With Spielberg’s most personal film chronicling his journey to becoming a filmmaker, we look at an undersung ’​90’s classic that lovingly celebrated the humble art of movie appreciation…

There’s a bit in Matinee, Joe Dante’s love letter to cinema, where John Goodman’s suspenders-wearing, cigar-chomping filmmaker Lawrence Woolsey explains why the cinema experience is so special. Likening it to the cave painting that marked man’s first foray into storytelling, he starts: “People come into your cave with the 200-year-old carpet. The guy tears your ticket in half. Too late to turn back now!” Meanwhile, Dante lovingly sweeps up through the halls of an old-school picture house in its prime, illustrating Woolsey’s speech. You can almost smell the hot popcorn. “The stuff’s laid out on the candy counter. Then you come over here to where it’s dark. Could be anything in there…” Woodsley sweeps open auditorium doors. “And you say… ‘Here I am!’ What have you got for me!’”

It’s an evocative moment in a movie that’s full of scenes reminding us of the unparalleled and transformative power of going to the cinema. Celebrating its 30th birthday this week, Matinee is far from Dante’s most well-known movie thanks to previous hits like The Howling and Gremlins. However, it’s definitely his most personal -- and as our own relationship with going to the movies has changed over the years in the wake of sofa streaming, it’s emerged as a celebration of not only filmmaking itself but the very act of going to the movies and the people who still show up to fill the seats for a big-screen experience. 

The story of a monster movie-loving kid who meets a big-time movie director, at the heart of Matinee is a deep love of movie-going. Much like its young hero Simon (Gene Fenton) and his military man father, Dante’s professional golfer dad had a job that led to lots of moving around, with cinema becoming one of the only consistencies in his life. As such, movies devoured his attention; much of the film posters and magazines glimpsed in Simon’s teenage bedroom all came from Dante’s own personal collection, with monsters quickly emerging as a stand-out favourite. When a new feature came to town, it was an event -- and in a pre-streaming age, something to be savoured whilst still available. This romanticism bleeds its way into Matinee’s nostalgic frames, with cinematographer John Hora frequently providing a golden hue to the film’s scenes, matching Dante’s clear love of that time period.

​It’s also a movie that frames cinema as a necessary form of escape. Dante’s movie plays out in the shadow of the Cuban missile crisis and an impending nuclear war that could start at any given minute. Despite thirty years passing since Matinee’s release — and even more since America’s close call with apocalypse in 1962 — this theme still feels eerily prescient. After all, it was only recently that we learned that the Doomsday clock had ticked even closer to midnight, placing us just 90 seconds from fiery catastrophe. With the ongoing war in Ukraine and Russian aggression, continual gun issues in America and a growing distrust of authority here in the UK, there truly couldn’t be a better time to elope into a dark, quiet room and escape into fiction.

Like a flipped take on Spielberg’s semi-autobiographic new one The Fabelmans, Matinee doesn’t so much chronicle the events that lead someone to become a visionary filmmaker but instead tackles the key coming-of-age moments that create a die-hard movie fan. It’s a film pairing that’s unlikely yet weirdly apt. After all, it was Spielberg who gave Dante his big break, selecting him to helm Gremlins, the first movie released under his Amblin production banner. Three decades later and while Spielberg’s still doing what he does best, Dante’s love for the world of movie making is stronger than ever, both in the films he creates and his extracurricular activities like his cinema celebrating Trailers From Hell podcast. Both individuals continue to showcase the romanticism and importance of the big screen experience — something that couldn’t be more important for the times we currently find ourselves in.

Matinee is currently available to buy on Amazon. Read more of my work by visiting my TikTok or following me on Medium and Twitter. 

We hear about the shortcomings of films all too often these days. It feels like sometimes a movie’s fate can be sealed even before the lights have started to dim in the cinema. Like it or loath it, the Internet has given everyone a voice and it seems that everyone has chosen to use that voice to bad mouth movies as soon as they hear absolutely anything about them. On the flip side of the coin, praise for good movies can be all too rare. Riding a wave of word-of-mouth buzz can literally make a decent film transform regular old film frames into statuette gold come awards season but what happens when a film becomes too successful for its own good?

The immensely successful Harry Potter franchise is a perfect case in point. Under the careful guidance of Producer David Heyman, a handful of talented and distinctly different directors and most importantly of all, series author J.K Rowling, the team pulled off a near impossible feat in fully realising a totally immersive Wizarding world. For eight movies, we lost ourselves on the big screen in a richly populated universe full of colourful characters and the money rolled in faster than a Snitch on a mission. And then it came to an end. With the story told, Rowling’s Potter anthology wrapped up naturally, leaving a nice neat package for us to enjoy and fondly revisit for decades to come. 

At least that was the plan. Despite raking it in at the box office, spawning a bespoke studio tour, multiple merchandise offshoots and its very own theme park, franchise owners seem reluctant to let it retire that easily. What followed was Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them, a spin-off tale set in the same universe that, while still canon, left our original hero’s story untouched. Successful, a sequel was soon announced and as we get our first looks at Fantastic Beasts: The Crimes of Grindlewald, it’s hard not to think that it’s the beginning of the end for yet another beloved franchise. 

It seems like whenever a film does marginally well, a sequel (or trilogy) is all but inevitable. For some these seem warranted - Back To The Future kept the fun going for three movies (for the most part) and cemented itself into cinematic lore. The Godfather undeniably improved itself in part two, even if it did get a little shaky in its lackluster third feature. However more often than not it feels like studios act too quickly, dooming a successful film to a fate of watered down future instalments, making you forget why you even tuned in in the first place. 

Bear in mind that while we may have only just met Newt Scamander and his magic briefcase, Warner Bros has already planned five (yep) sequels for the character. Proof, if you ever needed it, that can be a double edged sword. Newt’s certainly not the boy who lived but seen has he’s not going anywhere in a hurry, we better hope he’s the bloke who survives. 

Do you think sequels can improve films? Let me know in the comments section below!

The jury’s in. The debate’s over. In fact, there was no debate, just a whole load of common sense. If you’re in a cinema, you can’t really justify being on your mobile phone. That’s that. It’s time to face facts when it comes to those who choose a dark room in which to check their empty inbox or send cat memes to their mates. If you’ve made the decision to leave the comfort of your own home in favor of a multiplex or indie screening room, then you’ve temporarily lost the ability to constantly check that mini-torch you keep in your pocket. Sorry about that. 

Actually, is sorry the right word? Surely it’s not that much to ask. Two hours of your undivided attention in exchange for something you’ve voluntarily paid money to see in a venue that comes with a few specific social rules? You wouldn’t visit a library to try out your new fog horn yet when it comes to mobile phones and cinemas, people seem to think they’re the exception to the rule. Maybe it’s a generational thing. Maybe it’s a terrifying sign of how knackered our attention spans have become. Either way, it’s an irritating trait that shows no sign of going anywhere.  

Cinemas do little to battle it. While multiplexes go all infrared black-ops policing would-be picture pirates, they seem considerably less bothered about doing anything about this regular experience-ruiner. Some have even gone so for as to question whether or not it’s even a bad thing, with AMC head-honcho Adam Aron suggesting the chain launch ‘texting friendly’ screenings - a desperate attempt to keep paying punters on seats that instead sounds like a worrying lack of understanding of their own core audience. 

Thankfully, some venues lead by example. Like die-hard film hub The Alamo Drafthouse in Austin, Texas. These guys have a pretty no-bullshit approach when it comes to mid-film distractions. “If you are a person who likes to talk, text or use your cell phone during a movie, we are not the place for you!” explains their website, shortly before stating that all offenders will be unceremoniously booted. 

It’s hard to have much sympathy for distraction-addicts who break every cinephile's cardinal rule but it’s still worth asking why this even happens in the first place. Perhaps it’s an unexpected side-effect from a generation born into a world of readily available content, maybe movie marketers are contributing to the issue, selling introspective head-scratchers to audiences expecting mile-a-minute romps or it could be that we’re all a little more addicted than we’d like to admit? Whatever the reason, if a phoneless, chatter-free couple of hours is too much for you to stomach, perhaps the cinema isn't for you. 

This blog is now on Nerdly.co.uk, take a look here!

Yes, I did have an unfortunate experience with someone using a phone in a cinema recently, have you? Let me know in the comments below!

Andy did you hear about this one? The one where megastar comedian Jim Carrey appeared at New York Fashion Week and raised eyebrows during an out-there stint on the red carpet? No, it wasn’t due to his Grizzly Adams style beard (He ditched that a few weeks ago) and nope, he didn’t bend over and talk through his bum cheeks, Ace Ventura-style. Although, talking was to blame for all the news stories that popped up this week in the wake of his bizarre antics.

“There’s no meaning to any of this,” he tells E! News reporter Catt Sadler, once he’s stopped circling her. He glances distractedly into the distance, then continues, “I believe we are a field of energy dancing for itself. We don’t matter,” he says, “that’s the good news.” The whole interview was strange. Strange but not entirely unexpected. Especially if you’ve been paying attention to Carrey in recent years. If you haven’t, here’s a quick refresher: It started with talk of introspection and enlightenment at public events a few years back. Then he grew a massive beard, something which shouldn’t be weird but in today’s easily freaked out society, was instantly deemed to be pretty weird. 

Then things took a darker turn. An ex took her own life and her grieving family appeared convinced that Carrey influenced her decision making towards the end. Whilst quietly dealing with the legal proceedings he shied away from the limelight, shunning movies and instead focusing on painting and himself. Carrey’s recent red-carpet shenanigans mark his first major return to the limelight since the release of 2014’s Dumb and Dumber To. 

Which brings us to a crucial point - the reason we’re talking about Jim Carrey at all lately is because he’s promoting a new documentary, one with a right mouthful of a title. Andy and Jim: The Great Beyond - With a Very Special, Contractually Obliged Mention of Tony Clifton looks at Carrey’s ultra-method experiences bringing Andy Kaufman back to life for 1999’s Man on the Moon. As a comedian shrouded in a mist of ‘Is it real? Is it fake?’ controversy, what better way to promote a documentary about Kaufman than by blurring the lines and making audiences question whether the focal point of the feature is indeed losing it or just playing a character. 

Kaufman was the master of keeping audiences in the palm of his hand and with the help of Carrey, he’s still doing it over thirty years later. Or maybe not - perhaps the boundless trappings of fame and fortune have truly made Carrey crave some higher purpose in life, resulting in the unusual behaviour we’ve seen lately. It’s believable enough. Where do you go once you’ve reached the top, peeked behind the curtain and still find yourself unhappy? Right now, Jim Carrey may only exist as an existential notion but hopefully he won’t be gone for long. In the meantime, the spirit of Andy Kaufman appears very much alive and well. 

This blog is now on Nerdly.co.uk. Take a look here!

What do you think Jim Carrey is up to? Let me know in the comments below!

Feel that? There’s been a disturbance in the force… Earlier this week Director Colin Trevorrow parted ways with 2019’s Star Wars: Episode XI just months before the debut of Rian Johnson’s eagerly anticipated The Force Awakens follow up, The Last Jedi. According to Disney’s official statement, ‘differing visions’ were to blame for the apparent ‘mutual’ parting, however exactly what the nitty-gritty details were that caused the Director and studio to butt-heads remain a mystery… for now at least.

One thing we do know? Trevorrow’s departure marks the third time Disney and Lucasfilm have ditched a director whilst they’ve been deep in production. Fantastic Four’s Josh Trank was the first to go. The studio giant announced his departure from a (still) mysteriously unnamed Star Wars spin-off shortly after he dropped out of a Star Wars Celebration panel at the eleventh hour, despite clocking up a year of prep work. Then earlier this year, Jump Street duo Chris Lord and Phil Miller were shown the blast doors while more than half-way through shooting their young Han Solo movie, with Ron Howard quickly installed to take their place. Clearly, these weren’t the directors the studio were looking for.

It makes you think: Do Disney and Lucasfilm really want these young filmmaking rebels to shape their coveted Star Wars universe or would they rather call the shots themselves? Recruiting talent with distinct styles has been the secret weapon of that other Disney powerhouse, the Marvel Universe. How else could they have escaped the repetitive strain of countless origin stories and stepping-stone sequels? Whether it’s Kenneth Branagh bringing a little thespian class to Thor or James Gunn setting a killer pulse to a relatively unknown property in Guardians of the Galaxy, a varying tone has been crucial in keeping audiences glued to their seats.  

Star Wars is a different kettle of Nerfherders though. It’s a franchise so successful that most of us are unlikely to ever see the end of it. It’s also one that holds so much power and importance with fans, that those in control of its future are clearly quite cagey about steering it into new and uncharted territory. Getting a bad feeling about this situation? That’s because this trend of firing directors who get a little too familiar with the stories Disney have in mind and the universe Lucasfilm has spent decades fleshing out could very well lead to a decline in quality for the many Star Wars sequels and spin-offs currently in development. Especially considering the bad-blood stories that have surfaced months after each creative has been let go. Why would any emerging talent want to gamble their future career on such a high-risk investment?

It’s understandable though, to a degree. Nostalgia is undoubtedly a big part of Star Wars lore and while stepping too far off the beaten track would certainly be a misstep, Disney and Lucasfilm may have to loosen their force choke-hold on the directors they hire if they want to succeed with their ambitious multi-film plans. It could be their only hope.

This blog is now on Nerdly.co.uk. Take a look here!

Who do you think should take over Star Wars Episode IX? Let me know in the comments below!

When Stranger Things debuted last summer we were treated to something weirdly familiar. The small-town Spielbergian feel, that Stephen King font, countless Dungeons and Dragons references… The Duffer Brothers’ 80s-set sci-fi series was literally dripping with VHS-tinged nostalgia. Thankfully, it also featured some weighty turns from Winona Ryder, David Harbour and Matthew Modine. Combined, they saved it from getting lost in a bouffant-hair tangle of retro callbacks but still - that nostalgia factor undoubtedly played a huge part in shooting it straight to the top of everyone’s binge list in record time. 

​It’s not that surprising. With pop-culture’s incessant need to reflect on its own past achievements, a retro-gaze show like Stranger Things felt sort of inevitable. Twelve months later and with the Duffer duo prepping an eagerly anticipated second season little seems to have changed, although whether or not it’ll be gobbled up as ravenously by fans remains to be seen. If the show’s marketing push is anything to go by, Stranger Things has delved deeper into pop-culture regression than any of its scrawny cast ever dared delve into the shadowy Upside Down. It raises the question: how long can the show rely on self-aware nods in place of original tone-setting? 

Whatever the reason, it’ll surely have to make this transition sooner or later. With a reported four-season arc in the works, Stranger Things’ sophomore series will be a defining and crucial moment for the story. Will audiences lap up its numerous nods to the shows, movies and music that defined their youth or will they clamour for something a little more fresh and exciting? With any luck, The Duffer Brothers have a few left-field surprises waiting for us lurking in the deep and eerie darkness of the Upside Down...

This blog is now on Nerdly.co.uk. Take a look now!

Does Stranger Things' nostalgia bother you? Let me know in the comments below!