AgentNico Film Reviews

Brian May fisted his guitar so awesomely it almost felt inappropriate.

Plot: After being separated for 15 years, the Sword of Power leads Prince Adam back to Eternia, where he discovers his home shattered under the fiendish rule of Skeletor. To save his family and his world, Adam must join forces with his closest allies, Teela and Duncan/Man-At-Arms, and embrace his true destiny as He-Man — the most powerful man in the universe.

I am very much a stranger to the world of Masters of the Universe. My knowledge begins and ends with that online GIF of a strange-looking blonde hunk in a pink shirt dramatically proclaiming, “I HAVE THE POWER!” Fortunately, homework isn't really required here. And that's probably for the best, because this latest adaptation of a Mattel property — arriving in the wake of Barbie's enormous success a few years ago — is a very silly, very uneven, but undeniably fun summer blockbuster that doesn't ask much of its audience beyond showing up and enjoying the ride.

Taking heavy inspiration from Marvel's more comedic sci-fi outings, particularly Guardians of the Galaxy and Thor: Ragnarok, Masters of the Universe drops us into the colourful, vibrant world of Eternia, where larger-than-life cartoon characters (appropriately enough) settle their differences through good old-fashioned battles between good and evil. There's no deep underlying message here. The story is as basic as they come, the characters are mostly one-note and underwritten, the humour misses more often than it lands, and the visual effects fluctuate wildly between impressive spectacle and distractingly rough CGI. The Earth-set section also feels unnecessary, slowing the momentum whenever the film cuts away from Eternia.

And yet... I had a good time.

Maybe I caught it on the right day. Maybe I was simply willing to leave my critic brain at the door. Whatever the reason, I found myself oddly charmed by the film's self-aware, unapologetically goofy tone. It's hard to stay mad at a movie that's having this much fun with itself.

By the way, we need to talk about the music.

The score comes from Daniel Pemberton, one of the most consistently exciting composers working today. If you haven't listened to his work on Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse or King Arthur: Legend of the Sword, you're seriously missing out. Here, he delivers a gloriously epic orchestral score drenched in 1980s energy and heroic bombast.

And then there's Brian freaking May.

Yes, that Brian May.

The man shows up and absolutely unleashes on his guitar. Not just a little flourish here and there — he is shredding with the enthusiasm of someone who's been told this is his one chance to soundtrack a cosmic sword-and-sorcery adventure. Every time his guitar kicks in, the film gains about 30% more power. It's ridiculous. It's excessive. It's awesome.

The action is also surprisingly solid. The fight choreography is energetic, easy to follow, and generally a lot of fun to watch. I spent most of the runtime happily watching He-Man pulverise wave after wave of bad guys. The man really does have the power.

And as many critics have already noted, Jared Leto delivers the performance of his life as Skeletor. What makes the character work is his complete lack of complexity. There are no hidden motivations or tragic backstories here. Skeletor is literally a man (I think?) with a skull for a head who wants to do evil things because he's evil. That's it. He cackles, he monologues, he chews scenery by the truckload, and Leto commits to every ridiculous second of it. The performance works because he fully embraces how absurd the character is rather than trying to make him seem grounded or realistic.

Oddly enough, the most significant thing Masters of the Universe accomplished was making me even more excited for Amazon's upcoming Highlander remake starring Henry Cavill and Dave Bautista. Partly because this movie uses Queen's "Princes of the Universe" to spectacular effect, but mostly because it reminded me how much I enjoy watching impossibly powerful, larger-than-life warriors swing giant swords around while epic rock music blares in the background.

Is Masters of the Universe a great movie? Not remotely.

Is it dumb? Absolutely.

Did I have fun? By the power of Grayskull, yes.

Overall score: 6/10

So he does age after all!

Plot: When Rick, a past-his-prime wedding singer, meets fading boy-band star Danny during a gig, the two bond over music during a late-night jam session. But when Danny turns one of Rick’s songs into the hit that reignites his career, Rick sets out to reclaim the recognition he believes he deserves — even if it means risking everything he cares about.

Paul Rudd is one of those actors I'd happily watch in anything. He has endless charm, impeccable comedic timing, and an effortlessly likeable screen presence. Whether or not you enjoy Power Ballad will largely depend on how much you like Rudd, because despite sharing top billing in the marketing with Nick Jonas, Jonas isn't actually in the film all that much.

It's also refreshing to see Rudd play his age for once. He's one of those celebrities who seems to exist under the strange illusion of never physically aging, looking much the same now as he did twenty years ago. Here, however, he plays a washed-up musician, longtime husband and father, and a man whose best days appear to be behind him. Whether it's the haircut, the weary demeanour, or simply the performance itself, this is one of the few times where you genuinely feel like you're watching a man in his fifties. Rudd fully commits to that while still retaining the charm and tongue-in-cheek wit that make him so enjoyable to watch.

As for the rest of the film, it's fine.

John Carney has made much stronger films before, particularly Begin Again and Sing Street. Even his trademark musical focus feels weaker here. The handful of original songs rely heavily on auto-tune, and the central track that drives the conflict between Rudd and Jonas is presented as this huge, career-reviving smash hit. The problem is that the song itself is incredibly mediocre, making it difficult to buy into the stakes.

I also found myself heavily disliking Rick's family. For most of the film they refuse to believe him, and his daughter in particular seems to have almost no respect for her father. Considering the film repeatedly frames Rick as someone who sacrificed his musical ambitions for the sake of his family, you start to wonder whether it was really worth it when they're so unsupportive of him throughout.

The ending was another disappointment. Rick's mission to confront Danny over stealing his song ultimately feels anti-climactic and lacks any real payoff. What should have been the emotional and dramatic culmination of the story with a impactful commentary on plagiarism instead amounts to a lot of build-up for very little reward.

That said, the film isn't without its charms. The early scenes of Rudd and Jonas simply hanging out, drinking, chatting, playing guitar, and writing music together are genuinely delightful. The two share great chemistry, and those moments capture an easy, authentic warmth that the rest of the film struggles to maintain. It's a shame the rest of Power Ballad couldn’t sustain that energy.

Overall score: 5/10

Curry Barker's Obsession made me swear off love. Finding Emily brought me right back with its irresistible British rom-com charm.

Plot: When a lovesick musician is given the wrong number for his dream girl, he teams up with a driven psychology student to find her. Together, they spark a hilarious campus-wide frenzy that tests their hearts and ambitions along the way.

Since when does Manchester look so pretty? No shade to British cities, but they're often portrayed as grey and lifeless, while it's usually the countryside where the UK really shines. Yet Finding Emily bathes Manchester in vibrant colours, endless sunshine, and streets bursting with character. Forget looking for Emily — she's probably in Paris anyway. This film should be called Finding Manchester.

As for the film itself, this is a delightful rom-com that understands the importance of both the ROM and the COM. It's genuinely funny, drawing laughs from the characters' natural charm, their distinctly British awkwardness, and some sharp satire aimed at social media and modern campus culture. One of the film's funniest running gags is the public reaction to the protagonist's search for Emily. Initially, he's branded a creep and potential harasser after emailing every Emily he can find. Then, the moment he pulls out a guitar and performs an original love song, the internet instantly rebrands him as adorable — "like Ed Sheeran on Crimewatch." It's a light-touch but effective send-up of social media pile-ons and the speed at which public opinion swings from one extreme to another.

The romantic chemistry between the leads is equally strong and never feels forced. Is this a predictable story where you can see the destination from a mile away? Absolutely. But the journey is so charming that it hardly matters. Even when characters make questionable or self-sabotaging decisions, you understand why they're doing it and find yourself rooting for them regardless.

The film also does a good job of walking a difficult line with its protagonist. On paper, his determination to track down a girl he's barely met could easily come across as creepy. Yet his intentions are so sincere, and he's so painfully aware of how his actions might be perceived, that the film mines plenty of humour from his increasingly desperate attempts not to make things worse — while inevitably making them worse anyway.

Spike Fearn is excellent as the awkwardly endearing everyman at the centre of the story. He's instantly likeable, and I can easily see Gen Z audiences falling for his scruffy charm. Angourie Rice — who I suspected was destined for bigger things after her scene-stealing debut in The Nice Guys — is a perfect foil. Her character is torn between pursuing her dissertation and recognising that she's taking advantage of a genuinely decent guy. Yet thanks to Rice's warmth, eccentricity, and charisma, she's impossible to dislike. Distractingly, Owen bears an uncanny resemblance to a young Liam Gallagher, while at certain angles Rice looks remarkably like Taylor Swift. Whenever they're sharing the screen together, the effect can be oddly surreal.

Oh, and the soundtrack kind of rules. It's a fantastic mix of classic indie tracks, electronic anthems, and pop hits, with George Michael receiving some particularly welcome love.

Finding Emily feels like a love letter to the Richard Curtis school of romantic comedy (seriously, what happened to that guy?). It shares the same warmth, heart, and unabashed sentimentality, along with an abundance of cheesiness that some viewers may find cringe-inducing. But it's also almost impossible to hate.

Overall score: 8/10

“And there upon a rainbow Is the answer to the neverending Backrooms Aaaaaaah…”

Plot: After a therapist’s patient disappears into a dimension beyond reality, she ventures into the unknown to save him.

It seems YouTubers really are the future of Hollywood. In recent years we’ve seen YouTube film critic Chris Stuckmann transition to the big screen with his Kickstarter-funded horror film Shelby Oaks; the Philippou Brothers successfully delivered two horror smash hits for A24 with Talk to Me and Bring Her Back; Mark Fischbach (better known online as Markiplier) self-financed the feature adaptation of the video game Iron Lung to major commercial success; and Curry Barker delivered what is, so far, 2026’s best film with the thriller Obsession — a sub-$1 million indie that has somehow gone on to gross over $100 million worldwide while even pulling off the rare feat of a second-weekend box office increase.

Now Kane Parsons becomes the youngest director yet to helm a film for A24 with Backrooms, a feature adaptation of his viral, meme-inspired YouTube series about an endless maze of eerie yellow rooms. Safe to say, if you’re an aspiring filmmaker these days, you might need to embrace that YouTube lifestyle, friendo.

I’d been vaguely aware of Backrooms for a while but had never actually watched any of it until a couple of days ago, when I checked out Parsons’ original 2022 short that started it all. That nine-minute video honestly plays like a visual adaptation of Talking Heads’ “Once in a Lifetime”, especially the lyrics: “And you may tell yourself, ‘This is not my beautiful house’ / ‘This is not my beautiful wife.’” Maybe I’m the only one who made that connection, but still, I admired Parsons’ ability to make such a simple concept — wandering through lonely, slightly disorientating rooms while being stalked by some strange stick-like entity — feel genuinely unnerving. It’s the classic “less is more” approach to horror.

Still, I wondered how this concept could sustain a feature-length runtime. Nine minutes of wandering through uncanny corridors? Creepy. Ninety minutes? Surely that risks becoming repetitive and losing its impact.

Oddly enough, the endless wandering ends up being the film’s greatest strength.

Human beings have a primal fear of the unknown — of spaces and phenomena we cannot fully understand or comprehend. The sequences where characters explore the infinite corridors and rooms of the Backrooms feel like the movie at its most alive, despite being set within literal nothingness. It’s like a deeply cursed, otherworldly version of Narnia.

The Backrooms themselves reminded me heavily of “The Zone” from Andrei Tarkovsky’s 1979 film Stalker: a restricted, alien landscape where reality itself feels unstable and unknowable. Backrooms follows a similar philosophical formula at first. You could also see similarities to Tarkovsky’s other science fiction melancholy piece Solaris (1972), in like similar to the Solaris planet, Backrooms seem to operate as a kind of echo-space for memories; it’s why many places in the Backrooms look familiar but are imperfect, as our memories can’t contain the full snapshot of the places or people we’ve seen. However, where Tarkovsky wisely refuses to explain The Zone or Solaris, leaving its mysteries entirely to the audience’s imagination, Parsons eventually feels compelled to provide concrete answers about what the Backrooms actually are.

And that’s where the film begins to collapse.

By explaining too much and cornering the narrative into literal exposition, the movie gradually strips away its own horror. Some things are simply more terrifying when left unexplained. The first half is genuinely tense and suspenseful as we descend deeper into the increasingly bizarre levels of the Backrooms, but the second half devolves into characters being chased by a heavily CGI-rendered creature that looks less horrifying than outright silly. Instead of escalating the fear, the film accidentally deflates it.

To the movie’s credit, the final shot before the credits briefly recaptures that original “what the hell am I looking at?” atmosphere that made the opening so effective. Unfortunately, by that point, the magic has already been thoroughly demystified.

Now, this review is coming from someone who isn’t deeply immersed in the lore or mythology built around the original web series, but it does feel like A24 perhaps pushed Parsons toward providing more conventional explanations so the film could appeal to both hardcore fans and casual audiences alike. In trying to make the concept more mainstream and accessible, the film loses the very edge that made it compelling in the first place.

The strongest aspect of Backrooms is undoubtedly its visual craft. The production design creates wonderfully disorientating spaces filled with oppressive yellows and uncanny geometry, while the cinematography frequently employs symmetrical framing to maximise the unsettling atmosphere. The found-footage-inspired sequences in particular are incredibly effective, and honestly, I wish the film had leaned even harder into that style.

But for all its visual strengths, the story ultimately falls apart. Even early on, the characters feel frustratingly underwritten, giving talented actors like Chiwetel Ejiofor and Renate Reinsve very little to actually work with. And again, that CGI creature in the climax completely destroys the carefully cultivated mystery and unease the film spends so long building.

Backrooms works best when it embraces ambiguity, atmosphere, and the terror of empty spaces. The more it tries to explain itself, the less frightening it becomes. Heck, at least my walk back to my car through the multi-storey car park was freaky as hell after the movie!

Overall score: 4/10

Before the film started, Disney employees personally came into the cinema to check whether everyone had completed all three seasons and the required spin-off homework.

Plot: The evil Empire has fallen, and Imperial warlords remain scattered throughout the galaxy. As the fledgling New Republic works to protect everything the Rebellion fought for, they have enlisted the help of legendary Mandalorian bounty hunter Din Djarin and his young apprentice Grogu.

If you go into this expecting a grand-scale Star Wars event film that expands the mythology of the Skywalker saga, you’ll probably leave disappointed. This is a surprisingly small-scale story that does little to evolve the wider universe and instead feels entirely designed for fans of The Mandalorian Disney+ series.

And I really do mean entirely. The film barely even attempts to introduce or re-establish its characters, relationships, or lore for newcomers. If you haven’t watched the show beforehand, you’ll probably spend the first act wondering why everyone in the cinema is emotionally attached to a tiny green gremlin and a man who refuses to remove his helmet. So set your expectations accordingly: this isn’t really a Star Wars movie so much as The Mandalorian: Season 4 with a theatrical budget.

PROS:

* Ludwig Göransson’s score absolutely rules. Blending his iconic Mandalorian themes with gritty synths, pounding drums, and techno-inspired flourishes gives the film a unique energy that separates it from the traditional John Williams-style sound.

* Pedro Pascal remains effortlessly cool as Mando. As the proud owner of a full Hasbro Mandalorian helmet sitting in my film merch collection at home, I can confirm the character aura still works on me.

* Grogu continues to be charming, especially during a bizarrely peaceful swamp sequence where he’s basically just vibing. The puppetry throughout the film feels wonderfully tactile too, very reminiscent of classic Jim Henson creature work.

* The film is packed with weird aliens, monsters, and creatures, which helps the galaxy feel far more alive than a lot of recent Star Wars projects.

* Oddly enough, some of the smaller worldbuilding details fascinated me the most. One planet treats salt as an incredibly rare and priceless resource worth fighting wars over, while to Mando — someone constantly travelling the galaxy — it’s basically the equivalent of grabbing table salt from Tesco. Little details like that genuinely made the universe feel bigger.

*One sequence in particular genuinely made me feel like I was watching Thor: Ragnarok. The gladiator arena fight between Mando and the Hutt starts off almost beat-for-beat like the Thor vs Hulk “he’s a friend from work!” scene — right down to the big crowd spectacle and the “oh no, our hero has accidentally entered a death match” energy — except stripped of all the neon colour, absurdity, and Taika Waititi funk that made Ragnarok so memorable in the first place. Thankfully, the sequence eventually goes in a far weirder direction and ends with a wonderfully chaotic payoff that feels closer to the monster-release madness of The Cabin in the Woods, which at least helps it carve out its own identity by the end.

CONS:

* The action is weirdly lacklustre. There’s an overreliance on shaky cam and rapid cuts that often feel like they’re disguising the lack of proper choreography or stunt work. Granted, I’ve been watching a lot of martial arts and wuxia films lately, so maybe I’m spoiled by people flying through bamboo forests while sword fighting, but even by normal blockbuster standards the combat here lacks impact.

* Sigourney Weaver feels shockingly bland as the leader of a New Republic squadron. This is the same woman who gave us Ripley in Alien, one of cinema’s greatest badass protagonists, yet here she feels strangely wooden and completely devoid of charisma.

* Martin Scorsese showing up in a cameo after years of criticising “theme park cinema” is extremely funny. Does this officially make The Mandalorian & Grogu “absolute cinema” now?

* The narrative is incredibly repetitive: go to Planet A, fight some bad guys, travel to Planet B, fight more bad guys, repeat until credits.

* Worst of all, the film feels disposable. Like an expensive filler episode that changes almost nothing. Mando and Grogu end the movie in virtually the exact same place they started, which makes the whole thing come across less like a meaningful continuation and more like Disney trying to shift another mountain of Baby Yoda merchandise.

Overall, I still found enjoyment here — but that’s coming from someone who genuinely loves the original series and may or may not have worn his Mandalorian helmet around the house for an embarrassingly long amount of time. This is very much a film made for existing fans already invested in these characters. Harmless.

But if you’re a Star Wars fan hoping the first theatrically released film in seven years will reignite that old galactic magic and make you feel the way the saga once did… this probably isn’t the one.

This is the way… kind of.

Overall score: 6/10

“One of the greatest displays of heterosexuality ever committed to film.”

After the movie, I went back home where my wife greeted me with a cheerful “I love you, baby,” and I’m not gonna lie, I nearly turned around and walked straight back out the door.

Plot: After breaking the mysterious "One Wish Willow" to win his crush's heart, a hopeless romantic finds himself getting exactly what he asked for but soon discovers that some desires come at a dark, sinister price.

What Obsession essentially delivers is a feature-length horror reimagining of the Buffy the Vampire Slayer episode in which a botched love spell causes every woman in Sunnydale to fall obsessively in love with Xander, turning his life into a chaotic nightmare. Curry Barker takes that basic premise and twists it into one of the most disturbing and deeply uncomfortable horror films in recent memory — which is honestly impressive considering the original Buffy episode still mostly plays like a sitcom with a body count.

I’m not someone who scares easily, which is partly why horror has never been a genre I naturally gravitate towards. Yet Obsession genuinely unnerved me. What Barker accomplishes here is impressive precisely because he relies on such simple filmmaking techniques. Whether it’s the use of looming shadows and silhouettes — reflecting the protagonist’s fixation on the person he truly wanted to be with, but is no longer there — or the subtle rewinding of footage to make the “girlfriend” move in an unnatural, uncanny way, the film proves that the most effective horror often comes from restraint rather than excess. Turns out you do not need twenty gallons of CGI blood when somebody smiling too long can already ruin your evening.

And yes, there are jump scares. Normally, I dislike jump scares because they tend to feel like cheap tricks designed purely to provoke an audience reaction. The trope has been overused to the point where most can be predicted well in advance - horror fans can practically sense them like Spider-Man’s danger instinct at this point. However, Obsession contains one involving a car — that’s all I’ll say to avoid spoilers — which I saw coming a mile away, yet it still made me jump. That moment works because the film has already built such an oppressive atmosphere of dread that even the predictable becomes effective.

What makes the movie so unsettling is the constant sense that something is deeply wrong, a feeling that only intensifies as the situation spirals further out of control. One moment in particular keeps coming back to me: a scene where the possessed girl simply stands there, smiling unnaturally at the camera while the shot lingers uncomfortably long without cutting away. It immediately reminded me of the final scene of Pearl, where Mia Goth grins and cries directly into the camera during the credits. You almost don’t know whether to laugh, recoil, or look away — which, to be fair, is also my reaction whenever someone makes direct eye contact with me on public transport for too long. That lingering discomfort is exactly what makes Obsession so effective.

We also need to talk about Inde Navarrette as the possessed girl, because this is a genuine star-making performance. She initially carries the familiar “girl next door” charm, but the film constantly subverts that image by pushing her into moments of complete instability and madness. One moment she appears calm and composed; the next she is screaming, sobbing, or contorting her face into something genuinely unsettling.

I’ve already mentioned the unnatural way she moves, along with the lingering glances and disturbingly soft tone of voice, but it’s Navarrette’s absolute commitment to the role that elevates those moments from simply creepy to genuinely terrifying. Curry Barker deserves enormous credit for what he accomplishes behind the camera, yet Obsession ultimately works because Navarrette fully throws herself into the horror of the character. Her performance is unpredictable, uncomfortable, and deeply unnerving — the kind of turn that lingers in your mind long after the film ends.

In conclusion, Obsession delivers on its simple premise by fully committing to the bit, and succeeds in my eyes as one of the most terrifying horror films in recent years, proving just how much can be done with so little. I mean, now I’m genuinely afraid of my wife professing her love to me. Before watching this movie, she’d say it multiple times a day and I never thought twice about it. Now every “I love you” is followed by the intrusive thought: “is she obsessed with me?” and, more importantly, “am I about to suffer the same fate as the poor soul in this film?” Horror that can take something as warm and ordinary as affection and twist it into a source of dread is doing something right. Gosh, relationships are tough, aren’t they?

And just to be absolutely clear, dear, if you happen to read this review: I love you very much, you are wonderful, and this paragraph was written entirely in the name of film criticism and definitely not out of fear for my own safety. Which, honestly, is probably the highest compliment I can give a horror film like Obsession.

Overall score: 8/10

After all this time we finally got another Back to the Future movie! 

Plot: When their plan to book a show at the Rivoli goes horribly wrong, Matt and Jay accidentally travel back to the year 2008.

I have never watched the original Nirvanna show, and as such went into this sorely basing my pre-judgement on the rave reviews from critics and Letterboxd users, as well as the knowledge of Matt Johnson’s BlackBerry movie, which was a decent retelling of how this signature phone model came about, and featured a bald Dennis Reynolds. What I must say having now watched NTBTSTM is that I don’t believe it is necessary to have any prior knowledge of the original show to enjoy this movie. In fact it is preferable that instead your prior homework involves rewatching Robert Zemeckis’ Back to the Future Trilogy, as this movie heavily pays homage to those science fiction films, and even riffs on some major plot points. In fact, seeing this as an unofficial spin-off/sequel to that trilogy wouldn’t be too farfetched, though I don’t believe Zemeckis would sign off on that officially.

Regardless, Nirvanna the Band the Show the Movie is framed in the style of a mockumentary, where the cameras follow the musical duo Matt and Jay as they attempt to get booked to play at the Rivoli, and the shenanigans they come across during their journey. And the word “unhinged” is very much undermining the level of craziness this movie reaches, as the film’s opening sees the two main characters sky diving off the CN Tower onto the SkyDome during a Blue Jays game as a publicity stunt, which as expected doesn’t go to plan. From there we get into the time travelling madness and such, and throughout this so much silliness and buffoonery transpires, that the result is very very funny. Mind you the narrative around time travel is done really well, in particular where the film blends actual footage from 2008 of the Nirvanna show, as our modern day Matt and Jay go to the past and meet their younger selves, and it was really cool how the camera trickery and editing was done to blend the two together. There is also a wonderful sentimental emotional core with the friendship of Matt and Jay at the heart of everything, in particular through Jay wishing to move on from Matt and the Nirvanna group, and Matt still being stuck with his crazy lightbulb ideas.

But it all does come down to the comedy. There are so many excellent gags in this, from poking fun at the Will Smith/Chris Rock Oscars slap, to an unfunny joke from The Hangover that becomes the funniest thing ever here, to mispronouncing Barack Obama’s name as OBAMNA… it’s all hilarious, and though I do suggest setting your expectations a little lower following the highly overrated critical response, Nirvanna the Band the Show the Movie is a great time at the movies, with plenty of “how did they do that??” moments. Think the time travel shin-digs of Back to the Future, featuring meta humour and “guerilla style” filmmaking of Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping, the indie creative DIY energy of Hundreds of Beavers, and the awkward delivery of Nathan For You. The result? Nirvanna the Band the Show the Movie.

Overall score: 7/10

Uh oh, allergen season is hitting pretty hard lately… 🥹🥹

Plot: George Hardy is a shepherd who reads detective novels to his beloved sheep every night, assuming they can't possibly understand. But when a mysterious incident disrupts life on the farm, the sheep realize they must become the detectives. As they follow the clues and investigate human suspects, they prove that even sheep can be brilliant crime-solvers.

I heard about this movie a couple years back when it was announced that Hugh Jackman was going to star in a movie where he reads murder mysteries to his flock of sheep, and then gets murdered himself and they investigate who the killer was. It was an insane synopsis, but one I was genuinely curious about. Now it has finally arrived and boy oh BOY are you guys not ready for Hooves Out!! Get it? It’s like Knives Out but I swapped the knives to hooves?… Because they are sheep?… They have hooves?… And they are solving a murder?… Nevermind.

The Sheep Detectives plays out as a truly wild and woolly whodunnit. Setting aside its fluffy main characters for the moment, the film does have a genuinely intriguing central mystery, and very much feels in vein of those Rian Johnson detective movies starring Benoit Blanc. You have your suspects, their motives and convenient alibis, and then you must figure out the killer based on the clues provided. I am proud to say that I guessed the killer pretty early on due to a minor detail (which I won’t spoil for obvious reasons), but I think the film does a solid job of keeping the killer options wide enough for you to keep guessing until the end. That being said, we all know what really is the selling point of this movie…

The sheep! Yes, the sheep are absolutely adorable in this, from the very well realised visual effects, to the distinct personalities of each sheep (or shoop if singular?), as the film utilises its all-star voice cast to their unique strengths perfectly. Julia Louis-Dreyfus and Chris o’Dowd as our two main sheep buds are delightful together, with Julia a determined and emotionally driven character who is motivated to stop at nothing to find the killer of her beloved Hugh. Chris O’Dowd is fairly dorky, but also had an emotional weight on his shoulders as the only sheep that is forced to remember all the bad memories, whilst all the other sheep are able to forget anything bad that happens to them. You have your comedic sheep to from the likes of Patrick Stewart, Rhys Darby and Brett Goldstein, with the latter in particular a stand out as these two rams, aptly named after the Kray twins Ronnie and Reggie, who just want to smash everything they see, with Brett having a lot of playful fun riffing on the lighter side of his Ted Lasso Roy Kent persona. But what really gets me is how, for all the goofy silliness and parodying of sheep traits, the film never shies away from tackling challenging subjects like death and grief, and utilising the sheep’s simple innocent mindsets in how they interest these serious subjects. The ending of this movie in particular goes to some really surprisingly somber and heart wrenching places, mainly through the development of Bryan Cranston’s Sebastian, a “winter-lamb” outsider who’s backstory and his place of belonging are the central core of this movie. Look, I am not embarrassed to admit that my heart was touched by a bunch of CGI sheep!!

The Sheep Detectives is the definition of a cosy movie. From its sunny green setting of an English countryside village, to the lovely blend of mystery, comedy, pathos and emotion all put together in a delightful package that is targeted at audiences of all ages, this film is utterly wonderful. Although don’t expect much Hugh Jackman for obvious reasons, yet you do on the other hand get a lot of fun from Emma Thompson’s elongated cameo, who once again proves she is one of our most reliable British actors. Honestly, I really loved this, right down to the movie finishing on The Proclaimers’ 500 Miles!

Overall score: 8/10

“One ring to rule them all, one ring to go f*** yourself!” I must say, The Lord of the Rings were off the charts in this one!

Plot: The fan favorite champions—now joined by Johnny Cage himself—are pitted against one another in the ultimate, no-holds barred, gory battle to defeat the dark rule of Shao Kahn that threatens the very existence of the Earthrealm and its defenders.

For some reason we have a sequel to the 2021 Mortal Kombat movie, even though clearly the majority of the audience disliked it, from casual viewers to diehard fans of the games. Nevertheless, Warner Bros pushed on to get a second one made, as if to prove a point that they can do better. And what we get is a movie that, though I still think is a far-cry from what a good video game adaptation should look like, is very evidently a purposeful effort from the writers and creative team to write the wrongs of the previous entry, and listen/take on the feedback from the critics and moviegoers.

There is indeed more combat! The fight sequences are consistent throughout, with the movie narrative actually set around a tournament, and the is plenty of bloodshed and cartoonish violence to enjoy for the fans of the games. The movie also leans into the the fun side more with the introduction of Karl Urban’s overly heightened Johnny Cage - a Hollywood movie star/karate black belt expert who has been out of the limelight for too long and is hoping to make a name for himself yet again; and Josh Lawson returns as the wisecracking Australian loud mouth Kano, who stole the show in the last movie and does so yet again here with the best one liners. Also worth giving a shoutout to the creature designs. From the menacing Shao Kahn with his imposing presence and a cool AF warlord helmet, to Baraka - on odd humanoid creature with a desperate need to go to the dentist.

That being said, we are still not there yet with these Mortal Kombat movies. I get that the source material doesn’t offer a lot of story inspiration, and that at the end of the day we just want to see these characters beat the living crap out of one another, with a hopeful result of a gruesome fatality. However this movie very much makes an effort to tell a narrative and build up a mythos around these characters and why they are there, but all the plot beats or so generic and dull that whenever there wasn’t any fighting happening I found myself absolutely bored out of my mind. The acting also leaves a lot to be desired, with most performances coming off as way to wooden and monotone, which didn’t juxtapose too well with a film that aims to be dumb over the top fun. Which, by the way this is dumb and there is a level of fun to it….just not as much fun as I’d hoped for.

Overall score: 4/10

This time the Prada wears the Devil! 

Plot: As Miranda Priestly nears retirement, she reunites with Andy Sachs to face off against her former assistant turned rival: Emily Charlton.

Quoting the commandeer of the Resistance’s Starfighter Corps Poe Dameron, “Somehow, Andy Sachs has returned.” Not as rough and nonsensical as the aforementioned Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker though, yet The Devil Wears Prada 2 does have a little bit of a rocky starts with coming up with an excuse ti bring all the characters back from the first film after 20 years, and in particular due to how the original film ended. That being said, once we overcome the slightly messy beginning, The Devil Wears Prada 2 turns out to be a most surprisingly enjoyable legacy sequel. It does help that I rewatched the original 2006 movie a couple of days ago in preparation, so I already came into this sequel somewhat ‘locked in’ with all the characters, and the latter is indeed what makes this movie so damn fun! 

The returning cast is spectacular, and they all fall back into their roles as if a day hasn’t passed. Naturally there are some slight changes to their personas due to the long time that has passed. Anne Hathaway’s Andy Sachs is more confident and her fashion style has significantly improved since her first lap at Runway. “Still kept them eyebrows though”, as pointed out by the returning Emily Blunt as Emily, who has had the biggest character setting change, as is now the prime director of Dior’s retail management, yet she still hasn’t lost any of her snarky spice and edge. Stanley Tucci is absolutely delightful as ever as Nigel Kipling, Miranda’s trusty sidekick, and I am sorry, but we as men should all aim to be like Stanley Tucci! From his spectacular dress code to his cool and collected demeanour to his wonderful cooking and wine knowledge (yes, I admit I have watched his TikTok!), he is genuinely a wonderful chap. And as Nigel he again provides an added layer to the emotional core as someone who has been stuck all his life under the shadow of his boss, and never had the courage to take matters into is on hands, but additionally his endless loyalty to Miranda, and to Andy for that matter to, is the driving force behind these movies. In fact, the most adorable moment in this sequel comes from a line of his in “Forever my girl”, where even my stone cold heart was touched. And finally Meryl Streep makes her grand return (breaking her no-sequels rule only a second time after Mamma Mia!) as one of her most iconic characters - Miranda Priestly. And she is indeed fantastic, it is Meryl after all! However I do feel that she was forced to be more restrained here, as for the majority of the film Miranda’s character suffers a shift in power, in that unlike the first film where everyone around her tries to please her and go to endless depth of above and beyond, this time she is the one trying to please others, and that dynamic shift, though it made sense from a narrative perspective, felt a disservice to her character, the Devil of Prada. That being said, that “That’s all” needs drop was killer cold! 

I was also surprised with how many returning side characters appeared from the first film in addition to the main four. From Andy’s best friend Lily (Tracie Thoms) and Irv Ravitz (Tibor Feldman), bringing them all back, as well as the original writers and the director David Frankel returning to stead the ship he originally set sail really allowed this film to have such an old school 2000s vibe. These types of films where full New York streets are closed down to shoot external scenes are no longer a thing, so to see this movie do that and also retain the feel of the original film whilst providing a modern day narrative that tackles everything from digital consumerism and the rise of AI was a wonderful blend that worked really well.  

I do admit though that the new cast members left a lot to be desired. BJ Novak plays, essentially, his character Ryan from The Office (US), only that he is now a rich boy, but let’s be honest, the character of Ryan was only as good as a foil for Steve Carrell’s Michael Scott to play against. On his own, Novak is very monotone and there isn’t much to him. On the other side, Justin Theroux plays the villain, and he was so extremely over-the-top and caricatured, all the way from his evidently fake hairstyle to his person, felt like someone out of a cartoon, and was very jarring throughout the film. And Kenneth Branagh as Miranda’s new partner is wasted. Don’t get me wrong, Branagh does nothing wrong here performance wise, but he had zero to add to the narrative and just appeared in a few scenes to comfort Miranda, except his dialogue was the most generic stay-at-home-supportive-husband dialogue you can get. 

There are plenty of callbacks to the original for the nostalgia seeking fans, but the movie only falls for those tropes in the beginning, before progressing with its story and taking these characters forward. There are so many razor sharp lines of dialogue that I am sure will be quoted in years to come, and of course the costume design and the fashion on display is impeccable - naturally this is coming from someone who knows nothing about fashion as I happily wear my shirts from Next and tees from Joe Browns, but they were fun and colourful to look at. Props to Lady Gaga also on soundtrack duties, who again proves time and time again she is one of our greatest pop starts of modern day. 

The Devil Wears Prada 2 is, of course, not as good as the original. However it is a rare legacy sequel that respects the original, yet manages to feel fresh and give us a purpose to continue the story. The performances are all spectacular, and I must say Anne Hathaway is the MVP here, as her overly bubbly and frenetic Andy is such a perfect character to root for. The script is really tight, with plenty of joke, spicy moments and an ending that goes overly sentimental but that is what we are here for! Look - it’s a good one, ladies and gentlemen. Well, mostly ladies, but I am a man who is a proud fan of the original due to it being one of my mother’s favourite films, so of course I wasn’t going to miss out on the new one. And I’m glad I didn’t. That’s all.

Overall score: 7/10

When the movie started and I saw those snowy mount-scapes I thought I was watching The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers again, which wouldn’t have been a problem. But no, Apex was fine I guess.

Plot: A grieving woman pushing her limits on a solo adventure in the Australian wild is ensnared in a twisted game with a cunning killer who thinks she's prey.

There are plenty of solid cat-and-mouse nature survival thrillers out there, and though this one doesn’t really nail either the pace or the climax necessary to add itself to that list, it’s got two great leads and a borderline horror element in the back half that makes it at least somewhat memorable despite the standard disgustingly fake Netflix aesthetic. You know what I am referring to - that overly digitalised crisp oversaturated look that so many straight-to-streaming films suffer from. That is present here, yet at the same time due to the direction of Baltasar Kormákur (who is known for survival horror movies such as Everest and Beast), the aerial landscapes shots, with the movie opening up to majestic Norway snow-covered mountain tops and then proceeding to the Australian jungle scenery, and in particular when the characters or going through the rivers and adventuring the movie looks wonderful.

The double bill casting of Charlize Theron and bald Taron Egerton works really well here too. Egerton of course gets the showy role of the psychotic hunter killer (whom the film’s title refers to) and he has so much fun being really creepy and vile, whilst also allowing moments of humour to come out from his maniacal performance. Theron, on the other hand, has the more average character of the survivor, who at first appears dislikable due to her introverted and stand-offish nature, yet as the movie progressed she is able to showcase certain other traits that made us able to root for her. But yes, let’s be honest, this is indeed Taron Egerton’s and his bald head’s show, in particular when dancing to The Chemical Brothers.

As a whole, Apex provides some wonderful landscape shots, an unsettling villainous turn from Taron Egerton, and an exciting third act that turns to full horror. However the film does suffer from rough pacing, and even for a 90 minute movie it does drag. The narrative is predictable and characters make silly decisions as akin to this genre, but for a streaming release it’s passable.

Overall score: 5/10

Wow. The new Dune movie was not what I expected.

Plot: Dao Ma, the "second most wanted fugitive," is entrusted by his benefactor, the chief of Mo family clan, to take on a mysterious escort mission-escorting the "most wanted fugitive" to Chang'an.

It is only recently, and I mean within the last couple of months, that I have gotten really invested in the Hong Kong wuxia martial arts genre. Rooted in Chinese literature and folklore, these films feature stylized over-the-top martial arts fighting, gravity defying combat, and philosophical themes on Buddhism (there’s always a Buddha statue lurking somewhere!), Confucianism and Taoism. In particular to western audiences what is so appealing about these films is, due to our lack of knowledge on the mythology, seeing all the crazy witches, over-powered monks and monsters as well as the wonderful costumes and scenery is so infatuating and wonderful, even if some of the context is lost in translation due to either poor dubbing or subtitles. Then there is the action. The action is incredible, but also is the key deciding factor if you will or will not appreciate the wuxia genre. You have to completely dispense of any sense of disbelief, as the fights defy any laws of physics and reason, and human bodies or fling around and fly in the air in the most crazily acrobatic fashion. You will either think it’s too stupid or love and ravel in the ridiculousness of it all. I am very much of the latter, as recently, primarily through the 88 Films boutique label, discovered a multitude of wonderful old school fantasy martial arts epics from Golden Harvest ranging from A Chinese Ghost Story trilogy (and its many rip-offs including the infectious underseen 1988 wonder Picture of a Nymph), Peking Opera Blues, God of Gamblers, Righting Wrongs, The Seventh Curse and the list goes on. I am still only scratching the surface here. However when I heard that there was a brand new wuxia action film being released this year from martial artist choreographer legend Yuen Woo-Ping that was billed as a love letter to the old school wuxia genre, it was one I couldn’t miss. In particular as I’ve never seen a proper Chinese martial arts movie in the cinema, so I jumped at the opportunity of seeing Blades of the Guardians of the big screen.

Based on a series of graphic novels, Blades of the Guardians is a perfect piece of escapism for fans of the genre. Those looking for a particularly deep narrative should look elsewhere, as even though there are basic character dynamics and emotional enough stakes, the movie is primarily story boarded to go from crazy action set piece to the next, never really letting go or allowing you to breath or take a break from the ongoing acrobatic artistry on display. Think John Wick and The Raid movies only dialled up to the next level, with human bodies cannonballing left, right, up and down with no sense of gravity or physical limit, and the use of close combat sword play is incredible. In fact I have never seen swords fly around so much and be used in this form. In particular a one-on-one fight in fire was a showstopper, and also the sandstorm sequence that has been showcased in the trailers is indeed exceptional, very reminiscent of Mad Max: Fury Road except, again, with sword and humans doing things humans aren’t able to do. And though the story lacks much nuisance aside from characters going from A to B to C, the characters that come along for the ride all have their individuals fun traits that really made the time spent with them enjoyable. In particular each of them being introduced with a title card revealing another cool sounding name, ranging from One Eye to Master Hand to Old Mo and Double Headed Snake. And the cast, from the charismatic and badass Wu Jing, the stoic yet cool Max Zhang, the graceful and skilful Chen Lijun, the clumsy but fun Sun Yizhou and, of course, the legendary Jet Li appearing in cameo as an evil flying warlord swordsman.

Blades of the Guardians is an awesome time at the movies! The action is INSANE, with great visual effects, incredible stunt work and so many creative fights and kills, yet there too is that typical lighthearted humour sprinkled throughout, as well as the interesting historical backdrop setting during the Sui dynasty. Is it ludicrous? Of course, that’s what wuxia is made of, dammit! But man would I be surprised if another movie this year would be able to achieve this level of glorious and eye-popping action and imaginative brawls - Yuen Woo-Ping is a madman!

Overall score: 8/10

Actual dialogue from the movie:

“Have you ever fucked a dead person?”“No.”“Has a dead person ever fucked you?”“No! How does that even work?”“Let’s just say it starts with Mel Gibson and a whole lot of poppers, and ends two decks over with 10am Nate’n Al’s breakfast. You do the math, gorgeous.”“Just to be clear, you’re saying how a corpse fucks a human being is that Mel Gibson takes poppers?”“You’re saying that. You’re saying that. I would never betray a client like that, and I’m offended you’d even suggest it. I would lose my license to practice law in the state of California if I did. But just between us, it’s pretty fucked actually. They partied with the guy like he was alive all weekend. They actually made a cute little picture about it.”“Weekend at Bernie’s?”“Yes, Weekend at Bernie’s, Bubbi. You’re hysterical. You’ve gotten funnier.”

Written and directed by Jonah Hill, ladies and gentlemen.

Plot: Reef Hawk, Hollywood's poster child since age six, is not okay. When he learns about an extortion plot tied to a mysterious video, Reef preemptively sets out on a redemption tour to make amends, confront his demons, and avoid getting canceled.

Jonah Hill is evidently going through some things, as the movie is obviously based on his personal experiences, however a film that is based sorely on the idea of humanising Hollywood actors and making us feel sorry for them whilst they have so much money and fame is a narrative basis that is hard to connect with. Additionally, Keanu Reeves is a super likeable guy - we all love him of course. However the ‘actor’ he plays here, is highly unlikable through the way he dismissively treats his close friends, and how self centred and obsessed he is over his own self image, by constantly Googling his name and seeing if everyone still thinks he’s the best person in the world, and attempting to find at least one negative remark so as to give him an excuse to have a breakdown. There is additionally a story arc that involves him visiting people he has wronged in some way or other in the past to apologise to them. Yet it is evident that this is a highly manufactured mission that he does only, again, to save his own public image, and that these apologies aren’t sincere and don’t come from the heart. It is all theatrical, so for a movie that tries to humanise actors, it at the same time manages to disconnect us, the audience, even more so from them. Essentially, poor Jonah Hill wants us to give a crap about him, yet instead this movie makes us want to do quite the opposite. Oh, and the ‘cancel culture’ thematic is so loosely approached here without actually adding much to the topic that hasn’t been said or done previously, that it just underlined how bland and boring the entire movie is.

There is a lot of cameos in this, as evidently Apple has enough dirt on everyone to force them to come work on this. All performances here (aside one which I will come to in a moment) are one dimensional and lifeless. Keanu Reeves hasn’t been this wooden since Bram Stoker’s Dracula. Jonah Hill is as his media agent is extremely annoying, right from the visual off-putting beard and glasses to his character cussing and wining about environmentally friendly toilet paper. Cameron Diaz is fine - I’m still yet to see a decent role from her to justify her returning to acting. Matt Bomer, again, trying as best he can with what he has, except Jonah’s only directional note for him was “be gay” without any extra layers or nuance. The only one I enjoyed seeing here was Martin Scorsese (again, Apple must have gotten him to sell his soul to them in return for financing Killers of the Flower Moon) who plays a bowling-obsessed agent, and his scene was genuinely really sweet and endearing, as he speaks to Keanu about simply wanting to be remembered and noticed. This actually results in one of the only successful gags in the film, when Keanu does call him up for a check up and Marty gets highly offended and defensive at being asks “how’s your day going?”. Who would have thought that Martin Scorsese, who made a career out of directing some of the best acting talent ever, may be a good actor himself?

Not to be that person, but Outcome is, dare I say, a bad outcome. It’s a movie where the comedy doesn’t land at all. The thematics and narratives are misguided and aimless. The cinematography (from regular Gaspar Noe collaborator Beñoit Debie no less) is highly saturated and off putting. No judgement against Debie, his highly sensed colours work for hallucinogenic visuals of Gaspar Noe’s Climax or Enter the Void, but for a melancholic movie like Outcome it doesn’t particularly make sense. Again though, the point of Outcome as whole isn’t there. Jonah - what were you thinking?

Overall score: 2/10

The real Drama is The Odyssey they will take on the way to Dune: Part Three…

Plot: A happily engaged couple is put to the test when an unexpected turn sends their wedding week off the rails.

“Pedophilies are bad vibes and heroin users are good party vibes” is just one example of the type of dialogues characters engage in throughout A24’s new romantic black comedy The Drama, starring Zendaya and Robert Pattinson. Speaking of A24, they have been very tactical when it comes to the marketing of this film, as indeed they pushed more the romantic angle, with a dash of light comedy throughout. However they leave out a very key narrative aspect that is essentially the main theme that propels the story in the direction that it goes. This is a very cynical movie, and can be seen by some as of bad taste due to the subject matter it is handling. The jokes are very very dark, challenging taboo matters, and gun imagery can be shocking to witness, and I feel the comedy is very delicate and can brush people the wrong way. This feels very much up the street of someone like Yorgos Lanthimos, with Norwegian director Kristoffer Borgli (also did the awkward dramedy Dream Scenario with Nicolas Cage) not being afraid to cross the line. In fact the line is left far far behind! I definitely found parts of the film funny, but this isn’t a movie I see myself revisiting, as the whole idea is uncomfortable, which I get is the point. 

The editing is really interesting, as the movie cuts in a midst of a discussion/argument to 5 minutes later and continues. Almost a reflection of how when couples argue in real life, you tend to lose track of time and sometimes by the end of an argument forget what the initial cause for it was. That being said, certain segments are edited with intertwining flashbacks of events that occurred recently, and this non linear structure I felt didn’t work as it didn’t provide any extra significant reveals and instead came off a tad pretentious. Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against non-linear storytelling, as long as it serves a purposes. Otherwise best to keep things chronologically. 

Moving to the cast. Tom Holland must be an extremely secure partner. His second half Zendaya keeps taking these very provocative roles (see also Challengers) where she performs a lot of intimate scenes with young Hollywood heartthrobs the likes of Josh o’Connor, Mike Faist and Robert Pattinson, yet Tom Holland happily always shares on social media platforms how excited he is for his wife’s new movies. Bless his soul. Anyway, Zendaya is really good in this, blending vulnerability with past trauma in a powerful way, where you can never be too sure what she is thinking. Pattinson mumbles and stumbles his way through his lines, personifying the awkward nature of his character. Alana Haim plays a really vile hypocrite and was oddly more despicable compared to Zendaya, whose backstory I believe is intended to be worse. I’ve already seen a lot of users on Letterboxd throwing shade at Rachel and I must say I totally agree! I am here for the Rachel hate! 

The underlining commentary on the cultural aspect of how any normal person can have the darkest thoughts or secrets from their past that they never bring to light was interesting, even if this ideology was very passive and the film instead opted to focus on human behaviour of targeting one single individual. Essentially even your closest friend can be a messed up individual but you would be non the wiser, and if anyone finds out you deep dark secret you’ll be bullied and judged on it for the rest of your life. Lesson? Never tell the truth. 

Overall score: 6/10

Feels weird watching a stoner movie sober. 

A shy college student and his reckless roommate set out on a simple mission to grab pizza, but after a strange dose of a mind-bending experimental drug, they're thrust into a chaotic night of absurd encounters, wild hallucinations, and unexpected revelations that could change their lives forever.

It’s good to see Gaten Matarazzo attempting to branch away from his Stranger Things image, by taking on roles that are much cruder and foul mouthed, as seen in Please Don’t Destroy: The Treasure of Foggy Mountain and now Pizza Movie. That being said it’s nevertheless difficult to not see him as anyone other than Dustin Henderson, and unfortunately the young actor has a long way to go get himself recognised as a separate actor from the show that made him famous. Not impossible however, as the likes of Daniel Radcliffe (by taking on eclectic, strange, and highly artistic projects such as Swiss Army Man and the Weird Al biopic since Harry Potter in addition to delving into a substantial amount of theatre work) and Robert Pattinson (purposefully pivoting to indie arthouse films for nearly a decade following his Twilight days, earning critical acclaim in films like Good Time and The Lighthouse) managed to succeed in this. With Gaten, it seems, he’s riffing on Jonah Hill’s Superbad days, through a mix of neurotic energy, precise comedic timing, and an ability to find the humanity in complex or flawed characters. The result? Pizza Movie! 

The simplistic yet to the point titled Pizza Movie is a stoner comedy that blends the antics of Harold & Kumar with the drug sequence from 21 Jump Street, except the latter is elongated to a feature length movie, where the four distinct phases of a synthetic drug are now increased to six phases. It’s a basic premise that does a lot with throwing as many ridiculous and silly gags at you, and though there is nothing here that we haven’t seen before, it’s all very much amusing and for a straight-to-streaming Hulu release, me and my wife very much enjoyed this. Similar to Mike & Nick & Nick & Alice - don’t get me wrong, I love going to the cinema to experience new movies, but there is value to be found from these little comedies that are dropped straight to streaming platforms that me and my wife can enjoy on a Friday/Saturday evening after a hard week of work. 

I’m not saying Pizza Movie is a perfect film. Heck, it treads the line of being bad movie, as the jokes are very hit-and-miss, and the acting is quite mediocre to awful from most of the side characters. Gaten Matarazzo and Sean Giambrone play well off one another, even though Giambrone’s ‘awkward shtick’ felt forced and didn’t come across as believable. Not bringing Superbad into this again, but it did feel as if he was trying his best to imitate Michael Cera’s character too much. Though again that factor could be accredited to Pizza Movie as a whole, which relies heavily on narratives, ideas and character stereotypes from other movies. 

As mentioned, very hit and miss but overall an enjoyable if forgettable watch. There are some solid laughs to be had, from an exploding heads sequence to a full blown Inglourious Basterds parody, to a pizza delivery robot having an existential crisis as it desperately seeks a customer satisfaction rating, to an absolutely superb fourth wall break. It owns its irreverent hyper-stupidity with a confidence that its insecure young heroes would kill to have for themselves. Is it funny? Eh. Is it cheap? Very. Is it an easy watch? Yea. And featuring a killer voice assist from a certain celebrity that goes a long way, its madcap absurdity proves typical of a movie that’s willing to do anything to amuse its target audience. And amused we were! Of course we also had Domino’s pizza during it, because watching a movie titled Pizza Movie without eating pizza feels sacrilegious. 

Overall score: 5/10

Gives Easter eggs a bad name.

Plot: Having thwarted Bowser's previous plot to marry Princess Peach, Mario and Luigi now face a fresh threat in Bowser Jr., who is determined to liberate his father from captivity and restore the family legacy. Alongside companions new and old, the brothers travel across the stars to stop the young heir's crusade.

I quite enjoy the Super Mario games. From playing on the old GameBoy, as well smashing out Double Dash on the Cube, I like many others have grown up with these characters. Yet, The Super Mario Bros. Movie a few years ago didn’t leave me too inspired, but it’s Easter so I thought in light of the holiday I’d give the sequel a go with an open mind. In particular as Yoshi is joining the club and who doesn’t love Yoshi??

The Super Mario Galaxy Movie is bating to the extreme - characters from childhood we know and love appearing, musical cues of the signature theme tunes from the Nintendo games, the iconic 8-bit sound effect, one liners etc. As long as the movie does that and BOYYY does The Super Mario Galaxy Movie do that and then some, then of course it will please enough audience members. That being said, when the film has F all else to offer, I wonder how generally shameless Universal and Illumination are, where they aren’t even remotely attempting to hide the fact that this movie is an utter cash grab and nothing more. Of course - this movie will make $1 billion at the box office. At least. Probably even more. This is an under 2 hour fan-service meal for our brains to chew on without any significant substance or meaning behind it. Look, I get this is a kids movie. Fully respect that, but you can still make a childish movie with somewhat of a sincere message or life lesson behind it, or at least tell a cohesive and interesting story. Heck, we had Hoppers come out earlier this year, and it was a lovely story about animals and the environment, featuring fun characters, beautiful animation and a delightful time overall. That, by the way, was a big budget mainstream animation from Disney Pixar, so proves the point that blockbuster filmmaking doesn’t need to feel so empty and artificial. But then there is The Super Mario Galaxy Movie. You’ve got Yoshi saying his name in a high pitch voice (akin to the games) and yes it’s adorable, but otherwise adds zero to nothing to what’s happening in the movie. Let’s throw in a Baby Mario and Baby Luigi gag but then get that resolved so easily that one wonders why it was done in the first place. Star Fox shows up Nick Fury-style promising to invite us into the Nintendo Initiative, and then proceeds to act like Temu Han Solo for the rest of the movie.

Even with children as the primary target audience, the screening I was in had quite a few families and kids among them, and yet I hardly heard a peep from any of them. No chuckles or laughs and excited squeaks - almost as if they weren’t really enjoying what was happening on screen. So look, I’m not the only hater here. Blame my entire screening! 

There are some redeeming qualities - the animation looks fantastic with lots of eye-popping colours, and the animators have done a wonderful job at bringing the Mushroom Kingdom and the rest of the galaxy to life. The voice cast all do the best they can, with Jack Black as Bowser again standing out as the MVP, with his lines actual being quite funny, mainly due to his delivery rather than the actual lines themselves. Oh, as the music by Brian Tyler has plenty of cues from the original games, yet they were sprinkled well enough and spread out with some good melodies for a solid accompaniment. Outside of those this movie is bad, but it doesn’t matter what I say nor anyone, as this will make a ridiculous amount of money. Another win for Hollywood. 

Overall score: 3/10