You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Features’ category.


Just a man and a fish.

Serenity is a movie I liked more for what it tried to do than for the grace with which it accomplished it. I mean, it’s really not a graceful movie at all and that’s a big part of the reason why it got dumped in January and torn up by just about everyone who’s seen it.

But does it really deserve all the dismissive chuckling? Kind of. It’s so committed to its premise and parameters that it isn’t really in on the extent to which it’s hard to take seriously. There is a lot of bonkers in this movie. A boat load. But at the heart of it, there’s something else too.

I like the noir genre a lot and at its best, Serenity is a pretty good (sunny and sweat-soaked) rendition. It’s got a femme fatale, an ego-tripping criminal villain, and a hard-boiled seeker of truth at the center. Writer-Director Steven Knight is no stranger to crime stories with a healthy dose of noir. He’s better known for Peaky Blinders than for writing or directing movies (though he also has the very good Locke and Eastern Promises on his resume). So if that’s all this movie was going to be, I do think reactions would be different. Still, it’s not like what happens later erases this part of the film. It still works, for most of the running time, as a contemporary noir. But then it all gets really, really weird about halfway through. Liking this movie at all pretty much depends on whether you’re willing to take its weirdness for what it is, let alone meeting it on its own terms.

Read the rest of this entry »




Dudes, fire your agents.

Sometimes you have a couple of ideas and you want to mash them up and it seems like it’ll be cool. Then it turns out that it was a terrible idea. Just ask George Lucas about the Star Wars prequels, which tried to be space fantasy and an essay on the decay of democracy and rise of fascism (prescient but terrible). It maybe could have worked, I can almost see the movie(s) where it would have. Robin Hood is exactly like that. It wants to be a pseudo-medieval action movie and an essay on vaguely contemporary British politics (including wars abroad, wealth inequality, and anti-immigration sentiment). And again, I can almost see the movie that would have managed to make these ideas work together.

But this isn’t it.

There’s something like two-dozen movies about Robin Hood going back to fucking 1908. I’ve seen my fair share and this one is the worst of them all. Which is a feat considering it hasn’t even been 10 years since the last one and that one was pretty bad too.

Why is this one so bad? Well, for one thing it’s a rip-off of The Dark Knight. To a pretty stunning extent. But people have talked about that. More essential is that it’s functionally a superhero movie, but can’t decide whether it’s grim and gritty (like Nolan’s Batman films) or a more swash-buckling throwback. It kind of tries to be both, sometimes within the same scene, and the result is jarring at best. It’s also very, very stupid. And not in the fun way, where charm is either the result or the thing that gets it over. Robin Hood has no charm, just a bunch of poorly motivated set-pieces where the fairly competent action is too often ruined by over-the-top special effects and sequences over-edited and over-designed to the point where all cohesion is basically lost. The story is fundamentally confused about its own themes and sources of inspiration. Plus, the production design is just a mess. Read the rest of this entry »


I mean, it’s still kind of miraculous that this movie even happened.

Let’s get something out of the way first: Glass is bad. This isn’t going to be one of those apologia type reviews where I try to justify a poorly-executed, messy movie on behalf of its noble ideas, creative ambition, or whatever. Glass has some really solid moments and I’d even say the first half feels like it’s leading to a satisfying conclusion to what must be one of the most unlikely trilogies in cinematic history. Logistically, this movie is a complete anomaly since two studios had to share IP for it to even happen. Individual moments and scenes work well, and there’s a lot of fascinating junk hidden in the mess of it. Thing is, I don’t think it’s the stuff we are supposed to be interested in. So as usual, Shyamalan has made a fascinatingly bad movie. That’s not the worst thing that can happen. However, he also continues his long streak of not playing to his strengths and refusing to leave well enough alone. And I don’t mean that to say that this movie should never have been made. I mean letting a movie be a story strong enough to stand on its own and deliver themes and subtext by its own lights. Watching Glass is almost like dealing with a backseat driver, Shyamalan is always there over your shoulder or behind the screen to grab at that steering wheel. It’s like the guy can’t help himself.

Some context. I love Unbreakable and I did so from day one. That movie was under-seen when it was released but quickly found appreciation among its (possibly unintentional) target audience, if not mainstream moviegoers. It was a different time. Something as meta, deconstructive, and referential as Unbreakable probably seemed strange in an era before the tropes and textures of comic book superhero movies became commonplace. And like all good deconstruction, Unbreakable was able to make a case for the stuff in comic book superhero movies that is valuable in a more realistic context. Back then, 19 whole fucking years ago, comic books were still pretty fringe. 2000 was the same year that the so-so X-Men arrived as a new attempt to make comic book superhero movies palatable. While that one hasn’t aged well, it did launch an ensuing 19 years worth of X-Men and related movies that have a continuity, series of switch-backs, and retcons that are definitely worthy of their comic book origins on a structural level — if not exactly ever as high quality (with the notable exceptions of Logan and Deadpool) as anyone hoped for.

As for M. Night Shyamalan, it’s pretty much impossible for me to talk about this movie without spending about as much time talking about the dude who made it. It’s too personal a work to do otherwise. I consider myself a fan of his earlier work. That excludes his first two movies, Wide Awake and Praying with Anger as I’ve never seen them. When he broke out into Hollywood and mainstream success with Sixth Sense, I was too young to really see that movie or its maker in the grander context of cinema, but I knew it was special. Everybody did. Nowadays I tend to think it’s a bit overrated but that Unbreakable has definitely stood the test of time. I was a defender of Signs and The Village but really got off the train when Lady in the Water collided with it. Things were never really the same after that. I think a lot of us could relate to David Dunn, bewildered and disoriented like we’d alone survived the derailment that just kept going. For just about ten years now. A lot of people were hoping that Glass would be some kind of return to form. I even know a few people who totally believe it is. I disagree. I think it’s plagued by the same issues that were on display as early as Lady in the Water but in a slightly more cohesive and slightly less narcissistic package. But even that movie can stand alone as a story, I think. Shyamalan has always been overly engaged with his own celebrity, high on his own supply you might say. And starting with Lady in the Water there’s been a reflexive self-consciousness in his work that seems to keep manifesting as a plaintive cry to be taken seriously, to be some kind of game-changer, and for the meanie critics to just leave him alone. At least he had the good sense to make a character he doesn’t play the messiah this time around. Still found a way to stick himself in the movie, though, in a scene that everybody seems to agree is an indulgent waste of time.

This intro is running long but I’ll offer some more summary of my thoughts since that’s what I usually do. I think that Glass is a movie that says what it is all the way through, contriving and hand-holding and info-dumping its way to some semblance of meaning. There’s a long standing idea that art isn’t supposed to tell you how to think and feel about it, that real engagement relies on a less transmissive delivery mechanism. You’ll see people defending Glass from a literal position, with not much subtlety of thought, with direct quotes from it as a text, explaining away its narrative shortcomings by taking it all completely at face value. While this kind of literalism is actually pretty common in nerdy circles, it actively prevents or discourages a more sophisticated critical evaluation of a story. As poorly executed as this story is, it’s still fascinating enough to merit a better class of discourse then the same vapid repetition of its ideas that plague the movie’s dialogue.

At the risk of throwing too much shade on people who earnestly enjoyed Glass, I can’t help but fail to imagine the person who walks away from it satisfied. I’ve heard a few pretty good defenses of the movie by now, but I suspect that for most there’s a sunken cost issue here. Some maybe want to like Glass more than they actually do. Or maybe it’s just the current fixation on callback culture. If Glass is taken as roguish, it becomes a symbolic artifact for people who like just about anything that goes against “the grain”, even if “the grain” is wholly a product of their imagination. If you liked the movie and this doesn’t sound like you, fair enough. Take the above with a grain of salt. Still, I think it’s likely that many will revisit the movie and find themselves bored as they try to plumb its nonexistent depths, just as I think that I’ll revisit it and feel the same but only because the shock value of its twists can only work once and I will already know that the other shoe is about to drop.

Read the rest of this entry »


A strange mascot for a strange movie.

Lowlife is a couple years old now, but I missed it when it came out and was getting its share of buzz from some corners of the movie critic sphere. It’s a movie that I think is fairly off-putting at first but eventually becomes something not only interesting, but maybe overdue. See, after Grindhouse, it felt like there’d be a slew of films trying to capture some of that aesthetic and tone. I mean, there were some. Even some good ones, like the feature version of Hobo with a Shotgun. But they were rare and anyone hoping for a kind of revamping or update on the aesthetic has probably been mostly disappointed. Lowlife fulfills some of that exact potential.

One of the ways it does that is by playing against the shallow thrills and over the top cartoonishness that you’d expect from “this type” of movie. Even this movie itself, which invites you to think a lot less of it than it deserves. It pretend to be over the top when it’s really pretty grounded. It pretends its characters are cartoons when really they are well-drawn human beings. It’s pretty convincing about it, too. Like, I would forgive people who couldn’t quite follow the depth it eventually gains because it might seem kind of incongruous with the first third or so. That said, it’s exactly that depth which makes Lowlife a kick-ass movie. Read the rest of this entry »


Space dragons? Space cannons!

The lingering question of Kin is how they got all these name actors to do the movie. It had a modest budget, to the tune of $30mil, yet features some surprising performers. Let alone a score from Mogwai. The question isn’t raised by it being a terrible movie. In spite of the dismal reviews and it not doing so well at the box office, Kin is surprisingly good if you don’t expect too much ambition from it.

The two things to know about it going in are that it is basically a love letter to James Cameron, especially the Terminator films, and that it can sometimes feel like the two stories its trying to tell are too far apart. I think it’s a fair criticism to say that the science fiction elements of Kin can sometimes feel like an afterthought. That said, it feels true to the kinds of movies that it most resembles. Movies from the 80’s that told fairly humble stories with other-wordly fun at the margins. Mileage will vary big time on whether you still care by the time the movie lets the cat fully out of the bag. Honestly, Kin is the kind of movie I would have grown up watching and loving, even if I realized later that good is the best it ever gets. It’s a story about brothers made by a couple of brothers so if that’s your cup of tea, this movie might not feel as under-cooked as it will to those primarily here for the gizmos and doodads.


Read the rest of this entry »


A movie about wearing power armor and fighting space dragons. No, I am not kidding you.

Beyond White Space is part of the recent wave of low-budget science fiction films that seem to pop up out of the earth like beautiful mutant plants. They are often only passably written and acted, but usually feature some pretty cool concepts, effects, and specific scenes. Beyond White Space is typical in those regards, with the kind of hook that is plenty for huge nerds but probably not all that enticing for everyone else.

At its best, it’s a cool take on Moby Dick (and not even the weirdest I’ve seen) that features the 80’s retro-futuristic aesthetic of 70’s and 80’s space movies (particularly Alien or Silent Running). At worst it’s a half-baked collision of ideas and situations that don’t quite work or come to a particularly cohesive whole. It’s got a lot of chaff, in other words, but the effects and concepts are impressive enough to help a viewer like me get over the jank. It frequently looks and feels like director Ken Locsmandi and his crew get stuff about cool science fiction technology that most Hollywood movies ignore. “Power Armor” is a classic slice of tropes and iconography that isn’t featured often in movies. Same with giant semi-mystical space fauna! Read the rest of this entry »

In 2017 my Top 15 list was a little lackluster because WordPress ate it. Gone were the colorful commentaries and pictures I like to include with my rankings. Instead, I left a boring straight list and a recording on soundcloud of me saying the things I had written.

More or less.

This year, no such issues. Knock on wood. But I am writing this in 2019 so let’s call it the first test to see if this year will be way less shitty off the hop. I wrote and published last year’s list on January 2nd and the incredible frustration of losing my work should have been an augury written in the guts of an indifferent internet. For much of 2018, I wasn’t really going to the theater or seeing movies as they came out. I was broke, a bit listless, and focusing a lot on other hobbies and interests (for example, I wrote half a dozen short stories last year). But I did miss writing this stuff and I wound up becoming a regular contributor at a couple of months ago on the strength of the reviews I have been writing for over ten years. My new stuff is available over there, where I contribute one review per week. It’s a different style so I encourage you to check them out especially if you’re not big on spoilers or don’t have the time to read thousands of words of analysis about superhero movies or whatever. That said, I will also keep writing longer form reviews on this blog, though I won’t be reviewing the same movie twice. If you find me on twitter @evantoddmccoy, you can see links to new entries here and links to reviews and other articles on

Oh, and there’s also the podcast! Sirr’s Movies is a new podcast where I’m the co-host with Sterling Woods, owner and editor of We’re still figuring out our flow and format, but there are a few episodes out including an end of the year wrap up. That episode has my usual lists cut down to 5 Worst and a Top 10 instead of the usual 15. You can listen to it here. The podcast is available on itunes, spotify, and many other platforms so please follow that if you’re interested in more in-depth discussion of movies I’m seeing.

Without further ado, let me offer the usual disclaimer: I acknowledge that this is a subjective list. Trying to objectively compare the quality of any of these movies, one to the next, is impossible. It’s apples and oranges. You can like one movie more than another easily enough, but it’s far more difficult to make a case for why one is better whether you like it more or not. For me, writing film criticism has most often been about trying to get at those qualitative things that exist in spite of personal preferences, it’s about trying to be objective in an arena that is usually assumed to be subjective. It’s about not conflating what I like with what is good, to the fullest extent possible. My Top 15 lists are not about these things. They are about ranking my favorite movies, about summarizing the year, and about taking stock.

Read the rest of this entry »

Good movies, bad movies, endless movies from the endless year. 2017 was a shorter year, wasn’t it?  Here is the list from that long ago time.

Another new thing this year is that I’ve joined a podcast recently and since the timing worked out, we just posted a year-end wrap up episode that will include me talking about the bottom five in this list. If you don’t like reading or just want to check if I am consistent between mediums, give that a listen here.

As always, my list is half a “most disappointing” list and half a “these movies are truly awful” list. I could have included stuff like Netflix’s The Open House or teen horror bullshit like Truth or Dare but nah, wouldn’t even really be fun to talk about those. I also would have included the abysmal A Wrinkle in Time if I’d seen it in time, but so it goes. This was a year with some surprises, though, including that this is the first year in a great many where there was a Transformers movie but I didn’t include it on the list. Not only was 2018 an obnoxiously long year, it was also pretty weird. There were a lot of great films, but also a lot of terrible ones. I think this is the first year in a while where I made cuts to my Worst list. That doesn’t usually happen and as much as I enjoy tearing into a bad movie, I’m usually relieved about not having to consider extending the Worsts to a 15 list. There have even been years where I’ve considered dropping this list altogether, but I think it’s still too fun.

It’s also worth noting that several of the movies on this list are Netflix releases. I don’t really subscribe to the notion that Netflix has a lot of editorial concern about the kinds of movies it releases. I don’t think there’s any such thing as a “Netflix” movie. They’re just a platform that, due to the simplification of attribution in critical responses, people treat like a conventional studio or publisher. They’re more like a venue, so adding their role in the context of a release’s evaluation is like basing a review partially on seeing something at a Cineplex vs. a Landmark. Most critics don’t bother talking about venue for good reason. So while I’m noting that there are a lot of Netflix releases on this list, I don’t think it means a whole lot. I had twice as many in the running for my Top 15.


Read the rest of this entry »

I actually really enjoyed writing that list of games for last year. Enough that I decided to do it again and will likely do it next year as well. I even played more “current” games this year than I did last year. Not quite enough to go to a Top 10 list, but oh well.

I want to give a special shoutout to one game not on this list, the mobile game Florence which is a unique and really affordable (and really short) interactive narrative game. It’s kind of like playing a graphic novel but the choices in terms of its minimalist storytelling and minimalist interactivity draw attention to themselves in really interesting ways that I’m sure will inspire a whole genre of copycats. I’m not including it in my Top 5 only because I finished it in a day only a day ago and it’s a mobile game so I’m not sure I should really count it. If I was going to, this would be the game to start with though.

Other disclaimers? Well, there’s always the fact that some games are considered “new releases” on particular consoles which can be a problem for a list like this in that I’m not even sure if I failed to include certain games I technically could due to the platform I played them on. And, as always, there’s the disclaimer that this list is subjective and more about me categorizing my favorites than trying to make a case for why everybody’s list should look like mine (which they should not and do not).

Remember, folks: this shit is just for fun. Read the rest of this entry »

Hey readers. Those of you still out there! Turns out this thing isn’t actually abandoned. I totally forgive you if you thought it was.

I’ve been on hiatus with this blog for a long, long time. Maybe the longest stretch ever. I do want to bring it back though. I’ve recently had some cool things happen that have reignited my interest in talking excessively about movies.

In the summer time, I just seldom felt like writing reviews. I had this sense that I just didn’t have anything to offer to the discourses around the movies I was seeing. I also didn’t make it to the theater all that often and so I would have been writing reviews fairly late and I guess I told myself that was kind of pointless.

In September, I got really into EVA foam prop-making in preparation for an ambitious Halloween costume project. In a few weeks of youtube videos and experiments, I taught myself how to work with EVA foam. I worked pretty hard on this stuff for about 8 weeks and didn’t have time for much else. I recorded the results of the project on a new blog where I’ll probably be putting all my cosplay/prop/maker stuff from now on.  The blog can be found here.

In October I responded to an ad looking for writers for a new media and culture website. I answered for the movie reviewer position, which started as some pilot reviews and turned into weekly contributions within that month. I am now a regular contributor at and have been writing reviews there for a couple of months now. The reviews are shorter, more descriptive than analytical, and have no spoilers. A very different style of movie criticism for me but a welcome challenge. I also happen to be seeing more movies and I can’t review all of them for the site so it seems like I should use my blog for that, doesn’t it?

The last thing is that a couple of weeks ago I was asked by’s owner and editor, Sterling Woods, to co-host a podcast he was tinkering with. We’re still figuring out what the podcast is going to be, but you can find episodes (only one with me so far, but another that’ll be out within the week) basically anywhere podcasts are found. Just search Sirr’s Movies. The current format is a brief discussion on what we’ve seen lately followed by an in-depth discussion of a recent movie that is broken up into non-spoiler and spoiler sections. The episode out now covers Spider-man: Into the Spider-verse and the upcoming one from this week covers Aquaman.

Next week, we’ll be doing an end of year round-up listing off some of our least and most favorite movies. Those who follow this blog know that I’ve been doing that every year for a long time. Almost ten years if you count stuff I was doing before wordpress. I’ll be posting my usual Worst 10 and Top 15 list to this blog, but I’ll probably have a more limited list on the podcast. Those who enjoyed last year’s lists (where I recorded myself doing my spiel on each movie) might want to give that a listen. It’ll be out sometime around January 1st.

So a lot of exciting stuff is going on. I also may have some other projects happening that I can’t talk about yet. I’m not super active on twitter, but if you want to reach out you can find me @evantoddmccoy



Previous Posts

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 101 other followers