The Killer (2023)
Director: David Fincher
Screenwriter: Andrew Kevin Walker
Starring: Michael Fassbender, Tilda Swinton, Arliss Howard, Charles Parnell

When it comes to the work of David Fincher, his reputation as one of the greatest filmmakers of his generation would seem fairly earned. With films like Se7en, Gone Girl and The Social Network under his belt, it is hard to disagree. Though, with each movie that is hailed as a masterpiece there seems to be an equally underappreciated film that feels overlooked. For every Fight Club there is The Game, and for every Zodiac there is a Panic Room. Then there are those films that do big at the Oscars, garnering a ridiculous number of nominations only to never really be spoken about again. When was the last time you heard anyone talking about The Curious Case of Benjamin Button or Mank? So, with the release of The Killer, Fincher’s latest for streaming giant Netflix, one can’t help but to wonder if it will stand out as a masterpiece like Zodiac, come and go like Mank, or find its audience much later in life like The Game. Though its mixed reception by critics seems to point towards the treatment of one of the latter choices, perhaps it deserves the former.

The film follows Michael Fassbender’s titular Killer as he is embroiled in an international manhunt after an assassination goes wrong. Though the general idea of the film is one we have seen many times, this is not a bad thing. Just look at Michael Mann’s Thief. Even by 1981 the idea of a gangster pulling “one last job” had been done before, but it’s all about the execution. The same goes for The Killer.

It opens in Paris. Fincher, through Fassbender as narrator, introduces us to this character and his world in an opener so great that it feels as though any amount of time could have passed without our noticing. Simply, it shows Fassbender’s character as he waits on his first mission of the movie, explaining the hardest part about being an assassin; the boredom. Much like the character of the Killer, this opening is cold, calculated and precise. Long takes with steady, still shots. Calm. It is the perfect introduction. Stylish and funny, it gives us a perfect sense of the world and tells us everything we need to know in order to understand what happens from here. Throughout it, Fassbender gives us insight into the mind of the character, explaining his own morality towards the work that he does. He doesn’t ask questions about why or who he is killing, he always sticks to the plan, and he shows no empathy. That is until the mission goes awry, at which point hitmen are sent after the Killer and we see the character’s ideology disrupted. 

The rules set out by Fassbender and writer Andrew Kevin Walker at the beginning of the film are clever in this respect, as they work as a good reference point for both the audience and the character to return to throughout as we watch Fassbender struggle to maintain his cold and calculated nature. Moreso, it places us in the shoes of the Killer, allowing us inside his head in order to understand his actions. Better yet, Fincher uses this as a tactic to play a moral tug of war between our individual morality and that of the character’s, leading to a viewing experience in which we constantly hope – and maybe even believe – that we will see one outcome but instead are gifted another.

Not only does Walker’s writing and Fincher’s direction draw us into this world but Fassbender’s performance sells the film as a whole. Though there is an awful lot of narration throughout, we rarely see the Killer speak on screen, meaning much of Fassbender’s performance is told entirely through his body in an incredibly physical performance. Similar to Fincher’s direction of the picture, many of Fassbender’s movements are incredibly precise, leaving little doubt about this man’s abilities as a highly trained assassin. Unlike other films of the same ilk, such as John Wick, the action sequences in The Killer are restrained. Some may feel short changed by the film as a result, but it is in this sense that it stands out. Not only are many of the action sequences directed in such a slick way that it comes across as a reminder of the character’s skill, but when these sequences do become more violent or rough or even last longer, the more impactful they become. It is through little nuances like this that Fincher shows his masterful direction. Just as his meticulous directing style brought a cold and calculated manner to characters like Gone Girl’s Amy Elliott Dunne or The Social Network’s Mark Zuckerberg, it too has the same effect in The Killer.

With the feeling that Mank simply came and went, rarely mentioned now alongside Fincher’s other work, the fear that the Netflix era of David Fincher’s career was proving to be a disappointment was particularly pertinent. Thankfully, The Killer makes it clear that this could not be further from the truth. David Fincher proves that he is still a director with a killer aim that never misses, using everything at his disposal so delicately that it simply takes your breath away.

Though The Killer may seem conventional on paper, and the lack of big action set pieces may leave some disappointed, this slick and stripped back thriller brings us one of 2023’s best films through the character study of a cold as ice killer we simply can’t take our eyes off.

Score: 23/24

Recommended for you: David Fincher Movies Ranked

Wingwomen (2023)
Director: Mélanie Laurent
Screenwriters: Cédric Anger, Chris Deslandes
Starring: Mélanie Laurent, Adéle Exarchapoulos, Isabelle Adjani, Manon Bresch

In the early 2000s, just before the big superhero boom, there was a trend of lighthearted, easily digestible action movies that revolved around an endearing central friendship. Charlie’s Angels, Shanghai Noon and Ocean’s Eleven were all a part of it. Now, in 2023, we find ourselves at the other end of the superhero boom. Just as box office returns are diminishing for Marvel and general audiences seem to be moving on from the churn of comic book adaptations, Wingwomen takes a look back at the trend we all left behind.

Wingwomen opens with a simple sequence of our two protagonists in what comes across as a training mission of sorts. For what, we’re never explicitly told. Carole (Mélanie Laurent) is the calmer, more level-headed and focused half of the duo, while Alex (Adéle Exarchapoulos) is the maverick who never misses a beat, even if her mind is preoccupied with the latest man in her life ghosting her. They’re pursued through a forest by an army of military drones – Carole drives a quad bike while Alex shoots from the back, being sure to vent about the instability of her love life throughout.

It’s campy and cheesy, but it’s also very watchable for one good reason…

From the moment Wingwomen starts, it is quite obvious that one aspect of it holds a lot of promise. In Carole and Alex, we have two leads who feel like real people, and who interact with one another in such a way that makes it hard not to succumb to their charms. They’re in some kind of an extraordinary situation, but they could just as easily be painting a wall together and it would be just as compelling to watch.

Their character archetypes go as far back as Laurel and Hardy – one is organised and the other is a mess, essentially. It’s the same dynamic that films like Rush Hour and Lethal Weapon have created such memorable relationships with. Wingwomen takes it in a slightly different direction, one that’s more concerned with subverting expectations and creating a reliance on one another along the way. Carole experiences problems that would feel more natural to Alex, and Alex is the best possible person to help her reason her way through those problems. Carole isn’t going through anything that Alex hasn’t had to learn how to cope with herself, often just to survive the hectic life she leads. The touching element of it all is that it gives Alex a selfless purpose in this relationship too, despite being the messy one. They need each other more than either of them knows, and it’s hard not to feel warmed by it when the characters are so authentic.

Unfortunately, as the narrative unfolds and we learn more about the world that these two find themselves in, it quickly starts to feel like we actually learn less. Quite early on, Carole and Alex decide they want nothing more than to lead normal lives. It’s one of the most exciting parts of the film, because by that point it’s already abundantly clear that these two characters are the heart and soul of Wingwomen. To see them transition into normal lives together would be fascinating.

Instead of diving further into these two characters though, we’re just introduced to more and more plot points that only exist for the sake of facilitating mediocre action sequences. There are super high-tech concepts that are introduced and then immediately abandoned – like a retina-scan secured bunker in the forest that blends into its surroundings because it’s a big mirror that they can see out of but nobody can see into. It’s visually appealing, but it comes and goes without leaving any impression or being given any explanation. That’s true for more or less everything outside of the core story which is just the richness of Carole and Alex’s friendship with one another.

Just as Wingwomen is a film of two halves from a narrative perspective, it is also one from a technical point of view. Some of its cinematography is beautiful, and there are a number of shots that are reminiscent of films like Parasite. In those moments, everything comes together to create a visual image that tells as much of the story as the dialogue filling the scene could hope to. Then there are moments when the screen feels as if it’s filled with disposable clutter instead. One example is during an ad-hoc musical sequence that, again, comes and goes without anything to justify its inclusion.

There is a very strong heart to Wingwomen that is constantly undermined by a tendency to create flamboyant set pieces with poor execution. Carole and Alex are wonderfully written characters with a beautiful dynamic as friends, but it’s hard to truly appreciate how brilliant that is when the bells and whistles attached to them are so loud and pointless. Even so, if this was shown as part of an early-2000s buddy action marathon it would be very difficult to spot the imposter. In fact, the only thing that might give it away is how well the buddy part is written while the rest is on par. If this trend is to make a comeback in the wake of the superhero boom, then hopefully they’ll at least have characters that are as compelling as this early entry into its revival era.

Score: 12/24

Written by Rob Jones

You can support Rob Jones on his website: rbrtjones.com
Twitter: @rbrtjones

Love at First Sight (2023)
Director: Vanessa Caswill
Screenwriter: Katie Lovejoy
Starring: Haley Lu Richardson, Ben Hardy, Jameela Jamil, Sally Phillips, Rob Delaney, Dexter Fletcher, Tom Taylor

Over the past decade, there has been a revival within the Romance genre. While there are large-scale, sweeping romances on the big screen such as Past Lives and Portrait of a Lady on Fire, streaming services such as Netflix have also had a hand in the upward trend, with their many original rom-coms, from Christmas movies of the Hallmark ilk (The Princess Switch, Falling for Christmas), to teen novel adaptations like To All the Boys I’ve Loved Before. 

The latest in the collection is Netflix’s Love At First Sight, which arrived on the service on the 15th of September 2023. Starring Haley Lu Richardson and Ben Hardy in the most classic of meet cutes, this film offers a warm and welcome addition to the genre. 

Richardson stars as Hadley Sullivan, a 20-year-old New Yorker on the way to her father’s second wedding in London. Unfortunately, she has just missed her flight. And her phone’s dead (as we discover it often is). As she waits in the airport lounge looking for a charger, it is here that she meets Hardy’s Oliver Jones, a 22-year-old Londoner studying at NYU. He’s also heading to London on that next flight. He’s organised with a phone charger. The pair connect over the course of their seven-hour flight to London, an easy repartee flowing between them that takes both of them by surprise. As they touch down in London, each with family commitments to fulfil, they cannot let the thought of each other go, and so begins an emotional trek across the city as they seek to reconnect. 

Based on the novel, “The Statistical Probability of Love at First Sight” by Jennifer Smith, it is a film that is seemingly obsessed with statistics. In fact, it regularly lays them out for us, often by way of Jameela Jamil’s omnipresent narrator character (no seriously, she’s everywhere). And while narration can often grate, in this case it adds a touch of the nostalgic, her opening narration discussing the statistics of airports at Christmas immediately drawing parallels with the opening sequence of another classic holiday romance, Love Actually. Jamil’s narrator is the one who not only sets the scene, but offers an insight into who Hadley and Oliver are. Within the first five minutes, she has told us both of their top three fears, and why, as well as a brief summary of their family backgrounds.

With the extensive narration, it could be easy for Love at First Sight to fall into the trap of telling rather than showing, but the casting helps significantly to ensure that this isn’t the case. Haley Lu Richardson brings all of the quirky charm that made her a fan favourite in last year’s second season of ‘The White Lotus’. Meanwhile, Ben Hardy (Bohemian Rhapsody) brings a distinct British awkwardness, as well as a genuineness that matches Richardson’s warmth measure for measure. The chemistry between them is natural, meaning that even when their dialogue lacks, there is still great joy in watching them together. In supporting roles as the parents, Rob Delaney, Sally Phillips and Rocketman director Dexter Fletcher aren’t given much to work with, but help to make Hadley and Oliver’s characters feel more lived in. In particular, Oliver’s family dynamics form the emotional centre, helping to ground the film. Whilst only a side character, Tom Taylor as Oliver’s brother Luther is an incredibly accurate depiction of young British men.

As aforementioned, the family relationships are key in making this film something more than just a standard rom-com. Without this narrative element, the film would struggle to find meaning, even if the ‘opposites-attract’ central dynamic is cute. It’s not particularly profound, and certainly functions as a bit of heartwarming fun rather than as a film to reflect on once the credits roll. However, it’s clear that director Vanessa Caswill and screenwriter Katie Lovejoy are keenly aware of this, and seek not to make this a subversive number in the genre, but gleefully follow the tropes to the letter. Whether it’s the classic miscommunication, the race across the city to confess feelings, or even just a girl in a nice dress paired with trainers, Love at First Sight knows that if a formula isn’t broken, don’t fix it. A soundtrack full of acoustic pop always helps.

It’s a simplistic narrative, but on the shoulders of its two stars Netflix have served up another cute rom-com that makes for a delightful cosy movie night, even if it won’t be returned to afterwards. Richardson is definitely the highlight, continuing a streak in her career that shows that she is a promising, up-and-coming talent, not just in the indie sphere, but in the mainstream. Its script is cliché, but is wholesome enough to bring a smile to even a cynic’s face, if just for 90 minutes. It might have worked better as a Christmas release though!

Score: 17/24

Written by Rehana Nurmahi

You can support Rehana Nurmahi at the following links:

Twitter – @Han_notsolo
Letterboxd – hana_banana97
Portfolio – Authory

El Conde (2023)
Director: Pablo Larraín
Screenwriters: Guillermo Calderón, Pablo Larraín
Starring: Jaime Vadell, Gloria Münchmeyer, Alfredo Castro, Paula Luchsinger, Stella Gonet

Pablo Larraín’s newest film is a historical satire imagining the Chilean Dictator, Augusto Pinochet (Jaime Vadell), as a bloodsucking vampire. El Conde is aging and finally ready to die after 250 years plaguing the planet, doing everything in his power to quash socialism, unionists and revolutionaries. His family members, human children almost as vampiric as the man himself, his power-hungry wife Lucía (Gloria Münchmeyer) and his murderous butler, Fyodor (Alfredo Castro), have holed themselves up in a remote countryside complex to detangle a messy inheritance. An accountant (Paula Luchsinger) is called in, who also happens to be a nun charged with exorcising The Count.

This is a film without a goodie, Jaime Vadell’s Pinochet is a petulant toddler, completely unaware of his villainy. Nothing is fair, and what is the point of even being alive if he isn’t in control? It appears that his faked death in 2006 has finally taken its toll. As he is surrounded by people who openly declare their love for him, he is enabled to live in a fantasy world where this is true. Even the exorcist who openly chides him for his human rights violations seems to love him.

Larraín is well-versed at dealing with the political history of his country as his subject matter. His Oscar-nominated film No (2012), also starring Jaime Vadell and Alfredo Castro, was a historical drama about the 1988 vote in Chile, determining whether Pinochet should stay in power. Neruda (2016) explored Chile’s political history through the prism of exiled poet Pablo Neruda. While his critically acclaimed English-language movies Spencer (2021) and Jackie (2016) have cemented him as a filmmaker adept at dealing with controversial political figures.

El Conde (2023) is the first film by Larraín that directly tackles the dictator of his homeland, and it is not subtle. Every detail – even down to its release date, the 50-year anniversary of Pinochet first becoming president of Chile – is subtext and satire. Every scene exists to convey a message, from the promo poster to the clipped RP narrator.

Sometimes this works brilliantly. The detached way the vampire blends and devours his hunted hearts is a clear metaphor for the way the Chilean’s were treated during the dictator’s regime. Pinochet (Jaime Vadell) and Lucia (Gloria Münchmeyer) slow dancing to a brass band playing music that belongs in a political parade is ridiculous and hilarious.

Unfortunately, at times, the political points that Larraín wants to make overshadow any potential plot. For a film overflowing with gore, greed, love and lust, not much actually happens. But that’s okay, as long as the viewer knows that’s what they’re in for. And, within about three minutes, the viewer has got a pretty good gist of what they are in for.

The decision to film in black and white, possibly an ode to those original vampire films from Germany and Universal Pictures in the 20s and 30s, makes for rich and sumptuous viewing. It also goes some way to mask what is some truly graphic and gratuitous violence. Its almost velvety texture gives El Conde a dreamlike quality. Sadly, the notion that a political monster could be a literal monster is a dream. The nightmare being that they are in fact human.

El Conde confronts a difficult subject matter that almost accomplishes greatness. The best moments burn bright, truly grotesque, laugh out loud funny. While the gorgeous cinematography is a joy to watch. It might not be one hundred percent pitch perfect, but El Conde is well worth a watch, created by a seasoned and confident team. The note it ends on is sharp as a stake to the heart.

Score: 19/24

In this edition of Ranked, each of James Ponsoldt’s films – from Off the Black in 2006 to Summering in 2022 – is being compared and contrasted to judge which are the best and which are the worst in terms of artistic achievement, emotional resonance, critical reception and audience perception. These are the James Ponsoldt Movies Ranked.

Follow @thefilmagazine on Twitter.

6. Summering (2022)

There are glimmers of James Ponsoldt’s typical late summer mood in Summering, and a number of ideas that seem like they could truly take flight in another lifetime, but James Ponsoldt’s first feature film in five years is by far the worst of his relatively short filmography; a film of barely threaded together metaphors that loses all direction and focus as each unrealistic moment is followed by another.

As has been typical of Ponsoldt’s time as a director, the performances in Summering are largely good. The film is centred upon four girls, all of whom add their own unique dynamics to the group and are directed to accentuate their better qualities as performers, while the adults involved also turn in layered and nuanced portrayals that are too good for the quality of film they are in.

The key issue here seems to be that the film loses track of every good idea it ever has; it drops the ball so many times. It’s confusing, not because it’s too profound or deep or interesting, but because every moment of manifested anxiety that the film is attempting to portray is tackled with such a lack of nuance or creativity – then is forgotten about or contradicted – that it becomes frankly nonsensical.

There are hints of the spirit of Ponsoldt’s better work in Summering, but given the quality of work the director was able to produce on television after The Circle (2017), this 2022 film is a huge disappointment.

Recommended for you: 10 Must-See One-Shot Films

5. The Circle (2017)

The Circle Review

When Netflix announced a Tom Hanks-produced movie about internet privacy starring Emma Watson and John Boyega was to arrive on their streaming service in 2017, a lot of people were positive about what was to come. Unfortunately, what came was one of the biggest misses of James Ponsoldt’s career. Bad performances, a patronising story, below standard CG effects and an overall sense of what could have been made for a lacklustre offering.

It seems that the director often went missing when the film needed visual inspiration or an injection of character, and it was clear that he felt much less comfortable in the movie’s concept-driven formula than he had in his previous character-driven work.

The Circle at least makes sense (mostly) and isn’t entirely void of positives, but it is a red mark against an otherwise impressive character-driven filmography.

You Are So Not Invited to My Bat Mitzvah (2023)
Director: Sammi Cohen
Screenwriters: Alison Peck
Starring: Adam Sandler, Idina Menzel, Sadie Sandler, Sunny Sandler, Samantha Lorraine, Dylan Hoffman, Sarah Sherman

The last time Idina Menzel and Adam Sandler tried to raise a good, Jewish family together, Sandler ended up in the trunk of a loan shark’s car and Idina’s father found himself hundreds of dollars in debt. The film was Uncut Gems (2019). This time around, Stacy Friedman (Sunny Sandler) is planning her Bat Mitzvah and the stakes are just as high. 

Sure, the cerebral A24 cult classic and the family flick boasting an Olivia Rodrigo needle drop might not have a lot in common, but this does speak to the versatility of the Sandler family. We can’t help but to compare the two sides of fatherhood––from gambling addiction to embarrassing your daughter at the movies on a Saturday night, Adam Sandler has done it all. 

You Are So Not Invited to My Bat Mitzvah is a family comedy about the woes of 7th grade Stacy Friedman who is desperate to have the coolest Bat Mitzvah in the school. This is no simple task given her best friend, Lydia (Samantha Lorraine), is already totally rich with a huge mansion and neither girl is exactly in with the popular crowd. To make matters more complicated, a good Bat Mitzvah needs a killer DJ, a crazy venue, and a dance with the cutest boy in school, Andy Goldfarb (Dylan Hoffman). Of course, the latter causes some major tensions between the two best friends. As Stacy and Lydia careen into womanhood, they must overcome their feud to throw the ultimate party. 

The Sandler children, who play sisters Stacy and Ronnie (Sadie Sandler), are undeniably charming and turn up that sibling rivalry the way only true sisters can. Even Jackie Sandler has her moment in a cameo as Lydia’s mother Bree. The story, which is already a sweet tale of growing up, is made that much more genuine with the family connection. It is clear that the cast is a tight knit group of Sandler’s friends and family. In the case of this film, if the cast is having fun, we are too.

The film also works as a heartfelt crash course in coming of age in a Jewish community. The world is carefully crafted with sentimental details that explore a vibrant New York community. One of the highlights is the over the top Hebrew School teacher Rabbi Rebecca (Sarah Sherman) who provides tough love, guidance, and of course a themed song when the students come to class. Throughout the film, we get a sense of the closeness of this community but also the pressure to perform for their peers. Here it is proven that the universal lies in the specifics. 

Additionally, You Are So Not Invited to My Bat Mitzvah is an ode to girlhood. Soundtracked by hits from the likes of Taylor Swift, Olivia Rodrigo, Remi Wolf, and Selena Gomez, the film feels informed by real teenage girls. Unlike other Netflix Originals that are fraught with disjointed Gen Z slang and cringy references to outdated trends, You Are So Not Invited to My Bat Mitzvah manages to feel current and in the know (which is a soaring feat for a culture that moves as fast as ours does). The flick is angsty, melodramatic, and flamboyant enough to be ripped from the pages of a teenage girl’s diary––where a boy ignoring you in the hallway feels like the biggest tragedy in human history. 

You Are So Not Invited to My Bat Mitzvah is a quick and enjoyable watch that is good for reminiscing on the plights of early teendom. Sandler’s comedy seems to mature with his growing family. While it maintains his usual goofy antics, he steps aside to make room for his daughters––who prove that they are worthy comedy leads and then some. The family comes together to make a heartwarming and silly comedy that is great for a pick me up. 

Score: 18/24

Recommended for you: Top 10 Adam Sandler Performances

They Cloned Tyrone (2023)
Director: Juel Taylor
Screenwriters: Tony Rettenmaier, Juel Taylor
Starring: John Boyega, Jamie Foxx, Teyonah Parris, Keifer Sutherland

A pimp, a sex worker and a drug dealer uncover a massive government plot playing out (quite literally) beneath their noses. It’s not quite the usual set up for a mystery sci-fi thriller, but Juel Taylor’s feature-length directorial debut does it any way. And it’s a riot. Pulp fiction at its finest. Even the slightly grainy quality to the camera work is reminiscent of the cheap paper that murder mysteries were printed on back in their heyday. The plot is fast and full of twists, the two-hour runtime flies by. It is the screen equivalent of a page-turner.

They Cloned Tyrone’s marketing has its three protagonists labelled as an unlikely trio, but given the film’s setting they seem the likeliest of people to take down the man. ‘Nancy Drew ain’t got shit on me’ says Teyonah Parris’s ferocious Yo-Yo. A lovable sex worker who’s as sharp with her wit as her bullets. The confidence she displays in her ability to solve the mystery is possibly misplaced. Fontaine (John Boyega) and Slick Charles (Jamie Foxx) certainly look like they don’t believe her.

Whether they like it or not, these three are at the heart of this puzzle. A puzzle that started when Fontaine (John Boyega), one of the neighbourhood drug dealers, was violently shot dead by a rival. The thing is, he woke up completely unharmed.

John Boyega cut his teeth in sci-fi cult classic Attack the Block (2011) and played an important part in the Star Wars reboots, so it isn’t surprising that he’s comfortable in another sci-fi story. In fact, every character is perfectly cast, the on-screen chemistry between John Boyega, Jamie Foxx and Teyonah Parris is a joy to watch. Foxx in particular is brilliant in the comedic role of Slick Charles, the ‘1995 International Players Ball “Pimp of the Year”’. And Teyonah Parris is amazing, especially when sparring with Foxx’s Slick.

Like Joe Cornish’s Attack the Block (2011), or Jordan Peele’s Get Out (2017) and Us (2019), They Cloned Tyrone is a genre film with a clear social commentary. The Glen – the neighbourhood that Fontaine, Yo-Yo and Slick are fighting so desperately to protect – is a microcosm, albeit a slightly off-kilter version, of the world. This is a community plagued by lack of opportunity, lack of social mobility, the perils of masculinity, drugs and gun violence. The film does well to explore the cyclical nature of these issues too, the notion of those in power benefitting from neglected communities as well. Of course, Jordan Peele is a hard comparison to live up to and it’s fair to say They Cloned Tyrone doesn’t quite match up to Get Out (2018), but this still feels like a film that is going to do well, spark conversations and garner a solid fanbase.

Everything in They Cloned Tyrone, from costume to language is amped up, over the top to the point of absurd, or it’s boiled down to stereotypes, purposefully, and to interesting effect. Fontaine’s (John Boyega) gold teeth flash during rare smiles and Slick Charles (Jamie Foxx) wears alligator skin shoes.

In stark contrast to their stereotypical costumes, the characters are multi-faceted and complex. Boyega’s Fontaine is a tough nut who cares for a sick mother, and Yo-Yo is a sex worker who reads crime novels and dreams of hiking through Patagonia. Slick is articulate and verbose, why say ‘show me the way,’ when you can say ‘Excuse me, kind sir. But if you can point me to the elevator that leads to the freaky laboratory, I’ll be out your atmosphere’?

The film possibly suffers slightly because of the scope of topics it is trying to tackle. It could easily be double the length. The ending, unfortunately, feels a little rushed, especially after such a brilliant build up. Major plot points are dealt with in a matter of minutes while other moments are lingered on for too long. So much is going on it’s easy to miss a beat.

The culmination of so many ideas seems fitting with Taylor’s eclectic past projects. As a screenwriter, he has worked on movies such as Creed II (2018) and Space Jam: New Legacy (2021), he’s obviously someone who isn’t constrained by genre. This ability to borrow tropes is evident in They Cloned Tyrone. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, if anything it could broaden the film’s appeal. Fans of everything from Cabin in the Woods (2011) to Sorry to Bother You (2018) should find things to love.

There is no arguing that They Cloned Tyrone is enjoyable, funny, and entertaining, but it does sometimes miss the mark. Perhaps there are one too many twists, perhaps the title joke doesn’t quite pay off. Perhaps none of that matters when Jamie Foxx is so spectacular.

Score: 19/24

The Out-Laws (2023)
Director: Tyler Spindel
Screenwriters: Ben Zazove, Evan Turner
Starring: Adam DeVine, Nina Dobrev, Pierce Brosnan, Ellen Barkin, Lauren Lapkus, Poorna Jagannathan, Lil Rey Howery, Richard Kind, Julie Hagerty

When a film starts with the Happy Madison Productions logo card, we know what we’re about to get. 50 First Dates, Click, Grown Ups, take your pick. Everything they’ve done, with maybe the exception of 2022 basketball drama Hustle, is a light-hearted, inconsequential comedy that revolves around Adam Sandler, with a plot that appears to be reverse-engineered from its title. That’s not always a bad thing, there’s certainly a space for it in the vast reaches of filmmaking, but The Out-Laws is quite a bad example.

Adam DeVine plays Owen, the character that Adam Sandler usually would have played. He’s a loveable bumbling idiot who has somehow ended up in a job that requires a far more responsible person than he is. As a Bank Manager, he’s in charge of the safe and its voice-activated security system. The voice-activated security system exists for the sole purpose of a joke where Owen sings a Blink-182 song to it as a password again and again.

It’s his wedding weekend. His traditional parents (Richard Kind and Julie Hagerty) are unapproving of his yoga-teaching fiancé Parker, played by Nina Dobrev, and his soon-to-be in-laws (Pierce Brosnan and Ellen Barkin). The problem regarding The Out-Laws appearing to have been reverse-engineered from its title, is that we have to sit through so much set-up for a forgone conclusion that we’re already privy to.

As soon as we find out that Owen’s about to get new in-laws, its fairly obvious that they’ll turn out to be the out-laws. But we still have to go through the awkward introductions, Owen defending their aloof nature to his parents, and the standard “In-laws, eh?” humour that stand-up comedians have long since left behind. It all might have amounted to something that isn’t worth skipping if Owen went on to deduce that Parker’s parents were the out-laws all along in a way that felt anywhere near satisfying, but he essentially just recounts what we’ve just seen in the order we’ve just seen it.

The Out-Laws is so clearly an Adam Sandler vehicle in the same vein as almost every other Happy Madison production that it almost triggers an uncanny valley feeling to see Adam DeVine play the lead role. That’s not his fault, and the problem isn’t anything to do with his performance or comedic instincts, it’s just not his film despite being his film. Pierce Brosnan and Richard Kind do have some comedic potential as opposing in-laws, but The Out-Laws never really makes much use of it. Nina Dobrev, Ellen Barkin and Julie Hagerty unfortunately all fade into the background due to a screenplay that clearly isn’t bothered whether they’re all there or not.

What’s most emblematic of how far The Out-Laws misses by is the character of Tyree, played by Lil Rey Howard. Just by virtue of being Lil Rey Howard, he’s able to bring some relief to an otherwise dry and unsuccessful attempt at a family comedy, but he plays the exact same character as he did in Get Out. Obviously, with Get Out being a racially-charged horror that depicts some really rough stuff, it’s good to have a character that provides a space to decompress here and there. The Out-Laws really shouldn’t need the same character to do the same thing when it’s supposed to be a light-hearted comedy.

Unfortunately, there just isn’t much substance to The Out-Laws. It starts where it ends and it repeats itself on the way with very little to laugh at while we get there. It’s really just one in a long line of low-effort, low-stakes comedies that are designed for us to watch and quickly forget about, and that’s exactly what we’ll do.

Score: 5/24

Written by Rob Jones

You can support Rob Jones on his website: rbrtjones.com
Twitter: @rbrtjones

Extraction 2 (2023)
Director: Sam Hargrave
Screenwriter: Joe Russo
Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Golshifteh Farahani, Adam Bessa, Olga Kurylenko, Daniel Bernhardt, Tinatin Dalakishvili, Andro Japaridze, Tornike Bziava, Tornike Gogrichiani, Idris Elba

Netflix Original film Extraction (2020) is a spectacular action ride. It’s a more grounded John Wick – both because of its tight and brutal action set in naturalistic environments, and because it was directed by a marquee action stunt coordinator (Sam Hargrave). Chris Hemsworth shines as stoic soldier Tyler Rake, which is surprising because he’s at his best in Marvel when playing the charismatic, comedic Thor. Extraction 2 carries on the legacy of the first film with crazier, more bombastic action set pieces. But is bigger always better? While Extraction 2 is a fantastic feat of action filmmaking, its attempts to outdo its predecessor prevent it from being a truly great film.

Extraction 2 follows Tyler (Hemsworth) as he extracts a gangster’s family from a Georgian prison, inserting himself into a dark family affair. Like the first film, there’s just enough down time to build character and story. These moments are brief but effective, always delivering in an unobtrusive way that gives the film a chance to breathe. One of the main throughlines is that the gangster’s son (Andro Japaridze) is preparing to step into the shoes of his gangster father (Tornike Bziava) and uncle (Tornike Gogrichiani).

Like its predecessor, the action is why people are watching this film. And it is certainly entertaining. The highlight is a 21-minute “single take” scene that takes place in prison. It features hand-to-hand combat, explosives, car chases, helicopters, miniguns, anything and everything you could ask for as an action fan. The scene was rehearsed for five months with 400 actors and 75 stunt performers. The team had 29 days to shoot the scene, and it was near seamlessly edited together. 

It’s an incredible feat of filmmaking, but it deviates too far from the first film’s smaller scale action. Tyler has a rocket/grenade launcher that is a little ridiculous even if it is a real thing. And there are many moments where you might find yourself wondering why Tyler cares more about showing off his handsome mug than protecting himself from bullets to the head in the wild firefights. There is also a glass rooftop scene that seems a bit too silly for what the franchise established in its more gritty first incarnation. The excitement derived from the excellent craftsmanship doesn’t make up for the sheer absurdity of what is happening in many moments.

The cooler temperatures of central and eastern Europe also lead to the use of a muted color palette. While the first film’s cinematography is much more naturalistic than in John Wick, its setting in Bangladesh offered more vibrant urban environments than the snowy, industrial look on offer in this film. It’s like Chris Hemsworth is running through a ‘Call of Duty’ map, trying to reach the next stage of the level. Perhaps it could be said to reflect the bleakness of this more personal situation or a change in Tyler’s mindset after his near-death in his last mission, but it comes across as boring. The action should take precedence, but where the action is happening should matter too.

When compared to Netflix’s standard Original releases, especially their so-called “blockbuster” films like The Gray Man and Red Notice, Extraction 2 is a gem. This is the kind of direction and spectacle Netflix should shoot for, even if it is a film better suited for the big screen. It’s difficult to pull off creating such a massive action film, and the filmmakers certainly achieved their goals. If you’re a fan of fight scenes and and Chris Hemsworth, go check out Extraction 2.

Score: 15/24

Luther: The Fallen Sun (2023)
Director: Jamie Payne
Screenwriters: Neil Cross
Starring: Idris Elba, Andy Serkis, Cynthia Erivo, Dermot Crawley, Thomas Coombs, Hattie Morahan

Four years after series 5 of the hit BBC crime drama ‘Luther’, BBC Films and Netflix have teamed up to bring Idris Elba’s ruthless police detective to feature length frenzy. Luther: The Fallen Sun has Elba’s Luther on the case of a kidnapping and multiple murder case; that is, before he’s locked up for being every variation of a dirty cop you could be in the line of justice. Luther must team up with the new DCI and find a way to break out from behind bars to stop the killings from continuing.

Idris Elba, Andy Serkis, and Cynthia Erivo, as the main trio, pump in the best performances they can. Erivo does well as the under-pressure DCI trying against all odds to bring a man to justice whilst weighing up her own personal issues. Elba, as always, brings a sense of gravitas as the brooding, grizzled bear of a man, cunning and violent in equal measure, breaking the law so others can live peacefully, sacrificing himself for the good of the people. Serkis, even with blonde hair, manages to chill the bones with a refined, simple, almost Lecter-like calm, proving himself to be one of Britain’s best actors of the 21st century.

Moving from the small screen series to a sequel film has its pros and cons. You can just about pick up the basics without knowing the series, though there are one or two moments of ‘Look at the iconic coat! And the Volvo! Iconography! Fan service for those that have seen the show!’ that could have been done without, and the regular fans would have been just as happy. It also gives writer Neil Cross the ability to go slightly more cinematic with his ideas, seemingly dipping into Skyfall on several occasions. There’s a foot chase through the London Underground and the third act takes place in a big mansion out in the middle of nowhere that the hero and sidekick are shown driving to in sweeping helicopter shots. Anyone not thinking of Bond is deluding themselves. It’s a little indulgent, but it’s fun, and something ‘Luther’ hasn’t really had the chance to do too much of.

So most of The Fallen Sun is good. It’s a strong upscaling of the original series that you can follow, with good heroes and a chilling villain. And yet, there are some parts which don’t seem to connect. Jamie Payne, veteran TV director and former ‘Luther’ director, directs in a way that still somehow feels like a TV episode, if on a bigger budget and screen, and with bigger, more cinematic story elements. The story doesn’t push too much for going out there, and despite the dark, depraved nature of the storyline, it still plays it fairly safe. Considering Series 4 of the show was only 2 episodes long, this could easily have been split in half with only minimal adjustments made. Nobody would have been any the wiser.

Additionally, certain moments in the writing don’t make sense. There’s an appearance of a body that has been seemingly frozen for many years that has very minimal relevance to the plot and the solving of the crime, and several moments feel contrived, forced, in order to enable Luther to track down the evil mastermind of the story. Elba’s prison sequences don’t do much for the plot aside from a few action scenes, and the villain contacting him via a convoluted method in his cell specifically leads to his eventual tracing and capture. Timings of events are irritatingly coincidental, and of course all evil criminals can be goaded into a mistake by pointing out their character flaws directly to them, sending them into a furious rage and thereby enabling, through a brief tussle, the hero to escape. This is the law that even veteran genius writer, Neil Cross, cannot help but fall into.

Luther: The Fallen Sun is enjoyable. It has some fun sequences, the performances are good, and if you haven’t seen the show your enjoyment won’t be effected. But it isn’t much more than fun and enjoyable. It is, strangely, exactly as good as you think it should be.

Score: 16/24