Please Don’t Destroy: The Treasure of Foggy Mountain (2023)
Director: Paul Briganti
Screenwriters: Martin Herlihy, John Higgins, Ben Marshall
Starring: Martin Herlihy, John Higgins, Ben Marshall, Conan O’Brien, John Goodman, Bowen Yang

October 9th, 2021. The first episode of the forty-seventh season of ‘Saturday Night Live’ and the debut of Please Don’t Destroy with their short video ‘Hard Seltzer.’ Consisting of three New York comedians, Ben Marshall, John Higgins, and Martin Herlihy, the troupe almost instantly skyrocketed to fame after only four years together as a group. Now, after three seasons with SNL, the trio bring us their first feature film Please Don’t Destroy: The Treasure of Foggy Mountain. SNL stars like Dan Aykroyd, Eddie Murphy and Tina Fey have all gone on to bigger things, though the results are not always so pretty – some acts have failed to make a splash and some sketches that were turned into films have flopped. So the question is, how will Please Don’t Destroy fair?

The film stars the three comics as themselves, the exception being that they live, work and do everything together. When they realise that they don’t like their life trajectory, they set off to find a gold treasure that is rumoured to be buried in the nearby mountain.

Unlike the fictional versions of themselves in the film, it is clear that the trajectory of the boys’ popularity is one that not only they believe in, but in which many others do too. After only three years on the show, they earned a credit in SNL’s opening montage. Credited as “A Film by Please Don’t Destroy”, it marks the first time since 2008 that a recurring segment has its own credit in the opening; a reward that was not even afforded to the insanely popular The Lonely Island. Equally so, the opportunity to write and star in a film as themselves shows the belief that many have in the popularity of Please Don’t Destroy.

The movie opens with a narration from John Goodman explaining the lore of the titular treasure; a bust of Marie Antoinette, worth $100 million, was hidden in Foggy Mountain by French explorer Jean Pierre La Roche and the key, a golden compass, was found by the three boys as children. Flashforward fifteen years and we meet the Ben, John and Martin of today through a sequence in which they prepare to make breakfast and go to work, a sequence of events which continuously takes hilarious left turns including roller skates and underage drinking.

The film then smash cuts to Ben’s father in the form of Conan O’Brien, the owner of the store that the three work at, screaming “where the fuck were you!? You’re three hours late!” The story begins to unravel. We learn that Ben wishes to earn his father’s approval and take over the store, whereas Martin is trying to keep his girlfriend happy by going through with an adult baptism. As for John, he has no plans nor prospects. Worried about losing his friends, he proposes that they hunt for the treasure.

The story, in premise, structure and character development is far from original. The friendship of the three is predictably tested, and there comes a point where it seems as though they can’t move past their issues but in the end they remain best friends. It’s a tried and tested formula that, though not necessarily bad, is instantly recognisable. Ben, John and Martin’s sense of humour is far from traditional and so, to deliver it in the form of a traditional story allows for more accessible viewing for new viewers, all the while keeping much of the same humour that fans have come to know and love.

Similar to the writing and performance style they have become known for, the editing of the film is very in line with that of their regular sketches. Fast paced and manic, the editing allows for maximum engagement and a whole lot of laughs through unexpected sight gags and jump cuts.

By far the biggest challenge for PDD in this film was to take their style of comedy (which is usually told in three to five minute sketches) and stretch it out into a full feature film. Though there are little segments of the film that feel like their own individual sketches, they keep recurring and eventually combine together to tell a nicely intertwined story. From park rangers who wish to steal the treasure for themselves to cults, or John falling in love to a particularly sassy hawk, all of these come together well to tell the full story. It is in this sense that Foggy Mountain feels closer to traditional silent comedies like Harold Lloyd’s Safety Last, a film that similarly tells many little stories in order to make one complete narrative.

This film does not, however, feel as though it will work for those who are not familiar with Please Don’t Destroy or who are not fans of that type of humour. The group’s eccentric form of delivery, performance and writing may distance some audience members. The Treasure of Foggy Mountain is a movie made for the fans.

With their feature film debuts, Ben Marshall, John Higgins and Martin Herlihy bring their A-game in every single aspect of production. The jokes come quick and fast, and the situations they put themselves into are nothing short of ridiculous. Playing themselves, the three bring their likeable personalities and adorable chemistry to craft a trio of characters that are not only hilarious but who we care for and whose company we love to be a part of. Though every cast member does a fine job, it is when one or all of Please Don’t Destroy are on screen that we laugh the hardest. Moreso, they make it seem natural, as though comedy is second nature to them.

With The Treasure of Foggy Mountain, Please Don’t Destroy may not be making unforgettable characters or legendary films like fellow SNL alum movies The Blues Brothers and Wayne’s World, but by presenting themselves as the heroes of the story they create a movie that represents their brand and elevates it in the process.

The Treasure of Foggy Mountain is a wonderful new addition to PDD’s growing library, and is evidence of their popularity and talent. Proving themselves as one of the best comedy acts in all of the United States – better yet, the world – one can only hope that their sophomore effort will be as good as Foggy Mountain.

Score: 18/24

Wish (2023)
Directors: Chris Buck, Fawn Veerasunthorn
Screenwriters: Jennifer Lee, Allison Moore
Starring: Ariana DeBose, Chris Pine, Alan Tudyk, Angelique Cabral, Victor Garber, Natasha Rothwell, Jennifer Kumiyama, Harvey Guillén, Evan Peters, Ramy Youssef, Jon Rudnitsky

One hundred years of Disney. How does one possibly celebrate such an occasion? The little studio that begun with animated movies about a cartoon mouse (and rabbit) almost one hundred years ago now exists as a behemoth of the entertainment industry, owning half of Hollywood as well as the famed Disneyland and Disneyworld theme parks. With so much power, so much history and so many controversies, what could the company plan for their 100th birthday party release Wish that could possibly pay homage to such a legacy?

After undergoing a five year hiatus from releasing original animated movies between 2016’s Moana and 2021’s Raya and the Last Dragon, Disney have gone back to what they do best, what they are most known for, animation. They have returned to their roots in the past few years and released animated pictures like Raya, Encanto, and Strange World, to varying degrees of success. 

Wish finds itself set in the wonderful kingdom of Rosas, which is ruled by its king Magnifico (Chris Pine). King Magnifico performs a yearly ritual in which once someone turns 18, they can pass their greatest wish onto him and he will protect it and potentially allow it to come true one day. However, once Asha (Ariana DeBose) discovers that Magnifico’s intentions may not be as pure as they seem, she realises that she must do whatever she can to stop him. Even wishing upon a star. 

As is probably obvious from the story of a young girl wishing upon a star, the film finds itself heavily inspired by the famed Disney tune “When You Wish Upon a Star”, which originally featured in Pinocchio but has since become Disney’s signature song. Much like this little reference to the past of the company, the film is also filled to the brim with references that show the journey of Disney from then to now. 

It’s a good idea in scope; a nice way to celebrate the history of the studio whilst pushing forward with the new. This is, however, the only facet of the movie that feels at all genuine.

Whilst Disney were patting themselves on the back for how great their company used to be, they forgot to put heart into any other aspects of Wish. Similar to the hand-drawn animation style that the film attempts to replicate, much of Wish is flat and one dimensional.

This disingenuity is most evident in the film’s characters. The main character Asha (voiced by DeBose in perhaps the only memorable vocal performance of the entire film) is given a bit more depth and personality, but the side characters make it clear what was most important to Disney in the making of this film. The supporting cast of Asha’s family, friends and sidekicks is upwards of ten people, all of whom are of varying races, genders and sizes, placing equality, diversity and inclusivity at the forefront of the film to showcase the company’s core values. At least, what the company would like you to think are their core values. This becomes painstakingly obvious through the number “Knowing What I Know Now”, in which the film makes a point to show the differences in the characters through their blocking.

The issue is, these characters are given so little to do and have such little depth that we simply do not care about a single one of them. Though the filmmakers would like us to believe that these are beliefs, values and causes that the studio care about, they do almost nothing to convince us of that fallacy. Instead, the little bit of character that Asha’s friends are afforded is that each of them are inspired by the dwarfs in Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. This once again proves that what Disney cares about the most is patting themselves on the back.

Wish essentially only exists as a form of corporate self-fellatio that is as insufferable to watch as it is to write about.

Coming in at only ninety-five minutes, the centenary celebration of Walt Disney Studios moves along at a breakneck pace, showing us that even the execs up at Disney HQ wanted this one to be over just as quickly as we did. This simultaneously illustrates just how little care was put into the story aspects of the film and how Wish is really just one big advertisement for the company that made it. Come the end of the film, a character asks how they could possibly keep the magic of the Kingdom of Rosas alive, to which another responds “easy, just keep wishing.” What Disney are really saying is “keep buying tickets.”

Just as one man’s trash is another man’s treasure, it must be said that among the garbage there are some nuggets of gold in Wish. The story has a really good idea underpinning it, and the film offers a nice opportunity to create a full-circle moment for the “wish upon a star” fable that Disney is essentially built upon. Going back to the hand-drawn aesthetic is also a nice touch, as is making the film a musical. Given more time, care and passion, Wish could have been something special. All it needed was some heart. The lack thereof in the final product tells us more about the company that made it than anything in Wish ever could. 

Wish is a hollow and lazy picture that feeds its audiences the propaganda of Disney, only this time they aren’t even hiding it with the usual magic that pervades throughout their output. Though the kids seeing this film will undoubtedly enjoy it, they deserve better. 

Score: 7/24

Saltburn (2023)
Director: Emerald Fennell
Screenwriter: Emerald Fennell
Starring: Barry Keoghan, Jacob Elordi, Rosamund Pike, Richard E. Grant, Alison Oliver, Archie Madekwe, Carey Mulligan

With the release of her debut feature film Promising Young Woman in 2020, Emerald Fennell established herself as one of the most exciting directors working today. Her candy-pop infused, #MeToo-inspired revenge thriller provoked challenging discussions and introduced the world to Fennell’s fresh voice and unique talents. With her sophomore effort Saltburn, can lightning strike twice?

The film opens at the beginning of the 2006/07 academic year as Oliver Quick (Barry Keoghan) enrols at Oxford University. Though Ollie struggles to make friends at first – hilariously summed up in the trailer by Ewan Mitchell’s great line “Did you know there was a college Christmas party tonight? NFI, me and you. Not fucking invited” – he quickly finds himself under the wing of charming and aristocratic Felix Catton (Jacob Elordi). Before long, Catton invites Ollie to stay with him over the summer at his eccentric family’s sprawling estate, Saltburn.

The title card of the picture finds itself scribbled across the film’s 4:3 frame, like the graffiti you’d find sprawled over an old school textbook. Immediately, with this simple design choice, Fennell sums up the schoolboy immaturity of many of the characters; they think the world revolves around them but really their problems are the sort of issues you’d find on the playground, and they hold onto their grudges forever. What makes it so terrifying, as their placement as the elite in society shows, is that these are the people who hold power. The ones that make the rules for everyone else yet don’t abide by them (a very funny karaoke scene in the film seems to poke fun at a very real example of this in recent British politics), the kind of people who don’t need to worry financially. There is maybe even something to be said about the latter point with regard to the film’s setting in 2007, right before the climax of the 2007–2008 financial crisis. 

Making up this abhorrent and aberrant family are an unforgettable cast of characters made up of the airhead family patriarch Sir James (Richard E. Grant), the oblivious family matriarch Elsbeth (Rosamund Pike), Felix, his siren-like sister Venetia (Alison Oliver) and their cousin Farleigh (Archie Madekwe), a particularly mischievous jester-like character that entertains the whole family. Oh, and let’s not forget the ludicrously melancholic “Poor Dear” Pamela (Carey Mulligan). All of whom are portrayed wonderfully by each respective actor, often delivering hilarious comedic performances with such an immense depth to them that not only do they make us laugh but they offer a scarily accurate portrayal of the type of people we allow to control our world.

The loathsome behaviour and elitist thinking of each character is introduced very early on. This is perhaps best exemplified by Oliver’s first meeting with his tutor, in which he is essentially mocked for having completed the summer reading, rather than celebrated for his hard work. All the while Farleigh, who is twenty minutes late, gains the respect of the tutor due to his family name and the power that it holds. In this world, status beats out hard work every time. Equally so, the first time Oliver and Felix officially meet, Felix’s bike has a puncture and Oliver offers him his bike so that he can make it to class even though it is clear that Felix really wasn’t doing much to even attempt to fix his bike. Felix was raised to believe that all of life’s problems would be solved for him. 

In spite of all this, Oliver can’t help but to find himself seduced by their lavish lifestyles, just as we can’t help but to be tempted by the Catton family, leading to both us and Oliver finding ourselves entangled in their web. It is in the way that the film is shot that allows Fennell to seduce us so easily. Shooting the stately home as though it were a fetish object, Fennell captures the alluring nature of such a home in the most perfect way that it becomes clear why anybody who enters would never wish to leave again. 

Saltburn doesn’t produce a product that simply delivers a message of the evils of privileged high society, but instead delivers them as fully fleshed out humans of both good and bad doing. Just as Felix may be a spoilt brat he is also by far the most understanding of the family and the one who is constantly generous to Oliver for little reason other than genuine kindness. Jacob Elordi captures this in his layered performance as Felix, bringing a charm and charisma to the character as well as a childish nature.

Instead, Saltburn shows the evils of desire and the lengths that many will go to in order to get what they want. In the game that is Saltburn, everybody wants something and they are all playing against each other to get it. It’s like ‘Succession‘ for the ‘Skins’ generation.

Though it is certainly an ensemble piece and one in which each performer must be nothing short of brilliant in order to make the world of the movie work, the story really rests on the shoulders of lead actor Barry Keoghan. He, along with Fennell’s wonderful direction, brings Saltburn to life. As the film progresses and it is Oliver who becomes the desirable object, things begin to get interesting and Keoghan’s portrayal of this journey is nothing short of spectacular. Not only does he capture the growth and progression of his character with precision, but with each new scene he brings something a little different, making Oliver’s evolution all that more interesting. Come the end of the film, once Oliver has transformed into his final form, it is clear that what we have just witnessed is a special performance that will linger in the mind for years to come.

Deciding which of Fennell’s two feature films is better will inevitably come down to a matter of taste. For some, one message will hit harder than the other, but for others the pacing and structure will leave a lasting impact. It all comes down to the individual. What is clear, however, is that Emerald Fennell is one of the most exciting directors working today and Saltburn marks the second successive masterpiece in her short but impactful career.

Saltburn is a seductive odyssey of lust, desire and betrayal that plays out like a Shakespearean episode of ‘Skins’, with a slight dash of ‘Succession’. Perhaps just as importantly, it does for Sophie Ellis-Bextor’s “Murder on the Dancefloor” what Promising Young Woman did for Paris Hilton’s “Stars Are Blind”. Emerald Fennell has done it again.

Score: 23/24

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

Sparking his passion as a filmmaker at a young age, Raimi was making a slew of Super 8 short films with his friends as a teenager, releasing his very first feature film It’s Murder! (1977) at only eighteen years old. By the time 1981 rolled around and Raimi was twenty-two, he cemented himself as an exciting up and coming director with The Evil Dead, establishing his legacy in the annals of horror history. Over twenty years later, the director was a certified A-list filmmaker in Hollywood, directing some of the most influential superhero movies of all time and proving himself as one of the best and most recognisable directors in the industry.

Though Raimi still directs here and there, his work has slowed down considerably, releasing only two features since 2009. Thankfully, Raimi primarily spends his time lending his name to up and coming directors as a producer, playing a major role in the release of new and exciting movies like 30 Days of Night, Don’t Breathe, Crawl and 65. 

Raimi may no longer bless us with his own directed films as often as he once did, but the excitement that presides over a film whenever it has his name attached only goes to show what a true force he is in the world of filmmaking. Regardless of the story, genre or company he is directing for, it is always clear that it is a Sam Raimi picture. Having broken down Raimi’s vast and varied filmography, here is The Film Magazine’s guide on Where to Start With Sam Raimi.

Evil Dead 2: Dead by Dawn (1987)

When it comes to the story of The Evil Dead, there really are three separate places you could start. Firstly, there is the proof-of-concept short film Within the Woods that Raimi directed in order to entice investors into producing a feature film. Then came The Evil Dead, the bloody horror flick that introduced Raimi, Bruce Campbell and company to the world and really kicked off their careers. Lastly, there is Evil Dead II, which is truly the best place to begin with the work of Sam Raimi. Though technically a sequel, it is for all intents and purposes a remake, reintroducing fans of The Evil Dead to its wacky and individualistic world, all the while introducing first-time viewers to the story by rewriting and presenting it all in the first 10 minutes.

For the uninitiated, the Evil Dead 2 follows Ash Williams (Bruce Campbell) as he and some friends go to spend a few nights in a cabin in the woods. After discovering and playing an audio tape of recitations from a book of ancient texts, it unleashes a number of demons which possess and torment both him and his friends. A tale as old as time, really. 

Though it may be the third telling of this same story, it really is the ultimate version of The Evil Dead. Raimi clearly tightens up the screws and masters his passion project, taking the issues of the first movie being laughably camp and silly and using them to its advantage, in the process creating the entire basis of what makes the series and the character of Ash Williams so memorable and iconic. 

Filled to the brim with characteristically witty one liners and memorable moments (such as Ash’s famous catchphrase, “Groovy!”), Evil Dead 2 exhibits Sam Raimi going Full Raimi, allowing his balls to the wall style to take us on a campy horror adventure for the ages.

There may be more accessible watches for first time viewers of the director’s work but if you want a fully fledged introduction to Sam Raimi, Evil Dead 2 is perfect.

A Simple Plan (1998)

A Simple Plan is up there as one of the most underrated films of all time and certainly the most underrated of Raimi’s often praised career. Though he is most notably known for his horror or superhero flicks, Sam Raimi has made a handful of genre films, covering westerns, sports dramas and neo-noirs, as is the case with A Simple Plan.

Set in rural Minnesota, the story follows three hunters – brothers Hank (Bill Paxton) and Jacob Mitchell (Billy Bob Thornton), and Lou (Brent Briscoe) – who discover a crashed plane containing over four million dollars in cash. What follows is a tale reminiscent of Edgar Allen Poe’s “The Tell-Tale Heart” as we watch these three men and their bond unfold as they struggle to keep the money a secret from local authorities and as each of their inner demons come to the fore.

It is perhaps Raimi’s most stripped back film as far as his flashy style goes, but this still feels like a Sam Raimi picture as he expertly navigates us through the lives of the three lead characters and the unbearable weight of guilt that they all feel. This is brought to the forefront by three magnificent performances, the best of which is Billy Bob Thornton’s turn as Jacob, a shy, sensitive and innocent character whose devastating backstory not only steals the show in a beautifully written scene between he and Bill Paxton, but works as the backbone of the entire film and allows for many of the events to transpire in the way that they do.

A Simple Plan may not be Sam Raimi’s most accomplished film, but it very well may be his masterpiece. It is certainly one that is must-see for anyone who wishes to get into the director’s work.

Spider-Man (2002)

Though Sam Raimi has proven himself to be a master of the sequel with both Evil Dead 2 and Spider-Man 2 (and Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness, if that’s your bag), it is the first Spidey movie that really proved the director could be a major player in Hollywood and one which works as the most accessible entry point to the legend’s career.

Following the origin story of Peter Parker’s transformation into Spider-Man – bit by a radioactive spider, given superhuman powers, and now learning that with great power comes great responsibility – it may be a story that we all know by now, but Raimi’s take on the tale is irresistible. Despite his background in horror, the director’s over the top and campy style lends itself incredibly well to ripping pages out of comic books and putting them on the big screen. Not only does he capture the comic book feel that the movie requires, but he delivers to us the most perfect portrayal of Peter Parker ever put to screen in the form of Tobey Maguire. Raimi and Maguire worked together to capture the right balance of nerdy, sappy and courageous needed for the iconic part.

Though the director may have put together some excellent fight choreography, captured a wonderful lead performance, and crafted some of the most visually pleasing montages known to man (Parker coming up with costume ideas will never disappoint), it is the more sincere moments that bring to light the true filmmaking strengths behind Spider-Man. Moments such as Uncle Ben delivering iconic life lessons to Peter, Aunt May’s grief over the death of her husband, and Peter’s love for MJ. We may go into these flicks for the big action set pieces, but Raimi understands that this is a human story and one that deserves to be told with love and respect. Superhero fatigue may be setting in right now, but Raimi’s Spider-Man will never grow old. It is a perfect starting point for anyone who wishes to watch any of the director’s films.

Recommended for you: 10 Best Sam Raimi Movie Moments

Though Sam Raimi could easily be distinguished as a director of horror or superhero movies, and his contributions to both deserve to be respected, his filmography is just as unique as his style, allowing him to stand out as a true master of the craft in his own right. From campy horror films to blockbuster comic book adaptations, from sports dramas to neo-noir thrillers, Raimi’s direction behind the camera can always be felt.

In this edition of Ranked, we at The Film Magazine are taking a look at the five movies of the Evil Dead franchise, from Sam Raimi’s 1981 original The Evil Dead to 2023’s Evil Dead Rise, and ranking each movie from worst to best in terms of gore, catchphrases, and of course the quality of the films themselves.

Follow @thefilmagazine on X (Twitter).

5. Evil Dead (2013)

Fede Álvarez’s 2013 entry into the Evil Dead universe was met with mixed reviews from both fans and critics, and has continued to split audiences to this day. The more gritty, serious take on what is an overly camp, silly and over-the-top franchise was, predictably, jarring to fans of the series. Álvarez produced a blend of campy and overly serious that could be jarring at the best of times and laughable at the worst. 

Even so, the story revolving around a drug addict trying to get clean in the famous cabin of the original Evil Dead film was a brilliant idea, and Álvarez did deliver some truly disturbing moments that will make your stomach churn. 

Though Evil Dead (2013) is not a perfect addition to the Evil Dead series there are more than enough aspects within the movie to admire, even if they are sullied by the film’s not so great aspects. Evil Dead is definitely worth a watch, even if just to experience a more serious take on the famous story. 

Recommended for you: 10 More of the Best Remakes

The Creator (2023)
Director: Gareth Edwards
Screenwriters: Gareth Edwards, Chris Weitz
Starring: John David Washington, Madeleine Yuna Voyles, Gemma Chan, Allison Janney, Ken Watanabe, Ralph Ineson

The greatest critics will say that when viewing a film and critiquing its contents, one must treat that film as its own thing rather than as a part of something wider, that what is most important is how a picture works on its own individual merits: is the story told in a cohesive manner, are the characters engaging, does the camera work look good? 

Of course, some real world events may operate as a caveat to the contents of a film for the moviegoer: one could argue that much of the reason current superhero movies are underperforming is because of the oversaturation of such releases, for example, as opposed to their individual qualities. An important historical example of this duality is All the President’s Men (1976), which found its basis on the 1972 Watergate scandal but still works on its own. Carl Bernstein (Dustin Hoffman) and Bob Woodward (Robert Redford) are charming characters, the mystery they are trying to uncover is thrilling, and the twists and turns that the story takes still feel high stakes, shocking and important. Take away the real life story that the film was based on and it is still very strong in its own right. 

Gareth Edwards’ 2023 release The Creator also has its own outside context…

Set in a dystopian future in which the West is at war with the East over developments in AI, the film finds itself released at the height of both societal and governmental anxieties regarding generative AI’s place in everyday life. More importantly as regards this release, The Creator is one of just a few mid-budget features to have recently found its way into theatres.

For years, the way that the big studios of Hollywood worked is that they would have their major blockbuster releases spread throughout the year. These were the films with big budgets that the studios anticipated would generate bigger returns. In the quieter months, the same studios would release so-called mid-budgets films; smaller films made on smaller budgets, providing less of a risk but much higher reward if the films did well. Good examples of this are A Few Good Men ($33 million budget, $243 million gross) and Dead Poets Society ($16.4 million budget, $235 million gross). These mid-budget projects allowed filmmakers to work with larger budgets than in independent film whilst not having to sacrifice their creative freedom. It was a system in which, for the most part, everyone could win. Recently however, these films have begun to die out or have at least been transitioned into direct-to-streaming releases, the cinema release calendar instead being filled with new franchise entries, higher risk pictures that have (during our time of franchise fatigue and tightening purse strings) in many cases produced higher than usual losses. Thankfully, studios seem to be starting to appreciate the worth of the mid-budget feature film again, with 2022 and 2023 producing the likes of Ticket to Paradise, No Hard Feelings, 65, and now The Creator. So far, these mid-budget genre flicks have mostly managed to make back their studios a little something extra.

Joshua Taylor (John David Washington), an ex-special forces agent, is recruited specifically to hunt down and kill the “Creator” of AI (also known as Nirmata), who has developed a mysterious weapon with the power to single-handedly end the war. Welcome back mid-budget sci-fi.

Like many other science fiction works, The Creator begins with the primary objective of introducing the characters, giving some backstory and establishing the world in which the story is set. Finding its setting in “New Asia”, we are shown the wonderful scenery that the continent has to offer. Filmed primarily on location, much of the film takes place across glorious landscapes, creating a wonderful sense of a world that remains both natural and beautiful all whilst being primarily overrun by futuristic technology: rice fields overshadowed by large metropolitan spaces, forests crushed by large technologically advanced U.S. Army tanks. It creates some beautiful juxtaposition which acts as a useful visual reminder of what the film is really about; the old way of life versus the new.

This motif is most prominent in the story of our protagonist, Joshua Taylor. Though his objective within the film is to track down the weapon (a child, played by Madeleine Yuna Voyles) and keep her safe until the U.S. Army can retain her, the character’s real goal is to track down his wife who was presumed to be dead five years ago. Believing the child – whom Josh affectionately calls Alphie – knows where she is, Taylor uses her in an attempt to find his wife. Through flashbacks we are shown Josh’s relationship with his wife, a major point of contention being that he refused to see A.I. as people, believing they feel nothing, whilst she saw them as family. In his mission to keep Alphie safe, Joshua begins to understand where his wife was coming from.

The relationship between Taylor and Alphie very much follows the familiar odd-couple trope in which the two main characters are worlds apart both personally and ideologically but bond through spending time together and learning to understand one another. It comes as no surprise that director Gareth Edwards cited Paper Moon, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial and Rain Man as major influences on the film. Edwards and Weitz have written a good script with a well-structured and engaging story, but it seems to be in the key relationships that they have faltered: the chemistry between Washington and Voyles is nowhere near as strong as those they are emulating, though they do a fine job individually. Most of this issue arises from on the nose dialogue; numerous moments in which lines are written with zero subtext and can only be taken at face value. It can diminish much of the emotion that is required to heighten the story or the impact of a line or a scene. Thankfully, both John David Washington and Madeleine Yuna Voyles are so likeable and charming that the emotional impact hits when we really need it to.

The Creator is a grand sci-fi with grand ideas – man versus machine, new versus old, how the next generation are the future – yet it is never delivered in a way that feels as though it is inaccessible, the movie never thinks it’s smarter than it is. Instead, Edwards and company treat The Creator as escapism, pure and simple, and boy does it live up to it. There’s some substance there, sure, and yes there is a clear emotional core to the story, but each individual strand of this narrative is delivered in a way that is easily digestible alongside your popcorn and soda. 

It is a tremendously well built-in world, one that is designed in such a way that we stare with glee at the weapons and spaceships on the screen. The set pieces are filled with thrilling action and some unique ideas too – there is one particular sequence with self-destructing robots that is a joy to watch. The Creator’s crowning jewel, however, comes in the form of the USS NOMAD, a space station capable of launching destructive attacks from orbit. At numerous points in the film we get to see the NOMAD in action, floating along the sky while beaming down a light to the surface, constantly changing shape and lighting up the sky. It is stunning to look at, but once we see the NOMAD lock onto its targets we see the true power of the weapon – it is chilling. 

For all of these reasons, The Creator works well on its own merits. It is clear, however, that many will hold the film’s outside context against it.

Many filmgoers may wonder if they wish to be reminded of society’s fears surrounding A.I. or if a mid-budget feature is worth seeing given its less prominent marketing. But The Creator is, for all intents and purposes, a popcorn movie – this flick is hardly 2001: A Space Odyssey, it won’t change your life or leave you questioning what you just saw. Seeing it in cinemas will, however, certainly help to change the film industry, it will say something to studios about the variety of films audiences wish to see. If it succeeds. It deserves to succeed.

Gareth Edwards has returned to our screens after seven years and crafts an enjoyable two-plus hours of science fiction goodness, bringing with it some beautiful visuals, excellent world building and two charming leads to sweeten the deal. If you are looking for a good time at the movies then look no further than The Creator.

Score: 20/24

Frankly, choosing the ten best films ever made is incredibly difficult. When considering such a list there are endless criteria from which one could choose to base their list off: popularity, originality, box office success, how it did at the Oscars. Really, there is no one single way of creating a definitive list of the greatest movies ever made. Even if I were to only take in my own personal opinion, I know that I would change my mind week to week. After all, I haven’t seen every film ever made, I have a lot of catching up to do; who’s to say I wouldn’t swap out something for Interstellar or Stagecoach when I finally get around to ticking those off the list?

As if that wasn’t bad enough, there is the fear of the backlash I may receive by leaving certain films off the list. I don’t have any John Ford on the list, which means that Steven Spielberg will hate me, and I just know the middle class art students are going to come for me due to the lack of Godard, Truffaut or Varda.

Making a top ten greatest films ever made list is a lot of pressure, something that is not lost on me. All I can do is provide the top ten films which, until this point in my life, have had the most profound effect on me. Those films that I have not stopped thinking about since the day I first saw them, that I have introduced to whomever will let me, and that I have watched and rewatched until my heart’s content over the last twenty-six years. Wish me luck.

Follow me on X (Twitter) – @MarkJurassic

10. Aftersun (2022)

Aftersun Review

The only film on this entire list that was released during my time writing for The Film Magazine. Thus far, only one of two new releases I have given full marks to (alongside Celine Song’s beautiful Past Lives).

Since I first saw Charlotte Wells’ debut feature film at the Edinburgh International Film Festival, I have seen it a further three times in the cinema and have both directly and indirectly introduced many to the film. My passion shines brightly for this one.

With Aftersun, Charlotte Wells introduced herself to the world as an immensely talented director whose delicate portrayal of a father-daughter holiday in Turkey plays out like a gentle hand on your shoulder, leading you carefully through the complex relationship between the pair that eleven-year-old Sophie is yet to understand.

Releasing the same year as the wonderful Everything Everywhere All at Once, another film that handles the relationship between a daughter and a parent, Aftersun handles the relationship in a much more natural manner, making use of the finer details of the film to provoke the issues facing the pair, and equally providing two of the years most natural performances from Paul Mescal and Frankie Corio. 

It is a simple film told in a relatively simple way, but one which is filled with layers of subtext that linger on the mind long after the credits have rolled. Frankly, given more time to cement its legacy, the debut feature of Charlotte Wells could find itself much higher on this list.

Aftersun is not only one of the greatest feature film debuts of all time, but could be one of the greatest films of all time.

9. North by Northwest (1959)

Let’s not kid ourselves, this spot is essentially a revolving door for Hitchcock projects, and though the likes of Psycho and Rear Window have not been chosen this go around they most certainly would be any other time. Right now, I do genuinely believe that North by Northwest is the great director’s most impressive achievement.

Coming years before the first James Bond film Dr. No (1962), North by Northwest is incredibly ahead of its time in regard to not only what would come in the form of the Bond series but how action cinema would evolve as a whole.

Cary Grant’s advertising executive Roger Thornhill is no secret agent, though after being thrust into a story of espionage and mistaken identity he proves that he has all the charm, wit and cunning that one would hope for. Given its immortal recognition as an early formulation of the James Bond-style film, Cary Grant more than lives up as an early iteration of that type of character. And of course, Hitchcock more than lives up to the Bond style with sex references and innuendos galore.

Most importantly, however, Hitchcock takes the action scenes needed to make a film of this magnitude work and crafts sequences that are impressive by today’s standards but simply revolutionary for the cinema of the 1950s, ultimately changing the way action movies would be created forever.

Recommended for you: Top 10 Alfred Hitchcock Films

Fremont (2023)
Director: Babak Jalali
Screenwriters: Babak Jalali, Carolina Cavalli
Starring: Anaita Wali Zada, Gregg Turkington, Jeremy Allen White

The closing gala of the 76th Edinburgh International Film Festival (EIFF), Fremont, marks the end of what has been a tumultuous year for not just the film festival but film in Edinburgh as a whole. Given last year’s announcement about the closure of the Edinburgh Filmhouse, and subsequently the film festival, the state of cinema in the Scottish capital seemed at risk. However, here we are a year later and with the closing of the film festival comes the opportunity for a statement. Though the film festival could present itself merely as a showcase of the best cinema both locally and internationally, the future of Edinburgh’s film culture has been a major talking point of this year’s festival, with the programme viewed as somewhat of a manifesto. Has it been a success? Does Fremont perfectly bookmark such a mission statement?

The latest film directed by Iranian director Babak Jalali follows Donya (first time actor Anaita Wali Zada), a young woman from Afghanistan who previously worked as a translator for US troops and has since moved to Fremont, California. Her humdrum life takes a turn when she gets a job writing the fortunes at a fortune cookie factory.

Presented in a 4:3 ratio and in black and white, the film presents itself as an art flick but is actually more of a dark comedy. This interesting choice to juxtapose the style of the film with the tone of the script is made even more interesting by director Babak Jalali’s choice to use first time performers at the head of his cast. Almost like a real-time Kuleshov effect, the blunt performances he brings from his inexperienced cast reflect exactly what Jalali wishes, with Donya’s blank glare often capturing numerous emotions all with a different effect. The bluntness also reflects the loneliness that is pertinent throughout the entire feature. Just as Donya has left her loved ones in Afghanistan and struggles to fit into her new surroundings in the United States of America, it is clear that everybody else feels just as Donya does… alone.

This form of blunt storytelling won’t be for everyone, with Fremont offering less of a narrative to follow and more of a journey for us to go on. The film is less concerned with showing us Donya getting from point A to point B, and is instead focused on taking us on these experiences alongside Donya, inviting us to watch and study her as a human being. It may alienate some filmgoers expecting a more traditional feature narrative, but it does encourage an appreciation for the director’s vision and execution.

The impact and quality of the central performance from newcomer Anaita Wali Zada cannot be downplayed. Although Jalali’s casting and direction certainly plays a part in some of the great performances, Zada’s power as an actor is clear from the moment we first see her on screen. Her performance is blunt, but her chemistry with every other actor creates an electric atmosphere, and her versatility – jumping between comedic and heart-wrenching – illustrates a great understanding of the artform and proves that Zada may be a special performer to keep our eyes on.

Admittedly, she does have two wonderful actors to bounce off of in Gregg Turkington and Jeremy Allen White. Although their experience should not undermine the performances from those without such experience, it is undeniable that these two give the film’s best performances, with White arguably giving one of the best screen performances of 2023. Turkington plays Donya’s incredibly dry therapist whose attempts to understand Donya through fortune cookies lend the film some of its funniest moments. White, on the other hand, plays a lonely mechanic that Donya meets by chance on her way to a blind date. White’s performance is not only one of the best in the film but truly ties the story together through his wonderful portrayal of isolation and hope for connection.

Just as this year’s EIFF is a story of rebuilding something in the face of adversity and working hard to find hope in this world, so is Fremont. Just as the entire festival searches for hope that it will survive to the next year, and looks for meaning through the form of a manifesto, Fremont presents this in the form of an Afghan rebuilding their life in the United States. Perhaps this film is in of itself a manifestation of what the film festival must look for in their search to reignite the cinematic flame of Edinburgh; paying respect to the roots of cinema (the black and white imagery in a 4:3 frame) all the while pushing the form forward and innovating by breaking rules (non-traditional narrative structure and unusual performance styles).

It won’t be a film for everyone, but there is a charm to Fremont that is difficult to resist. Babak Jalali executes his vision in a unique way, creating a funny, heartwarming and bittersweet story of hope and loneliness in the United States of America.

Score: 18/24

Recommended for you: More Coverage from EIFF

Kill (2023)
Director: Rodger Griffiths
Screenwriter: Rodger Griffiths
Starring: Brian Vernel, Daniel Portman, Calum Ross, Paul Higgins

Having its world premiere at the 2023 edition of the Edinburgh International Film Festival (EIFF), Rodger Griffiths’ Kill marks the feature film debut for the director. Loosely based on his 2017 short film Take The Shot, Kill asks the question of whether or not stretching out a short film idea into a feature can work. 

The story follows three brothers who decide to murder their father after years of abuse and the eventual death of their mother, which they suspect to be at the hands of the family patriarch. However, the boys are soon racked with guilt, causing some infighting, and when they discover that their father’s body has been excavated from his grave, paranoia begins to set in.

What is an admittedly excellent premise sadly fails to engage from early on. With the murder of the dad, Don (Paul Higgins), happening only minutes into the film, there is very little time to explore the dynamic amongst the group in great depth, instead introducing each member of the family through a single key characteristic; Don is an aggressive and abusive father to the boys, the oldest brother (Daniel Portman) has inherited his dad’s aggression, the middle brother (Brian Vernel) is indecisive and repressive of his thoughts and feelings, and the youngest brother (Calum Ross) is the father’s favourite and finds himself under his thumb. It is an interesting dynamic for sure, but one that isn’t given enough time to flourish before the narrative begins to progress. 

Kill often feels uneven or, worse, uninteresting. Time is given to the characters and their dynamic – especially in flashbacks used primarily to illustrate the extent of abuse the brothers suffered at the hands of their father – but it lacks nuance. The biggest casualty of this is the dad himself, Don, who is played fairly well by actor Paul Higgins but lacks substance. He is hardly difficult to dislike given his position in the narrative, but the lack of exploration regarding his relationship to his family makes it difficult to care and causes you to question the decisions of the filmmakers.

Higgins is not the only performer to suffer at the hands of the screenplay, with both Daniel Portman and Calum Ross bringing strong performances that are ultimately all for naught. Whereas the paranoia of Portman’s character could create a tense dynamic in the group and thus a point for narrative tension, his anger is instead one dimensional. There comes a point in the film where it is revealed that he sacrificed animals in an attempt to bring their mum back to life, which not only comes out of left field but is almost never brought up again throughout the rest of the film, working only to intensify the lack of coherence present in the script.

Unlike the rest of the cast, Brian Vernel is not outperforming his material and is arguably underperforming it. Although his character certainly suffers at the hands of the same issues present in the rest of the screenplay, Vernel plays perhaps the best character. As the film’s protagonist, Vernel has an interesting journey, one which sees him go from the black sheep of the family to a much more confident character by the end. Sadly, Vernel does not have the acting chops to truly bring the character to life or to raise the quality of the material. Throughout the picture he appears to give little effort and frankly seems unconvincing with any of the emotion needed to convince us of his reality.

Perhaps the most unfortunate thing about Kill is that, come the final act, the film improves massively. Suddenly the situation has found its intrigue again and the dynamics between the characters come to fascinating climaxes that leave you with with more positivity towards the film than could have been the case. It is a shame that it’s all too little too late. 

It seems as though Rodger Griffiths had a very clear vision in his head, one that he just about manages to pull off by film’s end. Sadly, it is in the first and second acts that the struggles take hold. Together, these filmmakers tried to stretch a short film out into a feature, and they were ultimately undermined by all of the issues and teething problems apparent in this process.

Kill is a film with an interesting concept, one that could have succeeded with a little more fine tuning, but it ultimately fails due to its lack of depth in both the characters and the overall screenplay. What could have been a fascinating debut leaves us only disappointed with what could have been.

Score: 6/24

Recommended for you: More Coverage from EIFF