Wednesday, September 30, 2026

REBELLION - BFI London Film Festival 2026 - Preview


Documentarians Ken Fero (ULTRAVIOLENCE) and Tariq Mehmood have created an important, compelling, but problematic film retelling the story of the Bradford 12 - a group of British-Asians tried for creating Molotov cocktails to defend their community from violent racist thugs. 

The film does a superb job in situating us back in late 70s and early 80s Britain, complete with the rise of the violent far-right and a police force that could be just as racist.  1981 was a particularly bad summer of riots, with the memory of Southall fresh in everyone's memory.  So, when the violence came to Bradford, a group of activists realised that they would have to defend themselves.  They were arrested for being in possession of petrol bombs, but got off largely because a) the weapons hadn't been used and b) because the police manifestly lied about the threat level to the local community.  Nonetheless, it was a radical judgment because it basically confirmed that immigrant communities could not rely on police protection.

This film benefits enormously from having so many surviving members of the 12, as well as the wider activist community, able to recall the events in their own voices, whether in archive news footage or in present day interviews.  This makes the film an incredibly important historical document.  The conviction, passion but also nuance with which they make their case is impressive. 

Where the film falls down is in how it chooses to give or withhold context, and when it chooses or fails to interrogate the larger narrative of goodies versus baddies.  The first jarring example of this is showing the PLFP terrorist Leila Khaled as just another talking head in support of anti-racist activists everywhere. Not only is this disingenuous, it's also dangerous, because it undermines a key part of the argument of the 12 about how they were not actually radical terrorists at all.  

The second jarring example is of how the film-makers choose to handle the 12 admiring the IRA terrorist and hunger-striker Bobby Sands, even debating whether they should follow his example.  You have to get to the end credits to see that some of the original funders of the 12's legal defence were Sinn Fein too.  Again, I find it really bizarre not to more critically examine the links between criminal funding of terrorism flowing into the 12's defence.  And I also find it weird that we never interrogate where the line is between defending yourself from street thugs and waging an actual war of terrorism on innocent civilians. Maybe the film-makers don't see one, but I suspect the 12 might have done. 

The third example of taking a rather crude political stance and then not really interrogating it, is the way in which Margaret Thatcher is depicted: cursory footage and a voiceover from actress Taj Atwal, saying that Thatcher is "cold, monstrous" and inciting racial violence.  That's not actually what this footage shows. It actually shows Thatcher saying that immigration may well provoke resentment, which is manifestly what did happen then, and is happening now. That doesn't mean SHE is resentful or racist or inciting racism.  The documentarians would have been on more solid ground to find footage or speak to the introduction of extra powers of Stop and Search, which did indeed inflame tensions between the immigrant community and the police.

Finally, I found the prologue of the film, which attempts to draw a straight line between the early 80s riots and the current pro-Gaza activist movement cursory and ill-developed.   

All of which is to say that I found the construction and choices made by the directors questionable and alienating, and I say that as a second-gen Asian immigrant whose parents lived through exactly the racial abuse that this documentary depicts.  That said, the core content of the film - the all-important archive footage and contemporary interviews - remain powerful and important.  

REBELLION has a running time of 80 minutes. It does not yet have a commercial release date. Both BFI London Film Festival screenings are sold out.

Wednesday, June 17, 2026

MICHAEL***


Like many, I was reluctant to watch a Michael Jackson biopic sanctioned by his family. I was a huge MJ fan as a kid - his Bad tour was my first live concert - and I was crestfallen when the abuse scandal broke. Like many, my relationship with his art has become tainted.  And yet I know from my childhood obsession that he was a victim of physical and verbal abuse, with extreme body dysmorphia, and an exposure to sexuality way beyond what was appropriate at an early age. I don't think any of us truly have a hand on what his sexuality was - maybe he didn't either. And for me the jury is still out on his crimes.  

So we come to the film - which I watched VOD rather than in the cinema. It's a handsomely made straightforward emancipation story featuring some breathtakingly good performances from Juliano Valdi as young Michael, and Jackson's own nephew Jaafar as the older MJ.  They are both absolutely stunning as Michael and one can only imagine the innate talent and artistry and rehearsal time to pull of his singing style and dance moves. Jaafar in particular is absolutely joyous and breath-taking to watch.  The movie is worth it for the iconic concert recreations alone - whether the first Billie Jean moonwalk, or the final recreation of Bad live.  Kudos to director Antoine Fuqua (THE EQUALISER) and cinematographer Dion Beebe (CHICAGO) for getting us as close to that feeling of seeing MJ live as we could hope for.

The problem was always going to be what was unsaid and unexplored.  How did MJ's mum really feel seeing the family abuse?  Nia Long is warmly supportive as MJ's mother in this version, but wasn't she collusive, and what impact did her strict religion have on MJ's sexuality.  That sexuality is of course not explored at all. We fast forward through puberty. We never see any interiority from Michael about that. Only his need to escape his father.  His sisters get short shrift and his brothers barely feature.  How did they feel when he moved away from them? This movie does not care.  Yes there is the rising eccentricity and the menagerie of animals. A passing mention of vitiligo.  The awful Pepsi commercial fire.  But no interrogation of Michael's deeply messed up mental health. It's such a damn shame. But given the family estate constraints, I guess this is a good as writer John Logan (GLADIATOR) could have done.  Moreover, even without the constraints, going inside of Michael's head would involve making judgment calls, which would be highly contentious. This movie is for the fans, and most fans (unlike me) have long-since acquitted Michael of any wrongdoing.

MICHAEL is rated PG-13 and has a running time of 127 minutes. It was released in cinemas in April and is now available on demand.

Friday, June 12, 2026

POWER BALLAD****


Writer-director John Carney specialises in funny, heart-warming, music-centred films about ordinary people whose lives are transformed by song.  If that sounds schmaltzy and earnest, it is, and the world is better for it.  His latest movie is a genuinely delightful genuinely laugh-out-loud funny film called POWER BALLAD.  

It stars as Paul Rudd as an ageing wedding band musician whose music is ripped off by Nick Jonas' former boy bander who needs a hit to turn his career around.  So Rudd's character and his best mate and band mate Sandy (co-writer Peter McDonald) go to LA to confront the musician and get paid.  The moral of the story is that real love, real family, real friends matter more than success but that most people haven't got the emotional depth to realise it.  I laughed a lot - McDonald's Sandy is iconic - but it also got a little dusty in the cinema at the end. A good time was had by all!

POWER BALLAD has a running time of 98 minutes and is rated R. It is on limited release in the UK and USA.

SAVAGE HOUSE***


BARRY LYNDON meets BIG NIGHT in screenwriter Peter Glanz's directorial debut. It starts off as a dark, nasty, witty social satire on social climbers, takes a turn into a genuinely moving love story, but just loses steam in its second half. After such a sharp take-off in its first thirty minutes, I then wanted something, anything to happen, and it never did.  That's the point, but it made for a rather dull watch. This is all rather a shame as the two lead performances are absolutely superb.

The Crown's Claire Foy gives a wonderfully layered performance as Lady Savage - a properly aristocratic woman who defied convention to marry the dastardly rake and parvenu, Chauncey.  She gives a powerful defence of female agency and genuinely moved me.  But despite this, she pawns the last of her family jewels to scrape her way back into high society, when the chance to host the Marlboroughs comes her way.  And what of her husband?  Grant plays Chauncey as a kind of ageing Withnail, fuelled by port and gambling, all charm, wit, petulance and aching vulnerability. He wants to be accepted and also to avoid the bailiffs.  

The movie hits cruising speed fast.  And then stalls.  We get a nice side plot involving Jack Farthing and Bel Powley's valet and woman of all work respectively.  But ultimately this is a morality play about two people hellbent on social climbing and the agents of their own ruin.  It would have worked better as a sixty minute short.

SAVAGE HOUSE is rated R and has a running time of 113 minutes. It is on limited release in the USA and UK.

DISCLOSURE DAY**



Bless his heart! Steven Spielberg still thinks that network news is relevant. Steven Spielberg still thinks that if people watch something on network news that they'll believe it. Steven Spielbering still thinks that Roswell is cool. Steven Spielberg is still obsessed with midwest middle-class childhood Americana. Steven Spielberg still believes that, in the words of Woody Allen's MANHATTAN, "you have to have a little faith in people". FFS. Have you not seen the past decade? In the words of Peep Show's Super Hans, "People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people, Jeremy." Which is not to say that Spielberg hasn't made a simultaneously schmaltzy AND cyncal film. How else to explain the very deliberate care to tell ticket-buyers in Red States that the existence of aliens is compatible with the Book of Genesis?

Okay so what's the plot? Super intelligent aliens have been making contact with man since Roswell, and man - or at least American men - have been hushing it up and exploiting them ever since. A bunch of rebels (Colman Domingo, Josh O'Connor) steal the video proof and rather than just uploading it to TikTok they partner up with Emily Blunt's TV weather girl to put it out on local TV. That's it.

Now there are a bunch of MacGuffins and side hustles involving Blunt's character being able to suddenly speak a bunch of languages, and O'Connor's character being a maths savant, and Eve Hewson's character having a crisis of faith, but it's all just bollocks really. Colin Firth occasionally turns up in a turtleneck as a cross between Dr Evil and Basil Exposition and almost every line reading of a deeply hackneyed script (David Koepp and Spielberg) prompts unintended mirth.

And my enjoyment is not helped by the fact that Emily Blunt now falls into that category of actor (Bradley Cooper, Emma Stone, Nicole Kidman) whose plastic surgery and over-filled face is a distraction. I spent the entire movie wanting to give her an antihistamine. 

Oh yes, this being Spielberg there's also a weird-ass interlude featuring a Hansel and Gretel house and some poor kid has gone through CGI. I was wondering if Emily Blunt's face is now so waxy and unreal that they were forced to CGI a real kid to make her look like Blunt's younger facsimile.  The CGI is really bad by the way. The CGI animals are rubbish. I have seen a more convincing and emotionally affecting fox on Lego Masters Australia.

It's sad to see an old man stuck in 1987 and churning out sci-fi as if the past thirty years of film-making (or politics for that matter) didn't happen. Has he not watched any Gareth Edwards or Denis Villeneuve? Are we meant to be impressed by car chases that look like the Dukes of Hazzard when we just saw Paul Thomas Anderson break cinematic ground not once but twice in ONE BATTLE AFTER ANOTHER? 

Retire, mate. Retire.

DISCLOSURE DAY is rated PG-13 and has a running time of 145 minutes. It is on global release.

Thursday, April 16, 2026

THE DRAMA**** (spoilers)


Kristoffer Borgli's THE DRAMA is a nasty little relationship drama and social satire about good people doing bad things and bad people who are po-faced and judgmental. Zendaya and Robert Pattinson continue to make challenging and interesting choices that belie their teen-star good looks.  They play Emma and Charlie - a young loving couple who seem perfect for each other until goaded into reveal the worst thing they have ever done by their best friends Rachel and Mike.  Emma reveals that as a young teenage girl she planned a school shooting but did not go through with it and is immediately shunned by her maid of honour Rachel (Alana Haim) despite the fact that Rachel didn't just plan but did something really horrific - imprisoning a young developmentally challenged boy and leaving him for dead. 

In fact, there is something wrong with the whole way in which the friend group reacts. Nobody thinks to ask why young Emma might have been so disenchanted and alienated and bullied that she felt she had to commit an act of mass killing.  Nobody asks how she is feeling now that she has revealed it.  Just judgy Karen being the true villain of the piece and dragging her poor husband Mike along with her.  And nice earnest fiance making poor Emma restate her motivations despite the fact that reliving the memory is making her throw up.  

The resulting film is a nasty, raw and occasionally mordantly funny drama. I really believed in Emma and Charlie and wanted their relationship to work.  I also really liked how Borgli was very consciously playing with rom-com tropes - the meet-cute, the dumb cutesy in-jokes, even the .... well... end-cute?  It's like he's saying I know this is dumb and makes no sense and is incredible but go with me because I am using this genre-bullshit to show you what's going on with this young black woman in this hyper-white judgy scenario.  And I was there for it. 

THE DRAMA is rated R and has a running time of 105 minutes. It was released earlier this month.