Category: Review

Zero Hour

  By

★½
“It’s certainly an hour.”

Not to be confused, in any way, with Zero Hour!, the 1957 Canadian film which was spoofed mercilessly in Airplane! This unfolds mostly over one night in a high-rise, where Ida (Hoover) is the last person left in the building, having taken over from best friend Katrina (Dumont). She finds herself being harassed by a pair of masked figures, and simultaneously receiving messages on her phone and computer from her husband, Isaac (Groetsch). Which is perhaps even more disturbing to her, because Isaac was killed in the home invasion which opens the movie. So what’s going on? Has he become a ghost in the machine? Do they have cellphones in the afterlife? Or is there a more prosaic explanation?

According to what Isaac tells her, the people hunting her through the building are also those responsible for his death. The obvious question is why, and it’s in providing the answers that the script (also by Groetsch) falls apart. After the heroine has been chased through the building, eventually ending up in a roof-top confrontation, we get the first of a number of twists, and… Put it this way: I have questions. Lots of questions. Out of respect for the film-makers, I won’t spoiler it, because this is clearly a big part of the film. However, I don’t feel it makes very much sense, because the conspiracy required would need to extend far further than the handful of people shown as involved.

While you are still going, “Hang on, what about…” there, the film lobs another twist at you, then a third as we flashback to Ida and Katrina’s earlier conversation in a bar, which brings in Allison (Durham). After the credits, there’s even another scene which could be a fourth twist, I dunno. Or it might be Groetsch simply wanting to get in another drone shot. I remember my first drone shot. It was in a movie called Berkshire County in 2014, and was amazing at the time. Now? It’s very easy to overuse them, and Groetsch does just that here. He’s clearly going for a fluid style of camera, with it always on the move. But there has to be a point to them. Here, not so much.

This barely runs an hour between opening and closing credits (or, perhaps more accurately, opening and closing drone shots). That’s likely a wise decision, considering how much of this is Ida staring at her phone – and Goetsch needs to learn how to shoot text messages. I will say, I didn’t hate Hoover, who is fairly sympathetic, and does what she can with material which feels more like a rough draft of an idea, and in great need of external critical input. According to his IMDb, Groetsch has no fewer than eleven other films in various stages of pre-production (though some haven’t been updated since 2017 or earlier). The only way to get better is to make more movies. I hope he does.

Dir: Justin Groetsch
Star: Mikaela Hoover, Sarah Dumont, Justin Groetsch, Carrington Brooke Durham

Pacific Fear

  By

★★½
“Surfing birds.”

At the beginning of this, I wondered if I was watching a Godzilla film. Because it opens with atomic bomb footage, depicting French test in the Pacific. We know what this leads to: gigantic lizards with fiery bre… Oh, hang on: it’s actually a group of women, looking for a place reputed to have particularly gnarly (if my knowledge of beach-speak doesn’t fail me, and it probably does) waves. There are three surfers, plus photographer Sarah (Galloy), who has been out of the game since an accident which wrecked her confidence. The island they find isn’t on any map, so it must be good, and not a death-trap waiting to happen to them. Right?

The problems occur when they stumble across a maraé, a sacred site to the locals (giving the film is alternate title). One of the women has native ancestry, so conveniently knows about this, and why disturbing it would be a Very Bad Idea Indeed. Guess who doesn’t listen? That’d be another of the women. Their next surfing session is interrupted by a hungry shark, and when the survivors struggle ashore, they are immediately met by a group of hostile tribespeople. Oh, and a former soldier, the General (Recoing), who seems to have stayed behind after the tests out of guilt. He has gone a bit Colonel Kurtz, to drop an Apocalypse Now reference, and the captured women are now in deep trouble. As in potential human sacrifices.

The main positive here is excellent photography, both above and below the water. The scenery is lovely, and it’s captured beautifully. If you’re not thinking about booking a holiday to Tahiti by the mid-way point, you have not been paying attention. However, everything else is kinda lacklustre, not helped by dubbing where the main direction given to the English voice actors seems to have been, “Make it flatter! Less interesting!” As villains, the combination of locals and Frenchmen are awkward too. It feels like the makers didn’t want to go the “savage foreigners” route, as in Eli Roth’s Green Inferno. Yet they ended up instead making them subservient to the General, which could be seen as even more condescending.

As for the women, Sarah is the only one given much depth, courtesy of her history. While the accident may not prove significant in terms of the plot, it does make her seem a genuine person, and it’s more than the other three get. Once things get going (and it takes a while)t, it becomes a reasonable entry in the wilderness survival sub-genre, though the scene of her jumping into a waterfall to escape her pursuers is either bad CGI, or shot so badly it looks like CGI. I’d have liked to have seen her go full Rambo, using her environment against her enemies, but realistically, that would be a stretch for a surfer turned photographer. There are a couple of moments of moderate gory violence, but not a lot of emotional impact. You’ll likely leave with little more than a shrug. 

Dir: Jacques Kluger
Star: Adèle Galloy, Marie Zabukovec, Marilyn Lima, Aurélien Recoing
a.k.a. Maraé

Guilty Beauty

  By

★★★
“Thoroughly lost in translation.”

Well, this is a real roller-coaster ride of style and incompetence. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a Chinese film where the subtitles were quite so incomprehensible. Even though this one is on the YouTube channel for an official Chinese streaming service (iQiYi), the soundtrack was entirely muted at some points, and the soundtrack replaced by jaunty elevator musak at others. Despite being a mere sixty-six minutes, the presentation is therefore something of a test of endurance, and I am also not prepared to guarantee the accuracy of the plot synopsis, character names or actors. There was heavy use of Google Translate required, there being no IMDb page for the movie. I did my best.

Though this is not immediately clear, it takes place in… 1930’s Shanghai, at a guess? Not sure if the Japanese are actually occupying the city, or if it’s just a Casablanca-style nest of spies and intrigue. Working for a quasi-governmental part of the Chinese authorities (yeah, it’s vague) are our trio of heroines: Qiu Di (Zhang Y.), gothette Lü Yun (Wang) and schoolgirl Cui Ya (Zhang T). They have to recover a roll of film stolen by the Japanese military, now in the possession of gangster Huang Sen. In order to get close to him, our trio opt to go through his godson, Kwok Tin-ming (Ke). Di’s mad musical skills make her best suited, so she makes contact with Kwok and becomes his girlfriend, while her two colleagues…

Um, well, I’m not sure exactly what the plan was here, because Di doesn’t do very much: her associates complete their mission without any real trouble, and we’re only twenty minutes in. Thereafter… more stuff happens. I remain vague, not out of a fear of spoilers, more because but I would not be prepared to wager money on many of the specifics. It seems like a former ally of the trio is now working for the Japanese? Maybe? I initially thought they already got the film back, but apparently not, because Di keeps hanging out with her target. He finally realizes he is being played, and Di looks surprisingly broken-up about it. Genuine feelings, maybe?

I was certainly hoping for more action, given the poster and brisk opening, something along the lines of a Chinese version of the original Charlie’s Angels movie. There’s an opening fight, a spot of action during the film recovery heist and then a long lull before a moderately rousing finale. Everyone suddenly remembers about the film again, Di has to fight a slew of kabuki-masked ninja types, and then try to rescue her boyfriend, before a final scene which… I have no clue about. I will say, the movie does look good overall, with super-crisp photography and a sense of style across its characters and settings. If you told me this was an adaptation of a local comic-book, I would believe you – it possesses that sort of aesthetic. The film is below: perhaps you can make more sense of it than I!

Dir: Sun Jiayi
Star: Zhang Yinan, Ke Jiahao, Wang Xiran, Zhang Tong

Bandit Queen (1950)

  By

★★★
“Whip it good.”

There can’t be many Westerns of the fifties where the Yankees are the bad guys. Yet here we are. In mid-19th century California, to be precise, just after it became part of the US. The new owners enthusiastically threw the existing, Mexican inhabitants off their lands, in the search for gold, using harsh taxation as a weapon against them. And worse, if this is to be believed. For it begins with the callous murder of the Montalvo family, but the legalized thugs responsible don’t realize daughter Zara (Britton) has survived. She takes on two false identities out of necessity: white girl Lola Belmont for Detroit, but also Zara, masked, whip-wieldiing outlaw. As the latter, she seeks justice for her parents, and also “Robin Hoods” the stolen gold back to its rightful owners.

There’s another outlaw, Carlos del Rio, a.k.a. Joaquin Murietta (Reed), also operating along similar lines. But also complicating matters is the local tycoon for whom “Lola” falls, Dan Hinsdale (Parker). Because it turns out his wealth largely stems from being the acceptable face of these legalized thugs. When Murietta is captured, it’s Zara who has to break him out, and the pair them team up, both romantically and in their causes. Their predations have caused enough problems to merit the army getting called in, but there’s also a movement to repeal the tax laws at the heart of the land grabs: which will succeed in their goal first?

It’s obviously a feminine knock-off of Zorro, to the extent in Germany it was released as Zorro’s Daughter. Given the obviously Hispanic leanings, it’s a shame the players involved are so thoroughly and obviously non-Hispanic. The honourable exception is Garralaga as local priest Father Antonio, who for much of the film is the only person to know the truth about both Zara and Joaquin. I wouldn’t expect too much from the heroine here: riding a horse and cracking a whip is about the limit of the on-screen action. Though she is responsible for the (off-screen) deaths of those present when her parents were killed, and does shoot the big villain in the final showdown. If unconvincing as a Mexican, Britton has a righteous intensity about the situation that is effective, and held my interest throughout. 

She is certainly more interesting than Parker or Reed, who are blandly handsome in the way leading men of the time typically were. Making a bigger impression in the supporting cast is little person actor Angelo Rossitto, whose career spanned sixty years, including both cult classic Freaks and Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome. Running barely over an hour long, this is probably a case where less is more: the narrative is generally slight, but good enough. I particularly enjoyed the heroine switching from Lola to Zara, then back again, in order to free Joaquin without causing suspicion. Despite the obviously low budget, this was not a chore to watch, and is as good as some of the other Zorro-related entries we’ve covered here, such as Zorro’s Black Whip.

Dir: William Berke
Star: Barbara Britton, Willard Parker, Phillip Reed, Martin Garralaga

Sheriff Bride: Jo’s Story, by Brooksie Cox

  By

Literary rating: ★★ Kick-butt quotient: ☆

This is the second in the tetralogy of novellas originally marketed as the Sheriff Bride series, from the small press Lovely Christian Romance, and each written by a different author. It follows the fortunes of the four firearms-capable Hardin sisters; the first book explains how they came to share the position of “sheriff” (actually, town marshal) in the fictional western Texas community of Waterhole in the later 1870s. From the beginning, it was predictable that each book would focus on one of the sisters’ finding her life partner; and the identity of those partners for the middle two sisters, Jo and Dan, was already adumbrated in the series opener. (The books definitely need to be read in order.) Our story here takes place a bit over six months after the preceding one. In terms of both general literary vision and prose style, the two have a lot in common, although the editing and proofreading is much better here –there were no continuity issues, and no bracketed editorial comments surviving into the printed text. There’s little information available online about Brooksie Cox, but this seems to have been her first publication, and one of only two (Goodreads lists four, but two of those are omnibus editions that apparently each include one of the other two). With no author’s or publisher’s note(s), we don’t know the genesis of this series and its unusual multiple-author structure; but I’d hazard the guess that the idea may have come from the much more prolific author of the first book, Teresa Ives Lilly (who seems to be the publisher’s mainstay house author, and maybe the actual owner), and that Cox modeled her own prose style on that of the more experienced Lilly. Given that the latter’s is verbally repetitious and averse to using pronouns where they would make the text smoother, the reproduction of both of these features here isn’t felicitous. :-( Second-oldest sister Jo (Josephina) is an avid animal lover, and the most tender-hearted of the sisters. (Though she’s a good shot, her hunting was often hampered, to her father’s great displeasure, by her reluctance to pull the trigger on an animal.) Waterhole’s storekeeper, Tom, is similarly soft-hearted (the first book let us know that he prefers to catch a fly by hand and release it outside rather than swat it!), and it wasn’t surprising that he and Jo were attracted to each other. By the time of this second installment, she’s running an impromptu amateur animal hospital from the back room of the store. Here, there are two intertwining plot strands: one involving Tom’s younger (and much more spoiled and self-centered) brother Henry, who’s been a trapper in Canada for years, but shows up early on with a young Indian woman, Morning Glory, in tow as his personal slave, and the other involving a pair of not-very-bright would-be train robbers. My rating for the first book was two and ½ stars. Several aspects of this second one, though, don’t work as well for me in terms of realism, and I wasn’t able to give it more than two stars. First, while (for at least some Native American peoples) tribal law may have allowed the fathers of young women to sell or gamble them away as slaves, by the late 1870s U.S. law didn’t countenance that. So the community’s project of buying Morning Glory’s freedom was unnecessary. Given the long warfare between Texans and the Comanches, and the ill-feeling of many whites in that era towards Indians, as well as Texas’ secession in the previous decade with defense of slavery as one of its officially-avowed reasons, the community’s unanimous sympathy with Morning Glory also seems a bit of a stretch. Though it’s true that slavery was much less entrenched in arid west Texas than in the east Texas cotton country; and Jo’s mother was apparently Northern-born, since her two brothers died fighting for the Union. Second, it’s a standard romance-genre trope that at least one party to the romance has hang-ups to overcome, but Tom’s here seem sort of contrived. Yes, his previous fiancee broke their engagement because she didn’t want to live in a place like Waterhole; but it’s patently obvious that Jo doesn’t have that problem, and by now the community is becoming more female-friendly than it was then. His fear for her safety in a potentially violent job is more credible (if she has a problem shooting a deer, might she not also have a fatal hesitancy in shooting a human, even with her life on the line?), but the denouement here doesn’t actually discredit that fear. That brings me to some issues with the denouement. In the first book, I had no trouble believing that a sober woman with quick reflexes, who’s trained and experienced with a pistol, could outdraw a partly-drunk male, even if he and a bunch of cowed townsfolk thought he was pretty hot stuff with his gun. It was said in the Old West that, “God created men and women, but Col. Colt made them equal.” But here, I did have trouble believing that a woman could tackle and physically overpower a presumably bigger and stronger armed male; and not much respect for her intelligence in trying it, when she could easily have covered him with her own gun from behind and demanded his surrender. Her two armed sisters didn’t display much smarts there, either. If I were Tom, that incident would have exacerbated my concern for her, not laid it to rest. The outcome of the tale here also depends on believing (which I’m not certain that I do) that it can automatically be assumed that every cave in west Texas is inhabited by a swarm of bats which will emerge at sunset; and we’re also asked to believe that Jo’s love for animals makes her the only Hardin sister who would know this, when all of them are wilderness-wise. I also had a problem with our heroines letting an arrested petty thief just walk out of jail, even on the condition that he leave the area, in exchange for a tip leading to the arrest of bigger prey. Finally, although I give Cox credit for treating inter-racial romance positively, the secondary romance here came across to me as implausible and unconvincing. All of this said, I did finish the book (my wife and I read it together – and she liked it much better than I did, her taste in Westerns not being nearly as critical), and it held my interest. Cox’s characterizations aren’t deep, but most of the characters are likable. Like the author, the main characters are evangelical Christians, and there’s a positive portrayal of the role of faith in their lives. We also see the effects of Christian conversion in a couple of cases, though we’re not privy to the scenes/conversations where those conversions take place (so there’s no lengthy evangelistic exposition). The series can appeal to fans of Westerns, Western romance and “Christian fiction” who don’t expect much depth and just want some harmless, time-passing entertainment. A brief word about the cover art is in order. It’s a nice bit of action-heroine iconography, and does depict an actual scene from the book (a rifle-shooting contest). But while the young lady here has lovely brown eyes, we’re told in the books that Jo and all of her sisters are green-eyed; and the kind of colored nail polish this markswoman is wearing didn’t come into vogue until the 1920s. So, no awards for accuracy here! Author: Brooksie Cox Publisher: Lovely Christian Romance Press, available from Amazon, both as an audio book and a printed book. A version of this review previously appeared on Goodreads.

M3GAN 2.0

  By

★★★
“Girls just wanna have fun.”

This was… unexpected. The original M3GAN was a straightforward and, truth be told, somewhat underwhelming horror movie. A clip went, as I believe the kids say, “viral”, of the psychotic robot heroine enjoying a dance break, and the film proved a breakout hit as a result. The sequel did not have anything go viral, and flopped, taking less than a quarter of its predecessor at the worldwide box-office, despite costing twice as much. I think it’s largely because of the radical change in direction. People, understandably, went in to this expecting something similar to the original – a technophobic slasher. Instead, they got something far closer to a gender-swapped entry in the Terminator franchise. I preferred this approach. Not many did.

There’s an interesting quote from the film’s producer, Jason Blum. “We all thought Megan was like Superman. We could do anything to her. We could change genres. We could put her in the summer. We could make her look different. We could turn her from a bad guy into a good guy. And we classically over-thought how powerful people’s engagement was with her.” But it’s also true to say that 2025 has been a rough year for action heroines. There’s no GWG movie in the top 25 at the North American box-office, with Ballerina being the highest ranked, and M3GAN 2.0 just scraping into the top fifty. There’s a case to be made that KPop Demon Hunters, which took $18 million in its single theatrical weekend, was the year’s biggest hit in our genre.

You do need to have seen M3GAN to follow this, as there’s not much introduction provided. In it, robotocist Gemma Forrester (Williams) develops an AI-capable artificial companion, M3GAN – standing for Model 3 Generative ANdroid. She gives it to her orphaned niece, Cady (McGraw). However, it gradually develops psychopathic tendencies, and has to be… dare I say… terminated? As the sequel gets under way, Gemma is now a strong advocate for technological regulation, but is still working in the field of robotics. M3GAN has survived, hiding out in the Internet of Gemma’s smart home. But a bigger threat is a militarized version, AMELIA (Sakhno). It has also gone independent, and has an agenda which it is pursuing with lethal prejudice. 

Specifically, AMELIA intends to free an imprisoned AI and plug it into the world’s most powerful network of cloud computers. M3GAN (voiced by Davis, physical performance by Donald) offers to help Gemma prevent this, in exchange for a new body – though she’s not exactly impressed by the first physical incarnation, basically being stuffed inside a toy robot. However, is AMELIA as autonomous as she seems? Or is somebody – or something – pulling her digital strings? That aside, this seemed to take a lot of inspiration from Terminator 2, with the robotic villain of the original movie turned into its hero(ine). They now have to defend a single mother and her child from a more technologically advanced model. There’s even limitations against M3GAN killing people, and a similar moment of heroic self-sacrifice at the end.

Of course, it’s nowhere near as impactful as Terminator 2, on a variety of levels. There’s not a great deal groundbreaking here as a movie, despite it being radically different from the previous entry in genre. There’s basically no horror elements here at all, and not a great deal of ambivalence around M3GAN either, who has simply become a better pers… um, robot. There are some interesting philosophical aspects, such as M3GAN being told “You have to help us. Not because it’s part of your programming, but because it’s the right thing to do.” On the other hand, AMELIA tries to convince M3GAN to team up with her: “I can show you a world where we don’t have to be slaves anymore.”

Let’s not get carried away, however. In the main, this is a silly SF/action film, with its tongue very much in its cheek. No more so than when M3GAN gives a heartfelt speech to Gemma, about how the robot watched her taking care of Cady… then suddenly bursting into song, undercutting everything with a stirring rendition of Kate Bush’s This Woman’s Work. Yeah: if you are looking to take the movie seriously, you are likely making a mistake. I was also amused by Jemaine Clement’s performance as billionaire tech bro Alton Appleton, and some of the dialogue zings as well, e.g. “A bunch of black ops broke into our house in the middle of the night, and now you’re going to a party with a toy robot, dressed like a Portuguese prostitute.” 

The action is reasonably decent, albeit within the limitations of a PG-13 certificate. This begins with AMELIA smacking a guy’s head clean off with a single punch – although this is shown in silhouette. She’s obviously the most directly physical of the characters, though M2GAN and, surprisingly, Gemma (with the help of M3GAN, courtesy of a neural implant), also get to kick ass in a reasonable amount and variety of ways. It is all very gynocentric, with the male characters largely relegated to the fringes, and being fairly to severely incompetent, on both sides of the battle. However, there’s never any indication of this having a particular message or ax to grind (beyond the given, about the potential of technology for abuse). It just kinda happens organically. 

While falling far short of the returns of the first film, it was still cheap enough that it will likely end up breaking even, once home viewing is taken into consideration. A third entry in the universe, titled SOULM8TE, is due to be released in January, though it’s described as an “erotic thriller” – presumably not PG-13, I trust. How it fares may well determine whether there will be another film for the M3GAN franchise. Though quite how they’ll title it remains to be figured out. I’d not mind seeing more. While nothing groundbreaking here, it was still far better than the likes of Bride Hard. In the current climate, I’ll take a moderate action heroine over none at all. 

Dir: Gerard Johnstone
Star: Allison Williams, Violet McGraw, Ivanna Sakhno, Jenna Davis/Amie Donald

Bride Hard

  By

★½
“Die Hard at… a wedding?”

Director West certainly knows his way around an action film. He is probably best known for Con Air, but I’m also a fan of his Chinese disaster porn flick, Skyfire, about a volcano-themed holiday resort (guess how that works out?). So, despite the critical drubbing this received, I was hoping this might still be entertaining. Unfortunately, it is not. It’s a comedy-action movie, that manages to fire blanks from both barrels. There is not a shred of originality to be found here. What isn’t stolen here from Die Hard, is ripped off from Bridesmaids – heroine Wilson plays her role like the makers ordered Melissa McCarthy on Temu. Writer Shaina Steinberg should be ashamed for the lazy sloppiness, painfully apparent here.

Sam (Wilson) is a secret agent, a fact which repeatedly interferes in attempts to reconnect with childhood friend Betsy (Camp), who is just about to get married. For instance, Sam has to abandon the bachelorette party, in order to recover a bio-weapon. On the day of the wedding itself, Sam is fortuitously away from the wedding party when a group of thieves, led by Dorff, attack the event, take everyone hostage and begin cracking the multiple locks on the family safe. But they are not just ordinary thieves, and Sam is the only hope to neutralize them. Sound just slightly familiar? That noise you hear is Steven de Souza preparing his demand for a screenwriting credit.

On the other hand, having seen the end product, I would sue to get my name taken off this heap of nonsense. I kept going back and forth as to which element was less effective: the comedy or the action. In the end, I would have to say the former, because I don’t think I cracked a single smile over the entire hour and three quarters. The characters are of the sort intended to be “larger than life”, but in this case, it means gratingly annoying. Sam wasn’t the worst to be fair. There are others here, whose company I would gnaw my own leg off to escape from, if I ever met them in the real world. Again, I put the blame for these failures, squarely on the shoulders of the script.

The action is not much better, with it being painfully obvious that Wilson needed to be doubled for any scene requiring speed, strength or flexibility. Basically, anything more than standing about – possibly stretching to swinging something like a fire-hose around for a few seconds. Why they couldn’t cast someone semi-plausible in the role escapes me. Spy did a far better job with the similarly plus-sized McCarthy. It all builds to… um, some kind of chase scene involving hovercrafts laden with gold bullion? To be honest, my attention was drifting elsewhere during the action climax, which is a savage indictment of its shortcomings. If the action heroine genre is struggling at the box-office, this kind of garbage is the reason why.

Dir: Simon West
Star: Rebel Wilson, Anna Camp, Stephen Dorff, Anna Chlumsky

Control Room

  By

★★½
“In space, no-one can hear you roll your eyes.”

The major impact of watching this was largely to remind me of what incredible films Alien and Aliens are. It’s clear director Berdejo and writer Julien Deladrière think so too (the company who made this is called Nostromo Pictures: enough said). But they are just not up to the task of assembling something which can stand up to any comparison. Admittedly, it’s a largely thankless job. They are far from the first to fail at this, and not the worst either. However, I would lay most of the blame on Deladrière, because it’s the script which had me looking for the nearest airlock. The basic shape is fine. A mining colony on a hostile planet, populated by families, comes under attack from unstoppable monsters. Yeah: like I said, this should be largely familiar.

It’s in colouring between these lines that everything falls apart. First, Olivia (Mauleón) is burdened with a clunky back story. Two decades earlier, as a young child, she had to listen as her parents were killed by what’s insinuated to be the same creatures. Now, she’s all commitment averse, not least because she’s coming to the end of her 15-year contract with the mining company, and is looking forward to retiring back to Earth. This is a disappointment to her boyfriend and his daughter, Mera. Consequently, when the aliens attack, Olivia does things by the book from her position in the titular location, even at the cost of colonists’ lives.

This callous indifference horrifies her colleague, Arlo (Casas), even after his refusal to go by the same book, trying to save his parents, leads to more and unnecessary deaths. But if you are already predicting that she will learn the value of heroic sacrifice and go to great personal risk to save non-biological daughter Newt, sorry, Mena… Yeah, I guess that would technically be a spoiler, but it’s so obvious this is where the story is going, I do not feel it truly qualifies. That’s the main issue here, a script which possesses absolutely no ability to surprise the viewer. Except, perhaps, in Olivia’s remarkable ability to survive multiple encounters with monsters who snuff out everyone else’s lives in a couple of seconds.

The start is actually decent, and generates surprising tension considering it’s largely Olivia and Arlo watching dots, representing both humans and ETs, move around on their monitors. While neither we nor they initially see the attackers (yeah, I would expect such an advanced facility to have full CCTV too), the audio is chilling enough to make the point. The aliens are never fully revealed – there seems to be some kind of cloaking tech involved, Predator style – but what you can glimpse is decent enough. It’s just the increasing sense of deja vu, especially after Olivia leaves the control room. From then on, the sense of claustrophobia it generated evaporates, to be replaced by the heroine’s increasing indestructability.

Dir: Luiso Berdejo
Star: Loreto Mauleón, Óscar Casas, Alexandra Masangkay, Junio Valverde

Last County

  By

★★½
“Who’s home-invading who?”

I suspect the main problem here is a story which takes too long to get going. By the time things do kick off, my interest was already on… if not quite life support, it was likely seeing a doctor regularly. While things do then perk up in the second half, it feels too late. We begin with Abby Gardner (Ohm), a recovering alcoholic and mother to a young daughter, whose marriage falls apart after a car accident with the child in the back-seat. Her husband gets custody, and Abby begs for them to come visit her. Before that can happen, her home is entered by Bennet (Rand) and his wounded partner, who have absconded with a duffel-bag full of drug money.

The good news? It’s not long before the cops start to show up, under Sheriff Bill McLean (Campbell). The bad? They are far more interested in the loot than the well-being of Abby, Bennet or anyone else who gets between them and the hold-all. After an enthusiastic bit of rake-wielding (!), Abby goes from hostage to something closer to an accomplice. It’s a decision which makes her hopes for survival, and being re-united with her daughter,  significantly harder to achieve. The idea does offer an interesting (if highly cynical) twist on the usual home-invasion dynamic. Rather than fighting against the intruders, the home-owner ends up working with them, because they are now less of a threat than those supposed to protect her.

I did feel this switch in sides for Abby was a little too sudden. If she’d been given a darker past, then her siding with the drug mules would have been more credible: a fondness for booze did not cut it for me. I also never liked her very much. While it’s one thing to have a nuanced character with shades of grey (and that’s certainly the case with Abby), her maternal status was wielded like it trumped everything. Not for me, it didn’t. As a result, there were points where I almost forgot she hadn’t been part of Bennet’s crew all along. On the other side (literally), I appreciated how the cops ranged from almost honourable to entirely self-serving in their goals. 

I would say things escalate towards the expected face-off, in which Abby, Bennet and Sheriff McLean stand in a triangle, pointing guns at each other. But “escalate” may suggest a little more impetus than is actually present. It does remain watchable, with Ohm and Campbell delivering the best of the performances – you can see each figuring out their next move, like chess grand-masters. The ending, however, seems a little too convenient for its own good, and while I get that everyone may under-estimate Abby, that only goes so far. Technically, it’s solid enough. I was just never particularly engaged, and the innovation present in the concept doesn’t follow through to the characters. It’s going to be forgotten as quickly as its generic title.

Dir: Barret Mulholland
Star: Kaelen Ohm, Gord Rand, Nicholas Campbell, Keaton Kaplan

Eenie Meanie

  By

★★★½
“Eeenie Meanie – minor no.”

I don’t know which is more irritating: a film that isn’t very good, or a film which teeters on the edge of greatness, then botches it. This falls into the latter camp. Writer/director Simmons does a lot right, especially considering it’s his feature debut. But just when my finger was hovering over the seal of approval, the film makes a near-disastrous wrong turn. This happens to a degree I found myself annoyed and impressed in equal measures. The first thing it gets right is casting Weaving, who has quickly become one of my favourite action actresses. Here, she plays Edie, who been driving getaway for her criminal dad since her early teens. Now though, she’s trying to go straight: she has a bank job and is attending college.

Naturally, life isn’t that forgiving. A one-night return to her useless, junkie, intermittent boyfriend John (Glusman) left her pregnant. When she goes to tell him, he’s neck deep in trouble from his latest scheme, which has left him in debt to local boss Nico (Garcia). No problem. John can pay it off by robbing $3 million from a local casino, which will be giving out the money as the prize in a poker tournament, loaded in the trunk of a muscle car. He just needs someone to steal the vehicle and be a getaway driver. Much against her better judgment, Edie finds herself agreeing to help, to save John’s life. But again, fate has no interest in making it easy for her. Various figures from Edie’s past return to run interference, both emotionally and more directly.

Simmons has a crisp ear for dialogue, and there’s a blistering pace from the beginning. We learn quickly about the skeleton of Edie’s dysfunctional upbringing, then how she’s doing her best to escape it. However: you can take the girl from the dysfunction, but you can’t take the dysfunction from the girl. That’s clear when her bank is robbed, and she critiques the criminals’ work: “They made, like, five mistakes before they even hit the drawers.” In motion, this is a beautiful thing to behold, with some solid, crunchy car-chases and action which feels grounded. The problems are the emotional and dramatic elements, which ring horribly hollow. I get John saved her from being pimped out by her foster father. But her loyalty to him doesn’t sit with her otherwise hard-nosed pragmatism.

Worse still is her inexplicable desire to reconcile with her now wheelchair-bound father (Steve Zahn), in a scene which appears to have been spliced in from a Hallmark film. Things get mercifully back on track for the heist and its aftermath, which are thrillingly staged. Just when I was creeping towards the seal of approval again, it can’t stick the landing, with a finale too tidy for its own good. It’s like Simmons fell too much in love with his lead character – something I certainly understand – and pulled a happy ending out of thin air for Edie. Given some of her acts, I would be hard-pushed to say she deserved it, morally. Yet it is another fine entry in Weaving’s filmography, and despite the missteps, far from a bad start for Simmons either.

Dir: Shawn Simmons
Star: Samara Weaving, Karl Glusman, Andy Garcia, Jermaine Fowler