Category: Reviews

Why Madame Web Stands Out in Today’s Marvel Landscape

It’s been widely reported that Marvel films lost their shine over the last few years, and I’d agree. Each film seemed to be a rehash of the last one. And the CGI was too overboard. It’s also difficult to get excited when you know that superheroes are almost impossible to kill, so there’s little to really worry about.

Still, I went into my sitting room with an open mind. I’m nothing if not fair. And I’m so happy that I did. Madame Web is a uniquely refreshing entry in the modern superhero landscape—one that prioritizes character, atmosphere, and emotional resonance over the typical barrage of CGI-fueled spectacle.

A new story is finally being told. And she’s not invincible, but rather a haphazard time traveller. In fact, you see her death on more than one occasion. How refreshing. She is trying to protect three teenage girls, aptly played by Sydney Sweeney, Isabela Merced, and Celeste O’Connor. The dynamic between them, and the main character Cassandra Web makes the film. The trio exudes warmth, charisma, and a natural chemistry that gives the story an emotional core. Their scenes together are vibrant and often surprisingly funny, providing a wonderful contrast to Cassandra’s world-weary pragmatism. As their bond develops, the film gains a sense of heart that elevates the entire narrative.

Cassandra Web is played by Dakota Johnson of Fifty Shades fame. Thankfully, this film is much better. It gets five stars out of five from me. My first five stars in quite some time.

Have you seen it? Let me know in the comments.

Exploring Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein: A Modern Take

Ah, Frankenstein, the epic tale. It almost feels like a myth passed down thousands of years, rather than coming from the presumably seriously twisted mind of Mary Shelley back in 1818.

Now, it’s after getting the Netflix treatment. Frankenstein is a 2025 American Gothic science fiction film produced, written, and directed by Guillermo del Toro. It is a breathtaking reinterpretation of Mary Shelley’s iconic novel—faithful to its emotional core, yet bold enough to stand confidently as its own work.

From the start, the film establishes a chilling, immersive atmosphere that pulls you into a world where life, death, ambition, and heartbreak intertwine. It’s more than just a monster story—it’s a profound exploration of what it means to be human, and the cost of creating something you can’t control.

You see events unfold from two perspectives: the creator and the monster. In a way, they are each other’s mirrors. One is beautiful on the inside, hideous on the outside. The other is the opposite.

The acting is of a high quality. Oscar Isaac as Victor, the creator, and Jacob Elordi as the monster give powerful performances.

Even though it is a long film, many of the minor relationships feel rushed. Victor falling in love with his brother’s fiancée, and the brothers’ relationship misses the mark. The scene where the fiancée professes her love for Frankenstein is nonsensical. I can only presume important scenes were cut.

For that reason, it’s only three stars out of five from me. Read the book, it’s a classic.

Have you seen it? Let me know in the comments.

Exploring Football’s Greatest Con: King of Lies Episode 1

Hello, my dear readers. Took an annual leave today and decided that it was important for it not to be wasted. So, I watched TV and the above documentary, in particular.

Episode 1 of King of Lies: Football’s Greatest Con launches the series with an enticing blend of mystery and tension, but it’s not without its stumbles. The premiere does a solid job establishing the central scandal, which revolves around the sale of Notts County Football Club (the oldest professional football club in the world), teasing just enough information to pique curiosity without revealing too much too soon. The opening sequences are atmospheric and stylish, setting a tone that’s equal parts investigative thriller and sports documentary.

The documentary’s greatest strength is its interviews. I was stunned to see Sven-Göran Eriksson pop into the story. The interview is from the depths of sickness shortly before he died. Unfortunately, he gets caught up in it all and quite bizarrely ends up in North Korea at one point!

However, the pacing is noticeably uneven. Some sections feel stretched out, lingering on details that don’t yet carry emotional or narrative weight. The editing sometimes jumps abruptly between timelines or perspectives, which can make the episode feel scattered,

Russell King is the conman leaving ruin wherever he goes. It’s quite a complex con, almost masterful. But it’s impossible to see his out. He needed the con or new cons to keep being successful, to not get caught.

An interesting documentary. I learned that you can’t get people to do what they don’t want to. The art of persuasion is giving them a reason to do what they want.

Yes, so, not sure if that’s a positive, but what the hell.

It gets three stars out of five from me.

Have you seen it? What do you think?

Episode 1 of King of Lies: Football’s Greatest Con is currently available on Sky Documentaries.

A Review of Netflix’s ‘Being Eddie’: Insights and Reflections

Anybody within seven or eight years of my age (I’m forty-six) would have fond memories of Eddie Murphy. I still remember seeing Beverly Hills Cop for the first time. A great film that would never have made it without him. It was the first time I saw on-screen a black character who was clearly more intelligent than the white people around him. All the curses stuck out as well.

But what happened to him recently? I haven’t heard his name in an age. I was also interested in what other aspects of his life were like.

That’s why I watched the documentary “Being Eddie” on Netflix a couple of nights ago.

If you are looking for something visceral, raw, then this is not it. Some critics think it’s more like a prelude to him returning to stand-up more than anything else. It retreats from anything awkward/contentious. He comes across as a family man and reminisces about voicing the donkey in Shrek. There is nothing about the paternity suit with Mel B, for example. He has ten children. Musk would be proud.

The best part is when it just lets him speak. I found his tendency towards OCD intriguing. Great minds appear to have a likelihood for such things, and I doubt it’s a coincidence.

He also brings up that he has never won an Oscar, despite his great performances and sometimes playing multiple characters in the same film. I wouldn’t worry about it if I were him; their value has greatly diminished over the years.

The interviews with other comedy legends, Dave Chappelle, Chris Rock, Jerry Seinfeld, Kevin Hart, and more, show what a powerful influence he was on the industry. They all say nice things. What a pity!

I give it three stars out of five. It’ll make you feel warm. Just don’t expect anything beyond the bland, though.

Have you seen it? Let me know what you think.

Netflix’s The Last Czars: Drama, History, and Flawed Royals

Well, let’s face it. Russia is fairly topical at the moment. But how did we get here? Well, any story about Russia has to include the Romanovs, who ruled for 300 years. The Last Czars is an ambitious attempt by Netflix to blend historical documentary with dramatized storytelling, chronicling their downfall —and the rise of the Bolsheviks. The result is an intriguing, visually lavish production that succeeds in moments but often struggles to find its identity.

The lavish costumes, ornate set designs, and snowy Russian landscapes evoke the grandeur—and isolation—of the Romanov dynasty. The performances, especially Robert Jack as Tsar Nicholas II and Susanna Herbert as Alexandra, bring depth to historical figures often seen as symbols rather than people. And rather flawed people they turn out to be.

At times, I felt sympathetic to their plight as their Empire collapsed around them. Other times, not so much as they make one poor decision after another. The Bolsheviks shouldn’t have shot the children, but Nicholas II and Alexandra cared little for the ordinary Russian. It reminds me of someone, I can’t quite put my finger on it.

The most interesting character is, of course, Rasputin. He is someone I have always been interested in. A religious man. God saves sinners; therefore, it is important to sin. Only then can you ask for forgiveness. He tries his best to drink and to make love to as many women as possible. God bless, he loves his God. The Romanovs fall under his spell, a sick son creating a wedge between them and their people (well, she’s German, it’s complicated).

The inclusion of documentary-style narration and expert interviews gives the viewer valuable historical grounding. However, this same hybrid format is also the show’s greatest weakness. The constant switching between drama and documentary can feel jarring, breaking immersion and undercutting any attachment to what is happening.

Personally, I found it a bit of a struggle to keep watching. Three stars out of five for me. If you’re committed to hours of TV every day, give it a try. If time is precious, there is much better out there.

But let me know what you think? Have you seen it?

A House of Dynamite: A Thrilling Perspective on Nuclear Crisis

Happy weekend to all my readers. I had the good fortune to watch “A House of Dynamite” during the week.

A nuclear missile is fired towards the United States. What follows is a masterclass in contemporary suspense. The film’s structure is bold: it essentially shows the same 18 minutes (or the timeframe of the missile threat) from several perspectives — intelligence, military, and White House. This different point-of-view approach illustrates how separate parts of the US military and government respond to the crisis.

Whether the nuclear warhead actually detonates, and what then happens, is not part of the film. Under the direction of Kathryn Bigelow, the film plunges the viewer into a high-stakes nuclear crisis with astonishing realism. The sense of urgency is almost physical — Bigelow keeps the camera moving, the editing sharp, the clock ticking.

Some viewers might find the repeating structure (showing the same timeframe from different angles) slightly repetitive, but I enjoyed it. Others may find it frustrating that questions go unanswered. I find it apt. I see the ambiguity as intentional, just like the real-life situation would be.

The film is more than entertainment: it’s a wake-up call about nuclear deterrence, about systems we (or at least the Americans) trust being fallible.

The movie boasts a stellar cast: Idris Elba, who looks much older than when I last saw him, gives a grounded, urgent performance as the U.S. President. His chances of being 007 are now gone, though. Rebecca Ferguson and Gabriel Basso hold their own in the thriller’s pressurized settings.

The characters feel real under pressure — not caricatures of power, but people making impossible decisions in impossible times.

If you’re in the mood for a film that makes you hold your breath—and keeps you thinking after—it’s absolutely worth watching. Five stars out of five for me.

Review of Night Call (film)

Ladies and gentlemen, it is my pleasure to discuss an excellent film I saw yesterday. One of the great things about the modern era is that you get to appreciate great art from around the world. This is a French-language film I watched on Sky Cinema.

The scenes flow naturally from one scene to another. It doesn’t feel contrived but like something that could happen to an unfortunate soul. From Wikipedia –

Night Call (La nuit se traîne) is a 2024 action thriller film directed by Michiel Blanchart in his feature directorial debut from a screenplay he co-wrote with Gilles Marchand. Set over the course of a night amid a Black Lives Matter protest in Belgium, a young locksmith is called for nocturnal assignment that plunges him into danger. It stars Jonathan Feltre, Natacha Krief, Jonas Bloquet, Thomas Mustin and Romain Duris. The film is an international co-production between Belgium and France.

Jonathon Feltre gives a superb performance as the locksmith. The fact that he is black is generally not referred to (2024 film, after all), but it plays an unmentioned role towards the end.

There are some great and unexpected action scenes. I especially liked the car chase towards the end. There is quite a lot of violence and the threat of more. All good. It is unconventional, and you are unsure how it will conclude.

I give it four stars out of five.

Exploring Human Evolution in BBC’s ‘Humans’

Hello everyone. I hope you are all having a good weekend. I know I am. My plan was to finally finish Wheelchair Wars (some day soon, I promise), but as is quite usual for my good self, I got distracted. One of my distractions, other than watching the Lions getting slaughtered by Australia was setting eyes on the above BBC series, called “Humans” presented by the wonderful (and quite pretty) paleoanthropologist Ella Al-Shamahi. It details how humans have evolved and dispersed over the last three hundred thousand years, as well as the demise of our sister species (unless you’re an alien reading this in which case I’d like to remind you to please like, share and subscribe) Neanderthals, Denisovans and the human hobbits Homo floresiensis.

What does it mean to be human? Is it the way we look that is important?

These questions are asked and an answer is given.

It is clear that modern humans did not appear all at once but more gradually. It also states that East Africa was only one pocket among many others across Africa where humanity developed. It makes clear that our intellect and ability to change our behavior is what sets us apart.

A criticism though about its portrayal of the extinction of the Neanderthals. It never explicitly stated that although they covered a wide range, their population was always low even at its height, with possible as few as three thousand breeding pairs. So, although they persisted for hundreds of thousands of years, they always lived close to the edge. The fact that human pathogens might have killed them off was never mentioned.

No comment was really made on how they were probably not our intellectual match. Their groups were far smaller, and they were more heavily dependent on kinship lacking the Machiavellian intellect that is theorized to be required for larger groupings .

It did make clear that the second wave of humans (the first wave failed) were far more advanced and better able to thrive in the harsh conditions.

I recommend you give it a watch.

A deep dive into the TV Series “Travellers”

Hello ladies and gentlemen, I have just finished watching all three series of Travellers. It’s probably the best sci-fi series you’ve never heard of.

I have bad news for you, folks. There is an apocalypse on the way. I know what you’re thinking, no shit. But don’t worry. You see, the nineties were the key decade. A future super-intelligent computer (Is this even sci-fi anymore?) called the Director is sending back time travellers on missions to ensure a better future. The fact that I might like warmer summers, and will almost certainly be dead by the forthcoming ice age, doesn’t come into its calculations.

Alas, the time travellers have to take over a living body and erase the previous person. Kind of reminds me of “Body Snatchers”. Fear not, it’s all done very ethically. They take over the bodies of those who are about to die anyway.

The travellers have several protocols to protect the timeline (from Wikipedia) –

  • Protocol 1: The mission comes first.
  • Protocol 2: Leave the future in the past.
  • Protocol 3: Don’t take a life, don’t save a life, unless otherwise directed. Do not interfere.
  • Protocol 4: Do not reproduce.
  • Protocol 5: In the absence of direction, maintain your host’s life.
  • Protocol 6: Do not communicate with other known travelers outside of your team unless sanctioned by the Director.

The team historians have an additional secret protocol involving the periodic updates they receive concerning “historic information relative to [their] team’s role in the Grand Plan”. It is a sub-protocol of Protocol 2:

  • Protocol 2H: This forbids the revelation about the existence of the updates “with anyone, ever”.

The Director can invoke three other protocols in special situations:

  • Protocol Alpha: temporarily suspends all other protocols when a critical mission must be completed at all costs
  • Protocol Epsilon: can be invoked when traveler archives are threatened
  • Protocol Omega: permanently suspends all other protocols when the Director abandons the travelers because the future has either been fixed or deemed impossible to fix

Each episode is fast-paced and action-packed. A large part of the series is the relationships between the travellers and those who previously knew the host. The love story between Macy and David plays a key role in maintaining continuity and interest from episode to episode.

Another key relationship is between Grant and his wife, Kat, who can’t quite bring herself to believe her husband. Correctly, as it turns out. I don’t know if this series could be made today, as it brings up thorny consent issues. Can Kat give consent for sex if Grant isn’t who she thinks he is? Hey, it is kind of philosophical. Let’s leave it at that.

They end up completing many missions, but the future doesn’t seem to be getting better. In fact, “The Faction” ends up being created. This is a group from the future that opposes the Director. Ironically, they are from a newly created timeline where their shelter was not destroyed.

Then there is 001, who has gone way off mission, creating an empire and actually killing travellers.

Spoiler Alert.

It all comes to a head at the end of Series 3, which is probably one of the best finales ever. The director calls Protocol Omega, effectively giving up on the timeline. By the end nuclear war is breaking out, and the travellers are told all they’ve done is speed up the Earth’s destruction. What a downer! Ouch.

But there is one last throw of the device. Grant is transported even further into the past and sends a message that the Traveller program failed.

The final scene is the Director acknowledging its failure and initiating Team Two instead. So, everything you’ve watched at least in this timeline ends up never happening. Almost, like the whole thing is just one calculation of the director. I love it!

Travellers can currently be viewed on Netflix.

If you enjoyed this content, please like, share, and subscribe.

A Deep Dive into Arthur C Clarke’s Childhood’s End

Well, readers, I have a treat for you today after I completed the above novel that was written in nineteen fifty-seven by what is considered to be one of the best science fiction writers of all time. This is considered by most to be his greatest work.

First, a description from Wikipedia (in italics) that I’ve read and agree with.

In the late 20th century, the United States and the Soviet Union are competing to launch the first spacecraft into orbit when alien spaceships suddenly position themselves above Earth’s principal cities. After one week, the aliens announce they are assuming supervision of international affairs, to prevent humanity’s extinction. They become known as the Overlords. In general, they let humans go on conducting their affairs in their own way, although some humans are suspicious of the Overlords’ benign intent, as they never allow themselves to be seen.

Yeah, remember the Soviet Union? They were a big deal back then.

The Overlord Karellen, the “Supervisor for Earth”, periodically meets with Rikki Stormgren, the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Karellen tells Stormgren that the Overlords will reveal themselves in 50 years, when humanity will have become used to their presence. When the Overlords finally reveal their appearance, they resemble the traditional Christian folk images of demons, with cloven hooves, leathery wings, horns, and barbed tails. Humankind enters a golden age of prosperity at the expense of creativity.

The Overlords are interested in psychic research, which humans suppose is part of their anthropological study. Rupert Boyce, a prolific book collector on the subject, allows one Overlord, Rashaverak, to study these books at his home. To impress his friends with Rashaverak’s presence, Boyce holds a party, during which he makes use of a Ouija board. Jan Rodricks, an astrophysicist and Rupert’s brother-in-law, asks the identity of the Overlords’ home star. The Ouija board reveals a number which Jan recognizes as a star-catalogue number and learns that it is consistent with the direction in which Overlord supply ships appear and disappear. Jan stows away on an Overlord supply ship and travels 40 light years to their home planet.

The story then continues to reveal that humans are about to make a psychic leap, which will elevate humanity to a new level of existence, allowing it to join the Overmind, but also lead to the end of humans as an independent race.

So what did I think? Well, it was interesting what the author conceived a future alien species would be like. There is no advanced robotics, and only a brief mention of computers that can do wondrous things. Although they are still described as mostly mathematical tools.

Credence is given to the supernatural. This is something that the author quasi-believed at the time but later disavowed. Still, it helps the story come along.

The character development and writing are of the highest quality, and it is refreshing to read something from a nineteen-fifties perspective. You should give it a read.

On a more negative level, the passing of time shows. So, you have to put things we know now out of your mind and use some imagination.

Overall, I’d give it four stars out of five.

Remember to subscribe if you like my content, and chat with you all again soon.