Author seancarslake

My latest book is available at the Kindle Store

seancarslake Leave a comment

It’s that time of year when I submit the reading public to yet another literary masterpiece, and with the title of ‘Slumlord’ – you get a pretty good idea of what you’re in for.

Set in the Hobart suburb of Otago Bay – within a fictional residential estate – ‘Slumlord’ is the story of a rogue landlord who rents out his upscale apartment to drug dealers and criminals, causing the once-peaceful community to quickly descend into chaos and destruction. Out of sheer desperation, the mostly retirement-aged residents form a resistance and begin to fight back against the invaders – but will their experience and cunning be enough to overwhelm such dangerous adversaries?

‘Slumlord’ is available on Kindle – either to purchase or download for free through KDP Select – with the paperback version coming within the next few days.

See link below, or you can search for the title on Amazon.

Australia – The 2026 World Cup Report Card

seancarslake Leave a comment

After finishing second in a very tough group, our beloved Socceroos could not overcome a solid Egypt side in the round of 32, bringing their 2026 FIFA World Cup to an end. But was this campaign a success? Overall, I think it was – and I would give the lads a strong rating of B+. However, alongside the incredible highs came lingering questions of what could have been; and did result-driven football take precedence over playing an attractive game?

But before reviewing all four of Australia’s fixtures at the World Cup, we need to add some context by going back to the appointment of Tony Popovic as coach in September 2024.

After being kept goalless in the opening two matches of the final round of Asian qualifiers, including a diabolical 1-0 loss at home to Bahrain, the panic button was pressed and the experienced Graham Arnold made way for Popovic: – a no-nonsense manager with a strong coaching record in the A-League.

The decision to appoint Popovic would be justified, as the Socceroos quickly turned their fortunes around and easily qualified for the World Cup.

Then came the draw itself, and Australia found themselves in Group D against the home nation USA and two very good opponents in Paraguay and Turkiye (Turkey.)

Written off as the weakest team in the group, with one American pundit referring to the Socceroos as a ‘lay-up’; the stage would be set once again for the Green and Gold to prove their doubters wrong!

Breakaway goals from Nestory Irankunda and Connor Metcalfe – one in each half – would stun the highly-fancied Turks in their opening game in Vancouver. A combination of Aussie grit, a little luck and an amazing performance from goalkeeper Patrick Beach would get the job done – and just about secure a place in the knockout round.

Expectations were high for the second match against the USA in Seattle, but the Americans would apply a ton of attacking pressure from the start which the boys were unable to counter. Down 2-0 at the break, the contest was effectively over – despite a stronger second half performance that could not make inroads into the two goal deficit.

It would all come down to the final group match against Paraguay – who had defeated Turkey in their second game – and a draw would be enough to see both sides progress further into the tournament. The Socceroos were arguably the more enterprising team throughout the game; settling quickly into the match and although chances were few and far between, Paraguay would not offer too much of a threat and things would end 0-0.

This was enough to finish second on the table and progress through to the round of 32!

Going into the tournament, making it out of this group would have been the main objective for the Australian players and coaching staff – so to that end it was mission accomplished and anything on top of this would be a bonus. However, as great as this achievement was, the football being played was very workmanlike and – if I’m being completely honest – frustrating to watch at times. With only two goals scored – both against the run of play – across three games, as well as seeing vastly different team line-ups for each match – it was hoped that for the do-or-die (but winnable) clash against Egypt that we might see some fluent, attacking football…

But alas, it was not meant to be and having sat back and defended for most of the game against the Egyptians; only showing a bit of spark at times during the second half – the Socceroos would grimly hang on only to be knocked out in a penalty shootout.

Now, there’s no way I am going to be critical of the Socceroos – as my generation grew up during the thirty-two years of heartbreak in not qualifying for the World Cup Finals. I remember the strange games against Israel and Taiwan back in the 1980’s, and the odd occasion New Zealand would beat us and throw a spanner in the works; not to mention those unfair playoffs against Scotland (1985) and a Maradona-inspired Argentina (1993) – and the Iran disaster at the MCG in 1997.

The only thing I would question about this World Cup campaign is whether or not we just should have gone out with a settled line-up and played football – especially against the USA and even more so in the Egypt game. We should have seen more of Cristian Volpato for starters, and not played Nestory Irankunda in what was essentially a number nine position in the knockout match. I actually believe we could have beaten Egypt and gone on to play Argentina in the next round – where in all likelihood our cup run would have progressed no further.

So with all things being considered, I would still rate this campaign highly. For me to give top marks, we would have needed to break new ground and make it past our first knockout match. I am also factoring in that it was not a great tournament for AFC nations, with only Australia and Japan progressing beyond the group stage before being eliminated.

Therefore, I think that a B+ grade is a fair assessment.

Further to this point, I am certain that Tony Popovic is playing a long game with this very young squad, and hopefully we will see more adventurous football played in the upcoming Asian Cup in early 2027!

Photos and screenshots are from various online sources.

I watched ‘Supergirl’ – and it wasn’t good

seancarslake Leave a comment

To be fair, I went into this film already aware of the poor reviews and was hoping to find some positive aspects to write about, but alas there is very little to report here – but I will try my best. Considering that ‘Supergirl’ has only been out for a few days, I will carefully break down what I liked and disliked without giving any spoilers away.

Let’s start with Milly Alcock who was alright as the main character Supergirl/Kara Zor-El, considering all she could do was work with the script she was given. I suppose Jason Momoa was fine as Lobo – a character who was thrown in for good measure – and was having fun just being himself as he does in almost every film he stars in.

But the negative aspects of this movie far outweigh the positive.

On top of the list by a country mile is the writing. There is no excuse here as the screenplay was supposed to be adapted from an existing work – in this case ‘Supergirl: Woman of Tomorrow‘ – so there should be plenty of source material available to play with. But the studio handing the writing responsibilities for a multi-million dollar film to someone (Ana Nogueira) with little to no previous credits is utter lunacy – and the end result is the basic slop that was served up on screen.

I will elaborate a little: – ‘Supergirl’ suffers primarily from bad writing, which is more careless and lazy than anything else. There is a working plot here; enough for the audience to understand what the characters are doing and why – but within the progression of the story you will find short cuts, loose ends and minor plot holes – and anyone who takes pride in their work would not allow such errors to remain in the final screenplay. I’m not sure the writer nor the producers actually know any better – and that in itself is unacceptable.

I will give two examples of plot weaknesses – but note **mild spoilers ahead**.

Point One: – Supergirl’s dog Krypto is shot with a poison dart by the main villain Krem, and given three days to live. As Krypto has the same powers as Supergirl, then surely the best option would be to take him to a yellow sun to be healed – as the story goes on to reveal that such a sun exists only a short bus ride away. This obvious solution is ignored because having to obtain the antidote within three days is what’s driving the main plot.

Point Two: – Supergirl’s colleague Ruthye is captured and locked up, and the prisoner in the adjoining cell is Lobo. How? The only explanation we are given by Lobo is that he was trapped. Again – how? Where and when? The contrived script made it so an all-powerful God-like immortal is somehow imprisoned – which was used as a setup for four-foot-tall Ruthye to beat up a hulking guard and then help Lobo escape. Yay! Mary Sue girl power!

And then there is the dialogue which is terrible! How are these scripts getting passed? They all sound the same: – trash-talking, ‘wannabe edgy and cool’ with adolescent humour and irreverent remarks being churned out through the entire film. I’m sick of it – in fact, you could take conversations or exchanges from any James Gunn production and insert them into another and it would probably match up!

I will also touch on the colours and tones used as an overall aesthetic. Whoever was in charge of the finished product really went over the top with the saturation, and it looked like someone had stuck some yellow or orange cellophane to the camera lens. This was clearly an artistic decision, but some brighter and sharper imagery – and less lens flare – might have helped the visuals a little bit.

With plans for a larger DC Universe, Superman himself pops up in a few scenes – enabling this film to connect into future projects. You know, I thought David Corenswet was pretty good as Superman – but why do they keep belittling him and taking the piss every time he appears on screen? That being said, Superman/Clark Kent was used sparingly – mostly to help set up the Kara backstory from Krypton to Argo City and then to Earth. These sequences actually played out alright – and were about the only thing the writers did reasonably well.

Of course I couldn’t write a ‘Supergirl’ review without adding the now-iconic screenshot above, before wrapping things up with my overall thoughts and final score.

I’m not a big comic book fan, but I enjoy the odd superhero movie – which sadly we have had a saturation of over the past twenty years. ‘Supergirl’ does not suffer from ‘superhero fatigue’, because this is just a poorly-made movie, with very few moments of passable enjoyment to take from the cinema. It’s grimy and unfunny – and some would argue that it is depressing – with no real jeopardy nor uplifting highlights for any of the main characters.

It’s just a boring, flat mess that never gets out of second gear – with tired special effects and a bizarre colour palette that made my eyes go funny. The final battle scene presented in slow-motion and freeze-frames was a total embarrassment – and who thought it was a good idea to show Supergirl sitting on the toilet earlier in the film? Real gnarly stuff, guys!

Honestly, how much longer is this crap going to go on for? Films like this should be bright and inspiring – not a degenerate and abrasive drunken mess. Is there anyone out there who can make a decent superhero movie, and not this recalcitrant slop that hacks like James Gunn keep serving up? If so, hand them the keys to the studio – right now!

I’m giving ‘Supergirl’ a three out of ten – with one of those points going to Milly Alcock because she’s a fellow Aussie. But even then, I’m being generous!

All posters and screenshots are courtesy of DC Studios and Warner Bros Pictures.

‘Supergirl’ is showing at cinemas now.

‘Masters of the Universe’ was great…and yet it bombed!

seancarslake Leave a comment

What can I say? I enjoyed this movie a lot more than I thought I would, but all the numbers are pointing toward ‘Masters of the Universe’ being a box office disaster – and that’s a real shame! This is not a perfect movie, but it was a ton of fun! In fact, the good far outweighs the bad in this film – so what has happened here?

The 2026 re-imagining of ‘Masters of the Universe’ is better than the 1987 version, but could it be that this is a long-forgotten franchise that either no one has heard of before, or very few people bother to remember? I think these factors played some part in this film’s less-than-favourable reception; not helped by the unexpected hits ‘Obsession’ and ‘Backrooms’ being released at the same time.

Personally, I enjoyed ‘Masters of the Universe’ all the way through – I was glued to the screen and there were many moments when I burst out laughing at some of the wacky scenes, which was in stark contrast to watching ‘The Mandalorian and Grogu’ a week or so ago, for I almost nodded off a couple of times during that fizzer of a show.

But the box office doesn’t lie and on a budget of $170-200 million dollars, this He-Man reboot/adventure has crawled its way to only $60 million worldwide! The Mando movie on the other hand has been criticised for its underwhelming performance yet has managed to rake in $300 million – but this is still pretty bad for Star Wars.

I’m not going to do a full review here, but rather share a few thoughts as to why I liked ‘Masters of the Universe’ so much.

I’ll start by saying that this movie ticked a lot of boxes for me; the special effects were bright and sharp, the writing was a lot better than I expected – and above all it was just a rollicking two hours of entertainment. I thought the performances were pretty good too; especially Idris Elba as Man-at-Arms and (I can’t believe I’m about to write this) Jared Leto was awesome as Skeletor.

I do have to touch on some of the jokes and gags, as they constantly hit the mark throughout – some surprisingly so! There were times when the humour pushed the boundaries of a supposed family film; and I laughed aloud whenever the various nicknames Adam/He-Man had given to certain characters were brought up. The Dolph Lundgren cameo was priceless as well!

While I don’t have too many gripes with the movie overall, I do think there was a missed opportunity when the Queen song ‘Princes of the Universe’ was introduced during the final battle – the way it was cut and edited was strange as it omitted the iconic heavy guitar riff that would have been perfect for this pivotal moment.

There are no Oscars on the line here – which is maybe not a bad thing – so one needs to accept this movie for what it is and what it is intended to be: – just a loud, colourful, mindless-at-times thrill ride and charming dose of escapism that people of all ages can enjoy.

I walked out of the cinema with a smile on my face and was satisfied that I had got my money’s worth – which is something I rarely experience these days.

To that end, ‘Masters of the Universe’ exceeded my expectations, and I score it eight out of ten!

Posters and screenshots courtesy of Amazon MGM Studios and Sony Pictures

‘The Mandalorian and Grogu’ – my honest review

seancarslake Leave a comment

Disney Star Wars is in a sorry state – with most of their wounds self-inflicted through countless lightweight, woke and lore-breaking releases over the past decade. But it’s not as bad as some pundits constantly make out, as there were times when decent Star Wars moments have shone through within some of their less-than-average shows – such as the Baylan Skoll scenes in ‘Ahsoka’ and extensive parts of ‘Andor.’

I would rate ‘The Mandalorian’ Seasons One and Two as further examples of when Disney managed to get Star Wars just about right, but things would fall away sharply following the spin-off series ‘The Book of Boba Fett’ and this decline would continue into Season Three of ‘The Mandalorian.’

Which brings us around to ‘The Mandalorian and Grogu’ – a project that Disney played so safe with, that in Blackjack terms this would be the equivalent of standing on twelve.

This is a film made for kids – almost exclusively so. It is harmless and there is nothing in there that anyone could take offense from – unless weak writing and inconsistent pacing are what grinds your gears.

Personally, I found myself zoning out a lot throughout the movie – particularly during the second half – as it felt like I had seen it all before and was watching a re-run – but again, what I saw wasn’t necessarily ‘bad’ but bored me nonetheless. I am aware of other reviews claiming that this film plays out like three average episodes of what should have been Season Four strung together and repackaged into a theatrical-length release – and I would have to agree with those comments.

But let’s dive a little (spoiler-free) into the movie itself…

‘The Mandalorian and Grogu’ opens with a scene that sets the story up, where the New Republic have sent the heroic duo on an assignment to arrest an Imperial Warlord. This sequence is okay; lots of action with some lighter moments thrown in – before the main body of the movie plays out featuring Hutts, Stormtroopers and some characters from other Star Wars shows – as well as Sigourney Weaver.

The plot moves along quickly throughout the first act of the film, where Mando and Grogu set out to return Jabba the Hutt’s son Rotta – who has been enslaved as a gladiator – back to his family in exchange for information critical to the New Republic. I was still engaged with the adventure at this point, although the feeling that I had seen it all before was beginning to creep in…

For me, as an adult viewer and long-time Star Wars fan, I felt that the film dropped away from around the halfway point; grinding to a near halt for a good twenty minutes just before the finale. As for the ending itself – it consisted of little more than huge robots, some fighting and a squadron of X-Wings.

I did say this was going to be an honest review, so I will highlight a few things without writing an essay – trying my best to keep it brief and hopefully avoid any spoilers.

Firstly, the overall plot was serviceable, in that there were few inconsistencies – again, this would be the filmmakers playing it safe. In this current Star Wars climate, I will take that as a small win – remembering how shows like ‘The Acolyte’ and ‘Obi-Wan Kenobi’ were riddled with plot holes so large that you could drive a truck through them.

Secondly, the special effects looked a little off to me – and at times I thought I was watching an episode of ‘The Thunderbirds’ or ‘Space 1999’ with ships and puppets shaking about. I found it to be funny more than anything else – but was this the studio trying to limit production costs?

Also, I do have to touch on some of the finer aspects of the writing. Whilst already saying that the screenplay did its job to a degree; the writers’ refusal to take any risks or unveil any bold new ideas – and instead coat their beloved main characters in plot armour – is precisely why Star Wars fans are tuning out in their thousands. This seems to be a dynamic that Disney are unwilling to shake.

Finally, I must give a special shout out to Dave Filoni and his cameo in the film as a character called Trapper Wolf – yes, that’s what he named himself! Disney Star Wars is in safe hands with this guy, right?

Filoni jokes aside, as I stated earlier, ‘The Mandalorian and Grogu’ was not a ‘bad’ film – but rather a ‘nothing’ film. For those who have been Star Wars fans for decades, this offering will be considered by most to be more Disney slop, and I can’t argue with them there – but it’s nowhere near the worst of what’s been served up in recent years.

I can only defend this below par movie on two fronts; the fact that it played it by the numbers and tried not to destroy any more Star Wars lore – and that kids would have loved the end product. Make no mistake; this is a children’s film – whether or not the producers intended it to be – and I will therefore mark it accordingly.

‘The Mandalorian and Grogu’ gets five out of ten from me.

‘The Mandalorian and Grogu’ is currently in cinemas. All screenshots courtesy of Disney and Lucasfilm.

Was the 1976 version of ‘King Kong’ that bad?

seancarslake Leave a comment

It’s fair to say that monster movies have been well-represented in recent times, with Warner Bros’ ‘Monsterverse’ leading the way; supported by notable projects such as Apple TV’s ‘Monarch: Legacy of Monsters’ and the Japanese-made ‘Godzilla: Minus One.’

But back in 1976 we were given a blockbuster version of ‘King Kong’ that didn’t quite hit the heights it was expected to, and is rarely mentioned in terms of classic monster flicks. However, the film was remastered and released on Blu-ray a couple of years ago, which is more than enough incentive for me to go back and re-watch it for the first time in over two decades.

There was a lot of money thrown at this project back in the day, with a budget of around $US 24 million – and ‘King Kong’ would at least prove to be a commercial success by grossing just over $US 90 million at the box office. With Dino De Laurentiis producing and ‘The Towering Inferno’ director John Guillermin at the helm, hopes were high for this movie to be well-received critically, but things did not quite work out that way.

The cast was solid without featuring any major drawcards from that era, such as Charlton Heston or Robert Redford, preferring instead to have Charles Grodin, a young Jeff Bridges and Jessica Lange (in her film debut) playing the lead characters. Bridges and Lange would go on to become established and award-winning actors over the following decades, so those who made the casting decisions for ‘King Kong’ might have been onto something.

Interestingly, the actor standing behind Jeff Bridges in the photo above is none other than John Lone, who like Jessica Lange was also making his screen debut. Unfortunately, we don’t see a lot of Lone in this film as he plays a small role as the cook on the exploration vessel.

Before getting into the plot and themes of the movie, I should take a moment to mention the musical score composed by the legendary John Barry. This should have been a slam dunk, however Barry’s compositions in this film are little more than serviceable – and well below his usual high standards. Any movie wanting to reach classic status must have a memorable score and powerful theme music – but ‘King Kong’ falls short in these disciplines.

On a positive note, ‘King Kong’ remains fairly true to the storyline of the 1933 original, and is at its best during the scenes on Kong’s Island. In fact, the sets and scale of this spectacle are worthy of high praise, with the native village and defensive wall perhaps at the top of the list. The special effects used for the fog were also of a high standard, and looked quite convincing.

When Kong eventually turns up, some of the effects start to show signs of faltering, but I suppose they would have stood up to scrutiny back in the mid-seventies. Most of the action sequences still look alright though, but I wasn’t entirely sold on the Kong costume during facial close-ups – while the larger mechanical hand prop used to pick up Dwan (Yes – Jessica Lange’s character is named ‘Dwan’ and not ‘Dawn’) looked authentic more often than not.

Of course, there is the infamous scene where Kong gets a little frisky with his female captive…and the look on the big guy’s face says it all!

Two-thirds of the way through the film and it’s shaping up fairly well. The early scenes on the boat setting up the plot are solid, and the movie wastes little time arriving at the uncharted island and the introduction of Kong is neither too soon nor too late. Where the action falls short is not having enough monsters on the island for Kong to fight – except for a giant snake – and these elements were prominent in both the 1933 version and Peter Jackson’s 2005 movie.

Which brings us to the final act: – King Kong in New York City.

Who thought wheeling out Kong inside a petrol bowser was a good idea?

I can understand the argument that the film-makers were highlighting commercialism and corporate greed, but it comes across as a little cheesy and over-the-top for me. However, the humiliation ritual that followed was very well executed – the juxtaposition of Kong wearing a crown whilst imprisoned in a cage is clever and effective.

Of course, we all know what happens next – and I think the final act of the film suffers from the contemporary setting; especially the replacement of the iconic Empire State Building with the World Trade Center – which unfortunately has not aged well.

There was a sequence within this final act that I could not get my head around, when the main characters were on the run from a rampaging Kong and Dwan (Jessica Lange) insists on stopping at a bar for a drink. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for moments of levity – but the timing of this was diabolical!

And the shot of Kong looking through the window when he finds them is just as outrageous! What a shocker! At this point, I was having fits of laughter.

But it’s not all bad, because some of the sequences with miniatures only moments earlier were quite impressive!

The film is struggling to hold it together at this point, but it is still an enjoyable spectacle. Unfortunately, the special effects throughout Kong’s battle with helicopters atop the World Trade Center are pushed well beyond their limits, and the scaling and perspective are terribly askew – see screenshot below.

In the lead-up to the rooftop showdown, there were a number of shots that appear to have been filmed inside one of the World Trade Center buildings, which now come across as sombre and haunting. I am also certain that the plaza where Kong falls to his death was filmed at the now-extinct complex.

Overall, I enjoyed the 1976 version of ‘King Kong’ having watched it through older and more critical eyes. I found it to be well-directed, neatly-paced and above all entertaining – not to mention keeping fairly true to the original story.

On the flip side, I don’t think the modern setting works; especially during the New York finale, but plays out reasonably well throughout most of the film. Some of the special effects shots were a little ordinary – and I’m still giggling over that window shot – but it worked most of the time, and I must keep in mind that the film was made in the nineteen-seventies.

‘King Kong’ certainly aimed high, and delivered on most of its promises, but ultimately fell short of being the classic movie the producers intended it to be. That being said, this film impressed me enough to give it seven out of ten!

All screenshots are courtesy of Dino De Laurentiis Corporation and Paramount Pictures.

‘Paranormal Farm’ Trilogy – campy but enjoyable!

seancarslake Leave a comment

‘Paranormal Farm’ is a found footage horror film released back in 2017, and is the brainchild of independent filmmaker Carl Medland. I recall watching this on Amazon Prime Video a few years ago, and finding the show quite entertaining, especially as Medland was using little more than the camera on his mobile phone to bring this story to life.

Having recently learned that there was a trilogy of ‘Paranormal Farm’ movies, I took it upon myself to watch all three films over consecutive nights – and to say I was amazed and enthralled would be an understatement!

Before I continue any further with my glowing appraisal, I should point out that there are a few contentious plot issues – some wide enough to drive a truck through – and I am of the view that these were created deliberately. In fact, I am certain that Carl Medland is taking the mickey out of us – especially throughout both sequels – and the outrageous scenes featuring some truly bizarre behaviour from off-beat secondary characters would ultimately help his films gain cult status.

Therefore, this is not going to be one of my usual reviews and I will not deep-dive too much into the pros and cons of each episode. The simple fact that Medland has gone out and created something unique and original – putting a lot of time, money and effort into it – should be respected and admired.

While I am throwing compliments about, a special mention must go out to the actors who played Lucy and Darren – the farming couple whose property is the setting for the paranormal investigation – as they both have a natural screen presence, with weird mannerisms that keep the audience guessing as to their true intentions. This is countered by the performance of Medland, who spends most of the film recording himself on his phone while attempting to solve the spooky mystery, and doing so in a ‘big city’ manner that often rubs the country folks the wrong way. This is a strong dynamic.

There are a few well-crafted moments where nefarious villains creep up on Medland while he is recording – especially throughout the first film – and these movies are at their strongest during these scenes. However, when the main character’s reaction is to simply squeal and jog away, often turning around and moving back in the direction of where the threat was coming from, it does take away from what was a brilliantly-executed and genuinely frightening encounter.

Is this done on purpose? I think so – and this brings me back to using the term ‘campy’ in the heading, for at times I thought I was watching George Michael running about being chased by monsters and goons. What an absolute masterclass!

As far as the story is concerned, the mystery is solved at the end of the third film where an overly drawn out – and diabolical – scene plays out between the major characters. In many ways, it was a fitting end to the series and I was sitting on my sofa in total bewilderment whilst all was being revealed.

Despite its flaws and shortcomings, I cannot really fault the ‘Paranormal Farm’ series as it delivered an entertaining and eye-opening experience across all three films. The rural location featured was an inspired choice, with the clever use of disturbing mannequins and quirky storage sheds filled with junk adding to the eerie vibes and complementing Medland’s sharp direction.

I must say, for a guy who put an entire project together using only his mobile phone and editing software, Carl Medland has proven himself to be a talented filmmaker. Although Medland brought his colleague Mumtaz into the second and third films, along with a larger camera, I would say the original ‘Paranormal Farm’ is by far the superior product.

The ‘Paranormal Farm’ trilogy is available to watch on YouTube, but note that age restrictions apply in some countries. In any case, I have attached the link below.

Screenshots and posters are courtesy of Myspotlight Independent and MY Production Ltd.

Special thanks and appreciation to Carl Medland.

‘Sunday Lovers’ – The Roger Moore and Gene Wilder flop

seancarslake Leave a comment

Released in 1980 and featuring two leading men at the peak of their powers – with Roger Moore being the current James Bond and Gene Wilder arguably still in the prime of his career – this little-known film somehow ended up flopping heavily at the box office before vanishing without a trace.

‘Sunday Lovers’ was co-produced internationally, and is best described as an anthology of four separate romantic comedies, with the episodes set in various locations: – England, Paris, Los Angeles and Rome. Because the film was structured this way, Roger Moore and Gene Wilder did not share any screen time together – which may have impacted negatively upon the movie; perhaps not helped by a slightly misleading poster.

Overall, the film was savaged by critics, with a couple of the episodes in particular coming under heavy fire. With this in mind, the best way to explore ‘Sunday Lovers’ would be to separate it into the four different stories, beginning with the opening chapter starring Roger Moore.

‘An Englishman’s Home’ features Moore as a chauffeur named Harry, who would assume the role of his aristocrat employer whenever he was out of town as a pretense to seduce young and impressionable air hostesses. Actually, impersonating his employer would be a more accurate description. Aided by his work colleague Parker – a complicit butler played by Denholm Elliott – Harry convinces an American stewardess named Donna back to ‘his’ castle for a little romance, only for the weekend to be thrown into disarray by an unexpected visitor.

Thanks to Roger Moore’s performance as Roger Moore, this story – despite its lecherous premise – can be easily passed off as lightweight and harmless – and is easily the best of the four episodes.

The film then moves on to the second story – ‘The French Method’ starring Italian actor Lino Ventura as a Parisian businessman who agrees to hook up his secretary with an American client in order to close an important deal.

Honestly, the misogynistic themes throughout this episode were too heavy – even for me – with an all-too-willing young woman adding to the overall discomfort. Despite the performances being solid and the story ending with the main character redeeming himself, the distinct lack of humour here – in contrast to the previous chapter – leaves it well short of a pass mark.

The third story is titled ‘Skippy’ and was written and directed by Gene Wilder, who also plays the titular character – a mentally-troubled middle-aged man named Skippy.

I actually watched this episode twice, and still can’t quite get a read on it. This is a strange one, for out of the four chapters featured in ‘Sunday Lovers’, I suppose this would be the closest to a love story, and yet so much of this tale is ambiguous and open to interpretation. My suspicion is that Gene Wilder wrote this as a feature-length screenplay, and having offered it up to this project needed to cut it down dramatically into a twenty-minute piece. As a result, I sense there is a lot of exposition missing.

The story itself centres on Skippy – a man aged in his forties who has checked himself into a mental health facility – and his romantic escapades with a much younger woman named Laurie (played by Kathleen Quinlan) during a weekend release from the hospital. There are some trademark Wilder moments, such as his crazy dancing to Bee Gees songs, but seeing him naked throughout extended love scenes was definitely not on my bingo card. This story really was a mixed bag!

I enjoyed ‘Skippy’ to a degree, as there was just enough depth to get me invested in the characters; helped along by the madcap antics of Wilder, but brought down a peg or two by the excessive nudity. However, most reviewers and online commentators rate this story as a dumpster fire, with many saying it is the worst episode out of the four, but I did not quite see it that way.

The fourth and final chapter is titled ‘Armando’s Notebook’ and stars Ugo Tognazzi, who plays an Italian man named Armando who discovers an old notebook containing the telephone numbers of his former girlfriends. As his wife is away for the weekend, a bored Armando begins calling the names listed in the book, and of course – hi-jinks ensue!

Setting aside the willingness of the main character to cheat on his wife so easily, this story is really nothing more than a typical Italian romantic comedy/romp. Tognazzi’s performance is serviceable and there are a number of funny scenes; most notably a bizarre encounter with a woman possessing supernatural powers.

I would give this episode a pass mark, as it is quite entertaining yet mindless on so many levels.

Overall, ‘Sunday Lovers’ is a watchable film but will not have aged well with most modern audiences. Having Roger Moore and Gene Wilder attached to this project is what initially piqued my interest, and their respective stories are definitely worth watching. I maintain that Moore’s ‘An Englishman’s Home’ is the better of the four episodes, with Wilder’s ‘Skippy’ coming in second place. The Italian romp ‘Armando’s Notebook’ is next best – thanks to its comedic tones – with the Parisian tale ‘The French Method’ being the least enjoyable chapter.

‘Sunday Lovers’ or ‘Les Seducteurs’ used to be almost impossible to find, but fortunately – thanks to the wonders of the internet – the entire film can now be watched on YouTube.

I have added a link below to Don Alex’s YouTube Channel where not only can you watch the movie, but you can read some of the host’s insightful comments about the film – some of which differ from my own opinions. Regardless, if you are a fan of Roger Moore or Gene Wilder – or both – then I highly recommend you check out the film, even if you only watch their particular segments.

Again, the link is below – courtesy of Don Alex on YouTube.

Screenshots courtesy of Cinema International Corporation, United Artists and MGM.

QED – The Aussie One-Hit Wonder

seancarslake Leave a comment

I had completely forgotten about this song until I heard it playing today at my local shopping centre – and if I were to guess, I’d say I had not encountered this classic track in over thirty years!

The tune itself dates back to 1983, and I recall that it was given a lot of airtime on the radio when it first came out. It’s certainly a catchy number, and was performed by the short-lived band QED – featuring a young Jenny Morris on lead vocals, who would later go on to have a successful solo career in Australia.

‘Everywhere I Go’ peaked at number 19 on the Australian music charts in April 1984, but the band’s two follow-up singles would hardly make an impact. Their album ‘Animal Magic’ was to be their one and only release and performed poorly, and the group disbanded in 1985.

That being said, ‘Everywhere I Go’ remains an underappreciated song, and is typical of that great Australian sound from the early 1980’s – and I must add that Jenny Morris is smoking hot in the music video!

And speaking of the video, there is a link below courtesy of Austech YouTube Channel – and hopefully you enjoy the nostalgia rush as much as I did!

A must-see video for fans of ‘A Clockwork Orange’

seancarslake Leave a comment

For many years I have been strangely fascinated with the filming locations for Stanley Kubrick’s 1971 masterpiece ‘A Clockwork Orange.’ There are a few spots that I can recall instantly, such as Thamesmead, Tagg’s Island and Brunel University, but most are scattered about London and its surrounds – and it takes a keen researcher to track each and every one of them down.

A year ago I discovered a YouTube video from Sean Clark – who does outstanding work with finding movie locations – and his ‘A Clockwork Orange’ presentation is so good that it’s off the charts! With a run time of around an hour, this guy finds just about every place Kubrick and his crew filmed – even the areas that have since been demolished or drastically remodelled.

There are a few other videos on this same topic out there, but Clark’s effort is by far the best and most concise. If you love ‘A Clockwork Orange’ then I strongly recommend that you watch his video – and I have provided a link below.

Footnote: In the video, the McDonald’s restaurant where the Chelsea Drugstore once stood has since closed – see photo below.

Special thanks to Sean Clark’s YouTube Channel.