Ava (2020) - Movie Review

I’ve been trying to make at least a modicum of effort to avoid actively handing over my money to individuals whose continued presence in the industry is problematic. Mel Gibson starred in three movies that made it to cinemas this year, and I only saw one of them because I was sent out on official detail for FilmInk. I avoided the other two because, even though I’ve been receptive in the past… I just don’t want to see my dosh used to fund whatever stupid shit he’s got lined up next. And under those circumstances, I shouldn’t even admit to having seen this feature, given its writing accredited to one Matthew Newton, a disgraced member of TV royalty over here with a history of domestic violence. And if he was attached to this in any other respect, like as an on-set producer or as director (which he was originally, but Tate Taylor was brought in to replace him early on) or any other position that would’ve put the women on-set in the firing line, I likely wouldn’t have bothered.

But I don’t see enough reason to disregard the hard work everyone else put into this off the back of his shitty history. Far as I know (and more than ever, I welcome being wrong about this), he won’t see as much return on this as he would otherwise, and considering it recently made its way to Ava, the filmmakers are likely trying to recoup their losses as best they can in light of what are likely justified boycotts based on Newton’s involvement. I’m bringing all this up now because it seems impossible to get into this without addressing the controversy in some fashion. But also to highlight how Newton’s contribution to this production (the script), in spite of how much he dominates the conversation around it, is easily the least interesting part of said production. And it’s not as if this film is particularly captivating to begin with.

Ma (2019) - Movie Review

 

Much like with Welcome To Marwen, we’re dealing with another film that was released theatrically over here, yet I personally see no evidence of it making it to theatres. The fact that there is more than one example of that this year, also from a rather high-profile background and in the midst of Disney's ultimate transformation into Omnicorp, is a bit concerning. At any rate, with its home video release, I can finally check out the latest from The Girl On The Train director Tate Taylor… and man, did I miss out not getting to see this on the big screen.

The Girl On The Train (2016) - Movie Review

After spending far longer than I was expecting to this year complaining about movie marketing, I finally get to talk about the positives of movie marketing. Specifically, what it is capable of telling studios. The oldest rule in the medium of entertainment is to give the audience what they want, and what we spend our money on confirms that this is a thing we like to see and wouldn’t mind seeing again. It’s the cornerstone for the franchise-heavy filmmaking mindset that Hollywood has made some comfy cash on in recent years (or decades, if we’re being honest).

I say all this because, with only a passing glimpse at this film’s marketing, it is clear that the grease in the production’s gears is the success of David Fincher’s Gone Girl from two years ago. People saw that film in droves, both critics and casuals alike, and I myself would love to see more of that kind of smart and intense thriller. I’ve admitted before to my own fascination with trickery and games of wits, and no film of the last several years did a better job in those two areas than Gone Girl. But that’s where the association gets a little dangerous: This film wants to be seen as another Gone Girl. But is it capable of fulfilling that role? Hell, removed from connections to any other film, is it capable of fulfilling its role as a movie?