Havoc. Decades ago there were cinema films and there were 'made for tv' films, of inferior quality and neatly put together to fit between ad breaks. Occasionally one wormed its way into a theatrical release, but that was rare - by their very nature they just weren't in the same league as proper cinema. They knew their place. Now they're made for streaming, and for people to watch on phones, or have on in the background. Havoc belongs to a growing heap of barrel-bottom scrapers that are determined to be as digital as possible, to the extent of not even taking a film crew out of doors. I hate this sort of... I can't even call them films, they are screensavers. In the 20 minutes I lasted I didn't see a single exterior shot that wasn't greenscreened or completely cgi - and neither done well. And it was ugly as hell, even without the fake film grain. Edited abysmally. This isn't direction, it's just outlining to the software guys (or probably AI) what you want. Topped off by Tom Hardy as Rocky Balboa's slightly dimmer brother, without the charisma. With each new 'Netflix Original' release, it's becoming the byword for complete tripe.

Mickey 17. I didn't like this much either. Pattinson was good but it just bored me, and Collette was ghastly.

The Substance. driver8, I'm gladder than I can say that you didn't write this film.

Posted by: @wowbagger

↑

The Substance. driver8, I'm gladder than I can say that you didn't write this film.

hehe ... hey, wadda ya mean ? 😄 You actually liked the last 20 mins ? My alt-version FTW !

Your version is the one that scared studio execs come up with after negative test screenings. So yes, I love the last 20 mins! 😉 

Champions (Netflix). The US version of a Spanish "original". Woody Harrelson playing a basketball coach forced to work with an underdog team. You'll have seen it all before, but it's played well and passed its 2 hours quicker than expected. I'd recommend for an easygoing evening. Sometimes a retelling of a classic story is good enough.

And Havoc, yeah I'd forgotten about the ridiculous far too close-up shots of the action at the start. That did get better as it went on, but the film didn't. You should have trusted me and saved yourself the 20 minutes of your life 😀

Mrs driver was out, so I managed to squeeze in a horror-ish double-bill, with short runtimes. Both are recommended as something a bit different, but best to go in completely blind (do not watch the trailers!)

Strange Darling - reminded me of 80s horror in styling and tone, it could be Tarantino's 'lost' film. Some gruelling scenes (aggression & violence rather than gore - I'm getting old). Gritty, darkly intimate, realistic acting played straight. One of the few films I've seen where out-of-sequence editing really works to unpeel the story. 7/10

Companion - I had no idea what to expect, and even comparing it to [censored] would be a mild spoiler. It's an enjoyably fresh comedy horror-lite that gallops along, despite a couple of glaring plot holes (and the all-too-common 'keep watching' spoiler right at the start... why ??). 7/10

I enjoyed Strange Darling - though I had to stick with it as I found the opening scenes rather dull; it really doesn't get good till later. So-so on Companion though - it was okay but I'm not sold on Jack Quaid as a film lead, I find him very much a tv/streaming actor who goes for the 'cheeky charm' angle but is just mildly irritating (with a name that suggests a maverick cop played by Steven Seagal).