Dub’s Take: Madame Web

A spoiler-free mini movie review.


“Madame Web” is way more watchable than what has been suggested. Omitting the lack of hype, subdued marketing, and languorous comments from its lead star, the movie is mindless, low-impact entertainment, thankfully devoid of any Marvel movie baggage, and anchored by a solid leading lady who has nothing to be ashamed of.

To casual viewers, director SJ Clarkson – a TV veteran whom this is their first major feature – may seem like they’re playing the filmmaking side of things too safe, but I found the frame mercifully non-convoluted with the excess texture that drags most modern superhero movies down for me. In place of your effects-laden Marvel “extravaganza”, Madame Web’s shot structure & editing suggest themes of time & perspective in a refreshingly grounded, fluid, Mike Figgis-esque way (except perhaps including more single CCTV shots). All I was really left wanting was less cutting to the reaction, rather than letting the movement breathe, in the action scenes.

The obvious difference of opinion will be over Dakota Johnson’s insouciant performance. In the Cineplex pre-show, she says she took the role because she was interested in the idea of a woman “whose superpower is her mind.” Johnson’s last big gig was the “Fifty Shades” trilogy, and Cassandra Webb is another empowering role ripe for a feminist performer to tackle. Here, with her strong, self-sufficient interpretation – and looking good with her long, dark hair, red leather jacket, and Levis – Johnson is poised to become some little girl’s role model and a pre-pubescent male comic book film fan’s first female fantasy.

The film is nimbly paced and ends at the perfect point, except perhaps by five minutes, with an epilogue that eludes logic. Sony’s live-action Spider-verse expansion might not happen if Madame Web doesn’t gain more traction through streaming, but the climax isn’t clear enough to foreshadow everything the film throws at us visually in that final scene. It looks ridiculous, but is probably comic-book accurate.

4 out of 5

Poster sourced from impawards.com. What do you think? Was Johnson the right casting choice, or did Cassie need to be played by someone with more range? What about Emma Roberts? Considering her minor supporting role here, does an alternate timeline exist where Roberts & Johnson switch characters? Or are you one of the millions on the bandwagon ragging on the poor movie at the moment and you think I must have some ulterior motive for a positive review? Let me know in the comments below!

Dub’s Take: Argylle

A spoiler-free mini movie review.


In an age of debating whether movie studios like Warner have the moral right to destroy unreleased films like their “Coyote vs. Acme” and “Batgirl”, here we have “Argylle”: a movie that didn’t need to be made at all.

Director Matthew Vaughn also helmed all three “Kingsman” movies. Both Kingsman 1 & 3 (“The King’s Man”) were fun and non-conformist, with well-textured characters and believable dialogue that injected some juj into their otherwise-boilerplate spy-caper stories. And where Kingsman 1 leaned towards comedy, Kingsman 3 was effectively dramatic. The reason that absurdist humour in Kingsman 1 and those unexpected tragic beats in 3 worked so well was because the movies were good and had earned your disbelief.

Vaughn is obviously capable, so it’s perplexing that Argylle inspires no audience empathy. Its narrative coalescence is predictable & uninspired. Its special effects are functionally on the level of a television pilot. The all-star cast – from Sam Rockwell to Bryan Cranston to Catherine O’Hara – does exactly what you expect them to with neither subtlety nor relish. And, no surprise, it’s too long, with a final third that introduces an assembly line of misdirection that ends with a dance number, all of which plays like it was written during an endless night of bong tokes.

It is these workmanlike qualities that suggest everyone on Argylle was just doing it for the money: it’s exactly what you expect and nothing more. Vaughn made an inoffensive “Kingsman for Girls”, which will serve its purpose as disposable entertainment for its audience and as a tax write off for its executives. The actors knew that no one was winning any awards: they all showed up with their lines memorized (we hope), did their job, and went home. You will guess all the twists. Your partner will laugh at the cat. And there’s so much leg n’ boob from Bryce Howard & Dua Lipa that you can see what they had for breakfast.

1.5 out of 5

Poster sourced from impawards.com. What do you think? Did this review come across a little too “Red Letter Media”? Where was the cat’s gas mask in the finale? Is that like the “lorem ipsum” being left in the “Last of Us Part 2” PS5 remaster? Do you feel that there is a lack of attention-to-detail in these contemporary corporate-led media releases when there needs to be more scrutiny? Do you see that box below? Leave a comment!

Dub’s Take: The Beekeeper

A spoiler-free mini movie review.


There is something to be said for texture. You could have the most formulaic theme – like “the ex-super-soldier with a heart of gold” – and innovate it with unconventional dialogue, design, and direction, so long as it’s in service to the movie at-large. Screenwriter Kurt Wimmer’s latest crucible has so much texture that it’s a deliriously overcomplicated melting pot, with flavours of your January-variety Jason Statham release, a pseudo-political conspiracy thriller, a cautionary tale on fake virus alerts (really), and a parable about dispirited parenting, all under high-concept control from David Ayer.

The film derives the majority of its thrills from tense scenes of idiots in rooms minimizing the shit-storm they’re in with Statham’s anonymous vigilante. Ayer convincingly propulses the plot in these ‘quiet’ moments, and “Hunger Games” alum Josh Hutcherson puts his best foot forward as the film’s primary antagonist.

But we’re here for the boom-boom – as showcased in the film’s persuasive trailers, where Statham’s “1 2 3” gassing initially concluded that “The Beekeeper” would be a ratty good time in a month known for disenfranchised movie releases. Statham does indeed kill his way through baddies of increasing eccentricity, and the turbulent editing that dominated the theatrical version of Ayer’s “Suicide Squad” is gone here: every shot of Statham kicking a dude in the face is held just long enough for its impact to be felt by the viewer.

Bottom line: you already saw most of the boom-boom in the trailers. Slower moments – including an implied romantic history & a family connection, which serve as beleaguering texture – could have been cut for pacing. The increasing tiers of henchmen feel too much like boss encounters in a video game. And the climax – infiltrating a party at the evil guy’s mansion – is depressingly doddering & ends abruptly, without any real show-stopping confrontation to close the movie on. Disregarding those cons, it was an excellent watch as part of the Canadian $5 February deal at Cineplex.

3 out of 5

Movie poster sourced from impawards.com. Have you seen “The Beekeeper” yet? Would you if the ticket was only five bucks? Are you a connoisseur of other fine Jason Statham January fare like “Wild Card”, “The Mechanic”, or “Parker”? Are you disappointed when people talk about Jennifer Lopez’s acting career and no one mentions “Blood and Wine”? Leave a comment below!

Dub’s Take: The Divide (2011)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.


Anyone who wanted less optimism in Netflix’s recent movie “The Furnace” may find the nihilism they’re looking for in “The Divide”. Director Xavier Gens is best known to American audiences for the first “Hitman” adaptation with Timothy Olyphant, but his “Frontier(s)” from the same year is his eminent opus: an ultra-violent allegory about civil unrest in France. The Divide shares commonalities with Frontiers, including subject matter about each person’s “breaking point”, and a remake of its head-shaving scene. Know then that The Divide is not a “happy” movie, though thankfully nowhere near as unwatchable for a general adult audience.

It’s true that not everyone wants to watch a depressing movie these days, despite an influx of downbeat titles on the market – most inspired by current events. I myself am not an optimist and enjoy the occasional morbid movie for escapism. By the same measure, I also want the film to have some other purpose for being – beyond pure cruelty – to not make the whole experience a big waste of time. The Divide locks the viewer in and makes them want to know what happens, which is the greatest compliment I can give it.

It is by no means perfect. Some of its best ideas – such as the ultimate reveal of the third-act villains – come too late in the film. It has a mish-mosh cast, with unrestrained, melodramatic performances by Michael Biehn & Rosanna Arquette. There’s a left-field event a half-hour in that should change the dynamic of the entire film, but left-minded viewers will be disappointed that it never goes back to it when it’s over. And it could have had a tighter second act without diluting the material. Having said all that, it was still compelling, and generated some good discussion between my wife & myself afterward. I wouldn’t ever watch it again.

3 out of 5

Poster sourced from impawards.com. What do you think? Are you the kind of viewer who stays away from thematically half-empty media, or do you like to be challenged in this day & age? That line-dancing scene in The Furnace was money though, am I right? Do you agree with Tarantino when he says a great movie can “own” its use of a song? Let me know your thoughts below!

Dub’s Take: The Island (2005)

A spoiler-free mini movie review.


The best performance, in a film full of convincing performances, comes from Djimon Hounsou as Laurent, the morally-conflicted mercenary sent after our heroes Scarlett Johansson & Ewan McGregor. While it’s a character that easily could have been played by any generic macho movie touch guy on-reserve like Christos Vasilopoulos or Michael Jai White, Laurent – as played by Hounsou – has conviction, and commands attention. It’s probably the role I’ll remember him most for, even if he’s woefully sidelined in the third act – the film’s only real disappointment.

Anyone who wonders whether director Michael Bay (yes, THAT Michael Bay, love him or hate him) is capable of making something serious should look no further than “The Island”. Sure, Bay can’t resist himself in the handful of action scenes that are here – including a mid-movie showstopper that escalates from launching giant steel train wheels off a moving flat-deck, to hanging precariously off the edge of a giant logo at the top of a skyscraper – but they aren’t the film’s focus. Be that as it may, don’t think that because you aren’t getting the intensity level of “Transformers 4” that The Island isn’t consistently thrilling, because it is: Bay’s bombastic technique keeps the pacing kinetic for the 2 hour+ runtime.

The film’s secret standout is its script – co-written by TV showrunners Kurtzman & Orci – and the less said the better. Okay, so you might guess what’s going on before the cut-and-dry reveal by Steve Buscemi, and it isn’t necessarily the freshest story off the line, but the production finds new ways, right up until its climax, to raise the stakes – however predictable. It’s fun. It’s one of only a handful of films I’ve seen in theatres more than once by choice, and almost 20-years-later this most recent viewing was just as entertaining: my older, wiser mind was keen to catch all the tricks in the film’s first half to keep the viewer at arm’s length. Good Job!

4.5 out of 5

Poster sourced from impawards.com. Do you think such a high mark is justified? Can you not get passed Michael Bay’s involvement? Is he the guy Olivia Munn was referring to? Will we reach a point with A.I. when Ewan McGreggor’s forehead mole gets scrubbed from every film he made before 2008? Comment, why don’t ‘cha!