I'm starting to think we've been here enough times that no introduction is needed, but just to be safe, welcome to another edition of Review Roundup, this time with my best bits of writing across the month of October. We've seen and written on plenty of new and widely talked about films this month, as well as a few spooky ones to fit the Halloween season. Let's get started!
THROWBACK: Tron: Legacy (Joseph Kosinski, 2010) - reviewed 05/10/2025
"I’m most definitely not going to bother seeing Tron: Ares when that releases soon, but its existence did make me curious enough to revisit this for the first time in about a decade just to double check if there was anything in this franchise I’m particularly enthusiastic about. It’s alright, Kosinski does really well making the most of The Grid as a cinematic space in a far more visually refined and dynamic form than what was achieved in 1982, but I think the film might be a bit too reliant on how starkly that contrasts the original film’s construction of the same space to convey its ideas about the ever-changing and evolving technological world. If you know and love the original Tron (which I don’t, even after similarly revisiting it for the first time in a while this time last year), Legacy’s greatly augmented depictions of the same elements are probably very impactful, but for me, it really just communicates the bare minimum of what it’s getting at. This is interesting to me because legacy sequel shortcomings of that sort are precisely what Kosinski’s Top Gun: Maverick expertly avoided, as there’s a film that strikes a perfect balance of taking the time to honour and respect the original film and its characters, building on the legacy they’ve amassed, all the while elsewhere reaffirming the broad appeal that was essential to its predecessor’s success to make sure no one out of the loop is alienated. My indifference to the original Tron is comparable to how I feel about the original Top Gun, yet Maverick is a film I love and would even consider to be one of the best of the 2020s so far. There’s much I can enjoy about Legacy in isolation, with its inventive action set pieces, stellar neon-minimalist aesthetic, and atmospheric score all being highly praiseworthy, but there’s only so much it can do for me beyond that as someone with minimal attachment to what came before. Maybe it’s unfair of me to hold that against the film since I know Tron has a significant cult following and thus this is primarily here to satisfy those in that sector, but when you have the legacy sequel gold standard that is Maverick out there, literally made by the exact same director, you have to wonder if that’s a completely credible excuse anymore. Needless to say, Ares remains an easy skip for me." 6/10
NEW: The Smashing Machine (Benny Safdie, 2025) - reviewed 08/10/2025
"I’ve always been a fan of Dwayne Johnson. No matter how much rubbish the guy has been in, I just can’t bring myself to not be charmed whenever I see him in anything. I always enjoy his performances and, contrary to popular opinion, I find a fair few of his films to genuinely be great fun, even if they are often far from perfect. However, at the same time, I’ve always wanted to see him try something a little more risky, to change the trajectory of his otherwise mostly safe career in the same way that similar actors like Dave Bautista have been able to do (okay, there was Southland Tales and he was great in that, but that’s something of an anomaly in the grand scheme of things). Because of this, I was very excited at the prospect of him taking on a more serious role here, and it turned out to be one of the most rewarding cinematic experiences of the year for me. Johnson is really terrific here, essentially everything I could’ve hoped for, very much giving his all to this cinematic interpretation of real-life UFC fighter Mark Kerr. Sure, you’re always conscious of the fact that it’s him on screen, but it’s equally always clear how much he’s trying to immerse himself in the role, not relying on his usual charismatic qualities and letting a different side of his physicality be at the forefront. I really enjoyed how Benny Safdie constructed Kerr here, displaying two juxtaposing sides of the character and having them collide in various ways to make him especially compelling. There’s expectedly his UFC persona which we observe in all sorts of sporting violence, something Johnson is a natural fit for and is made extra effective here due to the careful sound design and camerawork, but then there’s his day-to-day self, many scenes of which see him possess an endearing ‘gentle giant’ quality. Just the sights of him delicately handling medicine or wearing a cosy jumper in his everyday life were so oddly captivating, likely because it’s the sort of thing we wouldn’t initially expect to see from Johnson, which Safdie is absolutely aware of and expertly capitalises on. There’s also an unpredictability about Kerr outside of the ring that is enthralling, namely his sheer size and presence coming across as downright scary yet simultaneously not always able to cover up his vulnerability as seen in the more emotionally cathartic moments, and Johnson sells all of this perfectly. It is true that this is one of those films where much of its impact hinges on the central performance, as there isn’t always much dramatic richness about Kerr’s story to sustain the necessary narrative momentum, but because that central performance was the main point of interest for me, I was mostly engaged with things the whole way through. Emily Blunt was also as great as ever, but it’s of course less striking to see a powerful dramatic turn from her as she’s done plenty of this sort before. While I don’t care about awards, I can’t deny that it would be satisfying to see Johnson get at least some nominations for this, as you can sense the passion at hand and can tell he wants to be taken more seriously as an actor, which is so wonderful as a fan of his. It’ll probably be a while before the general public’s perception of Johnson is greatly changed, but, that being said, it probably seemed unlikely at one point that Robert Pattinson would be regarded as anything more than the guy from Twilight, yet now people (myself included) consider him one of the most interesting performers currently about. While I haven’t seen it for myself yet, it was seemingly the Safdies that set him on that path with his role in Good Time, so hopefully the same applies here and we’ll gradually see something similar come Johnson’s way as his career continues." 8/10
THROWBACK: Offside (Jafar Panahi, 2006) - reviewed 11/10/2025
"Everyone wants to feel proud of where they come from, but sometimes there are things that prevent us from being able to do so in good faith. I’m English, and I don’t feel the slightest bit proud of that fact, least of all at the current moment where I’d even go as far as saying I’m ashamed. But, there are moments in life where, in spite of what holds us back, we and our fellow people can come together and have something to take pride in, and sport has always struck me as something most capable of such. Whenever a widely accessible event such as the Olympics or World Cup comes on, I know I suddenly forget everything I resent about my country and instead feel an urge to proudly support those representing us for the world to see. There’s nothing quite like the national unity and shared excitement that can arise from sport, however occasional and temporary it may be, and what Jafar Panahi does here is show how that special feeling can manifest in even the most turbulent of situations. A group of Iranian women put everything at risk to illegally see a decisive football match in person and are promptly caught and contained for the game’s duration. It’s a bleak snapshot of how women are unfairly treated in their country, yet even when faced with reason to be upset and angry with the system they belong to, the success of their national football team is enough to have them enthusiastically cheering such patriotic statements as “Long Live Iran!”. Even the soldiers tasked with detaining them are swept up enough to engage in discussions about the game with their prisoners and let them have their moment of celebration due to also enjoying such for themselves. As the film goes on, the sense of unity grows stronger, amounting to a climax of pure collective joy as eclectic groups eagerly huddle around televisions and radios, further chants are loudly boasted in unison, sparklers are lit and passed around, food is warmly shared, and handcuffs are flippantly removed. Much like his mentor Abbas Kiarostami, Panahi uses the realist lens to subtly guide the audience into a certain point of view by cleverly suggesting the absence of conventional cinematic construction, as the film is carefully structured to increasingly distance those watching from the harsh truths of Iranian society that are established at the beginning and eventually leave them with a portrait of a united and endlessly proud community, maintaining the illusion of truthfulness throughout. While those joyful scenes towards the end are real and felt, they are ultimately a distraction from the greater truth, as when the dust has inevitably settled around these exciting sporting achievements, reality always sets back in, something the characters here are conscious of despite the film never showing it. But, cinema is a medium of moments, enabling an everlasting presence for even the most fleeting of such, so it only feels right that what unfolds here is able to exist for all it’s worth. What a powerful and rewarding experience this was." 8/10
THROWBACK: Saw (James Wan, 2004) - reviewed 16/10/2025
"A film of two halves, with one being considerably more interesting than the other. Loved the way this began, the contained environment, the eerie atmosphere, and the uncertainty about the situation. It reminded me a lot of early [M. Night] Shyamalan, not dealing upfront with its horrific elements but instead letting the suggestion of such (in this case larger unknown forces orchestrating events) be what ultimately makes things so unsettling, and it was mostly quite captivating. However, things take a bit of a turn once the plot beyond that main setting starts to unravel, with the filmmaking becoming a lot more hyperactive and explicit, the tension a lot less heightened, and the scares a lot more conventional. The film remains very enjoyable, with Wan injecting plenty of unique flair into every twist and turn, particularly the moody and distinct lighting as well as the playful editing and camerawork, but part of me wishes things stayed locked to that initial environment for more of the runtime and that the uncertainty at hand was sustained for longer than it got. The concept of two strangers desperately trying to piece together a deadly puzzle all the while us audience members are just as in the dark and confined as they are sounds perfect for a unique horror experience, so it is a small shame that this potential is undermined by functioning that concept into a more standard mystery thriller. But, as discussed, the supposedly more standard fare that Saw gradually devolves into doesn’t disappoint in terms of being adequately thrilling and fun, never feeling workmanlike in its execution and providing plenty for a sensitive soul like myself to be repulsed by, in the best possible way. What I will say in praise of the film, though, is that I was somewhat struck by how relatively well behaved it was. This is my first proper experience with the Saw franchise, and from an outsider perspective, the series has always been defined to me by its extreme bloody violence / torture porn as well as an occasional touch of social commentary. What was most insightful about finally watching this inaugural feature film was noting how it really took its time before engaging in the violence I was expecting, dotting bits and pieces of it throughout until the climax goes all out. This is actually one of the film’s greatest strengths, as when you have that glacial and suggestive opening movement, the eventual arrival at an explosive and explicit catharsis is all the more engaging, and feels fitting given the gradual psychological breakdowns experienced by the two protagonists over the course of the narrative. It wouldn’t surprise me if the never ending stream of sequels this film got slowly forget this aspect and just consist of violence for its own sake, in turn prompting the broad, overarching understanding I initially had of the franchise, but it’s nice to see it began from a place of some nuance. Overall this was a solid watch, with a lot more interesting elements than I first imagined even if such are eventually substituted for more of what I perhaps anticipated." 7/10
CATCH-UP: KPop Demon Hunters (Chris Appelhans / Maggie Kang, 2025) - reviewed 26/10/2025
"I admittedly put off watching KPop Demon Hunters for the longest time because… it’s a film called KPop Demon Hunters? An admirably blunt and to-the-point title, but not one that left much room for intrigue and thus didn’t do much to convince me to watch. That might be shallow reasoning, but I’m also just a bit tired of western mainstream animation at the moment and have had plenty of occasions recently where a film in that sector has gone down well with others but not done a lot to me, and I suspected this would be a similar case. Despite this, the immense popularity this has acquired on social media gave me enough reason to finally check it out, and as much as I’d like to say I was proven wrong, I really wasn’t. I love Into the Spider-Verse, but I fear we’ve now reached a point where the style that film pioneered is getting old. After Beyond the Spider-Verse has inevitably released, we seriously need to move on from every other animated film consisting of the same sort of over-the-top, heightened visuals and hyperactive action scenes involving jumps in frame rates and frantic camera movements paired with an equally fast-paced and exaggerated sense of humour. It’s not that this is anything inherently bad, it’s just become so ubiquitous in the last five or so years that simply adhering to it isn’t enough to stand out anymore. It was exciting and bold when Spider-Verse did it back in 2018, but now following the likes of The Mitchells vs The Machines, The Bad Guys, and Puss in Boots: The Last Wish, it’s just kind of average. Still good for what it is, just not remarkable. Where KPop Demon Hunters is similarly unremarkable is in its narrative. The distinct cultural aesthetic is welcome and makes matters more memorable than they otherwise could’ve been, but there’s very little that stood out to me elsewhere. A generic if serviceable message about being true to oneself achieved through a series of lies and secrets that are conventionally laid out and revealed, it really just does the bare minimum and feels like no more than a functional vessel for the musical numbers. I did enjoy the songs on a superficial musical level and found the sequences based around them to be some of the most striking, but in terms of their overarching implementation it’s the frustrating backstage shenanigans where narrative efficiency is mostly prioritised over letting the distinct form of expression at hand have its time to shine, something that really annoys me in modern musicals. Maybe I’m being too harsh, I realise I’m absolutely not the target demographic here, and I’m sure plenty of young people who seek no more than bright colours and catchy tunes will be perfectly engaged with what’s going on here and eat up everything it has to offer, which is fine because, for better or worse, there’s always a place for that sort of content. Going back to my opening point, it’s a film called KPop Demon Hunters, and having seen it for myself, nothing about that title is the least bit inaccurate, so best to just take it for what it’s worth." 6/10
NEW: Shelby Oaks (Chris Stuckmann, 2024) - reviewed 31/10/2025
"I’ve been watching Chris Stuckmann since I was around 13 years old. Along with the likes of Mark Kermode and Doug Walker, he was definitely a formative figure for younger me when it came to my early interest in film criticism, especially on the more amateur level you’d expect from YouTube. As such, I’ve been aware of Shelby Oaks ever since Stuckmann first announced that he’d secured a feature film deal however many years ago, and I’ve gone on to follow each subsequent stage of the process, be it the crowdfunding portion, filming, post production, added involvement of Mike Flanagan, all the way to its debut screenings and what reactions came about. All throughout, I was intent on showing up to see the film when it eventually released, not because it sounded particularly good (if anything it’s actually the sort of thing I usually wouldn’t bother with since I’m not the biggest fan of horror, a fact not helped by the trailers making it look awfully generic), but rather because I just knew I had to experience the surreal feeling of seeing Stuckmann’s name on a real film I was watching at the cinema. Like him or not, it is impressive how he’s made it to this point, and it’s somewhat satisfying for me given that I’ve been there almost every step of the way. The word ‘somewhat’ is quite important in that sentence because what prevents this from being a wholly satisfying experience is that Shelby Oaks sadly isn’t very good. I would’ve loved to walk away very enthusiastically given all that preamble, but instead I’m just underwhelmed. The main issue is that, considering how eager Stuckmann has been to enter the world of filmmaking, this film is shockingly devoid of any distinct directorial voice. Sure, it’s a feature debut, it’s unlikely to be the most refined or assured piece of work, but what I expect from a new filmmaker’s first outing is at least a degree of promise regarding what sort of career they may go on to have and what their directorial project may come to be. This doesn’t have much of the sort, undeniably displaying a clear level of influence taken from other filmmakers but without much new being made of such. It feels like a melting pot of horror tropes and techniques we’ve seen here, there and everywhere before, and that’s coming from someone who, as I mentioned, really isn’t that adversed in this genre. The heavy focus on found footage and vague supernatural forces is very reminiscent of The Blair Witch Project, and the investigatory angle, small town America setting, and ‘Who Took Riley Brennan?’ motif feels extremely Twin Peaks / ‘Who Killed Laura Palmer?’ inspired. Most frustratingly, Stuckmann is known to be a large M. Night Shyamalan fan, and a lot about this is straight out of Signs in particular, what with the endless scouring of archival footage and the slow uncovering of some mysterious entity. However, in taking after Shyamalan’s film, Stuckmann rather ironically retains the few issues I have with it and even makes them more egregious. Specifically, my one main problem with Signs is the final act’s unsatisfying pay off to the unsettling suggestion of the alien creatures throughout most of the film by simply showing them upfront on screen, thereby undercutting a lot of what makes the film unique elsewhere. In Shelby Oaks, we similarly go from mysterious forces being merely suggested only to end up with far more explicit (and consequently more uninteresting) on-screen depictions, except here it’s an issue that plagues most of the second half rather than just the final ten to fifteen minutes. I do like seeing filmmakers draw upon each other, but really only when, one, the influence amounts to something broader and refreshing instead of just being apparent in itself and, two, when the weaker qualities of previous works are accounted for, because even if you idolise someone, their work can still have its flaws. The best thing I can say about Stuckmann’s presence here is that there is a mildly distinct theme about the film, that being its implementation of YouTube as a plot point. This obviously feels in line with where the director has come from, and at times it does sufficiently differentiate matters from the aforementioned comparisons, but it also feels like that is the extent of its place and that it isn’t explored for all it’s worth. The film as a whole doesn’t really have anything to say on that front, at most being vaguely critical of how figures on the platform are unfairly dismissed in the wider media landscape, even though that sentiment doesn’t feel so applicable in the given context of 2008 YouTube, a time when, from what I remember, the site was just a hub for funny cat videos and other frivolous material. Honestly, after a point this aspect feels incidental; given the timeline of the film, it could’ve commented on how YouTube as a platform has changed over time in its content and influence and factored that into the narrative, but it ultimately just utilises the basic feature of YouTube being able to serve as a source of video evidence in an investigation, thereby leading to the film seeming derivative as discussed. All that being said, even on putting everything about Stuckmann to one side for a minute, Shelby Oaks just isn’t a particularly engaging watch in a vacuum. It’s not scary in the least, mostly relying on conventional jumpscares and the odd superficially shocking visual, but doing little to construct a rich overarching horror atmosphere. It’s formally solid and passable enough, the low budget definitely being apparent but not rendering the film visually poor nor preventing the occasional decent visual from shining through. It’s fairly admirable and noteworthy how it feels like a legitimate film and not some kind of amateur student endeavour, which may sound like damning with faint praise but was genuinely something at the forefront of my mind while watching considering the small scale and also the fact that there’s a YouTuber at the helm. The general vibe I got from this is that it’s clearly made by someone who likes films and wants to exercise their passion for the medium at large as well as the specific texts they have reverence for, but at the same time still has a lot to learn in terms of doing the job well, namely by adding something valuable to this area. All the best filmmakers have added something to cinema, maybe not immediately, but at least in a way that’s partially visible from early in their careers. If Stuckmann is to continue after this, he needs to sit down and think about what he wants to add to the medium. He talks about wanting to inspire the next generation as someone like Shyamalan did for him, but that’s not enough to aim for when something like Signs remains readily available to watch and could easily be seen and obsessed over by an aspiring filmmaker today. Once he has something down on that front, maybe he could prove to have a successful career and we’ll find ourselves looking back on Shelby Oaks as an archaic object that signifies just how far he’s come. Writing from this point in time, however, one can’t be too sure of that." 5/10
