M3GAN 2.0

 

This review may contain spoilers!

M3GAN 2.0 is a sequel to M3GAN (2022) and follows Gemma and Cady a few years after the M3GAN incident. Now, a new weaponised android called AMELIA has gone rogue and is after everyone ever linked to her creation. With Gemma in the crosshairs, they must rely on an android adversary long thought to be dead.

They really stumbled into the right thing when they decided to make M3GAN camp and irreverent. This could very easily have been a sci-fi horror that played itself too seriously; having fun with the material is what found this film its audience. The sequel holds the exact same strength. While this film shucks the horror elements for the most part, it holds on tight to all the comedy elements that made it so beloved in the first place. Yes, M3GAN hates Gemma, and she lets her know it in what is some of the funniest dialogue in the film. Is M3GAN in a stealth operation? Sure, but you're getting a dance number. Cady just got kidnapped, so of course, M3GAN is going to serenade us with Kate Bush. This is a film that wants you shrieking with laughter now instead of fear.

I really felt like the special effects got a bit of a boost this time around, the M3GAN design still works incredibly well, and her big glidersuit scene is an impressive step up from the first outing. The soundtrack takes a little while to give something, but once it starts, you will have some hilarious additions. Though, as I previously mentioned, nothing beats M3GAN singing Kate Bush's 'This Woman's Work'.

Allison Williams, who played Gemma, seems to be having remarkably more fun with the material this time around; Williams really leans into the humorous rivalry between her character and M3GAN. Jemaine Clement, who played Alton Appleton, absolutely ran away with his scenes in this; Clement took the self-absorbed and idolised billionaire role to a hilarious place. Timm Sharp, who played Tim Sattler, was a really funny new addition to the cast; I loved how Sharp just played up his intelligence agent as a low-intelligence moron.

However, the best performance came from Jenna Davis, who voiced M3GAN. This was my favourite performance in the first film, and it is an easy pick in the second feature. Davis is naturally a bit snarky and biting as M3GAN; she is the reason this role is iconic. I often found the way M3GAN winds up on a pedestal is just how much Davis can go for it in a delivery. When the best you have is your title character, it makes sense to see who is lending all that personality to it. Jenna Davis might not be a performer hurtling through stunts, but every moment of comedy, rivalry or pure entertainment often has her at the centre.

M3GAN 2.0 is quite like the first film, with all of the same flaws, only louder and more obvious. These films have always struggled with their identity somewhat; the first film was supposed to be a horror, and this sequel might be an action sci-fi. Yet somehow, both movies are more comedy than anything else. The genre elements are quite confused, and because this follow-up isn't as sure of what it wants to be, there's not much surprise when we're left with a staggering overcomplicated film about AI threats grappling for saving or destroying the world. The film attempts to ground us with M3GAN, Gemma and Cady rather optimistically. But that's not really the light touch the film hopes for; Gemma and Cady's familial problems are even more underdeveloped than in the first film. Ultimately, the idea that M3GAN and co. are required to rout the oldest, most evil AI is a strange follow-up to 'evil toy goes rogue'. The more the film introduces M3GAN, the more it tends to lose focus on the main story that it too knows is boring. The theme is also buried somewhere along the way, it skews towards the AI is evil path again, while mumbling about technology in moderation. M3GAN feels pretty safe this time around; she is treated like a character who isn't really going anywhere, and therefore, the ending feels neither surprising nor particularly gratifying. It's a pity that the stylistic touch of the first horror outing seems to have been lost in the glamour of a big-budget Hollywood sequel.

While I felt the increased budget allowed for nicer effects, it is a pity that the visual cinematography of this film was less. Every scene had more of a lazily paced feel to it, and none of the framing was especially dynamic. I also didn't take much note of the score; the film didn't really lean on this to bleed emotional beats into the film.

Ivanna Sakhno, who played AMELIA, is quite a dull antagonist to pit against our protagonists; where M3GAN is quirky, Sakhno gives AMELIA nothing defining. Violet McGraw, who played Cady, is a young actress the series is sadly saddled with; McGraw struggles to lend her characters much emotional range, which limits any interest in this central character. Brian Jordan Alvarez, who played Cole, really stood out in the first film, but I really wish we had used him less this time around; Alvarez really tries to be the funniest in this film and comes off as a bit over the top. Aristotle Athari, who played Christian, was a letdown as the surprise human antagonist; Athari just doesn't seem to know when to play for humour or when to play a scene dramatically. Jen Van Epps, who played Tess, fell into the background in the first film and struggles with this issue once again; Van Epps just doesn't really seem equipped to make herself known amongst the ensemble.

M3GAN 2.0 is right to lean into its more comedic side, but flounders when it tries to morph into an action AI film. I would give M3GAN 2.0 a 4.5/10.

F1: The Movie

 

This review may contain spoilers!

F1: The Movie follows Sonny Hayes, a man who chases first place in all major automotive circuits ever since a life-threatening crash from a Formula One race in his youth. When his friend and former rival, Ruben Cervantes, offers him a spot on his Formula One team, Sonny reluctantly agrees.

I was immediately drawn into this racing film. We see Sonny smash through NASCAR like it's the easiest competitive circuit in the world. It is clear Sonny is a prodigy, and there is no doubt in the audience's mind that he could be the answer to Ruben's failing F1 team problems. The film is smart in how it handles introducing Sonny back to F1. He's not a natural winner from the first scene; he crashes, but he shows incredible potential and insight not present in the other members of Ruben's team. The film then spends a lot of time telling us who Sonny is. He physically trains himself for the race, he studies and learns both the car and the track, and he works to build up the other members of the team. One of the big challenges here is the other APX driver: Joshua. Throughout the film, Joshua is resistant to Sonny, disobeying him and insulting him, which eventually leads to the extreme of Joshua getting into a life-threatening crash. The pair then build back up, Sonny especially learning how to become a natural teammate to someone with a lot of talent but who needs to develop respect. This film felt like a very traditional Hero's Journey pathway done right, which will be no surprise to Joseph Kosinski fans post Top Gun: Maverick. I also felt extremely impressed with how immersive this film was. A lot of the racing places you right in the action and makes you feel like the driver behind the wheel.

This film is a technical masterpiece, which is no surprise if you're familiar with Joseph Kosinski as a director. This film uses incredible camera techniques to live-capture real cars positioned within real Formula One races. More than this, the camera work used throughout challenges itself to stay dynamic and is a massive contributor to why this film feels so immersive. The editing present here is some of the strongest this year, piecing shots together in a way that makes the visual storytelling of this film stand out even stronger than the narrative work at play. The soundtrack used throughout is full of comfortable rock and some fresh pop and hip-hop tracks, marking F1 as the trendy forefront of the racing world that it is. I also feel the whole thing being sewn together by a powerful score from Hans Zimmer is well worth noting.

Damson Idris, who played Joshua Pearce, really earnestly plays the young hotshot with an ego bigger than his talent; I appreciated Idris because he really brought Joshua on a journey that humbled the role and lifted him up. Javier Bardem, who played Ruben Cervantes, is entirely charming in this film; I also liked it when Bardem and Pitt got to portray a friendship with some conflict in it. Tobias Menzies, who played Peter Banning, was an oddball left-field antagonist role that I quite liked; Menzies has a couple of insanely good scenes where it feels like he is satirising Elon Musk. Kim Bodnia, who played Kaspar Smolinski, is a character I enjoyed seeing become increasingly frustrated by Pitt's lead; yet Bodnia also quietly built his character's camaraderie with Sonny up too, which worked well. Sarah Niles, who played Bernadette, really grounds Idris' role morally; I enjoyed seeing Niles play a sort of conscience while also having to reach the point of being a distraught mother in this film. Will Merrick and Joseph Balderrama, who played Nickleby and Fazio respectively, are a fun ensemble to the APX race team; I enjoyed the fast banter that adds a bit of levity to the racing or team briefing scenes. Shea Whigham, who played Chip Hart, gives a strong start to the film; this is a character who feels like a seasoned pro really passing grudging respect to Pitt's Sonny.

However, the best performance came from Brad Pitt, who played Sonny Hayes. At this point in his career, Pitt is picking roles and scripts that really excite him or allow him to stretch his legs. Hayes has that classic 'chip on his shoulder' aspect that Pitt tends to gravitate towards, which results in a nice storyline around living a life post-severe injury. I really felt this character had a gruff yet charming front, while holding deep personal fear behind closed doors. I liked that Pitt's role could be very aloof in one scene, while nothing but hard edges in the next. Yet across all of it, we saw a character with almost superhuman drive and willpower, someone who became self-sacrificing to win. I remember when the latest Mission: Impossible came out, people said Tom Cruise was the last true movie star, but I feel a similar affinity for Brad Pitt.

I think that at the core of this film, the thing holding it back from being an absolute knockout piece of cinema is how safe the story can be at times. I often felt it took the path most travelled, especially early in the film, with Joshua being a punk rival to Sonny. It felt like their antagonistic start could have had more of an edge to it. The ending also felt very cheesy, bringing Sonny back down from all of his development and reducing the feeling I had been sitting with after the big final race. Perhaps most annoying was the really poor romance subplot. The absolute lack of chemistry between Sonny and Kate is unbearable, yet the movie keeps pushing it up the hill. This is a love story that feels like it was mandated to be in the feature; there's no real love in it whatsoever.

Kerry Condon, who played Kate McKenna, just feels like she struggles to make herself be heard or stand out in this; I also really felt like there was no romantic chemistry whatsoever between Condon and Pitt. Abdul Salis, who played Dodge, was a character who really struggled to make himself known; I felt like Salis made little connection on set as his role paired well with nobody. Callie Cooke, who played Jodie, is a character who constantly fails and goes through growth we never really see; I expected more from Cooke and felt this character might have been interesting with some proper screen time. Samson Kayo, who played Cash, is a staggeringly annoying performance; Kayo gives a superficial and easy-going performance that makes him feel like the laziest we get.

Between Joseph Kosinski's ability to weave a visually superior film and Brad Pitt's knockout performance, this is certainly a must-watch on the big screen. I would give F1: The Movie an 8/10.

28 Years Later

 

This review may contain spoilers!

28 Years Later is the third film in the 28 Days Later franchise, and as the title suggests, takes us 28 years after the outbreak. In this feature, Spike is due for the rite of passage his island village partakes in. He and his father, Jamie, venture out onto the mainland to survive six hours alone surrounded by the zombie hordes.

The zombie genre is a realm that hasn't produced as many major hits on the big screen in a while. I certainly haven't been this entertained by a zombie feature since the second Zombieland graced our screens. The thing worth getting excited about for 28 Years Later is the reunion of the creative team; seeing the radical storytelling of Alex Garland partnered with the filmmaking expertise of Danny Boyle is a treat. It's what made 28 Days Later such a timeless gem for the genre. In this film, for nearly the entire first half, we get some of the best onscreen tension I have seen all year. Watching Spike and Jamie stagger through this decaying world is terrifying; any scene can tilt into danger, and even on the cusp of their village gate, they are faced with a spine-chilling threat to their mortality. It's a nice way to tell the audience from the very beginning that the stakes haven't gone away, they're still high, and if anything, the world for our characters is more dangerous than ever. So when the film decides to take a heel turn and have Spike venture out into the world with his ailing mother in the back half, you know this film is prepared to surprise you. The difference is quite worthwhile watching. Spike depends on his father when they leave, but he visually learns what he needs to survive. When he ventures out with his mother, he becomes the person leading them through the wilderness, and he has to grow in moments of danger. The second act was revelatory and held moments of surprising beauty. The Momento Mori tribute to the dead is actually quite a remarkably poignant point in the script. It is a setting in which Spike changes the most; he lets go of his boyhood while still holding on to the love that made him shine out from the others. This film is a beautiful character arc for Spike, and I felt like he really saw a complete journey as a character.

Danny Boyle is a master behind the camera, and there is no point in this film where that was put into doubt. The visuals on display here are incredible and make this world feel so expansive, the way we had these massive wides that showed the scale of the decaying world. I also really liked how shaky and frantic the action sequences got; it was nice that the camerawork didn't feel polished and only served to heighten the tension. The editing is going to be fun for some and awful for others, and at first, I thought it was janky. But the more the film went along, I really got onboard with the purpose of the editing, the tension of the kill and the way a scene was cut perfectly to the beat of the narrative. The soundtrack has a few numbers that will get under your skin, and the working of Rudyard Kipling's 'Boots' poem into the mix really heightens that transition into the world of the dead. I also found the score to be a terrifying piece that only really helped to ramp up those moments where I had my theatre chair armrests in a vice-like grip.

Alfie Williams, who played Spike, is an incredible young protagonist who really makes his mark on this series; Williams' progression from scared child to defiant explorer protecting his mother made this movie at every turn. Aaron Taylor-Johnson, who played Jamie, has found himself a tough apocalypse hunter role that he absolutely dominates in; how he plays a Dad who often fails his son is something I was very impressed by. Christopher Fulford, who played Sam, is another caring communal figure whom I enjoyed; Fulford also lends himself to being a bit of a storyteller in this role, which worked. Jodie Comer, who played Isla, is a tragic character performed beautifully; Comer's bouts of sickness worked just as wonderfully as the moments where she played heartbreaking clarity. Edvin Ryding, who played Erik, is a surprise addition in the back half, but he does good work; Ryding works the angle of being a complete outsider to this zombie world very well.

However, the best performance came from Ralph Fiennes, who played Dr. Kelson. I found the moment Fiennes appeared onscreen, it was clear we had a performer who was on a whole other level. Fiennes knows how to work the material he is given, when to have some levity with it or when to play it like a master. This is a film that offers him the opportunity to do both. By the time Fiennes first appears, his role has already had a lot of mystique built up around him. So to see this more casual character dressed in terrifying apparel was quite the about-face. Dr. Kelson is someone who has held to his humanity within the end of the world; he can joke with good humour. Fiennes is careful to not present Kelson as mad; he has eccentricities, but he feels fully capable. The way he describes the Momento Mori monument his character has been building is a real moment of beauty in the script that can only have been performed with someone capable of such poetry. In Isla's death scene, Fiennes is a remorseful participant. A true Ferryman. I think the gentle nature of this transition to death is owed greatly to Fiennes' portrayal of the moment. A man who can really craft moving moments in the projects he is in.

I found 28 Years Later to be excellent, but it had a few off-kilter moments, particularly in the second half. When the Swedish soldiers showed up with their guns and heavy-handed comic relief, I felt like the story lost itself to something else for a moment. When it was time for Ilsa to pass on, the whole premise of her flesh being melted off and her skull being handed back to her waiting son would have played for comedy if the acting wasn't behind that moment. The most egregious one was the ending with the introduction of the Jimmys; it was an oddball tonal shift that completely decimated my view of this film. I felt it was a sequel sting that did nothing for the feature and left me less excited for a potential sequel. The other aspect of the film I really didn't like was the zombie pregnancy. It was a perturbing, almost fetish-fueled moment that didn't really add a lot to the story. I've seen this done in Army of the Dead too, and it's an element of the zombie genre I really don't care for at all.

Jack O'Connell, who played Sir Jimmy Crystal, struts into the movie and immediately soured the whole thing; O'Connell's ability to just generate some of the most grating characters in 2025 needs to be studied.

A few narrative oddities aren't enough to undermine one of the more viscerally creative and constructed zombie films of the past few years. I would give 28 Years Later a 7.5/10

Materialists

 

This review may contain spoilers!

Materialists is a romantic-comedy following Lucy, a New York matchmaker who starts a relationship with a wealthy man through her job. However, when she reconnects with John, her struggling actor ex-boyfriend, she has to decide between financial stability and love.

What I really enjoyed about the latest film from Celine Song is the message clearly presented throughout. The deep criticism of modern dating and the commodification of finding your 'soulmate' is such an interesting premise. This film features several sequences in which a character rattles off very specific traits they desire in a partner, often developing an outlandish idea of the perfect partner. This is countered neatly by Lucy criticising the vanity and narcissism on display before her, often doing her best to wrangle her clients' expectations. There is always an underpinning point that emotional connection matters the least in the dating scene; it often boils down to looks, career, status and wealth. When this film shatters Lucy's 'perfect' world of pairing opulent partners together by exposing the dangers of blind matching people, the film really takes an intensive turn. Lucy is confronted with the fact that, though people have good-looking attributes on paper, there is still a danger to personal safety in the world of dating, no matter how luxurious the service. Watching Lucy face a client undergoing something traumatic and then absorb the guilt from that to grow as a person is one of the finer narrative points of this film.

The sophisticated visual style of Materialists is probably its winning feature. This is a film destined to be beautiful, with shots that are exquisitely framed and that do well at holding on to lingering moments of artistic decadence. I quite liked the soundtrack for this film; it had an almost rustic indie feel that also evoked a gentle love for New York City, rough edges and all.

Dakota Johnson, who played Lucy, is in one of the better roles I have seen her portray; Johnson's sense of self and how that changes between the men she dates, her work and the trauma she experiences makes for an emotionally compelling watch. Zoe Winters, who played Sophie, almost steals this entire film out from under the leading stars; Winters' raw emotion when she is confronted by Johnson is undeniably the best scene of the film. Dasha Nekrasova, who played Daisy, had some good dialogue exchanges with Johnson; Nekrasova's work friend character really painted the perfect illusion that the matchmakers lived within well. Louisa Jacobson, who played Charlotte, gave a pretty classic rendition of the 'cold-footed' bride; though I found Jacobson's role being coerced back to the relationship by the promise of status and money to be very sobering.

However, the best performance came from Chris Evans, who played John. In any other romantic-comedy, John would be the rough ex from the good old days who has a heart of gold deep down. However, what I liked about John in this is that he can be this constant rock to Lucy, while also making mistakes or not reading the room every time. He's not perfect, but he wants to be a good person for this woman that he cares about. Evans develops a man who is living a poor life well; he hasn't lost sight of his dreams and what he wants. But within the events of the movie, he also learns to grow and show some appetite for life, a drive to progress and show effort in his relationship. I found Evans and Johnson's portrayal of a relationship the most strikingly honest; they are so frank and sincere with one another that they almost crash and burn while sharing a warm smile. Yet, at every turn, this film proved that their immediate chemistry and Evans' phenomenal portrayal of longing made this leading man one worth watching.

This film really held a beautiful message, but I couldn't help but feel my teeth grinding against one another at times. Why, you might ask? Simply put, this film fails to make me feel like I was watching real people. The characters in this are so asinine, sultry and living in an easy-going diamond world that it gets hard to connect with as an average moviegoer. The concept of what a working-class relationship is like versus a more material one often presents a bit ludicrously, and the way the main character splits hairs between them makes her extremely hard to like come the end of the feature. This issue is also presented within the dialogue used throughout the film. No one really sounded like an authentic person; everyone was rattling off dialogue like they were within a play. This might make sense with Celine Song's background, but it made the medium flounder here. Yet, while this film is trussing itself up to position itself as the most poignant romance film of the year, the outcome winds up feeling very predictable. Also, let's get real: the whole caveman thing was stupid.

The editing for this feature seems almost ambling, in a lazy manner. A scene can just linger a little too long with a particular shot, and transitions in general feel like a weak point. I also expected a lot more from a Daniel Pemberton score, beyond a tantalising spike in emotion when things were going wrong, but there's nothing much to write home about.

Pedro Pascal, who played Harry, really just feels like he's here because his name brings a crowd; Pascal's range is not present at all, and he strikes me as emotionless. Marin Ireland, who played Violet, could really do with better control over her facial expressions; watching Ireland's whole head act a different way from how her voice was delivering a line weirded me out.

Despite a decent message and some impressive visuals, I couldn't help but find Materialists to be a little conceited. I would give Materialists a 6.5/10.

How To Train Your Dragon

 

This review may contain spoilers!

How To Train Your Dragon is a live-action remake of the 2010 film of the same name and a loose adaptation of the Cressida Cowell novels.

For a long time now the major complaint about the live-action remake has been the way they have all gone through major deviations, essentially abandoning the original film that they spawned from. However, DreamWorks makes a smart move by placing the original creative lead, Dean DeBlois, back at the helm for this adaptation. This creative link ensures that the original message and narrative beats are conveyed effectively. We get the chance to see the world of Berk, only it feels a little more real as humans interact, fight with and befriend the titular dragons. Taking on Hiccup's journey as an outcast who wants to belong, only to develop an unlikely bond that changes the Vikings forever is incredibly charming. I loved that this movie didn't pull punches. Moments where a fight had to have stakes we would see Vikings fall or our heroes in real peril, Hiccup and Toothless' bonding was really gradual and nice to fall into and the Red Death's reveal is a genuinely terrifying moment in the feature. This film might have lost a couple of scenes but it largely kept the script of the original, allowing this film to bring How To Train Your Dragon to a whole host of new young Vikings in the audience.

The visual effects for this film are pretty good for the most part. I most enjoyed how the dragons felt so characteristic, they were entirely expressive and the designs were as varied as they were in the original series. John Powell returns to give the iconic score one more go fresh, each song really uplifts the quality of a scene. Hiccup and Toothless' first flight is one of those iconic film moments that stays with you long after you've left the movie theatre.

Nico Parker, who played Astrid, does a great job of bringing Astrid's character journey to life; Parker presents a more aggressive character who finds inspiration in Hiccup and Toothless' bond. Gerard Butler, who played Stoick, looks like he is having the time of his life in this film; Butler really leans into the comedy of Stoick more successfully than I expected. Nick Frost, who played Gobber, is an admittedly decent pick for the teacher of the next wave of dragon-slaying Vikings; Frost wears his character's heart on his sleeve a bit which works admirably. Gabriel Howell, who played Snotlout, is a ton of fun as the cocky young Viking trying to impress everyone; I found Powell entirely entertaining without being too arrogant in his character. Peter Serafinowicz, who played Spitelout, did a lot without needing to say much at all; his rough-edged father figure paired nicely with Powell's Snotlout. Naomi Wirthner, who played Gothi, is a performance that really added an intriguing element to the world of Berk; Wirthner's Gothi managed to be mysterious and mystical without even needing to contribute dialogue.

However, the best performance came from Mason Thames, who played Hiccup. I have no idea how far they cast the net for this role but it was clearly the exact right amount. Thames is nearly flawless as the live-action Hiccup. He has a nervous and slightly off-kilter personality that makes Hiccup a bit of an outcast in the Viking village of Berk. Yet, he also has such a big emotional range and is relentlessly earnest. I loved the moments where he got a more determined edge to Hiccup, seeing him fight for Toothless and for his people to change for the better makes How To Train Your Dragon the special film that it is. I hope Thames gets the complete trilogy, he has more than earned it.

For better or worse, How To Train Your Dragon is exactly what the original animated film is. Beat for beat this film is the same, so it will not surprise you nor unfurl some major new plot point to keep it fresh. I feel the big criticism for live-action remakes beyond why on Earth they keep making them is that they often deviate too much from the original material. Here they find the best from the original work, but that can also be its own weakness.

Overall, the biggest failure of How To Train Your Dragon is the visual camera work. I often found the cinematography missed the best angle it could have found in a scene, favouring poorly framed close-ups or shots that only really serve to set up a visual effect. While I think the overall special effects in the film are good, that first village fight scene was really average and many of the flight scenes are blurry.

Julian Dennison, who played Fishlegs, is a New Zealand actor who has really struggled to make his mark in a blockbuster; Dennison was awkward and one of the characters I least wanted to see onscreen. Bronwyn James and Harry Trevaldwyn, who played Ruffnut and Tuffnut respectively, just pushed the comedic relief angle too hard; in a film where there was plenty of humour present, there was never much need for performances that oversold it. 

One of the most faithful and entertaining live-action remakes in years. I would give How To Train Your Dragon an 8.5/10.

Ballerina

 

This review may contain spoilers!

Ballerina is the first spinoff film in the John Wick universe, set between the events of John Wick: Chapter 3 - Parabellum and John Wick: Chapter 4. In this film, we follow Eve, a young assassin trained by the Ruska Roma, who goes off on a revenge mission when she encounters the group that murdered her father.

I love how scrappy Ballerina is throughout. Where watching John Wick is about watching a master assassin sweep his way through a room brimming with goons, Ballerina presents more of an underdog revenge mission. Eve enters this film through a fairly compelling tragic origin and an adrenaline-filled training sequence that sees her getting moulded into the fighter we've all come out to see. This is a film in which the protagonist struggles, she is smaller than most of her opponents and her punches don't pack a wallop. Seeing this character learn to fight more effectively as if her life depends on it, makes this an interesting premise from the beginning. We know Eve is going to hurl herself at her opponents like an animal, clawing her way through a fight creatively and without compromise. Eve's descent into the world of the High Table is fascinating, and this development introduces a new cult faction, making for a unique adversary. I appreciated watching Eve work her way up the ladder to achieve her revenge - even being judged for her righteousness by the Baba Yaga himself. The best aspects of this film come from seeing Eve fight her way through a killer village, that felt fresh for the John Wick universe.

This is a film that captures action brilliantly, thinking of ways for the camera to latch onto the most original form of movement to really make those brawls flow. Pairing neatly with that is just how nicely the editing weaves this production together; the action sequences involve very intensive cutting, which makes the film look all the better for it. I was blown away by the stunts across Ballerina, like a John Wick film the theme seems to be creativity first and choreography only half a step behind. The score for this film is nothing short of thrilling, with a real adrenaline pulse present throughout and a neat Tchaikovsky number scattered to weave an emotional bond with the character. Having a track from Evanescence and Halsey both meant this film had a broody, tough edge to close on that perfectly mirrored the tone of Ballerina.

Ana de Armas, who played Eve, leads this film with the same amount of intense drive that made Reeves' Wick so famous; de Armas has a primal ferocity and rage on show that really makes you sit up and pay attention. Keanu Reeves, who played John Wick, is such a staple of this franchise and a welcome return; Reeves presents a more morose and benevolent side of Wick here that I quite enjoyed. Anjelica Huston, who played The Director, is still an imposing force within this world; Huston lends a cold edge to this character which I loved. Gabriel Byrne, who played The Chancellor, is one of the most memorable antagonists in the John Wick universe yet; Byrne presents himself with such charisma while talking about spine-chilling actions. Ava Joyce McCarthy, who played Ella, is a brilliant child performer; she didn't get boxed into type and really gave her role a mean edge where required. Norman Reedus, who played Daniel Pine, is giving more than you might expect with his fatherly assassin; this role was quite a selfless type who pushed himself for the sake of his daughter. Lance Reddick, who played Charon, isn't in this for long but gives as good as ever; Reddick was a real treasure as Charon and he is an actor who will be sincerely missed. Abraham Popoola, who played Frank, is a role I'd love to see back in this universe; Popoola found the perfect balance between campy and cool.

However, the best performance came from Ian McShane, who played Winston. This character is such a brilliant fixture of the John Wick universe. McShane is entirely elegant and sophisticated in his delivery, making the actual person he is portraying both alluring and mysterious. In this feature we get the more benevolent side of Winston, seeing him shelter and protect young Eve. McShane does a great job of being the doorman in this almost fantastical world of killers and assassins. I was especially impressed with the way McShane subtly steers de Armas to her path of revenge. Winston becomes this figure for justice within the world of darkness he resides in, which has always been one of the most fascinating facets of his character.

I greatly enjoyed Ballerina, it feels like another sign that the John Wick universe is the safest place to go for good action. However, where Ballerina suffered is just how ridiculous it decided to get at times. I felt this film tried to be creative wherever possible, but it so frequently undercut this with a sequence that felt almost cartoonish. The grenade sequence and the flamethrower sequence in particular got a bit overbearing. Ballerina also tried a bit too hard to come off as a dramatic character piece at times, delivering Eve some plot twists around her past that were uninspired. This movie didn't need to make Eve's story overly complex, her revenge angle served the narrative enough. I also enjoyed seeing John Wick in this, but he was used a lot more than was really required. John Wick diving into the action at the end of the film as Eve's fight sequences were tapering out stole the thunder of her ending a bit. The focus was shifted from Eve right when it should have stayed squarely on her.

Catalina Sandino Moreno, who played Lena, just feels like an error within the story; the commitment to the secret sister arc is an emotional push that winds up having no weight behind it. Sharon Duncan-Brewster, who played Nogi, really gets saddled with the exposition dumps for this feature; I also found her being delegated the constant pep talks quite frustrating. David Castañeda and Victoria Comte, who played Javier and Young Eve respectively, weren't the most interesting aspects of Ballerina's opening; I particularly found Comte a difficult young performer to engage with as the child version of the leading role. 

This is just further proof that the world of John Wick continues to dominate the action film scene. I would give Ballerina a 7.5/10.

Mountainhead

 

This review may contain spoilers!

Mountainhead is almost a one-room drama of sorts involving four billionaires as they vent about their business woes, the disruptive consequences of their own A.I., and the idea of taking over world nations and crafting the perfect murder.

This movie is an interesting take on satirising modern billionaires and the power they wield. While I felt a lot of this movie lacked a decent narrative throughline, the presentation of the message was clear and decent enough. These characters are all very callous, none of them come near to being grounded and one even acts like 'other people' don't really exist. These characters release products into the world that have a global negative impact, and don't assess how to fix it but instead attempt to find humour in the situation. Everything is about reputation and how to get an edge over others to enhance their financial profiles. One character takes a sociopathic bend because he becomes convinced he needs to kill one of the others so that his consciousness can be uploaded digitally when the science progresses there. This seemingly convoluted fear of mortality turns into a crazy plot where three of the characters attempt the most ineffectual murder in history. This film does a lot of this, the characters talking about doing these big serious sweeping things and not really advancing towards an actual outcome. A light barb that billionaires are morally bankrupt and also only looking to make effectual change for themselves.

Jesse Armstrong has a pretty crisp visual style, with the camera keeping things active and interesting in spite of the singular location. I loved how dynamic the lighting was and how the camera sought every possible interesting angle of interaction. The score by Nicholas Britell is quite a delicate, almost trance-like sound that is virtually crystalline and perfect in sharp contrast to the characters at the core of this story.

Steve Carell, who played Randall, is a more sociopathic and emotionally devoid role; Carell's character is probably the most cutthroat in his willingness to betray others to preserve himself. Cory Michael Smith, who played Venis, looks to be having incredible fun playing the clear Elon Musk parody; this is a character who runs through some very extreme turns of emotion that happen at very surprising points in the script. Ramy Youssef, who played Jeff, is very intriguing as the more morally conscious member of the group; Youssef's character incites the most conflict which makes him fun to watch.

However, the best performance came from Jason Schwartzman, who played Souper. This is a character who is a simpering hanger-on to the big billionaires at the table. Schwartzman's role isn't a billionaire, the only one at Mountainhead with a net worth only in the millions. He walks around desperate for the approval of the other three, wanting to be seen as something close to an equal. The initial grovelling is embarrassing in the face of unabashed confidence or indifference, yet Schwartzman doubles down further and further. When he gets so desperate that he becomes the active pawn in a murder plot, we see how wretched and shallow this character truly is in the face of his ambition. He barely contains his glee at rolling over a rival to be held in better esteem by the end of the film. None of these characters is likeable, but Schwartzman's role certainly has the most interesting dimensions to it.

I really struggled to find the plot in Mountainhead. The story is really these four band together, talk some ideas but act impotently about them and then turn on one another for the sake of greed. It's a pretty shallow satire at best, depicting familiar celebrity billionaires via dramatic parody but without anything deep to say beyond what one might expect criticism of billionaires to look like on a surface level. The fact the comedic murder attempt story is as close as this film gets to a linear narrative is underwhelming. It's clearly a movie that thinks it has more to say than it really does, but the points aren't really these big intellectual discussion topics. This is a film that feels more like a corridor debate between university students than something helmed by an Emmy-winning creator.

The editing for Mountainhead is slow, no doubt owing to the limited ability to cut within a singular location. Unfortunately, it still contributes to a more sluggish presentation of the story.

More of a college philosophy bro's character assassination of a pack of billionaires than a groundbreaking satire. I would give Mountainhead a 6/10.