Urchin

 

This review may contain spoilers!

Urchin follows Mike, a young homeless man living in London and his journey towards rehabilitation after he assaults a person on the street for their watch.

As a character piece, this film is absolutely stunning. Mike is the sort of down-on-his-luck protagonist you want to root for; redemption dangles before him a few times. But then you are reminded that Mike is capable of cruelty, that he can lack empathy for his violent outbursts. He also returns to bad habits as a result of his addiction; his life is a spiral of self-destruction. Urchin holds a harsh mirror up to living on the streets, fighting to get just enough money to eat that day. Even the system in place to rehabilitate Mike seems detached. He is another body in the chair, needing therapy, needing medicine, needing accommodation. It's entirely tough watching him start to heal and grow, but then something bureaucratic fails him, and he takes a misstep. One of the things that makes Mike feel secure in his rehabilitation program is missed and suddenly he is in free-fall again. There is a point in this film in which Mike starts taking drugs again, and it is scary how aggressively he pursues that addiction now that it's in front of him again.

There is a real artistic lens across some scenes in Urchin. Those moments of Mike in solitude have such deliberate framing around them; this is a very grounded lens that takes in the world around Mike, too. I was also impressed with the pace set by the editing; it felt very steady. The score doesn't always feel the most present, but it is a choking element that really adds to that anxiety of teetering upon the precipice. 

Harris Dickinson, who played Nathan, was a very skittish role; Dickinson's homeless character spun quick lies that rang hollow the moment he said them. Michael Colgan, who played Scott, felt like a calm guiding presence; the scene in which he makes Mike feel patronised is very well-handled. Buckso Dhillon-Woolley, who played Nadia, is quite a stern and dismissive presence at times; it feels like she sees through Mike's niceties, which is refreshing. Okezie Morro, who played Simon, is a sincerely good-natured character; Morro's recounting of the crime in his last scene is one of the more harrowing moments. Amr Waked, who played Franco, is a straight shooter from the get-go; Waked is wary but wants to imagine the best is possible from the people on his staff.

However, the best performance came from Frank Dillane, who played Mike. I remember watching Dillane as Nathan in Fear the Walking Dead, another young addict role he portrayed in an exemplary manner. This role demands those moments of intensity from Dillane, a rabid quality to sustain the addiction. He can get violent to get money for the drugs. He can plead and barter, and he can break down. Mike is a character who wanders in a very isolated way through the streets of London, seeking all the things or people he needs to keep his pattern of being going. There are moments within the film in which Mike heals as a character. You see him accept responsibility, he apologises for his wrongs, shows empathy and connects with others. It is these moments of hope Dillane dangles in front of the audience nicely before ending it abruptly with a self-destructive implosion.

A tragic drama like Urchin likes to dwell comfortably in the misery of life sometimes, its entire thing is doing hardship well. But this does mean that Mike's story can get repetitive at times. More than this, there's a real performative quality to the commentary on homelessness at times. I didn't think the metaphorical elements of the film landed especially well. The nature scenes were strange, and the ending is a bizarre means of tying up loose ends.

I think this film often shows a lot more promise than it does flaws. However, as Harris Dickinson's directorial debut, it could stand to learn one particular lesson: it's okay to leave some stuff on the cutting room floor. The moments when the camerawork looked bad were when every shot felt included, when a montage happened where one wasn't needed. Not every creative effort was needed to bring forth that vision, sometimes post-production is a good place to kill your darlings. The soundtrack was an odd assortment that felt more like what the budget could get than anything else.

Megan Northam, who played Andrea, had quite a scattered role that barely connected with Dillane; the pair felt quite suddenly jammed together in the course of the film. Karyna Khymchuk and Shonagh Marie, who played Ramona and Chanelle respectively, are an unusual pair to be Mike's first sober friends; the friendship dynamic feels quite surface-level, with neither actress really elevating the relationships forming between everyone. 

Frank Dillane is exemplary here, with Harris Dickinson's directing debut showing a lot of promise. I would give Urchin a 6.5/10.

Wuthering Heights

 

This review may contain spoilers!

This is an adaptation of Emily Brontë's classic novel of the same name, in which Catherine Earnshaw's family adopt a poor boy, Heathcliff, and the pair become inseparably close. Yet, their love is a destructive one that pulls them apart before sending them crashing back together.

I think in its frenzied moments of passion, there are points where you can get submerged in the wild attraction between Cathy and Heathcliff. I also found their early friendship as children to be entirely endearing, if also still quite toxic.

The winning element of this feature is how absolutely visually stunning it looks. Emerald Fennell has crafted a colour palette that feels fantastical. This movie captures red like it is a jewel to behold. This movie is more about style than script, and watching the lavish visuals contrast so sharply with the vast natural landscapes or the dark vision of Wuthering Heights estate is the one shining triumph of all this.

Charlotte Mellington, who played Young Cathy, is an absolute moment of time travel between her and Robbie; Mellington genuinely feels besotted with Heathcliff while also playing to her sense of ego. Vy Nguyen, who played Young Nelly, was one of the strongest performers in the film's opening; her sense of hurt feelings and hard exterior are better captured than her older counterpart, Chau.

However, the best performance came from Margot Robbie, who played Cathy. Cathy is a remarkably vain character, extremely self-obsessed and expecting the world to revolve around her. Robbie likes to toy with others a bit, especially early in the film when she played across from Elordi. This is a character who is used to getting her way, whose arrogance and ego take up the whole screen. Her self-serving impulses contrast with her all-consuming love for Heathcliff, which is something Robbie understands and plays to very well, especially in the crossroads scene of the film in which she accidentally makes the wrong choice. There is a wickedness from here that only grows as passion and spite consume our protagonists. I found Robbie to be vile at times, and fated to destroy herself in others. This was one performer who really understood what her role was and what she was playing to.

Wuthering Heights is everything bad in Emerald Fennell's more illustrious works brought to bear. Where other works have been made to unnerve you with purpose, this is an adaptation that is here to be freaky and perturb the audience first. The intention of the film is to show the moments of passionate sexual desire and then the moments of grotesque disgust. Before long, it will become hard to distinguish the two, and in time, there is little left to see. This is a Wuthering Heights that wants to be carnal; it wants to root around in the mud, and it doesn't much care if you enjoy what you are watching. The opening of the film evokes imagery of sex before cutting to our first true flame and revealing a hanging. But it won't end there. Violent outbursts, gutted pigs, festering refuse, kinky acts, walls made to look like skin, septicemia, women acting like dogs... You get the idea. This is a film made to be shocking, but it fails to thrill. Someone I went to see this with me turned to me and asked if I had taken them to see a horror. I suppose I had. This is a film that doesn't want to achieve anything. The story itself is painfully vulgar, with two people who desire one another destroying themselves and everyone around them. It is the worst possible way this classic work could have been imagined.

This film is chopped up like a music video; there are entire jumps in the scene that don't work, and montages are overly stylised. I absolutely could not stand the music provided to this by Charli XCX; it yanked me right out of any scene every time something lyrical struck up. The idea that a trendy pop artist could pair neatly with a period tragedy is madness.

Jacob Elordi, who played Heathcliff, seems to be a casting choice more grounded in aesthetics; Elordi struggles with subtlety and seems downright evil at times. Hong Chau, who played Nelly, feels a bit too old for her role at the best of times; Chau's overbearing matronly manner was a weight on the feature. Shazad Latif, who played Edgar, is just a bit too dull to make himself known; Latif's entire character falls into the background time and again. Alison Oliver, who played Isabella, is just an absurd performance that seems doomed to fail; Oliver's doing that dog scene is absolutely ridiculous. Martin Clunes, who played Mr Earnshaw, doesn't seem remotely grounded in reality; his imp-like look near the end really jumped the shark. Owen Cooper, who played Young Heathcliff, is a bit too plain for the character; Cooper comes across as rather wooden, evoking just a bit too much of Elordi.

I can't imagine a more grotesque and horrific take on Emily Brontë's famous novel. I would give Wuthering Heights a 2.5/10. 

Crime 101

 

This review may contain spoilers!

Crime 101 is a crime thriller adapted from a Don Winslow novella of the same name. The film follows Davis, a skilled thief who has been conducting a string of robberies just off the 101 motorway. As he gears up for his biggest score yet, the police officer and rival thief hounding him are drawing closer.

I have always had a soft spot for heist films, and I wondered if I would feel the same way while watching this one. But though there are heists in this film, this is more of a 'cat and mouse' story. The whole thing pivoting around Davis running his cons and staying ahead of those after him by a hair is one of the most satisfying elements of the film. Lou, the detective after Davis, is having his entire life blow up while hounding this criminal, but this laser focus also becomes a noose slowly slipping around Davis' neck. I also liked the chaotic energy that came from Money sending Ormon, a young legacy thief, after Davis. These parties circling one another created some tense moments and left you wondering how that final job against Monroe was going to play out. In a lot of ways, Crime 101 is a film that pays tribute to old films of the honourable outlaw versus the honourable officer of the law.

If Crime 101 has a strength, it is just how impressive the cinematography looks. This is a very dynamic-looking film, with an intense neo-noir style. Every character is scrutinised with intensive close-ups, LA is captured like a timeless Metropolis, and car chases inject high octane adrenaline into the lens.

Halle Berry, who played Sharon, is quite a calculating numbers savant here; Berry's character is more grounded than others and building towards an explosive decision is a great piece of softer acting from Berry. Tate Donovan, who played Monroe, is that type of arrogant, rich mogul you decidedly hate; the way Donovan played to the ego of this character, even when he had a gun to his head, is great. Barry Keoghan, who played Ormon, is a captivating, unhinged antagonist; he has a frenzied need to prove himself by all means necessary. Matthew Del Negro, who played Police Captain Stewart, is a real bureaucratic point of corruption; Del Negro has a toxic energy to this character that makes him a good adversary for Ruffalo.

However, the best performance came from Mark Ruffalo, who played Lou. Lou seems a very disgruntled type of police detective protagonist. He is living in a cramped apartment with his wife, their marriage falls apart throughout the film, and his car is a piece of shit. Ruffalo still has a real water off a duck's back outlook around all this; he has a grouchy edge but remains laser-focused on his casework. Lou is like a dog with a bone around the Davis case; his police department is slowly isolating him, and yet he won't let the 101 robber go. The moment his job and his marriage implode, we get a new take on Lou. Ruffalo brings a stillness, a calmness to the character. He brings what he has always chased to a head in a very measured way, holding the fate of all that has transpired in the palm of his hand. Lou's euphoria by the end of the film seems rather earned; he is the honourable officer of the law.

Crime 101 is a rather desolate film, so sprawling and vast with a lot of emptiness there. And if I were just talking about the setting, this would be a perfect modern film noir story. But that's not Crime 101. From the moment multiple leading roles are introduced, it becomes clear that Crime 101 is a branching story with many perspectives guiding the story. The issue with this is that a slow-paced film passing the ball like that really has to have an incredible sense of structure. This film doesn't have that; if anything, this is a film that would have been better served as a limited series. There is a lot of empty space between narrative-forward scenes, which hurt the pacing tremendously. It is also clear that while the robberies are interesting, Davis is not. As a protagonist, Davis's 'Robin Hood' schtick is poorly explored, as is his relationship and background with Money, his ally in the criminal world. Davis jitters and shows signs of neurodiversity, but the creatives clearly don't know what they're doing here beyond vaguely saying Davis isn't your typical criminal. There's even a strange romance sub-plot for Davis that feels a little too fairytale and easy-going to work. The truth of Crime 101 is that it has a decent cast, but the writing rarely cracks open these characters and lets me see who they are as an audience member.

The editing can be disjointed at times and create an inconsistent flow, resulting in a pace that stretches out or even becomes a bit scattered to watch. There are moments of interest in the score, but the majority of this is just a long, warbling drone. The soundtrack is also a mismatch of tracks that don't really bring a lot of character to the piece, ranging from Run the Jewels to Bryan Adams.

Chris Hemsworth, who played Davis, really gives one of his worst leading performances in a long time; I had no idea whether he was playing autism or OCD, and it is his worst American accent in some time. Corey Hawkins, who played Tillman, is quite a bland police partner character across from Ruffalo; Hawkins becomes almost forgettable the second the film phases his role out. Nick Nolte, who played Money, is such a prolific actor who is struggling to still perform well; I say this because Nolte's line delivery as Money is almost indecipherable. Monica Barbaro, who played Maya, is a bit of a dull fantasy girlfriend role; Barbaro is really just here to dangle a happy ending outcome in front of Hemsworth's role.

Incredibly scattered crime film with a weak lead in Chris Hemsworth. I would give Crime 101 a 5.5/10.

We Bury The Dead

 

This review may contain spoilers!

We Bury The Dead is a zombie thriller in which an American pulse weapon accidentally kills the entire population of Tasmania during a test. Those killed have been rendered deceased by the electronic pulse, though some are 'returning to life'. Ava travels to Tasmania and volunteers to join the Body Retrieval unit, in the hope of being reunited with her husband.

In a world where the zombie genre has had a good stab taken at it a few times, it is such a delight to see how creativity can still bloom in the genre. At the top of the year, I remember thinking how off the wall it was watching Ralph Fiennes dance with a zombie alpha in 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple. This film has its own creative stake in the genre, presenting a world in which a mere few zombies roam. Each encounter feels more personal; this isn't about getting away from the undead hordes. Some of the zombies here thrash and gnash with rage at being unable to fulfil their unfinished business. But in the same feature, we see a dead man bury his family and experience grief, and a dead woman gives birth to her living baby and sees it safely into the hands of others. It is strangely unconventional in how raw and rugged it is, people become weight to be moved by workers who are hoping like hell to find a shred of life. I think the frantic nature of Ava's odyssey across Tasmania proves that more than anything else. I also think this film held a really solid antagonist in the form of Riley. This was a man who had his whole world ripped away from him and tried to keep it alive in a grotesque, malformed manner.

I think the style of We Bury The Dead really knows how to capture stark, graphic horror. And I don't mean graphic like gore, but the visual scale of the desolation. There are the cruel frames of death caught like a photo snapshot, coupled with the raging landscape of a destroyed Hobart. That blood-red skyline had me entirely captivated. I loved the score for this film, it has a hard, driven edge to the whole thing as our lead hurtles her way to her final destination. The soundtrack was a real tight collection of tracks, but nothing bests that moment when we're cutting out and Metric's 'Help I'm Alive' kicks in.

Daisy Ridley, who played Ava, feels like a very grounded and determined protagonist; watching Ridley be allowed to grieve and rage in the final act of the film is where she shines brightest. Brenton Thwaites, who played Clay, is a real rough-around-the-edges tradie who has jumped free from his life to gather the dead; Thwaites is pretty uncouth here, yet still manages to be entirely charming. Kym Jackson, who played Lieutenant Wilkie, is a genuine authority figure here; Jackson's role expresses some genuine hatred of Americans for what they had reaped on Tasmania in this, which was absolutely powerful.

However, the best performance came from Mark Coles Smith, who played Riley. This is a very stoic, military role at first impression; quite a tense hero type who saves our leading character right in the nick of time. But Smith has a deeper dimension going on here; he leans into a role that is sweating buckets and clearly not showing all the angles. Riley wants Ava for a very specific purpose; he has a hole in his life where his wife, soon-to-be-born child and family used to be. Smith is this fragile yet dangerous figure who holds Ava in captivity briefly, forcing her to play a part she wants no part of. Smith becomes imposing, trying to place Ava where his wife stood. In truth, he is unhinged and broken by the horrors that have been inflicted upon him; he is one of the greatest dangers Ava has to face in this movie. It's an impressive turn from Mark Coles Smith, who really elevates this whole feature.

When I watch a film, I often love falling into a character's story, learning about the people I'm watching and coming to relate with them. We Bury The Dead really struggles with conveying this part of the film. It tries to intersperse the feature with vague flashbacks to make a rough patchwork of Ava and Mitch's relationship. But this doesn't reinforce much beyond telling us two actors don't have a heck of a lot of romantic chemistry with one another. Ava is really bad at expressing herself; she states her core mission, but we don't chip much past that inciting incident layer. Yet pretty much every character we meet struggles to talk; no one knows how to frame their feelings and pull a scene into an interesting narrative direction. The themes around things left unsaid, or grieving a relationship that has already moved on, are obvious because the movie eventually gives up on itself and just has the characters overtly spell it all out in the last fifteen minutes. I found the first third of this movie to be a tougher slog; it was riddled with quite average Australian background actors that made this whole thing feel like a parody of itself at first.

The editing throughout the film seems relatively lethargic, which might be deliberate with this being a slower indie film, but it makes the pacing difficult at times. This is a movie about a journey, but the journey often feels a lot longer than it really is.

Matt Whelan, who played Mitch, felt like a complete empty slate; Whelan couldn't conjure anything resembling meaningful chemistry with his on-screen wife, Ridley.

I am just loving how creative the resurgence of the zombie genre is feeling. I would give We Bury The Dead a 6.5/10.

Iron Lung

 

This review may contain spoilers!

Iron Lung is an adaptation of David Szymanski's video game of the same name. A cosmic horror set in a futuristic dying universe, this film follows Simon, a convict set inside a sealed submersible and forced to scour the depths of a moon with an ocean made of blood.

Iron Lung is the sort of horror film that knows how to draw you in. We are just as trapped as Simon in this iron box, confined and desperate for answers. This film works hard to impose a growing sense of dread. It starts slow, a creak in the hull, an eerie picture on the camera feed or a droplet of blood from above. But the film gears us up towards danger, makes us wonder what else lies within the depths, knowing that we can only ponder. The deeper Simon goes, the more we are confronted with hallucinations, invasive voices and visions of eldritch bloody beings. Escape becomes less certain, and hope is like a guttering flame. Watching Simon wrestle with his own crisis of conscience, while his very environment preys upon him, is a powerful yet demented setting. The sense of mystery that is cultivated around the 'creature' that preys upon Simon, living in the blood, is well handled. In fact, this monstrous, oppressive entity is a great horror antagonist.

It is rare to see a film where one setting is what we are limited to. The why behind this seems clear: how do you keep such a film interesting when it comes to style? The visual style never seems to be a hurdle for Mark Fischbach however, he takes what amounts to little more than a tube and turns it into a cloying, claustrophobic experience. The intensity of the close-ups and the deliberate placement of the camera certainly helped that sense of mounting dread I described earlier.

Troy Baker, who played David, is a nice break in tone from a character perspective; Baker employs a bit of gruff macho camaraderie to try to influence Simon, which is amusing. Elsie Lovelock, who voiced SM-8 Research Lead and The Speaker, is a powerful force for the sense of inescapable horror in this film; Lovelock's voice work will cut you to the bone and has this drowning sensation to it that is extremely effective.

However, the best performance came from Caroline Kaplan, who played Ava. This is a role with quite a perceived level of power over Simon across the film; she is the jailor, and he is the prisoner. She is a tough, militaristic presence who commands and attempts to control Simon. She has a bend towards duty and shows little compassion for Simon at first. If anything, there is real venom between the two, but chiefly from Kaplan's side. As the film goes on, we start to see Ava as a figure with the capacity to change. Kaplan allows her to connect with Simon and show hope. We get a sense that she wants out of this wretched existence as much as he does and is willing to risk her station to get salvation. Though in a more minor role, Kaplan feels like a character with both feet firmly planted in the Iron Lung universe.

Iron Lung is an interesting piece of horror; it does the fear element well, but it really struggles to pull you into the world it occupies. I found the moments in which the film touches upon the Quiet Rapture, the Eden faction or even Simon's terrorist background to be entirely debilitating to the story. The world feels quite convoluted; it wants to be perceived as a difficult puzzle, but that doesn't make this especially palatable for the audience. It doesn't hold a sense of mystery like the horrors below the ocean of blood; it just feels like a clunky bit of sci-fi cobbled together to adorn the greater end result. Even the mission around sending down prisoners holds little sense of purpose; we get the sense it has something to do with saving the universe or gathering food, but it gets a bit aimless. There is also a long portion within the middle that feels like a montage of travel. It creates a needless hitch in the pacing that could have otherwise been smoothed out.

The editing across this whole thing takes a blender to what is quite a decent piece of cinematography, janky and disruptive cutting make Iron Lung difficult to follow when things get frantic. I also think the sound mixing here shows how indie this feature is; the way sounds trample over one another can entirely ruin a scene. The score for the film wasn't especially memorable, a hollow droning that doesn't heighten the sense of fear much at all.

Mark Fischbach, who played Simon, just seems a bit too polished to work as the bedraggled lead prisoner of the film; Fischbach has designed something brilliant here, but his more limited range gets in the way of what could have been a great leading character.

A perfectly commendable horror film that is absolutely changing the game for indie cinema. I would give Iron Lung a 6/10.