Carry-On (2024)

Junior TSA agent Ethan Kopek (Taron Egerton) and his partner Nora Parisi (Sofia Carson) have a rather exciting Christmas Eve. It’s not just that working on Christmas sucks, and even more so doing so at LAX, as they both are. Nora has also just told Ethan that she is pregnant, and his reaction is rather more complicated than one would probably hope for from a new father, though, to be fair to the guy, his reaction is based on self-doubt instead of the old deadbeat dad routine.

After some dithering, Ethan does decide to take this as an opportunity to get himself out of the motivational slump he has been in ever since he didn’t make it into cop school. Alas, his new-found go-getting attitude does put him in the crosshairs of a mysterious Traveler (Jason Bateman), who really, really needs Ethan’s help to get an object on an airplane. If not, a bullet just might collide with Nora’s brain.

Ethan’s doing his best to outwit his tormentor without endangering lives, but that turns into a very difficult proposition.

After going through a bit of a Rock-shaped slump, Jaume Collet-Serra is back making the kind of genre movies he’s shown himself to be oh so very good at. As always with the director, the initial set-up and characterization of Carry-On (not to be confused with the Carry On films for my imaginary readers from the British Isles) are taken somewhere out of cliché central. Once the plot gets rolling, however, that sort of thing becomes utterly irrelevant to the enjoyment gleaned from the film’s tightly constructed series of escalations, where every single move Ethan manages to make only appears to make the situation more dramatic and acute. There’s the proper and pleasant breathlessness to proceedings Collet-Serra does so well, and a kinetic energy that belies the fact this is taking place in a comparatively small number of places.

But then, one of the touches that give the film its extra kick is how well it uses the very quotidian locations inside of an airport for maximum excitement. Who knew baggage conveyor systems could be so exciting?

Also exciting – at least to me – is how well Carry-On uses the cliché characters and relations it establishes to further its dramatic impact. While Ethan is certainly the film’s protagonist, Nora and certain other characters are actually doing things as well, which of course makes it easier for a viewer not to see them as some kind of narrative furniture.

So yes, it’s Jaume Collet-Serra making a very Jaume Collet-Serra movie again, and I couldn’t be happier about it.

Three Films Make A Post: Evil Lives Just Beneath the Surface

Mary (2019): Michael Goi’s movie about a haunted ship that ruins a family should by all rights be much better than it is: a ghost on a ship is doubly creepy, seeing as it adds isolation to a vengeful supernatural force; terrible things happening to perfectly likeable people are my kind of horror; and lastly, the film has Gary Oldman and Emily Mortimer, and they don’t look bored. Alas, everything that could be wrong with the film is wrong, starting with the needlessly awkward narrative structure of having Mortimer’s character tell the tale to a cop (cue internal groaning about plot twists at once) instead of the film simply telling the damn story, characterisation that does neither know how to do shorthand (don’t even think about actual depth) nor how to properly utilize the abilities of a great cast.
As for the film’s horror business, Goi – despite a perfectly promising background in TV genre work – seems completely incapable to construct even a single creepy scene properly. The framing of scenes is random and uninvolving, and there’s not a moment of the appropriate atmosphere on display.

Kingsman: The Secret Service (2014): I must have mentioned my immense dislike for Mark Millar’s brand of industrialised cynicism here before; curiously enough, I don’t hate all adaptations of his crap body of comics work quite as much. Case in point is Matthew Vaughn’s (co-written by Vaughn with the great Jane Goldman) super spy movie at hand. The movie’s humour is acerbic and generally aims a bit low for my tastes, but at least it does tend to aim for the lower parts of the people on top. Why, there’s even a bit of thinking about class in here that seems…honest. The film also has a lot of fun with the whole super spy business, putting imaginative twists on all kinds of standard tropes. The action is generally loud and abrasive but well-structured, and for most of the time, the film’s on the right side of being cynical. It also features Colin Firth and Samuel L. Jackson in great form.

The final act does become decidedly weaker, though, suffering under the really Millar-ian idea that mass murder is inherently hilarious, at the same time it is trying to milk it for laughs, also trying to use it as the base for suspense. Which, no surprise, doesn’t work out terribly well, but doesn’t end up so bad it ruins what is a surprisingly fun time.

Kingsman: The Golden Circle (2017): Aaaaand, I don’t know what happened here. Same director, same writers, basically the same cast, but the film is a bloated mess, lacking the satiric edge of the first film, landing hardly any joke. It was apparently made under the impression that what this sequel really needed were about a dozen sub-plots, none of which is terribly interesting, and so spends more time tediously juggling all the bits and pieces of what feels like at least half a dozen different scripts in place of having an actual narrative.


It doesn’t help at all that the action sequences follow the way of the plot, becoming more and louder but less interesting, certainly going through the motions of how a contemporary big budget movie action sequence is supposed to look and feel, but never making much of an impact.

In short: Robin Hood (2018)

This godawful thing directed by Otto Bathurst is a sad attempt at making the Robin Hood legend “topical”. So expect crusaders in the Middle East carrying their bows as if they were assault rifles while wearing armour that’s meant to look like modern combat armour, our main character wearing a leather hoodie that makes him look rather a lot like the TV version of a certain Robin Hood inspired superhero, and a lot more in the spirit of an idiot’s idea of modernist theatre. Now, this sort of thing can be perfectly interesting – if perhaps not exactly what I’d want from a Robin Hood movie – if written with thought and care, but the responsible parties for the script, Ben Chandler and David James Kelly, treat their conceit with all the thoughtfulness and care of elephants waltzing through a porcelain store, never having encountered a thought they’d be able to actually follow through on.

Because this isn’t bad enough, the film’s plot is, absurdly enough, full of the worst attempts at your typical superhero movie’s narrative beats I’ve seen in quite some time, because obviously, it’s not enough for this one to be a shitty message movie, it also needs to be a really bad medieval superhero movie, too, with dialogue so bad, I started to fondly think about the Daredevil movie with Ben “I can’t do superheroes for the life of me” Affleck as the much superior film.


But hey, at least there’s some spectacle on screen, right? Well, unfortunately not, for Bathurst shoots the whole mess as if it actually were the amateur theatre production its writing reminds me of (probably mumbling something about Brechtian techniques), having never encountered a set he can’t make look like cardboard, and no action scene he can’t turn into nonsense by always choosing the least effective set-up, the worst camera angle, and so on and so forth. It’s honestly astonishing to me how a production that’s made by an actual production company and a director with experience in properly budgeted modern TV can look quite this shoddy. Need I even mention that the actors make the impression of having gotten no direction at all, so their performances meander wildly, with only Jamie Foxx actually giving the impression of playing the same character from scene to scene?