 I attended a preview screening of this film, so I got to see it a couple of months ahead of it’s official UK release date.
It’s a very good account of the injustice faced by the people of Palestine, spanning generations, from when their land was first seized, to the present day, following the lives of one family. Seeing multi-generations of the same, well-educated, middle-class family being kicked about and abused, and wanting nothing but a dignified life, with all the things you and I take for granted, was very moving. The film does well to maintain the perspective of the family, instead of focusing on the wider politics, so we get to see the repercussions of those politics, instead of them being discussed in an abstract way, as is often the case with anything to do with Israel and Palestine. Politics aside, it’s a good movie, because it focuses on character and the trials of being human in a very difficult and traumatic situation. The film could easily have leaned into the horrors committed by Israel these past few decades, but it’s surprisingly restrained, showing only the effects on one particular family, and the dilemma they face when their son is injured. Obviously, it’s impossible to film in Palestine, with the population under constant attack from Israel, so this movie can’t have been filmed there. That said, it looks completely authentic, which is all the more impressive considering it’s also a period piece. The film effectively portrays the plight of the Palestinian people without really pointing fingers at regimes, presidents or prime ministers, which is a feat in of itself. It’s just one family, trying to live their lives, whilst being bullied and attacked, yet maintaining their dignity and their humanity, despite that. What's also very impressive, is that the film was written and directed by one of the stars of the film, Cherian Dabis. It’s a sad film, but absolutely worth watching.
0 Comments
 I had no idea that this (2017) movie starring Jackie Chan, Pierce Brosnan, and directed by Martin Campbell, even existed! That’s some A-list talent, so how did it fly so far under the radar that even a movie lover like me, missed it?
It must be crap, right? No, it’s actually pretty decent! I only discovered it thanks to a Netflix recommendation. It’s basically a revenge film, featuring political intrigue, that doesn’t shy away from Britain’s troubled relationship with Ireland. Seeing Jackie Chan on a one-man revenge mission is always going to be good, and whilst not as stylish or action packed as a ‘John Wick’ movie, it’s still worthwhile, although not quite a ‘must-see’ material. Still, if you fancy an action movie with a little bit of substance to it, definitely give it a go!  I can’t find the notes I made for this talk and I don’t recall much about it, but I do remember not being convinced that the powerful will ever face prosecution.
I mean just look around at the aftermath of the Epstein files; one of the most heinous crimes in modern times, attacking the most vulnerable in society, and zero repercussions for the perpetrators. What an unjust world we live in.  I watched this anime because my niece and nephew were raving about it.
At first, I wasn’t really feeling it; the protagonist, Tanjiro, was a bit too much of a cry baby and a whinger for my liking, but he soon reveals himself to be a total bad-ass! The second season hits you in the feels with what happens to Rengoku, but my favourite was probably the third season. The artwork, animation and especially the fight scenes, are absolutely superb! Our little gang of heroes (Tanjiro, Nezuko, Zenitsu and Inosuke) are all very likeable, and the way they banter and get along is one of the reasons the show works so well. The lore and mythos created by the show are also very compelling. My only gripe is the aforementioned whinging by some of the main characters; they constantly catastrophise and flagellate themselves mentally whenever something goes wrong. The show can also break out into babyish scenes, but I think that’s a cultural thing with Manga and anime. Overall, a brilliant show; watching the main characters grow in strength, ability and maturity each season is very satisfying! Definitely check it out!  I remember watching this when it first came out, and it was good, but compared to the films of today, it’s a masterpiece!
The cinematography alone, elevates this film above most others. The use of darkness, shadow and contrast, creates an atmosphere of dread as well making the film very pleasing to the eye. In comparison, most films these days are made to be seen on TVs and phones; they’re bright, over-saturated, and look completely ugly! This film reminds us of how great a cinematic film can look, even when viewed at home. Visuals aside, this is a good film because it tells a good story. There aren’t many surprises, or twists and turns; the protagonist knows he can’t escape his past, as does the audience, it’s all about how much retribution he can inflict before he does. Also, a father on the run, trying to protect his son is a compelling story. It was just a good, very satisfying film to watch, and reminded me why I love movies so much. Also, seeing the late, great, Paul Newman in a powerful role was something special. Great film.  I’m writing this in March 2026, so it’s been a while since I saw this film, and I have to say, I was not impressed.
It was slow, drawn out, and didn’t move me in any way. Sure, it’s a character study about a gambler, and yes, it may be allegorical, but just because the film has high aspirations, doesn’t mean it’s good. If the film was a comedy, I feel it would have been more effective. The comedic adventures of a compulsive gambler who’s constantly trying to get a line of credit to gamble his way out of debt would have been more poignant, because there would have been a tinge of tragedy to the facade of humour. Colin Farrell was good in the lead, and the harmony between costume and production design was pleasing to the eye, but beyond that, there was little to enjoy.  I attended this brilliant talk about the challenges facing ‘creative freelancers’ a few months ago, so I’ll just post the notes I made at the time:
‘Precariousness and insecurity of employment plague the life of a creative freelancer. On average, they earn less than 25k per year, which is less than the minimum wage! Consequently, there’s an inability to plan or save for the future: not being able to afford to have a family, not being able to save for a pension, not even being able to afford to date (especially as a man, where you're expected to foot the bill)! Unable to get loans, car insurance, mortgages, etc. Not to mention malpractice and exploitation! The industry has a reputation of being difficult to enter, so employees get exploited, as they don't want to lose their place, or the opportunity to enter; ‘if you don't do it, then someone else will!’ From a 'quality of life' perspective, it is absolutely NOT worth being a creative freelancer! Low paid, intermittent work is absolutely no recipe for a good quality of life. It's no wonder poor mental health is so prevalent amongst freelancers, especially in Film and TV. You pretty much need to have a partner with a 'stable' job/income, or you need to come from money. 60% of creative freelancers have no savings for retirement! That’s a ticking time bomb. The industry keeps going on about 'diversity', yet non-white creative freelancers suffer worse outcomes compared to their white counterparts in all aspects. The creative sector is worth £125 billion to the UK economy, yet if other sectors worth as much (such as finance or defence, etc) had a workforce plagued by even a fraction of these problems, you can bet the Government would do something about it! Is the industry so valuable, because exploitation and low pay are so rife? An audience member suggested. The good news is, organizations are starting to think about these issues, and what can be done to solve them. Also, universities are pumping out creative graduates year after year, and there's not enough jobs, so it's a buyers market. Employers can demand more for less, as they do. Universities should be honest about the reality of finding work as a creative, yet still encourage students to pursue their passions. 80% of the challenges facing creative freelancers relate to money.’ As a creative who has never had a penny to his name, none of this was new to me, when it came to my own life, yet I was surprised that the issues I’m facing, are faced by the majority of people within the creative industry! Especially given that it’s such a lucrative industry! One could argue that a career in the creative sector isn’t worth pursuing, but in pretty much all sectors of the economy, the wealth is concentrated in the hands of the few. We pay our taxes so governments can look after our interests and regulate industries to make them fair; clearly the massive inequalities in the world today are a result of weak/corrupt government. The question is, what are we going to do about it?  I’m not really into horror movies any more, but this one had rave reviews, so I figured I’d check it out.
It started off really well, but by the end, I was left disappointed. The second half of the movie couldn’t live up to the premise established in the first half. The mystery of what happened, and how it happened, was really well executed; I wouldn’t say it was ‘scary’, but it was definitely eerie, and the suspense was well crafted. The main problem was the reveal of the ‘villain’ and the fact that she wasn’t scary! Also, the first half of the film is takes place mostly at night, whereas the second half is largely set during the day, which is not conducive to ‘fear’. In the end, the film just wasn’t scary, and despite creating great moments of atmosphere and suspense, it unravelled in a way that wasn’t satisfying. Disappointing.  I like Aziz Ansari; he was always funny in ‘Parks and Recreation’, his book on dating ‘Modern Romance’ was an honest appraisal of the difficulties of dating in 2015 (we all know things have got infinitely worse in the decade since then!); the first two seasons of his Netflix show, ‘Master of None’, were brilliant (I never watched the third season), but then he got ‘Me Tooed’, and disappeared for a while.
This movie, which he wrote and directed, is good. It doesn’t quite hit the high notes of being a great comedy, or a great drama, but kind of straddles the middle road of being humorous, and undemanding. It definitely has a comment to make on the kind of society we live in, where ultra wealthy people have more than they’ll ever need, for doing surprisingly little, compared to the hardworking masses who barely survive, despite working very hard. It delivers this social commentary in a gentle, amusing way, using the tried and tested ‘life swap’ device that many movies have used before, and also adds the novelty of an Angel trying to get his wings in helping (or not helping) the situation. The cast all do well, and Keanu Reeves is great at (seemingly) just being himself, which is more than enough to make his character appealing! Of course, the film can’t exactly advocate for societal change, or the end of capitalism, so the conclusion is pretty disappointing (rich people should just be more generous), but this film doesn’t really set out to solve society’s problems, only those of the characters involved, and it does achieve that. It’s decent. Not quite as good as some of the episodes of ‘Master of None’, but you know what you’re going to get, and it doesn’t disappoint. Worth watching.  Let’s be real, this movie was never going to live up to the original, but still, with the very capable Edgar Wright at the helm, I thought it would at least be decent.
Unfortunately, it was crap. I mean, usually in screenwriting, you’re told to compress the time frame of a story to make it more tense, especially when it comes to a game of ‘cat and mouse’. So why in the hell did they make the ludicrous decision to have this film take place over the course of 30 days??!! This film may be more faithful to the source material, but in this case, that’s not a good thing! Whilst it does make it a completely different film than the original, it definitely doesn’t make it a better one! One the appeals of Arnie’s character in the original, was that he was an innocent man that was framed by the system; there was an injustice to his situation that made it personal. The motivation for the protagonist in this film is so he can earn money to pay for his daughter’s medication; hardly as visceral, especially given that he ‘volunteers’ to take part in the game show, as opposed to being forced to take part, as was the case with Arnie’s character. The film is also riddled with political ideology with all the understanding and nuance of a social media post! Rich people bad, poor people good. It’s frankly insulting, and is the definition of Hollywood dumbing down movies to appeal the lowest common denominator. None of the cast have the charisma to step into the shoes of the original cast, and although Glen Powell is likeable in a romcom, as an action star, he doesn’t quite cut the mustard. I could go on and on, but there’s no point really. This film was yet another crappy Hollywood reboot/remake, from which there seems little escape! |
This page is...
A chronicle of films, shows, and theatre I've seen, as well as books I've read, and talks I've attended. Archives
February 2026
Categories |
RSS Feed
