The plot is slow and builds tension expertly, however, and is engaging. A true crime writer, who is admittedly disorganised, alcoholic and very emotionally affected by it, moves his family into a house where a murder has taken place to research and write about it. He finds the killer's home recordings of the murders; more that just the one he's researching. It's not immediately clear if the stress and whiskey are getting to him or if a paranormal entity is stalking him. Masterful use of light and dark give us the horror of unpenetratable shadow that could be hiding something while keeping the action itself well-lit. The jump scares are masterful, giving adrenaline spikes and breaking the tension without being treated as the horror itself. That being said, there are one or two that are scary in themselves.

As well as some amazing jumpscares, there is a beautifully theatrical sequence that would make the film worth watching even if it were bad. Luckily, it isn't bad, its brilliant. Who or what is behind the murders? Is he being stalked by the serial killer or is he sleepwalking and having night terrors like his son? The acting is superb, with believable anger and fear so real you'd be forgiven for fogetting it's fiction. While the marketing for the film plays heavily on the mythos behind the monster, "Mr. Boogie", and the idea that once you see him you're doomed, it doesn't come up in the film until at least four fifths of the way through.

Without spoiling it, the ending has a sense of closing the book on all the foreshadowing that came before. In this way it also turns seemingly aside moments into foreshadowing and answers all the fridge logic questions you hadn't realised you had. The moments that are for the audience only are what gives a lingering feeling of unease, and there is the posibility for a sequence without the obvious bait of a concept-milking series. 

Daniel Craig seemed like he would be a sleek or hard-boiled detective, before bringing his Texan-accented fun Benoit Blanc to life. Edward Norton, notoriously difficult to work with, was the perfect self-aware choice for unlikeable Elon-a-like Miles. Janelle Monae is the multifaceted actual protagonist Andi, Dave Bautista as the dumb muscle streamer, Kathryn Hahn as the career woman politician; all of which they were brilliantly cast.

This snapshot moment that Glass Onion is set in, paired with the celebrity version of the closed room mystery, gives this film a much more satirical aspect. The humour and genre keep it light, but there's some razor sharp critique and well-deserved mockery of both certain famous people and their entire out-of-touch celebrity world. The ending, combining the murderer's comeuppance and some political justice, gives the audience a strong gleeful feeling of vengeance and schadenfreude.

However, this isn't just a good murder mystery and satire, it's a really good film. Full use is made of flashbacks, either revealing a more detailed or alternative view of a previous scene or giving you a chance to rewatch a moment with the perspective of new information. Blanc's talk through of the murder is shown, masterfully, with different characters as murderer in each shot. The changed scenes are especially brilliant, the time equivalent of a zoom in on something. Foreshadowing hangs deliberately and obviously in multiple places, keeping the tension high with a "but which of those is it?" for the observant. Things that don't quite seem right are revealed as deliberate clues and as red herrings.

A talented and worthy sequel to the first Knives Out, Glass Onion is an exciting and enjoyable caper. If a third Knives Out is made, and it's as good as this, it could be an iconic series.

The setting, a sprawling storage unit building, is a maze-like collection of corridors and storage units: A dingy and confusing location that fits perfectly into the liminal spaces that are popular in horror at the moment. In parallel to the seemingly endless and identical corridors is the constant building of tension. With the protagonist's racism, each other character seems like a potential problem. Will the black storage building owner snap after what is clearly years of disrespect? Will the Spanish-speaking woman who openly curses him get her revenge? Will the mysterious and shady German collector of the arcane betray him?

When the reveal finally comes, and with it the body horror, it hangs in the air for a moment, letting the audience really savour it. As the opening short in an anthology, it brings strong promise. A balance of what feels like an age-old cautionary tale with a very current setting, strong acting and incredible quality visuals bodes incredibly well for the shorts that follow. It is curated and introduced by the body-horror (and scales-forward) Guillermo del Toro, so while he isn't the director of any or the writer of most of the scripts and short stories, he is happy to put his name and face centre stage. Lot 36 is his script and his short story, and is definitely well worth watching for any horror fan.

When they discover a way to bring the dead back to life, their attempts to build their park in the land of the living pulls Kat into a quest to bring her parents back from the dead, the evil prison corporation into a plan to finally decimate the small town and build their ultimate school-to-prison pipeline. Thrown in are demon hunters, school cliques and possession-based super powers; this is not a film to just put on in the background. Hopefully the sheer amount of backstory and complex characters is enough for a sequel or a spin off.

Race and gender are core facets of the story, with the protagonist Kat being a black or African American girl. The prison system and anti-black racism in the US are inseparable, and Jordan Peele's groundbreaking debut as a director was the racism themed horror Get Out. Whilst the demons are Key and Peele and half of the villainous power couple is a black man, Kat being black is integral to the prison criticism theme. Likewise, the school is an all-girls school taught by nuns, and it's all but said that demon possession and the superpowers it comes with is a female-only experience. This centring of women in terms other than sexuality/relationships or stereotypically 'feminine' traits such as being supportive or cute, is still a bold and important decision, especially one for a mainly male writing and production team to have made.

Another powerful choice was made in regards to gender, and one that they could have easily not have included without any effect on the plot: Kat's friend and ally is her fellow pupil Raul. A boy at an all-girls school, there's a quick scene where the clique call him his old name and say its hard to get used to and one where his mother corrects an unheard voice on the phone that she has a son, but aside from that this canonically trans character is completely accepted as a boy called Raul by every single character. It's a lovely inclusive detail and a perfect example of trans characters not being defined by their gender, as he's an artist and one of the few characters not to have shady or conflicted motivations.

Of course, it's hard for an adult without children to judge a children's film. Will kids love it? Will it's important messages be lost on them or too much for them? I can't say, but I do know a lot of children's films are quick buck garbage full of toxic messages or simply advertising, so it's definitely worth trying it. It's a good child-friendly horror and entertaining for adults too. 

Some of the most absurd elements come into play with the universe hopping, as they do odd things to trigger jumps and explore each alternative universe. In other lives, Evelyn is a film star, a chef, a scientist, a sign spinner... a rock, a pinata, and a woman with hot dog fingers. The rock universe is has some really touching moments for the family drama; this film is genre-rollercoaster.

The troubled relationships between Evelyn and her husband, Evelyn and her daughter, and Evelyn and her father take up this aspect. Just as there are all these multiverse versions of her, she is also juggling the laundry business, her own hopes and dreams, and her relationships like multiple lives. Her husband is less her life partner to her than he is her business partner, she wants to be close to her daughter but distance her sexuality and girlfriend from her elderly father, and the timing of this multiverse news clashes with both her father's birthday party and the laundrette being last-chance audited.

The villain reveal is heavily foreshadowed, as is the ultimate moral of kindness and happiness. Regardless, the impact it has on Evelyn is powerful, and the audience either reacts with her or can really take in her reaction. Just looking at the poster gives a good idea of the busy-ness, the artfulness and the brilliance of this film, and the fun it has. You'll never look at googly eyes, hot dogs or even the small local businesses around your city the same again.

In fact, the city's corruption is a huge part of the plot. While the villain is just going after the politicians and officials who are undeniably abusing their power, it's a fun grey area. I wanted the Batman to succeed, but I kind of wanted the Riddler to do enough to make a difference. The Riddler himself is excellently written, and excellently portrayed by Paul Dano. A familiar villain, but not as overplayed as the Joker, he is exaggerated enough to live up to the comic book character people will expect, but still held within real life bounds. Question marks abound, but in a black hunting mask and using Zodiac-like symbols rather than in a bright green bodysuit. His use of codes and unfinished jokes lets him fit the name well.

Zoë Kravitz' Catwoman is yet another brilliant casting, and yet another believable character. Her motives are noble but her methods (and the life surrounding her) are criminal, her cats and bisexuality are portrayed in a positive light, and her costume is realistic. Likewise, the Penguin, Alfred and James Gordon are all well balanced portrayals. The story is engaging, the action is exciting and the visuals are excellent. Whether you're a Batman fan, a Robert Pattinson fan or just a general film fan, The Batman is a great film worth catching at the cinema. It would have been nice to have had one whole film without the Joker, but his last second appearance did show that this is the first film in a series, and that the Joker is not going to be the terrible Jared Leto version.

The ending is clear early on, but its slow inevitability is enjoyable. If the silly parts were removed, the pessimistic idea of just waiting for the end of the world would make for an interesting film. The ironic switch between Leonardo DiCaprio's and Jennifer Lawrence's characters' media abilities and reception is fun and funny; more focus on their characters' relationships would have been better, as DiCaprio's Dr Randall Mindy's relationships plotline is witty. Lawrence's Kate Dibiasky has some relationship time with Timothee Chalamet's Yule, which is far more entertaining than any of the news scenes or Hill's entire character.

​The most annoying part of this film, really, is that it isn't bad. It's just not good. It sits there, teetering between failure and the potential that the concept has. The main actors are great and there are some really strong satirical points, like the Bash capitalism and monopoly parody. But, ultimately, its stunted by its own childish humour. The whole "Don't Look Up" thing is a rushed montage and heavy-handed point about the deliberate ignorance of the right wing. The idea that mainstream groups of people would refuse to look at the sky and say that looking at the sky is propaganda is too far, even in a world with flat earthers and anti-vaxxers.

You can tell that the creators here were patting themselves on the back smugly from the very beginning, and perhaps if they hadn't been so immediately pleased with themselves they might have pushed past their first thoughts and made a clever film. With all the generic versions of things and people, it's amazing NASA allowed their name to be used. The post-credit scene is a giggle, if you can be bothered to wait that long.

Despite being spoiled on the poster, DVD cover or streaming thumbnail, one of the two major reveals still packs a punch with the sheer body horror. Not for the squeamish, there are some very gross deaths and injuries. Don't think too hard about them, they're already unpleasant enough! And, on the topic of warnings and things that are unpleasant, the racism is pretty heavy. The sister and dad have some terrible blanket ideas, but the granddad ramps it up with overt slurs. They're more along the mispronounced generics, with a complaint about "Johnny Bongo-Bongo" than the n-word, but it's still some heavy-handed writing.

This is one half of the theme: the granddad is an abusive ex-military man who spouts hatred, and his abused son is the repressed, uptight head of the household. The sister, pregnant and outspoken, is to be protected and revered, with her husband the second in command. The mum, too old to be in the protected role of baby-making, is the unloved caretaker. The main couple are the failure of the family - a son who dares to not follow the authority and toe the line, coming back from a period of estrangement with a (insert shocked gasp) a "middle eastern" girlfriend who thinks dares to be more educated than them!

The dad becomes more and more unhinged as things get worse, needing so badly to prove that his belief system is correct and that following the rules will solve things. The sister and brother in law have little glimmers of redemption, the chance to stand up to the white supremecist patriarchy, but their relapse is immediately followed by punishment. This is where a horror staple slips away: while repugnant granddad does die first, second-in-line dad makes it to the finale and angelic mum doesn't. Waiting for that perceived poetic justice is frustrating.

Some haphazard Christianity comes crashing in with the dramatic peak, with a Son of Sam style God-in-the-TV and some second coming of Christ that comes entirely out of left field. This does almost link the other theme, which is the less interesting cliche of TV is bad and brainwashing us all. It's a bit overdone and hypocritical coming from a television screen itself, but could have been an interesting critique of the place of TV in the family if it had been properly explored. There's also a completely unacknowledge hallucination or dream of a wide open field, adding more mess to the symbolism.

Overall, mediocre characterisation and confused conclusion aside, the horror elements and racial points are enjoyable. Not an instant classic by any means, but the suspence had me hooked until the end, even if I did forget the characters names.

While the first group declared less valuable are the elderly, a pregnant woman and young girl are soon singled out as either most important or most sympathetic, and the group divides into two factions. One side want to work together to ensure at least one of the two reach the end, ensuring one may potentially survive. The other, lead by a bearded man, argue that they should be killed, as they aren't actually any more important than anyone else in the room and the sympathy for them condemns everyone else. It's a morally complex film, uncomfortable to watch. What would you do in that situation? What is the correct outcome? Are you making your decisions based on stereotypes or your own prejudices?

In what could have been a heavy handed moral moment, one black man calls on the other black people in the group. He says they will be killed by the white people, who immediately get heated and insist race is meaningless. The other black people refuse to engage, saying that whether or not he is correct, drawing negative attention to himself will just get him killed. It's put aside, but he is the last black person alive and in one last second redirection one white person literally says "Kill the black guy!" and he is zapped. Vocal male characters are only voted off for enraging everyone else; the rich jerk guy only faces the killer beam after an intense homophobic rant and the scruffy guy only after a blatent series of lies that are a blatent attempt to get everyone to kill the woman next to him.

In the moment, these deaths aren't even satisfying beyond shutting the ranter up. All but one is earmarked for death, and it's clearly going to come down to the pregnant woman and the girl. The question of why comes up a lot. The scenario is apparently the aftermath of alien invasion, mass panic and fleeing the city, and potentially random abduction. Staying in the circle right until the last scene, we not only do not see the aliens but also do not find out the answers to any of the questions posed. Why these fifty people in particular? Why are they voting each other off in a contactless battle royale? Is there a correct way to play, is it a judgement of humanity or is even anyone even watching? Unanswered and unimportant; the film is not about the motivations of the aliens, but the behaviour of the people.

As the cast slowly lowers in number and the conflict becomes the sole focus of the discussion, the outcome becomes more and more certain. The tension stays high and the 'leader' of each faction continues to outlive their groups. A last second twist leaves one survivor, released as it was guessed (or hoped) into the desolate city. Walking along a tunnel to echoes of their most effecting quotes, the survivor joins a small group of children and adults, and they all stand and watch one of the many giant circular spaceships over the city.

What does it all mean? It isn't clear. Just like the point of the game, the morally correct thing to do, and the truth of any of the people, the film is not here to give us any answers. With more courage, the film might have something to say about human nature, prejudice and selfishness, but it leaves it all up to the viewer. There's a missed opportunity for an amazing ending, if it had turned out that the fallen people were unconscious and they all had to face their victims. Interesting but ultimately unsatisfying, its worth watching if just for the concept.