Skip to main content

A shitting bird just shat in my eye!

Last Christmas
(2019)

(SPOILERS) Facile Christmas fare, just pre-Coof – so last, last Christmas – from the pen of premiere luvvie Emma Thompson, whose prior foray into original comedy was disastrous 1988 sketch comedy Thompson, and Paul Feig, whose major claim to fame henceforth will be inflicting the femidom Ghostbusters on an undeserving world. Last Christmas isn’t so much bad as aggressively smug in its affluent-Left, Blair-mare virtue signalling, helping itself to a slice of the self-satisfied romcom pie usually reserved for Richard Curtis (there’s even a reference to “middle-class do-gooders” so Em’s at least slightly self-aware).

I was quite ready to like Last Christmas, though. After all, I like a fair few Curtis comedies. Well, okay. A couple. I don’t consider Emilia Clarke (Kate) or Henry Golding (Tom) any great shakes in the acting stakes, but neither are intensely dislikeable (and Clarke’s best showing might have been in another of her death-fare pics – perhaps a consequence of the aneurysm she suffered a decade ago – Me Before You). But both leads’ naggingly textureless quality is only emphasised by Thompson’s premise (well, twist, if you somehow managed to make it through the proceedings oblivious).

She and hubby Greg Wise came up with the story, and she and Bryony Kimmings penned the screenplay, a variant on Bob Hoskins/Denzel Washington classic Heart Condition, whereby Clarke’s Kate received Goldings’ Tom’s pristine ticker the previous year. His actual ticker, but you know, like the Wham! song. So not.

This is thus the upbeat – but bittersweet with it – flipside to Michael Caine classic The Hand or Body Parts (which is pretty good), where the only deleterious effects of a transplant operation, besides just feeling “half-dead” and becoming an alcoholic slapper, are seeing dead people. Just more Ghost than The Sixth Sense.

Not for Last Christmas the messiness of rejection meds. Oh no. Kate’s year following the op has been one long shagged-out hangover. So, while the picture does pay lip service to the shock of suddenly finding foreign materials in one’s system – very popular just now – and nods to a romantic-spiritual idea of continuance, it scrupulously avoids any deeper delving into the subject. Which is, obviously, one advocated by materialist-atheist western medicine.

Kate is roused from her hedonistic fug by Tom, so sparking new spins on her relationships with those closest – mum Petra (Thompson), sister Marta (Lydia Leonard) and Christmas shopkeeper boss “Santa” (Michelle Yeoh) – as well as a spate of self-improvement as she quits auditioning for theatre and begins volunteering at a homeless shelter. Yeah, I know, you can see Emma doing the same. But only once a year, mind. And that’s if she isn’t too busy entertaining fellow luvs.

Thompson is, of course, a card-carrying, good-progressive-causes namedropper, such that her romcom offers a series of swipes at backwards, racist Brexit. That’s right, Emma, essaying a stereotypical comedy foreigner for our utmost amusement, denounces those actually racist folks, the ones launching into offensive diatribes at poor humble immigrants on public transport across the nation (“Why don’t you go back to where you came from!”) Along with jokes about lesbian pudding (she loves them really, hence the presence of popular TV lesbian Sue Perkins) and how funny/happy/brimming with character homeless people all are, all wrapped up in a bow of ineffectual inclusiveness.

The highlight is probably the actually-quite-sweet romance between Crimbo-loving Santa and Boy (Peter Mygind). Yeoh generally fares better than those diving headfirst into Thompson’s dialogue, as she can’t help but deadpan (some would say that’s because she’s naturally rather wooden, but not me. No fear). The insistent George Michael songs ought to have got massively on my tits, as he was never my favourite crooner, but were surprisingly less aggravating than Feig’s entirely craftless depiction of Yule London.

The thing is, it’s very easy to go very wrong with a Crimbo movie. Mainly because they’re considered no-brainers, so why put the effort in; it only really counts as a failure if you fail to make money on them. When that happens, it means something is very, very wrong (Fred Claus, for example). Last Christmas made more than enough dough, and it’s sufficiently inoffensive that it might even become something of a staple in some quarters. If it can happen to Love, Actually, it can happen to any overeggnogged Yule log.


Popular posts from this blog

The Bible never said anything about amphetamines.

The Color of Money (1986) (SPOILERS) I tend to think it’s evident when Scorsese isn’t truly exercised by material. He can still invest every ounce of the technical acumen at his fingertips, and the results can dazzle on that level, but you don’t really feel the filmmaker in the film. Which, for one of his pictures to truly carry a wallop, you need to do. We’ve seen quite a few in such deficit in recent years, most often teaming with Leo. The Color of Money , however, is the first where it was out-and-out evident the subject matter wasn’t Marty’s bag. He needed it, desperately, to come off, but in the manner a tradesman who wants to keep getting jobs. This sequel to The Hustler doesn’t linger in the mind, however good it may be, moment by moment.

I said I had no family. I didn’t say I had an empty apartment.

The Apartment (1960) (SPOILERS) Billy Wilder’s romcom delivered the genre that rare Best Picture Oscar winner. Albeit, The Apartment amounts to a rather grim (now) PG-rated scenario, one rife with adultery, attempted suicide, prostitution of the soul and subjective thereof of the body. And yet, it’s also, finally, rather sweet, so salving the darker passages and evidencing the director’s expertly judged balancing act. Time Out ’s Tom Milne suggested the ending was a cop out (“ boy forgives girl and all’s well ”). But really, what other ending did the audience or central characters deserve?

Listen to the goddamn qualified scientists!

Don’t Look Up (2021) (SPOILERS) It’s testament to Don’t Look Up ’s “quality” that critics who would normally lap up this kind of liberal-causes messaging couldn’t find it within themselves to grant it a free pass. Adam McKay has attempted to refashion himself as a satirist since jettisoning former collaborator Will Ferrell, but as a Hollywood player and an inevitably socio-politically partisan one, he simply falls in line with the most obvious, fatuous propagandising.

Your desecration of reality will not go unpunished.

2021-22 Best-of, Worst-of and Everything Else Besides The movies might be the most visible example of attempts to cling onto cultural remnants as the previous societal template clatters down the drain. It takes something people really want – unlike a Bond movie where he kicks the can – to suggest the model of yesteryear, one where a billion-dollar grosser was like sneezing. You can argue Spider-Man: No Way Home is replete with agendas of one sort or another, and that’s undoubtedly the case (that’s Hollywood), but crowding out any such extraneous elements (and they often are) is simply a consummate crowd-pleaser that taps into tangible nostalgia through its multiverse take. Of course, nostalgia for a mere seven years ago, for something you didn’t like anyway, is a symptom of how fraught these times have become.

Doctors make the worst patients.

Coma (1978) (SPOILERS) Michael Crichton’s sophomore big-screen feature, and by some distance his best. Perhaps it’s simply that this a milieu known to him, or perhaps it’s that it’s very much aligned to the there-and-now and present, but Coma , despite the occasional lapse in this adaptation of colleague Robin Cook’s novel, is an effective, creepy, resonant thriller and then some. Crichton knows his subject, and it shows – the picture is confident and verisimilitudinous in a way none of his other directorial efforts are – and his low-key – some might say clinical – approach pays dividends. You might also call it prescient, but that would be to suggest its subject matter wasn’t immediately relevant then too.

You ruined every suck-my-silky-ass thing!

The Matrix Resurrections (2021) (SPOILERS) Warner Bros has been here before. Déjà vu? What happens when you let a filmmaker do whatever they want? And I don’t mean in the manner of Netflix. No, in the sequel sense. You get a Gremlins 2: The New Batch (a classic, obviously, but not one that financially furthered a franchise). And conversely, when you simply cash in on a brand, consequences be damned? Exorcist II: The Heretic speaks for itself. So in the case of The Matrix Resurrections – not far from as meta as The New Batch , but much less irreverent – when Thomas “Tom” Anderson, designer of globally successful gaming trilogy The Matrix , is told “ Our beloved company, Warner Bros, has decided to make a sequel to the trilogy ” and it’s going ahead “with or without us”, you can be fairly sure this is the gospel. That Lana, now going it alone, decided it was better to “make the best of it” than let her baby be sullied. Of course, quite what that amounts to in the case of a movie(s) tha

You just threw a donut in the hot zone!

Den of Thieves (2018) (SPOILERS) I'd heard this was a shameless  Heat  rip-off, and the presence of Gerard Butler seemed to confirm it would be passable-at-best B-heist hokum, so maybe it was just middling expectations, even having heard how enthused certain pockets of the Internet were, but  Den of Thieves  is a surprisingly very satisfying entry in the genre. I can't even fault it for attempting to Keyser Soze the whole shebang at the last moment – add a head in a box and you have three 1995 classics in one movie – even if that particular conceit doesn’t quite come together.

It’s always possible to find a good moral reason for killing anybody.

The Assassination Bureau (1969) (SPOILERS) The Assassination Bureau ought to be a great movie. You can see its influence on those who either think it is a great movie, or want to produce something that fulfils its potential. Alan Moore and The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen . The just-released (and just-flopped) The King’s Men . It inhabits a post-Avengers, self-consciously benign rehearsal of, and ambivalence towards, Empire manners and attitudes, something that could previously be seen that decade in Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines (and sequel Monte Carlo or Bust , also 1969), Adam Adamant Lives! , and even earlier with Kind Hearts and Coronets , whilst also feeding into that “Peacock Revolution” of Edwardian/Victorian fashion refurbishment. Unfortunately, though, it lacks the pop-stylistic savvy that made, say, The President’s Analyst so vivacious.

Abandon selective targeting. Shoot everything.

28 Weeks Later (2007) (SPOILERS) The first five minutes of 28 Weeks Later are far and away the best part of this sequel, offering in quick succession a devastating moral quandary and a waking nightmare, immortalised on the screen. After that, while significantly more polished, Juan Carlos Fresnadillo reveals his concept to be altogether inferior to Danny Boyle and Alex Garland’s, falling back on the crutches of gore, nihilism, and disengaging and limiting shifts of focus between characters in whom one has little investment in the first place.

This guy’s armed with a hairdryer.

An Innocent Man (1989) (SPOILERS) Was it a chicken-and-egg thing with Tom Selleck and movies? Did he consistently end up in ropey pictures because other, bigger big-screen stars had first dibs on the good stuff? Or was it because he was a resolutely small-screen guy with limited range and zero good taste? Selleck had about half-a-dozen cinema outings during the 1980s, one of which, the very TV, very Touchstone Three Men and a Baby was a hit, but couldn’t be put wholly down to him. The final one was An Innocent Man , where he attempted to show some grit and mettle, as nice-guy Tom is framed and has to get tough to survive. Unfortunately, it’s another big-screen TV movie.