Review: ‘Love Lies Bleeding’ is the Raunchy Neo-Noir We’ve All Been Waiting For

Five years ago, British filmmaker Rose Glass wrote and directed the subversive and controversial Saint Maud, another film produced by A24. Taking a turn away from the horror genre, Glass makes her comeback with the Kristen Stewart led neo-noir film, Love Lies Bleeding. Stewart plays Lou, a chain-smoking gym manager with a shady past. The film is also led by Katy O’Brian, Ed Harris, Dave Franco, and Jena Malone. O’Brian plays Jackie, a traveling bodybuilder training for a Vegas competition, who finds herself in the New Mexico desert. A run in with Franco’s devious character, JJ, allows her to attain a job with Lou’s father, Lou Sr. Shortly after that, Jackie and Lou fall hard in love and give in to every incriminating impulse on the way; sense doesn’t exist in this 1980s microcosm of lawless mania.  

Continue reading “Review: ‘Love Lies Bleeding’ is the Raunchy Neo-Noir We’ve All Been Waiting For”

Review: ‘Happiest Season’ Is Flawed, But Still Fun

No three things go better together than Christmas, chaos, and love. That is, if the romcom genre has anything to say about the season. Happiest Season certainly has all three of these things in spades. When Abby (Kristen Stewart) goes to meet her girlfriend Harper’s (Mackenzie Davis) parents over Christmas, her plan to propose goes awry when Harper reveals that she hasn’t come out to her family yet. Continue reading “Review: ‘Happiest Season’ Is Flawed, But Still Fun”

Retrospective: ‘Adventureland’ is an Underrated Comedy Recalling the Horrors of Post-College Anxiety

It is a truth of being 20-something that if you have a crappy summer job, the best way to take your mind off of it is to befriend the other 20-somethings who hate it there just as much as you do. You are trapped there together, 8 to 10 hours a day for three months, right? So what else is there to do? Even in a film set in 1990, like 2009’s Adventureland, this is all too relatable if you’ve had a summer job. Continue reading “Retrospective: ‘Adventureland’ is an Underrated Comedy Recalling the Horrors of Post-College Anxiety”

Review: ‘Underwater’ Should Stay at the Bottom of the Ocean

Underwater is the latest of the Fox films to be released after Disney’s acquisition of the company, stuck in limbo and put out to die in months like January. Unfortunately, the is a case when this treatment is warranted; Underwater should sink back to where it came from. This wannabe horror film barely rises to the level of a B thriller movie. Its problems are numerous; weak acting, an even weaker trope-filled script, and an oversized budget with an inexperienced director to boot. Underwater lacks what it takes to be relevant when the horror genre has shown us it could be so much more than cheap thrills and jump scares.

Underwater features an ensemble cast, starring Kristen Stewart, veteran actor Vincent Cassel, Jessica Henwick, John Gallagher Jr., Mamoudou Athie, and T.J. Miller. The disgraced actor’s inclusion here clearly dates the film as it had its principal photography finished in mid-2017, long-gestating in a post-production hell. The cast leads us through a plot devoid of any message or theme, pulled along only on the minimal tension brought about by the question of whether or not anyone will survive the contrived mess.

This film couldn’t even bother with a proper beginning and ending, opting instead for hectic newspaper montages that bookend the ninety-five minutes of footage. The cast is meant to be portraying mechanics and engineers, but almost all look too young to have even graduated college. Certainly none of them demonstrate their superior intellect at any point during the plot. In any case, if they did, there wouldn’t be a movie. Stewart and Henwick are the only two with anything to do in the story, with Henwick surprisingly being the standout between the two. Between this and Charlies Angels (2019), I can’t say for certain if Stewart just needs a new agent or if she ever really did break out of her Twilight days. Vincent Cassel phones in his performance and the rest aren’t even of note, as in some cases, they are literally unconsciousness for over half the movie.

The plot is the same forgettable recycled drama that every film wanting to capture what Alien did in 1979 has used for the past forty-one years. It’s tired and predictable every step of the way, every beat being painfully telegraphed beforehand. Quite honestly, I’m not sure if this movie has a single unique element. This is only Eubank’s third directorial outing and it shows; the thirty-seven-year-old director clearly hasn’t had experience managing a budget of this size and I’m not sure where the eighty million dollars went sometimes.

Although I’ve spent the review largely defaming this production, it isn’t offensively bad and it definitely won’t make you fall asleep. You likely won’t leave feeling offended, but more of an empty feeling as if you’ve just wasted your time. This movie doesn’t ruin anything else, it just doesn’t have anything new to offer. The new decade is off to a rough start; it’d be better to skip Underwater and catch up on any of the Oscar nominated films you may have missed from last year.

2.5/5 STARS

Review: ‘Charlie’s Angels’ is an Unnecessary Entry into a Forgotten Franchise

It’s been 16 years since the last ‘Angels’ film, and for the most part, society has moved on. The days of the hypersexualized female action star are over; Hollywood showed us that women could hold their own on the silver screen. Whether it be Daisy Ridley in Star Wars, Gal Gadot in Wonder Woman, or Charlize Theron in quite literally anything, it’s pretty commonplace now to see well made female-led action movies. This is not that. Pitch Perfect 2 Director and actor Elizabeth Banks, who wrote, directed, produced, and starred in Charlie’s Angels, fails to do anything of real meaning here. It’s the film equivalent of empty calories; seeing it or not seeing it will have the exact same effect. There isn’t anything inherently offensive about this movie or even remotely controversial, it’s just an alright B movie at its best, and a waste of time at its worst. There’s no reason to go see it during this particularly crowded cinema season.

While I wouldn’t typically factor box office into a review, as the quality and money made often have no correlation, I feel it necessary to qualify my claims. This movie was a financial disaster; no one came out to see it, and frankly, I don’t blame them. The financial failure leads me to my primary criticism, who was this for and why was it made? I don’t know anyone who was clamoring for a Charlie’s Angels movie. The script feels aimless, simply wandering from scene to scene as if the plot had accidentally taken us there. It’s not written particularly well either, with dialogue feeling robotic and contrived. For example, there is one instance where a character describes the Angels as a “Non-Governmental NGO,” and to my understanding, NGO already stands for non-governmental organization, so that just goes to show the quality of the writing here.

It is also painfully clear that Elizabeth Banks has never directed action before, as it’s extremely choppy and filled with quick cuts sloppily stitched together. Today, the industry standard seems to be wide angles that give the audience a good idea of what’s going on, showing the action in full a la Mission Impossible: Fallout. In 2019, Charlie’s Angels feels lackluster and lazy. Compared to John Wick or Atomic Blonde, this movie has nothing remotely new to offer. It’s hard to follow and ultimately not enjoyable to watch, which is a big red flag in an action movie. Save for a few scenes, all the action is riddled with these style issues.

The saving grace here is the acting, which prevents a total disaster. Where the script fails, the talent is surprisingly able to pick up the slack. The cast includes Kristen Stewart, Naomi Scott, Ella Balinska, Elizabeth Banks, and for some reason, Patrick Stewart. Stewart, not Jean-Luc, is really enjoyable and genuinely funny with her performance at times as “Sabina Wilson,” which comes as a pleasant surprise. The other Stewart is left with almost nothing to do, so much so that his character could have been played by literally any actor. The disappointing thing is when he was intended to be vital to the story, it was hard to care at all, as the script didn’t do any favors for these characters. Every single one is a shallow cookie cutter from a 90s action drama. Balinska and Scott deliver fine performances, doing the best they can with what little they are given. Ultimately, Charlie’s Angels feels like a movie from another time and just doesn’t have a place in today’s market of rich, plot-driven action films.

2.5/5 STARS