OctaneNitro

While Toy Story 4 has plenty of good ideas, and executes most of them well, the film also carries significantly more flaws than its predecessors, and follows on from a near-perfect finale in Toy Story 3, leaving the whole package feeling significantly more cynical. Forky is an interesting character... but gets sidelined about a third of the way into the film. Reintroducing and expanding on the character of Bo Peep was generally handled well, but the rest of the classic toys receive almost no screentime whatsoever. Meanwhile, Buzz does receive the focus he deserves, but feels bizarrely dumbed down, mainly used as comic relief, in stark contrast to prior entries. For every idea Toy Story 4 does well (see the film's villain: Gabby, and her absolutely terrifying minions), there is another left to the wayside. The film explores new ideas, and new characters, in a new setting, but seems unable or unwilling to utilize most of what came before... and when you have a series as cohesive, imaginative, and beloved as the original Toy Story trilogy, those relatively minor flaws quickly add up into a product that simply feels lesser than what came before. Toy Story 4 is far from a bad film, and succeeds far more than it fails, but it still falls short of the franchise's prior bar by a noticeable margin.

After seeing the hype for Skinamarink, I truly wanted to enjoy it. A modern horror classic, combining elements of low-fi and analogue horror in an innovative way? Sign me up! Unfortunately, my actual impressions were... mixed. On one hand, I can definitely see why so many people enjoy it. The film's use of silence and grainy, shadowy footage genuinely evokes the feeling of childhood fears and nightmares, and several scenes are unbearably tense knowing the horrors that could be lurking just beyond view. The visuals of a familiar, childhood home, gradually morphing into a hostile, pitch-black prison are extremely effective. On the other hand, (and there is simply no way around this), the movie is empty and extremely long for what is actually there. Without any hyperbole, for every minute you'll spend watching actual horror or sitting with baited breath, you'll spend five staring at TVs, ceilings, and empty hallways, as the constant drone of static literally puts you to sleep. This is an experimental, indie project that simply did not need a 100 minute runtime - thirty minutes of content (or even enough to take the runtime under an hour) could be removed with essentially nothing of substance being lost. Additionally, by the end of the film, the heavy use of static and VHS effects were actually hurting my eyes from the strain of following the events on screen - though I admit this is a personal gripe. The bigger issue from this is the film's simultaneous effective and ineffective use of darkness: so much is obscured, and difficult to visualise, that I wish something had actually been hidden there to reward our attention. In Skinamarink, a black wall of static is just that 99% of the time, which makes you wonder why these effects are so heavy and so constant to begin with. Ultimately, whether you'll enjoy Skinamarink will likely come down to personal preference. If you're able to look past the flaws and enjoy the positives on offer, you'll come away equal parts terrified and refreshed. But if not, the effectiveness of those positives will almost certainly be diluted.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

After Yang spends so much time trying to craft a thematically-rich piece of high art, it fails to pay enough attention to the fundamentals. The film doesn't develop its setting at all, while also lacking interesting characters and a comprehensible plot. Sadly, whispered monologues and esoteric flashbacks can only get you so far - at some point, you actually have to DO something with the themes and foundations you've laid. Arguably the most engaging part of the film is how it portrays human connections in a world governed by cold technology, with the same privacy and "you'll own nothing and enjoy it" issues present in our world today. Unfortunately, the film's central family dynamic is similarly cold: "the good times" are hardly shown at all, and we're simply told that Yang was a beloved part of the family via unconvincing dialogue. The film's plot is equally sparse. Despite being fairly focused at first, after a while, it devolves into flashback after flashback, and conversation after slow conversation, killing any forward momentum before the film unceremoniously ends. At points, it actually becomes difficult to follow, with characters (some with the same name?) popping up for a scene or two and then vanishing. Overall, it's clear that this was created strictly for an indie, film festival audience. There's nothing wrong with that, but After Yang is far from a modern classic. It's bitter medicine, reluctantly taken and dubiously effective.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Unfortunately, far from Nolan's best. Christopher Nolan has always been known for making stylish films, innovating in their respective genres. The Dark Knight Trilogy, Dunkirk and Inception are proof of that. But those films were never style over substance, and this is a balance that Tenet comes close to breaking. Let's address the elephant in the room: Tenet's central "gimmick", which is reversing the flow of time. These sequences are certainly visually stunning, but ultimately bring surprisingly little to the table. Reversing tried-and-tested action clichés sounds interesting, but in practice, the sequences rarely manage to rise above merely serviceable. Even worse is the narrative. While I won't pick apart every twist and "timeline" here, the plot of Tenet is extremely convoluted, to the extent that a majority of audiences won't be able to follow what is going on. There are endless "gotcha" moments, most of which feel unearned due to the breakneck speed and wayward direction of the plot. Even worse, these "twists" - the centrepieces of the entire film, fail to carry any emotional weight whatsoever. Having a storyless, nameless "protagonist" may win style points, but it also robs the viewer of any emotional connection at all. At key moments in Tenet, I found myself bored out of my mind, rather than on the edge of my seat, as I simply did not care for ANY of the characters introduced. Ultimately, Tenet has some fairly imaginative (though still underwhelming) action scenes, strongish performances and the signature sleek cinematography of Nolan. But beyond that, it's the same action movie you've seen countless times before, with smoke and mirrors to trick you into thinking you're watching something more. Nolan can do so much better than Tenet, and it feels like he was on autopilot for the whole affair. Next time, more efforts needs to go into the story and characters, rather than just the premise and technical details.