enough. It hollows out the film as while the characters may cheer about change, it’s all corporate approved change, there is no actual rebelling against the system, mere illusion. It’s not just with these examples, but in the film’s very DNA, everything is designed to be easy to understand, squeaky clean and unthreatening, with nothing too extreme in its subject matter that would alienate even a single audience member. Sometimes the film is able to move itself in favour of this, for example having Lin-Manuel Miranda write the music, naturally you can imagine he was chosen as he is a talented musician with a history of embedding his Hispanic heritage into his work – and it was very much the right choice because this music is the best part of the film - but at the same time there was someone in marketing who approved of him because he’s popular and could be used as a selling point. Sometimes you get the best of both world elements like this, but there are other times it shows how limited the film was in its options.

It’s hard to say where Encanto will land in the Disney legacy, it is definitely a big step in terms of representation and because the formula has been perfected there is certainly a level of quality storytelling to entertain general audiences, but will it fall into the category of modern classics like Moana or Frozen? Don’t bet the house (Watch as this ages like milk).

-Danny

Tick, Tick...Boom! - Cheap Thoughts

There’s always this fine line when it comes to telling the story of a struggling artist. It’s an easy lifestyle to romanticise and glorify, creating this unhealthy ideal that for someone to succeed as an artist they have to be poor, depressed or socially exiled. Tick Tick…Boom loves to play on that line like it’s the string to a violin and yet never trips over to the other side thanks to some delicate decisions within the script. It’s safe to say a decent amount of credit to this can be given to Lin-Manuel Miranda’s own personal struggles in building his career as a theatre icon. Mind you, that’s is a blatant guess, having done no research into Miranda’s own history, it could entirely be that his career was an easy and fluid transition, in which case even further kudos can be given to him accurately being able to represent the struggle of trying to create art while trying to survive in an overwhelming money ridden corporate world. There’s a particular scene at Larson’s daytime job working the brunch rush at a diner that hits very close to home for anyone who’s worked in customer service.

For a directorial debut while Miranda may have played it safe with the story and choosing a tale he is no doubt very familiar with, he doesn’t play it safe with his camera. TTB is a musical adaptation of the life of Jonathan Larson (Played by Andrew Garfield) and Miranda clearly has enough experience in front of the camera to understand the power it can hold in elevating a film versus a staged production where his origins lie. There is such an energy and purpose to his shots, giving them life and emotion, while there is no big show-stopper production with flashy effects and bombastic dance numbers, each sequence is filmed appropriately to convey the emotions present in the song.

Above that he knows to give the majority focus to Garfield, the stand-out performance within the film. He provides such charisma and purposeful decisions behind every movement and facial expression. He is a character with such an explosive energy it leaks out constantly even in the humblest of moments and so when the film allows for him to fully express himself through the musical numbers and dramatic moments, he alleviates himself by giving everything to it. There is already much talk about a potential Oscar nomination for this performance which he certainly deserves and would definitely be preferred over self-indulgent dramatic performances full of nihilism and rage that usually takes hold of the Oscar voters. If there is one emotion that charges Garfield’s performance, it’s love.

There was another paragraph meant to discuss Larson’s real-life career and legacy, specifically that of his most famous work Rent but it felt mostly tangential and critical of external work. It didn’t feel right to harp on about it, but it also didn’t feel right to ignore it entirely as this whole film is a build up to his big break with Rent as his magnum opus and yet it feels disingenuous considering the reputation of Rent has only lessened over the years. It’s understandable the film wouldn’t address this, arguably it never needed to, especially when that’s not in Miranda’s style to analyse the complications of a person and instead focus on the legacy they left as a whole. Yes this is another Lin-Manuel Miranda piece about legacy what were you expecting?

-Danny

The French Dispatch - Cheap Thoughts

In someways this might be the “Most Wes Anderson” movie he has made, your mileage may very on whether that is a positive or a negative, but it does feel astute. Wes Anderson as a filmmaker is so comfortable in his style and in it’s hard to fault him for it, while it’s absolutely understandable if he’s not your preferred cup of tea, there’s a prescence to him that is hard to replicate despite what some may believe. It’s not just a matter of being simetrical, but his films have a comfort to them. 

They are stylistic and quirky, sometimes funny but never laugh out loud funny, and above all charming. He creates environments you want to spend time in, characters you enjoy listening to, though the narratives are often what lets him down and where his weaker aspects as a writer begin to divide audiences. Strange a description as that may seem, even contradictory consider the film’s clear love of the written word, and for writers and storytellers of all forms.

The French Dispatch structure as an anthology film helps to hide most of these, designing itself as a visual component to a fictional magazine, each piece emphasises character and style above all else, most of which are told to the audience through Anderson’s frequent collaborators. In a sense this then leads to the film falling into the faults of the anthology structure itself rather than Anderson’s own, mainly being you walk away having your preferences, some stories are weaker than others and when the time is divided unevenly you risk the lesser of the stories taking up the majority screentime.

In truth there is little that needs to be discussed about The French Dispatch, it is simply another Anderson picture. If you are already a fan, you will enjoy this one all the same, if you are not, it is certainly not the piece to convince you otherwise, and if you have never seen an Anderson picture before, do not start with this one. Anderson & Co have finessed their formula down to the perfect detail with little desire to deviate, and in an age where the average audience’s diet consists of grey-goo like blockbusters with little subtance or presentation, if you have a delicious meal that succeeds in both why would you wish to deviate? No it is not going to be a dish for everyone, but frankly that’s not a bad thing. Anderson & Co will keep on creating work that appeals to them and if it appeals to you along the way then good for you, if not, keep on moving, you’ll find your dish eventually, just don’t ask them to change their’s to match your preferences.

-Danny

Eternals - Cheap Thoughts

Without a doubt, best Power Rangers film there is. That’s only partially a joke. Eternals genuinely has more in common with that franchise than it does The Avengers. A group of diverse super powered beings united by the power of a godlike being instructing them to protect Earth from alien monsters, even down to their human clothes being consistent to the colour scheme of their superhero outfits. Of course the only thing that’s missing if the over the top comedic nature of Power Rangers, which yes, is ironic to say for an MCU film though not entirely unwelcomed.

Eternals is certainly the least like an MCU film we’ve had in a while and has very minimal to do with the franchise outside of an odd reference here or there, and yet it’s in an interesting placement as it could not exist without it, and not just because it’s the 26^th film in the franchise. Eternals being well aware of where film audiences stand with superhero stories allows it to skip through the majority of the origin and simply show audiences the highlights, even jokingly showing that these immortal demi-gods will have no desire to hide their secrets depending on the person because they live in a world with superheroes, it’s just the status quo at this point.

Where it gets more interesting is when it delves deeper into the philosophy of these beings. A dozen beings who were brought to Earth with specific purposes in mind and yet naturally their time there will change them, make them question their orders, their history, their relationships. What are these people willing to sacrifice and what do they gain from being here? They all go on to live very different lives and have different experiences, they are not always going to agree and when the film sits down to talk about it is when it becomes the most interesting, and not just because the fight scenes are all so very boring.

This is where the whip of Marvel comes striking down because when the film needs to fold into this suffocating mould the film is dull, aiming for the most obvious jokes, the least compelling fight scenes and ending with some of the most obvious, unnatural and annoying sequel bait this franchise might have ever seen. If a film with absolutely zero connections to the rest of this universe can’t escape this overbearing desire for consistency and force every film to look like the same grey indistinguishable blob from one another then what hope does any other film have?

The film’s biggest flaws are not unto its own shoulders, but the family of which it finds itself connected to, which is rather fitting for a film about characters who are being forced to fulfil certain roles for the sake of an all-knowing all powerful being, and if the film could escape that shadow much like the characters attempt to, they might have had something here.

Last Night in Soho - Cheap Thoughts

Edgar Wright has been nostalgic for the past for a while now, he is often just much more subtle about it, his work is heavily influenced by films and music of the mid-20^th century, however now he’s chosen to make it part of the text beyond mere references. Last Night in Soho presents us with that idealised rose-tinted view of a 1960s London, where the lights shined bright, the music was all grand and everyone dressed to the peak of fashion. Naturally of course this is to cover up the dark underbelly of both the social ladder of the time and now, that once you begin to climb you have the choice to carry on climbing regardless of how fatigued you are, or let go and plummet to your doom.

Wright is known as a very visually prolific filmmaker and while that is naturally still present here – every shot is filled with colour and gloss to create such a mood that can be lively and then shift to disturbing within a single movement – It is not as directly in your face as his other work. Any other Wright film you can see and know it’s him, if I did not know this was a Wright film, I never would have guessed it. Since Baby Driver he’s been peaking out of his comfort zone to experiment with other genres and with this one markedly is more subdued, he allows his shots to linger and create a discomfort, all the while making even the darkest of shots as beautiful and stylised as they can be.

There’s a fragility to what we’re watching, Ellie (Thomasin McKenzie) is a small fish forced into a very big pond, intimidating enough, but when she finds herself at the centre of attention of those much bigger fish, it becomes that much more disheartening. Even when the attention is not drawn to her, but to Sandy (Anya Taylor-Joy) who Ellie voyeuristically attaches herself to and connects to her to make her dilemmas her own even when she is merely an audience member, much like us, yet also like us, and like the best films, we are not just an audience member, when a film works we are also that person on screen. Wright builds a level of dread on these two levels, we fear for Ellie to get out of the situation unscathed and yet when she is alone, surrounded by men who wish to take advantage of her, we are just as alone and vulnerable.

Wright’s attempts to stretch his legs is a very welcome change, even if there are some growing pains to come with it. Structurally this is one of Wright’s weaker scripts, missing his usual bullet proof structure and quotable dialogue, even his infamous foreshadowing – though present – is given a backseat in favour of last-minute twists & turns, very nearly becoming a film about victim blaming though thankfully dodges that bullet, yet should never have been on the firing range to begin with. It is also perhaps a bit too indulgent in the past, though it is yes critical of the cultures of the time, the emphasis on how modern day sucks just as much, except back then everything was better because they had better music and style and whatnot feels very much “Life was better in my day” nonsense many like to uphold as an undeniable fact, and certainly some people will walk away from this film with their only thought being “Yeah life was better in the 60s” despite all the murders and whatnot.

-Danny

Dune - Cheap Thoughts

“It’s not an easy task to adapt Dune the novel”, that’s a sentiment that has been expressed since this adaptation was first announced, and there is fair reasoning behind it. Dune’s status as a classic work of science-fiction and incredibly influential on the genre as a whole has in some ways reflected back on it negatively, now many elements of the novel have become standard tropes for the genre that can sometimes make it seem basic and predictable, even worse it’s a story that thrives on its details rather than the grand picture. Two elements that work against adapting it into a film for modern audiences. Combine that with the prior adaptations less than stellar reception and director Denis Villeneuve’s back catalogue of work which consists of well-produced and received works of art but not exactly high in financial returns, it’s amazing this film got green-lit to begin with.

All of this is to say, the newest adaptation of Dune brings exactly what one would expect knowing this information prior. Villeneuve has concocted an incredibly well-crafted film that presents a story with beautiful cinematography and production design to create such a visual delicacy that is at times grandiose in scale and in power, it combines the fanatical world of fiction with the realism of the science. It is at times gorgeous and other times disgusting, all purposeful and a wonderful treat for the eyes. There are few sci-fi films to be held in comparison, it truly creates an iconography that holds up to that first syllable.

This is all a way of saying Villeneuve’s presentation holds up what is at the end of the day a very neutral story, to no fault of its own. As stated this is a very influential book, which puts the film in a difficult position to either be disloyal to its source material for the sake of originality, or stay true at the risk of being derivative…of itself. Villeneuve made the right choice of sticking to the latter, as one of the goals this film clearly had in mind is to give Dune fans a truly great and loyal adaptation of the book, to provide a visual component to the original text. Helping him uphold that is a truly great cast that bring such nuance and history to these characters even when the script is unable to support them.

Dune the film is best described as a very expensive arthouse picture, many would argue it would not the big box-office hit it would need to greenlight a sequel to complete the story, and yet Lionsgate already announcing a part two mere days into the film’s release shows promise of the studio wishing to tell a story first and profit second. It is unheard of for this to happen. This is not to say Dune is a revolutionary work of cinema, but it is rare for a film of this size to have such clear authorial intent behind it, to allow the filmmaker’s thumbprint to be clearly seen on every frame. This is not going to be a film to appeal to every audience member and good riddance, allow it to be divisive if that allows it to exist.

-Danny

Venom: Let There Be Carnage - Cheap Thoughts

There’s a level of respect Venom: Let There Be Carnage has earned. The original Venom film is – to put it eloquently – an on-fire garbage can, and yet it was the exact right on-fire garbage can for a lot of people. It was messy and silly but also comedic and violent, and even for some, kind of sexy (Lots of people wanna fuck Venom, we can’t escape it). This of course only happened due to a case of too many cooks in the kitchen and no one having a clear vision of what they wanted Venom to be. Now that Sony have a clearly defined demographic they want to shoot for, they rather than try to course correct lean into the fire and the joyous sexy mess it is.

Let There Be Carnage is at the end of the day the story of two couples going to war with each other, and I mean that in the sense that they are far more blunt on the relationship status of Venom and Eddie Brock. Our lovebirds did not get their happily ever after yet as we see them fight, struggle to compromise and even temporarily separate due to their arguments. Venom himself even going on a drunken bender, finding himself in a gay bar where he literally says he is “coming out of the closet”. This film is not subtle nor should it be. This is another level of respect the film earns, while it is not the ideal representation it is certainly…a different kind and it at the very least is very blunt in its Queer Coding of the dual protagonists. Unlike it’s older cousin the MCU who is so desperately wants to be a part of and yet that is a franchise so watered down and unwilling to commit to an image or theme for the sake of consistency both internally and externally that its first openly queer character was an unnamed cameo from the director followed by a vague non-committal suggestion that Loki might also be queer in an easy to edit around conversation for internationally bigoted markets. Venom is at least blunt about it, which is why it earns respect, not praise necessarily.

Not to say that alone saves the film, it is still a sloppy mess, regardless of intentional or not, the adjective of choice is still there. Particularly with the fight scenes which offers vague rules of powers or damage to the two symbiotes of blobby goo stabbing each other with no clear indication who’s winning or how. At least this time round it’s a black blob vs a red blob so I can for the most part tell who is who. Carnage himself lacks his trademark hyperactive extroverted psychopathy that makes him an entertaining character, which seems bizarre that this film thought that might have been too silly. Instead, he is simply a big red blobby thing that goes around killing. At a brisk 97 minutes the film certainly moves at a brisk enough pace, enough to keep you entertained without overstaying it’s welcome, yet perhaps too fast and no character arc feels like it moves at a natural pace, and the answer doesn’t have to be make the film longer, just alter the scenes chosen, Stephen Graham’s character for example is mostly superfluous, as enjoyable as he is as an actor to see appear, he is very unnecessary.

The Venom Franchise has solidified itself as this trash fire of a series and more power to it, it knows what it is and tries to make sure everyone is having a good time. If you weren’t a fan of the first one you won’t care for this, but if you enjoyed the messy nature of the original, this one is all that and more.

-Danny

Malignant - Cheap Thoughts

A time-honoured tradition when a filmmaker provides a major studio with a big box-office success is the promise of a future project where they can have as much creative freedom that they want with as much money as they want. James Wan is without argument one of the most influential directors in the Horror genre of the 21^st century, spear-heading iconic franchises such as Saw and The Conjuring, even his lesser works like Insidious somehow become recognisable staples. With that being said, Malignant might be his most inventive and engaging horror movie yet, certainly the loudest if that means anything to you.

From the opening scene, Wan sets the tone of the exact movie you’re in for, a violent, supernatural colourful film with an unexplainable yet engaging hook that you’re dying to know more about. The rest of the film carries that over splendidly, the lead performance of Annabelle Wallis offers such range of emotions that she can be put up alongside all the other iconic horror film performances that should (but inevitably won’t) be nominated for an Oscar. A character that has suffered severe trauma, and now in her darkest hour she finds herself at the centre of a disturbing mystery. She carries the film as an empathetic yet disturbed character, though that is not to take away from Wan’s direction.

This is definitely the most experimental Wan has gotten with his directing style. The way he moves the camera with slow purpose to build suspense, presenting unconventional angles to either show or hide as much as the audience needs like the best storytellers in horror. Heck, even the action movies of his filmography don’t use the camera as well as this film does during it’s minimal yet effective action beats. His command of colour to bring style, a blend of practical and visual effects, it all comes together to give this film an old-school campy vibe of a bygone era -best supported through Joseph Bishara sharp and clinging score - yet never to the point of becoming predictable in its plot, because while yes, the film does establish an interesting mystery, you will definitely not see where its going. Malignant is well aware that this is not your first horror movie, characters will walk around in dark empty rooms knowing exactly when and where you expect the scare to come from, and it subverts you just enough times -but not everytime-to create genuine tension. After all a film that features a character entering an abandoned psychiatric hospital in the middle of the night *alone* is certainly going to be a set-up that comes with expectations.

There’s not much else to say without giving away too much of Malignant, it’s a film that’s better to go into with as little information as possible, all you need to know is that across the board the film just works. The performances, the visuals, the music, the themes. It’s a smart, well-crafted work of Horror and it’s the best Wan has given so far, which encouraging to believe he’s still not done and will hopefully offer even better work in the future.

-Danny

Shang-Chi: Legend of the Ten Rings - Cheap Thoughts

 At this point, everyone is familiar with the same Marvel formula, whether it’s tiring or not varies by your own milage, but it lead to one simple result, for the longest of times Marvel seemed unwilling to try anything new, to attempt to fix their problems at risk of them interfering with the working elements. Namely that every Marvel movie looks like a pavement and the hand-to-hand fight scenes are as energetic as static cling. Shang-Chi has shown that it is possible to avoid that, while still following a traditional Marvel formula (again, for better or worse).

Shang-Chi is a visually vibrant film, the colour grading has depth to make the environments pop, the camera lingers on the fights, the sound design gives the hits impact. It might be the first non-super powered fight scene to have some life into it and convince the audience we are actually seeing two characters fight each other and not just stunt-doubles dance violently towards each other. Not that this should be surprising, the co-ordination of DoP Bill Pope and Stunt Co-Ordinator Brad Allan having worked together multiple times, they know how to make each other shine. The use of the environments as well to add dimension and creativity, a trait that any fan of martial arts films would be able to point out the importance too right away has finally been implemented, none of these fights scenes would work the same if they were in a different location.

Beyond the technical side of things the film has a character driven story that pushes the momentum of the narrative…for the most part. Shang-Chi (Simu Liu) and Xu Xialing (Meng'er Zhang) are the children of the immortal Xu Wenwu (Tony Leung), a former conqueror of nations turned family man suffering from grief is easily one of the most compelling ensembles to grace a Marvel film. Particularly that of Tony Leung, which is not surprising as the man is a legend who at this point can play any role and make it award worthy. This is not the first time Marvel have tried to portray a sympathetic villain, but it’s the first one they’ve committed to. In most other occasions – take The Vulture for example – they give them clearly defined motivations that make them identifiable, but in order to prevent the audience from sympathising to much they just have them randomly murder people in a lazy attempt to make it clear they’re the bad guy. There is no trickery with Xu Wenwu, the audience is introduced to him as a one-man army who takes what he wants with no concern for the lives of others, and then as the film goes on shows the human sides to him to make us care. The dynamic between him and his children makes for genuinely compelling drama, a man who clearly loves his children but is so narrow-minded and absent that he’s unable to see the error of his ways, and though his kids do love him, they’re not willing to put their own happiness above the safety of others.

This is when Shang-Chi is at it’s best, its compelling character drama of a broken family, with flourishment of beautifully produced hand-to-hand fight scenes for style. Unfortunately it is still a Marvel film and it has to be broken down with generic CGI Monsters showing up and have to be fought off despite no emotional resonance to be made against grey slimy bats. This as you can imagine doesn’t take up a majority of the film, but it certainly takes away when the film loses focus on what’s important for the sake of powerful looking but empty monsters (Huh, kind of like Wenwu, ironic).

-Danny

Candyman - Cheap Thoughts

The formatting for this review is going to be a little bit different from my usual takes, that is mostly due to the subject matter at hand and my relationship towards it. More accurately, my lack of a relationship towards it.

It’s not going to be a revolutionary hot take to mention that the original Candyman (1992) was a film steeped in racial commentary, while not the first and certainly not the last horror film to tackle the subject matter, it is one that is remembered fondly because of the subtext but equally for the surreal tone it creates as well as the delectably sweet performance from Tony Todd as the titular character. While the newest instalment certainly understands the importance of the theming to Candyman, there has been a large discussion of how well it represents the issues at hand. Quite simply put as a white British man I have no grounds to discuss the legitimacy of the film’s portrayal, there are better reviews out there to handle that, I would at best be regurgitating a description second-hand of what they have said.

What I can contribute to the conversation is the discussion of the rest of the film, but let it be acknowledged that it is certainly going to feel somewhat hollow and that’s not what I’m trying to get across. For better or worse Candyman (2021) is a thematically complicated film that I am not qualified to talk about.

“Complicated” might be the ideal word for this because there are plenty of ways on which this film confuses, mostly due to its own inconsistencies. A Film that is obsessed with following a strict ruleset for Candyman just highlights when they break their own rules for the sake of the plot. Candyman as a character, everytime his name is spoken 5 times he kills the speakers, the film makes a specific point of having exclusively white characters partake in this parlour trick, except for one scene where two young black girls perform it and are killed, a very quick flashback scene that is meant to give context yet only raises further questions than it answers and also contradicts its own central thesis.

Candyman is not just a killer or a theme, it is also a tone. It is the music of Phillip Glass, it’s the performance of Tony Todd performing the words of Bernard Rose, words that at times were nonsensical yet had a poetic rhythm to it you got sucked in anyway. There was a hypnotism to the dirty world of Candyman. Nia DaCosta certainly has a rhythm with the camera, yet makes such a polished world that keeps the titular character both far too vague yet also far too defined at the same time. Everything has to function by Candyman’s rules except when it doesn’t. Candyman is presented as mostly an idea, which is fair enough, the power of Candyman comes from the fear in his name, the legacy that persists, but at no point does he truly take control. Let him lurk in the shadows, be a whisper in your ear, but once he does finally take the spotlight it is only to contradict what came before in a bizarre presentation of vigilante justice.

Fittingly to compare it to works of art, DaCosta’s Candyman is an incredibly well detailed painting of a city skyline. You’re impressed by the thorough and pretty presentation, yet it doesn’t seem any deeper. While the original was more of an abstract piece that focused on creating an environment and an emotion that developed a long conversation after the fact. True you could say it’s unfair to compare it this much to the original, in fact arguably it’s better that this film went in a different direction to make it more unique, but years from now people will still be talking about the original Candyman as they have been for the past 30 years, but it’s unlikely this film will receive the same treatment.

-Danny 

The Suicide Squad - Cheap Thoughts

In many ways the greater context of this franchise is exhausting, mostly because every time a new film in the DC Extended Universe is released, people feel they need the entire backstory of someone’s viewing experience of this series and their opinions on every prior instalment. Particularly due to the infighting of DC Fans on whether they are Team Snyderverse or Team Good Movies. That statement probably gives enough context as is, but just to clarify, First Suicide Squad: Bad, this Suicide Squad: Good.

This certainly has more in common with Director James Gunn’s earlier films rather than his family friendly blockbusters in Guardians of the Galaxy. There is a dark and gory edge to his comedy, yet what this film lacks and all the better for it is the cynicism found in films such as Super or Slither. It’s an element that always held Gunn back as a storyteller, this desire to appear self-aware yet also contemptuous with any kind of vulnerability or sincerity that creates a barrier between himself and his audience that has only harmed his earlier works as time has gone on. It was somewhere around Guardians that Gunn grew as a director and overcame this desire to appear cool over earnest.

The Suicide Squad is a blend of Gunn’s style old and new to create the perfect fusion of both. It is a film that is violent and farcical yet offers up its characters trauma and desires with no shame or mockery. Now even then this is not going to be everyone’s cup of tea, the brutality of many scenes is enough to turn away those who seek exclusively light & earnest entertainment, yet for many others it is going to be that refreshing cocktail of a comic book film that will show the bloody mess of people’s heads exploding while also daring to try and make you care about a man named ‘Polka-Dot Man’ as he attempts to overcome his personal distress and tragic backstory, and by gum if it doesn’t succeed.

In fact there could be an argument made for every character to walk away being the fan favourite. Margot Robbie’s Harley Quinn is as entertaining as always, Joel Kinnemon’s Rick Flag holds the award for most improved character by actually being given a personality that can work off other characters, Daniela Melchior as Ratcatcher II acts as the heart of the film as she steals yours, and of course Sylvester Stallone’s King Shark is just a big stupid talking shark, what more could you ask for? Like a true ensemble no one character steals the show and in a film that specialises in the morally questionable, but personality driven, gimmick-heavy crew that is the titular squad, the endless combination of these characters makes for a delightful squad to follow for 2 hours.

Or if none of those does anything for ya, a giant psychic starfish from space named Starro the Conqueror is quite possibly the greatest fictional character of all time? So it’s got that going for it.

-Danny

Space Jam: A New Legacy - Cheap Thoughts

It’s easy to criticise Space Jam: A New Legacy. It’s easy to criticise it’s predecessor Space Jam. It’s easy to say both are soulless money makers that exist just for the sake of a marketing scheme that exists to prey on your nostalgia while offering nothing creative or entertaining in the slightest. It is all these things and more BUT…No there is no but. They are awful. They are awful films and if you are nostalgic for Space Jam, for the love of God watch better films. Space Jam was not good in the 90s, it is not good now. It was a horrible representation of the Looney Tunes, it lacked any kind of comedy or creative storytelling, the production value was lacklustre and the fact that Michael Jordan can say his move to baseball was not the stupidest decision he made with his career should say a lot.

Yet somehow, Space Jam: A New Legacy is all of those things and yet somehow worse. It is a hypocrisy disguising itself as a movie. A story that’s inciting incident is LeBron James disparaging Warner Bros attempts to lazily produce a multitude of films based on pre-existing Ips generated by an algorithm, yet then the rest of the film is exactly this ridiculous premise unfolded completely unironically. All this film exists to be is to remind you of how many franchises Warner Bros owns, throw in as many as possible regardless of context or purpose. Have a seen where LeBron James and Bugs Bunny travel into the DC Universe, visually presented as the Animated Series from the 2000s, yet with both music from 1970’s Superman: The Movie and the 1960’s Batman Television Series because it’s not about being consistent, it’s just about what people remember. Throw in baffling cameos from Rick & Morty, Mad Max: Fury Road and Casablanca while you’re at it because tone doesn’t matter! People will recognise them! That is all! You remember a thing! That means this is good! Don’t forget during the big final basketball scene to throw in Pennywise the Clown, The Conjuring monsters and The Droogs from A Clockwork Orange and even more so for some baffling reason give them all courtside tickets and throw Fred Flintstone in row 20 for some reason!

The final match itself having no consistency or even effort into actually presenting anything close to an actual match, the points are made up, people are given power ups at random, there is no actual drama, it’s all a farce! The movie in a nutshell. No consistency or effort to be found within a single pixel of this film.

Now there are plenty out there who claim that this movie is fine, it’s just 2 hours of mindless entertainment and if you expect more then you’re thinking too hard about it. Once again, these people need to be reminded that you are worth more! Demand actual effort in your films! Especially in your kids’ films! These being offered to children is no excuse for them to slack off! The Looney Tunes was not built on people giving the bare minimum! It was built on creativity, talent and endeavoured to give audiences something they wouldn’t expect. Everyone involved in this film should be ashamed of themselves, they’ve created one of the laziest and most pathetic motion pictures to come out in a very long time, it’s disgusting how bad this film is, if you enjoyed it, good news, you can go and watch any other film and you’ll have a great time, there’s nowhere to go but up.

-Danny

Black Widow - Cheap Thoughts

Natasha Romanoff had a slow start to being a character, didn’t she? No one would argue there was much there in her initial appearance in Iron Man 2 and The Avengers still treated her as someone separate from the other teammates, her only real connection being to Hawkeye who was physically away from the team for the majority of the movie. It wasn’t until Captain America: The Winter Soldier where efforts were made to establish a legitimate personality and relationships with her fellow Avengers and would progress from there. Yet there’s a moment in Avengers: Endgame that never sat right, that being her claim of The Avengers being like her family, a moment that doesn’t sit right because the only evidence of that being the case is because this film series never established any life for her outside of this team, but that doesn’t default to her having them as a family.

Now we have her solo film which offers up more context to her character as a whole. A midquel taking place after Captain America: Civil War but prior to Avengers: Infinity War (If you don’t keep up with the continuity of this series this must all sound like terrible gibberish). The story follows the fraudulent found family of Natasha’s past from her history of working for the red room, a Russian black ops organisation that trains assassins from birth. Working with what would be her final thematic conclusion from her final appearance in Endgame, expanding on this idea of family is absolutely the best direction they could have taken this, in order to give more weight to the idea and thus improving her appearances in other films by giving greater context, the exact purpose of any prequel film to fulfil.

Beyond that there is the return of the red room as we the audience are given further information on the organisation in an attempt to tie up further loose ends in her story. The inclusion of Florence Pugh as Yelana the newly established younger sister to Scarlett Johansson’s Natasha Romanoff truly works as the centre of the film. The youngest of this fraudulent family, she is the last to let go of the lie they lived, being so young and indoctrinated since birth it was her only reality, to quickly have it torn away from her before maturing enough to understand the fiction was living. Johansson herself isn’t given much of a challenge to work with, though that doesn’t seem the purpose of the piece, this from her perspective is the epilogue, to give her a final victory lap and shine in the spotlight. Tie up whatever remaining loose ends exist for her character with the standard story beats & tone with conveyor belt action sequences that leave little to be desired. The promise that comes from a stylised opening credits goes unfulfilled as everything else in the film’s production offers up the usual Marvel dish, which is certainly filling, and many won’t mind it and even still enjoy it after having it served up for the 24^th time in a row.

At the end of the day, for all fans of Black Widow the character this is sure to be a delight, for all fans of the Marvel Cinematic Universe this is another solid entry in the franchise, and for those who are done and dusted with this franchise—well, you stopped reading a long time ago because of course you don’t care about Black Widow.

-Danny