I first saw Late Night with the Devil at London Film Festival last autumn, and it has been embedded in my brain ever since, like an itchy splinter. I thought: This is an astonishing movie: uniquely fresh and original while also deeply lodged in the history of cinematic horror, with a powerful breakout lead performance from long-time “oh, it’s that guy” David Dastmalchian, who has been, onscreen, the most delightful weirdo — perhaps most notably as “Polka-Dot Man” in 2021’s The Suicide Squad; he also has small roles in that year’s Dune and the recent Oppenheimer — and here exudes true movie-star quality.
I wish I had reviewed this five months ago, but I’ve been dealing with my own mental-health issues that aren’t a million miles away the crisis of confidence that Dastmalchian’s troubled protagonist is coping with here. I couldn’t manage it, so I was happy that the film had scored a theatrical release on both sides of the Atlantic, which meant another opportunity to review it. But it’s all been a bit soured by the recent news that the filmmakers — the writing-directing team of Australian brothers Cameron and Colin Cairnes — utilized “AI” “art” in their production design.
I suspect that the general public doesn’t yet understand how programs erroneously dubbed “AI” are being deployed and the capacity this has to inflict enormous damage in both visual and written creative arts. In brief, computer algorithms that are nowhere near artificially intelligent have been trained on the enormous quantities of written text and visual art (drawings, paintings, photos, etc) available online to spit out what are essentially remixes of that preexisting material. These “AI”s do this in response to human-generated “prompts,” such as, for instance, “image of a walkable city with lots of greenery and beautiful buildings” or “write a literary essay exploring the themes in George Orwell’s novels.” But resulting text meant to sound natural is often stilted and rife with factual errors and references, such as to supposed scientific papers or legal decisions, that are outright inventions. Visual results meant to look realistic are often full of bizarre nonsense, like human figures with too many limbs or fingers, or impossible angles or lighting.
If you’re Extremely Online, as I am, you’ve already come across numerous examples of human writers, voiceover performers, and visual artists complaining about losing paying jobs to “AI,” including so-called deepfake video technology. (One of the issues behind last year’s Screen Actors Guild and Writers Guide strikes was studio use of these “AI” algorithms to replace their members’ work.) Even though there is no authentic creative effort or considered thought behind the output of these programs — they are incapable of conceiving anything new — they are already substituting, if poorly, for human innovation and inventiveness.
This is where Late Night with the Devil utilizes “AI”-generated visuals:
Advertisement
The movie is mostly set over the course of a single episode, which we’re told went out live on Halloween night 1977, of a (fictional) American late-night talk show called Night Owls, which aired on the (fictional) network UBC. The seasonally appropriate show logo (in this still from the trailer; it appears regularly in the film) was created not by a human artist but by “AI”: the wonky windows on the skyline building are a dead giveaway.
Here’s another of the show’s interstitials, a title card welcoming viewers back from commercials:
Here the missing fingers on the skeleton clue us in to the fact that the image has been generated by “AI.”
Now, you might be thinking, “What’s the big deal? It’s just a couple of images in the background.” There are many reasons why this is a big deal, perhaps not least: 1) the actual creative work of actual human beings was stolen without permission or recompense and repurposed by a computer program to concoct these images, and 2) actual creative artists were therefore not paid to work on this film in this capacity. It’s bad enough when money-grubbing, artist-denigrating megacorporate Hollywood studios do this — it’s not forgivable, of course, but it’s certainly well within their vampire-capitalist wheelhouse — but it’s far worse when a scrappy little indie production like this one does it. If the fire of human weirdness and invention is not appreciated by a pair of maverick brother filmmakers like the Cairneses, working so far outside of Hollywood that they’re literally on the opposite side of the planet — Late Night was shot in Melbourne — then what hope is there for anyone who just wants to be an arty freakazoid eking out a little living with their ingenious eccentricity?
Advertisement
I don’t know the Cairneses’ previous work, but I don’t understand how you can have the kind of deliciously disturbed imagination that rustles up the bonkersly off-kilter Late Night with the Devil and not understand that legitimizing the theft of bona-fide human imagination is so uncool. (Here’s a good Twitter thread on why this is a big deal and why it’s important to send filmmakers and studios the message that this is Not Okay.)
The long dark late-night monologue of the soul…
Dedicated movie fans are engaging in personal boycotts of this movie over the “AI” issue, they feel that deeply that this is a huge problem, and I am very much on their side. I debated with myself whether I should even give the movie what small exposure a review from me would bring it. I decided it was worth it in order to highlight this issue for the vast majority of movie lovers who are not Extremely Online. Because letting mindless computer algorithms built on the hijacked work of creative human beings is going to be very very very bad for anyone who cares about the work of creative human beings, such as movies. We are at the narrowest edge of a horrible wedge, and the time to push back is now.
Here’s the incredibly ironic thing about Late Night with the Devil: it is, at its heart, a story about a creative man who is, as I mentioned earlier, suffering a crisis of creative confidence and also, most likely, creative burnout. Dastmalchian’s late-night TV host Jack Delroy, a former Chicago radio personality, just cannot seem to make enough of a dent in the popularity of his competition: ur–late night TV host Johnny Carson and his The Tonight Show. We learn this in the mockumentary opening of the film, which sets the stage for the 1977 Halloween broadcast: Delroy is a man who has been on a roller coaster of personal tragedy and professional success and intrigue all around: he’s a member of an arcane secret society — of, natch, white men — known to make or break careers. Delroy’s career isn’t quite broken, but it’s not as solid as it could be. Maybe there’s a way he can bolster himself and his show? Via, like, some arcane stuff? *gulp*
If nothing else, the 1970s palette is pretty terrifying.
Oh, so, why burnout? In 1977, The Tonight Show ran for 261 episodes, one for basically every weeknight of the year. It’s a grueling schedule. Night Owls would have had a similar run. (Watching this movie at London Film Festival was a surreal experience for me, as a transatlantic type, for more reasons than the uncanny stuff happening onscreen, because there is no British equivalent of the American late-night-talk-show ecology; perhaps the closest thing in the 2020s is the solitary example of The Graham Norton Show, which airs only once a week, not nightly, and then only typically for half the year.) Late-night is a meatgrinder of American television. Like, no wonder someone might turn to the supernatural for an assist.
Wait, what?
The faux-documentary-style narrator informs us that we are about to be treated to the “recently discovered master tape of what went to air that night, as well as previously unseen behind-the-scenes footage.” It was, we are told, “the live-TV event that shocked the nation.”
Up next: an exorcism. But first a word from our sponsors…
What we witness in its ersatz-70s glory is late-night American TV at its cheesy apex. Guests for Delroy and his goofy punching-bag sidekick Gus (Rhys Auteri) include Uri Geller–esque psychic performer Christou (Fayssal Bazzi: Peter Rabbit), who does hilariously terrible (from our 2020s perspective) cold-readings on the studio audience; paranormal skeptic Carmichael Haig (Ian Bliss: The Matrix Revolutions), clearly modeled on James Randi, who throws cold water over Christou; and parapsychologist June Ross-Mitchell (Laura Gordon: Foe),who’s just written a book about her work with a teen Lilly D’Abo (Ingrid Torelli), a waif rescued from a “satanic cult” and allegedly in the grips of a “psychic infestation” — Ross-Mitchell prefers that term over “demonic possession.” It’s all so very late-70s: this was the era of Amityville Horror paranormal investigators Ed and Lorraine Warren, of The Omen and The Exorcist. This was the cultural stew from which the so-called satanic-panic bullshit of the 1980s would spring.
Now, the mockumentary conceit falls down in the behind-the-scenes stuff, which purports to show what is happening backstage at the Night Owls studio while the live feed goes to commercial break. But we never understand who is shooting this material, or why… and it certainly never makes sense that these people would be having the conversations that they’re having if there was a camera there recording them. I don’t mind that much, because a breakdown of the documentary style is necessary for the ambiguous ending to work… which it does.
Advertisement
Maybe I shouldn’t have signed that contract in blood?
I found it all a perfectly pitched nightmare of overegged ambition and an anything-for-success drive, and a sly twisting of the cosy familiarity of late-night TV, meant to soothe its viewers at home into sleep and not do, er, what this episode of Night Owls does. The entire cast is terrific, but this is Dastmalchian’s showcase, and he is marvelous: he nails the quirky but easy charisma late-night demands.
But the triumph of Late Night with the Devil is absolutely marred by the Cairneses own little deal with the AI devil. “It wasn’t supposed to turn out this way,” Jack moans as his Halloween episode goes to credits. It’s a shame that the same could be said about this film.
more films like this: • The Last Exorcism [Prime US | Prime UK | Apple TV] • What We Do in the Shadows [Prime US | Prime UK | Apple TV | BBC iPlayer UK | Shudder UK]
1 of 5 | Jason Statham is “A Working Man,” in theaters Friday. Photo courtesy of Amazon Content Services LLC
LOS ANGELES, March 25 (UPI) —A Working Man, in theaters Friday, never quite reaches the magnificent heights of last year’s Jason Statham vehicle, The Beekeeper. Nevertheless, it delivers a satisfying action movie with Statham as a new hero.
Statham portrays Levon, a former Royal Marine now working for Joe (Michael Peña) and Carla Garcia’s (Noemi Gonzalez) Chicago construction company. When the Garcias’ daughter, Jenny (Arianna Rivas) is kidnapped, the desperate parents hire Levon to find her.
Adapted from Chuck Dixon’s novel Levon’s Trade by Sylvester Stallone and director David Ayer, the story has familiar but reliable tropes. Levon’s set of skills are as particular as those of Liam Neeson’s character in Taken, enabling him to succeed where basic law enforcement fails, and no matter how many enemies attack him.
The Beekeeper elevated the genre with its cryptic explanations of covert agents and the flamboyant villains Statham’s Beekeeper faced. The baddies ranged from cyber scammers to outrageously high levels of authority, which made it even more fun.
Advertisement
The kidnappers in A Working Man are basic human traffickers funded by the Russian mob. They do their best to add flourishes in costume and demeanor, but no generic Russian villain is as memorable as the rogue Beekeepers who came after one of their own.
Human trafficking is also a much more real and unsettling crime. While cyber scams are real and devastating, The Beekeeper took it to a wonderfully absurd degree.
Still, it is undeniably satisfying to watch Levon shoot rapists and send them flying to the back wall of the room. He employs extraordinary interrogation on equally deserving targets, especially when he scolds them for unrelated but equally unsavory offenses.
There are fewer fights in A Working Man. Levon rescues one of his crew from gangsters as an appetizer, but the plot does not lead to as many scuffles. It still has a big finale with Levon taking on the mob and a biker gang at once.
The supporting characters exhibit maybe 1% more color than their plot functions require. Levon is fighting his late wife’s father (Richard Heap) for custody of his daughter (Isla Gie), so it’s nice to see Levon prove his worth to his father-in-law later in the film.
Advertisement
Jenny misses a piano recital when she’s kidnapped, so when she finds a piano in captivity and plays, it has earned that poignancy. In addition, Levon’s war buddy Gunny (David Harbour) is so lovable as a blind marksman that it is a shame he only babysits, rather than joining in the action.
Even though he’s a working man, the film does get Levon in a suit for one scene. Levon cleans up as well as Statham in The Transporter.
It is clear A Working Man was made by people who know what fans come to see in a Statham movie. Both Ayer and Stallone are frequent collaborators.
Perhaps the source material kept Working Man more grounded, or maybe adding the Statham elements made it far more outrageous than Dixon’s version. Though it’s not the best, it is the Statham movie that’s in theaters right now, and that’s not a bad thing.
Fred Topel, who attended film school at Ithaca College, is a UPI entertainment writer based in Los Angeles. He has been a professional film critic since 1999, a Rotten Tomatoes critic since 2001, and a member of the Television Critics Association since 2012 and the Critics Choice Association since 2023. Read more of his work in Entertainment.
Nick Cheung Ka-fai is one of the most prominent active Hong Kong actors to have dabbled in directing, and in doing so has proved himself a talented visual stylist and world builder with a penchant for the dark and supernatural.
But the main reason Cheung is not known as a visionary filmmaker is that, despite all his stylish visuals, he is a clumsy storyteller who could not fashion a convincing narrative to save his life.
In his four directing efforts to date – which include Hungry Ghost Ritual (2014), Keeper of Darkness (2015) and The Trough (2018) – he has repeatedly come up with colourful characters in memorably bizarre settings, only to squander them with subpar writing that often involves family tragedies reenacted in a cheesy way.
The nominal lead in his latest effort, Peg O’ My Heart, is Dr Man (Terrance Lau Chun-him), an unorthodox psychiatrist at a public hospital who has time and again broken protocol and taken patients’ cases into his own hands, interfering in their private lives to get results.
Man’s interactions with his doting assistant, senior nurse Donna (Rebecca Zhu Chenli), and his frustrated but protective superior – the hospital director played by Geoffrey Wong Chi-hung – make for amusing viewing that would not be out of place in a quirky sitcom.
There are two things that can make any movie better: Steve Coogan and penguins.
Fortunately, and not surprisingly considering its title, The Penguin Lessons features both. Well, at least one penguin, who goes by the name Juan Salvador. But he’s more than enough. He’s Coogan’s best onscreen partner since Rob Brydon in the Trip movies.
The Penguin Lessons
The Bottom Line
You’ll take it to heart.
Advertisement
Release date: Friday, March 28 Cast: Steve Coogan, Vivian El Jaber, Bjorn Gustafsson, Alfonsina Carrocio, David Herrero, Jonathan Pryce Director: Peter Cattaneo Screenwriter: Jeff Pope
Rated PG-13,
1 hour 50 minutes
Loosely based on a memoir by Tom Michell, the film takes place in 1976 in Buenos Aires, where teacher Tom (Coogan) arrives to teach English to teenage students at a tony private school. His timing wasn’t exactly fortuitous, as not long after he gets there the country is rocked by a military coup, with people disappearing subsequently.
Not that any of the tumult affects Tom, who soon embarks on a weekend getaway to Uruguay with his Swedish colleague (Bjorn Gustafsson, priceless), where he enjoys a flirtation with a local woman. Walking together on the beach, they encounter an oil slick and the bodies of several dead penguins. One, however, is still alive. Tom is eager to move on. “There’s nothing we can do,” he says with mock solemnity. “You can’t interfere with nature.”
Advertisement
But she implores him to help, and Tom, trying to impress her, agrees to take the penguin back to his hotel room and clean him up. Not only does this attempt at seduction not work, but Tom finds himself stuck with a penguin that won’t leave him, even after he throws him back into the ocean. In one of the film’s many implausibilities that you just have to go with, he smuggles the bird to Argentina and hides him in his on-campus apartment to avoid the watchful eyes of the school’s officious headmaster (Jonathan Pryce).
It’s not hard to guess what happens next. Tom, whose cynicism has already been well established, finds himself warming up to the adorable Magellanic penguin (I cop to knowing this from the press notes), working hard to procure fish to feed him and even bringing him to the classroom as a teaching aide. Which naturally does wonders for his bored students, who take a renewed interest in their lessons. And for Tom himself, who previously snuck off for naps during classes but now finds himself teaching with fresh vigor.
The trailer for The Penguin Lessons makes it look like a cutesy comedy, something that might have easily been called “The Dead Penguin’s Society.” The film is that, to a large degree. But it also attempts something more ambitious with a major plot element involving the disappearance of Sofia (Alfonsina Carrocio), the granddaughter of school housekeeper Maria (Vivian El Jaber), seized off the street by government figures right in front of Tom, who’s too terrified to intervene.
We eventually learn the reason for Tom’s hard-boiled indifference, involving a tragic incident from his past. With his appreciation for life newly restored by his feathered friend, he soon finds himself in the unlikely position of political activist, using Juan Salvador to strike up a conversation with one of the men who took Sofia and winding up spending a night in jail, beaten up for his troubles.
The film doesn’t fully succeed in blending its disparate tones, but under the careful direction of Peter Cattaneo (an old hand at this sort of feel-good material, thanks to such previous efforts as The Full Monty and Military Wives), it emerges as an engaging delight from start to finish. That’s partially thanks to the canny screenplay by frequent Coogan collaborator Jeff Pope (Philomena, Stan & Ollie) and partially, no make that majorly, to the superb performance by Coogan, whose expert deadpan comic timing and delivery make the film laugh-out-loud funny at times.
Advertisement
The Penguin Lessons also proves unexpectedly moving, its emotional manipulations fully forgivable. By the time it ends with home-movie footage of the real-life Juan Salvador happily swimming in the school’s pool, you’ll have fully succumbed to its charms.