Weekend Watch - The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare offers a solid theatrical experience with some decent action sequences and fun characters that just falls short due to an underwhelming climax and a profound lack of character development, leaning harder on its action and espionage than the characters themselves.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is Guy Ritchie’s latest action film that opened this week in theaters, The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare. The film is based on the now declassified British World War II Operation Postmaster and stars Henry Cavill, Alan Ritchson, Alex Pettyfer, Eiza González, Babs Olusanmokun, Cary Elwes, Hero Fiennes Tiffin, Henry Golding, Rory Kinnear, Til Schweiger, Freddie Fox, and Danny Sapani as the various historical characters involved in the story. It has opened, like most of Ritchie’s latest films, to mixed reviews from critics and a generally positive audience reception. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: C-; with good action and actors that you can tell are enjoying themselves, you can’t really say that this is a bad movie, just a bit underwhelming.
Should you Watch This Film? If this was a film you were already interested in seeing, I’d go a head and see it in theaters, but if you haven’t heard about it or weren’t intrigued by it, you’re totally fine skipping it.
Why?
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare manages to tell a fresh story about a period of history that feels so overdone in cinema and does it with solid action and some fun actors. I think Ritchie’s desire to be true to the historicity of the events, while admirable, weakens the film’s action sensibilities, but it’s not trying to be prestige war picture, so some of the decisions don’t make perfect sense. It’s definitely a film that pleases its target audience (TNT dads) well enough but that doesn’t hit any of its notes perfectly enough to have any kind of staying power, unlike Ritchie’s early films.
The film has the cast of a bigtime, hard hitting action film with the plot of a more historical film. It contains three major action sequences, which should build on each other, getting more intense with each successive scene, instead peaking in the middle. The opening sequence of the film grips you immediately with Ritchie’s typical blend of humor, action, and tension, well-played by Cavill and Ritchson. The film then cuts to its flashback for exposition, explaining the details of the operation and giving us a decent idea of who each of the characters are before getting back to the next, and best, action sequence in the film – an intense breakout from a Nazi prison camp that really showcases the potential of the film that it unfortunately never really realizes again. The back half of the film is devoted to complicating the plan, introducing new and decently interesting side characters, like Danny Sapani’s Kambili Kalu and the villain Heinrich Luhr, played menacingly enough by Til Schweiger. Eiza González and Babs Olusanmokun certainly have the most to do in this portion of the film, playing the intelligence operatives who consistently have to pass information back to the British to keep Cavill’s March-Phillips and company apprised of the current state of affairs. All of this culminates in what should be a climactic action sequence of taking over a ship, escaping an island, and sabotaging a U-boat refueling depot that underwhelms at almost every turn compared to the rest of the film’s action sequences. It leaves the audience with a sense that they’ve just been watching an Assassin’s Creed film but with guns with the sheer number of faceless stealth kills and lack of climactic showdowns where the heroes’ success is ever in doubt.
To its credit, the film is decently produced and well-cast. The film’s sound is the standout of the technical department with every scene drawing you in at the right moments through the sound engineers’ creative use of silence, cacophony, and focused sound effects, keeping everything, even the slower parts moving at an acceptable pace. By having all these World War II British soldiers and operatives played by some of the most fun people in the industry at the moment, they keep you invested in the characters even with the film’s minimal character development. González and Olusanmokun do their parts well as the on-the-ground operatives, looking the part and playing well off of each other in the process. Of the “active” group, Pettyfer feels the most out of place, mostly because his character has to be the group’s mastermind and straight man, so he doesn’t have much to do besides stand there looking good and come up with ideas. Hero Fiennes Tiffin is a surprisingly welcome addition to the cast, playing Irishman Henry Hayes as the fun young guy along for the ride. Henry Golding is the requisite unhinged explosives expert, which somehow works for him, as he gets to show off both his action and comedy skills. Cavill, as the team’s leader, feels like the inspiration for James Bond that Ritchie wanted him to be, just coming across as the coolest dude you’ve ever seen in an action movie (until you see what the guy actually looked like). But for me, and most of the audience in my theater, it was Ritchson as the Danish expat Anders Lassen who stole the show at every turn, giving the funniest and most physically impressive performance of the film (this film combined with his recent slew of tweets might finally get me to check out Reacher).
The Ministry of Ungentlemanly Warfare offers a solid theatrical experience with some decent action sequences and fun characters that just falls short due to an underwhelming climax and a profound lack of character development, leaning harder on its action and espionage than the characters themselves. It’s inoffensive and fun but not as fun as it could be. The story is interesting enough to feel fresh in the context of World War II, and the technique of its telling offers some solid examples of production design. If you wanted to see this film before reading this review, I think you’ll still have a solid time watching it. If you didn’t, you’re not going to miss something that changes your life. It’s a film that does just what it says it’s going to, leaving a lot on the table that could’ve made it better without ever really misstepping into “bad” territory.
Weekend Watch - Fallout
So much of Fallout’s highs and lows go hand in hand, with leading characters being hit or miss in their writing and how compelling their stories are, worldbuilding that doesn’t go too hard in its lore dumping but does require some suspension of disbelief, and action sequences that thrill but could feel excessive to some audiences.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating, review, and recommendation. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is the latest video game to television adaptation from Amazon – Fallout, based in the world of the highly successful video game series from Interplay and Bethesda. The show, set in a postapocalyptic, retrofuturistic version of our own world, takes place 219 years after a massive nuclear war and follows a menagerie of characters who are figuring out how best to survive in the new wild west that is the bombed out west coast. It stars Ella Purnell as vault dweller Lucy MacLean, Aaron Moten as Brotherhood of Steel Squire Maximus, Walton Goggins as mutated former Hollywood star Cooper Howard, and Moises Arias as Lucy’s brother Norm MacLean in addition to a roster of recognizable cameos and B-list actors filling out the rest of the cast. The show premiered on Amazon Prime Video last Wednesday evening and has quickly become a hit with both critics and audiences. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: B+, it’s not a perfect show, but it captures the spirit of the games well without alienating potential new audiences with too much overreliance on lore and references.
Should you Watch This Show? It depends on what you’re looking for in a show. If you want gory, occasionally goofy, action with just enough heart and topical discussion of corporate greed and government infighting, this’ll be right up your alley. If not, I don’t know that the characters and world have enough to offer everyone to make it a universally lovable show.
Why?
So much of Fallout’s highs and lows go hand in hand, with leading characters being hit or miss in their writing and how compelling their stories are, worldbuilding that doesn’t go too hard in its lore dumping but does require some suspension of disbelief, and action sequences that thrill but could feel excessive to some audiences. It captures the contemporary spirit of the latest Fallout games, embracing its kitschy 1950s meets wild west meets futuristic dystopian aesthetic and themes in every sequence. The music, production design, costumes, makeup, and visual effects (mostly) hold up really well and deliver what you’d want in a series based on these video games. They also don’t try to cater too intensely to the fans of the games that newcomers will be totally lost, which really helped my wife and me get into it from the jump – I have played probably ten hours combined of Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas, and she had no interaction with the brand before starting the show. I will say that I’m not sure if it offers enough to keep people who aren’t interested in the world and themes of the games super invested (i.e., this isn’t going to suddenly become your parents’ and grandparents’ favorite show), but it’s a fun one for its target audience of late teens to 40-somethings.
As far as the show’s story goes, I’m not going to get too into it here to avoid spoilers, but I will say that they’ve done a good job with their characters (mostly). It’s really fun to see Moises Arias in a well-reviewed piece of media that’s not aiming for the YA audience, and his character has a surprisingly engaging subplot that allows him to flex some of his more serious chops without losing his snarky, jaded humor either. Ella Purnell shines as the series’ lead, playing the fish-out-of-water archetype so well as she slowly assimilates to the world outside of the vault where she was raised, serving as both audience proxy and compelling heroine at the same time. Lucy’s a really fun lead character for the modern era, and Purnell plays her well. So many side characters have such well-fleshed-out stories and characterizations that I don’t have time to go into all of them here, but it really does give the show that sense of being lived in that the best open-world video games seek to capture, and I’d argue that the combination of great casting and writing accomplish that even more so here. The true star of the show, though, is Walton Goggins, whose gunslinging “ghoul” is simultaneously the coolest and most loathsome antihero we’ve seen in a long time, especially in the world of sci-fi/action media. He gets to do a lot in both the present and in flashbacks, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see him contend for an Emmy before it’s all said and done. The one character that I have some issues with is Aaron Moten’s Maximus. Moten does a good job of delivering the dialogue and playing up the character with his flaws and motivations. It’s just that the show takes way too long to flesh out his motivations, and in the time they take doing that, Maximus comes across as inexplicably incompetent, vaguely whiny, and generally not likable enough to be the secondary protagonist that they want him to be by the time we get to the back half of the season. I have faith that he’ll improve as a character in the show’s next season (hopefully), but his parts are definitely the weakest and slowest in this season – again, at no fault of Moten’s.
Fallout manages to offer audiences an original story, fun world, faithful game adaptation, memorable characters, and strong performances in its retrofuturistic packaging, sure to please fans both old and new even if its story occasionally lags and it doesn’t necessarily have that universal charm needed to snag some of the older audiences. It’s so much better than I had any reason to expect, and I look forward to it getting that second season. You can currently watch this show on Amazon Prime Video, and I’d encourage you to do so.
Weekend Watch - Expend4bles
Odd but predictable story choices, fun but mostly basic action sequences, and a marked lack of character development for anyone leaves Expend4bles as a disappointing and barely entertaining offering in theaters this weekend.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch where each week we take a look at a new piece of film or television media and give it a rating and review. This week’s topic, as voted by the blog’s Instagram followers, is the latest in Sylvester Stallone’s action franchise, Expend4bles. The fourth film in the series sees the return of Stallone as Barney, the leader of the titular team of military contractors, as well as Jason Statham, Dolph Lundgren, and Randy Couture in reprisals of their respective roles. They are joined this time by Megan Fox (Transformers), 50 Cent (Escape Plan), Tony Jaa (Ong Bak), Jacob Scipio (Bad Boys for Life), and Levy Tran (The First Purge) as additions to the team, Andy Garcia as the team’s CIA handler, and Iko Uwais of The Raid films as the new villain – Rahmat. The film opened in theaters this weekend. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: D+, this film is probably a C+ in its best form, but a truly convoluted story and more misogyny than you’d even expect weigh it down.
Review:
Expend4bles offers more of the same fare that we’ve all come to expect of the franchise – classic action heroes getting to show off that they’ve still got it alongside some decently well-known up and comers while they try to stop the bad guy from doing something that threatens world peace (or whatever). In this particular iteration, Statham is given more of a leading role, while Stallone takes a backseat, which works for the pacing of most of the film’s action sequences, but leaves it lacking a bit of the goofy heart that has made the films as successful as they have been (at least financially), since Statham is stuck delivering his one-liners to dead (or soon-to-be-dead) henchmen more often than his aging associates.
The mission is another odd point for the film, considering the absence of Stallone’s Barney for much of its runtime. The Expendables are called on by the CIA to infiltrate a hijacked cargo ship that is carrying a nuclear device and stop it from entering Russian waters while also uncovering the identity of a shadowy figure from Barney’s days before the Expendables and bringing him to justice. That second point is what makes Barney’s absence from most of the back portion of the film so odd. The character motivations of everyone on the team not played by Stallone end up becoming fairly shallow when he dips out. It ends up becoming a film about watching people do their jobs, sometimes with some entertaining action sequences and decent one-liners.
The biggest saving grace that keeps Expend4bles watchable, like the other films in its franchise, are the action sequences. An opening villain takeover of a desert compound gets things going, showcasing Iko Uwais’s capabilities as a fighter for any unfamiliar with his other work as he dominates the grunts that try to come between him and his prize. The chase with military-grade ATVs, a cargo plane, trucks, and a Humvee makes for a solid wrap-up to the first act – nothing overly creative, but it still works to establish characters, conflict, and keep the audience engaged. Statham then gets his own infiltration sequence that works really well in the second act before being elevated by the addition of Tony Jaa and plenty of hand-to-hand combat for both of them. The big team-up moment is fine with enough gunplay and knife play to keep those hungry for action happy, even if the stakes feel fairly basic and understated. The final showdown is probably the weakest in terms of actual action, focusing more on reveals, elevating the stakes, and offering the audience payoffs, which leaves it somewhat underwhelming after a series of solid fights up to that point.
Odd but predictable story choices, fun but mostly basic action sequences, and a marked lack of character development for anyone leaves Expend4bles as a disappointing and barely entertaining offering in theaters this weekend. This probably shouldn't come as a huge surprise to anyone who’s seen the first three films, but it would’ve been nice to see it improve just a bit in the direction of its second installment, which remains a decent B-level action flick, rather than the predictability and underperformance of the first and third installments. Nonetheless, here we are coming into the last week of September, so hopefully, we’ll be kicking back into gear in the next few weeks with awards season rolling ever closer.
Weekend Watch - House of the Dragon - Pilot Episode
House of the Dragon’s pilot episode does a great job of filling the shoes that its fans expected it to fill with a combination of high production value and memorable characters.
Welcome back to the Weekend Watch, where each week we take a new piece of film or television media, as voted by the followers on the blog’s Instagram, and give it a rating, review, and watch recommendation. This week’s subject is the pilot episode of HBO’s House of the Dragon, a prequel series to the wildly successful Game of Thrones, set 172 years before Robert’s Rebellion, the event that directly set up the events of Thrones. The pilot stars Matt Smith, Paddy Considine, Rhys Ifans, Steve Toussaint, Fabien Frankel, Milly Alcock, Emily Carey, and Graham McTavish, among others, as major players in this family drama set in the land of Westeros. The viewership numbers for the pilot episode were apparently the highest of any HBO premier in recent history, allowing the show’s second season to already receive the green light before its second episode has released. Let’s get into it.
Letter Grade: B+/A-; there’s a lot to love and a lot of potential in this pilot, but I want to wait before I’m fully sold on the show.
Should you Watch This Show? If you were a fan of Game of Thrones, absolutely. If you like Succession or other family dramas and also want something with a more medieval/fantasy bent, absolutely. If those things are not your cup of tea, you’re probably okay skipping this one.
Why?
House of the Dragon comes out swinging with a pilot episode full of intrigue, dragons, violence, big characters, and difficult content. After a brief, possibly unnecessary, prologue, the show flashes to its present with a dragon front and center, flying over King’s Landing – a shot that might be slightly triggering to certain fans of Game of Thrones who were less than satisfied with that show’s final season. Immediately, the show’s production value (much higher than most comparable shows) becomes apparent, with some pretty good CGI work, excellent set pieces, and decent costume and makeup design (some of the wigs look a little more wig-ish than others). The characters, whose names might be a bit more difficult to pronounce/remember than Ned, Jon, or Jaime, still stand out as individuals, particularly Matt Smith’s villain(?) Daemon Targaryen, Fabien Frankel’s hot, young nobody Criston Cole, and Milly Alcock’s young heroine Rhaenyra Targaryen. Smith embodies a combination of characteristics reminiscent of some of Thrones’s most iconic villains – the creeping menace of Ramsay Bolton and the entitled violence of Joffrey Baratheon – I’m intrigued to see where they take his character as the show progresses. Frankel’s simple charm combined with his character’s skill on a battlefield make him a potentially great tragic hero, alongside Robb Stark or Jon Snow or Oberyn Martell from the original show. Alcock brings much of the charm of a young Arya Stark and combines it with the tact of Margaery Tyrell to become the show’s new protagonist (at least at this point), having to walk the complex minefield that is the political state of Westeros. If we’re being honest, my two biggest concerns going forward with the show are its inevitable time jump, which has already been teased, as both Rhaenyra and her friend Alicent Hightower are portrayed by different actresses later on in the season, and its lack of a fully likable character (a Tyrion Lannister). Time jumps in the middle of a show’s inaugural season make me considerably nervous, as audiences don’t always react super well to a change in actor, particularly in shows with character lists as lengthy as House of the Dragon’s. I also know that you shouldn’t compare two shows when doing a review, but it’s hard not to with Dragon and Thrones, especially with the knowledge of how the original ended. The surprise deaths and complex political games will only take a show so far if it doesn’t have an almost universally beloved secondary protagonist. Overall, House of the Dragon’s pilot episode does a great job of filling the shoes that its fans expected it to fill with a combination of high production value and memorable characters; we’ll see where it all ends up as the season progresses, but there’s a lot here to be optimistic about in HBO’s return to Westeros. The first episode is available on HBO Max if you missed its premier, and the second episode drops on Sunday night on HBO and HBO Max simultaneously.