Quickee Film Time

Film Studies/History Double Major Student. Film Critic. INTJ-N. Ravenclaw/Horned-Serpent. Thestral Patronus. Letterboxd: RustyDetective. Chaotic Good-Tiefling Bloodhunter. Night-Owl. ~ A quick, sometimes convoluted cellphone review of whichever new release came out that week. Ideally, I would like to have said review up within the hour (after exiting the theater). Typo Danger Close. ~ Bottom line, if you want to see a movie, go watch it. Don't focus and dwell on what people and critics are saying, go watch it and make your own informed opinion. I'm just a simple cinephile giving you my opinion based on what I think, not the media.

[qftreviews]

"You know it only takes three steps to get into that ring. You've done it before, but tonight... Those same three steps are gonna seem like a mountain."

Like any sensible moviegoer, I was a bit hesitant when Creed II was announced. Not only was it a sequel to a film that did not need to be continued, but it also lost its mastermind, that of director and bromance filmmaker of Michael B. Jordan, Ryan Coogler. While I applaud the respectful sequel with just as much heart and soul, it did lack Coogler's unique vision and technical ability. New director, Steven Caple Jr. did a solid job at carrying on the fight into the second round, and dare I say that I felt more emotion amongst the characters in this film compared to the first. 

The plot remains the same, and there is little innovation in its telling. The sins of the father and further cementing of independence and creating your own legacy still dominate Adonis Creed and now, Viktor Drago (Fabian "Big Nasty" Munteanu). Every character committed to their role immensely, with the entire ensemble standing out as a cohesive squad. Jordan continues to be the superb actor he has become in recent years, Tessa Thompson's Bianca and her loving relationship with Adonis is further expanded with a newborn child, Stallone's Rocky is as good as ever in his aging stallion years, newcomer Viktor Drago is more than just muscle, and the return of Ivan "I Will BREAK you" Drago (Lundgren) is surprisingly sympathetic. You feel for all the characters, and most surprising of all is that I felt emotion when it came to the Drago family. The same family that had killed Apollo Creed decades prior. Viktor is a struggling boy who has grown up with nothing but hate, blood, and sweat instilled into his bones by the hatred and resentment his father burdened since his loss to Rocky. The Drago name is worth nothing, and Caple Jr. does a great job at depicting how that life has treated them and building an antagonist worthy of a film. It may be a cash grab to bring back the Drago name-drop, but it was certainly justified and depicted respectful enough to warrant the film, in the end. As urgent and desperate that Adonis was to make his own name and legacy for himself, so too does Viktor struggle to find his own life with Ivan constantly berating him into hating a young man he has no reason to despise. The sins of the father run deep, and Viktor drowns in them, as Adonis struggles to avoid making the same mistakes of his own showman champion father. 

Dolph Lundgren is at his best in quite a while! Munteanu is more than just a big beefy fighter, as his acting does carry through the trauma and drama behind his likely abusive childhood upbringing. He also looks like a jacked Jaime Dornan. Tessa Thompson brings even more chemistry between herself and Jordan's Adonis Creed. The two are perfectly in sync and it never skips a beat to come through as nothing less than a couple who have been through a lot together, and support each other's own desires completely. And of course, Stallone has mastered and perfected his own role to an exact millimeter. The passing of time and visual aging we experience as fans of the iconic Rocky Balboa truly brings every wave of nostalgia and emotion with each scene. There were various scenes and lines of Rocky in Creed II, that are going to be damn hard to rewatch one day. He has always been Rocky, and he will never not be, but with each progressive film, we literally age with him and feel every hit. But at the end of the day, he's still the humble guy from Philly, who can't sing or dance, but can sure throw and take any punch in the world. The performance is literally so lives in that it just oozes off the screen as the character, not the actor. He still has the sweater, the hat, the bouncy ball, and even the turtles. There's also a scene in which Rocky is in a wired phone-line in his house...hilarious yet unsurprising from him. 

In between the two brawling sons, Rocky and Bianca expand various layers of drama and heart. Jordan IS Adonis, and his performance is honestly award worthy (not that they would), but like a fighter's corner, it's nothing without the team; reflecting the heart of the family in Bianca and embracing the Urin soul that "Unc" Rocky has been shouldering for roughly four  decades. Just like before, I can see Stallone receiving another supporting actor nomination. 

The camera work is crisp and clear, and while it lacks Coogler's unique style and long takes, it gets the job done. There were some very epic shits, particularly through the desert training and pool. You still feel all the punches, and I could literally feel the audiences clinging to their ribs during fights. The ebb & flow between the ring, training, and the family life are all visibly evident and showcase proper lighting and attuned pacing to the tone. But it was the music that stood out to me. Now expanding into making his own name, Adonis also needs his own motif; he adorns his own new equipment colouring and his own music. What I absolutely loved is that composer Ludwig Göransson hinted and sprinkled the iconic Rocky theme, "Gonna Fly Now" into Adonis' musical score. He mixed the old with the new, which is something that Coogler established with the first Creed. In a minor note, I continue to respect the film's decision to showcase Adonis and Bianca utilising modern tech in their free times, in the form of the iPad use rather than always having a TV or computer on. 

So, while the fights and training lack Coogler's eye, Creed II still offers brutal hits, inspiring montages, and a whole lot of heart. It does stick to the safety of the tried formula, but it does not necessarily stick to the script the entire time. Predictable, yes. But it's still every bit entertaining as Creed. If you are a fan of the franchise, without any doubt, Creed II deserves your ticket purchase. I was pleasantly surprised and impressed that I liked it as much as I did. 

[ ★★★½ / 5 ] 

BSA & NO END CREDIT SCENE 

~ Genuinely,

Quickee Film Time

[qftreviews]

So... I think I would rather take up the Sheriff of Nottingham's threat of being boiled in my own piss.

The latest retelling of Robin Hood is quite possibly the most courageous, bold, and unique iteration to date. And I mean all of this with immense insult and laughable disgust.

It's pure revisionist George W. Bush Iraq war commentary, set in the context of the Third Crusade to Arabia. The inaccuracies are a plenty, not to mention how the Sheriff of Nottingham has his very own premium Gestapo jacket, and how the lowliest peasants somehow have well knit beanies and suede vests. What else, oh how about a unmistakable Trump speech on borders, immigrants, and the class system? Riveting stuff, I tell you. And, no... It's nothing like King Arthur. At least Guy Ritchie tried to make it entertaining. 

The ultimate scene that really nailed the coffin, was a rip-off of American Sniper + Black Hawk Down, as Lord Robin "Rob" of Locksley infiltrates the Arabian walls with an elite Navy Seal team. Once in, his squad set up their parameter, wielding their bows as if they were M4 assault rifles, scanning each corner and going cover to cover as they progress. Once you get past the fact that this is being shot like a war film, treating the characters as if they were special operators in Desert Storm, maybe you'll have a laugh? OH NO, what's that! Your laughter just alerted the enemy of your squad's location. Now you are being pinned down by none other than a totally historically accurate crossbow gattling gun, firing 10s of bolts at you per second. What's more, is that even after you manage to flank the lone gunner in a tower, you are sieged by another wave of masked enemies with pump crossbow shotguns, firing 5 bolts per pump... Oh, did I mention the bit on how these were archer units (with no swords and 2 arrows each) being sent to infiltrate the fort? 

I knew this movie was going to be atrocious, but I had no clue it was going to be dumpster fire. The only saving grace that makes it watchable, is that the performances are not bad at all. Taron "Nightwing" Egerton is very charismatic, Jaime Foxx is awesome, the supporting cast gets the job done, and Ben "Fucking" Mendelsohn is given a blank check on this villain. Mendelsohn turns it to 11, no holds barred with this iteration of him playing essentially another deviously hilarious SS officer. 

Oh, and I watched this after about two boots of beer. So that doesn't help one bit. If you really want to watch this disgrace of a Robin Hood movie, do so at your own risk, and ONLY do so in the perspective of a Comedy. This is a Top 2018 Worst. 

  [ ★½ / 5 ] 

NO BSA & NO END CREDIT SCENE

~ Genuinely,

Quickee Film Time

[qftreviews]

"Our lives are in danger. Our husband's are gone and they're not coming back. We're on our own."

Elizabeth Debicki casually towers at 6'3. Great, now that I have your attention. 

Alas, one of my most anticipated films since announcement has arrived. Steve McQueen's untraditional gender and expectations reversal heist film, Widows. Marketed as a high-octane heist thriller with a star studded cast that include the likes of Viola Davis, Liam Neeson, Colin Farrell, Daniel Kaluuya, Elizabeth Debicki, Jon Bernthal, Brian Tyree Henry, and Robert Duvall, to list a few, Widows is what happens when you give an arthouse director, a blockbuster budget. When a heist goes horribly wrong, and Neeson along with his crew are killed, the remaining debt is passed on to their bereaved wives. To save themselves and what remains of their now limited lives, the widows must Band together to pull off a final heist that their husband's are no longer alive to complete. All this while still offering a top marks socio-economic-political commentary with the second half of the cast. And yet, regardless of the bigger budget, thrills, and modern Chicago setting, every iota of art and contemporary messages remains true to McQueen style. The film has some impeccable acting, terrifically fluid direction, and a simplistic plot that manages to offer some surprises. With all that said, I still left a little disappointed, and here's why. 

My biggest gripe with the film was in the script. I've only seen it once, and I truly intend to see it at least once more, but the script just seemed to branch of into more subplots than it needed to. It bordered the line of becoming contrived and forced at times. In example, without spoiling anything: the entire mail-order bride subplot had no grand culminating purpose, the widowed husband architect make-out scene went nowhere, the NFL bodyguard driver, oh and Carrie Coon was in the film (that's not someone you use for a minimal role)? Now I can give McQueen the benefit of the doubt with much of the widows filler scenes, because perhaps it can be argued that they were present and lengthened in order to demonstrate their lives now. It could be debated that those scenes were present to purposely juxtapose the two lives they now have a foot into, one in hopes of moving on, and the other in the world that their husbands all left for them to fix; regardless, they struggle and work to survive in either one. But much like the bodyguard/driver played by Garrett Dillahunt, I think it could have been solved had the film given a little more developmental time. My screenplay writer professor always drilled something into my head, "Every scene must serve a purpose, it has to move the plot along, it has to reveal vital information, but it can never just stop the film. If your scene does nothing for the plot, than it's just a car park scene. Now you've stopped the entire plot and parked it indefinitely, risking the loss of attention and momentum." I think of that a lot, regardless of not liking that professor much. And I was a little disappointed to have felt some scenes in Widows came off in that manner (to me). Had you cut some time elsewhere, in this slightly too long drama film, I feel that you could have added some culminating scene to complete some of those carpark arcs. 

Now the script also seemed to come off a bit to overdramatic at times, without the necessity of being (for lack of better term) "try-hard". There were some lines and scenes that seemed to be overpaying their hand in attempts to make us feel more, when we already knew the trajectory of where the plot was headed. Whilst at other moments, a dialogue scene just wouldn't flow and would cause things to get messy. In example, I get that the money shot line Davis dictates in the trailer "Because nobody thinks we have the balls to do it", sounds epic and ice cold through a terrific performance, but it rubs off a little extensive. It's not anything about gender, and none of the antagonists ever bring up gender as a issue or obstacle for the widows completing their job. I thought that it was refreshing that these ladies just did what they had to do, and I can't specifically recall anyone directly stating and sexist remarks in terms of women being able to be just as good at a heist as their husbands. So when that line and a few others are played in an overdramatic delivery, it takes me out of the moment when it should get me excited. It's not because you're women, it's much more simplistic. You have to do it because your lives are at stake; you owe money to a corrupt up incoming politician (Tyree Henry) who himself, needs the money in order to defeat his nepotism beneficiary competitor, Mulligan (Farrell). Its stated early on when Henry's Manning force forces himself into Veronica's (Davis) house to remind her that what her husband (Neeson) stole from him. And now, she is thrust directly into the criminal world, as she is charged with having to payback that stolen money. In one powerful swoop of magnificent racial commentary, Manning holds up Veronica's dog by the neck and says, "You've been living up here in this fancy penthouse, without a care in the world. And you tell me that you didn't know what you husband did? Well you know what the Chicago police did when your husband died. They laughed, and they couldn't wait to scrape up his burned remains from the street. He's gone, welcome back." God damn, when the film hits, it hits fookin' hard. But that's why those other melodramatic money's just didn't pan out for me. 

Now with all that said, this is still a superb pulp meets arthouse film, and I genuinely recommend giving it some support. We all know how it will need some support, especially since it's not the type of film 90% of the world would be interested in. Which is another controversial thought. Most people love heist films, with the epic team ups, the star ensemble the planning sequence, etc. But when Widows comes around, where's the love? Is it because of its diverse cast, it's female perspective, a auteur filmmaker? It's confusing. Obviously this film is going to bomb at the box-office, and that's just a damn shame (No pun intended). The film I marketed as an action heist film with one of the best casts of the year, but between you and me, it's a political drama in which thrills are delivered through performances not action. And since you're a loyal reader I'll also let you in on another non-spoiler secret, not all the cast gets time to shine. 

Now who does get to shine is the phenomenal performance that Daniel Kaluuya gives. I wish the film could have focused on him and his brother Jamal Manning (Tyree Henry). Kaluuya has been knocking it out of the park ever since his Black Mirror episode, and I would watch anything he signs onto. The intensity that his character Jatemme brings to the film is absolutely outrageous in how good it is. Remember that scene in Sicario, where Benicio gets in real close to the informant he's interrogating, how uncomfortably close he gets. He's right in your face and yet you lack the will or strength to do anything about it, even if you weren't tied or paralysed, you just can't. That ferocity and pure body language acting is aces! Every single scene that Kaluuya is in, he steals it. That basketball rap and bowling alley scenes were oh so delicious. Out of the entire cast, the Manning Brothers and Elizabeth Debicki were my favorites by far. Now that's not to say the rest were forgettable entirely, but I just felt the most internal emotion and excitement for those three. Viola Davis did what she does best, while the back and forth between father-son in Farrell and Duvall was solid. The rest were purposely wasted? It's strange to say, but the film establishes that the husband's are killed off early on. So I guess the fact that Neeson and Bernthal (the most famous if the husbands) are barely in the film shouldn't have come as surprising, but it still did. Much like Dillahunt and Coon, I was hoping the husbands would have had a fair amount of background/flashback development, at least to cue us into certain plot events and choices throughout the film. Instead McQueen purposely opted to have them as little as possible, relying on roughly one scene to establish what type of Men they were, with the rest being informed by the later bereaved widows. 

My recommendation is to go into the film with as little knowledge as possible, and preferably without having scene the trailer. It's a bit too long for the simplistic plot they provided, and while there's very few instances of action, the terrific performances will carry you through. I can smell some awards season noms, perhaps for lead actress (Davis), supporting actress (Debicki), supporting actor (Kaluuya), direction (McQueen), adapted screenplay (Gillian Flynn). Where would I rank it in terms of McQueen's perfect filmography? 

Ranked:

1.) Shame

2.) 12 Years a Slave

3.) Widows

4.) Hunger (aside from that long take, I don't see myself rewatching it) 

~ ★★★★ / 5 ~ 

(BSA) / NO END CREDIT 

~ Genuinely,

Quickee Film Time

[qftreviews]

The primary antagonist of the film literally hums "itsy bitsy spider" in the edgiest manner possible. That along should inform you of the state of affairs for this latest entry into Lisbeth Salader's Millennium Saga. 

Fincher's intro set to Led Zeppelin's Immigrant Song, is far superior to the entirety of Fede Alvarez' entry into the Lisbeth Salander series. And while there is the aspect that Spider's Web is the first story that was not written by the recently Departed Steig Larsson, there is not excuse for the alteration of tone for a series with 4 films. I'm on Fincher's team, finding his Rooney Mara/Daniel Craig Dragon Tattoo film to be the best of the whole lot. I really like the original trilogy with Noomi Rapace and (another recently departed) Michael Nyqvist, but Fincher with Reznor & Ross are my longtime homies. Fede is a very good director, already with two solid horror films in Evil Dead and Don't Breathe. I personally felt that Fede would have been a terrific choice for the H40 rebootquel, especially applying his claustrophobic suspense prowess into the final third act between Laurie and the Shape. And while Spider's Web visually looks great, very crisp, and fitting the cold atmosphere of a classic Scandinavian thriller... It does not fit in the legacy of the Millennium series. 

Both lead actress Claire Foy and director Fede Alvarez had a large disadvantage going into this project. To attempt and surpass or even at least match the likes of their predecessors was essentially like asking someone to make a gangster film like Scorsese. You just can't, and regardless of the very good direction and cinematography of Spider's Web, the aesthetic and the acting don't even make a spark beside the raping fire that Rapace and Mara established. Foy while serviceable with her dramatic performance and the commitment to the accent, doesn't really do much more than dress the part of Lisbeth. The commitment and the decimation that the previous actresses put towards this role shows just how much superior those renditions are. And once again, I don't think that not having Steig Larsson as a writer/consultant accounts for this decrease of merit. Spider's Web does include its own version of ace investigative journalist Mikael Blomqvist, but he's barely worth mentioning. Not only is the actor useless with nothing to offer, but the film seems to disregard any merit, intuition, and authoritative journalism that the character is known and seen to have. The film could and would have functioned tighter without spending time on him. The primary antagonist is played by Sylvia Hoeks (Blade Runner 2049), who has shown potential to play a intense demanding enemy in 2049, but came off as also hollow. There was little to no build-up aside from a contrived and very forced background story that seldom details much, yet expects you to sympathise immediately. The only actor who seemed to fill his basic role, was Lakeith Stanfield as an NSA agent tracking down Lisbeth. I like his performance, but it was nothing short of ordinary for Lakeith as it had little to no development or drama to play along. A simple paycheck and chance to visit Sweden. Oh, and Stephen Merchant and Vicky Kreips (The Phantom Thread) are utterly wasted. 

There are some moments that intrigued me, some. And those directly revolved around set design and Fede's experience with horror film lighting. Some brief scenes with nice special effects in terms of gore were also visually impressive. I can tell you right now that there were a total of 3 scenes I liked, and none of them have any real plot development or spoilers. One is really a single shot, but where Lisbeth hides in her tub as flames engulf her living quarters, all lit in a crisp manner with the edgy analogy of being thrust back into the life (flames) and having the dragon rise. That explosion is in the trailer, so it's not spoiling anything. The second scene is a "club scene" with Lakeith's Agent Needham. And no, it's not an epic sequence you may think it to be, I just really liked the lighting and aesthetic. Lastly, the sniper shot sequence (in trailer). But there was no grand action sequence or choreography that blew me away at all. And since Fede decided to drop the journalistic-investigative thriller aspect that the stories are, you would have hoped for better action. So it was a lose-lose in the end. Don't even get me started on that car chase or motorcycle escape across the ice... Rubbish. 

Being the first of the two newer novels that Stieg was not a part of, I can't help but imagine that the studios want to rebuild and form a new marketable franchise of the series. Along with a new vision, comes the dreaded and wrong approach to Lisbeth, one of action rather than mood and investigation. Since the first trailer, I was a large critic of how Spider's Web was a sham and made the series look more like a Bourne rip-off than anything else. And I can safely say that I was correct in my fears, and it has become just another action film covered by a weak facade of looking like it is more detailed and complex than it really is. You can solve the mystery and pinpoint every character from the trailers, and by the end of the first act you know exactly how this plot will culminate. Extremely disappointing and shocking to see how this was given the greenlight by the Larsson estate, and I hope that unless Fincher makes a generous return they do not try and do the other novel, "The Girl Who Takes an Eye for an Eye". I do not recommend this to any Lisbeth Salander fan. But hey, at least it was better than The Snowman.... 

  ~  ★½ / 5  ~

NO BSA & NO END CREDIT SCENE

~ Genuinely,

Quickee Film Time

[qftreviews]

"The one-thousand year Reich, needs one-thousand year soldiers."

You may not know it, but this is the best videogame film that is not a direct adaptation of one. What happens when you blend Wolfenstein, Call of Duty: Nazi Zombies, Sniper Elite, Re-Animator, an Inglorious Basterds admirer, and cut out the controversial Cloverfield tag... You get Overlord. I mean this in the best way possible, without hesitation and sans jest, Overlord is one of the most entertaining films of the year. 

The premise is simple enough to get your boots to the ground, first marketing itself as what was at the time a possible entry into the gradually deteriorating Cloververse. JJ Abrams was attached to this seemingly WWII action/thriller revolving around a secret operation, a Nazi scientific experiment lab, and a whole lot of blood. By the time the literally explosive Trailer was released, it was instantly labeled as the next Nazi Zombies Film. To say the least, we were devouring the possibilities of just how fun this could be. Frankly, I was not disappointed with the end result, and had a blast! The acting is far superior than it had to be, the special effects (albeit spotty at times) were great more oft than not, the makeup was excellent, and the action was captivating. From start to finish this roughly 2 hour film flies by for the majority of its intensive runtime. 

The action is fun, the special effects range from serviceable to awesome, the gore is aces, set-pieces are satisfying, and the acting is far better than it has the need to be. Standouts formed by Jovan Adepo, Pilou Asbaek, and Wyatt Russell. Adepo plays our protagonist and the boots we view from. He is our greenhorn playable character, who has the necessity to always try to do the right thing. While I applaud his great performance of a young innocent kid experiencing war and death firsthand (not to mention the supernatural), the majority of the ethical perspectives and dialogue came from him. It's not bothering in the slightest, just figured the director chose him to be the focal point of asking the "deeper" questions and being the moral center. It also helps that he has proven his dramatic chops opposite Denzel Washington in, Fences. As for Pilou (Ghost in the Shell live action), he plays the hell out of his SS officer. You can tell that the set, that director Julius Avery established was incredibly fun. Pilou and Russell seemed to be having an amazing time acting their roles, the prior not pulling back any of the Nazi officer stereotypes and the latter truly embracing his father's cool. We're not talking Christoph Waltz here, but Pilou did a damn good job with his scenes and I he seemed to be having a good timing doing so. Seeing how he plays the extravagant Euro Greyjoy, it snot surprising, but he dies pull off both a German and French accent in contrast to his native Danish. Wyatt "son of Kurt" Russell, really comes off in shades of one of his fathers myriad badarse roles. He's got some work to do, but for the minimal screen time that each individual character gets to shine, I really enjoyed his tough guy-no shinola corporal. I really recommend checking out some of his indie filmography, as he's thoroughly a good actor who has the potential to break out of the supporting lead space. There are other characters, but they don't stick out or leave much of an impression. I would have liked to see some more insight into the squad and some of the French villagers, but I can accept that the director placed priority in keeping the action and suspense going. Just don't expect anyone to feel for every character (or any, really).

Now like any military operation, there will always be a margin for error. Overlord does suffer from a second act sluggish meander, it does drop the ball on some grander horror-centric possibilities, and the script can bog down the adrenaline pace by trying to overplay its dramatic hand at times. Overall, there were more Home-Runs than fouls throughout. The first 10 minutes of the film are fantastic, encompassing the establishment of key characters, giving a motivational speech, giving us time and setting, and then pulling the floor for beneath us. The last 10 minutes are also great, but predominantly for the pure adrenaline that the third act is and a decently executed long take. But in between the first banger establishing act and the videogame third act, the middle ground seems to struggle in landing completely on the right tone. There are a handful of scenes and script directions that come off as being overly serious and building dramatic tension when this is not the right film for such themes. This is a shooter action/thriller for pure entertainment, I don't expect nor need the moments of brevity to explain to me why war is bad and how their is collateral damage. As a B-movie (possibly) revisionist history thriller with what are essentially Nazi Zombies, having moments to make me feel for the loss of innocence is not it, chief. When it sticks to its action, one-liners, humor, and gore, it is terrific. Hence why there was a section that seemed to drag on or grind the building ominous tone to a halt in the second act. By the time it picks back up, we've gone full video-game; an all-out action-fest with final boss fight included to shift it back into the proper gear. 

I did wish it had spent some more time in building the suspense and eerie nature around the occupied village and the laboratories. It seems like we were going to get much more horror with some action, but it was the contrary. Both results could and would be solid routes, and I still enjoyed it for what it was. It is far superior to the laughable cult, Dead Snow. But it did seem to drop the sense of intrigue and fascination the moment we enter the labs. Had we stayed some 5-10 minutes more building up the labs and actively feeling the tension within (can't spoil much), it could have resulted in adding another solid video-game style set piece. Something like hints of a horde mode, or epic survival montage. But these are all aspects that could have derailed the film too far (or made it even more epic). 

There are various scenes and shots that call back to playing a videogame, and I say this as a complement to the film. Introduction of crew with the likes of an intellectual, a wise ass, the not pulling punches commander, canon fodder, and the innocent, check. Cinematic quick time event intro, yep. Secluded small map, stealth recon mission, an Escort mission, character choices matter, cut scenes, and a final boss fight, all present. And then some. It's a solid and extremely satisfying entertainment B-movie with heavy influence by videogames. A whole lot of fun, action, and gore that will easily be a fun ride for the weekend. 

~ ★★★★ / 5 ~ 

BSA

-

NO END CREDIT SCENE 

~ Genuinely,

Quickee Film Time

PS - Extra credit viewing: Blood Creek (early Fassbender) , Deathwatch, Outpost, Dead Snow (cult hilariocity). 

[qftreviews]

"Happy Halloween, Michael."

While I wanted to love this film so much, I left a bit disappointed. It had everything going for it, from Carpenter's return and blessing, as well as the reunion of Jaime Lee Curtis and Nick Castle. The 1978 original is my favourite slasher horror film, and the 2018's reliance on homage combined with some contrived plot points, and cloche stupid character decisions... What could have been a terrific swan song became just another entertaining slasher film with style.

The film is certainly not without its merits, as I must applaud the smooth tracking shots and eerie setting that David Gordan Green managed to imitate. Even the Danny McBride assisted script wasn't without its worthy entries. And I can fully assure you that my excitement was at its peak when the opening credits began, cueing the infamously iconic "Halloween theme". I was doing my little shoulder jiggly to it, as is appropriate for one of the best themes ever! But the primary concern going into this hard reboot/sequel was that by actively trying to erase what many claim to be unneeded and inconsequential entries into the Laurie Strode character arc, they are effectively stating that they will fix the problems by doing it better. That is quite the tall glass to be ordering, in a franchise heralded as having the best horror film ever made. So, in rewriting the whole character relationship details and eliminating 80% of the story (especially the supernatural and Druid bits), Green and McBride had quite the Herculean task. One that while not asked for, was appreciated. Taking place 40 years since the events of the first film (with some slight ending adjustments), Halloween 2018 marketed a full Sarah Connor badarse Laurie, ready to kill "The Shape" once and for all. The culmination being entertaining and with inklings of potential at some turns, but overall remaining almost like a more brutal remake.

To reiterate, I liked the film. But I think rather than being just good, it could have been great. I feel like in taking up this task, the new filmmakers had the almost impossible mission to create a story that both respects the original classic but also unfolds some new and intriguing plots... But you know, also staying in tone with the Carpenter legend. They ride the fine line of pissing off a dedicated fanbase and being criticised for not being original. I find it hard to really pinpoint anything original that I really loved, as instead it came off more as an amalgamation best hits of the Halloween franchise. There are just back to back scenes, kills, and plot points throughout this reboot that just kept bringing up the exact scene from Michael's extensive (not retconned) filmography. They were done in a much crisper manner, for the most part, but it still doesn't sidetrack from the fact that these exact set-pieces (such as a bathroom scene) have been explored in prior Halloween films. And throughout the new film you will be constantly questioning whether they're being too respectful and sticking to the original homage, too much. At least I began to think to myself, when the plot would get original rather than playing it safe. I did enjoy the various callbacks, from Loomis name-drops, to Season of the Witch masks, or replica scenes, but we payed for a retcon retelling that respected the original, not was the original. 

It is in this dichotomy that I find the crux of rating the newest and hopefully final entry (for a whole) into the franchise that lives as long as Michael, himself. Audiences will be divided with the film, either proving it for being like the original but with more gore, or being let down because it didn't do anything new. For those who only care about the kills, I think you'll really enjoy it. At face value, there is a lot of entertainment value here, but for those of blues big fans, I left with longing for more depth and unsettling nature. For those who want scares and that classic Carpenter suspense there's nothing grand here. It's a modernised version of the original filled with an abundance of frustrating decisions and clichés. At the base of it, there was sadly nothing out of the norm, leaving me with a bit of a hollow culmination and closure. There were points where I genuinely thought it would be setting up for what we all expected, but then something would occur to derail and halt the interesting takes being hinted at. 

Aside from Curtis and a little boy being babysat (Julian), I really didn't like any of the characters or performances. The marketing of the reboot was essentially the Sarah Connor approach, and that is what I was expecting. I can't get to the specifics without spoiling or hinting so I have to leave it as, I felt unsatisfied by the amount of tormented, functioning alcoholic gun-ho Laurie, we got. It does its job of developing Laurie's familial collapse and struggles with PTSD more, but not nearly enough of what it could have had. I would have preferred having much more Laurie instead of focusing so much on her granddaughter and her highschool drama. They could have cut the supporting cast in half, in order to give Curtis more screen time to do her terrific job as a traumatised prey turned predator. Just narrow down the focus to Laurie v Michael, which is what we all want in an epic showdown of wits and brawn. Of course the body count brings in more views, so keep them, but don't spend so much time going from journalism teams, to policing, to highschool dances and intoxication. There are entire characters and scenes that could have been cut in order to supply said time.

As mentioned before, this entry is much more violent than the original. The kills are very brutal and fitting of Michael. The stark contrast presented in the form of showing us the kills and wounds rather than the suggestive suspense Carpenter mastered. There is less of mystery and imagination out to work to his actions, as the 2018 version sort of shows you the damage he has done, as well as much more of him stalking around. Take it how ever you please, but while I miss the camera pans and long takes with Michael casually in the background, I did enjoy seeing the kills in action. To say the least, the theatre had multiple moments of "woah" and "damn". This version is also one of the more comedic takes, which can probably be accredited to both Green and McBride's experienced comedy backgrounds. I felt that some of the jokes really hit and made sense to the diegetic world, but the majority came out of place, ruining the tone and pacing set for the scene.

Overall, I do think there are moments of top quality in the reboot, but they got muddled under some contrived character decisions, for my taste. The 2018 version is still a contained and very respectful sequel to the original, and offers quite a lot of fun. I enjoyed my time with the film but I wasn't impressed nor in a rush to rewatch it, as I always am willing to for the original. If you're a fan of the series, it's an obvious choice to still watch it. But if you're not caught up, I would still recommend viewing the original first. I think for now, I'd place this 2018 reboot/sequel behind the all time 1978 classic, and H20. My primary concern is that with success and a great box office opening, that we will risk another Halloween franchise misstep in going from an isolated solid retelling entry like H20, and feel the unnecessary demand to make another like Resurrection... Like a true final girl, please be smart Blumhouse. 

★★★ / 5 & B$A

END CREDIT SCENE: Sort of. No actual footage, but there is some lingering audio... 

~ Genuinely,

Quickee Film Time

[qftreviews]

Attack the Block was a terrific underseen, teen action adventure with some heart. Cornish looks to do the same with his childhood adventure take on the Arthurian tale. Also, that kid is Andy Serkis' son (FYI).

[qftreviews]

Tom on Twitter

“Here’s the Leaked Hellboy trailer for y’alls Viewing Pleasure ! #HELLBOY https://t.co/TNI8ZBkhjG”

Leaked Hellboy trailer, leaves me a bit underwhelmed. I was really excited for this, but based off this leak I found online, this is not the tone I was hoping for. If this is what it is, I guess it'll be fun and forgettable. But I'm now switching gears to cautiously optimistic.

[qftreviews]

"Armed with the book of Jesus Christ, I led my parish into the heart of Peking. And we showed them the glory and the love of God himself. And then they showed us the Devil." 

The Wicker Man + The Kill List + Gaelic/Folk horror

You already know I'm a massive fan of Gareth Evans and his martial arts filmography. It goes without argument, that The Raid & Raid: Redemption are two of the best action film of the decade. Don't agree, well tell me your address and I'll see you at the top. With his latest film releasing on Netflix (or any VPN site you can access your films through), Apostle places in the shoes of the brilliant Dan Stevens as he infiltrates an eerie pagan worshipping island cult. What ensues is not only some more brilliant camera work, direction, and atmospheric mood, but a whole lot of gore. Evans pauses his masterful handling of martial arts in favour of a more layered supernatural thriller. 

The plot detail should be kept as minimal as possible until you watch it. I refused to watch the trailers for Apostle, because I wanted to go in with no information. All I knew was that Dan Stevens was going to an unknown island in order to find his sister, who was being held ransom by some self-proclaimed lunatic prophet, played by Martin Sheen. You had me at Gareth Evans directing it, but the addition of Dan Steven's just added the cooling ice to my already refreshing beverage. 

I have to begin with my praise for just how well Evans establishes his diegetic world. His continued collaboration with the same film team adds more personal credit to his stocks. He has the same musical score duo he's been with for ages, Aria Prayogi and Fajar Yuskemal, to score quite a suspenseful slow burn score. The film immediately commences with a blaring off kilter cult chanting soundscape, letting you know you've entered something new, something strange and off-putting. The smooth cinematography and lighting all seem to make use of a almost stormy filter, devoid of coloration and life, all perfectly blending with the directional tone and musical cues that keep you and Stevens' Richardson on your muddy toes. While the film is a bit over 2 hours (and I reckon it could have been cut down by 10min), you feel completely invested in the mystery of the cult, the search for the missing sister, and the sense of fight or flight around each corner as the plot progresses. You certainly don't feel welcomed on this island, and the establishment of being kept on guard says to me that Evans successfully pulled off the desired effect. I absolutely love films about cults, and the sense of dread and hidden lore that revolve around them!

What astonished me the most was just how well Evans pulled off the blend between wide shot transitions to claustrophobic interior horror. You transition easily from one character to another encompassing the same vicinity. The world building around the island is executed very well, allowing you to have a sense of where everyone is at any given point. And just as easily as Evans tracks two people working on a boat along the seaside, he crams you into a burst of action inside of a house. The pacing and tone of Apostle capture equal parts folk horror, cultist mystery, integrated with Evans' capacity for well executed action choreography. 

The performances were all to the tone of the film, with everyone pitching in to do their job. But it is clearly evident that the leads were Martin Sheen and Dan Stevens, in that order. The prior managed to give a more layered performance with more emotion, versus the latter's still good but linear role. Stevens' character sort of resorted to a more eyebrows furrowed, silent protagonist who clearly has seen things, but refuses to open up. When the film does cue you in on inside detail for Mr. Richardson, it is all to brief and moved upon too quick for my taste. The primary antagonist does a solid job as well, one I could only imagine would have been even further amplified by the likes of Brenden Gleeson. I'd also like to give a shout-out to the solid dramatic performance given by Sing Street's Lucy Boynton.

Most of the complaints will arise with the slow nature of the film's plot and with the lighting. While I was absolutely fine both of these factors and how they were utilised, I can assume others will complain that it was too slow or that they could barely see anything during the lantern-lit night/cave scenes. But of you are a fan of atmospheric folk/period piece horror, I recommend you give this a watch. 

★★★½ / 5 & B$A

NO END CREDIT SCENE

~ Genuinely,

Quickee Film Time

[qftreviews]

Imagine a fusion between American Psycho, and Vampire's Kiss, set in the world of LIFE. 

Forget what you heard, this is it chief. Venom is the best comedy of the year (also Eighth Grade). Not only does Tom Hardy deliver one of the most memorable performances of the year, truly embracing his inner Nic Cage, but Venom is truly an experience you have to embrace for yourself. You would not believe the things shown or spoken throughout. I'm judging this as a comedy, because I couldn't stop laughing. If I were to rate it as a movie movie, it'd probably be 2-2.5 stars at best. But the way I see it, we can do and say whatever we want. 

Venom seems to have come straight from the early 2000s, right alongside such esteemed company like Fantastic 4, Daredevil, and Hulk. I kid you not, this is quite possibly the best pound for pound entertainment I've had in recent months. And might I add, it could also be that this is the first outing to theater I've been to in over ~4 weeks. If I was to compare myself to the "sym-bye-oats", I would have died a long time ago without being able to consume a cinema experience at least once per week. You must have been just as amazed and excited when Tom Hardy was attached to the movie. Furthermore when you saw the trailer like almost everyone else, you knew this was going to be a bomb, and even so... This was not as horrible as people said. It's a great aid that I went in with below zero expectations, and a wholesome love for both Hardy and memes. This movie was curated for memelords and the endless ammunition it has and will spawn for months to come. 

Somewhere deep down, underneath the symbiote, there is a solid film that could be salvaged. Had they stuck to the established sci-fi horror they set up in the first 20 minutes, the pacing and tone would have been just fine. Frankly, they should have surprised everyone and canonised that LIFE was a prequel to Venom. Thus maintaining both the scientific set up of the symbiote as well as a focused scifi thriller tone. Admittedly, there were also a handful of solid scenes that could have been made much more epic with both an R-rating, and a tighter direction. The action sequences would have benefited much more with a wider shot, to allow us to see the maneuvers. But with some iffy special effects and the fact that it's a CGI Venom (as it would have to be), I get why they went for more of a close up shake for the majority of the fights and chases. Imagine if they could have had WETA to work on the symbiotes! Instead, Venom bounces around as much as Tom Hardy's, Eddie Brock sweats. Don't even try locking down on one tone because pacing and subplots fly in and out on their own volition, doing whatever they please. And the studio and writer can say what they want but there was just no solid structure established, so in its place we get roughly 2 hours of hilarious action and Hardy being bullied and peer pressured by the Symbiote. It's quite a riot. Not only was I left alternating between hilarious cringes and put my drink down laughs, but I found myself completely invested at just how fun this bad movie was. 

I wasn't kidding when I brought up Nic Cage and the likes of Patrick Bateman, because Hardy did what very few actors can do. Playing the "are they terrific or just really awful" card in his recent filmography. Well, personally, we love and respect Tom Hardy in this house for both his acting and his love for dogs. His Eddie Brock performance was equally hilarious and nuanced. The chemistry between Eddie and Venom was impeccable, and resulted in the best jokes throughout the film. As soon as "symbiosis" is achieved Venom really takes over both Eddie and the film with his almost Brooklyn 99's Captain Holt (Andre Braugher) forceful presence awkwardness. The dynamic between the two alone is enough to cover the ticket cost. It doesn't get much more hilarious than Tom Hardy going Bateman/Cage in the Dorsia, prior to casually sitting in a live Lobster tank to cool off. And while I really enjoyed the comedic performance (as did the entire theater moving with laughter), there was certainly a dramatic level underneath. You can tell where there was some cut out the possible serious drama in a Jekyll & Hyde manner through Hardy's performance, but I do think in this instance knowing what you are and going for the comedic entertainment was the better outcome. Those reports of Hardy's favourite 40 minutes cut out seem legitimate, but by no means do I think they would have improved the film at its current state and mixed tone. If you want more mercurial chaos from Hardy, give the underrated Taboo a watch...or Bronson. 

Everyone else hardly worth talking about, as Riz Ahmed and Michelle Williams seem to be underutilised... Again. I found it funny that the three leads are all British, and yet they're all concealing their true identities under their American acting. Riz passes as he has already proven with Nightcrawler and The Night Of, Williams sort of still does that annoying cheerleader/nasal accent, and Hardy continues his hunchback of Boston persona. What made it seem unneeded in Ahmed's case was that they describe him being born to British parents within the movie... So couldn't his evil Elon Musk character just have been British? I digress, for this is undoubtedly a Tom Hardy multiple personas carriage with supporting characters to react at him. 

It's a simplistic straightforward plot with nothing surprising and unfortunately not much gore. If they're smart, and if they count their luck and blessing to get a sequel, they sure as hell better bump it up to a hard R-rating. If they are considering bringing in Carnage, they would be complete imbeciles to not make it R. I highly recommend going to see Venom if you want to have a genuine laugh out loud time. I reiterate that Venom is one of the most entertaining movies of the year, and in the greatest of ways. But by no means is this a good movie, but by no means should you miss out on these quality comedy scenes. So make like a turd in the wind, and go watch Venom, or A Star is Born, im sure they're both highly entertaining for each respective genres. Oh, and you damn well know I'm signed on for the sequel! Because if it gets out, it's gonna be... 

~ ★★★ / 5 & B$A ~

MID/END CREDIT SCENE: Yes (as well as a preview of Into the Spiderverse).

~ Genuinely,

Quickee Film Time

[qftreviews]

And the Oscars go to...

[qftreviews]

This looks rather bland with various retreads. I'll go watch it for the same reason I've seen most of the recent X-men films, because I'm a huge fan of the bromance Fassbender + McAvoy have.

[qftreviews]

‘Bond 25’ Gets Cary Joji Fukunaga As New Director For 007 Daniel Craig

EXCLUSIVE: Eon Productions and MGM have set Cary Joji Fukunaga as the new director who’ll mount James Bond 25 with Daniel Craig in the sta

This is the best news I've heard in a long time!

[qftreviews]

Very interested in what looks to be a sleeper release. On a side note, I highly recommend everyone watch Steve Coogan and his bromance, Rob Brydon's "Trip" films.

[qftreviews]

Marvel Studios' Captain Marvel - Official Trailer

Higher. Further. Faster. Watch the trailer for Marvel Studios’ Captain Marvel, in theaters March 8, 2019. ► Subscribe to Marvel: http://

A bit underwhelming for my taste. You would have thought that this long of a wait for the trailer would have resulted in something amazing. At least we know we're getting the Mohawk!

At first glance, I'm already seeing that the special effects in some shots come off a bit weird. It'll be a CGI heavy film, so that will probably be worked out in due time. Plot will probably be a standard origins formulaic predictabowl.

That said, I'm still cautiously optimistic. Also Brace for the sucker punching old lady gifs.

[qftreviews]

More Westerns are always welcomed, especially by the Coen Brothers! Furthermore, Neeson and Gleeson are in this? I had no clue.

[qftreviews]

Going by way of strictly evil Terminator 2 route. Laurie is joining up with her spirit sister, Sarah Conner.

Carpenter's music never gets old. I could listen to it all day!

I'm so (cautiously) hyped for this reboot!