Author: cinemadilemma

Sookshmadarshini – an entertaining, fun thriller

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://arynews.tv/

Rating: 4.5 stars out of 5
Starring: Nazriya Nazim, Basil Joseph, Akhila Bhargavan, Merin Philip, Deepak Parambol, Pooja Mohanraj
Where to watch: JioHotstar
To watch or not to watch: Oh it is a must watch. It is a fun and thrilling ride.

Priya or Priyadarshini (Nazriya Nazim) is a homemaker and an aspiring professional who lives in harmony with her husband, daughter and group of ladies around the neighbourhood, where they are always into each other’s business. When a new neighbour Manuel (Basil Joseph), with his sick mother, moves next door to Priya, her curiosity peeks its head. Manuel is a people pleaser and very well to do, managing his family’s bakery. His mother is said to have dementia and is thus a recluse. Priya finds that suspicious as she has seen the mother walking around their property, seemingly in full control of her senses. One day the mother walks out of the house and is subsequently lost, but Priya is sure she has seen her in the house, leading her to conclude that Manuel is holding her captive, but none of her friends believe her. In the parallel, Manuel is indeed cooking something with the help of his uncle and his doctor friend who is treating his mother. What is the plan? And why such elaborate facade in a gossipy and nosy neighbourhood?

This movie is not trying to hide things. We know there is something crooked about Manuel, we know Priya has seen his mother easily carrying out daily tasks without any hint of confusion and that he has fed a monitor lizard as beef to his neighbours in a party (gross!!!). But there is still a sense of urgency, a sense of confusion and an eagerness to know the truth throughout the film. Priya appears to be a very loving mother and wife, who is frustrated at not being able to bag a job and is bored as a homemaker. It is understandable when people don’t believe her, but as an audience member you get frustrated on her behalf. This is movie is that engaging. It is so much fun too, as Priya makes a cartel of sorts of the other stay-at-home ladies of the neighbourhood to aid in her investigation. It goes to show that minds can work in mysterious ways.

The end of the movie is gratifying, though albeit convoluted. It is wasn’t for some of the overdone climax twists, this movie would have been a 5/5, hands down. This is a fresh take on the whodunnit trope which can only be experimented in the Malayalam film industry. All the other regional and national movie makers need to stop what they are doing and really, deliberately take notes of what is being done right. This movie’s budget is 10 cr or approximately $1.2 million and what it produced is pure entertainment. Yes, it is not a thought provoking, moral preaching movie – it is a fun, entertaining watch which delivers the thrill it promises the audience.

A Complete Unknown

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://cineccentric.com/

Rating: 2 stars out of 5
Starring: Timothée Chalamet, Edward Norton, Elle Fanning, Monica Barbaro
Where to watch: In theatres
To watch or not to watch: It is a pretty meh biopic, has a starting but doesn’t have North Star so there is no end. The acting and music are good.

A young and broke Bob Dylan (Timothée Chalamet) arrives in New York City to meet his idol Woody Guthrie who is hospitalised. Woody is with his friend Pete Seeger (Edward Norton) and encourage Dylan to play a song, which impresses both older singers. Seeger takes Dylan under his wing, lets him stay at his house and in general introducing Dylan to the larger music scene. That is where Dylan meets Joan Baez (Monica Barbaro), where they have a situationship form of the xx-ship, and Dylan also meets Sylvie Russo (Elle Fanning) and gets serious with her. Slowly and steadily Dylan moves up until he is recognised when he is out and about, people gather to listen to him at Newport Folk Festival, which saddens Sylvie for some reason and she breaks with him, only to get back together with him because he has charm (?). Anyway, this goes on, Dylan finds his music evolving into non-folk, gaining more fame, slightly alienating people sometimes, until he performs what he wants to at the Newport Folk Festival, where is booed by half the crowd and the other half is grooving, so it’s a good thing (?, Maybe?).

It is all very confusing. What was the point of the movie? To show that he was a narcissistic prick who had oodles of songwriting and singing talent? One who wanted people to like him, at the same time “leave him be” but love him still, without him doing any work? To trigger people who have been a victim of such narcissists?
There is a lot this movie could have done, but does absolutely nothing. First of all, the movie should have been termed a musical, without the dancing. Also without a story. It has many starting points – his relationship with Sylvie which must have affected her negatively, his personal and professional relationship with Joan and their rivalry-affair, what made women fall at his feet, what drew people like Seeger to root for him, and getting only indifference in return. What it does instead is to cut these scenes right before any explanation is coming forth, without any information on the timelines. Are we to fill all the details through imagination? Even an oyster needs a seed to weave a pearl.

This movie is full of flaws and will definitely not go down in history well. But… The performances!!! Oh Malone! The performances! It is difficult to say where Bob Dylan ended and Timothée began. He embodied the singer so completely that it dislike for the character was passed from it to him seamlessly. And who knew he could sing!? (Or, maybe Bob Dylan was not a good singer? It is so liberating and easy to say stuff like this when the blog doesn’t get views). Monica Barbaros was a literal angel in front of the mic! It was easily the best sound in the whole movie. And for the first time in a long time, Edward Norton didn’t look bored playing a character. Too bad it was for a movie which lacked a soul. Miss this one.

Strange Darling

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://www.primevideo.com/detail/

Rating: 4 stars out of 5
Starring: Willa Fitzgerald, Kyle Gallner
Where to watch: Jio Cinema/Peacock Network and Prime Video
To watch or not to watch: This non-linear, largely two-hander is using your conscious mind and societal standards in the best way possible to give this fun ride of a movie

The movie opens with Willa Fitzgerald’s character named Lady running away in a car from Kyle Gallner’s character (Demon) who is snorting coke and loading a gun to shoot at Lady. They both met through a dating app and decide to hook up and things turn for the bad. What follows is a chase littered with cold-blooded murders, car chases, makeshift bandages for gaping wounds, and basically a short sprint for survival (the movie covers barely 2 days).

This movie has the shortest summary in the history of this website till now. And that is because the real meat of the movie is revealed in the first few minutes of the movie, and any description beyond that would be a buzzkill. But still this movie works and the reason is the non-linear storytelling style employed here. The whole movie is divided into chapters and the opening chapter sets the tone of the movie while some of the following chapters are shocking and thrilling. It is true that the non-linear storytelling is a cop-out making an otherwise bland, run-of-the-mill story into something more than what it is, simply by jumbling the parts that make it a whole. But this movie, and by extension the director, is aware of it. The parts are labelled as chapters and are revealed in piecemeal basis the emotion that needs to be extracted from the viewer. It is this awareness which subconsciously sets the expectation from the movie, and the movie rises to meet it.

Finally Kyle Gallner gets some of the recognition he deserves. He was brilliant in The Haunting in Connecticut, which happens to be one of the best horror movies (Rotten Tomates and IMdB disagree), and he is perfection in this one. This movie also does something which is turning to be commonplace and that is subverting the genre (anymore said on this will be a spoiler). It is not not done before, nonetheless, it is being done quite refreshingly here. There are multiple (intentional or unintentional) instances which have a deeper meaning to the scene and it is fun to rewatch and learn more about it. All in all, time well spent. Highly recommended.

Nosferatu

Published on by cinemadilemma1 Comment
https://www.imdb.com/title/

Rating: 4 stars out of 5
Starring: Lily-Rose Depp, Nicholas Hoult, Bill Skarsgård, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, William Dafoe
Where to watch: Playing in theatres
To watch or not to watch: A fitting and honest tribute to the 1922 movie and 1897 book Bram Stoker’s Dracula. But it is not for everyone

It is 1830s and Elle (Lily-Rose Depp) is widowed at a very young age and is terribly lonely. To alleviate the loneliness, she makes a deal with the devil, and in this case Count Dracula, and pledges herself to him eternally. But time passes, she gets married to Thomas Hutter (Nicholas Hoult) and they are quite happy together in Wisburg, though rather poor. Hutter gets a quite lucrative job at a real estate agent, and the first order of business is to deliver the documents of a castle to Count Orlok (Bill Skarsgård) in Transylvania, leaving Ellen with his friend Friedrich (Aaron Taylor-Johnson). He finds the menacing presence of Count uncomfortable and tries to escape, but he keeps falling more and more sick (because the Count is feeding on him). Thomas ultimately escapes the castle and is nursed back to health by nuns living in an orthodox convent, meanwhile Orlok travels to Wisburg in a ship to be with Ellen. On meeting Ellen, he gives an ultimatum that he will kill everyone in Wisburg in three days if she refuses to be with him, and he has already killed half the population by spreading plague. They manage to find an ostracised scientist named Von Franz (William Dafoe) who believes in occult and has more answers than they have managed to find with conventional medicine, and they can actually win against the devil.

This movie is not for everyone – the dialogue is not in the linear, conventional English we know and use, but rather poetic, true to the time in which the movie is based. There are also a lot of dream sequences as Dracula visits Ellen in dreams for more than half the movie, which is interspersed with the real life having the same characters. The movie is grey-green-blue toned, whenever it is not out and out black-and-white. Despite all this (and maybe because of this), it is a masterpiece! Can this type of movie be scary, in the true sense of horror that we have come to expect? Not really, no. The story is well-known (adaption of a 1922 movie of the same name which in turn was adaption of Bram Stoker’s book titled Dracula) so it is not a surprise element which can work in this case. What can work is the portrayal of the story, the ability to elicit the emotions different from what has been done and maybe give a different perspective. And this movie delivers! Thanks to (in no small measure) Bill Skarsgård’s portrayal. He has the ability to go beyond himself and totally into the character where it becomes difficult to ascertain if he is even there or is it wholly the devil. This performance is closely followed by Hoult’s as a naive husband (who is so ripped, by the way) looking at his wife getting sicker and in a twisted way more pleasure from Orlok than him. Depp on the other hand, is a one-dimensional figure who is unfortunately central to the movie and sticks like a sore thumb. She lacks the range which a character like Ellen requires, and most of the sympathy falls to every other character, which doesn’t really tie with the story.

This movie is divisive and it takes no stretch of imagination to understand the other side of the opinion than the one listed above. It is only a matter of focus – focus on the colour scheme, the on-the-nose size and accent of Orlok, confusing dream sequences mixed with real life, and the weird English, and you won’t like this movie one bit, even move out halfway. But keep in mind that this is a nod to the 1922 movie, keeps true to to the book and is not necessarily reinventing the wheel, and you will see the charm and what it brings to the table. At the time of this post, the Google review is 3.0 whereas some of the movies reviewed on this site and have received 2 stars have received 4 stars and above. Eggers in general has been divisive. While The Vvitch is often lauded as one of the best horror movies of this generation, it lacks any definitive storyline, open so much to the interpretation that without the requisite mindset, it will fail to register with 90% of the audience. Keep an open mind with this one and you will definitely enjoy it.

The Day of The Jackal

Published on by cinemadilemma1 Comment
https://www.lifestyleasia.com/

Rating: 2.5 stars out of 5
Starring: Eddie Redmayne, Lashana Lynch, Chukwudi Iwuji, Úrsula Corberó, Khalid Abdalla
Where to watch: Jio Cinema/Peacock Network
To watch or not to watch: Disappointing at multiple levels. What a crime against the book

The Jackal (Eddie Redmayne) is one of the best snipers in the world and he is using this talent as a hit for hire. He has a beautiful wife Nuria (Úrsula Corberó) and a 1 year old son. He is hired to kill a German politician, which he does with a slightly round-about but terribly brilliant way, which took MI6 some time to figure out. Also, the kill was at a record distance, which set him apart from 99% of other snipers in the world (and hence easier to identify). A firearm expert at MI6 named Bianca Pullman (Lashana Lynch) is intrigued by this shot and takes it upon herself to find out who the sniper is. This results in an expected, typical and cliched cat-and-mouse chase, only the mouse was smarter but made a dunce, the cat incompetent but blessed with a ton of luck.

The series is true to the book in only the essence, that is, an assassin with military background aiming to assassinate a prominent figure. While in the book that figure was Charles de Gaulle, in the series, it is to assassinate a tech billionaire Ulle Dag Charles to stop him from releasing a software which will disrupt the finances of the world, by somehow publishing the finances of billionaires to everyone??? And there is no more thought put into explaining it or why it would merit $100Mn as assassin’s fees. And The Jackal forgot all about his safety protocols because his greed took over??? He also has no deterrents installed in his home office which stores his passports, cash in different currencies, his tools of disguise, etc, so that even his toddler son could walk in and dismantle his castle of sand. And if this is not enough, the agent in-charge of the investigation is doing so on a prayer. She has caused more harm to innocents without any consequences to herself, is clearly incompetent and has very one-dimensional “I am important” stance at her home with daughter and husband. The only good thing the show does is the elaborate design of the assassination plot, they were truly a treat to see and made the show slightly fascinating.

Eddie Redmayne’s acting chops made something of the character and script which otherwise would not have passed the audience test. Looks like the writers are still on strike because this script could only have been written by 5 different AI tools stitched together by an underpaid human who couldn’t be bothered to check for continuity. There are phases where the Jackal is overcome with remorse to the point of inaction, only to go ahead and unnecessarily kill bystanders to show his brutality. What is the message for the audience, because we already know his profession and all that it entails? And all that is wrong with Bianca cannot even be summarised in one post – it needs to be taken apart scene by scene. What a waste of a good, concept, good book and a good actor. This is a crime against humanity. And it gets renewed for season 2 when Maigret is cancelled? Make it make sense!

Longlegs

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://www.imdb.com/

Rating: 2 stars out of 5
Starring: Maika Monroe, Nicolas Cage, Blair Underwood, Alicia Witt
Where to watch: Amazon Prime Video
To watch or not to watch: What the hell! Stitch together incoherent pieces together and you get this rag doll. Yea… no.

The movie is set in the 1990s where Agent Lee Harker (Maika Monroe) is with the FBI, is awkward, socially inept, a loner and is discovered to have uncanny “psychic” powers. For this ability, she is pulled into the investigation of a crime 3 decades running, where the patriarch of a totally normal family suddenly goes violent on his family and butchers them all. Her supervisor William Carter (Blair Underwood) wants to solve this case and things that Harker’s psychic abilities might aid in the endeavour. And she does help, as she is able to crack the code on the letters left by an unknown entity known as Longlegs at the murder sites, claiming credit for the murders. The investigation takes Harker to one of the survivors of the annihilation, an in-execution annihilation where a life size doll of the girl child is discovered with a mysterious metal ball in its brain, and back to her own childhood. We do see Longlegs before long and its… interesting? Anyway, the movie is not.

What an utter ridiculous farce of a movie. A wanna-be Silence Of The Lambs, without the substance. Or rather scattered substance which changes tone without so much as a “Hey” and goes about as if nothing has happened. Kinda like that co-worker who has made a mistake which affects the project but is entirely unbothered. (Mild spoilers follow)
The villain/evil character has a Satanic bend and is able to twist the patriarch against the family with the girl child in some sort of trance. But why? Is the agenda to kill all normal families? Why? Is the idea to kill God fearing Christians? Again, why? And these questions stare into the abyss which is the travesty of a horror movie. So much so, that it might have been slightly better if it had stuck to the tropes and made it a cliche. It starts ok, you can see there is something off about Harker and Carter is like a father figure to her, looking beyond the awkwardness and seeing the person, but then enters Alicia Witt as Harker’s mother and then it is throw-everything-to-the-wall-and-see-what-sticks.

The direction of the movie is good. Genuinely. It is specially visible in the first act with the dark yellow and brown tones, slow pace, few dialogues. The choice of a wide angle camera for shooting most of the movie was a good artistic choice, without which they wouldn’t have even enough marketing material. And it so far removed from the promises made during marketing that a case can be made for false advertising. “The sample doesn’t match the final product delivered”. The wide angle remains throughout the movie but it cannot take the place of a story or script or screenplay or agenda. Cage has turned out a good performance (though not many people agree with this), it is not creepy. It gives the vibes of a sad, lonely, retired circus performer who is fighting to make ends meet and is losing sanity due to loneliness. This theme is a social issue, not necessarily a horror movie subject matter. Go back in time and undo this movie. It should not have happened

Immaculate

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://www.imdb.com/

Rating: 2 stars out of 5
Starring: Sydney Sweeney, Álvaro Morte, Simona Tabasco, Dora Romano
Where to watch: Amazon Prime Video
To watch or not to watch: No, for the love of God, no

The opening foreshadowing shot shows a nun sneaking out from a convent in the middle of the night, and running away from that place, only to be caught by a group of nuns at the gates and her legs broken.
Cut to: Sister Cecilia (Sydney Sweeney) is a novice who has moved to a convent in Italy from a small town in The USA at the behest of Father Tedeschi (Álvaro Morte). Her belief in Christianity began at a young age when she was rescued from a frozen lake and died for 7 minutes. This rescue was understandably covered in news and got a bit of virality. And her faith and fate sealed for Christianity. At the convent, she goes about her life normally, making friends and trying to do good, but she also has glimpses of something sinister going on, and it involves the higher-ups (because, of course).

Have you seen Rosemary’s Baby? Yes? Then you have watched this film. Goodbye and good night.
If you haven’t, then watch that rather than this. This movie is the rehashing of same old faith vs fanaticism, where good Christian women are used and abused, and for some reason virginity and purity are equated and highly revered. While this genre of movies is supposed to use the concept of objectification of women as a source of horror, they at the same time unironically do the same thing. In this case for example, Sydney Sweeney regularly received comments about her good looks, is shown bathing with the fellow nuns, etc. “You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become a villain”.
If that was not enough, they have eerie shadows, abruptly cut scenes, and mockery of science (which is the biggest sin of all). Can we please collectively as a society decide we don’t want to weaponise nor demonise religion anymore? Thank you.

The only reason this movie is not a hot pile of stinking garbage is the lead, Sydney Sweeney. She has single-handedly carried the story, to the point where it became apparent she was trying antics to fill the spaces. There are too many scenes filled with screams, needless to say, unwarranted. She was carrying on the movie so she was over-doing things. Sad but forgivable. There is nothing particularly horrifying in this movie, and nothing we haven’t seen before. It takes a different path from Rosemary’s Baby but it is not impactful enough that it redeems itself, because by that time we have waded through a lot of scene-there-heard-that. Its 1.5 hour runtime feels at least twice as long, and it is no wonder it has a current rating of 2.9 on Google and that tells you everything you need to know. Don’t listen to anyone who says it is good, because it is not. Don’t bother.

Exhuma

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment

Rating: 3 stars out of 5
Starring: Kim Go-eun, Lee Do-hyun, Choi Min-sik, Jung Yun-ha, Yoo Hae-jin
Where to watch: Amazon Prime Video
To watch or not to watch: It has the right atmosphere and is deep rooted in spirituality and superstition. Interesting, but not enough

Lee Hwa-rim (Kim Go-eun) is a celebrated shaman in Korea. Her tattooed protégé Yun Bong-gil (Lee Do-hyun) have created a name for themselves and amassed wealth for themselves. A real-estate developer Korean-American family is facing a mysterious illness where the men inheriting the bloodline are falling sick and passing away before their time. They could not find a cure in the western medicine for this, so they turn towards more traditional methods. They contact the shaman for her help, who studies the newborn son of the patriarch and concludes the reason to be “Grave’s Call”, or curse by an ancestor from their grave. The shaman duo enlist the help of geomancer Kim Sang-deok (Choi Min-sik) and his mortician friend Yeong-geun (Hae-jin Yoo). The issue seems to be the ominous location of the grave – on the top of a hill near the border between North and South Korea. They decide to relocate the grave to a holier location which is a prime real estate and earn a lot of money in the process. During the exhumation, they come to face evil which is beyond their power to control.

The movie is very atmospheric, at least in the first half, where the hue is yellow, brown and generally dark. The movements are slow, there is little dialogue or emotion and even lesser laughter. There is a selfish interest in helping the American Park family, question about the legitimacy of shamanism, and the class difference shown through the geomancer’s view. Then it all changes in the second half where we come face-to-face with the evil itself. The reason for the evil to be what it is, is either not present or not explained well (depending on the ability to hear between the dialogues). In addition, there is also a underlying cause (literally) for the curse on the family, which was way out the left field, and in a lets-drag-the-movie-to-make-it-an-acceptable-length-way. It totally leaped over the goal of freeing the Park family to avenging Korea. Not good (did the audience dirty). It could have been shorter if it had only stuck to the story and delivered what it promised.

It is by no means a bad movie. It is like a A-grade student suddenly delivering B grade assignment in their best subject. Not bad, but wasted potential. And disappointing. There is more emphasis on Korean history and what it considers evil. An a non-Korean, it might not have that impact on the reception of the story. It gets the cinematography right. Like, bang on. And the atmosphere with the chanting, drumming and screaming as required. It takes audience on a journey into the netherland along with the actors. And the actors, Wow. It was refreshing to see Kim Go-eun in this mature role and look after Goblin. Lee Do-hyun was unrecognizable in this role and get-up. Everyone performed perfectly. It is what made the movie get 3 stars here, because we should rightly leave looming evil entities to Hollywood.

Why The Autopsy of Jane Doe Is Good and How It Could Have Been Saved

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://www.imdb.com/

Rating: 3.5 stars out of 5
Starring: Brian Cox, Emile Hirsch, Olwen Catherine Kelly
Where to watch: Lionsgate Play
To watch or not to watch: It is a new concept and well done. Though it has its failings, it is worth checking out

Tommy (Brian Cox) and Austin Tilden (Emile Hirsch) are a father-son duo who own an operate a morgue and crematorium in a small town. The place has been with the family for generations but Austin doesn’t feel comfortable working with the dead all day long and is looking for a way out. One day, the town’s sheriff comes to their workplace rather late with a dead body of an unidentified female in her early 20s. She was found in a home where there were multiple homicides and bodies buried in the backyard. Hers was the only body they could not account for, she had no clothes on and no identification. As the father-son start working on the body, they find many inconsistencies – her blood flows from her body even though she is dead, her fingernails have peat under them which has not been found in that part of the country for centuries, her joints are broken but there are no external injuries, her lungs are scarred, but again no external injuries. In fact, they couldn’t account for any of her conditions without going beyond the obvious. They do continue the work despite the difficulties for humanity’s sake, only to find that maybe humanity is not always a virtue.

The concept of the movie is very fresh. It is also a masterclass in making a naked female in full view non-sexual! It is sometimes shocking to realise that there is a naked female on the table (an actual table) and there is no focus on sexuality. Kudos to the team for this.
The horror of the movie comes in slow waves, till it crescendos and ends – it starts with the disconnected finds on the Jane Does eternal body and really takes off when the autopsy reaches her internal body, where they find scar tissue on her lungs, completely blacked out lungs, flower of dathura (a hallucinogen) wrapped in a scribbled cloth, her tooth etc. It is jarring and the audience is left wondering about her life. The movie is also largely a two-parter shot mostly in a claustrophobic environment of the autopsy room. It adds to the creepiness and makes for an uncomfortable watch. In a good way.
There are still problems with it, and that’s unfortunate. The movie is filled with jump scares. For an idea which is this elevated, the jump scares are a cheap ploy (they are a cheap ploy nonetheless). There are some unexplained points, like what really could have happened to her, what is the end goal, what are her powers, and all. That would have made the movie stay on the subject matter. There is also this unnecessary short story of Austin’s love life, which takes about 10 minutes and add absolutely 0 to the movie.

There is something wrong with the people who make horror movies (excluding Peele, Ari Aster, A24 productions, and all). Or the genre might be difficult to execute, people who are in the business would be better equipped to comment on this. Given the tripe we have been served, the latter might be true. It is easy to fall into the trap of crescendo music which culminates abruptly, dark corners with a hint of something lurking behind it. The one movie which plays with shadows well would be Hereditary aided a million times by the perfect acting by Toni Collette. The fact that someone has taken a great concept of an alleged witch semi-dead wielding her powers, and made a lukewarm movie off it, is sad and disappointing. Maybe somewhere down the line someone decides to revive this movie with a remake and does it right. Also, can we please pick good concept movies executed badly and make them better? And not do the vice versa? Thanks.

Inside Man – a study on wasting good actors with bad writing

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://m.imdb.com/

Rating: 2 stars out of 5
Starring: David Tennant, Stanley Tucci
Where to watch: Netflix
Seasons and episodes: 1 season, 4 episodes, 1 hour per episode
To watch or not to watch: Please skip this despite the stellar cast

The series opens with Jefferson Grieff (Stanley Tucci) in a prison cell helping someone solve a murder. He is a former American law professor convicted of murdering his wife, to which he confessed and is haunted by his act. In the parallel, there is Harry Watling (David Tennant) who is a vicar in a small town in England. He has a troubled parishioner Edgar who lives with his verbally abusive mother. Edgar hands a memory stick to Harry to safe keep, away from his mother. Harry picks up his son’s maths tutor Janice Fife (Dolly Wells), reaches home and deposits his keys and memory stick in a bowl at the entrance. Harry’s son Ben (Louis Oliver) gives the stick to Janice to transfer some material. Janice pokes her nose into what is stored on the drive to find child p*rn, and thinks Harry is a pedophile. This leads to a lot of misunderstandings, and a comedy of errors.

If they had made the series into a real comedy instead of whatever it was, it would have gone down better with the audience. From the opening scene with Tucci’s Hannibal-esque Grieff acting as a consultant because somehow he is a criminal mastermind to the taking of memory stick home, when it was equally safe in the church is farcical. Ben tries to save his father by declaring ownership of the offending memory stick, but the father is digging a deeper hole for himself. Maths tuition and all is fine, but maybe a cognitive understanding class was more needed in this household. There was no confusion which couldn’t be solved by a simple conversation with Janice, which would have taken barely 5 sentences and need not involve Edgar’s identity. Instead, Janice is locked in the basement, she is a believer in making a bad situation worse, by the way (maybe she also needs lessons in cognitive understanding), Tucci is doing something, which has nothing to do with anyone or anything but still features in the series, and there is a reporter investigating Janice’s disappearance? SOS, brain not computing.

Netflix, my dear Netflix, what is wrong hun? All ok? Childhood trauma working overtime? Why take the stellar cast, drive up your production cost and not have someone go through the script once? How did you even get Tucci and Tennant to sign up? Are you blackmailing them? Ok, apologies, got carried away for a bit there, but then the series is unbelievably bad. And the actors did a fantastic job. So much so that a case can be made that Janice was the real villain (and if you go by some of the reviews online, many writers have the same opinion), such is the residual emotion for her character. Listen, the premise is great, and with good writing, it might even make for a beautiful thriller. But working with what was given to us, unfortunately it makes for a horrible horrible play, which cannot be saved by acting alone. Please do better.