Connect with us

Movie Reviews

Oscars 2023 film reviews: Our critics’ view on this year’s winners

Published

on

Oscars 2023 film reviews: Our critics’ view on this year’s winners

Every part In every single place All at As soon as, the science-fiction comedy from Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert scooped seven Oscars on the ninety fifth Academy Awards, together with these for finest image, finest director, finest actress, finest supporting actress and finest supporting actor. Our reviewer Tara Brady was actually impressed by this big-hearted household drama about acceptance and a love story between an older married couple which she gave 4 out of 5 stars to. You possibly can learn her evaluate right here.

This yr’s finest actor award went to Brendan Fraser, star of The Whale, in what Donald Clarke describes as Darren Aronofsky’s “largely dreadful translation” of Samuel D Hunter’s play a couple of bereaved English instructor consuming himself to loss of life. Sadly, Donald writes, not even somebody so heat as Fraser can win us over to probably the most jaw-droppingly daft remaining shot in current cinema. The one-star evaluate of the movie, which additionally gained finest make-up and hairstyling, is right here.

After being drugged, raped and crushed by the boys in the neighborhood, the characters in Girls Speaking (winner of finest tailored screenplay) – who’re largely illiterate and unaware of wider tradition – collect in a barn to debate whether or not they need to get of their carts and go away. A number of the perpetrators have been arrested and, bail posted, will quickly be returning to the farm. The ladies should resolve earlier than then. Cunningly drawn characters fleshed out by glorious actors (together with Jessie Buckely) hold the exchanges sharp and fascinating, with Donald awarding it 4 stars in his evaluate.

Its 4 stars for the multi-Oscar successful All Quiet on the Western Entrance, too. Erich Maria Remarque’s first World Battle novel has attracted the curiosity of surprisingly few adaptors since its publication in 1928. Edward Berger’s bone-rattling movie is, in reality, the primary function adaptation to open commercially in cinemas for near a century and it doesn’t disappoint, writes Donald of the winner of: finest worldwide function movie; finest cinematography; finest authentic rating; and finest manufacturing design.

Finest animated function went to Pinocchio with Guillermo del Toro, one in every of cinema’s nice visible stylists, placing his authentic stamp on the 140-year-old story of the mischievous animated marionette and his adopted woodcarving father, Geppetto. The stop-motion animation takes place in fascist Italy between the wars, a setting that permits for a lot contemplation of mortality, a dramatic bombing sequence that robs the carpenter of his solely (human) son, and a cameo look by Benito Mussolini. Whereas there’s a lot to like about this movie which Tara awarded three and a half stars to, she does surprise who precisely the movie is for?

Advertisement

Prime Gun: Maverick gained finest sound at this yr’s Oscars, and was hailed as “higher than the unique” when it was launched, 36 years after the unique hit the display screen. Within the fashionable launch, Let’s Dance is on the jukebox and Ed Harris is one in every of a number of senior figures tasked with relearning the artwork of performing whereas lit via Venetian blinds. Defying all of the legal guidelines of physics, biology and economics, Tom Cruise continues to be Tom Cruise and Pete Mitchell continues to be “Maverick”. In his 4 star evaluate, Donald says the movie takes your breath away in all the precise locations.

Donald was a lot much less impressed with Avatar: The Manner of Water – winner of finest visible results. Coming greater than a decade after the unique, he says Half II is little greater than a holding sample for an incoming convoy of epics. It’s extraordinarily lengthy. It presents us with disaster and tragedy. However there’s barely sufficient exhausting plot for an hour of telly. Awarding it two stars, Donald “wanted a darkish room and an ice pack on my brow after that”.

It was additionally a two star evaluate for Black Panther: Wakanda Eternally (winner of finest costume design). Letitia Wright makes the centre stage her personal in a movie that offers sensitively with Chadwick Boseman’s loss of life. However your thoughts might wander on this sluggish sequel which Donald says is “finally, a weary drag. It’s as if the James Bond franchise had gone straight from Dr No to Moonraker in a single leap (however with fewer jokes).”

Learn our options on different Oscar winners:

Advertisement

Movie Reviews

‘Homestead’ Review: It’s the End of the World as We Know It (and You Might Feel Scammed)

Published

on

‘Homestead’ Review: It’s the End of the World as We Know It (and You Might Feel Scammed)

Ben Smallbone’s “Homestead” takes place in a world where foreigners detonate a nuclear bomb off the coast of Los Angeles, the protagonists are saved because they own a Tesla, Bitcoin is the only valuable currency, and the truth can only be told on Right Wing radio. For some people that’s a selling point. For many others, it’s a list of red flags.

It’s easy to think of films like “Homestead” as if they live on the fringe of mainstream media, but though this particular film isn’t a major studio release, they’re hardly uncommon. Hit movies like “Black Hawk Down” and “300” have shamelessly vilified non-white antagonists, portraying them as fodder for heroic, mostly white hunks to mow down with impunity, sometimes in dramatic slow-motion. “Forrest Gump” is the story of a man who does everything he’s told to do, like joining the Army and embracing capitalism and participating in anti-communist propaganda, and he becomes a great American success story. Meanwhile, the love of his life suffers decades of indignity by throwing in with anti-war protesters and Black Panthers, and for all her trouble she dies of AIDS.

The point is, this is not an unusual starting point for a film. “Homestead” is up front about it. It’s clear from the start who this movie is for and what this movie respects. What is surprising is that this production, based on the first of a series of novels by Jeff Kirkham and Jason Ross, also has real conversations about moral conflicts and ethical crossroads. By the end, it even declares that Christian charity is more important — and also more productive — than selfish nationalism. For a minute, right before the credits roll, even people who aren’t in the film’s target demographic might be forced to admit that “Homestead” is, for what it is, one of the better films of its ilk.

And then the movie whizzes all that good will down its leg at the last possible second, contradicting its own morals in a shameless attempt to bilk the audience. 

We’ll get back to that. “Homestead” stars Neal McDonough (“Tulsa King”) and Dawn Olivieri (“Lioness”) as Ian and Jenna Ross, a fabulously wealthy couple whose gigantic estate, vast hoard of doomsday supplies and seemingly unlimited arsenal make them uniquely prepared to survive the country’s collapse. At least one major city has been nuked, the power has gone out across the nation and everyone who didn’t prepare for doomsday scenarios is looking pretty silly right now. They’re also looking directly at the Ross estate, Homestead, as their possible salvation.

Advertisement

As such, Ian enlists a team of ex-Navy SEALs to guard Homestead. They’re led by Jeff Eriksson (Bailey Chase, “Longmire”), who uses the opportunity to keep his own family safe. His teenage son, Abe (Tyler Lofton), is the same age as Ian’s daughter Claire (Olivia Sanabia), and nobody else is a teenager, so that romantic subplot is a foregone conclusion. Jeff also has a daughter named Georgie (Georgiana White) who has psychic visions of the future. You might think that would be important later, but leave the fortune-telling to Georgie because she knows (as far as this movie is concerned) that it won’t.

Tensions flare between Ian, who only wants to hold the fort until the American government gets its act together, and Jeff, who assumes civilization will quickly collapse like soufflé at a Gwar concert. Meanwhile, the hungry refugees, some of whom are Ian’s friends and associates, camp outside their gates, desperate to get to safety. Jenna wants to give them food and shelter, but Ian is doing the math and says their supplies won’t last: “What you give to them, you’re taking from us. It’s that simple.”

Gloom and doom fantasies like “Homestead” take place in the very contrived situations where everything you’ve always feared, and for which everyone mocked you for believing in, finally come to pass. ‘Oh no, the government is here to help,’ in the form of a sniveling bureaucrat who wants to inventory Homestead’s supplies and redistribute them to people in need — that monster. Thank God we bought the Tesla with the “Bioweapon Defense Mode,” that wasn’t paranoid at all.

Then again, in the midst of all this anti-refugee rhetoric and pro-billionaire propaganda, cracks in “Homestead’s” façade start to form. Ian’s pragmatism isn’t preventing Homestead from running out of supplies. Jeff’s paranoia seems to be costing more lives than it saves. There’s even a scene where the same woman whose life was saved by a Tesla bemoans how dangerous the vehicle was when her family got attacked by looters, and screams, “Why?! Why did we buy a Tesla?!”

By the end, “Homestead” has explored at least some nuanced perspectives on the real moral issues it raises. With a mostly game cast and efficient, professional direction by Smallbone (“Stoned Cold Country”), it’s not a badly made movie from a technical perspective. And the film’s final message, espousing the positive Christian value of charity, and both the importance and practicality of being generous to the needy, is hard to dispute.

Advertisement

Until, again, the movie’s actual ending. This part won’t require a “spoiler warning” because, A.) It doesn’t spoil the plot; and B.) It’s more like a warning label. This part of the film should have been clearly labeled on the package — like “Smoking causes cancer” or “This paint contains lead.”

It’s a bit of an annoyance to discover that “Homestead” is actually the pilot episode of an ongoing series, which you are expected to commit to now that you’ve bought into it with cold, hard cash. Not that there’s anything horribly wrong with that storytelling approach, but you probably went into this theater expecting a standalone movie and it’s hard not to feel a bit scammed, like you just bought a brand-new AAA game and found out most of its content is still locked behind an additional paywall. The TV series version of “Homestead” isn’t even mentioned on the film’s Wikipedia page, at least not by the time this review was written.

But more than that, “Homestead” ends with a cast member breaking character, speaking directly to the audience, and saying that with Christmas right around the corner, you should be thinking about charity. But they don’t suggest donating to the needy, like the actual film preaches. Instead, they tell you to give more money to the filmmakers. You are encouraged, with the help of an on-screen QR code that stays on-camera throughout the whole credits, to buy a stranger a ticket to “Homestead,” which they may or may not even use, thus artificially inflating the film’s box office numbers and the industry’s perception of its success. It would be one thing if they were straightforward about this: “Please give us money to make more stuff like this.” That’s not the worst thing in the world. But to couch this in terms of charity? It’s very difficult not to take issue with that.

Is this a bad business model? That depends on your values. If you value business, sure, that’s a way to make money. You show people a film designed to convince them that they should be charitable and then tell them to be charitable by giving you more money. Is it ethical? Is it a little hypocritical? Is it not just a little hypocritical, but in outright defiance of everything you just said you believed in? 

I suppose your mileage may vary. I couldn’t help but feel like I was being scammed. Just when I was finally enjoying the film, I was given every reason not to. Any movie that espouses the Christian value of generosity and then tells its audience the best way to be charitable is to make the filmmakers richer is hard to recommend in good conscience, even if it is otherwise pretty well made.

Advertisement

“Homestead” is now playing in theaters.

a-complete-unknown-timothee-chalamet-elle-fanning

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

‘Carry-On’ Movie Review: A ‘Die Hard’ Style Christmas Thriller You Definitely Need To Watch

Published

on

‘Carry-On’ Movie Review: A ‘Die Hard’ Style Christmas Thriller You Definitely Need To Watch

One of the great debates around Christmas time is whether the classic Bruce Willis action-movie Die Hard should be considered a Christmas movie or not. Sure, it takes place at Christmastime, but is it really a Christmas movie the same way Home Alone or Miracle On 34th Street are Christmas movies?

The obvious answer is “Yes” though a more nuanced one would be “It’s up to you.” If you consider it a Christmas movie, it’s a Christmas movie. If you don’t, that’s cool by me. “To each their own” is an old saying that more people should study and practice.

Whether you consider Die Hard a Christmas movie or not will determine whether you consider Netflix’s new thriller, Carry-On a Christmas movie. Like Die Hard, it takes place near Christmas and like Die Hard 2 it takes place in an airport. Unlike Die Hard, it does not have the star power of Bruce Willis to elevate it into the halls of classic action movies. On the other hand, it’s much better than the later, lousier Die Hard films that released after Die Hard With A Vengeance, perhaps the greatest in the entire franchise.

Advertisement

Carry-On will never be considered a Christmas classic or an all-time great action-thriller, but it’s still a lot of fun and I’m happy we have another holiday action flick that doesn’t suck, because a lot of Christmas movies across genres are pretty terrible.

The movie stars Taron Egerton as Ethan Kopek, a TSA agent stuck in a job he hates with a remarkably patient and attractive girlfriend, Nora, played by Sofia Carson. They learn they’re having a baby, because having a pregnant girlfriend makes the stakes that much higher when things go bad. Nora also works at the airport, but not as a TSA agent. She tells Ethan that all she wants for Christmas is for him to follow his dreams of becoming a police officer.

Things take a turn for the worse when a mysterious criminal, only known as Traveler, shows up. Jason Bateman is terrific in the role. He’s casually, almost nonchalantly, villainous. Using Nora’s life as collateral, he forces Ethan to allow a suitcase through the baggage check. The contents of the luggage turn out to be worse than Ethan could ever imagine. What follows is a tense series of events as Ethan tries (and often fails) to outsmart the Traveler and prevent a terrible tragedy, all without getting his girlfriend and unborn baby killed.

Danielle Deadwyler plays Detective Elena Cole, a police officer investigating a murder which leads her down a trail of breadcrumbs right to the airport where she dives headfirst into the conflict playing out there. The Rossi plays the Traveler’s sniper and tech genius, Watcher. And Breaking Bad’s Dean Norris plays Ethan’s boss, Phil Sarkowski. It’s a good cast overall, though mostly the film focuses on Ethan and Traveler and their interactions.

Advertisement

The movie works because it does a great job at keeping the tension high and the pacing tight. It never outwears its welcome, moving along at a nice clip, with most of its best moments just a conversation between Ethan and Traveler. There’s action, but not Die Hard levels of action.

I did feel like the ending was a bit dangly, with some big plot points unresolved. I won’t spoil any of that because, well, you should watch for yourself. And while the writing is just fine throughout, it’s nothing special either. There are no classic yippee-ki-yay lines here. I doubt I’ll rewatch this over the years, not because there’s anything particularly wrong with the movie, but because there’s nothing particularly stellar about it, either. Carry-On is a fun, tense, popcorn movie with some holiday tinsel on top. Give it a watch.

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

‘ED – Extra Decent’ movie review: A quirky drama powered by a brilliant Suraj Venjaramoodu

Published

on

‘ED – Extra Decent’ movie review: A quirky drama powered by a brilliant Suraj Venjaramoodu

A still from ‘ED – Extra Decent’
| Photo Credit: Special Arrangement

Dark comedies have a different ring to them, and a small misstep can leave them neither here nor there. Aamir Palikkal’s ED – Extra Decent has managed to fit into that space quite well, with the right mix of suspense, intrigue and some laughter.

The film opens with Binu, the protagonist, being hit on his head by his apartment’s security. He loses his memory and efforts are on at the hospital to make him remember something from the past. But his parents (Sudheer Karamana and Vinayaprasad), sister (Grace Antony) and brother-in-law (Shyam Mohan) are wary of that situation. It seems they fear for their lives. That is where Binu’s past, which is dark and disturbing, unfolds.

Binu, the jobless, subdued protagonist, is a loser in the eyes of his father, a retired tahsildar, whereas his mother and sister are sympathetic towards him. Binu’s behaviour is attributed to childhood trauma and bad parenting. But there comes a point when the embittered Binu goes into psycho mode and sets out to settle scores with his family in a ruthless way. However, for the residents of the apartment, he is that ‘extra decent,’ smart youngster who loves his family, and they do not know that he is in the process of transforming from extra decent to extra dangerous.

Even though certain actions of Binu look far-fetched, the impact is not lost on the audience, thanks to the fine actor that Suraj Venjaramoodu is. The National Award-winning actor, also the co-producer of the film, has pushed his limit as an artiste. The quirky and twisted but engaging narrative is shouldered by Suraj, whose measured performance transitions unabashedly between humour and villainy. The transition is subtle and with a smile that does not give away who he really is. It seems the actor has been let loose by writer Ashif Kakkodi and director Aamir, and his talent shines through in a scene where he loses control.

ED – Extra Decent (Malayalam)

Director: Aamir Pallikkal

Advertisement

Cast: Suraj Venjaramoodu, Sudheer Karamana, Vinayaprasad, Grace Antony

Runtime: 126 minutes

Storyline: Binu, mentally shaken by childhood trauma and therefore low on confidence, is labelled a loser by his father until one day he reacts in a ruthless, psychotic way

The taut screenplay has several moments that keep the viewers hooked. Even though the audience knows that all is not well with Binu, one keeps guessing about what he will do next. Just when you think the script is losing its grip, the writer springs a surprise.

Although promoted as a dark comedy, the humour is not that pronounced in the film. In fact, the film would have worked even without certain dialogues and situations.

A scene from ED - Extra Decent

A scene from ED – Extra Decent
| Photo Credit:
Special Arrangement

Sudheer Karamana and Vinayaprasad have done well as Binu’s parents. Grace is always a delight to watch on screen, and so is Shyam, especially after his impressive outing in Premalu.

Ankit Menon’s music is almost a character in the movie, with the tracks playing in the background, complementing the emotions unfolding on the screen. Editing (Sreejith Sarang) and cinematography (Sharon Sreenivas) add to the layers of the narrative, especially in the scenes shot inside the apartment that involve several close-up shots.

Advertisement

ED – Extra Decent is currently playing in theatres

Continue Reading

Trending