Reviews

63 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1923 (2022–2023)
4/10
Started bad, got worse
20 March 2024
Warning: Spoilers
I'm bamboozled by how much love this gets because, for me, the silliness of the story was only matched by some of the truly rotten dialogue.

The series obviously has investment - the settings and production by and large are stunning. And there's some heavyweight acting chops available with Ford, Mirren, Dalton and others.

But there's a helix of story arcs that coil around each other without building to anything.

Jacob Dutton grumbles about the world changing and the horse gives way to the car ("Where's mah hitching post?!?") while the fight for the storied Yellowstone ranch heats up. Timothy Dalton's Uber-villain is so disgusting and arch (we know this because of laboured sexual deviancy scenes) he may as well be stroking a white cat.

Meanwhile, Jacob's nephew sets sail from his dream job of big game hunting in Africa to chart a course home, picking up a feisty damsel along the way. These two, Spencer and Alexandria, get the absolute worse of the dialogue but they sure do have some crazy adventures. Lion attack! Ghost ship! Shipwreck! Ship-board duel! These crazy kids can't catch a break.

Also meanwhile, young First Nations girl, Teonna, stolen from her family, is tortured into violent revenge by missionaries from central casting. While maybe the most compelling of the stories, it's a colour-by-numbers escape quest that, unsurprisingly, eventually leads to Montana.

Which, I guess, is where all roads lead for Season 2.

I rather enjoyed 1883 and have never seen a second of Yellowstone but even so, I hope that other seasons of this part of the canon make for better connective tissue between the two than this series is.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
John Wick (2014)
2/10
If someone killed my dog I'd be angry too
30 January 2024
Is this meant to be a cartoon? It has all the right ingredients.

Dumb baddie hurts smart good/baddie's feelings so he kills...everyone. All the time. Everywhere.

Elaborate, fantasy world-building, surreal settings, lots of pop-pop, bang-bang. Minimal dialogue; and what there is feels pretty pedestrian. Maximum action; and every bit of it is straight out of a gaming console. It's less fighting than it is ballet, but generally with a distracting soundtrack that feels like WWF wrestlers should be walking into a ring with it in the background.

No one did anything to give me someone to cheer, boo or even be that interested in. I mean, I liked the dog, but his screen time was limited.

I can suspend my disbelief with the best of them, but this feels like an absolute phone-in.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sunshine (2007)
2/10
Wait... what?
29 November 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I'm not a sci fi nerd. I know that there IS gravity, but don't ask me to explain it.

But I do know that a crazy dude with full thickness burns is unlikely to survive for 7 years on a dusty, broken down ship. Is he microwaving a pie every day with his burnt up fingers and chewing it with his burnt up mouth? What is he drinking? How is he pooping?

I also reckon that a HAL-level computer might toot a klaxon when a complete stranger sneaks onboard and starts using his scorched up murder mittens to take out the good guys.

Like most others who didn't fall in love with this film, I found the first two acts ok. By now we've been inoculated against the idea of completely ill-equipped space crews being selected to undertake humanity's salvation. So the fact that each crew member occupies a trope so rigid they may as well be the Spice Girls is acceptable. The film looks good, the pace seemed right, the ratchet/release of tension was a bit sloppy but passable.

The third act is a such a bizarre left turn that it was like a separate movie was accidentally spliced in. Everything and yet nothing happens and the shudder-cam, stop/start, glitchy focus nonsense isn't a suitable replacement for an actual emotional or narrative resolution.

I just found it weird. And not in a good way.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A lot of quality does not equal great
27 May 2023
Everyone's performance is great. Soundtrack - tick. Script and dialogue - good. Locations and cine - excellent.

But sometimes the some of the parts is disappointing. I'm clearly not the only person that thought pacing and timing was an issue here. In the end, for me, the drift away from a solid murder mystery with heaps of personal skin in the game simply got sidetracked by fancy footwork in the form of historical and personal flashbacks. Such an unnecessary distraction from outstanding acting and a solid premise.

Also - hair and wigs. A small detail but if your plot is invested in hair (and this plot definitely is), then blow your budget on it because otherwise you've got me having a giggle at all the wrong moments.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The White Lotus: Departures (2021)
Season 1, Episode 6
5/10
Just not that into it
17 December 2022
I don't need a hero or a villain but at least a character to either like or dislike would have been great.

There's about 4 hours of useful plot in series 1 once you take out the lengthy montages and about an hour of that I truly enjoyed.

The soundtrack is full of beautiful music that's over employed and while the production value is lovely, it's at the expense of both drama and comedy.

I like the 'fly in the wall' approach but it didn't have a pace I found compelling, dialogue I found engaging or characters I found completely interesting.

Murray Bartlett's Armond vears toward slapstick but at least it's a somewhat useful through-line in a stop/start collection of character developments. Jennifer Coolidge's Tanya is similarly cartoonish but her inability to make eye-contact, while consistent with character, was distracting for me.

The balance of the ensemble were just a disappointment, without sufficient highs and lows to make them keep my attention.

I really wanted to care about someone, anyone, for any reason. I'm rooting for Quinn but everyone else was about as disappointing as a resort buffet breakfast.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Becoming Jane (2007)
5/10
Hits and misses
24 November 2022
I don't have any problem with productions that use a historical character or event/s as a jumping off point, but Becoming Jane tries to out Austen Jane Austen and that just leapt too far for me.

The film tries to take the established Austen trajectory, but her works are a roller coaster ride infused with spunky dialogue. Comparatively, Becoming Jane is derivative and dull.

The production values are as lovely as you'd expect but didn't see the chemistry between the leads that others obviously have, and the supporting cast don't get enough opportunity to really support. I enjoy Hathaway and McAvoy but neither the script nor their performances ramp up the frisson.

And when Hathaway's Austen tells fellow female author Mrs Radcliffe that she wants to write about matters "of the heart", mine sank. Sure, Austen's works are romantic, but they aren't romances - they're social commentary in which love (of a person, of choice, of self) bangs up against the strictures of the times. Maybe that isn't such a snappy substitute response, but that one line reduces Austen dreadfully. Even in such floridly imagined fiction, her legacy deserves better.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Silence (II) (2019)
3/10
Irrelevancy is the least of its worries
16 October 2022
Warning: Spoilers
We all love Stanley Tucci. And what's not to like about Kieran Shipka, Miranda Otto and that fella that was the nice boyfriend of Carrie's in SATC?

But no amount of likeable cast can make up for complete lameness in every other facet.

Monster movies should be about the monsters we are capable of becoming as much as the ones that arrive. However, The Silence under-delivers on both fronts with the plucky suburban Andrews dropped into a rapidily dystopianising world when a flock of hungry bats are unleashed on humanity.

The bats have epic hearing and so, yes, like Birdbox and A Quiet Place, people are robbed of one of humankind's natural advantages - our ability to communicate. And our unfortunate habit of just being really noisy.

In spite of a series of failures in logic and commonsense, the Andrews find themselves a safe harbour in a nicely decked out cabin. And while the fright bats pose an existential threat, that's trumped of course by the other monsters - people. Mysterious people with vague, rape-y ambitions.

Combat ensues, and while I was hoping Tucci would go full-Leeson, the confrontation is short and predictable.

In spite of the vast landmass involved, Team Andrews somehow navigate successfully to a happy ending at The Refuge, above the snow line where the bats aren't fond of the weather.

The plot line is succinct, but it's journey is ungratifyingly paced, without any great sense of urgency or relief to keep us engaged. It's silly, telegraphed, and poorly rendered. Not only does it measure poorly against its other mute counterparts, it doesn't meet any threshold of decent monster movie, and isn't camp enough to qualify as a terrible one. It's a sad fate for a good cast.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Gift (VI) (2015)
6/10
Pretty but shallow
21 September 2022
A bit like Bateman's character, for me this film was all veneer without a lot substance.

The much referred to 'plot twist' isn't exactly well disguised but what was interesting was a plot where the two key protagonists are profoundly un-likeable, leaving Hall's character as possibly the least dynamic but also the only character one worth rooting for (except maybe for Jangles the dog who is a total cutie).

Some of the gaping plot holes could have been easily plugged. No internet searches? No home security - the guy works in security for Pete's sake! And the world's weirdest maternity ward at the end was almost as creepy as the awful dye job of Edgerton's hair.

This is a movie that looks good and has fine aspirations but could have ratcheted up the tension with at least 20 minutes less screen time and some more pulling back of that veneer in the second act.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
The real deal is more entertaining
9 March 2022
To get us excited about a story we already know, a production has to bring something really unique to the table - a new dimension, a brilliant characterisation, an evocative rendering.

The problem with Joe vs Carole is that the version already told had all those elements dialled up to 12 already and there was nowhere new, or at least different enough to transport us, for a dramatisation to go.

The clunky CGI (mind you, props to them for avoiding any real animal use), the slightly surreal use of Queensland, Australia as a Florida substitute, and the fact that every main character is already basically a live-action cartoon, push the whole production into 1990s family adventure territory. If Brendan Fraser had jumped out of a tree I wouldn't have been surprised. But none of this imparts a charming quality; more one of cheapness.

John Cameron Mitchell and Kate McKinnon are fiercely into their characters, but a good impersonation doesn't necessarily make for compelling viewing. Some of the peripheral characters hold up well, particularly Nat Wolf and Sam Keely as two thirds of the tragic throuple, and Brian Van Holt as Joe Exotic's loyal ballast. Kyle McLachlan is consistent as Carole's long-suffering husband.

At the end of it all though, this is a story where truth IS stranger than fiction, and the dramatisation is left with nowhere to go and, frankly, not enough appetite to satisfy given what was served up in Tiger King.

Disappointingly for me, it was, like the documentary, a missed opportunity to promote the unnecessary horror of exotic animals being bred and kept for pedestrian purposes. Yet again, the selfish narcissism of humans overshadows a nasty, cruel industry that could so easily be ended if we chose to put the needs of these animals first for once.
17 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Spencer (2021)
2/10
Awful, which would be ok if it wasn't also pointless
1 March 2022
I kind of get where Pablo Larson was going but, for me, it was wildly off the mark.

This is a horror film. It's protagonist is a vulnerable young woman who is kept a virtual prisoner in a spooky old house by a creepy family who live in virtual isolation from the normal world, and by a set of rules that are impossible to follow. Our heroine brings her own ghosts with her but also has some set upon her. She's desperate to protect her children, and she's desperate to escape. It's kind of The Others but with less interesting twists.

As a plot summary it reads fine, but the problem is that we already know the story. As a fiction it's a series of tropes that are so worn out that the concept and presentation would have to be immaculate to feel fresh. It isn't, and it doesn't.

And as a posited version of factual events, well we already know that story too. Or think we do, at least.

The score is a dominant player, but the loopy discordant jazz is too irritating to be atmospheric and the contrast with 80s escapist pop is well intended but hammy.

It's basically a solo show for poor Kristen Stewart. Alistair Gregory is wasted as the gross ringmaster called in to break the back of Diana's rebellion either by negotiation or by shoving her completely over the edge - a tactic in part achieved with a dreadfully rendered Anne Boleyn ghostie conjured up. Jack Farthing gets one half good scene as Charles. Sally Hawkins and Sean Harris are the two points of adult humanity drafted in to amp up the contrast with the grim Family - that they are staff I guess telegraphs that apparently those 'downstairs' have hearts, while the monsters upstairs don't. Hearts which, in the case of Hawkins' Sally are maybe a little too fully given. But who doesn't love a princess, right?

So it's the Kristen Stewart show and she is working SO hard, but for me it's an uneven and distracting performance. She takes the Diana-isms so far that I worried she'd end up with either a neck injury or an asthma attack. I took heart from her scenes with Jack Nielen and Freddy Spry who are charming as William and Harry. The interaction between the three approaches feeling authentic, but falls apart when William is forced to parent Diana as her mental health unwinds.

For me, this is one of those movies where both too much, and too little happens. It ended up feeling campy, but not in a good way. Frankly I would have been happier if they'd lent in and gone full horror vibe, but Larson pulls up short, creating a pretty 'meh' vibe and adding nothing to the canon of the global Diana obsession.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Station Eleven (2021–2022)
9/10
If you left early, you missed out
26 February 2022
This is a 'circles within circles' proposition. Not concentric circles though, but ones that overlap creating multiple timelines, plot lines and characters that intersect, particularly in the first half of the series.

I stopped and started a fair bit, but the complexity pays off as the various threads draw together and gain resolution. The consistent attraction is the powerful performances throughout. Mackenzie Davis has a lot of hard work to do and I found her uneven in a role that calls for both childlike naivety and dark, violent sophistication. She's buttressed by a really great cast though, particularly by Matilda Lawler as her younger self, Daniel Zovat as her darker reflection, and Himesh Patel and Nabhaan Rizwan as her fellow travellers.

The staging and costumes are also compelling, with the whacky, comic-book tone of the future-state contrasting with an often cold and starkly rendered past-state.

I don't think any of us expect to see travelling troupes of orchestras and actors a mere couple of decades after the fall of civilisation, but this isn't meant to be a documentary. It's a parable with a nice truth at its heart that one person can make a difference to another person, whether it's in the here and now, on a lonely space station, or in a dystopian future.

I ultimately found the series to be moving, rewarding and original (in spite of it leaning heavily on Shakespeare to amplify both the plot and vibe). It's also refreshing to reach a conclusion that feels resolved and well-paced, something which doesn't seem to happen a lot these days when producers have one eye on their prospects for a pick up, and another on the need to reach some kind of conclusion before budget or audience tolerance runs out.

My advice is to stick with it, and even to binge if you can to keep the various relationships fresh in your mind.
11 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
This Is Paris (2020)
7/10
Even 'It Girls' are real girls
7 January 2022
Warning: Spoilers
There are some really uncharitable reviews on here. Not necessarily about the film itself which is an ordinary production, but about its subject who, like it or not, is an actual person.

Privilege shouldn't equal excuse but neither should it equal dismissal. Does Paris Hilton have a privileged, largely vacuous life? It seems so, and in fact it's pretty much repeatedly admitted by Paris herself. But that doesn't protect her from either injury, nor the long-term consequences that can come from injury, especially when they are inflicted on a child.

Spoiler - Paris reveals, and is supported in her disclosures by multiple other victims, that as a child she was hauled from her bedroom during the night by strangers and taken to what might be described as a reform school. With the consent of her parents, upset by her teenage rebellion and it's stain on their conservative family brand, Paris tells of physical and emotional abuse. Her peers also refer to sexual abuse. In light of what we now know about institutionalised child abuse, these claims have a ring of truth.

Now an adult, an insomniac, a work-a-holic, a recipient of domestic violence, and largely friendless, Paris' fantasy lifestyle has all the hallmarks of a seriously damaged young woman, albeit on a very luxurious scale.

Enter the judgement of a lot of reviewers who can't get past the gowns and jewels to offer any sympathy to a woman who, to me, seems obsessively committed to creating a safe space she can cocoon herself inside of. All the 'stuff', the transient lifestyle, the collection of animals, the relationships with unworthy men, the creation of an alter ego - none of this will be unfamiliar to anyone who has spent time with damaged children who've grown to adulthood.

The film itself is patchy and while I'm sympathetic to Paris, it is, as any autobiography is inclined to be, an exercise in curation and indulgence.

Ultimately, it's not going to change any of our lives but maybe it could help Paris change hers.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Stand (2020–2021)
1/10
Torture
15 February 2021
Haven't seen the previous version, haven't read the book so at least I can't criticise this absolute shambles compared to them. As a stand-alone (pun intended) piece though, it's hard to imagine how this could be worse. It would have been smart to stop watching but it's a proper car-crash so it was hard to look away. It took me weeks to watch it though - it's impossible to binge without becoming stupider. The plot is so nonsensical that I have to presume that some important arcs have either been left out or terribly damaged. When the plot isn't breaking your brain, the over-blown performances (I'm looking at you, Skarsgard) send everything spiralling into farce. Of course, it's entirely possible, with a deft hand, to bring together farce, drama, comedy, pathos and deliver well-formed entertainment. The Stand does not do that. It lurches around, building zero tension or character development, and occasionally has an explosion of sets or bodies that look like they were executed by the work experience team. The final episode in particular is a relentless, irredeemable mess that just becomes (unconvincingly) preachy. I hope that everyone involved at least got to pay their rent for a while, because there's pretty much no other reason for them to be happy about their participation. The dog was good.
101 out of 132 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A Discovery of Witches (2018–2022)
7/10
If Twilight and Outlander had a baby...
13 December 2020
I haven't read the books, so I'm unprejudiced by the source material. This isn't the worst tv, but the tropes are well-used and pretty predictable but I've also only seen series one, so can't speak to further character and plot development. It probably borrows the best bits of Twilight's gothic fantasy of advanced communities of 'monsters' co-habitating with the human world, but de-tweens it, with a dash of Outlander's more adult characters and themes. Like both other series, it leans heavily into the consequences of inter-relationships between groups historically separated by time, bloodline, culture and history. Of course, the 21st century thus far lands these themes firmly at the centre of the zeitgeist. Series leads Teresa Palmer and Matthew Goode have believable chemistry and while some of the action sequences are definitely tv-grade, the locations and sets general uphold some pretty good production values. This didn't dazzle me but it's an ok solid watch.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Nightcrawler (2014)
7/10
Satire more than thriller
29 November 2020
Warning: Spoilers
From the first scene in which we see protagonist Lou Bloom, we know what he is. He's an amoral liar and thief who doesn't bat an eyelid when cornered, or when he sees a thing he wants. His first go-to is violence. Within minutes we also know he's a bizarrely confident slick- talker, albeit with delusions of grandeur. So what do you get if you cross a thug with a car salesman? A psychopath. And where better for a psychopath to find his niche than within the orbit of journalism as a collector of carnage video content for fee-for-service news programming? This package of information is delivered deftly in the first act but the trajectory for Lou Bloom is well sign-posted which, for me, deprives Nightcrawler of 'thriller' status. It does rate as satire, although the use of a psychopath to represent the distillation of our own most base and craven instincts and behaviours is a well-trodden (and more successfully trodden) path. Let's face it, since the chase that ended Princess Diana's life we've all known that it's our own weirdly voyeuristic drive to see each other, and our celebrities particularly, at our most vulnerable or hurt that feeds the paparazzi and shock journalism. Jake Gyllenhaal does do a pretty neat job of capturing Bloom's twitchy descent (or ascent, depending on your POV). Rene Russo is the most improbable local news director ever rendered and suffers from the weird, unresolved and ultimately unnecessary sexual interest sub-plot. Similarly, the glancing blow Bloom has with law enforcement feels lacking in tension and intent. For me, Nightcrawler was more an interesting film than a compelling or thrilling one. Props to Dan Gilroy - the film looks slick and gritty with Bloom's wild, shining eyes the focus of the frequent night-time scenes, then hidden behind sunglasses in daylight like he's developing into some sort of modern-day vampire. The soundtrack is grinding and unsettling. But for me these couldn't compensate for a lack of slow-burn and points of tension release that a really great thriller needs. A solid 7 though.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Gangs of London (2020– )
6/10
If Peaky Blinders & GOT had a baby
14 November 2020
Not terrible, but certainly not original either. And very confusing. It swings from gritty realism to ultra-florid Tarantinoism without ever really settling into a clear vibe. It's graphic and violent but that's ok. It's well choreographed in a '300' type of way, with lots of shakey camera work amping up the tension. In addition to the Blinders/GOT foundation of a family in ascendancy under siege from rival clans and cliques, there's an undercover infiltration thread that harks back to .... every crime show that has an undercover infiltration thread. Throw in a bit of The Wire with a complicated web of property development, financial district and political intrigue. If you feel like if references a lot of stuff above, it's because Gangs of London is highly derivative, which doesn't mean it's bad, but you should be prepared to never once be surprised. Joe Cole does his best with a role that doesn't offer a whole lot for a lead. Sope Dirisu gets all the action and it's nice to see Colm Meaney off the helm of the Enterprise. Probably a few hours longer than it needed to be in spite of not having a strong arc of development in any of the many interwoven threads and back stories. It's ok, not great.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Prisoners (2013)
4/10
Staring Hugh Jackman as Liam Neeson
10 April 2020
I feel like everyone is trying super hard, but even with it's distended length, Prisoners only just manages to be ok. I know Hugh Jackman is talented as heck, a national treasure, and a delightful guy but as a dramatic actor he just doesn't do it for me. He plays every scene for the cheap seats - you can almost see him reaching deeply to bring every ounce of angst or anger up. He serves a lot of aces but I just don't see enough subtlety for him to sustain a thrilling rally. As the dad straining at his limits of humanity in his quest to find his daughter, Jackman is a working class Neeson-in-Taken facsimile striking one note for several hours. The supporting cast is incredible on paper, but no-one other than Gyllenhaal and Melissa Leo gets anything to work with. Paul Dano and Terrence Howard in particular are wasted terribly. The plot feels like a Scandi Noir relocated to the mid west. It's also twists and turns, bizarre coincidence, red herrings, and tricky symbolism. I feel like they could have junked a fair amount and tightened into either a cracking thriller, or amped up the psychological tension of Jackman's character descending into darkness. Alternatively, a limited series format could have allowed some of the sub plots and spirals to develop a bit more (although then it would have basically been The Killing). For my money, too much of everything added up to not much of anything, which is a shame because it's clear everyone showed up with conviction.
0 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Next in Fashion (2020–2023)
7/10
Great fashion, average show
31 January 2020
Tan France and Alexa Chung are delightful hosts but we needed to see less of them. Same goes for the designers' backstories which are laboured rather than engaging. It's be so much more interesting to see them at their craft rather than seeing their primary school photos. The production is over engineered. The jump edits, the fake 'three, two, one, GO!', the confected judging conversations - are all unnecessary distractions. Frankly, I don't even understand the need to start the competition in teams of two and finish as individual competitors. Kudos though to the runway stage designers; their work looks great. The heavy handed, host-centredness of the show is particularly galling because the fashion is so good. The design sensibility and, in most cases, construction seems so elevated compared to its OG - Project Runway and its infinite spin-offs. By the last few episodes I was fast forwarding to the runway segment because it's bookends were completely tedious. I hope Netflix finds a way to recraft the show so that the design work (not the hosts, the guests, the editing or frankly even the designers) gets to be the superstar. Five of my seven stars is for the fashion.
29 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Sew good
14 January 2020
GBSB is just a lovely piece of tele and a panacea to many of the over-hyped competition shows that have multiplied in recent years. It borrows from the Bake Off format with a couple of challenges on day one (broken up by a nice bit of morning tea in the local caf) and a major challenge on day two. A small starting group is whittled down week by week across eight episodes by judges whose sewing expertise is matched by their delightful oh-so-British eccentricity. The contestant's backstories are light-touch, and largely without drama. Most importantly, the contestants are delightful, kind, considerate, polite and humble. There aren't any villains and the products of their sewing remain in focus the whole time. Wholesome, restful, entertaining tv without any octane, and that's ok.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cheer (2020–2022)
7/10
Left me cheering!
14 January 2020
Warning: Spoilers
This is not documentary that's only about its titular subject. It's certainly an examination of cheerleading. Across the 6 hours of the series we learn a little about the history of the novelty-cum-billion dollar sporting industry of 'cheer'. We get some insight into the complexity of the sport, the athleticism required to compete, and the insane physical and emotional cost of the commitment needed to excel in the sport at an elite level. But it also reads as docu-drama. Head coach Monica is a post-millennial Mr Miyagi, a small-town gal who tasted the Big Wide World but eventually came home to find it was where she needed to be all along. Monica is both mother and mom-ager to the 40-strong cheer team. She supplies both hugs and butt kicks as she navigates through the difficult terrain of kindness and ruthlessness that's needed to refine the team to razor-sharp performance. The team members selected as feature characters could all have come from central casting and over the series we get back-story packages that press into some pretty raw points. Golden girl Gabi is an industry for her stage-parents. Lexi wobbles on and off the rails after her parents divorce, tumbling (literally) into cheer in spite of not fitting into any crevice of the cheerleader mould. Morgan, adrift of her own parents, anchors herself to Monica and triumphs as a disciple who commits herself wholely. Complex, prickly La'Darius is a tunnel-visioned survivor whose pursuit of perfection turns him from a joyful bro to acid-tongued meanboy in a heartbeat. Jerry is the husky, gentle-natured tryer whose sheer love of the sport (coupled with natural athleticism and commitment) propels him to success, and patches some of the devastating loss of his mother. A supporting cast of assistant coaches, team mates, family members and industry experts provide the scaffolding from which the arcs of the main cast curve. This is an interesting time in the lives of these young people. They're not children anymore but not fully formed adults either, and you get the feeling that the formative experience of being part of the Navarro cheer family is a bridge between those two worlds. And it's a bridge they could just as easily topple off as use to guide them to a happy path. The series is beautifully produced and thoughtfully paced, giving us just enough of the cheer to justify it a sports documentary while gaining our investment in the drama. It's easy to be cynical, and the manipulation is there, but Cheer still read to me as 'real' rather than profoundly confected 'reality'. There are heart catching moments, particularly in the finale as the months of build up lead us to the national championships in Daytona where just 135 seconds of performance will define this collection of characters as a team. Lexi's grandparents fumbling with their steaming tech. La'Darius' brother shedding a single, silent tear. Jerry being held by a team mate who urges him to "Look up - your mom's watching you". On paper, these moments could easily warrant editing out, but they touched me. So maybe I'm a sucker, but I'm a sucker who was genuinely moved. Also genuinely awestruck by the physical and mental conviction of these athletes. Also genuinely troubled by damage rendered on these young bodies. Also genuinely sad for the carelessness and even cruelty that adults can visit on children that leaves them in search of niches where they can belong and feel safe. Also genuinely grateful that, for some, a sport, a team or a coach is the niche where they find that comfort.
38 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6 Underground (2019)
5/10
Terrific and revolting film
18 December 2019
It's a Michael Bay film. There's a sky-high body count, jaw-dropping settings and effects, product placement galore and a clear line between who's the good and bad guys. It also has Ryan Reynolds and some other very likeable, and perfect looking people playing spy/assassin/thieves from central casting. Other than processing the high octane action and suspending an incredible amount of disbelief, this is the least work your brain will ever have to do while watching a film. It's brilliant and awful. It reinforces a dangerous idea that so long as you're 'right', you can kick off a fight however you want with impunity and utter disregard for any other point of view. The only people who have emotional consequences are the 'good' guys (the soaring emotions of their back and front stories are tears-in-your eyes stuff, but presumably the several hundred bad guys they've just slain didn't have adorable kids, or cute puppies or loving grannies). The final scenes are gratuitous, depicting middle Easterners as barbarians, and the 'good' guys as judge, jury and executioner in the most base way possible. I know people think that reading too much into a Michael Bay movie is a fool's errand, but if you've ever looked at a road-rager smashing the windows of a car owned by a complete stranger who's just ticked them off a bit, you've also seen a Michael Bay film. It's an astonishing film, but in terms of a watching diet, it's empty calories.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Eastsiders (2012–2019)
8/10
Uneven but the highs are high
6 December 2019
When Eastsiders hits the sweet spot it's great. Touching, authentic, funny, and sad - all the feels! But in between the splendid highs is a lot of relationship and existential navel gazing. I get it that 20-somethings into the 30-somethings are inclined to wonder out loud a lot about where they've been, where they're going, who they're going with yadayada but this ensemble are way to easily distracted by their own self-importance. Personally, I think the writing and character development improves over the seasons, although I loved the short-format of its early days. It never gets any less unbelievable that everyone in Silverlake knows each other, are hot as anything and have great sex all over the place, but these aren't exactly drawbacks. Traci Lords and Willam Belli playing it for the cheap seats are fabulous. I really like Eastsiders a lot. It's good tv and way overdue in the 21st century.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The King (I) (2019)
9/10
Judge it on its own merits
2 November 2019
It's not Henry V and it's not a documentary of the events leading up to the Battle of Agincourt. Judge it on its own merits. Personally, I liked it a lot. It's dark, it's not a fast burn. The acting and script aren't flamboyant but rather sparse and conservative. I could have lived without the ye olde pre-battle speech although it did let lead actor Timothee Chalamet off his leash for a second which was nice. The battle sequences are lumbering and brutal - probably a lot more realistic than a lot of the ballet productions used in many period pieces. The supporting cast I thought was great. Joel Edgerton is transitioning into an elder statesman-like period and this role is a great start. Robert Pattinson is the only real disappointment in a brief but pivotal role as the Dauphin. His accent and blonde dye-job compete for the worst bits about his performance but the whole thing lacked the chicanery and arrogance I think he was aiming for. I think Netflix has done a good job. The movie worked great for me at home but it's also cinematic enough to render well on the big screen.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lambs of God (2019)
5/10
A no, for me
7 August 2019
I'm surprised that a number of reviewers have responded so positively, but I was disappointed. Part gothic horror, part detective story, part family saga, part examination of the tribulations of the Catholic church and its treatment of children and women, part love story (of God and of people) - so many parts, but for me, not enough solid connective tissue to make the whole thing work really well. It's beautifully shot, although the logistics of the set make absolutely no sense (that land bridge wouldn't get a tank across, let alone a sedan!). Ann Dowd in particular doubles down totally into the marginal insanity of her particular character. Jessica Barden's twitchy novice is believable around half the time and the redoubtable Essie Davis is great in spite of the unnecessary eyeball prosthetics. Poor Sam Reid looks sensational as the Priest With A Past and his ab workouts are taken well advantage of. I feel like there was a lot of components that may have worked brilliantly on the page, but didn't quite make a successful translation to the screen. It's not the worst thing I've ever seen - not by a long shot - and I'm glad to have seen it but in my opinion it was a disappointing use of some great talent. I really like the nun's knitted habits though.
10 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Made for a drinking game!
26 July 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I honestly can't say this is the worst movie ever made, but mostly that's because I haven't seen every movie ever made. The plot has more holes than a pair of fishnets and every single person acts like they're being made to do it at gunpoint. Poor wasshername, who had some sort of career before Secret Obsession, hoppity hops from trope to trope as the Woman with Amnesia. The slow reveal includes a Sad Cop who is battling his way to redemption, a Nice Nurse who must be making a billion dollars a year because she seems to be the only person ever working at the hospital (although she also finds time to conveniently be in a car park for an accidental path-crossing) and a Mysterious Tattooed Guy who.... actually I have no idea what he was doing or why. Bad Husband slowly reveals his badness through general creepiness, the threat of sexual violence and then by being a total murderer. Gorgeous wood house in the woods where all the action happens is ironically less wooden than all the acting. (One of my fave bits is where hubby boasts that there's no shortage of wood for the fire, whilst gazing into the flames of a gas fireplace). Watch this with your friends and take a shot whenever something stupid or inexplicable happens. You'll be buckled by the end of the first act and possibly hospitalised by the time the credits role.
48 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed