EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM (2021, Christian Sesma)

 

* 

A father rocks up in a small town looking for his daughter, vengeance on his mind.

Starring  Paul Sloan, Jake Weber, Taryn Manning, Michael Madsen, Richard Dreyfuss

Written by  Chee Keong Cheung, Alistair Cave, Matthew Thomas Edwards, Christian Sesma  

Produced by  Mike Hatton, Michael Walker, Christian Sesma

Duration  82 minutes

 

All right then, so. You've read a lot of movie reviews. I've read a lot of movie reviews. Let's take that as a given.

We can therefore agree that movie reviews have certain conventions. Marks most reviewers seem to want to hit.

And I'm concerned that I'm not doing my reviews properly, because I never tend to hit those marks. Some of them I don't think I've hit even once.

This is the kind of thing that keeps me awake at night. (That and staying up too late watching movies.)

So that's why, for EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM, I'm going to pose what I've identified from my reading of others' reviews as the 10 essential questions a movie review must ask. And damn it, I'm going to bloody well answer all of them.

1. Does it know what kind of movie it wants to be?

It's a stranger-in-a-small-town thing, a man getting embroiled in an isolated place's business. The first thing that tipped me off was when the local head honcho was referred to as "the shogun around these parts" – surely a weak reference to YOJIMBO? And, therefore, LAST MAN STANDING?

It also wants to be a gritty suspense thriller. Emphasis on 'wants'.

2. Is the protagonist likable?

His name is Hunter, Jake Hunter. He's kind of an asshole. 

The movie tries – and fails – to get us on his side by surrounding him with less likable characters, in what is known as the Jeremy Piven tactic. There's a smarmy rich kid lording it up in a strip bar. Assorted thugs and heavies surround him. Corrupt cops come onto the scene. Not forgetting the strippers ... not to judge but, you know – strippers.

I'll tell you who I always thought was likable: Jake Webber, specifically in the brilliant DAWN OF THE DEAD remake. Not in this movie though, sadly. Here he plays strip-club-loving rich kid's dad, the aforementioned shogun. 

"We don't like strangers in this town," Webber declares early on. Are there really places like that? Wouldn't they welcome the tourist dollars or the fresh blood that would help the town to grow? What happens when people die or move away – will it just be left to the current families to keep the population going? Hmm, probably best not to think about that last one too much.

Anyway, our man Hunter is in these parts hunting for information about his missing teenage daughter. Turns out she was killed by Strip Bar Kid, after he got her into smack and all of that scene. So, that makes Hunter likable, I guess? Concerned parent and everything. 

Wait a sec, concerned parents can be assholes too! He shoots the kid dead in cold blood, despite not having yet found any real proof. I mean, I suppose we can say he's conflicted? A conflicted asshole. Much better ...

3. Is it trying hard to be another movie?

All descriptions of this film say it wishes it was CHINATOWN, owing to its water-control-conspiracy subplot. Kind of in the same way SPIES LIKE US wanted to be TRADING PLACES, or EVOLUTION wanted to be GHOSTBUSTERS, or DAYS OF THUNDER wanted to be TOP GUN. Only with an even wider chasm.

What I'm saying is, EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM is definitely no CHINATOWN. It's not even DAYS OF THUNDER – a movie, as I take any opportunity to point out, that was once described by Quentin Tarantino as "Sergio Leone with cars". 

4. What is the movie saying politically?

It's a left-wing fantasy about the little guy fighting the system. 

No, wait, it's actually a right-wing fantasy that glorifies a man killing anyone in his path he feels entitled to. 

Basically, you can take your pick. Hey, you will anyway, right?

5. Are there any ways this is the movie we need right now?

Only if what you need right now is noise to put on in the background while you do something else, like fold the laundry. And only then if you really can't abide the sound of silence.

6. Is it pretentious?

Richard Dreyfus's grizzled mentor figure is introduced playing chess in a park (apparently against himself). 

Groan. Using chess has to be the number-one cliché in the history of cinema; that and references to THE WIZARD OF OZ. Or in modern times, eulogising Batman and/or Superman.

7. Do any of the featured players have personal reputations that mean we aren't any longer allowed to enjoy their work?

In May 2024, JAWS star Dreyfuss attended a screening of the Spielberg classic at a cinema in Massachusetts. He took to the stage wearing a dress and then went on what a number of media outlets described as a "sexist and transphobic rant". Targets included Barbra Streisand, trans teenagers and the Motion Picture Academy of America's inclusively rules.

Abhorrent, for sure. My question is, will I still be able to watch ANOTHER STAKEOUT, MR HOLLAND'S OPUS, POSTCARDS FROM THE EDGE, et al? Or does the veto only count for pictures he starred in from the point of the scandal onwards? Which would make 2021's EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM safe, too. 

I wish someone would clarify the rules. Then I might have had a reason to avoid this movie altogether.

Oh, and the cameoing Michael Madsen (RIP) was no angel, either: drink, drugs, being accused of assaulting his wife and arrested for battery.

8. What was the budget and does the film 'do well' for it?

The number is unconfirmed, but it can't have been much. Dreyfuss and Madsen probably received a good chuck for their few minutes of screen time each. Whatever they were paid, it was worth it for giving the movie at least something to catch the eye when it pops up during a streaming scroll. Because certainly nothing else makes it stand out.

9. Is there something to be said about the contribution of random crew members?

Cinematographer Anthony J Rickert-Epstein manages to keep a consistent washed-out look throughout, like when you dial the 'colour' setting on your TV all the way down.

It's edited by Eric Potter, who seems to specialise in incoherent fight scenes. He goes for a fractured timeline, but fails to make this choice elicit any suspense or narrative drive. He does as least keep the running time mercifully brief.

The production designer is Johnson Cooley, who kits the cast out in a nice variety of bland, muted outfits. Wait, is that what a production designer does? The sets all look cheap, too, if it means that instead.

The makeup department consists of Britney Daley and Emily Unnasch, and they make sure that ... um ... shiny faces are kept to a minimum?

Meanwhile, art director Russell Jones ... ah, forget it.

I would also like to note that EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM has 32 credited producers. Thirty-two! That's across executive, co-executive, associate, line and just plain old producer, including its four best-known actors. What does this tell us? Buggered if I know.

10. What are the 'missed opportunities'?

You have to think. With all the money you need to make a movie: to secure the sets; employ the cast and crew; transport all the equipment; schedule everything and keep on track; get all the footage you need; lock down an edit. And finally, to get the thing actually released and seen by ... well, at least one person.

You have to think: what an opportunity to make something good. And so, yes, we do have an opportunity missed here. They could have made a much better movie than EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM.

One star out of five.

 

 

Valid use of the word ‘last’?  Hunter gets some of them, but certainly not every last one. Of them.

What would a movie called EVERY FIRST ONE OF THEM be like?  A grammatical travesty.

 

Previously:  LAST OF THE GRADS

Next time:  THE LAST HEIST

Check out my books:  Jonathanlastauthor.com