Reviews

Without a doubt the franchise's best work thus far.

'Mad Max: Fury Road' starts off perfectly good, though the movie properly clicks into gear when the characters of Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron join forces. From then on it's entertaining and I certainly enjoyed watching it all unfold. The action remains super effective and visually epic, the stunt work really is fantastic.

Hardy and Theron put in convincing showings, definitely an improvement on anything from the original trilogy in terms of the acting talent; no disrespect to those from the first three, it's just a noticeable upgrade for me. With all that noted, I still don't think the characters in these films are as strong as they could/should be (but still good) - and that's what probably stops me from utterly loving this.

A prequel with Anya Taylor-Joy portraying Charlize Theron's character sounds great on paper, so I'm very much up for checking out 'Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga' at some point soon!

Feels like a watered down version of 'Mad Max', albeit one that is still worth watching.

'Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome' turns out to be a problematic title, given the most entertaining moments happen at the Thunderdome - so when events move away from said location, it isn't quite as interesting. I didn't really like the 'Peter Pan' Lost Boys-esque parts, not that what's produced is bad it just isn't what I want to see from this franchise, personally.

Mel Gibson is good value as the lead once more, while it is noteworthy to see one Tina Turner in a big supporting role. Yet again, though, I didn't get that much off the cast performances. I'm sounding like a broken record, I know, but it's very much the action that keeps these movies ticking over.

The weakest of the series, for me. Here's hoping 'Mad Max: Fury Road' is the best one, which - based on murmurs down the years - I am led to believe that it is; with Tom Hardy as the main man, I imagine that I will enjoy that 2015 flick - fingers crossed!

I got more enjoyment from 'Mad Max 2'. It's a good watch!

Everything felt a bit more fleshed out to me personally. Mel Gibson's titular character is improved, as are his sidekicks and their antagonists. The action is still at the same high level, there's plenty to gain entertainment from in regards to that along with the more amusing aspects; but disappointing to see that the wacky eye bulge gag did not reappear! I will say that final sequence overruns, not a big deal though.

Most importantly, the story is more interesting. It is, in my opinion, much better befitting of the movie's dystopian setting and is, just generally, a more noteworthy watch compared to its predecessor's plot. Gibson puts in another solid showing, as do Bruce Spence and Michael Preston in this entry. Honestly, mind, across these opening two flicks the cast don't really stand out to me all that much - it's all about the action!

Intrigued to find out what 'Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome' had to offer!

The action is stupendous, but the rest is a bit of a drag.

When the attackers be attacking it's all great to watch, like I got a lot of entertainment from seeing Toecutter's gang do their thing; and vice-versa with the MFP, really. However, the film kinda goes through peaks and troughs in switching from the action to the more mundane and the latter parts did bore me a little.

The characters of Max and Jessie do act noticeably dumb in bits too, I don't necessarily mind that as the whole movie is silly and all those onscreen chew the heck out of the scenary. But it does get a bit annoying to watch, I can't lie. I do like how much extra the characters act in general, though.

The whole 90 minutes of 'Mad Max' are over the top completely, but it does fit for the majority. I just wanted wall-to-wall overexuberant action, rather than that sprinkled amongst some fairly dull attempted storytelling. Still, I am looking forward to viewing the sequels/spin-offs, particularly those modern-day releases.

Absolutely tremendous!

I haven't got much (edit: five paragraphs later...) to say about 'Layer Cake', but that's only because it's simply one of those movies that is undeniably outstanding, to the point it's plain and simple that it requires little explanation. I had heard this bandied about down the years as being arguably Daniel Craig's best, though that is all that I knew about it.

What a film! I knew it was one of my favourites because I got goosebumps as soon as the credits rolled as I processed it and that only happens for the movies I adore. Going back to Craig, that man is superb in this, definitely one of the best performances of his that I've seen - up there with 'Knives Out'. That's also saying something, given his other stellar stint as that spy geezer.

Michael Gambon is, though, the one I enjoyed most. I'm already a big fan of his, though here he is also a notch above; his voice is up is just so iconic. Away from Craig & Gambon, I lost track of all the known faces that appeared insert Rick Dalton meme here. Crazy to see Tom Hardy in this and that he's used the least of his whole crew! I also didn't even recognise Sally Hawkins, despite seeing her name in the opening credits!

Simply put: It's brilliantly entertaining! I loved every second, quite literally. It gave me exactly what I wanted from a British gangster flick, so many from this subgenre fail to correctly tow the line between the crime and comedic gangster elements so it can either be cringe or boring, or even both.

This, however, utterly nailed it for me. It also holds a pleasing score, you give me that, an entertaining plot and a fantastic cast then, I'm afraid, I am gonna love your movie. It does surpass (the great) 'Stardust' as my standout Matthew Vaughn flick.

A cinema release without any prior reviews on a few major websites?! How about that!

I gotta say, 'The Present' surprised me big time! The lack of awareness that I had for it prior to watching (to be expected based on the earlier mentioned, evidently), a bog-standard poster and a meh-sounding premise meant that I wasn't expecting much from this 2024 flick. However, I had a seriously good time viewing it!

It's, in my opinion, a well crafted movie and, unexpectedly, quite amusing, it is also extremely touching when all is said and done. Isla Fisher and Greg Kinnear make for a solid onscreen pairing, while the trio of youngsters in Shay Rudolph, Easton Rocket Sweda and Mason Shea Joyce - even if the latter has less to work with - all give good performances.

One bad thing about me leaving the first review is if everyone else dislikes this, so here's hoping that a barrage of low-rated reviews aren't forthcoming!😆 Hey-ho, I had fun with it and that's all I can say!

'The Strangers: Chapter 1' is a let-down.

It sets the scene well with some tension and is held together by a strong score, visually in terms of cinematography and literally in the case of the masks it is fairly effective too but the film doesn't really do anything - with those aforementioned positives and just in general. It starts onscreen by describing forthcoming events as "brutal", yet by the end I saw little that was all that noteworthy; just your standard horror fare, at best, really.

Madelaine Petsch and Froy Gutierrez are good in the lead roles I will say, though some of their character decisions (as is typical with this genre, I guess) are frustratingly dumb; I'm looking at you in particular, Gutierrez's Ryan. Some of their dialogue isn't much better, either. All in all, I'm disappointed as this could've been real great. Instead, we're left with something that I'd personally class as poor, unfortunately.

Chapters 2 + 3 might improve things, let's hope so, but I wouldn't be surprised if this basically just gets rehashed in those next installments, let's hope not in that case. 'Twas, nevertheless, nice to see the cinema screening busier than usual for this, even if there were more dissatisfied chuckles than desired scares from those nearby.

A good movie, albeit one that finishes weaker than it started.

I really enjoyed the set up of 'The Stranger', though once the cat is let out the bag events do move along at a notch below. The final 30 feels a little drawn out, admittedly only in a relative sense because it is still perfectly watchable - but I personally wasn't as interested as I was across the opening chunk.

There is a commanding showing from Edward G. Robinson, the best of those onscreen for my money. Orson Welles is good too, particularly visually. Loretta Young has a couple of impressive moments in there too, even if her character is quite baffling at times. Billy House stands out in my memory from this too.

Taking everything into consideration, this 1946 picture is one I'd recommend; even if my feelings post-watch are of wanting more from it.

Great cast! Great movie!

'In the Land of Saints and Sinners' is a film I enjoyed, in fact I don't have any complaints with it at all. It features a very interesting story, one that left me engrossed from beginning to end. The tension is built well, while it's easy to care about the characters that appear. It's also wonderfully shot and holds a lovely score.

Liam Neeson puts in a top performance, he is undoubtedly a terrific actor. He is matched onscreen by Kerry Condon, who portrays her character tremendously. Many a familar face appear elsewhere, most notably Ciarán Hinds and Colm Meaney. Good, too, to see Jack Gleeson, who I thought retired after his stint on television but he is seemingly back in the game - and rightly so, a very talented actor.

Undoubtedly worth your time. I'd more than happily revisit this one.

Thoroughly fascinating to watch this unfold.

'BlackBerry' reminded me a lot of fellow 2023 flick 'Air', two movies that were in fact released within months of each other interestingly. Both are great watches, with this being one I particularly enjoyed. It's super well put together.

The two hours go by fast, the story is presented in such a way that there wasn't a single moment I was even the slightest bit uninterested - there's a great flow to proceedings. Jay Baruchel is excellent throughout, so is Glenn Howerton. The whole cast do good work, amusing to see SungWon Cho (aka ProZD) appear too!

I remember BlackBerry being huge at my high school back in the day, though based on the timeline shown in this movie it was very much during the company's spiral - guess our parents couldn't afford iPhones at that point!😂 I am still yet to own an iPhone mind you, guess I'm in the severe minority with that one. I did own a Blackberry though and I'm with Lazaridis: keyboard >>> touchscreen, all day! Same goes for buttons >>> sensors for TVs, while we're here. I'm stuck in the dark ages, I know I know.

Tangent over, this is a quality film!

There are remnants of a good film in there, but 'The Whisper of Silence' is ultimately boring viewing.

One or two moments piqued my interest, though for the vast majority of these 90 or so minutes I was super unintrigued by events onscreen (or lack thereof). The main plot is literally about coffee tasting (!), the filmmakers were evidently going for the artsy approach but boy does it feel like a waste of screen time. The subplot with Alfredo at least offers something to watch with interest.

With all that said, I will say that I did actually like Laura Osma in the lead role. She has a great acting face, I know that's a weird thing to say but what I mean is I can see her acting in something like a bloody horror flick and killing it. Unfortunately, here, Osma doesn't have much to work with; in that sense, she actually does quite well.

This picture does admirably end with a stark message about women's rights, so that's something. Strictly as a movie: disappointing.

Overly long and simply rather dull.

'X-Large' just about harbours a positive message by the end (debatable), but it does so in such a roundabout way and via uninteresting means that as a movie it's an underwhelming watch, for me at least. This could have easily been told across 90mins, rather in the 135mins that is in fact produced. The effects for Magdy's 'look' are also unconvincing.

Despite being a oomedy it doesn't offer much amusement. There's just one scene that I did find minorly comical but I've already, even just moments after watching, forgotten what one it actually was, which kinda says it all. Admittedly the language barrier perhaps contributes - that would be a fair argument, even if it's not one I necessarily agree with.

Ahmed Helmy, Donia Samir Ghanem and Ibrahim Nasr (the standout) are decent on the cast, though they are probably the only things I'd praise about this film - which isn't a terrible picture by any means, just a perfectly unfulfilling one in my eyes.

'Journey 2: The Mysterious Island' improves upon 'Journey to the Center of the Earth'.

This is good fun. It's a shame that Brendan Fraser and Anita Briem were unable to reprise their respective roles, though the additions of Dwayne Johnson, Michael Caine, Luis Guzmán and Vanessa Hudgens are all positives. Johnson has a few silly moments (berry pecs + "What a Wonderful World"), but all in all is fairly solid.

The special effects, though still not as great as they should probably be, are upgraded, the score is also better. The plot is the main improvement, this location is more interesting than that of the last movie; admittedly the lame effects for the latter are quite the hindrance.

Seems as if a third film from this series isn't completely dead in the water, despite the now twelve year gap. It's pretty surprising that it has yet to happen given the financial success of this and the 2008 flick - studios turning down money, that's a rarity!

What an ugly looking movie! It's all watchable, mind you.

Even for 2008, the special effects of 'Journey to the Center of the Earth' are quite bad, they are more reminiscent of early 00s video game graphics. That whole initial sequence looks awful, admittedly the effects aren't actually as bad as that opening suggests but still looks unbefitting of a flick with a reported $60m budget!

What saves this film is that the adventure plot itself is solid and the cast do admirable jobs. Brendan Fraser, Josh Hutcherson and Anita Briem are a trio that made it work for me. I haven't got much more to say about this one, it is visually woeful but as a picture overall it didn't drag or anything for me personally so I narrowly view it positively.

Now to see what the sequel had to offer!

Pleasantly surprised by this!

I have no idea how 'Rise of the Footsoldier' has managed to reach its sixth (sixth!) installment, but to be fair I actually truly enjoyed this entry - to the point that I'd even say this is the best of the series. Admittedly, I am someone who only likes the second film; 1 and 3-5 are all forgettable, at best.

Craig Fairbrass is, despite the aforementioned, someone I do appreciate from these flicks. I wouldn't class his acting as anything incredible, though he does definitely have enough screen presence about him and undoubtedly fits the character he portrays. This film, in my opinion, holds his best performance as Pat Tate. Elsewhere on the cast, Geoff Bell has an impressive (albeit brief) appearance.

What helps this movie is that it doesn't only rely on the cringey wannabe gangster clichés of drugs, guns and women, like most of the other five productions do; 'Rise of the Footsoldier 4: Marbella' particularly falls victim to that, from what I remember. It's still in there, just not as front and centre as before. Here, the story has a bit more meat on its bones as my interest remained throughout. The score is quite good too, a few well chosen tracks.

In conclusion, a film that is vastly more entertaining than I thought it would be. Credit to all those involved with making 'Rise of the Footsoldier: Vengeance'. Incredibly, a seventh release has already been confirmed! You know what, after this, I'm actually here for it. Fascinated to see how many of these they end up making, the UK's very own 'Fast & Furious'...

A diving film that does the job.

'Breaking Surface' doesn't set up its characters all that well, though once underwater the stakes are very much felt and the dangers that exist are made apparent. It does get unsettling in parts. Moa Gammel Ginsburg and Madeleine Martin are good value, though the former's Ida isn't as likeable as she ought to be; written a bit iffily.

This movie does offer some stunning visuals of the local landscapes. All in all, I'd say it's worth watching. The short 82 minute run time also ensures that events don't drag.

//// "Two Swedish/Norwegian half sisters go on a winter diving trip in Northern Norway, when they get trapped after a rockslide."

Has its moments, though overall I kinda found 'Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes' a bit of a slog to sit through.

The original trilogy are films that I do enjoy, they're very good. This fourth installment, however, underwhelmed me throughout its 145 minute run time. It starts off a new plot, obviously given how 'War for the Planet of the Apes' concluded, and the new characters and their stories didn't really interest me.

Some of the action is watchable, the military bunker angle is decent, the visual effects are strong (but we already knew that) and the bits directly with Noa and Raka are the film's best in my opinion. I don't, though, really recall much else about this and remember feeling quite nonplussed whilst watching; the literal final music-filled shot got me pumped though, out of nowhere. None of the cast (voice or otherwise) stand out, either.

I'd have finished this franchise with the 2017 flick, but very much sounds like the filmmakers are planning another trilogy with this one. Hopefully I'll enjoy those (and the inevitable 2030s 'new' trilogy... 😏) more.

Boy did this one catch me by surprise! I absolutely loved watching 'Abigail'! An unexpected gem!

I knew nothing pre-watch aside from that it was classed, on Wikipedia at least, as horror, so was simply expecting the usual fare à la 'Imaginary' and/or 'Immaculate' (former bad, latter good fwiw). Clearly, what I in fact saw knocked my socks off! I had a tremendous amount of fun with every second of this, it's unsettling as it is amusing... every department did a grand job!

Not even sure where to start with my list of many positives. Alisha Weir is the star of the whole thing, what an utterly brilliant performance from the youngster - so damn convincing, particularly early on. Melissa Barrera is also outstanding, I previously found her fairly forgettable in 'Scream' but here I undeniably liked watching her act. Dan Stevens (another I've found 'meh' elsewhere) impresses as well, as does Kathryn Newton. Heck, everyone onscreen is great.

I love how they showed the bloody (and the blood in general) body implosions, great use of (I assume) practical and special effects - proper thrilled me each time. I was happy to see the film get straight into the plot too, no messing about. It does a good job after that opening portion in setting up the characters before the mess truly hits the fan, which is when the movie seriously clicks into gear. Everything from that point on was an absolute blast - quite literally, eh?!

Going back to that opening few scenes, I was actually a touch concerned when it went from the initial fun escape to a one-location dynamic; I thought that was going to slow it down and make it more in keeping with the vibes of those two earlier 2024 movies that I noted at the top of my review. However, each moment in that one location is fantastic to watch, I have zero complaints. It's all paced to perfection!

Almost stunned at how much I enjoyed this, probably because I wasn't expecting anything from it. Looking at my ratings I've just now realised that I weirdly haven't got a favourite horror movie. According to the Letterboxd sort, I haven't even rated any films from this genre at anything above 9/10 - and even with that score it's only nine flicks, none of which I strongly adore. An unnoticed blind spot in my taste is evidently no longer.

The reviews for this seem generally favourable (at worst), which is nice to see. I've seen many online in agreement with me, what a ride! Not that it needs stating, but I'd highly recommend you check this one out!

'The Prestige' is tremendous!

An expertly made movie about magic, one that lasts just over two hours but it is most definitely 120mins+ well spent. I was sold by the whole vibe of it from the very beginning, sometimes you can just tell you're going to absolutely enjoy something from the opening minutes and this, for me, was one of those films.

The casting is terrific, many well known faces appear. Hugh Jackman, Michael Caine (how about that speech), Christian Bale and Scarlett Johansson are all brilliant, the latter two do hold minimally iffy accents though; or maybe it was just me. There are a few other strong performers too, like Andy Serkis and David Bowie! No-one onscreen puts a foot wrong.

Christopher Nolan is again back to his twisty best with this one. It's admittedly nothing as super deep as, say, 'Inception' and I did read where this one was going in certain aspects, though certainly not every angle - either way, it's just as thrilling to watch no matter how much or how little you pick up. Big fan of the way the film depicts its events throughout.

Just now seeing how highly this is regarded, on Letterboxd at least. I know I do try to avoid as much as I can with movies, but based on the aforementioned I'm kinda shocked I hadn't heard anything about this growing up or even in recent years. Most of Nolan's other works I at least recall hearing through the grapevine, yet this one evidently somehow slipped through the net. Probably a good thing, mind you.

A relatively normal Christopher Nolan movie? Well I never!

'Insomnia' might not be as deeply entwined as what the director usually produces, yet in entertainment terms it is still right up there. I really enjoyed this one, thanks in large part to the performances of Al Pacino and Robin Williams - great to see those two icons onscreen together! You also have some nice visuals, Alaska looks real neat!

////// shoutout the cast: Al Pacino Robin Williams Hilary Swank Martin Donovan Nicky Katt Maura Tierney Paul Dooley Jonathan Jackson Katharine Isabelle Larry Holden Jay Brazeau Kerry Sandomirsky.

Phenomenal.

What a movie! I had heard plenty about 'Memento' prior to watching in regards to how high-quality it supposedly was, though didn't actually (thankfully) get spoiled on anything that occurs onscreen - I did know of the note-taking, though for some reason thought it was via post-it notes rather than polaroids - no idea why!

It's a very satisfying movie come the conclusion, concentration is very much the order of the day but the film does connect enough dots rather sharpish. I thoroughly appreciated the ending itself, Guy Pearce delivers the final moments supremely. Speaking of he, I've not seen much of him before but this is a terrific lead performance!

Joe Pantoliano and Carrie-Anne Moss are excellent in their respective roles too, even Stephen Tobolowsky and Harriet Sansom Harris manage to leave an imprint on my mind despite much less screen time; first time I've seen Harris in anything properly since I was in my teens a decade or so ago, always remember her great showing in 'Desperate Housewives' (interestingly the first television show I ever got into, it's quality, don't @ me 😎).

Anyway, back on track... Christopher Nolan - some director, eh?! I'd put this right in my top three ranking of his work, behind 'Inception' and 'Interstellar'. Such a fulfilling movie! I hope for similar-ish with his other pictures in 'Insomnia' and 'The Prestige', two flicks I know absolutely zilch about. I don't anticipate that Mr. Nolan will let me down at this point.

So the trilogy ends here. Whatta ride! It has been a pleasure. 😓

'MXP: Most Xtreme Primate', in seriousness, is the worst of the three, hardly a surprise I know. Yet again I didn't dislike the time I spent watching this, though there is simply nothing to really praise about it. The story is more mundane than prior installments.

Things aren't helped by the fact that the snowboarding gimmick wears thin quick due to it's near verbatim reproduction of the skateboarding subplot from 'MVP 2: Most Vertical Primate'. The other subplot with the thiefs is quite bad too, these two characters barely feature and yet still manage to whip out two racially insensitive, at best, 'gags'.

The cast are fine, nothing really worth noting. I did notice a young Alexander Ludwig appear for a few seconds though, interesting that these Robert Vince pictures do tend to have a familar face pop up in random spots; Ludwig here, Zendaya (!) in 'Super Buddies'...

This one of the three-part does, at least, have the 'best' end credits, gag reel and canonical amateur garage band included! So long, Jack!

Still not all that unwatchable, though 'MVP 2: Most Vertical Primate' is a clear downgrade from the original.

I still have nothing (aside from the standard 'using animals for entertainment' questionables, obvs) to dislike about these, they are so plain and unproblematic in movies terms that it's kinda impossible for me to get bored or anything with them.

With that said, this is an objectively poor movie; especially when compared with the first film from the trilogy. The human actors are a step down, the chimps clearly aren't as well trained/convincing and the plot is more broken apart; a skateboarding chimp is quirky enough to be interesting, though mashing it alongside the ice hockey stuff doesn't work.

The bits of the story with the characters of Scott Goodman and Richard Karn are, by process of elimination, the flick's biggest strength, though the former's low acting ability does hinder events onscreen - no hate on the kid actor, of course.

Next up, the woefully titled 'MXP: Most Xtreme Primate' - they couldn't have at least tied to stick with the MVP naming, eh?

Low quality, but a harmlessly fine 90 minutes.

I found 'MVP: Most Valuable Primate' to be perfectly passable. Sure it isn't a movie that requires any sort of thinking, it's very silly and would never top great film lists and/or win any major awards. However, not a single part of me disliked this as a movie. It's flimsy but watchable. The beginning also holds more depth than anticipated.

Kevin Zegers and Jamie Renée Smith are likeable leads, while those chimps are cute - and convincing 'actors', btw! Rick Ducommun is also involved, always remember that guy from 1994's 'Blank Check'. Elsewhere, I proper thought Devin Ratray appears here as Larry, turns out he was played by Trevor Roberts - a bit of a doppelgänger!

Two more of these flicks left to watch. One of the best trilogies of all-time, I'm sure.

A kick-ass third installment!

The story depicted in 'The Equalizer 3' is surprisingly straightforward, it's literally just Robert McCall reactively killing bad guys for almost two hours... so what's not to enjoy?! Denzel Washington in the lead role is as ace as he is in the prior flicks, I am yet to watch a less than good Denzel picture; 15 films deep into his filmography, what an actor!

I don't recall the previous two movies from this trilogy featuring as many brutal deaths as this one does, which is great. I could be misrembering but, whatever, I really enjoyed seeing McCall do his thing in this one. The music is also noteworthy, while the Italian setting is splendidly portrayed - terrific choice of location! The support cast are inferior to Washington, naturally, but still solid, cool to see Dakota Fanning reunite onscreen with the aforementioned.

End of the trilogy it seems, though there are murmurs on potentially more films in some sorta way - hardly unexpected. As for these three, 2 is my favourite followed by this and then 1. Antoine Fuqua (also yet to see a less than very good movie from him, from 7 watched) and Washington are evidently a top notch pairing, either way.