Xenia David

Another great comedy series brought to life by Michael Schurr. It’s wholesome, yet doesn’t shy from painful themes. It’s witty but not overly pleased with its own cleverness. It has a moral ground but doesn’t swim into sanctimoniousness. Each character is treated with respect and dignity. Ted Dansen is as sharp and funny as ever. He is surrounded by an able and endearing cast, some of whom are familiar from Schurr’s other series. It’s also easily watchable as each episode consists of thirty minutes and proceeds at a good pace. The plot isn’t confusing but has enough slight twists to keep you hooked. Highly recommended!

I was not expecting much from Anna Kendrick’s directorial debut. I was pleasantly surprised. I’d probably give it 4 1/2 stars, because of a few slight flaws, but overall this is an excellent film touching on the story of serial killer Rodney Alcala. (Spoilers follow) Serial killer documentaries and movies usually rank high on the most-watched list of every streamer worth its salt. These ride upon the crest of the public’s fascination with true crime. Often this fascination verges on voyeurism and exploitation. Some feel that serial killers are fetishised, with attractive actors such as Zac Efron and Evan Peters playing murderers Ted Bundy and Jeffrey Dahmer. There is also a risk of trying to make a killer more sympathetic by telling their backstory, which often shows high levels of familial dysfunction. Classic retellings of serial killer narratives focus on how the perpetrator was caught, and verge on a police procedural. Woman of the Hour is none of these, and simply tells the story of the women who survived rapist and murderer Rodney Alcala, from a woman’s perspective. It is non-exploitative. It is not gory. But it does have plenty of fear factor and moments of unbearable tension, even for those familiar with the story. Daniel Zovatto portrays Alcala with charm, childlike vulnerability and chilling coldness. It seems a deliberate choice to make him somewhat physically unappealing. The real Alcala had chiseled cheekbones and flowing curly locks - he was deemed superficially attractive by some. Only by peering into his eyes did one detect the hint of a sadistic killer. Alcala often beat his victims savagely and at one point used the claw hammer that one of the women had tried to protect herself with. Kendrick chooses not to dwell on the violence of these murders, and instead employs brief moments - a glimpse of a photo, blood caked under the fingernails. The women aren’t portrayed as damsels in distress or sassy Mary Sue’s who know everything. They are the women you meet every day. They’re people who are vulnerable because they had a bad breakup, or because they are struggling to catch a break. They try to look out for one another, as when an audience member of the Dating Game tries to report Alcala to the police (and is ignored), and a waitress quietly refuses to serve Alcala more drinks. There is an exemplary show of shrewdness and sheer grit as one girl escapes from Alcala using her wits. She is preternaturally cool and collected until the end, when she gasps in pure relief and fear. In the beginning I was concerned that Kendrick would veer into black comedy, as her character Cheryl is introduced as a budding actress being rejected for her part in what I thought was a very Kendrickesque scene. Her rom-com roles have always been the self-deprecating hot girl who’s only just slightly loser-y. But soon Kendrick takes control of the story and guides it assuredly through to the gripping end. The pace seems to lag at times, and very little is told of Alcala’s backstory. But I think this is a very welcome addition to the slew of serial killer movies. Anna Kendrick has shown great talent both in front and behind the lenses. I’m looking forward to more of her visionary films in the future.

The Princess Switch has become kind of a holiday tradition for me! I love watching Vanessa Hudgens portray different characters in these light-hearted stories. PS3 involves the same cohort of duplicates - but this time they have to do a royal heist! Hijinks ensue as the demure duchess, catty cousin, and benevolent baker all trade places to retrieve a stolen crown jewel. Romance! Gorgeous clothes! A tango! What’s not to like?

I did not expect to like Schmigadoon, but if you grew up with musicals, you tend to feel nostalgic about them, and Schmigadoon unabashedly brings all the elements to rhe table. You have swooning “manly” men, prim young women, cartoon villains and of course a dance number every few minutes. At the same time we recognise such elements to be hopelessly outdated. Schmigadoon does a good job of infusing modern values and sensibilities into the pastel coloured town and it’s denizens, while staying firmly within the genre. Fans of musicals may recognise some of the cast (such as Kristin Chenoweth, Alan Cuming and Aaron Tveit), complemented by well-known comedians like Keegan-Michael Key, Fred Armisen, Jane Krakowski and Martin Short. I was not familiar with Cecily Short (who plays the leading lady role as Melissa), but she was excellent, bringing the right mix of quirkiness and exasperation that her character requires. She manages to make Mel likeable, and though sparks don’t fly between her and boyfriend Josh (played by Key), their relationship is believable as the type of modern day romance that everyone is more familiar with. There is less amusement at their being New Yorkers lost in a musical (why is it always New Yorkers who’re fish out of water?), but there are enough contemporary cultural references to keep the savvy viewer chuckling. The rest of the cast are pleasantly multi-racial, which gives it a well-rounded feel. Sadly, none of the songs are especially memorable, though all of them are melodious to the ear (if not too reminiscent of the musicals they pay homage to). Still, watching Schmigadoon is a nice way to spend the afternoon and is a fun diversion from today’s grim headlines.

As a fan, I enjoyed Wonder Woman 1984 and appreciated the character arcs, action sequences and attention to 80s details. Gal Gadot and Chris Pine return with charming performances as Diana and Steve Trevor. Kristen Wiig and Pedro Pascal bring emotional weight as the antagonists, Cheetah and Max Lord. A surprise appearance by a radiant Lynda Carter will delight fans of the series. The lighter overall tone may turn off a few, compared to the epic feel of the first movie. Wonder Woman’s debut was set in World War I, so the stakes seem lower in WW1984, when America enjoyed relative prosperity and all things were thought possible. The 1980s landscape has a cheerful, campy atmosphere, with enough big hairdos, boxy outfits and leg warmers to remind me that it is an era best left to memory. A few jokes don’t land; the film sags in the middle, losing some of its focus. The first movie had the No Man’s Land sequence at its centre, which added weight and beauty. WW 1984 suffers from the lack of such a scene that resonates among viewers and elevates the material to superhero lore. Still, there is plenty of emotional heft, thanks to the performances from the cast. People accustomed to a colossal, bone-breaking, epic showdown may be disappointed. Director Patty Jenkins opts for a confrontation that is more psychological than physical. For me, this illustrates that Diana’s superpower is her sense of principle, as much as her ability to throw a tank. This distinguishes Diana as an inspiring figure, though it can be a letdown because action sequences are a key feature of today’s comic book films and form part of their major appeal. Gadot is better than ever as a superhero who struggles with heartbreak and loss; her Diana has a near-perfect life that sadly feels empty (she keeps to herself and is mostly preoccupied with work and secret superhero forays). We don’t know much about what she’s been doing since we last saw her. She keeps only a few key items that remind her of her lost love, which is touching, but doesn’t inform us much about her life since 1918. Wiig brings surprising teeth and ferocity to a “nobody” who discovers an outlet for her rage. She effectively sheds the comic persona that has kept her in funny “loser” roles. I do hope she gets more parts that show her darker side. Pedro Pascal may initially remind one of a certain narcissistic businessman out for world domination, but the movie takes care not to drop him into this “evil” stereotype. Pascal does his best to flesh out what is usually dismissed as a greedy megalomaniac supervillain. The rest of the supporting cast bring life to the storyline. Scenes from Themyscira which feature a young Diana (ably played by Lily Aspell) and her Amazon kin are always welcome. The storyline (about an ancient stone that grants wishes, with expected devastating consequences) is not fresh, and the script feels clunky at times. Some tropes that flourished in previous decades of cinema, such as body-swapping, may not go over so well in today’s era of political correctness. However, the cinematography soars, and the costumes are fantastic; the movie would have been wonderful to see on the big screen (I watched it through Amazon Prime). Overall, WW 1984 is slightly above the generic superhero fare we’ve become accustomed to, though it fails to meet the high expectations brought on by the first film. Still, Wonder Woman stands head and shoulders above many of her female counterparts, and I look forward to many more movies featuring Diana Prince.

This new “Rebecca” movie feels more like an unfunny chick flick than a gothic horror film. The cast is very competent but there was minimal psychological tension and the story unfolds in an almost businesslike manner.

Probably the best "Little Women" adaptation to date. Not only does it stay faithful to the well-loved book, it also offers a fresh perspective on each character. Warning: some spoilers ahead. The movie starts from the middle of the story we know, and swivels between past and present. It is a clever method, highlighting the nostalgia of childhood and illustrating the wisdom that comes with time. Meg (Emma Watson) reflects on the brief fun she had at a ball while struggling with poverty as a wife and mother. Jo (an incandescent Soairse Ronan) is proud of her independent status but later grows to doubt her own abilities as she gradually loses critical pillars in her life. Beth (Eliza Scanlen) quietly defines the people around her, which unfortunately becomes apparent only during her bouts of illness, which feature the parallel sicknesses in her youth and adulthood. Amy (Florence Pugh) matures from a flighty, spoiled child to a grave young woman, the progress of which is highlighted whenever she interacts with Laurie (Timothee Chalamet, born to play the role). For such a well-known and beloved book, one might be surprised by the fresh insights provided by Gerwig's adaptation. Amy's choice to marry into wealth, which seemed mercenary in the book, was given a wider dimension in a scene with Aunt March. A young Amy is impressed upon to do well for the sake of her family, and during those times, marriage was the only option for a reputable young lady. This was painfully brought home to Jo, as she grappled with her writing career. The ending shows how she managed to be true to herself while being successful. As she envisioned the happy events in her book - a prosperous school in Plumfield surrounded by loved ones - Jo clutches her freshly published book to her chest. It is her true love, her progeny. Greta Gerwig deserves to be nominated for an Oscar for this film. She breathes life into this centuries-old novel and makes it new for the current generation. I could only wish that she could adapt the rest of the books ("Little Men" and "Jo's Boys",). I would love to see the actors playing these beloved characters again. There were some initial doubts about the casting, but they managed to flesh out their roles beautifully. Some may feel put off by the accents (especially Louis Garrel's, whose lovely French accent is apparent despite playing German professor Friedrich Bhaer). Still, the actors are so engaging that I am inclined to ignore this particular point.

7/10 Dark Phoenix plays more like a psychological thriller than your run of the mill superhero action movie. It’s blessed with a talented cast, exciting action scenes, and excellent production values. Unfortunately, it has failed to connect to general audiences. This has plagued the X-men movies for a while. The films have mostly been about the clash of diametrically opposing ideologies - the extreme idealism of Charles Xavier and the pragmatic utilitarianism of Erik Lehnsherr - and the survival of the mutant species. A superhero cinematic universe must bring a relatable, human element to the narrative, apart from the usual good vs evil trope. The X-men films were always a commentary on how the marginalised sectors of society seek acceptance, or lash out (as exemplified by the clashing ideologies of Xavier and Magneto). This concept (of X-Men being outsiders) is reiterated in each film, a theme that audiences may have become overly familiar with. The movie’s strength easily rests on the powerful duo of Xavier and Magneto. James Macavoy and Michael Fassbender have always been excellent in their roles as the two most powerful mutant leaders; they have more chemistry with each other than with the third member of their love triangle (Jennifer Lawrence’s Mystique). Those who ship this particular bromance have good cause to watch Dark Phoenix. Another reason for watching is to witness the developing dynamics among the X-men. Sofie Turner is exceptional as the deeply conflicted Jean Grey, who struggles with an incredible power she can’t control. The early scenes do an excellent job of establishing her fatherly relationship with Charles Xavier. Some may end up seeing Jean Grey as nothing more than a vessel for a mysterious force - or in this case, the event that once again drives mutants apart. She, Scott Summers (Tye Sheridan), and Storm (Alexandra Shipp) would have benefited from a stand-alone movie featuring the other cast (Cody Smit-McPhee as Nightcrawler; Evan Peters as Quicksilver; Lana Condor as Jubilee) - perhaps a fascinating, coming-of-age superhero film showing how these kids try to control their abilities while coping with the travails of teenhood. We can only mourn this missed opportunity - a movie with such an attractive cast would have pulled in more youthful audiences to the X-Men movies. Still, it’s always a thrill to watch the heroes display their powers in creative ways when fighting a powerful villain. Magneto, as one of the most powerful mutants in the X-men universe, is always a pleasure to behold. The fight scenes that take place on a moving train are meticulously shot, and is easily one of the highlights of the film. This movie is also the antidote for those who may be tired of the fun yet formulaic superhero films. Maybe it was doomed, coming on the heels of Endgame. It’s unfortunate, because this movie is a fitting end to the X-Men series. It’s the end of an era - the ones that began way before the first avenger movie - the films which helped whet the audiences’ appetite for superheroes. In my opinion, there is no need to reboot the Dark Phoenix storyline a third time. I would like to see them pick up the pieces from where they left off. The future films could focus on the X-Men’s personal lives as they try to exist apart from the team. (In the comics, Scott Summers is happily married to a woman who’s the spitting image of Jean Grey - until he comes up against a shocking revelation.) Fans of the series can only pray that Dark Phoenix’s fortunes will rise, fanning the flames of hope for the perpetuation of the franchise.

I was not expecting too much but came away impressed with Roma. The story, seen from the viewpoint of a helper in an upper middle class Mexican suburb, is simple and straightforward. The film functions as a mood piece, a retrospective insight into one family’s life. Banal domestic moments are interspersed with light comedy and tragic events. There is an objective, documentary feel in the way that the characters are lensed, allowing the story to be told in small vignettes. At the same time, the viewer feels as if one was accessing memories or old photographs. This is cemented by the black and white cinematography. It adds a nostalgic element while not neglecting small details. Each scene is like a moving photograph, and the director allows one to linger on certain moments. The photojournalist-like approach, mingled with an eye for personal introspection, is augmented by the realism permeating the film. Just as in every day lives, personal tragedies occur in a background of triviality. A woman gives birth in a hospital, her fear and panic interspersed with the flurry of staid, weary medical professionals surrounding her. A young family receives sad news while on vacation, and their grief is subsumed by eating ice cream cones as wedding cheers blare out a short distance away. This is a good film to watch, reminding us that Mexico is not all about drug lords and illegal immigrants. I was surprised to see such an art film released on Netflix. The streaming service has several excellent documentaries, but the original films (such as a spate of comedies which would never have made it to the big screen) leave much to be desired. Roma has elevated the overall tone. I sincerely hope they add more Oscar worthy films to their roster.