Wednesday, May 13, 2026

3 Short Paragraphs (Or Not): How to Make a Killing

2026, John Patton Ford (Emily the Criminal) -- download

I generally don't like fiction that puts unlikeable characters at the centre of the story. I have never watched Seinfeld, I didn't bother to watch Arrested Development and I had no desire to watch the rich summabitches of Succession. Yet, while I knew the premise of this movie was that a disowned heir to billions in old money started bumping off his own relatives, in order to leave himself as the only possible heir, I do like Glen Powell, Margaret Qualley and Jessica Henwick, so we gave it a go. Maybe a man murdering is relatives can be played for black comedy? Maybe the relatives are so comically evil, we don't mind them dying? Maybe he is so set upon, in life, that we forgive him his trespasses? All yes, but still, he never really becomes... likeable. And that was probably the point -- Fuck the Rich.

Since I am currently "not watching movies" and also "not writing", a good amount of time has passed since I wrote the above, and well, I am reaching "I Saw This!!" levels of escaped memory.

The movie is a death-row confessional. Becket Redfellow (Glen Powell, The Running Man), who was raised by his single mother, after she was ousted from her family fame & fortune for choosing to keep the boy, has been convicted of murder. Becket promises his mother on her deathbed that he will do everything he can to claim his heritage. Years later, while working dutifully in a men's haberdashery, he bumps into a childhood friend Julia (Margaret Qualley, The Substance), still precocious and deviously flirty, who reminds him of the promise he made to his mother. She is part of the world that Becket only got to watch from the outside as his mother seemed to still have some contact with her "friends", of whom Julia's mother was one. This reminder inspires Becket to kill his cousins, leaving him the only heir. We can only assume he ends up getting caught, given the opening of the movie.

I was very confused by the timeline of this movie. It was as if, at some point in the production of the movie, they had wanted it to be set 20 years ago. There are clothing choices, lifestyles depicted and even Becket's wonky haircut that are out of place -- he wears these cut-short sideburns, something I embraced in the late 90s all the way thru the late 2010s, but is entirely absent now. Some of the outfits adult Julia wears would not be out of place in the original The Devil Wears Prada. Maybe Patton Ford has a visual style? If so, its never truly embraced.

Becket's rise to power, through the death of unlikeable people, does not really endear us to him. And yet you are probably supposed to? I guess its just me. As he kills one cousin, a doofus flighty artist, he "steals" the man's girlfriend, giving us a mostly-likeable love interest. Ruth (Jessica Henwick, The Matrix Resurrections) is supposed to have agency but... And then Becket endears himself to the father of one of his victims, a truly likeable figure, which is weird considering he is a Wall Street investment mogul, all the while knowing he eventually has to kill the grieving man.

Black Comedy. That is what the movie is positioned as, and while there are some light chuckles, its mostly just black. If anything is played for fun, its that the FBI catches onto Becket's play almost immediately, but they seem unable to make things stick. Meanwhile snake-skinned Julia is played as an even bigger villain, catching Becket's scheme immediately, and getting the evidence of his acts, and he is just a pawn in her BIGGER plot. But its all about money & power, that some have, and others want.

There is no "rooting for" in this movie, and while I liked watching the movie, the performances by actors I enjoy, in thinking back, in writing about it, I am left exactly where I was before I started -- I do not enjoy watching bad people do bad things while setting us up to admire them. Sure sure, the commentary is that you become the monster you want to destroy, and there is some slice of "its in the blood", but ... meh.

And yes, I still think that, given billions to play with, I would not devolve into the Evil everyone believes is caused by money... well no more than I already am.  Cackle. Moustache Twirling.

Tuesday, May 12, 2026

KWIF: The Devil Wears Prada 2 (+4)

 KWIF=Kent's Week in Film. It was a real toss up: final two episodes of Daredevil: Born Again's second season, or the sequel to The Devil Wears Prada. It was no toss up. Daredevil has been, to put it bluntly, repetitive and boring, while TDWP2 is an event! It wasn't even a competition.

This Week:
The Devil Wears Prada 2 (2026, d.  David Frankel - in theatre)
Mortal Kombat II (2026, d. Simon McQuoid - in theatre)
Keyhole (2011, d. Guy Maddin - tubi)
Deadly Outlaw: Rekka (2002, d. Takashi Miike - tubi)
Tokyo: The Last Megalopolis (1988, d. Akio Jissoji - tubi)

I am not a journalist. Despite having been a writer and for many online resources for over 30 years, nothing I've done is what I would call journalism. The closest I came was a 3 year stint on editorial at my student newspaper in University (I thought this was an extraordinary and fundamental time in my life but in hindsight, turns out it was a somewhat juvenile and retroactively embarrassing era for both myself and the paper, full of (my own) sloppy work, ill-informed editorials, and errors in judgement. My desire to be more like the Harvard Lampoon or Mad Magazine than anything with journalistic integrity (which is not to diminish the work of my collaborators, but I was really not up to the task...but I digress). 

I got a degree in business, not journalism, and I cared about each equally (which is to say, minimally). It's probably for the best I never went into journalism professionally (though I tried on a few occasions). I don't have the stones for it. Much like being an artist, being a journalist requires sacrifice, and the rewards are not monetary, and you have to love it (which I don't...I respect it, don't love it so much). Plus, in the past 15 years or so, there's been a decided attack on journalism as an institution. Truth telling is now all a matter of perspective (or so the 1% overlords would have us believe). It's been a rough dozen-plus years for the media. Most of my favourite writers are now doing their own Substack or Substack-adjacent writing, and supplementing any written work with podcasting. The world is a lesser place for social media having supplanted traditional media as people's primary source of news (or, rather, "news"). There's no security to working in the world of journalism.

The Devil Wears Prada 2 is a sequel that doesn't need to exist. Nothing about the end of The Devil Wears Prada demands we know more. But now that it does exist, that it sets itself on top of the backdrop of the failing state of traditional media and the billionaire bros who snap up media outlets so they can control the narrative with their detached-from-the-layman world view...well, at least there's something for it say, something to explore in this moment, even if it doesn't quite have the firmest grasp on its message.

We find, when this film starts, Andy Sach (Anne Hathaway) has just won a journalism award but also, at almost the same moment, via text, finds out that she and her entire staff at the newspaper she was writing for have been laid off. Meanwhile Miranda Priestly (Meryl Streep) has just had an expose written about how Runway Magazine has promoted and supported a brand who runs a manufacturing sweatshop. This is a scandal, one which Miranda of 20 years ago would never have found herself in (it's telling in many ways that she has).  The owner of Runway's media parent, Irv Ravitz (Tibor Feldman) needs damage control, and thus returns Andy to Runway, the place where she interned 20 years ago, now as the new features editor.

She reunites with Nigel (Stanley Tucci) and Miranda (who doesn't remember her, or so she says), and is instantly swept into a meeting with their key advertiser, Dior, where Emily (Emily Blunt) now works as retail manager.

Andy finds Miranda in a subdued position relative to where she once was. Still a titan of the industry, print media is all but dead, and the online sphere for Runway has trouble competing with other scroll-and-like spaces. Andy's role is, at first, damage control, but also about trying to raise Runway's profile up.  It needs to be more than just about the pictures, people need to read it for the articles too.  Without saying it, it's attempting to "Teen Vogue" it (where in the mid-2010s Teen Vogue shifted its focus from fashion and entertainment and rapidly gained attention for it's provocative and insightful political articles.... Teen Vogue was collapsed into the parent Vogue in 2025 by its publishing overlords, according to many to stifle its anti-right wing messaging).

Andy's efforts to raise the status of the magazine is noticed in the media, but not represented in the site traffic. She needs a big gambit both to secure her place and to gain at least a modicum of respect from Miranda. She needs to land the white whale interview: Sasha Barnes (Lucy Liu). The ex-wife of one of the world's richest men (a chuckling tech bro doofus played brilliantly under gobs of makeup by Justin Theroux) is now the world's richest woman, but Sasha hasn't given an interview in the three years since the divorce. Andy lands the interview (conducted by Miranda but the article written by Andy) and not only gets in Miranda's good graces once again but becomes a bit of a legend.  

The crux of the film, however, is that no matter what one good story brings for a day, a week, or a month, it's not enough. The cycles move on so fast that there's no time to rest, and media and journalism are still a dying form, unable to demand enough attention in the attention economy when there's injured baby foxes being fed milk from a bottle or video game live streams that run for two days straight to compete with. Runway is on the table to be sold...or on the chopping block to be axed.

While the first act is all about Andy getting reacquainted with a world she left behind 20 years earlier and noting both the similarities and shocking differences, the second act is about settling in, about establishing a new life in a roller-coaster world of uncertainty and insecurity. Miranda is the only one who seems like teflon-coated steel, nothing penetrates and nothing sticks...but even she is showing signs that that it's all actually getting to her too. The world is changing and she can only do so much to change with it.

The third act then becomes about Andy's perception of the situation, that the threat to Runway, one of the last bastions of traditional media, is the warning siren and that saving it means much more than just saving a magazine but providing hope for the entire industry of journalism.  It's idealist and optimistic, and it takes the audience on that ride of hope and scrappy-can-do attitude.

And then Miranda slaps her in the face with reality. It's only a matter of time. There's a boa wrapped tightly around every industry, squeezing tighter and tighter trying to milk them for everything they're worth, until they're worth nothing, at least monetarily. The solution to the troubles in this picture all rely on the good graces of an ultra-rich benefactor to whom minimal, or no returns (or even negative returns) are worth the investment for the art and integrity. You can't monetize artistry and integrity.

This, mercifully, isn't a naive film, although at times Andy is far too naive as a character, and Miranda is far too withholding to fully invest in the driving story forces at play. It does oversimplify its narrative so that it can have a satisfying ending while still being cognizant that there remains a dark cloud overhead and the struggle will continue after the last pan of the New York skyline.

The Devil Wears Prada was a really good movie that has become sort of legendary. The sequel doesn't tarnish the legend, though it fails to find its own legendary status in the process. It's a pretty picture, with tons of fabulous outfits, sets, and settings (and boy does Anne Hathaway look more amazing than she ever has), all of which are a must, and it mercifully doesn't wallow in the past. It does unfortunately seems obliged to put Andy kind of in the same place she was in during the first movie, even though she has two decades of prestigious experience, world travelling and her own life under her belt. It's natural for someone to find themselves repeating patterns of behaviour when with certain people, but I just felt like she should be much more assured than she is here. Similarly, Miranda shows next to no sign of growth, yet she feels muted compared to the ruthless ferocity which she had in the prior film. But she's also almost 70 now, and there does come something of a softening with age which we should find believable.

Already a massive box office success, the best we can say about The Devil Wears Prada 2 is that it does fine as a sequel. It doesn't at all diminish what came before, nor does it immediately discount its own existence. I find myself wishing that it were more interested in its setting, exploring the erosion of media and journalism, especially given the eyes it has on it, but that's not the audience its serving (this isn't The Paper 2 or Broadcast News 2). It serves its audience well...or well enough.

---


I didn't see the 2021 iteration of Mortal Kombat (but Toasty did) and, to be honest, I didn't care to. From all reports it was attempting to be a character-driven narrative exploring the characters of Sub-Zero and Scorpion, and that there was not, in fact, any Mortal Kombat to be had. I mean, what's the point then?

I am by no means invested in Mortal Kombat as a property. The last version of the game I played was its original incarnation. But that said, I've long had a soft spot for the '95 cinematic treatment from Paul WS Anderson, a film that has aged surprisingly well in that it was always kind of hokey and wasn't taking the whole thing too seriously. The last thing we need to do is take Mortal Kombat too seriously.

It seemed like (at least from Toasty's report) MK2021 was taking things too seriously. Mortal Kombat II wants you to think it's not taking things too seriously... but it still is. What story there is within the film is wildly unfocussed and largely predictable, with absolutely no tension built along the way (for a number of reasons). The movie starts by introducing the concept of "Mortal Kombat", where two realms, instead of waging war, compete in a tournament of 10 fights. The first to win five of these fights is victor and the losing side's realm is theirs. Kitana (Adeline Rudolph) watches her father get brutally defeated by Shao Kahn (Martyn Ford) and her mother and people immediately subjugated under him. He takes her as his daughter (I can't say for certain the scriptwriter was just aping Gamora's story from Guardians of the Galaxy/Infinity War but it's basically the same) which I'm sure will work out fine for everyone as a big happy new family.

Meanwhile Johnny Cage (Karl Urban) is a washed up Stephen Segal-type 90's action star who nobody cares about anymore. He's sad about his life but Lord Raiden (Tadanobu Asano) and Sonya Blade (Jessica McNamee) recruit him for Mortal Kombat, Raiden promising him a greater, more fulfilling destiny. He declines, but, it turns out, he doesn't have a choice.

And so Kitana fights for her father, reluctantly, while Johnny Cage fights for Earth, reluctantly, only it turns out Kitana is a spy for Raiden and Johnny Cage has a warrior within, so the dramatic narrative arcs these characters can take are, well, straight lines rather than curves. Their stories go from A-to-C without even thinking about venturing towards B along the way.

So if there's no real character arcs in this film, surely it will have fun with team dynamics, right? Inner conflict and romances and whatnot? Notsomuch. Or at all. The "team" here, Raiden, Sonya, Johnny, Cole Young (Lewis Tan), Jax (Mechad Brooks), and Liu Kang (Ludi Lin) spend their time together largely spitting exposition. There's no real sense of camaraderie or any sense of these characters becoming friends or connected to each other in any way (we're told that Sonya and Jax are old friends, but do we feel it? Notsomuch). 

The film spends a lot of time trying to circle back on characters from the prior movie, even though they are not central figures here. As such, unless you are really invested in MK2021 then these beats have little to no weight on their own (like, Hiroyuki Sanada returns as Scorpion, but in the underworld, where he resumes his fight against the revived Sub-Zero to no real effect of the story at hand). 

So, if it fails at developing anything meaningful with its characters, MKII must be all about the tournament and the fighting, right? Yes and no. It does feature heavily its match-ups, the one-on-one fights, but none of them carry with them the weight of what the stakes of the tournament, and the fate of the "Earth realm". The film brutally fails at finding any tension within the tournament itself. With one or two exceptions, nobody witnesses the fights, so there's no crowd reactions, no cut to team-mates or friends as they watch their friends succeed or fail brutally. There's just nothing exciting outside of maybe a few cool manoeuvres or a particularly gory fatality, and there's not enough of those to justify a feature length movie this uninteresting.

It wouldn't be so bad if the film at least had style, but it's so evident that it was filmed on the Volume or similar on-set digital backdrop technology, and that the crew were either inexperienced with it or didn't have the time to refine their shots. The actors are lit so horrendously that they have a soft glow outline around them much of the time, while the backdrops too often don't feel tangible at all (I will concede that it's entirely possible that watching this on an IMAX screen made this so much more evident than a standard movie screen, or any home viewing implement). The few sets actually constructed feel cheap, much cheaper than an $80million budget would presume.  That, visually, this film feels inferior to the 1995 adaptation of Mortal Kombat is very telling.  That film used mostly practical sets that were well lit and well shot. This film seemed hampered by its constraints and is pretty ugly as a result.  At the very least the 1995 film had a still-iconic techno soundtrack, and this film's score doesn't even seem to be trying. 

There is one sequence not shot on a set, where Johnny, Liu Kang, Sonya and Jax venture into the home terrain of the excessively-toothed character Barada. It's an exterior desert set that has scale and doesn't feel contained by walls or barriers. Since it's outdoors there's a lot of natural light, and it does everyone a world of favours that the rest of the film does not. The fight between Johnny and Barada is fun and silly and feels like the only real payoff for Johnny (or any character for that matter) in the film.

Fans of the franchise will probably get more out of this than I will, but a films at this budget really should be trying for something more than fan service.

---

I'm a bad Canadian cinephile. I don't spend enough time exploring the films or filmmakers of my home country. This is in large part due to the fact that Canadian cinema, by and large, doesn't have the resources that the films of other countries do. And with the exception of Quebec, which has an industry all its own, most of our best talents get co-opted by our neighbours to the South, obfuscating a film's Canadian-ness, if anything remains at all.

There are a few notable filmmakers who have made a name on an international scale that still largely work within the Canadian system and tell stories set within the country.  Guy Maddin is definitely such an auteur, one who likes to combine his fascination with the earliest era of filmmaking with a love of his homeland. Or so I've been told. I've seen maybe one or two of his films in the distant past, and have long been meaning to catch up.

Keyhole, his 2011 effort, was maybe not the first place to start. A psychological noir set in a haunted house, the film follows Ulysses Pick (Jason Patrick) and his gang of thugs as they barricade themselves in Ulysses' home. 

Our key signal that things are askew finds Ulysses' second-in-command telling the dead to face the wall and the living to face forward. The dead, then, march out the back door to face a proper disposal.

Ulysses emerges from the rain with Denny (Brooke Pallson) slung over his shoulder. They're both drenched. Eventually Ulysses will get dry, Denny will always seem perpetually wet, despite a change of clothes.

Ulysses warns the gang the house is haunted and to beware of touching ghosts. Meanwhile he searches the house with Denny in tow, her ability to read into his thoughts aid him in his quest to find his wife Hyacinth (Isabella Rossellini) within the twisted maze of hallways and stairs and doors. 

He is vexed by the ghost of Hyacinth's father (a very nude Louis Negin), who manipulates environments throughout the house, though does not seem to have any real control.

The journey is an abstract one, lacking decisive logic, living between metaphors. As a film, it is an exploration of Ulysses' life, his failures as a husband and father, and it questions whether these failures mean anything to him.

It's a puzzling film which it both its greatest and most detrimental asset. Bending your brain to understand what it is Maddin is trying to convey has its rewards when you can reach an understanding in what you see, but the dream logic that prevails often has no meaning, serving primarily to keep the audience off balance.

Maddin's first digitally-shot film, it's a black-and-white production but doesn't have the olde-timey feel (the heavy make-up of the silent or gangster film eras, for example) and it doesn't look particularly good. The sets, lighting and costume seem constructed on a shoestring budget (which they probably were) and lack the usual hand-crafted flair of the films of Maddin's I'm (not-so-)familiar with.

What probably lets the film down the most, however, is the character of Ulysses, who just isn't very compelling. Whether it's Patrick's performance or what he was given to work with, I was never certain why we should care about Ulysses or his journey.

Once I get into the swing of watching Maddin's pictures, acquainting myself anew with his sensibilities, I might soften on Keyhole, but as stands I found it a pretty rough watch.

---

If I were to attempt to catch up on the works of Takasi Miike, it would have to be the only movies I watched in a year. The director has made around 120 films since his debut in the early 1990s and dozens upon dozens of television episodes. That prolific level of output seems unprecedented, and one has to wonder what gets sacrificed in the process of producing as such speed.

Like Guy Maddin above, I'm not particularly well-versed in Miike's repertoire, certainly not enough to speak to any overall style or sensibilities (a quick search of this blog finds no entries of Miike films...which surprises, me. I thought for sure Toasty would have one or two Miikes written up). 

Deadly Outlaw: Rekka (aka "Noboru Ando's True Outlaw Tales: Raging Fire") opens with a primal scream over a heavy metal track. The camera tracks a young man running full tilt through the streets of Tokyo (intercut with flashes of...other things, a perplexing montage of images at this stage of a film to be sure). Finally the young man, guns drawn, leaps over a small barricading wall of an outdoor stairwell and begins firing on the group of men below (clearly mobsters, based on the way the one man is dressed compared to the other men around him). The gunman dispatches everyone, having hit the boss at least once at this point. The boss does not fall, he keeps lumbering forward, taking more and more bullets, until he has his hands around his assailant's throat. The only escape the gunman has is to cut the man's hand's off. Thankfully his partner has come by for clean-up.  The next shot of the young assassin, we see him naked on a couch, the severed hands still attached to his throat.

Yeah, this is kind of what I think of when I think of a Miike film. Extremes.

The story of the film finds Arata Kunisada (Riki Takeuchi ) freed from prison. The mob boss that was just assassinated was a father figure to him, and he is distraught and vengeful. 

But this isn't a one-man-assassin squad/John Wickian tale, at least not yet. The film cuts between different mob factions and Kunisada's journey, which for much of the film's run time finds him hiding out, rather than pursuing his revenge.  But eventually Kunisada gets back on track and, well, finds a missile launcher to help him on his quest.

Having just watched the excellent Italian mob-revenge actioner Big Guns, this very much feels like another take on the same story, right down to the police sort of standing by, or perhaps even aiding the protagonist in their mission of revenge. The difference is Big Guns felt quite calculated and detailed in its execution. Rekka on the other hand feels quite rushed and unrefined. That shagginess has a bit of an appeal, for sure, but it makes for some confusing story beats, or even whole acts. (There's a detour that Kunisada takes with a possible love interest that seems completely inconsequential to the overall story, and, for the amount of screentime it takes, contributes little to our understanding of this rather one note character).

The film dabbles with character drama and mafia intrigue but isn't particularly committed to either, and by the time the big rocket-launcher climax happens, it becomes a big old cartoon that betrays whatever it was trying to do emotionally before. 

The film closes with the ghost of a dead mob boss popping his head into frame, shouting "rock and roll!" It's not a vibes movie, per se, but perhaps Miike is a vibes director, and you're either on his wavelength or you're not. I dunno...Rekka wasn't boring, except when it was.

---

One thing I'm always searching for is films from the 1980s with great special effects, including miniatures and big sets and puppets and stop-motion animation. I've exhausted most of the North American releases some time ago (though there is still the rare surprise) and have to look internationally for such pleasures. The main problem is I have no idea where to look, or what I'm looking for, and sacrificing a few hours hoping for something inspired to look at can be such a gamble.

The opening moments of Tokyo: The Last Megalopolis (aka "Teito Monogatari") deliver instantly. A glorious barrage of manufactured clouds, impeccably lit with purple and red hues leads way to a massive set where a group of mages start mumbling incantations, causing the set to rumble and fracture and animated lighting to strike. There are rods sticking up from the ground that receive the lightning and are rotoscoped with a glowing red tinge. This is all glorious even if the dialogue of the scene is moving so fast that I had to rewind at least three times over to catch all the exposition.

The gist of The Last Megalopolis is that, centuries ago, Taira no Masakado led an uprising against the lords of Tokyo and failed. His spirit, though dormant, haunts the city. Should anyone dare to desecrate the site where he lay, he will awaken and destroy the city. And so, the demon Yasunori Kato (garbed in an Imperial Officer uniform, he is no doubt the inspiration for M. Bison in the Street Fighter video games) seeks to do just that, but in order to awaken the Masakado, he needs the blood of his descendant to do so. Some men just want to watch the world burn.

What follows is a convoluted but enthralling tale that takes place over three time periods from the early 1910s to the late 1920s. It's heavy on incantations, sorcery and witchcraft (of a type), and a bevvy of effects to go along with it. The best special effects in the film find paper being dispatched by both the good guys and bad, sailing on the wind before crumpling itself up and then transmogrifying into a bird or a wee little rat-like beastie. It's really, really cool.

The Last Magalopolis is based off the novel "Teito Monogatari" (adapted into Manga prior to the film's release and into an anime series in the early 1990s), and combines elements of real Tokyo history with epic fantasy and spirituality. A lot of the characters in this story are actual historical figures, and I guess the production team thought that it was enough of a shorthand to not really explore these characters at all.  It is completely a story-driven film, and figures wind their way in and out of the story in such a manner that if you're not used to Japanese names it can get confusing as to who is being referred to in a given situation and why. Also, this film is not waiting for you to catch up.

It's a propulsive narrative, even at two hour and fourteen minutes, and by the end while it has a resolution, barely feels resolved... because it isn't. This is effectively the first half of the story, condensed. A follow-up film, Tokyo: The Last War would be released the subsequent year. 

Part fantasy, part horror, part historical fanfic it's a wild and dense production that perplexes and delights in equal measure.

Monday, May 4, 2026

KWIF: Sisu: Road to Revenge (+3)

 KWIF=Kent's Week in Film. Lady Kent was down with the same cold that took me out last week, so weirdly I watched more movies this week than when I was down and out last week. It's all international cinema cinema week: Finland! "Persia"! Australia! Italy!

This Week:
Sisu: Road to Revenge (2025, d.  Jalmari Helander - crave)
Sinbad of the Seven Seas (1989, d. Luigi Cozzi - tubi)
Picnic At Hanging Rock (1975, d. Peter Weir - xumo)
Big Guns (aka Tony Arzenta aka No Way Out - 1973, d. Duccio Tessari - tubi)

---

The first Sisu was a cartoon orgy of violence, but underneath it beat the heart of Finnish pride, fortitude and resilience. If there was a message to Sisu it was to tell the world that Finns are tough motherfuckers.  

But Sisu also set itself in a time and place that it didn't really explain. If you're Finnish or familiar with it's history (particularly during World War II) there was no explanation needed. I on the other had had to do some digging. It was a complicated situation with Finland already engaged in conflict with Russia when other battles in Europe started. Sisu took place at the end of World War II, with the Germans set to return home, but attempting to take as much with them as they could before they left, including the gold grizzled veteran Aatami Korpi (Jorma Tommila) had just found.

I don't fully understand the timelines, but Road to Revenge, takes place shortly after the end of World War II, so I assume not long after the first film, just enough time for Korpi to heal. A treaty with Russia saw the ceding of much of Karelia (on the southeastern side of the country) to the Russians, with its citizens of the area being forced to leave within ten days. Korpi's home, which he built himself, remains in the ceded terrain. He crosses the new Russian border with a massive, massive truck, where he deconstructs the home and loads the truck on his own.

His border crossing, however, raises awareness that Koschei ("The Immortal") is in the country. Korpi had infamously killed 300 Russians himself in a rageful tear following the murder of his wife an children. A KGB Officer (Richard Brake) frees the man responsible for killing Korpi's family -- the war criminal Yeagor Dragunov (Stephen Lang) -- from his prison and gives him the resources to, quote "destroy the legend you created and you will go back home a rich man".

And so Korpi and his massive truck and big pile of wood have to travel the 120 kilometers from where his home once stood back to the border...chased by trucks, motorcycles, and airplanes. It's a scaled-down Fury Road but director Jalmari Helander continues to prove he's got the action goods. A lot of wild craziness happens along the way, beyond logic but gleefully entertaining.

The last act takes place on a train, and gets Koschei back into physical action, with some fun setpieces like traversing through the two sleeping quarters without awakening the soldiers (or taking care of them should they stir). The final duel between Korpi and Dragunov is maybe too slow and unrefined to be truely Wick-ian, but it's only one small moment in this 89-minute deluge of violence and survival.

Tommila doesn't speak a word the entire film, and this lack of dialogue really strips the film down to the barest of actions and emotions. Where Brake or Lang might have more to say, there's still likely no more than two or three pages of dialogue, max in the entire film. Whereas the first Sisu felt like a nuveau western, this one feels almost more like a samurai film...but with guns and vehicles and whatnot...but the same attitudes apply.

Helander's next film will see the director's first American production, being brought aboard to helm the John Rambo prequel starring Noah Centineo in the title role. I have no idea what the story might possibly be like, but I'm excited to see what Helander can do with big hollywood franchise budget.

---

One of the final releases of legendary 80's B-movie studio Cannon Film, Sinbad of the Seven Seas stars famous muscleman and former Incredible Hulk, Lou Ferrigno as the storied Persian hero, Sinbad the Sailor. Yes, that's right, Italian-American Lou Ferrigno plays Sinbad. Seems a natural fit to me [/sarcasm].

The story is set largely in Basra, which the filmmakers seem to know as much about as I do, which is to say, nothing at all. All the characters here are played by white and/or Italian actors, nary a middle-eastern among them. If this seems like it could be offensive, it would be, if anyone, anyone at all were trying to convincingly portray this as an authentic tale. As it stands, it's one of the least egregious of its cinematic sins, afterall, Sinbad has been portrayed by white actors many times in the past (and will again...RIP Patrick Muldoon).

But Sinbad of the Seven Seas lies to its audience from the moment the film starts. Before its title card, a chunky block of text mentions how famed author Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote an additional adventure for Sinbad titled "The Thousand-and-Second Tale of Scheherazade" and that this is an adaptation of that story. It is not. Not in the slightest.

As legend on this film goes, writer-director Luigi Cozzi (who had directed Ferrigno in two Hercules films for Cannon in the mid-1980s) had written the screenplay for Sinbad and the Seven Seas, but was (for unclear reasons) dismissed from the project and it was handed to Enzo G. Castellari. Castellari would proceed to make substantial changes to the script and then proceed to produce an unreleaseable three-hour film. The film sat on the shelf for years before Cozzi was hired back to make some sense of it, to salvage something out of the whole production.

And so, the film's story does not begin with Sinbad and crew on his boat, or in the city of Basra, or in Baghdad or anywhere fantastical, it starts in a bedroom, with a child (Cozzi's daughter) being read a story by her mother, played by Daria Nicolodi.  Nicolodi will proceed to narrato over a large portion of the film. The touchpoint might seem to be The Princess Bride for this framing sequence, but really, it's just a way of trimming down 3 hours of garbage footage into a barely, if you squint, serviceable 93 minute series of adventures.

The wicked vizier Jaffar (portrayed by English white guy John Steiner, it's a variation on Aladdin's Jafar both of which hearken back to The Thief of Baghdad films rather than One Thousand and One Nights) is fixated on the Caliph's daughter, Princess Alina [Alessandra Martines, a French-Italian white lady]. She is involved with Sinbad's ship-mate Prince Ali, but he's been away adventuring. The vizier steals the town's sacred gems of power, keeping one for himself and dispersing the rest across the seas. He then hypnotizes the Caliph into doing his bidding, including telling Alina to marry Jaffar. She refuses and thus is strapped to a fantastical chamber designed to (verrrry slooooowly) sap her of her will. She will marry him some day). When Hercules...I mean Sinbad and crew arrive in Basra, they beat up some bad guys, get captured, break free and then set out on a quest to find the four gems of power (but not before Sinbad escapes from a pit of cobras by *checks notes* making friends with the cobras and then tying them together to form a rope for him to climb out of.  You know how you make friends with wild creatures [totally normal] and then twist their bodies together, with their consent of course [nothing unusual, at all] and then climb them [all checks out, do it all the time].

The majority of the adventures of Sinbad and his crew (consisting of handsome Prince Ali [white guy], Cheropolis "the bald cook" [another white guy], Poochie the dwarf [not a rapping dog, but a white guy], Viking [played by an Italian actor, not a Scandanavian] and the Chinese mercenary Cantu [played by a Japanese-Italian actor]) are narrated over with the action or conversation or both happening silently under the narration from Nicolodi (yes, we see the characters have an exchange and our narrator explains what they are saying], all the while accompanied by the of shoddiest of synth scores.  

In the first stop, he fights a rock monster that shoots lasers from its head. Sinbad must use feats of his notorious Sinbad strength to defeat it and retrieve the gem from its head. In the second, Sinbad and most of the crew (except Bald Cook and Poochie) head to the isle of the amazons where their notorious beauty finds them immediately under their sway (except Prince Ali who seems to be psychically connected to Princess Alina for some reason). If not for Bald Cook and Poochie coming to the rescue with an magical anti-hypnosis potion...I don't know what would have happened, actually. The Amazon queen Farida was played by the stunning actress Melonee Rodgers, a Black, possibly American actress (there's not much available detail on her and seeing as she had no speaking lines left in the film - which doesn't really matter since all lines were dubbed anyway by different actors, except Steiner and one or two others) and all the Amazons were black, which I thought was fantastic...except when Queen Farida has her gem of power taken from her and she turns into an old lady...well, it's just some old Italian lady in blackface. Yeah. Woof.

During the adventures, we constantly check back in with Jaffar, and how progress is going on sapping Princess Alina of her will. The movie makes it seem like Sinbad's voyages are only taking him the better part of an afternoon in total and not days or weeks of sailing the seas. He tries to interfere from afar, but seems to only be able to do anything sometimes for some reason and most of the time looks like a sweaty guy whose going to lose his kneecaps if the team he's watching doesn't lose the match. He's also joined, bafflingly, by the witch Soukra (played by American bodybuilder Teagan, the only other actor not to be dubbed, it seems) for seemingly no reason. Jaffar sort of acts like she's the one who will break his kneecaps if his bet doesn't pay off.

The third adventures finds Jafar sending a gust of wind to send Sinbad's ship ashore (but why send them to the very island that contains the gem they're looking for Jaffar? The guy is an idiot). There they face, ghosts or something...? I dunno, I fell asleep for a bit. 

When I woke up Sinbad was having a conversation with Kira (another white lady), daughter of Nadir the wizard who speaks in gibberish. They landed on the Isle of the Dead in a balloon. They are jumped by a gang of ghouls, and while Kira puts up a good fight, which Hercules, I mean Sinbad immediately falls in love with her over, she gets kidnapped along with her father. Sinbad mounts his rescue but must face the Lord of Darkness, who is like a pot-bellied Swamp Thing who shoots lasers from his hands. Hercules uses his own gems of powers to shoot lasers and destroy the big gooey plant then head home with Kira and her goof-talkin' father in tow.

The big show-down is ...well, not so big. Hercules/Sinbad rescues Princess Alina and defeats Jaffar, but not before facing a Jaffar-controlled mirror version of himself in a match of strength and cunning. Ali and Alina are married, and so are not-Hercules and Kira, the end, go to sleep kid.

There were little glimmers that maybe the original production, under Castellari, was aiming for high camp, but the structure Cozzi rescues the picture with leaves a lot of the camp off to the side, sneaking in only occasionally. But it's obvious from the footage and dialogue left in why Castellari's first draft of this was considered unreleaseable: it's really really bad. I could never get past the idea of Ferrigno as Sinbad. As witnessed above, my brain kept defaulting to him as Hercules, and it would seem Castelli did too. Sinbad is not a legendary strongman, and yet so much of what Ferrigno does here is "feats of strength".

In the right setting, Sinbad of the Seven Seas might be a so-bad-it's-amazing cult classic, but as a tired adult just looking for a break from having to think about shit, this was just an awful 90 minutes. I had more fun recapping it above than watching it.

---

I was introduced to Picnic at Hanging Rock by a friend who I met on a dating website almost exactly 20 years ago. It was an odd time. We'd both recently gotten out of long term relationships and we were trying to figure out the next phase of our lives. We really clicked, but emotionally we just weren't ready for anything other than friendship. It was a friendship that forged quickly but not strong enough to survive eventual physical distance and other life demands (babies) and, frankly, the friendship-subverting suckhole that was facebook (it gives the illusion of being in contact without being meaningful contact in any way). Strangely, Picnic at Hanging Rock was the shared experience most cemented into my mind of that friendship, watching a VHS copy borrowed from the library on a strange couch in a brightly lit room next to a new friend where we were still trying to figure out our dynamic. 

At that time I went into watching Picnic... with a pre-conceived distaste for Peter Weir, having had a high-school art teacher who was a Weir fan and would play us Dead Poets Society, Green Book and Fearless in class at least once per semester...for inspiration? These were not really inspirational films to a 14-17 year old. They were grown-up films for parents.

At that time I found Picnic... a bit confounding. The film starts by letting you know that the titular picnic would end in some sort of tragedy, just as the film's poster does. "On St. Valentines Day in 1900 a party of schoolgirls set out to picnic at Hanging Rock... some were never to return." It's an ominous, and it implies something sinister, something terrifying, something harrowing perhaps. The implication is there will be, at least, something to raise one's blood pressure in watching this film...and there is not. Not really.

It is a film that stuck with me though, left an impression. It's not just a totem but a representative point for a very specific, transitional moment of my life. My memory of the film is nothing to do with plot or characters, but images and tones.

This rewatch reaffirmed that it is a tranquil, vibes-based movie above all, loaded with melancholy (and the tranquil tones of Zamfir's pan flute) 

The girls are aflutter not for their picnic trip but for a Valentines card someone received. Where most of the kids are privileged, some are sponsored, such as Sara, an orphan who is kept behind from the trip because...well, I'm not exactly sure. We don't spend much time with any of the other girl to really get to know them, but there is focus on Miranda, the pretty and independent-minded blonde, and Edith, the cliched fat girl who whines about physical effort and is seen eating.  There at least doesn't seem to be any bullying, at least not in the traditional sense...not at this point. 

At the picnic site is already a young Englishman, Michael, who is there with his parents (grandparents?), and their driver, Albert, who Michael makes friends with. The presence of the girls is instantly exciting to them, and though Albert makes some crude comments to Michael which he finds distasteful, the girls don't even notice they are there.

Miranda, Edith and two others decide to venture up the rock (more than 500 feet high it is!), and they push themselves up until they can seemingly go no further. But they find a crevasse and venture into it, except Edith, who freaks out. She runs down the hill, the others are gone... as if purposefully taken by the rock. A teacher stays behind as the rest of the girls are sent home, and she disappears as well. End of act one.

The rest of the film covers next few hours, days and weeks that follow. There is a manhunt and an investigation. Both Albert and Michael are looked at and then dismissed. Both young men are troubled by thoughts and dreams of the missing girls, with Michael seemingly haunted by Miranda specifically. Michael takes on a dangerous solo search which he nearly dies from, and when Albert picks up the trail, he finds Irma, near death.

The school is in disarray. The teachers are having breakdowns, some kids leave school altogether, and Sara falls ill. Irma remembers nothing and has no answers. She's harassed by the other girls when she returns to visit. Everything's collapsing because nobody can process the tragedy. It's not being swept under the rug, but it's also not being addressed either.

Picnic at Hanging Rock is not a horror movie, but it is a haunting picture. It's hard not to be affected by watching others unravel in the wake of tragedy, unable to make sense of it and not having the support knowledge or infrastructure to work through it. With years in between, and some further exploration of the film and story in the meantime, I respect the picture even if I still have a hard time with its storytelling decisions and the routes it does not take.

It took some additional contemplation to realize that this is not a film about the incident, despite the title. It's not about the disappearance, but a story about the school, and the impact the incident has on it and the people within it.  That's a defined choice made by the storytellers (be it original novel author Joan Lindsay, or screenwriter Cliff Green, or director Weir) not to answer questions, not to give a resolution. It may be unsatisfying but it's most definitely intentional.  It's a film that has, in a way, haunted me for 20 years now, and I think that will never go away.

---

I have a watchlist on Letterboxd that I don't consult very often, but any time I do I'm bound to ask the question of "what the hell is that?" to about two-thirds of what's on there. My tastes and interests are mercurial to the point of self-aggravation and self-annoyance. I have to be in the right mood or zone to watch something, so just because I don't feel like watching it now doesn't mean I won't want to watch it later. But also, a lot of what is on my Letterboxd list is obscurities that, well, just won't be cropping up on any of the "mainstream" streamers I most regularly have access to.

But then there's Tubi, always full of surprises. I don't love the streamer, primarily because it's owned by Fox, but also because it has ads (which used to be all Fox News-based ads, but now just seem to be targeted Canadian market ads for dish soap and such), and no standards. You can find a lot of great stuff on Tubi, but in terrible quality streaming speed, bad digital transfers, godawful audio and frequently without closed captioning (a terrible combo for a half-deaf guy like me).

I don't know how the Italian action-thriller Big Guns (aka Tony Arzenta aka No Way Out) wound up on my Letterboxd list but I'm sure glad it did, and I'm also so happy it was among Tubi's fairly decent selection (if not decent quality) of Italian 70's crime pictures.

This one stars Alain Delon, the handsome French actor who played one of the first notable on-screen hitmen in Le Samourai, back again playing another hitman, but this time also a family man, and he wants out. He's done. No more killing for him. Except the consortium of mobsters he works for aren't willing to let him go and they know there's no talking him out of it.

And so before John Wick, before The Punisher, before Death Wish here we have an anti-hero whose wife and child are killed (accidentally mind you) and the response is basically warfare in the streets, one against one hundred.

Delon is Tony Arzenta, an astute, savvy, steely killer who has been wronged, and there's only one way to make right. He's going to dismantle multiple crime syndicates from the top down. At first Arzenta makes his plans and executes them, although not always with ruthless precision, it's a fight from the jump. The mob bosses aren't just sitting back, they have their own schemes as well, setting Tony up so that he has to improvise his escapes. The police are monitoring the situation, but they're sitting back. They're, in a way, buffering for Tony as they see him doing them a service, cleaning up all these syndicates for them.

Tony's bloodlust takes him from from Milan to Copenhagen, murdering on the street and on trains, wherever the opportunity needs to occur. He's not alone, he's aided by his pal Domenico (Marc Porel) and Sandra (Carla Gravina), as well as an ex-dom now living life as a priest who looks out for Tony's parents. 

The film isn't solely told from Tony's perspective and spends plenty of time with the various mafia dons as they start renegotiating territories as Tony picks them off one by one. But there's always one been one don, Nick Gusto (Richard Conte) who didn't want any of this and had tried numerous times to convince the consortium to push for piece. It's only when he's the last one left does he really have any sway, and it all leads to Tony's invitation to Don Gusto's daughter's wedding, and the tense, anything-can-happen environment.

Nothing about it is as straightforward. Tony seems to have ice in his veins, but family, friendships, these have meaning for him, it's where he's vulnerable and he knows it. The scenes where he brings Sandra to stay with his parents, and the awkward-yet-sweet encounters that occur there. There's no definition to what Tony and Sandra are to each other, except that they're family now.

I loved this movie. I'll be eagle eyed looking out for a physical media release. It deserves some special treatment.

Thursday, April 30, 2026

3 Short Paragraphs (Or Not): The Wrecking Crew

2026, Angel Manuel Soto (Blue Beetle) -- Amazon

I did not enjoy Blue Beetle and all its screaming, and yet I enjoyed this comedy-action movie, even with its screaming & swearing; well, at least for the first two acts. We took a break after the first two acts, because it was my bed time, and came back to a movie that felt it was directed by the man who made Blue Beetle even though I didn't know it was his, until the credits were rolling.

But, what I liked. 

Soto exchanges the Latinx experience for a Hawaiian one, except, of the primary cast, only Jason Momoa has any real Hawaiian heritage, instead having people of New Zealand, Somoa and Fillipino culture, along with some stunt casting of actual Hawaiians as supporting cast. OK, I guess I didn't really like that, but Hollywood wants faces, so at least they took Pacific cultures. Sigh. Anywayz, its a light hearted, action-comedy by way of a murder-mystery with family challenges, and almost followed the format of the grimy detective story, but using suspended cop Jonny Hale (Jason Momoa, Aquaman) and Navy SEAL James (Dave Bautista, Guardians of the Galaxy) investigating the murder of their father Walter, who was a private dick, and a man they both actually loathed.

Jonny and James do not like each other. They are half-brothers and Jonny still resents James for not helping him investigate the murder of his mother when they were teens. Jonny is only back for the funeral, and to annoy James, but he cannot help himself but to start digging into the death, even when warned off by local thugs, and the cops. As Jonny pokes around they add Pika (Jason Batalon, Reginald the Vampire) to the mix, who plays the role of the fat nerdy tech kid. Eventually James is onboard with the investigating, and they even go so far as dressing up as wait staff to infiltrate the local corrupt land developer's party. It does not play well.

Its at this point I realize we are watching an 80s buddy investigator show, like Magnum PI or Simon & Simon except a wee bit more twisted. The half-brothers are constantly arguing, and Jonny's barbs are hilarious, as is his constant Japanese pop-culture references. There are enough one-liners between the two that had me charmed by the characters, especially the supporting cast of the brothers' cousins.

And then it had to go and ruin it with over the top violence. I mean, I know its an action flick, but it starts with the Yakuza attacking the brothers downtown, leading to a number of bystanders dying as the bullets fly. To be fair, the brothers do their best to get people to safety and take out the Bad Guys but... I still hate collateral damage, which is why I hated, utterly HATED the inevitable car chase scene. Its set on a highway, and it grabs the helicopter-vs-car trope and probably ends the lives of at least 50 innocent bystanders in fiery explosions and crashes, adding insult to injury in that the brothers are never held to account for it. We don't even see it make the news! If Yakuza and other corrupt gangsters were slaughtering people in the streets, most movies would at least mention the mobilization of a task force or local anti-terrorist squad. But no, this is just played for bloody, bone crunching, blood spewing, cars-exploding "fun" so the characters could come out of it bloodied & battered. At least we got to see Jonny's ex-GF Valentina (Morena Baccarin, Elevation) do some kick-ass driving.

I have decided to head-canon this movie into a setup for a new Hawaiian-based TV series from Amazon. We've got our Magnum PI reboot and they already had it cross-over with the Hawaii 5-0 reboot, but this new show could come at it from the indigenous experience. We could enjoy the 80s-style re-casting of the main characters but also do some more stunt-casting by having at least one supporting cast member stay in the new show. Maybe Pika.

Wednesday, April 29, 2026

Ah-Ah-Argento #4: Door Into Darkness

 Door Into Darkness (aka La Porta Sul Buio) was a four episode anthology created and produced by Dario Argento for RAI (Radiotelevisione Italiana, nee Radio Audizioni Italiane - the national public broadcasting company of Italy) following his third film, Four Flies on Grey Velvet. Originally airing in 1973, part of the intent of the series was to give friends of Argento some directing exposure, including Luigi Cozzi, one of his early assistants, and Roberto Pariante, an early assistant director. The series was modelled somewhat after Alfred Hitchcock Presents... wherein the director himself would introduce each episode, which Argento does here sporting a shaggy mop and stylish '70's clothes.  It turned Argento into an unlikely, but legitimate star in the country where he would become known as a media personality almost as prominently as a director.

The series originally aired in black and white (since RAI could only broadcast in black and white at the time) but Argento and company was asked to shoot it in colour for the eventual re-airings when they would appear in colour. The crew, however still shot the series optimized for presentation in black and white, so it's bizarre to me that the physical media collection this series is featured on ("Dario Argento's Deep Cuts" from Severin Films) does not have the episodes presented both ways (but from all signs, it seemed a difficult task to find even decent copies of these episodes...the transfers are exceptionally noisy and grainy with frequent haziness or film errors, so it almost feels lucky we even get them like this).

The episodes are:
1. "The Neighbor" (aka "Il vicino di casa") - written and directed by Luigi Cozzi
2. "The Tram" (aka "Il tram") - written and directed by Dario Argento (direction credited to a pseudonym)
3. "The Doll" (aka "La bambola") - written by Marcella Elsberger and Mario Foglietti, directed by Foglietti
4. "Eyewitness" (aka "Testimone oculare") - written by Argento and Cozzi, directed by Argento with Cozzi but credited to Roberto Pariante.

---


For The Neighbor, prior to the story starting, Argento introduces the series as a concept before introducing the episode. He's a gentle, contemplative speaker, unassuming for someone considered a master of the macabre. This staged setting transitions sharply to Argento slamming the hood of a car on the side of the road on a highway where he continues to introduce the episode. He then flags down a car, and a young couple pick him up. He gets into the back seat and we see the resulting conversation from his POV. It's truly and odd sequence, lasting about 90 seconds or so before Argento asks to be dropped off and the car drives off. 

But the charm of the sequence reveals itself when it turns out we will be following this couple as our protagonists for the story. They've just bought a beach-front apartment that they're moving into. The truck is to arrive with all their stuff the next morning. However, their upstairs neighbour has just murdered his wife. They would have been none the wiser if not for the fact that he forgot to shut the tap off to the bathtub and it starts to leak downstairs. He's gone out to fetch a shovel and the couple allow themselves into his apartment to shut off the water only to find the body.

With their car stuck in the sand and neither their electricity nor phone hooked up they're trapped with nowhere to go. Their only hope is the murderous upstairs neighbour will be unaware that they found out about his crime... if only the didn't leave something inside his apartment.

The Neighbor has suitable tension, but it's only got about 30 minutes of story in an over 50 minute episode, so it feels every moment of its padding. Much of the padding is meant for ratcheting up the tension but it's more frustrating than intensifying.

Aldo Reggiani plays the husband, Luca, and has the lightest work to do, while his wife, Stefania, played by the beautiful Laura Belli is our primary POV character, and the one who has to interact with the titular neighbour (Mimmo Palmara) the most. Palmara sports a big 70's moustache and a high head of aged grey hair, and at first seems tired and unassuming, but when he needs to take an unconscious Luca to the beach, we see what a beast of a man Palmara is, throwing Reggiani over his shoulder with relative ease, and moving around with him with no difficulty. The threat level triples after we see this strength.

---

Argento shines with The Tram, a really fun piece of detective/mystery fiction directed with Argento's usual assured hand and only a slightly tamped down version of his traditional flair. Shot on 16mm (as all the episodes were) there are a number of beautiful shots and impeccable use of his environments (the titular tram car as well as the tram depot), neither of which I've seen used anywhere near as well in TV or cinema in the 50+ years since. While Argento (and his cohorts on the other episodes) did not have nearly the time and definitely not the relative budget of his feature films for this production Argento makes a mini-Argento movie that feels as accomplished and as entertaining as anything he's done (Argento cites the lighting being the biggest sacrifice, but he still does well with what he has here).

In The Tram, a body is found under a streetcar seat when the car is being cleaned. The police arrive and investigate, what seems to be an impossible crime. How could someone be murdered AND stowed without anyone seeing it, including both the streetcar driver and ticket taker who were on the vehicles trip from start to finish.

Enzo Cerusico plays the Inspector on the case, Giordani. He has habits and ticks on display as he thinks through his problems, and Cerusico is not only a handsome lead but absolutely charming one as well. Giordani should have spun out into his own series of mysteries, either on TV or film. Having only one adventure with him was definitely not enough.

But part of it is the case, as well. It is a perplexing one, especially if we're to take all the eyewitness testimony (none of which provides any immediate clue to the killer's identity) as fact, then there seems to be only one or two answers that remain. 

The intelligence of the script is that Giordani follows the remaining threads, and it does point to the most obvious answer, through to completion of the accused being convicted but, his please of innocence haunt Giordani. So even though the case is close, justice has been served, Giordani can't shake that he's missed something. So off the books, with his partner Giulia (the beautiful Paola Tedesco), he takes another crack at it, and it leads to an exceptional climax.

The only weakness of this episode is the off-topic, preachy coda that feels like something Argento just wanted to get off his chest (he's not wrong, but it's just such an aside).

---

For the third instalment of Door Into Darkness, Argento brought his friend, journalist Mario Foglietti, whom he collaborated with on Four Flies..., for his first directorial effort.

The story begins with an escape from a mental hospital completely shot from a first-person POV perspective. It's an effective sequence (apparently shot by Cozzi, who stepped in as second unit director when Foglietti fell behind).

From there, it's a confounding and yet kind of compelling puzzle. A police inspector meets with the head professor from the mental hospital. They agree to collaborate on finding the missing patient, whomever they may be, noting that they're a schizophrenic and potentially dangerous.

We follow a handsome, but slightly rumpled man (Robert Hoffmann) around a small town as he checks into a rooming house and looks out upon the street, clearly searching for someone. He finds her (the beautiful Erika Blanc), and follows her, but stops tailing her when she meets up with another man. Later in the evening she is killed in her fashion warehouse.

The inspector and the professor have a follow-up conversation, which only serves to obfuscate rather than illuminate what is actually happening. The man starts following another woman (the beautiful Mara Venier) who looks like the same woman he was following earlier, and he starts messing with her. She seems to let him mess with her. The dynamic is incredibly perplexing and uncomfortable. 

The climax is even more discomforting as the inspector leads a dragnet in the town and the man and second woman play out their psychodrama in hiding. It all comes to a head with the reveal of who these people are.

It's a challenging hour of television, and maybe the payoff doesn't reward the effort, but, as I noted I was pretty compelled the entire time trying to figure it out. Cozzi, in his second-unit direction, really seemed to reach for Argento's-style of first-person shooting, which finds some element of visual consistency across the episodes.

---

The final episode, Eyewitness, turned out to be a bit of a mess. From what Cozzi said about what happened behind the scenes, Argento was not pleased with the quality of what Foglietti shot after the first few days of shooting (each episode shot for around 8 days) and he and Cozzi stepped in to take over production, reshooting what they could (Argento's take was that cast and crew were unhapping with Foglietti and asked Argento to take over... in both cases Argento seems hesitant to disparage anyone, and wished that Foglietti retain credit). That the episode is as engrossing as it is proves that the talent of the directors and the series crew.

The plot is an interesting gialli. Roberta (the beautiful Marilù Tolo...there's a lot of beautiful women in Italian cinema and more than a few of them in this series) is driving to her rural home after a day and evening in the city. On the familiar road home, she turns a bend and something jumps out in front of her. She screeches to a halt and sees a woman's body laying in the road. Roberta gets out, certain she hadn't hit anything. She checks the body. It is dead with a wound in the back. There's a rustle in the bushes and a man with a gun emerges. Roberta runs, knowing the local tavern is not far. She makes it without incident. The cops arrive. The chief inspector (Glauco Onorato) questions her, then takes her back to the scene where he explains that he believe she believes she saw something, but there was no body found.

There's one mistake Argento made with the rest of the story. Where we should be following Roberta and her husband as they're, maybe, terrorized by the perpetrator of the crime, or maybe it's all just a series of weird coincidences and Roberta really did "just see something" (the way it's shot largely allows for both possiblities) instead a transitional sequence does show us gloved hand disposing of the dead woman's bloody clothes, thereby eliminating the possibility, at least for the audience, that Roberta might have just been making the whole thing up.

But this "mistake" then does lead to the most surprising part of the story, the inspector, after another incident or four in Roberta's life, which could all be chalked up as random events or even fabrications, he believes her. He intuitively trusts his instincts on her character, and believes her. It's a surprising and wonderful scene when one expects tropes out of stories from this era. 

The climax plays out as it should, and it's satisfying (if the final note a bit weird), but this is a story that really could have been filled out nicely into a full-length movie, really the only one of these stories that has that in it.

---

I enjoyed all of these entries, with The Neighbor thrilling me the least, and The Tram exciting me the most. In all, as much as these were made for TV, they are all put together with cinematic professionalism. Argento had to cut costs, but I don't think he knows how to cut corners when he directs. Even when he's not successful, he's always intentional and it shows in the work. He was on set for most of the productions, so his guiding hand is there over the whole procession even if he wasn't writer or director on everything.

The Hitchcock/Rod Serling-esque episode introductions are an anthology convention, and Argento serves the role well. Unfortunately the clever way in which Argento's introduction was incorporated into the story set-up of The Neighbor did not happen in the remaining episode. It was an exceptionally interesting way to get an episode started. 

The series ran into trouble with the censors even before the first episode aired, and then ran into more trouble after the first episode aired. All the censorship issues displeased Argento that he abstained from producing another series or even working in television again for years. But what we got is an absolute treat.

Monday, April 27, 2026

KWIF: The Housemaid (+1)

KWIF=Kent's Week in Film. More than a few sick days for ol' Kent this week, and usually that means curling up on the couch and just gorging on a diet of cold & flu Tylenols and, of course, movies. But the pain on my brain from sinus pressure was so debilitating for one of those days that I could barely leave my bed and just could *not* look at a screen. Here's what little I got up to...

This Week:
The Housemaid (2025, d. Paul Feig - Crave)
Universal Language (2024, d. Matthew Rankin - Crave)

---

The Housemaid is not a film meant for me, a nearly 50-year-old man-boy still obsessed with toys, comic books, superheroes and scifi.  Based off the novel by Freida McFadden, it seemed to me to be right in line with all the other chik-lit adaptations in recent years (Where The Crawdads Sing, It Ends With Us etc), which, again, I am not the target audience for. All this is not intended as disparagement...I mean, I spend two months of the year writing about Hallmark movies, which, again, I am not the target audience for. But where I've found an admiration for the cliches and tropes of the Hallmark formulae (and how they are broken), I've never quite grokked the women-in-peril-stories-for-women subgenre. I've never seen Single White Female or Sleeping With The Enemy for example.

I was warned in advance that The Housemaid was trash cinema, but a couple of reviewers had deemed it highest quality of trash cinema and it's hit some early best-of-2026-so-far lists, and, hey I *generally* like Paul Feig's movies, including A Simple Favor (not enough to review it, or watch the sequel, apparently...that link is to Toasty's review) so I thought, I'm trapped in bed with nothing else to do ...why not.

Millie (Sydney Sweeney) arrives as the Winchester estate on Long Island for an interview to be their new live-in housemaid (and occasional nanny). The place is pristine. Nina Winchester (Amanda Seyfried) greets her, shows her around the house, including the attic bedroom she would stay in, details the job, and both seem to feel pretty good about the exchange. And then we see Millie back in her car, where she lives, taking hobo-baths in gas station washrooms. We eventually learn she is out on parole and she needs a steady job and place to live, or back in the slammer she goes for another five years.

After a couple days, just when she thinks she isn't getting the job, Nina calls and needs her immediately. In the days since, the pristine abode Millie first saw is now a fucking calamity. So disastrous that it seems kind of impossible. Millie gets to work. She has the place restored to near perfection when Nina's husband, Andrew (Brandon Sklenar), and her daughter Cece come home. Cece, in a near Damien-from-The-Omen deadpan tells her shoes are not allowed on the furniture. 

The next morning Millie, having slept in a bed for the first time in ages, wakes up late, and rushes downstairs to find Nina in the midst of a complete meltdown. The place is trashed and Nina accuses Millie of tossing out a speech she had written. Andrew steps in and, like he's had to do this many times before, calms Nina down, kisses her passionately and carries her away, but not without looking at Millie apologetically first. It's just the first of Nina's micro- and macro-aggressions towards her, including canceling her Saturday off to run chores, then calling and asking Millie to pick up Cece from dance class, only not telling her where dance class is before hanging up, and when Millie arrives, another mom notes to Millie that Cece is sleeping over at her house and she calls Nina to confirm and disses Millie to. her. face.

Millie doesn't understand why Nina is fucking with her until a peek in her medicine cabinet reveals prescription drugs for treating psychosis. Later she overhears other mothers, at tea, talking about what a saint Andrew is (not to mention so sexy with a million-dollar-smile) for taking Nina and her daughter in, and learns from another nanny about how Nina tried to drown Cece and kill herself with sleeping pills. As Nina continues to harass Millie, Andrew needs to come to Millie's defence more and more... and Millie starts having nighttime fantasies about Andrew.

All of this is just the literal set-up. If it feels like Millie's being set-up, she is. But why. Why is Nina fucking with her so badly? It seems so...intentional, not just erratic thinking of a mentally unstable person. 

And that's the twist of the movie.

Where it seemed so obvious where this movie was going to start - Millie would have an affair with Andrew and Nina would make her life hell for it - the timing was wrong. This is a 131-minute film. From the moment Millie arrived on her first day of work, everything was awry and Nina started fucking with her immediately. A movie would usually build to such events and give us some explanation as to why they were happening. But here, we're left to wonder throughout the prolonged first act, is Millie's criminal past part of it? What about Nina's past?

And then there's Cece, whose need for control and perfection are downright creepy. But then we meet Andrew's mother (Elizabeth Perkins), whose every comment is something disparaging, nothing living up to her standards. The hints are there...is Andrew the problem?

The first act spans the first hour, and then it takes off when Millie and Andrew fuuuck. She's been in prison for 10 years and he's a big, handsome beefcake with a white knight complex...it was bound to happen. Nina finds out, like, immediately, and goes after Millie, but Andrew comes to her defence and tosses Nina out. And soon all the secrets start to unfurl, all the clues come together and the whole thing comes into focus.

Without spoiling too much other than what I've already spoiled, it gets dark, abusive and demented. Then there's a pivot where the abuse is still demented but not so dark. And the finale which ties things up in a nice little bow.

Except the bow is made of horseshit, such that spending more than 30 seconds thinking about not just the ending, (or worse, the franchise set-up) and the whole thing makes less and less sense. It's a trashy story that's barely held together with popsicle sticks and Elmer's glue. 

What Feig brings to the trash is a steady hand and a lens for wish fulfillment. There aren't many male directors who understand the feminine gaze like Feig. If this were an 1980's thriller, the sex scenes would be luridly all about Sydney Sweeney's naked body, but Feig knows that what's important to this film's audience is the setting, the mood, the touching, the contact. In the non-sex scenes he lovingly captures the idyllic Winchester house, he get's Millie's POV that even amidst all the hardship she faces from Nina, there's still something she desires about this place. He gets that as much as a naked Brandan Sklenar is of interest to his audience, Sklenar wearing a white tank-top and showing his muscles put to use picking a weeping Amanda Seyfried up off the floor is even sexier. Feig makes a good-looking picture, and makes good-looking people look good in his good-looking picture.

I am not on the Sidney Sweeney train. She's not a bad actor, but she's not a tremendously versatile one either. I've never been wowed. Sure, she has curves (paging Dr. Wenowdis) but her dead eyes counteract the allure.  Maybe in time she will develop from it-girl to prestige performer like a certain K-Stew I really used to dislike and now have tremendous respect for. That Sweeney is taking ownership of her films, nailing those executive producer credits, and no doubt having full control over how much of herself she wants to show and how she wants to show it does relay that she has some idea of what she's doing, at least on a business end. 

Seyfried is quite good here, but only as good as the script will allow her to be. It's within her ability to put Nina into performance mode, and relay to the audience that that is what she is doing, but it would betray the twist of the story for her to do so, and so she's stuck playing Nina as, basically, two different characters. The Nina of the first half who we have to hate, and the Nina of the second half who we need to sympathize with.

The Housemaid is not a bad time, if it's your sort of thing, but it's not really my thing and I was left just kind of annoyed with it.

---

When I think of filmmaking and Winnipeg, I think of Guy Maddin, the surrealist Canadian filmmaker obsessed with the silent era and with a penchant for stories that revolve around a fictionalized version of himself (I also think of Hallmark movies, but that's besides the point here). It's an impossibility that Winnipeg-born director Matthew Rankin wasn't influenced by Maddin's films, as there are touchstones too hard to ignore in Universal Language, Rankin's second full-length feature.

I am by no means a Maddin expert, so comparing this work against Maddin's filmography is a bit beyond my grasp, but just to point out that Universal Language does feature a character named Matthew Rankin (played by Rankin) who is returning to his hometown of Winnipeg to visit his mother. The story, toying with ideas of identity, community, and reality, also presents itself in a non-linear narrative, and the world in which it takes place is not unfamiliar, but is definitely an alternate reality to our own. Rankin does not share Maddin's fixation with early cinema, he does, like Maddin, have a fascination with branding and advertising and the way in which products penetrate our lives. 

The Winnipeg and Canada of Universal Language finds Persian and French as the national languages (no English words are spoken or seen). The Riel is the currency of this version of Canada (with Louis Riel's image stamped upon it), and the Quebecois of the film seem to have real difficult understanding the landscape of Canada outside their own borders... sovereignty is still a fixation.

The patient pacing of Rankin's film is immediate from the first frame, a frame which holds for over three full minutes. It is of the exterior of a school. The entrance in the middle left of frame, the window into as classroom in the upper right. The bricks and windows and eaves create width across the frame and make for their own frames. The class, as viewed through the window, is fully chaotic, unruly. A man carries his luggage in a hurried gait across the frame, up the stairs, into the entrance in the middle left, appearing again as a he enters a doorway visible through the window in the upper right. He scolds his class mercilessly. He's not a fan of their behaviour. And as he berates them, a child enters the lower left of the frame, up the stairs and into the entrance before it cuts to the interior.

Rankin uses this minimalist technique throughout the film, a static shot, precisely framed, often using brick or cement architecture to create depth and space within the scene. The camera doesn't move, instead it becomes all about the movement within the camera. It's spectacular to watch, to marvel at the precision of the movement and the eye that understands what to keep in and what to leave out of the shot. 

The story, as it were, not only finds Matthew returning to Winnipeg to visit his mother, but two young sisters, Negin and Nazgol, who discover a 500 Riel note frozen in ice on the sidewalk and seek a means to retrieve it, as well as Massoud (Pirouz Nemati, also the film's co-screenwriter alongside Rankin and Ila Firouzabadi) who leads a dubious tourist group through mundane highlights of the city.

There are sub-plots (well, "plots" might be a bit much) about turkeys of the wild and pageant-winning variety, Kleenex bingo, and birthday cakes, and in the end everything is connected, which is the whole point. As Massoud says to Matthew, "Just as the Assiniboine joins the Red River and together they flow into Lake Winnipeg, we are all connected, agha". The beauty of the film, beyond the visual aesthetics, is the discovery of the connectedness. The details of this alternate reality are so unique that they stand out, so once the pieces start coming together, it's easy to see how they all fit, but it's possible a second viewing would unveil even more.

I wondered what the purpose of the character being named after the director (and played by the director) was, as it's hard to know when something plays with the surreal in this way what of this film is personal. Has Rankin found himself deeply ingrained in the Iranian-Canadian community, and this is his message to his country and the world of how warm and kind the community is, or is this simply an absurdist conceit that he really committed to? I have not delved into the works of Jafar Panahi yet, but my understanding of the Iranian filmmaker is he often works blurring the lines between what's real and personal and what is fiction. So as much as Rankin is tapping into Winnipeg's most notable filmmaker, he's also reaching outward to much broader cinematic influences (he also cites Iranian cinema legends Abbas Kiastroiami and Sohrab Shahid-Saless as influences as well as other Winnipeg directors John Paizs and John Paskievich, among others. I am, of course, unfamiliar with any of these).

The climax of the film finds Matthew finally reaching his mother, only to learn a stranger has been taking care of her in the years since he's been away. There's an unspoken element, that there was distance between Matthew and his parents, and that in that distance someone else has filled the gap. Though not presented as "big drama" in the moment, there is something nakedly raw and emotional about this idea, that we can find ourselves more connected to strangers than our own family, and also in that disconnect we can lose ourselves.  

It seems 2026 is the year I invest more of my time in Canadian film. I really need to see Rankin's debut The Twentieth Century, and I need to do a filmography walk through of Maddin as well. 

---

3 Short Paragraphs (Or Not): Omni Loop

2024, Bernardo Britto (Jacqueline Argentine) -- download

I had every intention and expectation of doing this write-up as a Loopty Loo post, as the movie is, as the title suggests, about loops. But in watching, it is less about looping than it is about time travel, and it is less about time travel, as it is about living a life. And yet it does begin with the trope -- "Careful, " Zoya Lowe (Mary-Louise Parker, Weeds) says to the elderly lady about to sit on a bench at the rest home where Zoya's mother stays, just before a bird leaves a big plop of poo. "How did you know?" And you know what her answer is -- that she has lived this before, many times before. She's in a loop.

How did she get into the loop? When Zoya was 12 years old, she found a bottle of pills in a field. That bottle had her name on it. When she takes a pill, it sends her back five days. The pill bottle never empties. But now, decades later, it has had its consequences. Zoya has a black hole growing in her chest. These are her last five days, which she is living over and over. She wakes up in the hospital, she gets the news from her distraught but supportive family, and then they live, with her, for the next five days, until she has a nose bleed while blowing out candles on her 55th birthday cake, goes into the bathroom and takes the pill.

So, in some ways, its most definitely not a time loop movie. She isn't stuck, she doesn't have to find her way out. The way out is either living onward, or death. And yet we get to play with the tropes a wee bit. Zoya decides she doesn't want to die with regrets, nor just keep looping these same sad five days. And as fate would have it, she bumps into a young woman named Paula (Ayo Edebiri, The Bear) who is carrying a book on quantum mechanics that Zoya wrote. You see, Zoya is not just a woman going through time, but also a woman who spent a good part of her life studying time. That is, until she decided she would settle on living a life with a husband and child, and gave it all up. But bumping into Paula, literally, she finds a new path during those five days, and recruits Paula into unraveling the mystery of the pills, and their time travel abilities.

Except that's not what the movie is about, either. This movie is about the life Zoya chose over unraveling the mysteries of the universe. You see, Zoya has built a life on being brilliant, but is she? She admits she did so well on university tests because she knew the answers; time looping allows for that, quite easily. A professor accuses her of being lazy and unfocused and entitled. That's because she comes to knowledge by way of the answers, not the hard study, at first, I imagine. But eventually, given enough five day loops, she learned enough to write text books on the topic. But it seems she tired of that, and gave it up to become a mother and a wife. But now, in her final five days, she wonders if she regrets it.

This is a weird movie in a weird universe. When she is diagnosed, there is no, "How the fuck do you exist with a black hole growing in your chest?!?!?" The world isn't panicking, its not going to suck in everything in our solar system. It will just kill Zoya and doctors, despite saying they have never encountered it before, are calm. "Take her home, make her comfortable," they say. There is also a dying "last one-horned rhino in the world" and a plastic box containing The Nanoscopic Man, a man who was the subject of an experiment and is now shrinking, forever -- he is already molecular. His box is stored away in an aging, forgotten, professor's drawer. 

Zoya and Paul do end up spending many many MANY loops trying to figure out the power of the pills, but to no avail. The movie just breezes right past the challenges Zoya must be presented with in having to bring Paula up to speed on every previous iteration's experiments. Zoya hopes to break the five day timeframe, perhaps to go back far enough to choose a different life, but the more and more she loops, away from her family, focused only on the work with Paula, the more she comes to value the family time more than the expected benefits to cracking the code. Finally, she sees what she really wanted most out of life, and she had it.

Complete spoilers hereafter.

Zoya has always blown out those candles, seen the drops of the beginning nose bleed, but never opened the birthday presents her family have brought. Until that last "day", when she presents all her studies on time, and on the pills, to another new iteration of Paula, telling her to "proceed" with the work without her, for she knows Paula has her own very personal reasons to go back further than five days. And Zoya she goes home, opens the present, sees that she is going to be a grandmother, and they will name the little girl Zoya. She finally sees she has had a completely full life, and her regrets were silly. And the black hole sucks her in with a pop, and she's gone. No more loops, no more Zoya.

This is why I watch movies. Stories that make me think, touch on emotions, touch on ideas, leave me thinking long afterward. In some ways this was why this blog was created; to record those thoughts, and find rebuttal and/or furtherance. 

Finally, there is a toss away scene, one which makes a small comment on Loopty Loo's in that, each time Zoya pops a pill, she disappears, but the time loop continues. It is a reality, a time line, from which she has escaped but it doesn't go away. So in a way they are not loops at all, but a generation of new time lines in their multitude. I love that idea, something new for the sub-genre I love so.