Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 14 October 2025

In the late 1990s, twenty-something-year old Jeffrey Manchester robbed roughly 50 fast food and department stores in the United States.  He would wield a firearm, lock staff in cold rooms, and take cash from company safes.  He was finally apprehended in May 2000 after robbing two McDonalds stores in North Carolina… on the same day!  Several months later, a jury convicted him of first-degree kidnapping, in addition to a weapon’s offence, and he was sentenced to prison for a term of 32 to 45 years.

Of all the people in the world to make a fun, fluffy biopic about, Jeffrey Manchester is a curious choice.  Writer-director Derek Cianfrance (The Place Beyond the Pines) and co-writer Kirt Gunn were drawn to this “truth is stranger than fiction” tale and are milking it for all it’s worth.  They’ve cast a likeable actor in the lead role, Channing Tatum (Magic Mike), and highlight the character’s positives.  The version of Manchester we see in the film is an unemployed former soldier who steals primarily to care for his children.  He’s super-polite when robbing people, he’s friendly when interacting with others and, yep, he even donates used toys to a church group.  What an awesome guy!

The crux of the movie is spent in the year 2004 when Manchester escapes from prison, takes on an alias, and hides for several months in the cavities of a Toys “R” Us store in Charlotte.  He’d occasionally sneak out and, in doing so, falls in love with Leigh Wainscott (Dunst), a single mother with two daughters.  The pair spend increasing amounts of time together and, in being more in the public eye, Manchester is increasingly vulnerable.  Is it only a matter of time before his identity is revealed?

I grew tired of the “please-like-me” approach to Manchester.  It spends too much time on his goofy antics like stealing M&Ms, changing staff rosters, and creating a makeshift shower in the staff bathroom.  We never get a clear understanding why he’s that way.  Where was all the money going?  There are fleeting moments showing the heavier ramifications of Manchester’s actions (e.g. knocking a security guard unconscious) but, instead of judging him, the movie wimps out.  The closing credits feature sappy interviews with real-life people talking up his better qualities.

The supporting players are one-note and lacklustre with a single exception.  Academy Award nominee Kirsten Dunst (The Power of the Dog) steals every scene as Leigh.  She’s the most complex, fleshed-out character – a lonely, middle-aged woman looking for comfort within the church while also trying to connect with an increasingly distant teenage daughter.  Manchester arrives like a breath of fresh air in her life but we, as the audience, know her newfound happiness will end in heartbreak.  I wish the film was centred on her perspective and not Manchester’s.

It’s worth seeing to learn about the bizarre true story but Roofman could have been a lot better.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 02 October 2025

It’s nice to see Dwayne Johnson doing something different.  He’s one of the world’s biggest box-office draws but there’s no denying he’s been typecast as the likeable, muscular action hero.  Now 53 years of age, The Smashing Machine is the closest he’s been to an “awards season” role – out of his comfort zone, playing a real-life person, and wearing a lot of prosthetics.  Academy voters gravitate towards such performances and there’s a chance he could earn a first Oscar nomination early next year.

In the lead role, Johnson slips into the tight shorts of Mark Kerr, a wrestler who rose to fame in the 1990s and laid groundwork for what would become a massive professional sport – mixed martial arts.  The film is written and directed by Benny Safdie (Good Times, Uncut Gems) who drew from a 2002 HBO documentary.  The focus is on the years from 1997 to 2000, and it delves into his fighting, his drug addictions, his rocky relationship with his girlfriend Dawn (Blunt), and his friendships with fellow fighters.  Johnson brings obvious physicality to the role but, aside from a few wild outbursts, plays Kerr as a kind, softly spoken individual.

This will be a weird analogy… but The Smashing Machine is like a lengthy conversation with a friend who has had too many beers.  They’ve got a bunch of interesting stories to tell but, in jumping all over the place, they never actually finish any of them.  Kerr has an addiction to painkillers, but we don’t see how this developed nor any part of his recovery (he’s just picked up from a rehab centre).  He seeks more pay from Japanese fight promoters, but we don’t learn if his demands were met.  He has an intense argument with Dawn in the film’s final half-hour, but we don’t follow it through to resolution (there’s just a few words offered up in the epilogue).

Mark Kerr may be a wrestling pioneer and an intriguing person but that doesn’t come through strongly enough in Safdie’s film.  I got tired of interviews with Japanese journalists and out-of-place interludes (like the sequence at a local fair).  It’s tweaked my curiosity enough to hunt down the 2002 documentary but as a standalone movie, The Smashing Machine isn’t interesting enough.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 09 October 2025

They’ve been in no rush with follow-ups.  We had a 28-year gap between Tron (1982) and Tron: Legacy (2010) and now a 15-year gap for the third instalment, Tron: Ares.  For those new to the material, the franchise has been centred on human characters who “travel” inside computers and are immersed in a crazy, colourful ecosphere… where not everyone is friendly.  It’s like something out of a video game.

Tron: Ares makes the odd creative choice to spend most of its time in the “regular” world.  Eve Kim (Lee) and Julian Dillinger (Peters) are the highly competitive CEOs of two rival computing companies.  They are each trying to get their hands on something called “permanence” – a magic formula which brings computer-generated folk to life (for longer than 29 minutes).  Eve wants to use the technology for good while Julian’s reasons are, well, not so good.

Oscar winner Jared Leto (Dallas Buyers Club) has the title role of Ares, an intelligent, powerful soldier brought into the human world by way of a cool, 3D printer-like device.  He should be following the directions of his villainous master, Julian, but he’s developed a quasi-conscience that leaves him questioning those commands.  To whom do his allegiances lie?

It’s obvious from the opening scenes that Tron: Ares will provide a full-throttle mix of music, sound and visuals.  Norwegian director Joachim Rønning (Kon-Tiki) goes hard in that regard.  A few style elements are overused (e.g. countdown clocks, TV news reports) and the editing is clunky (e.g. the transitions between heavy VFX scenes and normal scenes) but I can appreciate the crew’s efforts in creating an immersive, big-screen experience.

The screenplay is a disappointment, however.  I realise it’s science-fiction nonsense, but the first two movies had a semblance of believability given they took place inside a computer.  The chase sequences here are bright and flashy but the weird “orange rays” which emanate from the black motorcycles make no sense.  Julian lacks nuance as a one-dimensional bad guy, a subplot involving Eve’s sister is undercooked, and cameos from Gillian Anderson and Jeff Bridges add nothing.  The dialogue is also very heavy-handed.  Was the script always this bad or did something go wrong in production?

Tron: Ares is an unfortunate letdown.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 01 October 2025

One of the most talked about releases of last year was The Substance, a horror film that tapped into, amongst other things, the lengths celebrities go to in maintaining their physical beauty and staying relevant in a highly competitive entertainment industry.  It’s not a revelatory theme but director Coralie Fargeat and star Demi Moore packaged it in a blunt, hyper-exaggerated way to jolt audiences.  Both earned Academy Award nominations for their efforts.

Him heads down a similar path with the finger pointed at professional sports.  Cameron Cade (Withers) is a gifted, hard-working quarterback who has finished college and is likely to the #1 draft pick in the pro leagues.  The only possible hiccup is a recent concussion which has many questioning his longevity and price tag.  The San Antonio Saviors have their eye on Cade but before making a contract offer, they want to put him through a rigorous boot camp at the expansive home of soon-to-be-retiring Isaiah White (Wayans), an 8-time championship winning player considered the greatest of all time.

That’s when things get strange. Cade receives injections and other medical advice from a weird doctor, he submits to unusual training techniques that leave one competitor with a disfigured face, he encounters deranged fans who are obsessed with his mentor, and he starts hallucinating to the point where reality and fiction are difficult to discern.  He knows something is amiss but he’s also incredibly close to achieving a lifelong ambition.  To reach the top in professional sport, a few sacrifices need to be made… right?

It’s a topic worth covering.  I once chatted with an AFL footballer about concussions and, to be concise, they said the risk was worth the reward.  They acknowledged it may be something they deal with later in life but that’s just part of a business that also offers fun, money and fame.  In addition to the worthy subject matter, I also like the way American director Justin Tipping (Kicks) infuses his creation with distinctive production design and cinematography.  It provides a visual feast.

Despite its many positives, the film struggles to weave its ideas together into a clear, credible narrative.  Characters made head-scratching decisions, certain plot points are undercooked, and it builds to a rushed, weakish finale that could have provided more in terms of drama and impact.  It’s a missed opportunity to create a cool epic but Him still deserves a look-see.

Details

Written by Matthew Toomey

Created: 07 October 2025

The rise of big-screen documentaries has been a curious phenomenon.  I started reviewing in mid-1990s and looking back through old spreadsheets, I can’t find any record of a documentary being formally released in Brisbane cinemas between 1996 and 2001.  The only chance to see them in theatres was at film festivals.  Helped by an increase in independent cinemas, the dam wall broke in 2002 with the release of Michael Moore’s Oscar-winning Bowling for Columbine.  We’ve now reached a point where I’ll see double-digit numbers each year (peaking at 31 during the COVID-impacted 2021).

So, what makes a documentary feature worth seeing in cinemas?  For me, it’s one which takes subject matters you know next-to-nothing about… and leave a lasting impact.  It might change your view on the world.  It might prompt you to do hours of further reading.  It might have you recounting the narrative when catching up with friends.  Personal favourites over the past decade have included The Last Journey, Flee, The Truffle Hunters, Collective, The Sparks Brothers, The Australian Dream, Free Solo, and The First Monday in May.  I could list dozens more if not sticking to a word limit!

On the flip side, weaker documentaries tend to be too narrow with their focus and messaging.  They’re still worth seeing (well, usually) but will only appeal to those already knowledgeable of the topic.  Further, they can fall into the trap of being a one-sided homage with interviewees lavishing compliment after compliment.  It’s like when “famous” folk pen a published autobiography.  Just because someone has been successful in life doesn’t also mean they’re an interesting person.

Marking the feature debut of director Stephen Soucy, Merchant Ivory is a 112-minute outing which chronicles the history of a small film production company which made over 40 movies between 1963 and 2009.  The focus is on producer Ismail Merchant, director James Ivory, screenwriter Ruth Prawer Jhabvala, and composer Richard Robbins.  The company became known for their adaptations of acclaimed literary works, usually period pieces.  Their most successful movies were A Room with a View (1986), Howards End (1992), and The Remains of the Day (1993) which earned a combined 25 Academy Award nominations.

Merchant Ivory lands roughly in the middle of my ranking scale.  I’m not convinced it has broad allure, and I wouldn’t be recommending to those who aren’t cinephiles.  That said, if you’re a movie tragic like me, it provides enthralling, behind-the-scenes insight into the filmmaking process.  They were a small company working with even smaller budgets.  To have survived for close to half-a-century and to have churned out so many classy, arthouse works… it’s a miracle.  The documentary includes interviews with the likes of Emma Thompson, Hugh Grant, and Helena Bonham Carter as they recount their involvement with Merchant Ivory films.

Also exploring the unusual friendships/relationships of those within the production company, Merchant Ivory will be of interest… to those who are interested.