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.

Likewise, it can be as easy for a director to become typecast as an actor; Robert Pattinson has broken away from the dull love interest he played in Twilight, and this follows an almost-arthouse role in The Lighthouse. While a viewer might expect a different feel of film from Nolan, the action-heavy style of Tenet is not a flaw.

John David Washington's protagonist is a brilliant mix of a proactive instigator and an audience surrogate, buffeted along by the plot. What is happening? he asks, and How does this time reversal thing even work?. As we move through the film, his awareness and comprehension matches ours, ending with a satifying conclusion and the set up for the events before the beginning of the film.

While the plot and the time travel concept is measured out, the climactic battle scene is wild and chaotic. The gist and the core events are easy to follow, but the details are confusing. Just like a real battle, it's hard to spot the red and blue armbands or keep track of where the action is happening. The balance of action-packed moments and exposition-packed dialogue make this a textbook Nolan, in that watching it once is nowhere near enough to spot everything. Luckily, I found it so enjoyable I'm looking forward to those further viewings.

In conclusion, it's a brilliant sci fi.

Where the film fell down on some of the original's unknowable aspects, it also excelled. Instead of a protagonist who can't comprehend what they saw or a witness too traumatised to explain, we have some truly disgusting body horror and the fate worse than death that comes with it. With this comes quite a lot of gore, and perhaps falling into the trap of mistaking gruesome for scary. These bloody moments are in stark contrast with the brilliance of the colour and framing; the moments that are not nauseating are a delight to see.

Keen eyes will enjoy the slow shifting in colour palette and distracted eyes will really enjoy the scenery and the house. The characters are developed far better than HP Lovecraft's stories often manage, and once the film has its fun with the red spray effects the ending really relies on the viewer caring about the fates of the characters. A tale with minimal "cosmic" in the "cosmic horror" the Cthulhu writer is known for, the visuals of the titular colour and visions lay the foundations for the cosmic elements of the mythos.

A thriller for fans of the story and newcomers alike, be sure there are adaptions to come.

Set partly on a spaceship conducting energy-creating experiments and partly on the energy deprived world, it's again unclear if this is the same world or story as before. For most of the film, the threat below is unknown and the main 'monster' is the quantum weirdness going on aboard the spaceship. There is some body horror, as disgusting as it is scary, slowly and steadily revealing the extent of the bizarrity. The unexplainable stays unexplained, and the explainable is trickled out to keep the tension high. Where is Earth? What is happening on Earth? What happened when the energy core overloaded?

Focusing on one of the group of astronauts and following her husband on Earth is a good technique, keeping the globally-impactful events relevant on a personal level and tying a strong link between the two. The believable performances of all involved keep us interested in whether they will survive and whether the couple will reunite. Likewise, the personal connection grounds the scientific elements and advancements that are fitting for it's potentially future setting.

It's strange for a sequel to the outstanding and successful Cloverfield and 10 Cloverfield Lane, but this link is this film's downfall. It's a standard sci fi, not the innovative horror that the other two were. The mystery of Cloverfield is a core part of it's found footage subgenre, with the audience forcibly as uninformed as the characters. The central premise of 10 Cloverfield Lane is whether or not the kidnapper is lying. The plot of both focuses more on the immediate problems faced by the individuals than the overarching danger or the how and why. The Cloverfield Paradox at once distances itself and fails to live up to the name by trying to be mysterious AND giving us an informed perspective. When the audience can work out what's happened at the same speed as a team of accomplished scientists, the mystery is not one.

The ending does end with the kaiju theme and surprise reveal that makes Cloverfield a great series. With the protagonist astronaut finally returning home in assumed triumph, her husband suddenly reveals that he doesn't want her to return; it's not just the energy and human chaos, it's that the planet is overrun with enormous monsters. It feels like an Easter Egg in it's reveal, and is fun for those that loved the first two, but doesn't make up for the rest of the let downs. 

With the sheer amount of films being made, the hit-and-miss of watching indie films, and all the ways that films can be disappointing, it was truly amazing to see the credits appear and know I was truly thrilled. Picking for flaws left me only with some criticism of the characters' actions. The plot is airtight and the questions the viewer is left with are all intriguing and non-central. Even the casting of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis as the same person manages to work perfectly.

The blend of genre work well for fans of any. The science fiction elements are easy to understand and grounded in real life. Time travel is here, of course, but it's simple; one way with explained timelines and without any technicalities in the plot at all. The futuristic setting of the present is not too far off, eyeball drugs and flying motorbikes aside, and the further-futuristic setting of the future is brief. There's some telekinetic powers, but as explained and logical as they can be without drawing too much attention from the time travel. The action is interspersed with conversation, exposition and character development: Nobody shoots without motivation, even if they shoot a lot of people. The main character is an assassin and the antagonists are gangsters without feeling like stock characters.

Some interesting questions or just concepts are brought up. The film is set in 2044, but there are only 2 types of gun seemingly in existence and only two new technologies. How did we get there from here? Time travel is invented and immediately banned in 30 years, but the first contact with the past is not explored at all. How did that happen? How were the loopers set up? Sara's past and her sister's death is skirted over when it comes up. What happened? After the end, we don't know if it all ends up okay. What becomes of Joe? A perfect ending to a pretty perfect film.

There are plenty of callback and references to the original: Keep your eyes peeled for cameos, quotable lines from the original, and Slimer and Stay Puft. The little moments are satisfying for older fans, and aren't too over-the-top so wouldn't stick out awkwardly to newer viewers. The creation of the ECTO-1, the name "Ghostbusters" and the logo are all amusing, too, as in between the big laughs are constant giggles.

A big part of the film is the genderswap aspect, and they make good use of it. The Ghostbusters have a ditzy blonde secretary who's not competent enough to answer a phone but is very much eye candy, swapping the the gender for that role with the delicious Chris Hemsworth's Kevin. While this may bring cries of 'misandry', it is more a reflection of contemporary female stock characters. There are ironic misandrist jokes, which will appeal to the dry humour of many adults watching for the female empowerment. It's worth mentioning misandrist joke don't have the social weight to cause harm that misogynist ones do; this is an argument for another day and another person.

The plot itself is multilayered but not complicated. Lecturer Erin Gilbert loses her job at a prestigious university when old friend and colleague Abbie Yates publishes the paranormal science book they wrote year before. The baddy, Rowan, is the archetypal nerdy outsider seeking revenge on the world as a whole, and is trying to release every malevolent ghost into the world. The Ghostbusters are trying to investigate the paranormal with genuine scientific interest while the media are portraying them as fakes and non-scientists.

Overall, this is a really important film in the history of women in film, passing the Bechdel Test, the Sexy Lamp Test, the Mako Mori Test and the Furiosa Test. Definitely a must-watch for young girls, and for any men or boys who don't know why female media is important. It's a great film for all Ghostbusters fans, and a really good laugh.

If you are able to watch without feeling sick or dizzy (small screens recommended), there's plot and action to be seen. It opens up with some pornographic violence. I don't mean nudity, and I don't just mean it's gratuitous; the sheer glee with which the slow-motion neck stabbing and face smashing is shown makes me wonder if there wasn't some gore fetishist involved...

Protagonist and camera Henry takes a good close look at all the violence he witnesses and commits. Be ready for some intense fighting, some improvised surgery and a lot of shooting and stabbing. It feels like they got a special effects budget and got overexcited.

Under the nauseating motion and wanton gore, the plot... is lacking. According to the person who managed to stay in the cinema, the robotics of Henry are almost explained, but exactly zero explanation is given for the one telekinetic bad guy. The overall story is "Henry is made into a robot-man, he has to fight to the lab and avoid the bad guy" which is more of a game first mission than a full and captivating story. Shocking plot twist, the wife is not who she says she is - the 'surprise! not your wife' is basically a stock character for amnesia plots at this point.

And on the wife? Couldn't tell you her name. There is a grand total of one interesting developed character, but female characters get it a lot worse that male. At one point, we go into a brothel full of permanently naked lookie-likies whose only personality is "likes to touch penises". It's not particularly plot relevant, and most likely just an excuse to film a bunch of boobs. One is referred to as "wh*re" like that's reasonable, and minutes later they're apparently all dead. All of the stripper/sex workers. It's an inconvenience to the motorbikes-and-gun brunette madam, another stock character who probably has a name but whatever.

There's also a rape scene, or attempted rape scene, but I'm lucky enough to have been outside for that. It isn't a main character, it's not plot relevant, and it sounds like another random hyper-violence without concern for the sanity or stomach of the viewer.

​As I said at the beginning, I was looking forward to this film. I've been waiting since the first trailer, and I'm thoroughly disappointed on all fronts. There's some worthwhile concepts in here, and I'd love to see them better done.

The camera lingers on shots of water and walking passerbys, giving the uncertainty a fourth-wall breaking element. The characters are realistic and believable, and as time goes on the tension rises as the likelihood of their survival looks bleaker and bleaker. There is a touch of romance, which feels shoehorned in as the characters had seemed platonic friends up to that point. Genuine romance is shown in between the married characters, and the friendships all four main characters share gives a feeling of reality that the crisis has interrupted.

With its alien invasion, impostor, and zombie-virus-like themes, the horror elements work well today, although the setting, visuals and botanical sci-fi is dated. At first glance, it has a downer ending, but some interesting positives can be found in the survival of characters to that point and ambiguity implied by a few scenes leading to it. While violence and jump scares are barely a factor and how scary it is depends on the viewer, this film deserves a lot of modern respect. Find it online, as classics like this are films everyone should see at least once in their life.