Movie Review – Downton Abbey (2019)

 Four years on from the final season, Downton Abbey makes its cinematic debut, and it’s safe to say that fans of the series will not be disappointed.

⭐ ⭐ ⭐
Elle Cahill 

Downton Abbey picks up in 1927 – one year after the series finished – as the Crawley’s are informed that King George V (Simon Jones) and Queen Mary (Geraldine James) will be staying with them while visiting the area. Excitement and nerves quickly turn to frustration and disappointment when the servants discover they won’t be waiting on the King and Queen. Instead, they are to be stripped of their duties by the Royal’s own staff.

Upstairs, the Crawley’s are experiencing their own drama. Violet Crawley (Maggie Smith) discovers that her cousin and hand to the Queen, Lady Maud Bagshaw (Imelda Staunton) has decided not to name Robert Crawley (Hugh Bonneville) as heir to her fortune, so Violet hatches a plan to confront Maud when she arrives at Downton and convince her to change her mind.

The film version of Downton Abbey has definitely been made with the fans in mind. It cleverly acknowledges important past characters, such as Sybil Branson, but still provides enough background information to ensure newcomers can follow along. The film largely avoids drawing from past storylines, choosing to simply place audiences in the Downton Abbey universe during a time when excitement and conflict naturally unfold.

All the regular cast members return, along with several new players who add some drama to the storyline. Series writer Julian Fellowes has also been kept on for the film, carefully constructing a story that can be completely resolved within the space of two hours. While each subplot comes to a predictable conclusion, the Downton service staff bring a light-heartedness to the film that makes it thoroughly enjoyable.

As always, Downton Abbey well and truly belongs to Maggie Smith. Whether she’s engaging in witty banter with Isobel Merton (Penelope Wilton), or facing off with Lady Maud, she is captivating in every scene, bringing a touch of feistiness to an otherwise conservative society. Other memorable characters include the enthusiastic Joseph Molesley (Kevin Doyle) whose nervousness ends up revealing itself in a hilarious manner, and Daisy Mason (Sophie McShera) whose spunk and wandering eye gets her into trouble.

Filmmaker Michael Engler is in familiar territory here, having directed several Downton Abbey episodes and recent period drama The Chaperone. In collaboration with the production design team, he has continued the glamorous aesthetic of the series, with beautifully extravagant sets and costumes.

Downton Abbey knows its audience and knows what’s going to appeal to them. It’s also careful not to alienate new audiences, subtly reintroducing characters for those unfamiliar and bringing in a brand-new story without any past context needed. It’s very easy watching and is sure to be a hit amongst loyal fans.

Downton Abbey is available in Australian cinemas from 12 September 2019

Image © Universal Pictures 2019

Advertisements

Movie Review – The Kitchen

Widows 2.0… set in 1970s New York City.

⭐ ⭐ ½
Elle Cahill

The Kitchen follows three women (Melissa McCarthy, Tiffany Haddish and Elisabeth Moss) who must quickly learn to become independent when their husbands are incarcerated in an FBI sting. Upon realising the current racket leader isn’t supplying the support promised to local businesses, the women decide to take over. While expansion plans are underway, the husbands are released from prison early, threatening the empire the women have established.

In her directorial debut, screenwriter Andrea Berloff (Sleepless, Straight Outta Compton) effectively captures the atmosphere of the 1970s in Hell’s Kitchen. She successfully mixes the grittiness of the time and place with the sexiness of the fashion of the era, but ironically, it’s the story that lets her down.

Berloff struggles to capture the desperation of these three women. While it is suggested that they will be burdened by financial issues when their men go to prison, their circumstances never become dire enough to justify their turn to crime. In the end, everything is all wrapped up a little too nicely, making the whole story a little hard to believe. That being said, The Kitchen still has its good moments.

Elisabeth Moss ends up stealing the show as the damaged and downtrodden Claire who takes to crime like a moth to a flame. Moss expresses the essence of a woman who has served as nothing more than a punching bag for society, both physically and emotionally. Invigorated by her life of crime, Claire becomes a force to be reckoned with and finds her place in the world.

Melissa McCarthy and Tiffany Haddish each bring a certain level of gusto to their respective roles, but their characters don’t have the same level of depth or complexity. Haddish is definitely the weakest link, which makes sense considering this is a big step away from her recent comedic films. This isn’t to say she’s bad; she simply doesn’t carry her character as convincingly as the others.

Ultimately, The Kitchen is an interesting film about female empowerment, but it fails to bring anything more to the table. Its untimely release also means that comparisons are inevitably going to be drawn between it and 2018’s Widows, with the latter unfortunately being a far superior film. The Kitchen has all the components of a thrilling and entertaining film, but the end result is neither compelling nor memorable.

The Kitchen is available in Australian cinemas from 29 August 2019

Image courtesy of Roadshow Films

Movie Review – The Public

Who knew public libraries could be so exciting? Emilio Estevez writes, directs and stars in The Public.

⭐ ⭐ ½
Elle Cahill

The Public follows Cincinnati librarian, Stuart Goodson (Emilio Estevez), as he interacts with the local homeless population who take shelter in the library during the day. With a bitterly cold winter killing half a dozen homeless people a night, the homeless community decide to barricade themselves in the library one night to save themselves from death. Stuart finds himself in the middle of a stand-off with the police, eventually becoming the face of the demonstration as his own personal moral code overtakes his duty as a public servant.

Estevez’s first film since The Way (2010) features a very strong ensemble cast that are each given an opportunity to showcase their acting chops. Michael Kenneth Williams is a stand-out as a humble, homeless man who leads the demonstration. Following his stellar performance in Netflix’s When They See Us, here he captures the determination of a man fighting injustice who is more concerned for others in his own situation.

Gabrielle Union also makes her mark as an ambitious reporter who isn’t opposed to twisting the truth of a story. Having seen Union reduced to one-dimensional characters time and time again, it’s nice to see her in a role with a bit more depth, even though the character makes some questionable decisions.

The other major players in the ensemble – Alec Baldwin, Christian Slater, Taylor Schilling and Estevez – all bring their usual acting prowess, delivering convincing performances as they each sit on either side of the barricade, driven by their own motives.

Unfortunately, the major let-down of The Public is its two millennial characters. Library assistant Myra (Jenna Malone) falls victim to millennial tropes, making it difficult to connect with her. While she starts out making various tirades on climate change and social injustice, she later shies away from taking part in a real social movement, coming across as naive and cowardly. The other millennial is a drug-addicted homeless man who purely serves as a plot point and fails to bring anything to the table, ruining the film’s otherwise authentic take on the homeless.

Estevez manages to capture all facets of a community reacting to an event like this, giving us glimpses into the background of each character. The only trouble is, most of the back stories fail to serve a purpose and few influence the character’s actions in the film.

The Public is a solid social justice film, but it lacks any sort of punch. The stakes aren’t high enough to make it memorable and a lot of the supposedly “big” reveals are obvious and predictable. It showcases the traumatic experiences that the homeless endure, but despite being supported by a strong cast, overall The Public fails to really engage.

The Public is available in Australian cinemas from August 1

Image courtesy of Rialto Distribution

Movie Review – Ophelia

Ophelia does away with stereotypes and explores how two women impacted the downfall of Hamlet.

⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ½
Elle Cahill

In this retelling of William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet, we are provided an entirely new perspective that delves deeper into the life of Hamlet’s love interest Ophelia. Adapted from Lisa Klein’s novel of the same name, the film follows Ophelia (Daisy Ridley) from her childhood through to her time as a lady-in-waiting for Queen Gertrude (Naomi Watts) when she starts a secret relationship with Hamlet. When Hamlet’s father the King dies suddenly from a snake bite, Ophelia pieces together a far more sinister explanation for the cause of his death.

Ophelia seeks to give purpose to an otherwise overlooked and underappreciated female character, further enriching a classic tale. Before any Shakespeare aficionados start to object and brandish pitchforks, it’s important to remember that this is a retelling of Hamlet, not a modernisation or an adaptation, meaning a certain amount of creative freedom can be permitted.

Screenwriter Semi Chellas does not attempt to replicate Shakespeare’s language and instead focuses on character development. Here, Hamlet (George MacKay) and Claudius (Clive Owen) become footnotes to a largely female driven story, with Ophelia and Gertrude taking centre stage. Ophelia answers questions that the original play left open-ended, while explaining certain behaviours that may have previously seemed erratic.

Ultimately, Ophelia belongs to Watts. She is featured twice in this film, playing both Queen Gertrude and a completely new character, Ophelia’s sister Mechtild. As Gertrude, she captures the difficult nuances of being a loving mother who is tossed aside as her son pursues pretty, young girls, and how this escalates into deep insecurities about ageing and her place in a world where her son no longer needs her.

Ridley’s Ophelia fails to compete. Torn between the sensitive and submissive Ophelia that we know from Hamlet, and the newly empowered and defiant version of the character, Ridley ends up coming across as confused and lacking self-confidence. It doesn’t help that the chemistry between Ophelia and MacKay’s Hamlet is all but non-existent, taking credibility away from their actions to protect each other in the name of love.

Despite all this, Ophelia is still very watchable. The production design and costumes are beautiful, creating a vibrant palette that gives the film a Romantic Era feel. The plot moves at the same pace as the play, with the last act bringing everything together in a series of fast-paced action scenes.

There’s been demand for more female-led films that aren’t just remakes, and while Ophelia isn’t an entirely original concept, it is a step forward in terms of bringing entertaining female-centric stories to cinemas.

Ophelia is available in Australian cinemas from August 1 

Image courtesy of Madman Entertainment 

Movie Review – The White Crow

Ralph Fiennes takes the director’s helm for the third time in his career with The White Crow. While beautifully shot, Fiennes’ latest fails to nail the life story of ballet dancer Rudolf Nureyev.

⭐ ⭐ ⭐
Elle Cahill

The White Crow follows the journey of famous Russian ballet dancer Rudolf Nureyev (Oleg Ivenko) as he travels to Paris at a time when the USSR is treated with suspicion all across Western Europe. Intertwined with moments from his poor childhood, The White Crow attempts to demonstrate not only Nureyev’s exposure to and immediate love for the Parisian art and culture, but also why he eventually chose to defect from the USSR.

Ivenko is brilliant as Nureyev, managing to juxtapose his constant arrogance with his physical strength and beauty as a ballet dancer. There are a lot of layers to Nureyev that Ivenko brings to the surface without ever overshadowing Nureyev’s core characteristics.

Director Ralph Fiennes has taken a risk in choosing a professional dancer to star as his lead, as opposed to a seasoned actor with a body double for the dance scenes. His risk thankfully pays off, as it gives Ivenko’s performance a rawness that I don’t think would have been achieved if Fiennes had chosen otherwise.

The White Crow is beautifully shot, with distinct colour palettes used to define different parts of Nureyev’s life. The glimpses we see of his childhood, with a largely absent father and a mother struggling to feed her children has a distinct, dark blue and grey palette that slowly becomes warmer and brighter as he is accepted into the prestigious Vaganova Academy of Russian Ballet.

Fiennes has also done a wonderful job of making the ballet performances the standout scenes of the film, with a strong focus on capturing Nureyev’s emotions pre and post-performance. There’s a lot of frenetic energy in this film, which is contrasted by the eerie quiet and stillness of the dance scenes, and the result is truly captivating.

For the most part, this film is a great offering from Fiennes, but at times the storytelling becomes disjointed. We are only offered glimpses of Nureyev’s past and are left to our own devices to piece it all together. There are a lot of questions about Nureyev’s character that are left unanswered, with his underdog side never fully explored and his unlikable qualities never explained or justified.

The White Crow is a visually strong delivery from Fiennes but lacks real direction or purpose beyond showcasing a beautiful harmony between Paris and professional ballet. Much more of Nureyev’s story could have been told if the film did not focus so heavily on indulgent shots of Parisian architecture and galleries.

The White Crow is available in Australian cinemas from July 18

Image © Universal Pictures 2019

Movie Review – The Lion King (2019)

Jon Favreau’s latest CGI-fest is not so majestic.

⭐ ⭐
Zachary Cruz-Tan


There is a reason why animals shouldn’t speak in the movies. They don’t express emotion the way humans do. It’s why when a movie like The Lion King is made, it should only exist as an animation. This new “live-action” Lion King, for all its visual splendour, is deeply unsettling, because even though the story pulls its characters through a range of emotions, they’re plastered with the same expression from start to finish. It’s like a nature documentary with the animals possessed by highly paid actors.

I think Disney has entered a dangerous phase. Its movies used to have the power to transport us to faraway places. Now it seems more like a time machine stuck on repeat, hurtling us into the past with remake upon sequel upon remake. This “live-action” Lion King is the poorest remake of them all, because since it basically trades one form of animation for another, it’s neither live-action nor a remake, and struggles to be something in between.

Anyway, I’m sure I don’t need to go over the plot. Anyone wishing to see this picture would’ve seen the original, or the hugely successful Broadway musical that followed, or read Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”. The truth is none of it matters, because this Lion King follows the original step by step, down to certain lines of dialogue and shot choices. It offers no room for original thinking. Like Gus Van Sant‘s ill-advised Psycho remake, it’s a brilliant facsimile of a great movie, and irrefutable proof that facsimiles of great movies, no matter how brilliant, are pointless.

So what’s left to talk about? The cast is okay, I suppose. The two best vocal performances come from John Oliver as the hornbill Zazu, and Chiwetel Ejiofor as Scar. Ejiofor is really quite frightening. His voice doesn’t register like Jeremy Irons’ from the original, but he finds a cool menace that works for his blank-faced villain. Donald Glover voices adult Simba and almost passes by unnoticed. Beyoncé, as adult Nala, does all her own singing. And we get Billy Eichner and Seth Rogen as the hipster outcasts Timon and Pumbaa, who naturally trigger the most laughs. Meanwhile, James Earl Jones probably sets a record for most Nostalgic Voiceover Paycheques. Though at 88, his Mufasa sounds awfully frail.

Alas, I return to the animals’ faces. Their thorough lack of expression cripples the movie beyond repair. Simply consider the moment after Mufasa rescues Simba and Nala from the hyenas, and Mufasa bellows to Zazu, “I’ve got to teach my son a lesson!”. In the original, Simba’s face weakens and he sinks miserably into the tall grass. At once, the animation makes his fear and embarrassment clear. We get nothing of the sort in this new version, because this Simba can’t emote, at least not in the way we need him to. I felt like I was staring at empty faces, into empty eyes. The animals looked convincing. Their mouths moved. I heard their voices, but no one was home. This Lion King is a grave miscalculation.

The Lion King (2019) is available in Australian cinemas from July 17


Image courtesy of Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures

Movie Review – After

Sometimes fan fiction should remain just that. New teen romance After never should have made it from the page to the screen.


Elle Cahill

Based on the One Direction fan fiction of the same name, After follows good girl Tessa (Josephine Langford) who moves away to college and meets resident bad boy Hardin Scott (Hero Fiennes Tiffin). The pair begin a tumultuous relationship, leading Tessa to disappoint her family and friends, and test her once grounded morals. As they fall further and further in love, Hardin’s past threatens to tear them apart.

After is as melodramatic as it sounds. There are many similarities that can be drawn between it and the Fifty Shades of Grey franchise. For starters, neither is any good. Both scripts are poorly written, with highly under-developed stories, and both feature bizarre casting choices, with two leads that lack the connection needed to drive a romantic drama.

If you could take every romantic cliché in existence and put it into a single film, you’ll end up with something that resembles After. The dialogue is jarring and unnatural, making you very aware that you’re watching a film, and there are endless corny  scenes that made me cringe so hard I wanted to be swallowed up by my chair.

Coming in at just under two hours, After is far too long. It moves at a glacial pace that forces you to feel every painstaking minute as you wait and wait for some form of conflict to arrive. But never fear, the conflict eventually comes along, only to be quickly resolved in the last 15 minutes.

Perth-born Langford (younger sister to Katherine Langford from 13 Reasons Why), does her best to find something in the role, making her immediately better than Dakota Johnson in Fifty Shades.

Fiennes Tiffin’s performance is wooden and contrived. He seems completely disinterested in Tessa at times, with the exception of a bathtub scene. But alas, he opens his mouth again, and the feeling is lost.

Admittedly, I’m not the target audience for this film, but even so, After is condescending and embarrassing even for chaste teenagers. Apparently, a sequel is already in the works. Let’s hope the filmmakers put more effort into crafting a romantic drama that at least contains some romance or some drama.

After is available in Australian cinemas from July 4

Image courtesy of Roadshow Films

Movie Review – Under The Silver Lake

Put on your tinfoil hats and pop some anxiety meds, you’re in for a brain-melting labyrinth that will probably pick up traction among cinephiles in about 10 – 15 years.

⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ½
Corey Hogan

Unemployed and unambitious, Sam (Andrew Garfield) passes the days pondering conspiracy theories and possible hidden messages buried in pieces of pop culture. A beautiful and mysterious woman named Sarah (Riley Keough) becomes his new neighbor in his Silver Lake apartment building, and the pair almost immediately grow friendly and flirtatious with each other. After a night where Sarah promises more for Sam the following day, he returns to find her and most of her belongings gone without a trace. Obsessed with finding out what happened to her, Sam uses his sleuthing skills to investigate, uncovering some bizarre clues, shady characters and a much stranger conspiracy than he could have imagined.

When you think about the paranoid delusions that seem to have resurfaced in a magnitude these days – the earth is flat, the Illuminati controls everything, Beyonce is a lizard – perhaps David Robert Mitchell’s Under the Silver Lake could be a film that defines our age. If it defines anything at all that is, there’s so much and so little going on that it could all mean everything or nothing, or both. Yes, it’s another weird ride.

It follows his much-praised It Follows, but while there’s shades of horror and disturbing imagery here and there, this is Mitchell jumping over the fence in to full-blown David Lynch territory to paint a lucid version of Los Angeles that’s hiding a dark and violent underbelly. An acidic, neo-noir score from Disasterpeace sets an enchanting mood at every turn as we follow Sam tracing clues through high class parties and underground bars, superstars’ mansions, reservoirs and deep underground.

It’s not just the disappearance of Sarah he’s chasing either; Mitchell throws in a missing celebrity daredevil, a dog killer on the loose, a cryptic comic book that may hold its own answers and a songwriter supposedly behind all of history’s hits, among more. Piecing it all together seems an ordeal of its own, and perhaps that’s the point. No matter how pointless it may seem to follow the plot, at least it’s never once boring.

Probably about 40 minutes longer than it has any right to be, shamelessly indulgent and overly ambitious, Mitchell’s Silver Lake is the kind of incomplete, messy masterpiece that has no appeal to a mass audience, but a certain subgroup will absolutely get their rocks off to. Here’s hoping that whatever Mitchell does next, he shoots on film; the beautifully vibrant frames of L.A. are here looking lush but digitalized to the extreme. But wait, maybe that’s another clue waiting to be cracked? Oh boy, onto the next conspiracy…

Under The Silver Lake is available in Australian cinemas from June 20

Image courtesy of Umbrella Entertainment

Movie Review – Tolkien

Tolkien has a quiet, magical quality about it. Not an elvish or wizardly sort of magic, but a desire to find wonder and whimsy in the doldrums of everyday life.

⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ½
Cherie Wheeler

I’m not entirely sure what I was expecting when I settled in for my Monday evening session of Tolkien. But I do know I wasn’t expecting a film that would make me feel such joy and such sorrow in equal measure.

Tolkien, much like The Lord of the Rings trilogy, is a story about friendship, love and war. It tracks John Ronald Reuel Tolkien as an orphaned boy in Birmingham, before becoming a student of Oxford and a soldier conscripted in WWI. Director Dome Karukoski explores how each of these life stages shaped Tolkien into the man who would go on to write the tales of Middle Earth.

As Frodo, Sam, Pippin and Merry served as the heart of LOTR, John Ronald (Nicholas Hoult & Harry Gilby) and his three boyhood friends Robert Gilson (Patrick Gibson & Albie Marber), Geoffrey Smith (Anthony Boyle & Adam Bregman) and Christopher Wiseman (Tom Glynn-Carney & Ty Tennant) form the heart of Tolkien.

The entire film is carried by the comradery between these four boys/men who are determined to explore artistic pursuits in a world ruled by propriety and tradition. We share in the spirited highs and crushing lows of their friendship over the years, while a romance simultaneously blooms between Tolkien and like-minded, fellow orphan Edith Bratt (Lily Collins).

Hoult is perfectly serviceable as adult Tolkien. He seems to be making a habit of playing literary figures, following his 2017 outing as J.D. Salinger in Rebel In The Rye. But while Salinger and Tolkien have writing and war in common, that’s about where the similarities end. Salinger was a non-conformist New Yorker who became a recluse. In Tolkien, Hoult conveys a gentle and soulful British scholar with a passion for language and fantasy.

Meanwhile, Collins is unexpectedly pleasant as the charming Edith, bringing a Hermione Granger-type quality to the character. With this and Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile now under her belt, she seems to be turning a corner in her career. 

Tolkien is also supported by gorgeous cinematography and incredibly detailed production design that makes the most of early twentieth century fashion and architecture, but it is by no means a perfect film. Far from it.

There are times when emotional beats are overplayed, lingering longer than necessary. At other times seemingly significant moments are brushed over and quickly forgotten. It flits between timelines with little reasoning and becomes heavy handed when referencing and drawing parallels between Tolkien’s life and his works.

I knew very little of Tolkien prior to seeing this film. I didn’t even know what the J.R.R. stood for. All I knew was that I wanted to learn about the man behind one of the greatest fantasy franchises ever committed to the screen. Perhaps that combined with my love of writing and books makes me biased, for in spite of its many flaws, I still thoroughly enjoyed Tolkien.

Others have slammed the film as a ‘plodding biopic’ that ‘struggles to justify its existence’ and the Tolkien family have declared ‘they do not endorse the content’ of the film. Yes, Tolkien may struggle with structure and pacing, and it may lack finesse, but it made me feel something real. I genuinely cared for the four boys and their friendship and I can’t ask more of a film than that.

Tolkien is available in Australian cinemas from June 13

Image courtesy of Twentieth Century Fox

Movie Review – Wild Rose

Tom Harper teaches us hard life lessons, in a movie about a country singer from Scotland, of all places.

⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ⭐ ½ 
Zachary Cruz-Tan

Wild Rose begins with a self-centred country singer from Glasgow, Scotland, and ends with a complex, deeply human student of life. In between lies the discovery that life is a cruel, cruel mistress. Her lessons are harsh. Her punishments savage. There are no reset buttons. And she has a sneaky way of throwing us nasty curveballs when we least expect it. 

The singer is 20-something Rose-Lynn Harlan (Jessie Buckley), who we meet on the day of her release from prison. She was incarcerated for smuggling heroin, but as we’ll learn, heroin doesn’t play a part in her life. As far back as Rose-Lynn can remember, she’s been obsessed with country music. “I was born in the wrong country”, she tells Bob Harris of BBC radio. Her dream is to save up, fly to Nashville, Tennessee, and perform in the Grand Ole Opry, and then, I dunno, maybe a record deal?  

There are just two problems: a daughter and a son, who have lived with Rose-Lynn’s mother Marion (Julie Walters) while Rose-Lynn was locked away. Now Rose-Lynn is back, her kids don’t know her and she doesn’t know them. Dinners are awkward. Time is silent. 

Rose-Lynn deals with her kids the only way she knows how, by not dealing with them. Her heart still belongs to country music and her sights are still set on Nashville. She gets a job as a house cleaner for the wealthy Susannah (Sophie Okonedo). They become friends, and before long Susannah’s offering to fund Rose-Lynn’s ambitious trip.  

Maybe all this sounds a little bland, but there is a web of consequences beneath Nicole Taylor‘s deceptively simple screenplay that threatens to undo Rose-Lynn. She is clearly a woman who outgrew life at a young age. She was performing at her local pub when she was 14. She had two unplanned children before she was 18. Poor choices landed her behind bars and now she has a family to care for before she ever had the chance to care for herself. Nashville should be the last thing on her mind. Her children should come first. But what Rose-Lynn has to learn is that she must play the hand she’s dealt, even if it means losing the pot.  

Wild Rose is directed by Tom Harper, who crafts it into a quasi-musical where Rose-Lynn is often listening to or performing country music. It’s worth noting that all the songs are sung by Buckley, who proves she’s as tremendous a country singer as she is a dramatic actress. The songs are indeed lovely. I’m not a fan of the genre but I can see why it provides Rose-Lynn with comfort and an escape. It’s what she was born to do. It’s really the only thing she can do. In another life, she might’ve been an international superstar. In this one, she’s a single mother of two in Glasgow, who sings country on weekends, and pays all her bills on time.

Wild Rose is available in Australian cinemas from 13 June 2019

Image (c) Universal Pictures 2019