23
epigram 28.02.23
You Season Four: Part One sets up a deliciously entertaining murder mystery Hello, you. Joe Goldberg is back, although this time, he's left the States for a fresh start in London. It isn't long until his new identity gets caught up in a murderous scandal as he stalks his new posse.
Sienna Thompson, Second Year, English
T
he return of the infamous Joe Goldberg has made its way back to Netflix user's screens as we dive into a fourth season of the obsessive, hopeless romantic, serial killing book lover. But for this season, we’ll have to wait to see it in two parts… Season Four of YOU (2018-) follows up with Joe Goldberg (Penn Badgley) as he leaves the United States in the perusal of Marienne (Tati Gabrielle) throughout Europe. After leaving things on a bad note, he reluctantly enters a new life under a different identity as a professor in London. Here, it is where he ends up grudgingly befriending a group of pompous, arrogant, elitist upper-class group of people. Might I add a scarily accurate portrayal and definitely annoying one too. Where this season takes on a refreshing new turn is that it turns into more of a murder mystery after the
murder of Malcolm (Stephen Hagan) uproots Joe’s entire secret cover. In addition to this, Joe is the one being watched as he is sent anonymous and eerie messages - a bit like A from Pretty Little Liars (20102017) - blackmailing him into being blamed for Malcolm’s death and that of the others that follow. What I personally love about this season so far is the new perspective the show is taking entirely. Sure, Joe is still a serial killer and has some issues he needs to work through, but there isn’t his usual blind obsession with a woman. Joe seems to possess a lot more self-awareness this season, constantly trying to prove to ‘you’ that he’s different, imminent to move on from his past, as he argues that he no longer needs to kill people- though he inevitably keeps finding himself
cleaning up dead bodies this season. In fact, with the character of Kate (Charlotte Ritchie), there seems to be more of a pure admiration, as if he did fall in love with her deeply. This seemed to be missing from all
What I love about this season so far is the new perspective the show is taking entirely. Joe is still a serial killer...but there isn't his usual blind obsession with a woman. the other women he’s obsessed over. At first, I was hesitant if a fourth season was needed for this show. However, this seems to be the type of show that, each time I say that,
I’m always surprised, and this season has been no exception so far. The character of Joe is a very complex and delicate one to handle. But I believe that Penn Badgley, also aiding in producing the show, has been of massive assistance to ensuring his character is not burnt out or portrayed wrong. I also think his job as an English professor at Royal Holloway was such a great character arc to make, and so interesting to see him thrive in this environment. As far as the ending of Part One goes, I was surprised to find out who the ‘Eat The Rich’ killer was. I did feel disappointed with this revelation as I had hoped for someone almost more outrageous. My hopes for the second part are first having Joe’s son Henry return to him somehow. He is in a better
position not being in Joe’s care at the current moment, but besides a few mentions of his name, he seemed to have been pushed aside. In relation to this, I hope for some form of the return of Love (Victoria Pedretti). The Part Two teaser trailer showed a flash of her face in what could be some hallucination or her actual return from the dead, revealing that she had escaped Joe’s attempted murder and house fire last season. Either way, she was such a unique and engrossing character that it would be interesting for her to be added to the current equation. Overall, I was very impressed with the enjoyment level of this season, and I have very high hopes for part two. I’m hoping to see the return of some characters and to find out how this will all end for the infamous Joe Goldberg.
Image Credit: Amelia Jacob
Knock At The Cabin: Shyamalan struggles to sell this home invasion slog Back from hiatus and following the great success of his earlier works, M. Night Shyamalan is presenting us with his latest thriller, Knock At The Cabin. However, it seems to have missed the mark.
chant for writing ponderous and boring screenplays? Unlike him, I won’t withhold the twisted answer: no.
Isaac Woolley, Msc Public Policy
P
erhaps one of the most curious careers in Hollywood is that of director M. Night Shyamalan, after ruling the Hollywood roost with classics like The Sixth Sense (1999) and Unbreakable (2000), he suffered a fall from grace, releasing critical disasters such as The Happening (2008) and The Last Airbender (2010). Undeterred, he has continued to release a new film every few years, finally clawing back some critical praise with Split (2016). But can this latest effort resist his pen-
In this film, Leonard (Dave Bautista) leads a group of people who invade the holiday cabin of a family of three. They tell the family they must choose one family member to sacrifice to prevent the apocalypse. Thus follows a drama contained solely within this cabin in the woods. Leonard’s cohort is humanised early on; they are not there to harm the family and are reluctant to carry out violent acts. Leonard, despite his phys-
ical presence, reveals he is a schoolteacher in an attempt to befriend the family and avoid scaring them. Former WWE wrestler Dave Bautista can seemingly do no wrong since his breakout role as Drax in Guardians of the Galaxy (2014), and this film is no exception. He compellingly portrays the role of a gentle giant, forced to act against his good nature in service of the greater good. His physicality and unique appearance lend his character a special kind of strangeness which works in the film’s favour from his first introduction. Sadly, the film squanders the initial intrigue. Events trundle onwards with repetitive arguments between the characters about why this family was selected, whether the forewarned apocalypse is truly happening, and whether the family would be willing to make the
sacrifice even if this was the case. If you were hoping the film would do something clever or interesting with any of these questions, it does not. A series of indulgent flashbacks only serve to drag out the screen time and fail to in-
If you were hoping the film would do something clever...it does not. troduce any new secrets or twists. Knock at the Cabin is further undermined by poor directing choices. There are some comically bad depictions of the apocalypse unfolding live on the news, which are executed with crummy special effects and no attempt to alter the cinematography to look like believable news footage (instead they look like film scenes played on a TV). The TV’s importance in the
plot as the characters’ only evidence of an unfolding apocalypse makes the film hard to take seriously at points. Shyamalan worsens the situation by cameoing on a teleshopping programme before an apocalyptic news report, rather than being funny, it sacrifices dramatic tension for the sake of having the director appear in his own film. This example makes me question whether the man purposefully sabotages his films as part of a scheme to become a living meme because if it were, it would make more sense than this. Perhaps this story, which is based on a 2018 horror novel, The Cabin at the End of the World, is more compelling in book form than as a feature film. Either way, it’s another Shyamalan project which misses the mark. Image Credit: IMDB