Ballerina

In The Wick Of Time

Ballerina
aka From The World 
Of John Wick - Ballerina
Directed by Len Wiseman (and Chad Stahelski)
USA/Hungary 2025
Lionsgate
UK Cinema Release Print

Warning: Some spoilers of a sort.

After her big action sequence in the last James Bond movie (No Time To Die, reviewed here) which was, let’s be honest, the only good bit in that entire movie... it was inevitable that someone would have to give Ana de Armas a big action vehicle and, this ‘spin off’ set in ‘the world of John Wick’, called Ballerina, is it. And, I’m glad to report, it’s not the mess that some of its critics and its troubled shooting history would suggest it to be. I had a blast with it, in fact and the story has a very strong through line. Maybe some people just weren’t paying attention.

Okay, so this was never intended to be a John Wick adjacent movie when the script was first written but it was adapted and things were kinda shoehorned in (it does have some slight problems which I’ll get into later but they don’t really detract from the movie as a whole). And even when it was adapted, I don’t think John Wick was originally supposed to have been in it. From what I’m hearing, Len Wiseman’s original cut of the movie was considered a dud in some quarters and so original John Wick director Chad Stahelski had to jump on and do extensive reshoots... and I mean a lot of them from what I am hearing. Which explains a) why this has taken so long to come to screen from when I first heard about it and b) why Lance Reddick is in it as the concierge of The Continental once more... so this was actually his last screen role before his untimely death... along with Ian McShane’s Winston, of course. 

So this is a standard revenge movie with a couple of minor twists but mostly just long and pretty good action sequences. After her father is killed for reasons she’ll discover near the end of the movie, Ana de Armas’ character Eve (taking over from a minor role version of the same character played by someone else in one of the earlier movies) is trained by the branch of the High Table run by Angelica Houston (who gives the whole thing a little more gravitas). She then goes out as an assassin but, soon she gets wind of a path to vengeance and takes it, disrupting the truce between Houston’s people and a group of outsiders, who I’ll get to in a minute.

It’s action all the way including a final act (where she ends up meeting John Wick for a second time, as he’s sent out to stop her) which involves her inadvertently taking on a whole mountain village community who, it turns out, are all trained assassins, lead by the big bad of the movie, played by Gabriel Byrne. And everyone is great in this, especially de Armas. And a big shout out to From star Catalina Sandino Moreno as one of those assassins and also, as one of the concierges, Nikita herself, Anne Parillaud.

There are a couple of problems with, in my opinion, shoehorning in the John Wick stuff, as good as that stuff is. Firstly, his involvement in the final third of the movie didn’t, to me, make sense to where his character is at that point. He should be off the grid and resting up to take on the high table one last time, not working for Angelica Houston. This was all something which could have easily been solved just by setting it either earlier or even before the first couple of movies.

Secondly, the ‘cult’ of assassins, who have not been mentioned once in the series and who don’t play by the rules of the High Table (and yet have a truce with them) makes no sense in this as world building. The whole premise of the world in which these assassins operate revolves around the concept of ‘rules and consequences’... this bunch shouldn’t really be able to exist in this manner, it seems to me... when they are able to launch an attack on the ‘hallowed ground’ of The Continental. That should never happen in this world, surely?

Other than that though, Ana de Armas fighting her way through an entire village of enemies involving death by china plate, death by ice skates and a standout fight between a flame thrower and a water hose... well, it’s all good stuff although, those stunts looked really dangerous (there are a lot of burning people in this movie). But that’s me done with Ballerina... don’t let some of the negative reviews put you off. This one is a real crowd pleaser for the John Wick brigade and I certainly had a good time with it.  

No Time To Die

 



A Die For A Die

No Time To Die
UK/USA 2021
Directed by Cary Joji Fukunaga
EON Productions
Blu Ray Zone B

Let me once more state for the record that I don’t have anything against Daniel Craig. In fact, I think he’s a great actor. He’s just got the wrong colour hair for James Bond and, also, I just don’t like any of the Craig Bond films. I’d frankly rather watch him in other roles. That being said, my expectations were hopeful for No Time To Die because I was receiving some very mixed, word of mouth reviews from the various friends I have. For instance, my die hard, Bond fanatical friend Chris, who usually has very few bad words to say about the Daniel Craig Bond films, was very disappointed with this one... thinking it one of the all time lows of the series, from what I can make out. Conversely, my cousin Steve said this was one of the very best Bond films and went back to his local cinema in Australia to see it a number of times. So, yeah, I thought this one would at least be interesting if it was dividing people’s opinion so much.

Alas, I have to report back that this latest outing for England’s popular secret agent has a lot in common with the previous Craig films, as far as I’m concerned... in that it’s very boring, drab, dull and any other descriptions which could be best summed up with the modern term... meh! My initial response once the film had concluded was... how can they make a movie which was both worse than Quantum Of Solace (reviewed here) and simultaneously, unbelievably more boring than Octopussy (reviewed here)?

Once again, the film picks up the plot threads from the previous Craig films, allowing them to all be seen as one single arc. We catch up with a now retired Bond living with his girlfriend Madeleine (Léa Seydoux reprising her role from S.P.E.C.T.R.E, reviewed here) but then, of course, Bond manages to find himself back in the thick of the action and attempting to save the world from yet another super villain, this time in the form of Safin (played by Rami Malek).

And... it’s a bit of a yawn, to be honest. The fact that the opening gun barrel sequence has Bond missing his target for the first time ever in the history of the EON Bond films (there’s no red blood washing it out in this version... just a really awkward transition), should have given me a heads up. The pre-credits sequence is certainly plot and character motivated but it forgets to be a big blast of action like the many James Bond films before it. I mean, there’s definitely a little action there but just as it starts to get going it’s already over and we are into a quite dreary opening title animation accompanied by a similarly dreary opening song. Sadly, this is a good guide to how the rest of the film is going to go... it’s a long, slow burn (running two and three quarter hours) with very few action sequences and, for the most part, not enough ooomph in them to really deliver the kind of pace and energy a loyal legion of Bond fans might expect from the franchise. This would perhaps explain why the response to the movie in my timeline on Twitter has been lukewarm at best.

Now, I was pretty careful to pick up absolutely no spoilers for this one before I fired up the Blu Ray but, alas, as I’d revealed to my friend @cultofthecinema on the phone a few days before, I was pretty sure how the movie was going to end (using the same kind of casting information with which I’d predicted, a couple of years before release, a certain event which takes place towards the end of the Star Wars movie The Force Awakens). And, yes, I was dead right on that one. I really don’t want to give away the ending of the film here but, even if I’d had no suspicion before the movie started as to the final trajectory of the story, the writers and director manage to telegraph it so much that it’s pretty much a foregone conclusion by the midway mark. Scenes which would have been better occurring at the end of the movie play out earlier than you might expect and, by some point, I suspect most people in the audience would realise there’s a reason why certain plot points are explored more fully before the final innings, so to speak.

Okay, enough on that. Let me say something positive here. There are two things I did like about the movie. One was the brief but effective scenes where a new character played Ana de Armas shares the one good action scene with her Knives Out co-star Daniel Craig. I could have done with a lot more of her character in the movie, to be honest.

And the other thing was Hans Zimmer’s score. He’s done a wonderful job on this one and managed to deliver a nice score which really gets to the heart of what the John Barry and early David Arnold scores were about. I love Zimmer but I was really surprised he was able to pull something like this off. He also interpolates various themes from the classic Bond film On Her Majesty’s Secret Service (reviewed here) for the score and, although the film doesn’t reference the plot of that movie at all (how could it when the Craig films were supposed to be a total reboot), there are a lot of musical echoes of it... enough to inject a kind of ‘surrogate nostalgia’ into the movie, it has to be said. Probably didn't need that ‘emotional association by proxy’ though. Not that there aren’t a lot of visual references to previous Bond films from the history of the franchise in the movie anyway... bit of a strange kind of homage. Nevertheless, I thought Zimmer did a remarkable job with the music... although now I know why there wasn’t too much action music on the CD soundtrack... you can only score what’s on the screen, I guess.

Okay, my biggest problem with the movie is it’s far too long. And that makes no sense since, not long after a scene where M and Bond are at each others throats and Bond is not welcome to return to active duty, it’s almost immediately followed up by them being all pally again and Bond being recruited for the mission. I can only assume that some kind of sequence of events which would have led to this change of heart was cut from the movie to get the time down. Even so, the film drags so much that, you have to wonder why the producers and director didn’t get the editor to trim another hour out of it.

All in all, then, I didn’t have a good time with No Time To Die. I wish Craig all the best in the world and hope to see him in some more movies soon but, as far as Bond films are concerned, I think I’m more than happy to see the back of him. If the series is to continue, as it implies right at the end with the familiar caption ‘James Bond Will Return’, it will have to be a hard reboot with, I suspect, a much younger actor. But let’s see what happens with the ageing producers before we count any more chickens, would be my final word on that.

Blade Runner 2049

Morphology. Longevity. Incept Dates.

Blade Runner 2049
2017 USA/UK/Canada
Directed by Denis Villeneuve
UK cinema release print.

Warning: I could have written a spoiler free review here but I decided I wanted to address the issues that this film throws up a little more freely. So, fair warning, all the big spoilers will be covered here. If you don’t want to know this stuff then don’t read until after you’ve seen the movie. Lots of spoilerage per paragraph and you won’t see them coming until I blindside you with them so, seriously, if you don’t want to know, don’t read further than this warning paragraph.

To paraphrase another famous movie, this was not the sequel I was looking for.

That being said, I really wasn’t looking for a sequel to Blade Runner at all and I’ve always dreaded, even back in the 1980s when the subject first came up, that anyone would ever get around to doing one. I’ve already made clear my thoughts on the first film, which I first saw at the cinema in 1982 in its most perfect cut (as far as I’m concerned), the original studio cut. You can read my Blade Runner review here where I look at the various cuts of the movie and also detail my personal relationship with the film, helping to keep the movie alive long after it expired as a box office flop by going to see it with my friend at various midnight screenings before it suddenly started to gain popularity again in the 1990s. I must have seen the first movie somewhere between 50 and 100 times by now and so, yeah, I have a lot to be compromised by a bad sequel to a perfect movie which, lets be honest, doesn’t really need a follow up anyway.

So the first and most positive thing I will say about it is... it’s not a terrible movie. It’s actually, in fact, a pretty well made, modern science fiction film which harkens back to the 1950s or earlier for its central themes... themes which writer Philip K. Dick, who wrote the original source novel pillaged by the first movie, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, explored on a number of occasions in his writing career. So, for a nice, adult themed, science fiction movie... yeah, Blade Runner 2049 is quite successful in that sense.

As a sequel to the original film both in look and in spirit though... well that’s another matter and, much as I like Villeneuve as a director, I don’t think he does either of those things justice here.

For example, the film does, indeed, look spectacular but, honestly, compared to the look of the original movie which, it seemed to me, was much denser and more coherent in its portrayal of a crowded, urban environment in meltdown... this film felt a little inconsistent and sketchy. Maybe it’s because none of the establishing shots or fly bys of the various environments are long enough but... it didn’t really hit me the way it should do, I think.

The director eschews the classic opening titles of the first film and cuts to the intro text. At various places in the film we get text highlighting the various locations but, I can tell you, I was sitting fairly close to the front with a giant screen and those titles were so small I could barely make them out. The white type just about but the red type just above them... no way. Goodness knows how this would play in a home environment with a smaller screen. We then get a vista of landscape and, while its set in a different environment and we still get the giant eyeball shot to echo the first movie, it just all feels a bit ‘by the numbers’ to me. I’ve seen the first movie a gazillion times on some great screens and, almost without fail, the opening shots of the city on that old one flip flops your stomach over and dazzles with the sheer spectacle. Alas, this movie doesn’t have anything nearly as close as that opening and... yeah... I really felt it.

One thing this film does have which is similar to the original in terms of positive stuff is a cast of very good actors. Ryan Gosling is amazing (as he pretty much always is), Harrison Ford is... well, he’s Harrison Ford (so that means he’s always watchable), Ana de Armas  is pretty great as Gosling’s virtual companion, Sylvia Hoeks as a ‘bad gal’ replicant is actually more like the ‘andies’ in the original Dick novel than Ridley Scott’s movie (in that she’s actually genuinely evil rather than the like the morally superior replicants of the first movie) and Mackenzie Davis looks stunning as a working gal replicant who slinks about and is dressed similarly to Daryl Hannah’s Pris from the first movie. The film does, indeed, try and echo a lot of the beats of the first film and the gait of this particular character is one of the things which actually works as an homage here, I thought.

And then you have two genuinely outstanding performances which I think were worth the entry fee... although they are both fairly small roles. One is Robin Wright as Gosling’s boss. She really knocks it out of the park here playing an equivalent role to Deckard’s old boss Bryant from the first film in terms of inherent species-ism. She was great in Wonder Woman (reviewed here) and she is truly, old school, hard boiled, tough as nails here. Her final scene in the movie opposite Sylvia Hoeks is pretty memorable. And then we have David Bautista playing a truly sympathetic replicant. He shines in, literally, his only scene in the movie which is the opening sequence. I’m beginning to really like what this actor can do and this is the most interesting thing I’ve seen him perform so... yeah, very impressed with his performance here. So those two were the stand out performances for me in this film, it has to be said.

About that opening sequence though?

Well, it’s something I’ve been half wanting to see since 1982 in that it’s a throwback in spirit to an early draft of Blade Runner, as a way of establishing what the central protagonist does in an action sequence. Here it further serves to establish that Ryan Gosling’s character 'K' is also a superhuman replicant... so it proves useful. It also kickstarts the story when certain ‘clues’ are found on the farm residence where Bautista’s character is working. Instead of pulling the retired replicant’s jaw bone out and revealing a serial number as in that old draft screenplay I am referring to from the first film, Gosling just harvests one of the characters eyes as proof of something he already knows from what amounts to a mini, portable Voight Kampff test replacement he carries in his pocket. It’s actually a pretty good scene and plays with a lot of tension... Villeneuve using that ‘old chestnut’ of the boiling pot in the corner as a way of enhancing the suspense of the scene. And it works really well here. Here’s the thing, though... I remember back in the early 1980s, Phiilp K. Dick complaining about that scene when he read it in the script and saying that it was one of the worst things he’d read (or words to that effect), condemning the tone of the film Ridley Scott was about to make (although I understand that, from what footage was available of the original that Dick actually saw back in 1982 before his untimely death, he really liked the final film Ridley was making and praised it wholeheartedly). However, I can’t help but think that, with the reintroduction of a variant on that opening (which I kinda guessed they would be doing here, to be fair), he would be turning in his grave.

One of the things which I’ve always loved about the original is the fact that Deckard is never portrayed as being a replicant... something Scott tried to change on all subsequent versions of the movie. There are lots of reasons why he actually wouldn’t be a replicant (quite apart from the fact that Philip K. Dick’s original novel explores the same issue more implicitly and categorically states that he’s not an android)... for instance the weakness of him against any other replicant in the film (newer model or not). In fact he actually gets rescued from death by two replicants in that first film... admittedly by one who is trying to, at first, kill him at the end of the picture in the case of one of them. I’ve never believed for a moment that Deckard could ever be a replicant, despite Scott continuing to say he is... because the evidence just doesn’t stack up. My biggest worry would be that this film would paint him as a replicant but the writers are quite clever here. We have a scenario where Jared Leto’s Niander Wallace character... a more evil equivalent of Doctor Eldon Tyrell from the first movie... kinda assumes that Deckard is but poses the question to him because he isn’t certain.

And... I still think he isn’t. And here’s why...

Villeneuve has gone on record that the original studio cut is his favourite (like me) but that he’s made this one as a sequel to the Final Cut. I think not, actually. This film seems to me to be a sequel more to the original studio cut than people might, at first, realise. The story involves Gosling’s ‘K’ hunting the child of Deckard and his replicant lover from the first film, Rachel (played by Sean Young back in 1982 and again... wait, I’ll get to that in a minute). The back story here is that Rachel died about five years after 2019, in childbirth, due to a C-section. So there you go, if I got my timelines correct, already the film is sequelling the original ‘drive off in to the sunset’ ending where Rachel is deemed a special replicant with no built in, four year life span. Secondly, if Deckard was a replicant then how could he have impregnated Rachel? One or the other sex would surely be manufactured as impotent? Especially since a lot of them were destined to be ‘pleasure models’ and engage in sexual activity. After all, if you’re making replicants, you surely don’t want your male replicants running around shooting anything other than blanks in the reproduction department, do you? So, yeah, I’m happy to say that, as far as I’m concerned, this movie categorically proves Deckard is not a replicant. Finally. End of discussion and we can finally return to seeing that original ending with the origami unicorn fashioned by Edward James Olmos’ character Gaff (who returns in a brief scene with another origami animal here), as the metaphor for Deckard believing in a myth, for what it was. Thank goodness.

Okay... so Rachel. Just under a year ago I complained about the bad job the computer graphics guys had done with resurrecting Peter Cushing’s character in Rogue One (reviewed here). Something I still  stick by now. Well, we have a similar disappointment here where Niander Wallace has created a new version of Rachel who looks somewhat similar to what she did in the original (presumably voiced by Sean Young? It doesn’t say in the IMDB). Except, like Cushing in Rogue One, the CGI character looks really dodgy to me and if I didn’t know she was a recreation of a younger character, I would still see that something was really ‘off’ about her here. This just doesn’t work for me and although the way the character bows out of the film is quite dramatic, it kind of takes the edge off any emotional response to the character I might have had, I think.

One last thing...

There’s a scene in Dick’s original novel emphasising the lack of empathy the androids have which is where, after finally saving enough money up to afford to buy a real animal (a sheep which Deckard names Groucho), one of the female androids throws it off the roof and kills it. There’s a similar incident going for the same emotional beat here, where Gosling’s virtual companion has deliberately put herself in a situation where she has become... for all intents and purposes... mortal. The lead replicant villainess destroys her in a similar throwaway moment and this, at least, is something which I think Philip K. Dick might have been able to appreciate. So there’s that.

Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch’s new score is trying hard to be like the Vangelis original but it gets way too overbearing a lot of the time. I would have preferred to hear what Jóhann Jóhannson would have done with the movie before he ‘left’ the project. Interestingly, there’s a moment at the end where, from what I can tell, ‘K’ dies from his wounds. As he lets go of his life, we get a new version of the Vangelis Tears In Rain music from the original movie, which underscored the death of Rutger Hauer’s character. However, since the replicants don’t seem to die from injuries too seriously unless shot somewhere vital, it seems to me that you could interpret this moment as 'K' just having a rest for a while. After all, there’s no visual metaphor like the release of the dove from the replicant’s dying hands as in the 1982 version. So it’s interesting that, unless you know the music, you may not realise the character has died at the end, I suspect. However, I could be wrong and placing too much emphasis on the strength of the original score, to be fair. The soundtrack is filled with lots of similar (and in some cases identical), ambient sound effects as the template movie and sometimes, just like the original, you may have a hard time trying to work out where the music ends and the sound design kicks in.

The thing which the story did really well is to actually fool me with the twist reveal of the child of Deckard and Rachel. I was pretty sure who it was all the way through the movie until this moment it’s spelled out and it gives the character in question a new beat, as it were, in that the person is obviously ‘recruiting’ a replicant army by giving memories to various artificial characters. It’s a nice moment in a film which looks great (although not nearly as good as the original) and is full of nice moments such as this. However, for me, even though it’s trying, it just doesn’t feel anything like a sequel to Blade Runner. It doesn’t quite get there... but it does get close on the odd occasion.

One last piece of symmetry with the original, though, was the audience size. When the film came out and flopped back in ‘82, I remember being in a cinema with my parents and there were literally maybe just over ten people in the audience. Well, quite surprisingly, since this new movie has had such high praise, I found myself in the same situation in a 3D screening on opening night, where there were again just over ten people. Which puzzled me and, I can tell you, I saw two couples walk out of the movie at various points. Which I find quite interesting because, whether it lives up to the original or not (and I’m siding with ‘not’), it’s still quite a nice piece of cinema on its own merits.

My friend, who I have been seeing screenings of the original film with since the mid 1980s, was with me for this performance and I think his reaction to the movie pretty much sums it up the best for me. As we both left the cinema, he looked in about as pretty much a state of mixed irritation and dejection with Blade Runner 2049 as I was feeling. He turned to me and said six words... “What was the point of that?” Other than to point out the studio were going for some cash again, I really couldn’t think of a good answer or disagree with his sentiment. For me, I’m afraid, it’s too bad this sequel won’t live... but then again, who does?