bradens584

At it’s core, Escape from Pretoria is just another prison escape movie. The finish of the South African apartheid setting does enhance it, and Daniel Radcliffe is good despite a questionable South African accent. But the thrilling scenes of the daring escape get less thrilling as you see them rebranded and recycled.

The Dead Don’t Die, but they sure do disappoint. After I saw the trailer I was filled with anticipation for a well made zombie spoof, but it didn’t quite live up to my expectations. It isn’t without it’s funny moments and the acting is around the board quality. But a confused plot, and some poor writing weigh down a promising intent. Along with the fatal flaw of too many characters of little development, I wouldn’t recommend it.

Greyhound tries really hard to be the 1917 of the Navy, but just falls short. Despite having epic action and compelling set pieces along with nice cinematography, there isn’t much more than that. Tom Hanks is great, but his character isn’t. There’s not really any substance beyond ‘looking cool’, but at the same time, it wasn’t really aiming for that. It was aiming to take the audience on a journey into the middle of the Atlantic during WWII, and as far as that goes, it succeeds with flying colours.

The Karate Kid may not be a masterpiece, but it’s an undeniable classic. Plagued with caricatures of the 80s (you can interpret that as good or bad), this film still manages to convey a good message with a great story and characters. The acting was especially impressive, and is something its many clones have failed to replicate. The character arcs are nuanced (another thing the clones lack) and it has generally good writing. I can’t fathom anyone not having seen this movie, so I don’t think there’s much more to say.

Hope. That’s what Hellraiser: Judgment represents to me after watching one of if not my favourite film progressively get worse and worse over the course of too many sequels, it’s nice to know somebody still cares about the Hellraiser legacy. Judgment is by no means a perfect film, hindered by an insultingly low budget and sub standard acting, some portions can feel near unwatchable, but the intent is still there. It has the Hellraiser feel, while still adding something incredibly new and creative to the mythos, the biggest addition to the story since the second film eight movies ago. The actor who plays Pinhead (while still not British) captures the essence of Doug Bradley without coming off as a shoddy imitation, and I think that sentiment carries over the entire film. And if more Hellraiser sequels can be like this, then I’m on the edge of my seat awaiting Hellraiser 11.

The story is already great, and the execution is even better. The cinematography and writing are very good, however some less desirable aspects of Spike Lee’s style seep in when paralleling Donald Trump. Not that I even disagree with the comparison, but it was done with no level of subtlety, unlike the other very nuanced dialogue. The acting steals the show, John David Washington and Adam Driver are amazing as the two main leads. I did mention before about ‘less desirable aspects’ of Spike Lee’s style, but he does have some nice moments where his personality shines through, particularly when the main character is talking to the love interest about their favourite Blaxploitation heroes. Overall, a great film, definitely check it out.

When it comes to my personal politics, one of the things at the forefront of my political identity is my admiration for the life and work of Barack Obama. So needless to say, going into his biopic Barry, I was excited. And I was let down, but also somehow given something better than I could have hoped for. Barry tells the story of a young Barack Obama going through university and the various trials and tribulations of that, while forming his political views. But if you’re watching this movie BECAUSE it’s Barack Obama, you’re going to be thoroughly let down, as I was. But if you want a well acted, well shot and well written tale of an African American man grappling with prejudice and privilege in the environment of a high end university, then this is the film for you. There are some really good discussions in this movie about race, where, unlike some films, a reasonable person could take either side, and when a film can pull that off it’s incredibly thought provoking. However, the movie is paced incredibly poorly, when it ends it feels like it’s the end of the 2nd act, and, though this may be my personal taste shining through, there were portions that were quite uninteresting. But overall, I would definitely recommend Barry to anyone who’s curious about the story.

All Day and a Night has some major flaws. From the clichés to the generic plot, the film is definitely nothing remarkable. It tries to make an impression on its audience, but falls a bit flat. Nothing is extremely noticeably bad, the cinematography and music are both quite good. The acting is also a standout, the actors manage to turn quite a standard script into a pretty engaging story. But despite this, it doesn’t change the fact that you’ve probably seen All Day and a Night before in another film, and that one was probably better.

Just Mercy is a great story. The true story the film is based on is absolutely amazing, but the execution leaves something to be desired. Don’t get me wrong, it’s still a good film, Jamie Foxx is great, the writing is well done, but it lacks the punch a story like his should have. If you’re interested in the tale of a lawyer representing Death Row inmates in Alabama, then this film can serve as a conduit to convey the information, but it may fall a little short on the emotional level. However, this film is saved by the amazing complexity of the characters, no one is clear cut bad, and with the exception of the weakest characters (Michael B. Jordan and Brie Larson), no one is clear cut good. However, as with the emotional moments, it doesn’t feel like it takes it far enough.

Watch this movie. Usually I’ll recommend a movie, but this time it’s compulsory. Selma tells the story of Martin Luther King Jr.’s March in Selma, Alabama. This film is so good, the acting writing and directing are all on point, but the thing that makes Selma a must watch is the relevance to today’s climate. Anyone who preaches social justice and racial equality should take $5 and rent this film. So many of the messages and themes that were relevant in the 1960s are still relevant today, in a truely horrifying way.

12 Years a Slave is hard to watch. It’s by no means bad, with amazing acting, beautiful directing, fleshed out characters and a brilliant script, but it is so incredibly brutal. The film does not hold back in recreating the horrors of slavery, and that’s why I believe it’s a very important film to see. I’ve been seeing Lupita Nyong’o in a lot of films recently and she’s quickly developing to one of my favourite actresses, and she does not disappoint in this film.

African American filmmaker Barry Jenkins brings the story of the life of a homosexual black boy named Chiron. The story is told from Chiron’s childhood, to his teenage years and then into adulthood. The cinematography, while personally not for me, was still creative and fit well with the film. It also contains some great performances, Mahershala Ali really shows his range in this film, and Alex R. Hibbert is one of the best child actors I’ve seen recently. The writing is also good, and the plot flows nicely into an ambiguous ending, which leaves you to reflect upon the rest of the movie.

I’ll reiterate what I said about Get Out. Jordan Peele is a genius. But part of what made Get Out so good was its simplicity, in contrast, what makes Us so good is its ambition. Not only with its storyline, but also with its incredibly thought provoking themes. The horror elements are also amped up making a really frightening experience. And to top it all of is Lupita Nyong’o’s amazing dual performance as Adelaide and Red.

This type of parody truely is dead. And that makes it somewhat sad to watch the 1984 film Top Secret! Following a rock star who ends up embroiled in East German espionage, this movie spoofs every spy trope imaginable. From the cliché love triangle, to stereotypical French names, this film is positively filled to the brim with absurdist humour. Watching it reminded me of Airplane and when I saw the poster, I realised it was made by the same people as Airplane. There’s not much to say about the rest of the film, as it is purposefully bad. It isn’t great, but neither did it aim to be. And it’s still a hilarious watch.

The Banker had a rough start. It suffered the infamous true story to movie syndrome, which is like the book to movie syndrome but ten times worse. You can’t tell a person’s entire life in a movie without either seeming disjointed or changing the source material massively. Too many events happen in a person’s life and not all of them are going to fit into one convenient narrative. The best thing to do when adapting a true story to the screen is to make it a TV show. TV shows do not need to have the same pacing as a film and can cover multiple arcs both on an episodic and serialised basis. And that’s what they should have done with the Banker. The film skips over a large and extremely significant part of the characters’ lives and sometimes has to sacrifice character building for cramming the sheer amount of events in the lives of these quite extraordinary people into one 2 hour movie. But that being said, once it gets going, the Banker is a really enjoyable film. The writing is good and the plot, while poorly paced, tells a very interesting story. And a story that is important and poignant in today’s social climate surrounding issues of racial tension. And the core of this movie is the brilliant performances by Anthony Mackie and the incredible Samuel L. Jackson.

Doug Bradley is gone. This is a sad day (I mean this movie came out almost a decade ago, but still, I saw it yesterday, so it was a sad day for me). But Doug Bradley is replaced by the new Pinhead, Stephan Smith Collins, who, I’m going to be frank, is absolutely awful. He sounds like he’s trying to do a terrible Doug Bradley impersonation when HE ISN’T EVEN ENGLISH. Collins was born in Chicago. But there are even more flaws aside from that. The cinematography is reminiscent of a bad sitcom. Most of the acting (most, I actually like Jay Gillespie and Nick Everman) is bad. The writing is good in places, but in others it’s horrible. It also has some of the worst pacing I’ve seen in a movie recently. However, despite being called the worst Hellraiser movie, I’ve seen worse in this series. The concept is pretty good, and there are some really creative ideas that if given to the right people *cough* Clive Barker *cough* Scott Derrickson *cough* Doug Bradley *cough* could have been really entertaining to watch. Keywords being ‘could have been’.

The Breadwinner is breathtaking in every way. The story is great, but so, so sad. The acting is terrific. Visually, it is absolutely brilliant. It uses its 2D animation style to its advantage to create some awesome scenes. Directed by Nora Twomey, the Breadwinner follows Parvana, an 11 year old Afghan girl who pretends to be a boy to provide for her family after her father was arrested by the Taliban. But instead of painting a black and white picture of Afghanistan, it takes the time to show the great aspects of the people and culture, but it doesn’t shy away from the ugliness that is prevalent throughout these countries. A relevant film to watch in this day and age, highly recommended.

Sunshine is great. Nice cinematography coupled with brilliant set design and CGI make it an immensely immersive experience. Terrific acting from people like Chris Evans, Benedict Wong and Hiroyuki Sanada help it as well. It has a bit of a shift within the story in the second half, and it seems somewhat out of left field, but I still enjoyed it. It also has a nice plot, it’s quite well done and creates a detailed world with interesting science fiction elements.

Brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. The social commentary is incredibly relevant and will resonate with you long after viewing. It’s probably the best social commentary in a film I’ve seen. The cinematography is great, with deep symbolism and meaning in every shot. The writing is amazing, with great performances and characters. The film follows the Kim family, a poor family of four, who begin to leech off of the Park family, a naive rich family, by slowly taking over their house. It’s a terrific film, with so many pertinent lines of dialogue and overarching themes, complemented by a story filled to the brim with thought provoking allegory. I couldn’t recommend this film enough.

This movie looks spectacular. Incredibly lavish sets, with intricate detail and hundreds of extras, the Great Gatsby might be the most visually appealing film I’ve ever seen. But most critics aren’t willing to give it much praise above that. Now, I haven’t read the F. Scott Fitzgerald novel that this is based on, and I will admit the film gets off to a rough start, but honestly, I think this is a really great movie. Leonardo DiCaprio and Tobey Maguire are both brilliant, and it’s really well-written, all topped off with some good cinematography. There’s some pacing issues, but overall this well worth the watch.

No. It wasn’t supposed to be possible. It wasn’t supposed to be possible to make a worse movie than Hellraiser Hellseeker, but Hellraiser Hellworld somehow is. First, the things I liked. Lance Henriksen is good and I laughed at 3 of the jokes (I actually think Anna Tolputt is quite a funny actress, that’s presumably why they kept her out of most of the movie). I also liked the return of the Chatterer Cenobite, but it feels like just a cheap way to win over fans. Now, the negatives. I HATE THIS GODDAMN MOVIE. It’s directed by Rick Bota, you also directed Hellseeker and Deader, but the real big name is Carl Dupre, the mastermind behind Hellraiser Hellseeker, who writes this movie, and you can tell it was made by these two. The cinematography is bland, the acting god-awful, even Henry Cavill (Superman) is horrid. The characters are cliché cardboard cutouts, and whenever they have some character, they’re incredibly unlikeable. The special effects are either simple or laughably awful. This movie is also the first to not introduce any new Cenobites, even Hellseeker did that. But the most frustrating thing about this movie is the fake outs. There are so many hallucinations or dreams that it gets genuinely infuriating. The twist, and the ending as a whole, is also the worst thing ever to happen to humanity. And the final cherry on top is that Doug Bradley’s Pinhead has the least screen time out of all the movies thus far. Before the last scene, which is really short and doesn’t feature any protagonists, Pinhead has less than a minute of screen time. LESS THAN A MINUTE. YOU HIRE THE DOUG BRADLEY AND YOU PUT HIM ON SCREEN FOR LESS THAN A MINUTE AND ALL YOU HAVE HIM SAY ARE BAD ONE LINERS?!?!? I’m done. And there’s still two more. Jesus.

It’s always key to separate the art from the artist. Because Chinatown is the exact opposite of its director, Roman Polanski, and that should be taken as a great complement to this film (for one, Chinatown didn’t flee overseas after pleading guilty to a major felony). But Polanski aside, this is a great film. It follows a private investigator played by Jack Nicholson, who, after being hired on a simple case involving a cheating husband, is entangled in a vast web of fraud, deception, government conspiracy, dark secrets and murder. I don’t think Chinatown is the masterpiece critics say it is, a few plot lines could have been fleshed out more. But it still has great cinematography, brilliant dialogue, terrific performances and an enthralling mystery.

I don’t even know how to start this. Clueless is fine. It has some nice performances by Alicia Silverstone and Paul Rudd. The cinematography is passable. It can be quite funny, and the writing is pretty good. The main issue with this film is its point and the character arcs. Without getting into spoilers, so many arcs and themes seem incomplete, like it was too scared to go all the way with a message.

Jordan Peele is a genius. And that is immensely clear in his debut film Get Out. The cinematography, writing and directing are all on point. The acting is great across the board, with particularly great performances by Daniel Kaluuya and Caleb Landry Jones. The film also has brilliant scares. But the best part of the film is the themes. Peele tackles racism in ways few, if any, horror films have done.

Bleh. Think of the phrase ‘crappy Netflix horror film’ for a second. You’re thinking of the Open House. Even if you’ve never heard of the Open House, you’re still thinking of the Open House. The writing is bad and the plot stupid, uninspired and worse, boring. With the exception of Piercey Dalton as Naomi, the acting is bad, especially by the star, Dylan Minnette, of 13 Reasons Why fame. There are some nice shots, but this, like all of the positives in this film, is overshadowed by the overall experience which is that of boredom and little scares.

Coffee and Kareem isn’t great. It’s debatable whether it’s even good. But this movie received so much hate from critics that it’s ridiculous. This movie currently sits at 19% on Rotten Tomatoes, that’s worse than ALL THE STAR WARS PREQUELS. And I have to say; I enjoyed Coffee and Kareem. It’s not original, rather it’s almost painfully generic. But it delivers on comedy. This movie is hilarious, most all of the jokes land and they’re almost all at least chuckle-worthy. Ed Helms (Andy from the Office, Stu from the Hangover) is great as always, and has great chemistry with his co-star, Terrence Little Gardenhigh. The plot isn’t anything innovative or original, but it kept me engaged enough that I wasn’t checking my watch. Action, crude comedy, great performances, strong characters, Coffee and Kareem isn’t anything new, but it’s a fun time.

I’m a bit of a Hellraiser fan. So when I heard that a possible sequel starring Ashley Laurence’s Kirsty had been scrapped and replaced with this, I was geared to hate this movie. It was directed by Rick Bota and written by Tim Day, the duo behind the awful piece of trash that is Hellraiser: Hellseeker. But when I sat down to watch Hellraiser: Deader, a strange thing happened, I started to enjoy myself. It isn’t great, but it does exactly what it sets out to do, it’s scary. It has legitimately frightening scenes and concepts that make it worth the watch. Kari Wuhrer, who plays the main character, journalist Amy Klien, is a talented actress with good charisma. But almost everyone else is horrible. The cinematography had the signature Rick Bota/Gary Tunnicliffe flair, which I found annoying in Hellseeker, but I actually found it a bit less so in this one. It kind of fits in with the entire movie feeling surrealist and outlandishly strange. There are really three things that sink this film. The first, and least significant, is the title. Deader? Really? The cult in the movie is called ‘the Deaders’, but still; it sounds really stupid. The second is the writing; aggressively bad. The third is the fact this is a Hellraiser movie. Like Inferno before it, there’s extremely little Cenobite appearances. But, in Inferno, when they do show up, they’re damn good. But Deader manages to make Doug Bradley bad. How? That was a feat even Hellseeker couldn’t pull off.

Legally Blonde is a mixed bag. To start off, this movie is really funny. A lot of the jokes, especially in the first half land pretty well. Reese Witherspoon as Elle Woods is also great, she's funny but also gives a somewhat nuanced performance, which is impressive considering the material she was given. The concept is also rather creative and overall a strong idea. And that's about as far as my affections for this movie goes. The plot is generic and every story beat you see coming ten miles away, which isn't a horrible thing, I could still enjoy it with this being the case. But what really sinks this movie is the awful writing. Every character is what the writers need them to be for their next generic cliché plot point, characters flip flop for apparently no reason throughout the film. And the dialogue is mostly painfully horrible. All of these problems are exacerbated in the demonstrably bad second half of the movie. If it wasn't for the second half of this film I probably would have given it a positive review, but the jokes almost immediately stops being funny, and all sense of stakes in the story are lost. Elle's character is meant to grow, but at no point does it seem like she really understands anything she's learning, and proves herself to be a bad lawyer, and even when she does learn something, it's a montage. A montage. Of course. Because the only way to convey growth is a montage. But the worst part of this final act is the contrivances. Stupid things are everywhere, and they're not funny enough to be jokes, at least good ones, so they're just frustratingly stupid. Although I did enjoy the Blair Witch Project reference.

Quentin Tarantino strikes again with another blast of a film. The Hateful Eight stars the great Samuel L. Jackson alongside Kurt Russel and Walton Goggins and many more. Everyone is brilliant, and the characters and performances really carry the whole movie. It took a while to really get into the Tarantino groove, but when it does it’s truely worth the wait. Tarantino delivers on the ambitious direction, poetry-esque dialogue and unapologetic gore that everyone’s come to expect.

From Dusk Till Dawn is one hell of a rollercoaster. Written by the legendary Quentin Tarantino and directed by the almost as legendary Robert Rodriguez, it is a film that shouldn’t be missed if you’re a fan of either of them. Great acting from George Clooney and Quentin Tarantino with special appearances by the great Tom Savini and Salma Hayek. Savini also does the effects, which really shines in this film. There are a few moments where it gets a little too ridiculous and corny, but it’s fun all the same.

Everyone talks up the Shawshank Redemption. Some call it the best movie ever made. I don’t exactly agree but that doesn’t take away from this being a awesome movie. Great performances, especially by Morgan Freeman, brilliant writing and an amazing story from the mind of Stephen King blend together into this melting pot of genius. The story is simple, Andy Dufresne, who may or may not have murdered his wife is sent to Shawshank Prison, there’s not much more to it. But Shawshank’s strongest asset is its heart. It makes you face the harsh reality of the prison system, and raises many questions that continue to cause me to ponder, not just about the penal system, but about the very nature of humanity. And I’m not ashamed to admit that I cried more than once.

The concept of the Platform is a straight up genius idea. It’s chilling, creative and dark. And the movie does everything you’d hope for. Shocking gore paired with grim social commentary and great performances by Zorion Eguileor and Alexandra Masangkay make this a great horror film. It has a somewhat anticlimactic ending that may not appeal to everyone, and the film is in Spanish, but if you can look past that there is some great direction and brilliant symbolism. It does feel a little short, and I feel like there’s more this story has to offer, but it is a great watch nonetheless.

Wanted tries to be more than a simple action movie. And with its creative cinematography and editing it pretty much succeeds in that. The characters and acting are both very good, I particularly enjoyed Morgan Freeman and James MacAvoy. The story, which at times can be difficult to swallow is entertaining as well. The action is good, but at some times its ambition exceeds its capabilities, and I think that statement applies to most of this film.

Kirsty’s back! That’s right, Ashley Laurence returns to the Hellraiser franchise for a whole two minutes. And that’s one of the best things about this movie. The real protagonist is Trevor, who is Kirsty’s husband and an extremely boring character (although he is played by the actor who played the Vulture in Brooklyn Nine Nine, which I got a kick out of). But the thing is, I genuinely hate this movie. I have like two good things to say about Hellraiser: Hellseeker. First, Doug Bradley returns as Pinhead, and is good (while he’s on screen, which is about the same as Kirsty). The second is one scene in the climax is kind of cool. And that’s it. Rather than that, the acting is horrible, the special effects boring, the cinematography uninspired, the filmmaking lazy, the story barebones and a blatant ripoff of Hellraiser: Inferno and worst of all, it’s trashy. Hellraiser films are meant to be smart, the thinking man’s 80s slasher. Even in the weaker instalments, Hell on Earth and Bloodline, there was still an element of intelligence, but Hellseeker is complete trash exploitation. And that is the worst thing a Hellraiser film can be.

Jack Reacher is based in the critically acclaimed novel series by Lee Child, which I have not read. I have heard from a person that has read the books, that Tom Cruise is a subpar Jack Reacher. So, keep that in mind throughout this review. But in my opinion, Jack Reacher is a perfectly fine action film. It’s nothing special, but the fights are entertaining and the acting surprisingly good, Werner Herzog in particular. But he’s awesome in everything, so that’s not necessarily unique. The cinematography is surprisingly creative at times, full credit to Christopher McQuarrie’s direction. McQuarrie wrote the Usual Suspects and directed two Mission Impossible films, so he has a good record. My biggest problem with Jack Reacher is its characters, they weren’t two dimensional, but also not quite fleshed out. It also tries to tackle serious issues, and is successful to an extent, but also overreaches at certain points.

Scott Derrickson had a huge task ahead of him when he took on the project of Hellraiser: Inferno. It had the lowest budget of the series since the original, Clive Barker was no longer involved, Ashley Laurence hadn’t had a major role since the second film, Doug Bradley didn’t want Pinhead to be the main villain anymore and there were no returning Cenobite actors. But Derrickson managed to make this into one of the best movies in the Hellraiser series. The grey characters, interesting story and suspense make this a great film to watch, diehard Hellraiser fan or not. The twist is also brilliantly executed, and will leave chills running down your spine. Doug Bradley’s Pinhead barely appears but when he does he is great. But the film is plagued with shoddy acting, and it doesn’t quite live up to the standard of creativity set by the earlier films. The special effects are lacking, they’re fine when they’re there, but they’re oftentimes not. These factors make Hellraiser: Inferno an entertaining horror film, but a somewhat subpar Hellraiser movie.

Detective Pikachu is a passable movie. It’s just exactly what you’d think a Detective Pikachu movie starring Ryan Reynolds would be like. It was formulaic, sometimes painfully so, but had some nice jokes and dialogue along the way. But it’s the effects that really make the movie at points, they manage to capture the art style very well, and some of the CGI is downright impressive. The story was alright, if not a little bland, but towards the end, where it became too ambitious and confusing for a Detective Pikachu movie. Ryan Reynolds does great as the titular character and Justice Smith is fine as the lead. That pretty much describes the entire film: fine.

Beautiful. Wholesome. Just plain good. The best Pixar movie ever made. There’s nothing more to say about Wall-E.

And the downward spiral continues. Hellraiser: Bloodline is the fourth film in the Hellraiser franchise, and it’s the worst one so far. There were some bits I liked, the entire film has a cool framing device of an interrogation. Doug Bradley’s back as Pinhead, and I liked seeing the origin of the puzzle box. Adam Scott was entertaining while he was onscreen, you can see he was a real pro, even back then. There was some really bad writing, but his delivery almost convinced you it was good. And now for the bad, the writing and acting are plain bad. I sort of liked the new villain, Angelique and her dynamic with Pinhead, but at a point Pinhead isn’t even the main villain, and I know that was the case in the first movie, but Frank and Julia were really interesting, and the rest of the movie was good. In that movie, Pinhead was used as a foreboding background character, and when he was put on screen you really felt his presence, and that’s not the case in Hellraiser: Bloodline. Doug Bradley’s great, but Pinhead’s just kind of thrown in randomly, and Angelique was just discarded to make way for the climax, whereas in the original, Frank and Pinhead are both incorporated into it. The cinematography is completely uninspired even compared to Hellraiser III, not to mention the first two. The three main characters are all the most bland things I’ve ever seen put on a screen. The special effects are all pretty boring when compared to its predecessors, nothing is shown that hasn’t been seen before in previous instalments, and, after the beginning, they don’t even get really intense until the end. The Cenobite designs are also lacklustre, there are only two new ones, and no returning ones other than Pinhead, one is just a boring design and the other is cool, but at a point, the effect gets too ambitious and ends up looking pretty bad. Hopefully the fifth one’s better.

When I saw Clive Barker’s name above the title I thought Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth might be good. I was wrong. Very wrong. Alright, the film isn’t all bad, it has a strong, suspenseful, gory opening scene. Doug Bradley’s performance as Pinhead is the best in the series so far, and it alone makes this a film worth watching. I also enjoyed Paula Marshall as Terri and her dynamic with Pinhead, at least before it was completely abandoned. I got some kicks out of references to the previous films, like when the characters discover records from the Channard Institute, the insane asylum from Hellraiser II. It had a good climax, but even that dragged on for far too long. And now for the bad. EVERYTHING ELSE. The cinematography is uninspired, the dialogue and acting by everyone but Bradley and Marshall is garbage. The new Cenobite designs are kind of cool, but no where near the originality of the previous films. The main character is a personality-less prop that simply moves from one scene to the next. There is hardly any good special effects until the climax, and even then it’s quantity over quality. After watching this film I was confused, how could Clive Barker have written this? The answer, he didn’t write most of it. The film has some good ideas, and I assume that’s coming from Barker, but the majority of the film is written by Peter Atkins, who co-wrote Hellraiser II, and that film was far from perfect. In fact, the lack of returning talent really sinks this film, not just behind the camera, but in front. Ashley Laurence’s Kirsty is reduced to a cameo, being replaced by the prop, Joey, played by Terry Farrell. Clare Higgins as Julia doesn’t even appear. Overall, an enjoyable film, if merely for Doug Bradley’s performance, but fundamentally flawed at every turn.

1917 is more than a movie. It’s an experience. It demands to be seen in a cinema on the big screen, because this is a work of art. It perfectly encapsulates the feeling of the front lines of WW1 in a riveting fashion. Filmed all in one take, it follows Lance Corporals Schofield and Blake as they embark on a dangerous mission to deliver a message across enemy lines. Sam Mendes’s (Spiderman, Skyfall) direction coupled with beautiful cinematography by Roger Deakin (Fargo, No Country for Old Men) make this film a true spectacle. Emotional, moving, technically brilliant, 1917 is one of the best movies ever made, and the equal best movie I’ve reviewed on this account.

Miss Americana is a documentary made up of twos. It has two very distinct parts which are made up of two types of scenes. The first type of scene is pretty much just a behind the scenes clip, honestly, this was the parts I enjoyed the most, even though I’m not a fan and didn’t know most of the songs in it, it was kind of cool watching these things come together. The second type of scene is everything else, and this is where the problems start to come out. It hits every note it wants to hit and does everything it’s expected to do, but nothing more. The entire thing comes off as formulaic, like if a computer was asked to make a Taylor Swift documentary. It’s good, I couldn’t find many things outright wrong with it, it’s just that it feels soulless. But there are some real flaws in the film. It, whether intentionally or not, is divided into two parts. In the first, Taylor rises to fame only to have her reputation tarnished by a scandal involving Kanye West. In the second, she must gain the courage to speak up against things she knows is wrong at the potential cost of her career. It isn’t necessarily bad that these are the plots, it’s just that the filmmaker ties the first part up in a nice bow, and then moves on to the second one, rather than having them flow. It gives the appearance of being a 6 act film which really makes it drag around the middle, since it lost its momentum ending the first part. It doesn’t help these two parts have very different themes, the first being about fame and the second about cultural issues, this makes the parts even more separate. Some foreshadowing of the cultural themes could have eliminated this problem. And my final point, Miss Americana would be better as a movie, with actors. A documentary has limitations that stops this one from telling the story it wants to tell. I could point out multiple points in the film where a film could have done it infinitely better. I recommend Miss Americana for any fans of Taylor Swift, but there’s not much there to keep someone who doesn’t like her music engaged.

Hellbound: Hellraiser II is a rollercoaster. By the 15 minute mark I was prepared to but this film in the mid threes. By 25 minutes it was low fours. By 35 minutes it was low fives. And by the end I can say a thoroughly enjoyed it. There are some bad qualities. It isn’t as creatively shot as its predecessor, and where Hellraiser is very well plotted, Hellbound seems more like a showcase of special effects, not that that’s a necessarily bad thing. William Hope as Kyle is absolutely atrocious, but there are some good performances. I especially got a kick out of the returning characters, Clare Higgins as Julia is really able to spread her wings in this instalment, as whole I really liked Julia’s arc in this one. Ashley Laurence reprises her role as Kirsty and she does well. The special effects are brilliant as always, nothing as mind blowing as some of the effects in the first one, but still very well done. And the most important component, the Clive Barker script. In the first half hour I was really worried the film was going to fall into repitition of the first one, but Clive Barker manages to bring new lore elements and expands the world of the franchise in a way you rarely see horror sequels do. Doug Bradley also returns as Pinhead, and he is awesome.

Gattaca takes place in a dystopian world where genetic engineering is being applied to children and those that are born naturally are shunned by society. The film is creative in its depiction of the future and poses deeper questions about society and ethics in relation to science. The cinematography and writing are well done and the characters are well fleshed out and have very satisfying arcs throughout the film, I especially liked Jude Law as Jerome.

Based on the Stephen King/Joe Hill novella of the same name, In the Tall Grass definitely has the King tone. It isn’t the best adaptation of a King story, nowhere near it, but it has moments of creepiness and genuine scares. The concept is genius, it has so many good and disturbing ideas that it elevates the entire film. The main flaw of the film is that it feels somewhat stretched, like a lot of King short story adaptations. The acting, other than that of Patrick Wilson is also subpar. But, I would still recommend it for any Stephen King fans, or anyone who’s looking for a good scare while being able to overlook some pacing issues.

This is the best horror film ever made. It’s brilliant, scary and well written. Clive Barker’s direction gives this film so much more depth, there’s so much symbolism in the imagery and cinematography. The characters are extremely well-fleshed out, especially for an 80s horror film. The effects are also amazing, the stop-motion and makeup combined with the creature designs also make for a thoroughly enjoyable watch.

Dumb. Stupid. Garbage. Horrible. Terrible. These are just a few of the words that come to mind when I think of Dolittle. Bad acting is prevalent, even when there are so many talented people involved. From Ralph Fiennes to Antonio Banderas to Robert Downey Jr. to Tom Holland to Jason Mantzoukas, they’re all mediocre to bad. Harry Collet is also one of the worst child actors I’ve ever seen. The story, writing and cinematography are all absolute trash. There were a few genuine laughs, mostly from Martin Sheen, but they are all buried within the giant mountain of bad. Also, Robert Downey Jr.’s accent is just hilarious.

Bad Boys For Life is bad. Really bad. You might enjoy it if you can completely switch your brain off. I mean completely. But there are so many aggressively dumb things in this movie that I just couldn’t handle it. Will Smith and Martin Lawrence have great chemistry, but it’s somewhat undercut by the stupidity of some of the dialogue. The action is also enjoyable enough, but even that can gets stale sometimes. Honestly the film gets boring at multiple points and some narrative beats just don’t make any sense.

Joaquin Phoenix is brilliant. I mean, the movie, Joker is fine, but the main thing you take away from it is Joaquin Phoenix’s performance. Joker isn’t a masterpiece, far from it, but the cinematography, acting and sets all make the film incredibly engaging. It is still a flawed film, and it’s not as brilliant as I feel it wants to be. I won’t get into spoilers, but I highly recommend Joker.

I really wanted to like the Invention of Lying. I love Ricky Gervais, and the premise has tonnes of potential, but it never goes much further than that. The basic jokes that can be made about only one guy being able to lie land just fine, but anything more fails. Gervais also fills up a large portion of the movie with a drawn out joke about making up Christianity. I found it mildly funny at first but the more it dragged on, the more tiresome it became. But the central problem with the movie was the lack of chemistry between the romantic partners, Mark Bellison and Anna McDoogles, played by Gervais and Jennifer Garner. The story, when you strip away the lying concept, is pretty much a cliché-filled generic rom-com.