BITE-SIZED: Thirteen Days (Roger Donaldson, 2000)

A look at the Kennedy White House’s response to the Cuban Missile crisis in October 1963, Thirteen Days is a solid historical drama, boosted by some terrific performances.

While the biggest name in the movie is Kevin Costner, Thirteen Days is a real team effort.

Whenever an actor takes on a recognisable historical figure like JFK, it often feels like a facsimile - all the attention is on approximating the person’s most recognisable external characteristics. 

Eschewing makeup and the familiar accent, Bruce Greenwood might not look or sound like JFK, but he works for the movie. He brings a flinty intelligence and sense of authority that anchors the ensemble.

Steven Culp feels like a closer match for Robert Kennedy, but he never feels like a facsimile.  

Thirteen Days was directed by New Zealand/Australian filmmaker Roger Donaldson, famous for films as varied as Smash Palace, No Way Out and Cocktail.

There is a sturdy craftsmanship to the direction that ensures the various administration machinations are easy to follow.

Released at the end of the nineties, Thirteen Days now feels like a warning.

One of the key layers of tension is the disconnect between the military brass and the civilians responsible for overseeing their actions. The most suspenseful scenes is McNamara trying to pull an admiral away from escalating the standoff with the Soviet convoy.

It always feels like the institutions meant to protect the state are the ones most agitating for action.

Thirteen Days ends up as a tribute to calm heads in tense times, but it is hard not to read Kennedy's struggles as a temporary (and geographically limited) deviation from American escalation.

A fine drama on its own merits, Thirteen Days is worth a look.

The James Bond Cocktail Hour is back!

The James Bond Cocktail Hour is back!

In the season premiere, Hugh, yours truly and special guest Stitch (@atitchmediamix) unite to talk No Time To Die!

And in episode two, Stitch and I sit through the 12 hour runtime of Bond 25 in the podcast's first (and probably last) watch-along commentary.

These episodes were recorded right after No Time To Die was released so if they sound a little behind the times, they are!

Links to the episodes are all below:

No Time To Die (review)

No Time To Die (commentary)

Words on Bathroom Walls (Thor Freudenthal, 2020)

Adam Petrazelli (Charlie Plummer) is a teenager struggling with his mental health. 

Kicked out of school, and dealing with a new stepdad, Adam has a lot to deal with.

Adam is sent to a Catholic school where he meets the school’s valedictorian Maya Arnez (Taylor Russell).

As their bond grows, Adam is wrestling with whether to tell Maya about his mental health…

The moment in Words on Bathroom Walls that won me over is during the confrontation between Adam and Maya with the bullies from his previous school.

The main antagonist grabs Maya; she shoves him away and tells him not to touch her.

He then charges them.

It feels like it is setting up for another fight. sequence or a beat down.

But instead, as he reaches Adam, Maya shoots out of nowhere and decks him full force across the jaw.

She reiterates that he should leave her alone.

And then they run away.

It is a neat spin on a cliche and it sold the movie for me.

Words on Bathroom Walls was released in the middle of 2020, and I only heard about it recently. Hopefully it gets a bigger audience now because it is a really good movie.

The older I get, the more I am won over by movies where characters show genuine empathy and care for one another. 

I also like romance movies where both characters feel like they are on their own trajectories (ideally that should be the case but…).

I am no expert on mental health or neurodivergence so I cannot speak to the film’s portrayal of schizophrenia. 

What I can speak on, and what Words on Bathroom Walls does get, is the way a diagnosis can become a target on your back.

While there are personal benefits to gaining more knowledge about yourself, it can also become a box that you get put in.

What I immediately reacted to was how the movie focused on that stigma, and the ripple effects it can have on your mental state. Adam’s paranoia about people (especially Maya) finding out is a real source of tension. It never feels like a contrived attempt at conflict.

While the movie is a romance, it does not sacrifice other aspects of the main characters. 

Most of the movie is based around Adam’s relationship with his mother (Molly Parker) and new step father (Walton Goggins).

And while Adam is the central character, Maya is not treated as a romantic object. She is on her journey, with her own goals and struggles.

This movie chooses to realise Adam’s symptoms through visual effects and actors playing various personae. This element could have been schlocky but the movie deploys these elements at dramatically appropriate moments so they do not come off as visual excess.

The same goes for the to-camera sequences, in which Adam addresses the viewer. These scenes provide an opportunity for the character’s perspective front and centre.

Frankly, I put my initial dismissal of the movie’s style down to the young adult genre, and a general suspicion of the way disabilities have been used in Hollywood movies.

On a second viewing, I think part of the issue is the score by the Chainsmokers - it hits the emotional beats a bit too hard.

The cast are good across the board - including a piece of casting against-type that pays off in one of the film’s best reveals.

My only prior experience with Charlie Plummer is his role All The Money In The World.

He is a solid centre to the movie. Commendably, he avoids burdening the character with physical tics or other affectations.

Taylor Russell has played characters defined by their intelligence but both Lost in Space and Escape Room felt like they were resting on that. She gets more definition and depth here.

Maya is also a character introduced by her learning abilities, but this role gives her so much more to do.

She is not an archetype - she brings a pragmatism, insecurity and empathy that make Maya more fleshed out.

I get the sense that Russell is unafraid to play someone who can come off as abrasive or unlikeable. I hope she continues in that vein because she brings a bluntness to Maya that was compelling - particularly in a movie that is ultimately a romance.

Not in the sense that I hoped she would change, but because it felt like that aspect of her character was contextualized rather than neutered.

There are a few moments that work against the movie - there are certain scenes where the personae are treated like supporting players with individual shots and reactions that break from Adam’s POV.

There is also some obvious symbolism - the theme for prom is the painting ‘Starry Starry Night’.

And during Adam’s final crisis, he is framed in a long shot against a painted backdrop resembling Van Gogh’s (another artist associated with mental health) painting.

But these are minor quibbles.

There are so many elements which this movie could have got wrong, but it does not.

The visual effect elements could have been exploitive, but they end up being the most overt sign of the movie’s focus on the central character.

While those effects were part of the marketing, the film is not as interested in Adam’s diagnosis as it is Adam the person.

This focus is the key to the film’s success - Adam is not a diagnosis. He is a person with interests, hopes and dreams, just like anyone else.

So many romantic dramas use a character’s impairment (especially physical disabilities) as a dramatic crutch - a set up for tragedy or a catalyst for another character to become a better person. 

It may be a little obvious in aspects of its execution, but Words on Bathroom Walls succeeds because it never loses sight of Adam’s humanity. 

If you are new to this blog, I also co-host a podcast on James Bond, The James Bond Cocktail Hour. 

You can subscribe on Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.

OUT NOW: The Invitation

Following the death of her parents, Evie (Nathalie Emmanuel) takes a DNA test to learn more about her family.

She is quickly connected with Oliver (Hugh Skinner), a distant relative, who invites her to England to meet the rest of the family at a wedding.

What starts out as a family reunion begins to become more romantic when Evie is introduced to the devilishly charming Walter (Thomas Doherty), a close friend of the family who owns the palatial estate they are staying at.

As the nuptials draw closer, Evie becomes increasingly unnerved by the ancient house and the things that take place there…

I feel like I am going to be the one person who kinda liked this movie. 

I went into The Invitation knowing almost nothing about it - and that is the best way to see it.

If you are interested in seeing it on the big screen - make it quick because there were two other people in my screening.

The Invitation feels like a combination of a couple of different influences - the set up feels similar to Get Out, although it does not feel like the message is as foregrounded

The other influence is from the real world: When the movie draws attention to Evie’s race, I was wondering if the movie was going to end up being a supernatural metaphor for Meghan Markle’s brief involvement with the Windsor family. If you want to get sweaty you could view the movie that way but the movie is not aiming for subtext.

And that is no bad thing.

The premise of the movie - Dracula is looking for a new bride - is solid pulp, and the movie has a pleasing lack of pretence. It does not have a lot to add to that twist, which is a problem, but the movie is not long enough to get that worked up about.

The movie does not waste time - a few minutes after Evie is introduced, she is winging her way to England. 

The best example of this movie’s straightforwardness, and the best aspect of this movie, is Tom Doherty as Walter.

Just from a physical POV, he is perfectly cast as an undead lothario.

I think the makeup department might have teased his eyebrows to give them a more diabolical curl, but other than that he looks so naturally uncanny, he is like a living special effect.

He is so diabolically good-looking he is a human spoiler, but it adds to the movie’s slight air of camp.

The movie pushes its clues to the foreground by focusing on key details and stepping outside of Evie’s POV to show specific scenes.

 

While it is not aiming for laughs, the movie begins to feel like a massive joke as we wait for our heroine to finally figure out what is going on.

As our lead, Nathalie Emmanuel is good. She handles the American accent well, and it does not inhibit the characterisation that much - there are times when British actors lose something in their performances with an American accent.

She has solid chemistry with Doherty and brings a spikiness to Evie’s interactions with the more suspect characters. 

The conceit is dependent on Evie showing a certain level of obliviousness, but the script manages to avoid making the character come off as an unsuspecting victim. 

Evie is not oblivious to her plight and the script does give her a healthy air of scepticism about the manor and its occupants. Another asset is her chemistry with Doherty, which also helps in getting over Evie’s eventual seduction.

To its credit, the script does not treat this seduction as the ultimate conversion - Evie is clearly attracted to her suitor, but she also laughs off the idea of a quick marriage. 

While I enjoyed it, The Invitation is not perfect. In fact, as a horror movie it feels like a modest failure.

While I liked the gothic stylings, I wish it was directed with a little more originality and flair.

The sound design is over-egged, and used to amp up some obvious jump scares.

Certain aspects of the movie reminded me of a music video - there are some shot choices and editing which prioritise mood over geography and work against some of the suspense.

The lighting is low and amplified by filters which make it feel artificial in a way that felt cliche rather than an evocation of the film’s genre roots. 

When the action shifts to daylight, the movie feels less generic and more unsettling - the mansion’s exterior, with its bright two tone colouring is so picture perfect it feels uncanny. 

While the relationship-building between Evie and Walter is fun, the movie around that dynamic feels a little less interesting.

The third act feels rushed, and aims for an emotional weight that the movie does not quite earn. It turns into a low-budget version of Van Helsing, and feels disconnected from the movie that comes before it.

As a twist on vampiric seduction, The Invitation is fun. But it never quite makes the landing.

OUT NOW: Prey

In the 1700s, a young Comanche woman, Naru (Amber Midthunder), dreams of being a hunter.

When she joins her brother and the other hunters to track down a mountain lion, 

In her quest to prove her abilities, Naru will have to pit herself against another mysterious hunter on a similar quest to prove itself against other top predators…

Just when I was bemoaning the blot of Bullet Train, along comes Prey.

Prey is what the Predator series should have been.

Take an established story and drop a Predator in it.

The first movie is a beefcake 80s action movie - and then the Predator shows up.

The second movie is a cop action movie starring Murtagh - and then the Predator shows up.

Prey is a coming of age story about a young woman who wants to be acknowledged as a hunter by her people - and then a Predator… you get the idea.

 

The key thing is that the Predator is a new variable in a genre story that we are vaguely familiar with.

It helps that this story would still work without the Predator.

There is a version of this story where Naru goes on the hunt and undergoes a similar journey.

There are so many scenes which are effective without the presence of the familiar alien, from Naru’s relationship with her brother Taabe (Dakota Beavers), to her attempt to hunt a lion, or her discovery of a herd of skinned buffalo rotting in a field.

The Predator just raises the stakes.

Amber Midthunder is terrific in the lead role. Tough, practical and deadpan, she is a great action hero who never feels like she is fitting into a template.

Beavers is also great as her brother. It can be thankless role to be the barrier to another person’ a success but the role is better constructed than that, and he brings a gravitas and flinty empathy that is great.

He also gets one of the more overt callbacks to the original film and it does not feel like fan service.

Midthunder and Beavers also have a great, unstated dynamic as siblings, down to the way he nudges her awake in one scene.

They might spark off each other, but there is a level of trust between them that is refreshing.

There is no need for an obnoxious exposition drop.

That sense of economy extends to the whole movie - character is largely conveyed through action.

If I have criticisms, they are minor - and relate to the portrayal of the Predator itself.

Part of it is nostalgia and awareness of the original. 

The 1987 movie is a miracle born of circumstance - like Jaws, the filmmakers  had to rely on a slow build of tension because they did not have a working design for the Predator. 

There are scenes where I feel like we see too much of the predator too early.

There are a few too many scenes where the CGI is obvious, and could have been obscured with a more subtle approach in camerawork to obscure it.

It is a fault of contemporary filmmaking, but maybe it is also because this is the upteenth version of the Predator so the mystery is a bit pointless.

The other thing I could not help but notice was the creature’s movements. Performer Dane DiLiegro is blunt and brutish in his physicality in a way that feels a bit stiff. 

Perhaps this is a choice - this is meant to be the first time these creatures came into contact with humanity - but I think the movie could have sacrificed that continuity for greater suspense.

The other unique element that the original movie had was the late actor Kevin Peter Hall, who brought a presence and grace to the creature that remains terrifying.

Hall developed a specific series of movements for the creature, but that specificity has been missing from his successors.

This might just be my own nostalgia. DiLiegro os effective in the role.

Back to what is great about the movie.

We get a variety of different set pieces in different locations, and the finale is not a damp squib. There are also no big dollops of fan service.

While this movie is technically a prequel, it never feels like the movie is bending itself into a pretzel to set up events in the future.

This is its own beast. 

Overall, Prey is the kind of stripped-down action thriller I love, with a great lead performance at its centre. The movie it reminded me of the most was Sweetheart, another small-scale genre piece.

Prey is a great movie. 

OUT NOW: Bullet Train

 Ladybug (Brad Pitt), a veteran mercenary, has a job to lift a briefcase off a bullet train.

The only problem is that there are several other parties on the train who are also interested in the contents of said briefcase.

Cue mayhem. 

Based on the novel by Kōtarō Isaka, Bullet Train is a movie I should love.

It is a closed-room scenario featuring a fun cast. Count me in.

Bullet Train is the third solo effort from director David Leitch. Leitch started out as the co-director of John Wick, with Chad Stahelski.

While Stahelski has stuck with the Wick franchise, Leitch has pursued a more varied slate of films. 

Bullet Train feels like a stylistic continuation of his solo debut Atomic Blonde, particularly in its use of retro styling and needle drops (here it is seventies disco).

Atomic Blonde has many virtues, but I found its eighties styling somewhat unnecessary, while Charlize Theron and some strong action sequences were submerged in a confusing, overcomplicated script. 

Bullet Train is a more successful application of style, and a far more enjoyable film than Atomic Blonde, but like his other film, Deadpool 2, it also seems to have more story than necessary. 

Despite an interesting theme, I found the movie overlong and - in its flashback structure - a bit clunky. There is no eureka moment where it comes together.

The movie does not quite work but it benefits from a genuine star at the centre.

Brad Pitt is perfect as a fish out of water, both hyper-competent and goofy.

A cold fish trying to get in touch with his feelings, he is both too self-obsessed to gauge other people, but also paranoid that danger is around every corner.

He is so funny he lifts the movie around him. When he is not in the scene, the energy level dips.

And with a large cast, this movie has a lot of scenes without Pitt.

The big problem with Bullet Train is that the movie is two hours and six minutes long when it should have been 90 minutes long.

Part of the reason is that there is little about the additional scenes that feel original, or add that much to the movie’s suspense.  

There are so many characters and we spend an inordinate amount of time with all of them, covering their various individual plots. 

Watching the early scenes of characters gathering and talking (lots of talking!), I was getting flashbacks of Smokin’ Aces and all the post-Tarantino crime flicks of the noughties. When the characters start arguing over the specifics of The Thomas The Tank Engine, it feels like a photocopy of a photocopy.

While a certain level of audience knowledge can help generate suspense - a gun wired to explode and a poisonous snake add some level of tension - but we are given so much information the movie loses momentum. 

The film is also terrified of losing the audience so we get multiple flashbacks of key moments from earlier.

By the end of the movie, I was more exhausted than exhilarated.

Aside from Pitt, the cast are an embarrassment of riches - some of which feel wasted.

Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Brian Tyree Henry have a good rapport as brother assassins, although they suffer from the lion share of po-mo dialogue. It takes a late-in-the-day flashback to give them any kind of pathos, which just reinforces how shoddy the story-telling is.

Zazie Beetz is great in Atlanta, but she seems to be stuck in supporting roles on the big screen. I like that she keeps popping up in action movies - but when is she going to get a good part?

Her role could have been played by anybody.

The same goes for Karen Fukuhara, who appears as a train attendant.

Andrew Koshi and Hiroyuki Sanada are fine actors with legitimate martial arts skills - but they are stuck with a po-faced storyline that feels too weighty for this movie.

I may be being a little too critical, but there is not much more to say.

This movie features a great performance from a genuine movie star, some gorgeous production design and solid action. But it would benefit from a more disciplined script and some judicious editing.