"Paddington in Peru" stars Ben Whishaw, Hugh Bonneville, Emily Mortimer, Julie Walters, Jim Broadbent, Carla Tous, Olivia Colman, and Antonio Banderas. Released in the United Kingdom on November 8, 2024, followed by a United States release on February 14, 2025, the film has Paddington and his family traveling to Peru to find his missing Aunt Lucy. The film featured the directorial debut of Dougal Wilson, known for directing the John Lewis Christmas adverts and several short films like "Largo al factotum" and "No Pressure". It is the third installment in the Paddington film series, which is based on the Paddington Bear stories by Michael Bond. With how things have been turning out recently, we could all use a bit of innocence and hope occasionally. Of course, regarding me, there's no better way to provide that sense of harmless escapism than with a film fit for the entire family. One that's deemed possible to "bear". Yes, that pun was intentional and with good reason. This latest family-friendly sequel sees the return of Michael Bond's uplifting and courteous bear, who has been captivating the world since 1958 through his adventures on the pages and television screens. His cinematic outings that began in 2014 also proved that the franchise's charm has yet to dwindle regarding the films' critical and commercial successes, and it's looking to have a Broadway musical on its way soon. Until then, we have another cinematic adventure in the franchise that takes Paddington back to his original home with his human family in tow. Does it still contain the heart and charm of the previous films, or is this vacation "unbearable" to witness? Let's find out. The story once again centers on Paddington (Whishaw), an anthropomorphic bear living with the Brown family consisting of Henry (Bonneville), Mary (Mortimer), and their two children, Jonathan (Samuel Joslin) and Judy (Madeleine Harris). One day, Paddington receives a letter from the home for retired bears in Peru, notifying him of Aunt Lucy's (Imelda Staunton) strange behavior. This prompted Paddington and the Browns to travel to Peru to visit her, only to discover that Aunt Lucy had gone missing. Using the clues she left behind, Paddington must rediscover the instincts he left behind to find her while uncovering a sinister plot that could threaten his family. It wasn't until 2014's "Paddington" that I was fully exposed to the bear who's as cuddly and kindhearted as Winnie-the-Pooh. With an abundance of charisma, heart, and humor within its all-ages storytelling, "Paddington" was a genuinely well-deserving surprise that accomplished the one thing most live-action/CGI adaptations struggled to achieve: being faithful to its source material without modernizing it constantly. "Paddington 2" also did the impossible in being as good, if not better than its predecessor, signaling a brighter future for the franchise on the big screen. This leaves us with "Paddington in Peru", another kid-friendly live-action/CGI hybrid threequel that takes the characters beyond the comfort of their home. As far as those sequels go, like "Alvin and the Chipmunks: Chipwrecked", they tend to impress kids with their overseas shenanigans but also fall extremely short in their straightforward narratives and humor to let the adults enjoy the ride. With "Paddington" following the same concept and a new director on board, it was concerning that the franchise could follow suit in this downward trend. Luckily, that doesn't appear to be the case. The "Paddington" films are usually known for their lighthearted and simplistic tones, but they also provide a subtly offbeat and imaginative vibe in their presentations to help them stand out from other family-friendly options. They're humorous enough to delight plenty of kids and endearing enough to remind adults of the simpler and innocent times without overshadowing them with pop culture references and modernized jokes. So, if you loved the previous installments because of that, then there's no doubt you'll feel the same about "Paddington in Peru" as I did. Following the same path as the first two films, "Paddington in Peru" is a straightforward and charmingly engaging family adventure that balances British bizarreness with a genuine yet occasionally corny heart. It often gets lost in its franchise fatigue and pacing, but it found its way back by understanding the basic principles of the previous films without needlessly upping the ante in each sequel. Dougal Wilson had plenty of expectations to live up to when it came to taking over directorial duties for the franchise. Paul King didn't return to direct "Paddington in Peru", but he's still involved with coming up with the story, leaving Wilson to take over. Considering this is his first feature film as a director, it's hard not to be concerned about how Dougal Wilson would fare in carrying the legacy compared to King. Fortunately, my concerns fluttered away upon watching the film. While far from spectacular, Wilson managed to maintain the previous movies' innocent essence through its framework, production design, and visual gags reminiscent of a Wes Anderson movie. In a way, it represented something out of a special episode of a Saturday morning cartoon that both kids and adults can enjoy with its charisma, comedy, and messages. Despite not matching Paul King's own sense of family-friendly appeal, Wilson's vision could be seen as a starting point for his career as a feature film director. Regarding the story, "Paddington in Peru" may seem like a simplistic and inconsequential sequel on paper, but there's more to the plot that makes it better than expected. During Paddington's adventure in Peru, the film provides a sense of closure regarding the bear's origins and where he comes from. It featured heartwarming moments between the characters and highlighted the importance of family, no matter their background. The subplot involving the characters searching for the mythical "El Dorado" reinforced the idea that family is a treasure more valuable than gold. Of course, even with its heartfelt and innocent nature, the storytelling is far from perfect. In addition to the pacing being a bit slow for younger kids, the plot can be predictable and sometimes corny in its dynamic, especially regarding the film's uninteresting antagonist. The film also had some underutilized narrative elements, including the Browns' changing family dynamic, which would've worked in exploring its emotional depth involving their growth further. But then again, what else should we expect from a family movie about a bear living in London? The narrative may not pack a sentimental punch in its themes compared to the previous two films. Nonetheless, it's still a fun and suitably comforting family adventure that's well-mannered for its all-ages audience, mainly when the humor focuses more on its innocence than modern pop culture references. Most of the cast returned once again to reprise their roles from the previous films, except Sally Hawkins, who was replaced by Emily Mortimer for her role of Mary Brown. While there were times when their performances felt a bit stale, they still did pretty well in capturing the characters' charismatic and supportive personalities worthy of the film's tone. Ben Whishaw proved to me once more that he was the perfect choice to voice Paddington. The bear's innocent and well-mannered persona was one of the significant aspects that made Paddington a beloved beacon of inspiration and hope, and Whishaw didn't skip a beat in capturing that personality effectively, whether for comedy or drama. Hugh Bonneville continues to be an entertaining presence as Henry Brown, mainly due to his arc involving him facing his phobia of risk-taking. Emily Mortimer was also a serviceable replacement for Sally Hawkins regarding her performance as Mary. I would also credit Antonio Banderas for providing plenty of energy and heart into his performance of Hunter Cabot, a treasure hunter searching for the lost city of El Dorado, continuing his trend of delighting families with his playful roles outside his mature ones. Olivia Colman had a few decent moments to make herself a respectable addition to the cast as The Reverend Mother despite the predictable twist involving her true identity. Overall, "Paddington in Peru" further expands the beloved franchise with another all-ages adventure that's as endearingly sweet as a jar of marmalade. It may not be on par with the previous films regarding its hit-and-miss plot elements and pacing. However, I still admire this sequel for maintaining the predecessors' innocence and charm without going overboard with its overseas shenanigans and kid-friendly humor. It's another delightful and heartwarming family film that showcases compassion in its messages and craft thanks to its solid cast, Dougal Wilson's approach to its simplistic tone and story, and charming humor. More importantly, it would undoubtedly remind people that it doesn't hurt to be as polite as Paddington every once in a while. I would gladly recommend this film to those who loved the previous "Paddington" films and those who want something more tolerable than mindless. B
0 Comments
"Captain America: Brave New World" stars Anthony Mackie, Danny Ramirez, Shira Haas, Xosha Roquemore, Carl Lumbly, Giancarlo Esposito, Tim Blake Nelson, and Harrison Ford. Released on February 14, 2025, the film has Sam Wilson getting caught in an international incident. The film is directed by Julius Onah, who also directed "The Girl Is in Trouble", "The Cloverfield Paradox", and "Luce". It is the fourth installment in the Captain America film series and the 35th film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Steve Rogers has had one hell of a run as the super soldier Captain America. He fought in World War II, traveled to the present, uncovered a conspiracy within S.H.I.E.L.D., and defied the Sokovia Accords. If those weren't enough, he even led the largest group of superheroes ever assembled in the ultimate battle against Thanos. In short, Steve had quite a legacy worthy of the title "Avenger". However, even though Steve's journey concluded in "Avengers: Endgame", the Captain America name still lives to fight another day, as the mantle is now passed down to his trustworthy comrade, Sam Wilson, formerly known as Falcon. But, as usual, this job isn't complete without another political conspiracy to uncover. The Marvel Cinematic Universe continues to be in full swing after the massive success of "Deadpool & Wolverine" last year, especially with its mixed-bag Multiverse Saga being plagued by outside controversies. Its latest installment, the first of many coming out in 2025, may not be exploring the multiverse further, but it does seem to be going back to the basics of a political thriller with superhero elements, which worked exceptionally well with the previous two Captain America films. Was this brave new world able to deliver the same results regarding its storytelling and entertainment values? Let's find out. The story centers on Sam Wilson (Mackie), a former pararescueman who has taken over the mantle of Captain America. As he works to honor Steve Rogers' legacy, Sam is hired to work for former U.S. Army general Thaddeus Ross (Ford), who was recently elected as the president of the United States. Despite their past tensions, Ross hopes to cooperate with Sam to reform the Avengers and negotiate equal trade of the adamantium medal on Celestial Island. However, those plans are put on hold when they're caught in the middle of an international incident involving the Serpent Society, led by Seth Voelker (Esposito), and the mysterious rise of former cellular biologist Samuel Sterns (Nelson). Allied by first lieutenant Joaquin Torres (Ramirez), now taking on the mantle of Falcon, Sam journeys to expose this conspiracy before the villains' dangerous plan causes war between the countries. Amid the MCU's solo films, "Captain America" provided audiences with a trilogy that improved with each installment. "The First Avenger" proved to be a solid action war film involving Steve battling Nazis. However, it wasn't until "The Winter Soldier" and "Civil War" that the MCU upped the ante in the character's arc and the modern political themes. I would consider "The Winter Soldier" to be the best of the trilogy regarding the Russo Brothers' direction, action sequences, and thrilling genre elements. As for "Civil War", it was a strong Avengers-type conclusion to the trilogy that's also frustrating for the right reasons due to its character depth and emotional stakes. Despite that, I still struggle to return to that movie without feeling the need to punch Tony Stark in the teeth for letting his emotions get the better of him. With how well-received those movies were, this provided a variety of challenges for "Brave New World" to live up to those expectations regarding its plot and involvement in the MCU. One of them is that this is another MCU installment that interconnects with one of its Disney+ shows, following "Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness" continuing where "WandaVision" left off. "Brave New World" serves as a continuation to not just the previous "Captain America" films, "The Incredible Hulk", and "Endgame" but also the Disney+ limited series "The Falcon and the Winter Soldier", which involved Sam's transition to Captain America. So, there is some concern that those who haven't watched "Falcon and the Winter Soldier" may be less emotionally invested in the plot elements introduced in that show. One such factor is Isaiah Bradley (Lumbly), a former Korean War veteran revealed to be the first black super soldier imprisoned and experimented on for 30 years, playing a key factor in the show's mature social commentary involving racial discrimination, injustice, and systemic oppression. "Brave New World" continues Bradley's arc as he becomes a pawn in a villainous scheme that Sam must dispose of. While that may be the case in some parts, the filmmakers ensured the importance of Isaiah and Sam's relationship was convincing enough to attract the newcomers amid its saving-the-world plot. Instead of being a background cameo, Isaiah played a prominent role in the film's storyline. Not only that, but it also allowed the spotlight to shine on the character's actor, Carl Lumbly, who reprised his role after starring in "The Falcon and the Winter Soldier". You may have heard of Lumbly from other projects like the 90s superhero series M.A.N.T.I.S. and his roles in the DC Animated Universe, including Martian Manhunter. "The Falcon and the Winter Soldier" and "Brave New World" are my first exposures to Lumbly's talents, and after seeing his commendable performance in both of those projects, I wouldn't mind seeing more of him in the future. Lumbly's portrayal of the veteran's traumatic and fearful state was one of the many elements that elevated these projects in my eyes. While "The Falcon and the Winter Soldier" did Isaiah more justice than "Brave New World" regarding the commentary, I'm still glad that they didn't forget about one of the key roles in Sam's journey to become Captain America for the latter. But, regarding the story itself, does "Brave New World" live up to the legacy left behind by the previous "Captain America" installments? Honestly, I would have to say no. That goal was obviously an uphill battle right from the get-go, especially with how great the last two "Captain America" movies were and the current state of the franchise's "Multiverse Saga". With a new director and a ton of screenwriters on board, along with some reshoots, "Brave New World" felt less of a shell of the trilogy and more of a middling display of modern blockbuster commercialism. It retained the elements that made the "Captain America" movies fantastic, especially the mantle's representation of inspiration and hope and the complex political themes. However, instead of combining them with a bold, innovative, and thought-provoking narrative, "Brave New World" used them as a bridge to provide more room for its superhero blockbuster antics and visual-heavy chaos to thrive. This movie would've been a great opportunity to further examine Sam's doubts in his role as "Captain America" introduced in "Falcon and the Winter Soldier", mainly for him being compared to Steve Rogers. While there were a couple of moments that explored this element, they struggled to reach those intended emotional heights due to the film's restrained structure and runtime. However, regarding its entertainment value, "Brave New World" mostly compensates for its narrative issues with another agreeable addition to the overly-expanding MCU. Understandably, it's far from perfect, given the circumstances of the film behind the scenes. But, as long as it delivers something that leaves me with a mild satisfaction, I'd be willing to forgive an issue or two, but not all of them. It's another flawed superhero movie, but it packs plenty of suitable thrills in the action scenes and political mystery amid the superhero-CGI fantasies. Julius Onah had only directed three films before taking on a big-budget blockbuster like "Brave New World", with 2019's "Luce" being his best critically. I only heard of Onah through "The Cloverfield Paradox", which I thought was serviceable but understandably flawed compared to the other "Cloverfield" installments. So, this makes "Brave New World" a true test to see if Onah's vision could intrigue me enough to anticipate his future career. He certainly has that proper vision regarding the movie's tribute to classic political thrillers, the cinematography, and the action scenes, with the latter being more like fun eye candy than emotionally driven. However, I wouldn't say he was the best director for the job, which could be due to him being bound by the MCU's business methods. Julius Onah gets some credit for bringing back the "political thriller" vibes of "The Winter Soldier" with a dash of Hulk callbacks to also identify it as a long-awaited sequel to "The Incredible Hulk".…without the green Hulk. Unfortunately, he wasn't able to reach the similar heights the Russo Brothers achieved in the last two "Captain America" installments regarding the depth and intensity of the narratives and characters. Part of the movie's entertainment value is due to the cast, whose chemistry and performances left a good enough spark to carry the characters' flawed arcs. Anthony Mackie has been proving himself to be a remarkable addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe regarding his role as Sam Wilson, first introduced in "The Winter Soldier". Despite being in supporting roles, Mackie offered plenty of delightful moments to make his character's presence worthwhile. "Brave New World" sees Mackie leading the charge with Sam donning the Captain America identity, and the result is another decent turn for the actor. Mackie's performance continues to embody Sam's perseverance and liberality with a sense of charisma and heart, emphasizing the character's underdog journey. With the future already set in stone for Sam, I'm eager to see more of Mackie as Captain America in action. Danny Ramirez was an enjoyable addition to the cast as Joaquin Torres, the new "Falcon", due to his enjoyable chemistry with Mackie. It's far from memorable, but seeing the two interact with one another was another reason why I loved the previous two "Captain America" films: the chemistry between Captain America and the Falcon. As for Harrison Ford as Thaddeus Ross, he was decent enough to portray the character the late William Hurt played before his death in 2022. I would even say that Ross's redemption arc was the film's most interesting part due to Ford's performance. Giancarlo Esposito and Tim Blake Nelson were also serviceable as the villains Seth Voelker and Samuel Sterns, respectively, although none of them could overcome the franchise's usual villain issue. The visual effects have been one of the staples of the MCU's earlier entries, especially regarding the immersive action and production designs. However, while some of the recent installments post-Endgame had some merits in their visual-heavy presentations, they also had some "questionable" choices that concern us about the studio's quantity-churning methods. I can understand the issues involving CGI, but I'm also not entirely bothered by most of them, and the visuals in "Brave New World" are no exception. Most of the visual effects weren't as bad as people make them out to be regarding the action sequences, with the Celestial Island sequence being the movie's highlight due to the flight scenes. However, I would say that the CGI effects lost some of that appeal with its Red Hulk sequence due to its shoddy appearance. But I will admit that the Red Hulk looked pretty cool design-wise. Overall, "Captain America: Brave New World" delivers some agreeable entertainment through its superhero thrills and charm, but it doesn't feel brave in reflecting its political and character-driven themes on a bold and sentimental level. For those seeking blockbuster escapism, the film is satisfactory in its political thriller aspect and blockbuster antics, mainly due to its cast and action scenes. However, for those hoping for another masterpiece similar to the previous "Captain America" movies, it's a mildly disappointing and dry continuation that falls short of the trilogy's cinematic quality. Regarding its middling screenplay, hit-and-miss visuals, and rough storytelling, the film lacks the push it needs to take the MCU's fifth phase to new heights. It certainly doesn't hinder my interest in seeing more of Sam as Captain America, especially with its post-credit scene teasing something grand for him to tackle. But regarding his big screen appearance with the mantle after "Falcon and the Winter Soldier", this wasn't the best first impression I hoped for. C+"Love Hurts" stars Ke Huy Quan, Ariana DeBose, Daniel Wu, Marshawn Lynch, Mustafa Shakir, Lio Tipton, Rhys Darby, André Eriksen, Sean Astin, and Cam Gigandet. Released on February 7, 2025, the film has a realtor using his hitman skills to confront his brother. The film featured the directorial debut of Jonathan Eusebio, the stunt coordinator for many movies like "John Wick", "Black Panther", and "Violent Night". It's challenging to move on from a breakup, especially if it's with one that you truly loved. Even though you act like everything's fine afterward, the revelation always comes around to bite you in the butt more times than you can count. However, this particular breakup is an entirely different story, mainly when it involves a history as a notorious assassin. This serves as the topic for the latest action-packed experience from David Leitch's 87North Productions, the company seeking to copy the success of "John Wick" with its fun and violent concepts. This also marked this year's latest attempt to revamp the romantic cinematic vibes, thanks to its "love" story involving a generous man and his brutal past self. "Companion" and "Heart Eyes" had their share of success in revitalizing the romance genre, so let's see if this action-comedy can do the same. The story follows Marvin Gable (Quan), a kind-hearted realtor with a perfect job and a happy life. His career eventually hits a snag when he receives an ominous message from his former partner, Rose Carlisle (DeBose). It's then revealed that Marvin was once a skilled assassin for a mysterious organization, "The Company", who helped Rose escape and left his life of crime behind to start fresh. Things get even worse when Marvin discovers that his not-so-nice brother, the organization's leader Alvin "Knuckles" Gable (Wu), is hunting him down as revenge for his betrayal. After reuniting with Rose, Marvin is forced to rely on his hitman skills to confront the past he left behind and his estranged brother. This was another action film I was interested in checking out for multiple reasons. One is, of course, the involvement of 87North Productions, which has a pretty decent track record in delivering entertainment in their straightforward concepts. Except for "Day Shift" and "Kate", I've been impressed with the films it's put out throughout the decade regarding their executions and charismatic yet violent appeals. So, I hoped that "Love Hurts" would keep this streak going with a former assassin turned realtor. Another reason is Ke Huy Quan, who's just promoted from being in supportive roles to leading his own project, let alone an action comedy with a touch of romance. Quan has made a comeback story for the decade after winning his Oscar for "Everything Everywhere All at Once", and he seeks to continue that with "Love Hurts". With my revamped appreciation towards Quan, this was something I shouldn't pass up. However, its surprisingly terrible reviews may have slightly damaged my optimism towards the film. But then again, there had been several movies I watched that I enjoyed more than the critics, mainly because of my ability to judge them by their entertainment factor, not just their stories and crafts. Unfortunately, "Love Hurts" doesn't appear to be one of those movies, as its title reflects my disappointment with its execution. When it comes to the storytelling aspect, "Love Hurts" is a lazy exercise of copying several plot elements from recent action movies and scrunching them together without a sturdy substance to bridge them. It's not without a few diverting moments to keep my heart from being completely destroyed, but it rarely took advantage of them to make itself stand out from the action-comedy crowd. In terms of its plot, "Love Hurts" is yet another action-packed tale of a seemingly normal person who's secretly a violent badass who worked for a secret organization, similar to other films from 87North Productions like "John Wick" and "Nobody". I would also throw in Jason Statham's "The Beekeeper" for good measure. In this case, the movie's protagonist, Marvin, is a former assassin who wants to live a peaceful life away from his controlling brother, Alvin. However, Rose's involvement with a conspiracy prompted him to return to that former life to be truly free. From a storytelling perspective, this should've opened the door for some interesting and amusing ideas in its world-building and characters. Not to mention, it would've provided a compelling inner conflict in Marvin, who struggles to maintain his newfound life due to his violent history. Sadly, it doesn't look like 87North has the right talent behind the scenes to make this concept work for me. The screenplay was written by three people (Matthew Murray, Josh Stoddard, and Luke Passmore), which usually doesn't bode well in most cases such as this. There were some scenes that could've worked well in the film's messages, genre cliches, and character depth, but the constrained and rushed nature of those elements prevented the movie from reaching the potential it was going for. As a result, it became a barebones, formulaic, and messy reflection of genre imitation that lacked the heart and wit to overcome its heartbreak. It's like the writers copied the homework of every other film involving a "former killer disguised as a normal person" trope and improperly stuffed them into a Valentine's chocolate box. While they surely mean well in giving audiences what they want out of a straightforward action comedy, the lack of an expanded narrative and enticing character dynamics made it possible they won't make it past the first date. Jonathan Eusebio became the latest stunt worker to step into the role of filmmaker, following in the footsteps of others like David Leitch, who served as one of the film's producers. Eusebio has been involved with stunt work for many action movies, especially ones from 87North. Considering how well the other stunt worker-turned-directors turned out, especially Leitch, I was pretty confident that Eusebio would wind up surprising me, too. Sadly, that wasn't the case, as Eusebio struggled to provide consistency and nuance in the film's charming essence and genre cliches, mainly the unconvincing romance between Marvin and Rose. The film's humor was mostly okay for the stunt work and Ke Huy Quan's charisma, but the director's approach to the pacing made the movie feel clunky and empty in its sentimental drive and character moments. This is primarily due to its shockingly short runtime of 83 minutes. While appropriate for a quick watch, this is another occasion where a runtime can affect a film's storytelling potential. As long as the story is interesting enough to keep me engaged, it barely matters how long or short a film is. But, if a movie is too short to expand its world-building and ideas further, there's a good chance we're not getting much bang for our buck. Lucky for Eusebio, the film's fight scenes were the only redeeming factor of his vision. Copying off the similar style from other 87North films, "Love Hurts" delivered a comprehensive sense of slickness and white-knuckled delightfulness into the violence and presentation to maintain the film's energy. Not only was Bridger Nielson's cinematography respectable for capturing the hard-hitting stunt work on display, but the action choreography was also pretty decent, especially ones involving Quan. For the latter, the first two fight scenes involving Marvin battling the assassins resembled some of the earlier Jackie Chan films, in which his stunts involve his use of props and comical timing. I wouldn't say they're innovative in the stunts, but for those hungry for R-rated fist fights, "Love Hurts" gets the job done in delivering some violent joy amid its heartbreaking affair. But even with its serviceable action, I feel that Eusebio may not return to the director's chair anytime soon. As for the cast, the only actor who showed the most effort in carrying the film was Ke Huy Quan. He has proven he can provide delighting charisma as a supporting actor, ranging from Short Round in "Indiana Jones" to Waymond Wang in "Everything Everywhere All at Once". Regarding his diverting performance as the violent yet generous Marvin, Quan also convinced me he could accomplish the same goal as the main lead. The only problem is that the film's script wasn't the right fit for him to convince everybody else. Hopefully, this doesn't persuade him to stay in supporting roles because I was mostly satisfied with what Quan delivered in this role, even if it's not his best work in his comeback years. Ariana DeBose continued to stumble in her filmography as usual. However, her performance here as Rose was a tad more tolerable than what she delivered in "Kraven the Hunter", mainly because she was having a bit of fun capturing her character's wild side. Marshawn Lynch also had a couple of amusing moments as King, one of the assassins hunting Marvin, although not enough to make him a standout, especially since coming off his successful feature film debut in "Bottoms". The film also featured a "Goonies" reunion between Quan and Sean Astin, who plays Cliff Cussick, so if you grew up with "The Goonies", you might like this small piece of nostalgia. Overall, "Love Hurts" breaks many hearts for the wrong reasons, as it lacks many opportunities to mend its own. Like most films from 87North Productions, the movie provided an entertaining essence in its action scenes, especially regarding its choreography. However, regarding everything else, the company hits another unfortunate snag with an awkwardly paced and formulaically restrained imitation of some of its previous outings. Ke Huy Quan made the most of his charismatic capabilities to carry the film in his leading role, and I admittedly had a swell time watching the stunt choreography. But its mediocre direction, limited and rushed plot, weak characters, and formulaic script make this cinematic heartbreak all the more tragic. If you enjoyed Quan in his other roles, then you'll likely enjoy him in this, although I would recommend waiting for it to stream for free. It's certainly not as intolerable as the other two terrible movies I saw last month, but I can also see it not being the top choice for date nights. D+"Heart Eyes" stars Olivia Holt, Mason Gooding, Gigi Zumbado, Michaela Watkins, Devon Sawa, and Jordana Brewster. Released on February 7, 2025, the film has two co-workers confronting a serial killer targeting couples on Valentine's Day. The film is directed by Josh Ruben, who also directed "Scare Me" and "Werewolves Within" and was involved with the subscription streaming service Dropout. Well, guys, it's officially February once again, and you know what that means. We're approaching Valentine's Day, a special time of the year when we spend quality time with our special someone or sit around hopelessly wishing for one. But in this particular case, it's also the holiday when we attempt to keep our relationship alive, especially when a masked killer threatens to make our holiday a living hell. Around this time, we usually have plenty of romantic options for us to choose from throughout February, movie-wise. However, 2025 attempts to revamp that tradition by giving us not one but two distinct "romance" films this weekend to spice up our lovey-dovey vibes. One of those movies is a holiday slasher seeking to bring a lot of bloodshed amid its boy-meets-girl love story and maybe extend the subgenre's winning streak that started with Eli Roth's "Thanksgiving". Was it able to provide a gory date night to remember, or are we better off staying in instead? Let's find out. The story follows two co-workers, Ally (Holt) and Jay (Gooding), who don't see eye-to-eye with each other. As the two get together for work-related reasons on Valentine's Day, they receive word of a masked killer running amok in their hometown. Known as the Heart Eyes Killer, the infamous murderer goes around the country every year targeting and killing couples in gruesome ways. Unfortunately for Ally and Jay, the killer mistakes the two as a couple and pursues them. The co-workers must now put their trust in one another to escape and put an end to the killer's bloody rampage for good. I don't watch many romance movies as much as others, probably because of my current situation. However, when I see one that involves either action, comedy, or even horror, I usually jump on board the love train to see its concept in action. I may have to deal with the typical corny love-fest as a result, but as long as everything else is properly executed to be entertaining, I won't see it as a massive issue. Unsurprisingly, "Heart Eyes" is another evidence for this case, as it combines the usual rom-com tropes of an unlikely relationship with a straightforward slasher narrative involving a masked killer with hearts as its eyes. Considering my experience with past slasher films, including holiday-based ones, this movie seemed to be a solid cure for my romance blues. But what matters is whether the execution of those cliches delivered enough fun moments to satisfy both sides of the two distinct genres, which it surprisingly does. "Heart Eyes" offered precisely what you'd expect from the marketing: a rom-com with a bucket full of blood and guts courtesy of the silent but deadly killer. It's straightforward, understandably cliched, and appropriately short, thanks to its 97-minute runtime. However, the film also functions as an entertaining and charismatic multi-genre showcase that invigorates the fun of slasher movies and suitably stabs its rom-com tropes in its heart. I rarely enjoy romance films because of how abundant and disposable their plots can be. I mean, just look at the Netflix menu and count how many of them it's got in store. I'll give you a hint: there's a lot of them. Fortunately, "Heart Eyes" became one of the few occasions where I became convinced that the typical romance genre can be enjoyable if the effort in its concept exists. This is due to filmmaker Josh Ruben, who's made a name for himself in the horror comedy genre with only two movies. Sadly, I didn't watch those films beforehand, but after watching "Heart Eyes", that may change sooner or later, especially when regarding his balance of the two genres. While it is technically a slasher film, it's more along the lines of another typical romance comedy involving two co-workers struggling to find love due to their pasts. Ally has it worse as she recently had her heart broken before the film's events, resulting in her losing her faith in romance. That is until she unexpectedly wound up with Jay due to "circumstances beyond their control". In a way, the film showcases the protagonists rediscovering what it takes to love and be loved amid the bloodshed and heartbreak. While the movie can be predictable with its cliches, especially its twist in the third act, the journey toward that message was the sole reason for surpassing most of my expectations. With its focus on the romantic comedy side of things rather than the horror aspect, there was some doubt that this may be another situation where horror fans may feel duped by its lack of scares. Fortunately, that doesn't appear to be the case, as Ruben managed to prove that the rom-com elements can be just as fun as the slasher moments. The romance between the protagonists was genuinely endearing and charismatically humorous, resulting in them being the most likable duo of the bunch. Not only that, but the horror and comedy moments worked really well together with the lovey-dovey stuff in between without feeling like a completely different movie. The slasher parts delivered plenty of decent kills from the Heart Eyes Killer that's neither too gory nor too tame from an entertainment perspective. It had an appropriate mixture that'll make those with weak stomachs squirm but satisfy enough people who want to see victims get shot by cupid arrows. As for the humor, it occasionally jabs at the romance cliches in a playful manner, but it's also well-balanced with the genuine charm of the protagonists, resulting in a delightfully humorous outlook of the popular genre that doesn't feel too much like a spoof. The charm that came from Ally and Jay relied solely on the attractive chemistry between Olivia Holt and Mason Gooding, which was just as entertaining as the film's brutalities. Olivia Holt is another former Disney star who has made herself known outside the brand through some of her mature roles. It's pretty crazy how many young actors have come this far in the acting business since working on kid-friendly projects for Disney, with some being more successful than others. While I haven't seen much of Holt compared to the other former Disney stars, I respect her attempt at reintroducing herself to a new generation unfamiliar with her earlier works. Her performance as Ally would surely be remembered in terms of Holt's filmography, as she provided a sublime balance of humor and charm amid her "scream queen" vibes. Mason Gooding was also a satisfying surprise regarding his magnetic and amusing performance as Jay, continuing his consistent run in the horror genre. Devon Sawa and Jordana Brewster also offered enough decent moments as the two detectives to make their existence worthwhile, whose names serve as a comical reference to the "Fast & Furious" franchise, which also starred Brewster. Overall, "Heart Eyes" pours a lot of love into its romance-slasher mixture to craft a killer Valentine's Day treat for genre fans. Unsurprisingly, it's not going to change the way we see cinema due to its hit-and-miss screenplay being riddled with cliches and a predictable twist. However, It's also another movie that successfully makes its straightforward tropes more fun and endearing than dull and corny. As a result, the film is another horror experience that's diverting, brutal, and even humorous. Holt and Gooding are a match made in heaven regarding their magnetic chemistry and performances, and Josh Ruben delivered a rewarding mixture of romance, comedy, and horror without losing the film's intended identity. For fans of romance and slasher films, it's a surprisingly fun time at the movies that's to die for or worth falling in love with. Maybe even both? B"Companion" stars Sophie Thatcher, Jack Quaid, Lukas Gage, Megan Suri, Harvey Guillén, and Rupert Friend. Released on January 31, 2025, the film chronicles a chain of events surrounding a group of people at a lakeside estate. The film was written and directed by Drew Hancock in his feature directorial debut. Hancock is known for writing episodes of television shows like "The Wastelander", "The Mountain", "Blue Mountain State", and "My Dead Ex". It doesn't come as much of a surprise that the horror genre didn't start the new year on the right foot, based on my experience. "Peter Pan's Neverland Nightmare" failed to make its twisted childhood character more of a nightmare than a dream, and Leigh Whannell's modern take on the "Wolf Man" lore was more of a subtle whimper than a howling success. Although, I would say the "Wolf Man" reboot had more effort in its bold direction than a low-budget slasher film based on a boy who never grew up. Fortunately, things started to turn around with Steven Soderbergh's "Presence", a refreshingly compelling ghost story that I surprisingly loved more than I thought I would, although expectations may vary. With January closing its doors, we now have yet another horror film that's hoping to keep this streak going. One that further emphasizes just how dangerous robots can be, especially ones programmed to serve your every desire. "Companion" was the latest film to feature the involvement of Zach Cregger, a member of the comedy troupe The Whitest Kids U' Know, who's made a surprisingly large impact in the horror genre with "Barbarian". Regarding its commercial and financial success, "Barbarian" was the type of experience that warranted the theatrical treatment through its horror aspects and twists, the latter of which was hidden from its marketing. While he was not taking the directorial helm for this movie, with the role now belonging to Drew Hancock, Cregger still had his fingerprints all over it regarding his approach to hiding the crucial surprises for its final cut. That is, until its recent trailer showed what the film was actually about: a companion robot unleashing chaos. But does it hinder my experience with this latest AI horror film? More importantly, does it pack enough surprises in its plot to fulfill the desires of the genre's fans? This is another movie that desires audiences to go into it blind and even talk about it without giving specific plot details away, similar to "Barbarian". Of course, that includes me, despite seeing its recent trailer once. So, for the sake of this review, I will do my best to express my thoughts on it without spoiling anything so that you can experience it yourself. Regarding the film's plot, "Companion" tells a tale of a group of friends hosting a weekend getaway at a remote lakeside cabin, including young couple Josh (Quaid) and Iris (Thatcher). However, the seemingly harmless getaway slowly descends into chaos when one of the friends reveals themselves as a companion robot who's self-aware of their existence. This resulted in a series of events involving the group attempting to shut down the cyborg. That's pretty much my abridged version of the story, as everything else makes the experience more enjoyable and surprisingly satisfying than the concept suggests. While I wouldn't say its narrative programming is perfect, I can say that I had a really good time with "Companion". It's a subtly demented and entertaining cat-and-mouse film that successfully puts a twisted spin on its traditional "love story". "Companion" is often described as a horror film since it's clearly about a rogue sex robot who kills people, but I don't think that's the case regarding its seemingly "light-hearted" tone. It does have a few horror elements, but it also has a surprising amount of humor thrown in there to emphasize the film's wild premise, so I guess you can say it's a "horror romance comedy". Drew Hancock had plenty of hands to fill to ensure these elements were properly balanced enough to satisfy those looking for some terrifying fun that also functions as a "date night" movie. Considering this is his first time directing a feature film, Hancock's vision could wind up in either direction. Fortunately, Hancock managed to keep this genre balance from malfunctioning too early, especially the effective dark comedy, even though the "horror" part of the film lacked any frightful functions in the system. Not only that, but Drew Hancock provided another horror movie that's sublimely shot regarding the production designs and Eli Born's wide-angle cinematography. However, what really surprised me is that it doesn't follow the traditional slasher horror blueprint we've seen in similar movies, including ones involving rogue robots. If you're hoping for it to be a cheap "Terminator" rip-off that features a sex robot killing victims in gruesome ways, I must warn you now that "Companion" isn't that type of film. Yes, it does have a companion robot killing people, but it restrained itself from getting too over-the-top with its brutality. Instead, "Companion" focuses more on a love story gone wrong. Equipped with some surprising twists and wit, Hancock's screenplay puts a clever spin on an abusive relationship characterized by control and its theme involving self-independence, providing a nuanced perspective on this dangerous relationship. I would say more about what I mean, but it's best to find that out for yourself. Rather than playing with the usual horror tricks regarding the violence and genre formula, the script relies solely on its surprises, humor, and thematic material to depict a flawed relationship descending into chaos. It may not work for everyone since the film is more bizarre than scary, but "Companion" marks another compelling case of humanity being more frightening than a rogue robot, especially characters obsessed with control. The film also marks another showcase of the cast carrying the project through their performances, including the main leads. Sophie Thatcher continues her path as one of this generation's "scream queens", which I am here for after she impressed me with her roles in "The Boogeyman" and last year's "Heretic". "Companion" sees Thatcher portray Iris, a young woman questioning her identity. Of course, if you've seen the new poster of the film, you would've already figured out who Iris really is. Regardless, Sophie Thatcher delivered another satisfying performance that showcased Iris's inner anxiety, concern, and perseverance, along with some appropriate comedic timing. Jake Quaid was also consistently entertaining as Josh, whose questionable motives unraveled themselves as the movie progressed. Quaid is another actor who continues to impress me through his television and film roles, especially "The Boys" and 2022's "Scream", so here's hoping he can repeat that success with his leading role in the upcoming "Novocaine". Harvey Guillén and Lukas Gage also provided a few amusing moments as Eli and Patrick, respectively, with the latter actor progressing down the horror path after appearing in last year's "Smile 2". Overall, "Companion" is a worthy and fiendishly fun contraption that satisfies almost all my genre desires. Despite being labeled as a horror film, it doesn't pack in a lot of scares in its system to lure in those needing a terrifying treat, meaning this would likely be another movie that'll divide audiences depending on their expectations. However, if you go into this film not knowing it's a horror movie, you might be treated with a well-shot and satisfyingly twisted depiction of love characterized by control that's as intelligent as an AI robot. Regarding its enjoyable cast, Hancock's direction and screenplay, effective humor, and solid cinematography, "Companion" is another surprisingly good addition to the horror genre, which is enough to compensate for the other disappointing ones I watched beforehand. If you're interested, I'd recommend you go into it blind without watching the trailers for a more "pleasurable" experience. B+ |
Home of the most friendly movie reviews on the planet.
Categories
All
Follow Me |