The Flip5 folds flat for the first time in Samsung’s Flip-range! The front screen is (obviously) plastic, layered, ‘Foldable Dynamic AMOLED 2X’ with a substantial ‘crease’ but after a while, as usual, most of us have brains that will ignore it. Sometimes when swiping I am reminded, but a lot of swiping is done on the bottom or top of the screen, not top/bottom or bottom/top. It refreshes at 120Hz (if you like), has HDR10+ support and is very bright when cranked up (in auto) at 1750nits. It’s a rather large 6.7”, though that’s smaller than Moto’s Razr and others which are often now 6.9”. 1080p with 425ppi.
The cover screen is Super AMOLED, 3.4”, 720p at 306ppi. It’s got a ‘dogleg’ around the camera lenses and I found that anything other than Samsung’s own official TPU ‘case’ means that swipes up from the bottom-left are really difficult to execute. Especially with my big fingers. There’s GGV2 on the cover screen and back, which is encouraging - especially for those using the outside screen more than the inside one, now that it’s bigger, and the frame is reassuringly the tougher drop and scratch resistant Armour aluminium.
The Samsung updates and software support is not quite the market-leading version that the S24-series gets, 7 years, along with Google, but at 4 OS updates (so Android 13-17) and 5 years of Security (so to Summer 2028), it really is enough - assuming the screen holds out that long!
The chipset flies through anything that I ask of it, SnapDragon 8 Gen 2, last year’s as it might be, and my unit has 512GB of storage, plenty (or indeed too much) for the huge majority of people (with UFS 4.0 supported) and the 8GB RAM doesn’t seem to be an issue (even if the unit supported DeX I still think 8GB is fine, based on tests with other phones, such as the S23). The baseline storage for the range is now 256GB, so nice to see 128GB being dropped, especially as most of the big players don’t even want a sniff of microSD now.
There’s no 3.5mm audio-out available but there is support for 32-bit/384kHz audio. Music played via the USB-C will clearly depend on the attached equipment and how good that is, but via Bluetooth 5.3, for which the same is true, sounds great to my ageing ears. No complaints with any of my 101 pairs of headphones, earphones and speakers that I have tried in tests here.
Connectivity by 5G seems good for data and voice - the latter making great use of the ‘flip’ form in terms of answering/ending phone calls by opening/closing the clam. It’s great fun, retro and practical.
WiFi works really well in my tests here with a range of routers and situations. It supports 6e for that and GPS seems to lock on well and keep a hold. NFC is a bit odd in that the aerial needs to be in the ‘bottom’ half of the phone and Google Pay only works if the phone is opened. Retraining needed for those of us who are expecting to present the top-back of the phone to the scanner, aerial usually being up-top somewhere alongside cameras.
The side-mounted, capacitive fingerprint scanner is perfectly placed for open or closed use on the right, works flawlessly, first time, every time, and the face unlock supporting it means that the user is ready for action at lightning speed!
The battery is pretty good in my tests since I’ve had it here, though in various clinical tests online people are questioning it. It’s certainly longer-lasting than the slightly smaller battery in the Flip4, but then the Flip4 needed to be opened up for more tasks than the Flip5. In turn, the Flip3’s battery was worse again. So it’s steady progress, wings clipped by physics largely. It is a 3,700mAh unit which offers 25W charging, so not great, but gets half the battery full from flat in about half an hour. There’s 15W Qi and 4.5W reverse wireless in the mix, so options all-round, slow as they might be.
The main camera is a 12MP f/1.8 shooter with OIS and in support is a wide-angle 12MP f/2.2 unit. It can shoot 4K video at 60fps, 1080 at 240 and 720 at 960. There’s a 10MP f2.2 Selfie inside the clamshell. It has Samsung’s camera software of course and it’s very capable, limited only by the hardware they were able to squeeze into the small, folding, flipping body!
Like Pixels these days, a lot of the appeal of Samsung phones is in the evolving software, version by version, update by update, as the tech world is flooded with the buzz of AI this, AI that and AI the other! We try to keep up with what’s going on but don’t forget that Samsung has a flavour all of its own in the shape of OneUI, currently on v6.1, with all that comes with it - including the bells and whistles, depth of Good Lock modules and whatever can be baked in by these clever engineers, now, apparently, working squarely hand-in-hand with those from Google. There’s tons of stuff to cover in the software, so head for YouTube and take your pick from a million and one videos!
I’m more interested in the form factor, though. The Flip5 in the hand, in the pocket, is certainly dinky and I am finding that over time I am using the cover screen more and more. I sneak applications into the Good Lock cover screen module and before I realise, I’m out there using the phone a lot. The phone folded nestles nicely in my hand and by the use of pinky-finger and scrolling thumb it balances nicely. There are some applications which are a bit rubbish and you just have to open the phone up, but I’ve been surprised at how useful it has been of late, running those apps. Typing on the keyboard is fiddly of course and sometimes, with some apps, you simply can’t see the text input field when typing. So voice input is encouraged - which works very well in most instances.
Flex Mode is great! Yeah, yeah, I know, in reality it's of limited use (especially on the small Flip5 screen and not the bigger Fold5's) but it's just great tinkering fun. With the device sitting up looking at me, playing with a cursor using the Touchpad is wicked fun - and screenshots - and more usefully, probably, music controls in various Music Playing apps. Tent mode (so almost closed and forming a ‘v’ shape standing facing me) and playing/watching Music Video is one of my favourite uses for the Flip5. I often do this and love it. It's kinda nostalgic. Like using an iPod Classic. It's charming.
I’m still finding out more as I go, including the hookup with a Samsung Galaxy Watch for health tracking (and even Blood pressure - well, except currently in the USA apparently), integrating use with my Samsung Galaxy Tab S8 and loads more. Nobody can deny that with joined-up thinking going on, Samsung does provide a playground with oodles of fun, productivity and functionality at every turn. Anyway, these have been some random thoughts - a kind of progress report really, having never actually ever done a formal review on the unit as such. Great fun and I continue to enjoy it.
It’s typically 1960’s ‘feeling’ in style, fashion and approach with actors looking like The Saint’s Simon Templar on the set of an episode of The Avengers or the like. People are polished with slick-back hair and I couldn’t help myself thinking of Roger Moore!
There are some differences from the other stories with various details adjusted giving it it’s own style. According to one review I read, Highsmith wasn’t very happy with the ending in Purple Noon as it wasn’t the same as the book (not that I’ve read it yet), and certainly different from the other two versions I’ve now seen, mentioned above. There’s lots of tension built up around the events, especially as the dark deeds come to the fore, but just in more of a ‘Hitchcock’ type way than we expect in more modern films and TV shows now.
There’s also pretty much no inference or suggestion regarding Tom’s sexuality as there are in the others (and I’m guessing, knowing Highsmith’s other work) or the book. In fact, in attempting to ‘take the place’ of Philippe/Dickie, that seems to also include here becoming the lover of Marge as well. Much of the rest of it is similar, though with much less time than the 8-episode Netflix version had to explore and dwell on details, patching things together seamlessly. Or even, to a large degree, The Talented Mr Ripley. But the style and production more than makes up for that and it doesn’t feel too rushed most of the time.
Alain Delon plays Tom and, as I say, he looks very much like The Saint! He does a grand, if less intense job than the one we see from Matt Dillon and especially Andrew Scott, but again, a style of the 1960’s French cinema - and his own. Tom’s ‘talent’ on show here is much more subdued as a feature, as we witness him, for example, having to work very hard to learn Philippe’s signature and not, as with the other adaptations, it being presented as a skill he just has. On display are the other ones however, being able to mimic people’s voices and forge documents - so again, a different emphasis and impact on the story.
Marie Laforêt plays Marge nicely, with a feel of Raquel Welch or perhaps more Gina Lollobrigida about her - again, reflecting the era and leading ladies. I do think that the sultry and suspicious Dakota Fanning pulls the job off best in the Netflix version, and even Gwyneth Paltrow, again, played differently, is ahead of Laforêt in The Talented Mr Ripley. But they are different approaches to the role, to be fair. Maurice Ronet plays Philippe and demonstrates very well the upper class spoiled-by-money, annoying character who one could argue gets what’s coming to him!
Much like the other versions, the cinematography and sets are very nicely organised, exploited and shot. Maybe it’s not such a hard job to at least make those kinds of locations look great, sun, sea, sand and ancient European cities, building and culture, but it is visually delightful with that kind of ramped-up colour palette we were used to back in the 60’s.
I still think that I prefer the 2024 Netflix version, followed by this one and The Talented Mr Ripley coming in last. I have one more (I think) to see before I put this (first book) to bed and that’s Wim Wenders’ 1977 shot at it with Dennis Hopper called The American Friend. Watch this space!
Around the site of the hotel during the film, the police are interviewing the staff about it and even dredging the hotel’s pond/lake for any signs of a body. But it’s never spoken openly about by the odd-ball collection of characters who sullenly run the hotel, lurk around corners, indulge in ritualistic behaviours and generally remain tight-lipped and dour.
Then there’s the mystery surrounding a local cave where a bunch of hikers had mysteriously disappeared some years ago and the ancient legend of some witch or other from the local woods, who Irene is given a brief introduction to the story regarding during her brief, cold induction. The induction in which a creepy under-manager leads her through basement corridors where lights time out if a person lingers too long and with a door that shouldn’t be opened, if one knows what’s good for one!
She asks if she can use the hotel pool out of hours instead of running for exercise, which is reluctantly granted by another of the glum employees who looks like she has a huge amount to hide. And so on. And that’s the main thrust of the film really. It’s staged as a horror, but almost all of the so-called horror is about suspense, darkness, the spooky cave, strange fumblings with local people and suggestions of what might be. What might have happened to Eva, whether Irene is trapped with the same fate awaiting, or whether whatever it is, is going to happen to her as well!
It’s very slow-paced for most of the length of the film but shot so as to squeeze every drop of atmosphere out of the building itself - by use of lighting, angles, dark corridors - and similarly spooky locations out and around the hotel. Irene is presented as pretty much the same dour, glum character as those around her, so she seems to fit in well. She decidedly lacks personality and humour or flair - I don’t think anyone as much as smiles throughout the whole 1 hour 17 minute runtime!
Anyway, it’s clearly an interesting project from director/writer Jessica Hausner, which is worth a watch. In German with subtitles on YouTube, so grab it while you can. Try not to nod off, but instead accept the above and consume the spooky atmosphere as you wonder what, if anything, is to become of poor Irene, thrown into the middle of this dark, gloomy situation.
Back to 1979 then and a group of young filmmakers rent a pretty run-down building from an elderly couple (Pearl and her husband) who also live on the same Texas site, in a bigger house, across the way. The team are making porno-flicks and after convincing the elderly couple that they are about something different, they get on with shooting their films.
Pearl and her husband stumble into the truth about what they are filming, however, and this is the point at which things turn sinister and the film becomes an all-but teen-slasher flick, which in time-honoured fashion, leads the viewer through much gore, violence and nastiness as they get bumped off one by one in various different ways! And this is what makes the film stylish, fun and engaging really. The sex they are filming becomes a bit of a side-issue as the audience is encouraged to focus more on the dark deeds!
Pretty much all of the film is based in and around the isolated house and farmyard, where all the deeds take place. The actors (and director) are clearly have lots of fun with this, but we also get some insight into each of the characters, their leanings, prejudices, liberation - and how far they can pushed before they become very different people, often defying their traits! Jenna Ortega is a good example of this as the ‘sound’ person in amongst all this for the flicks, apparently prudish and reserved, until pushed and challenged.
There’s lots of good tension at certain times during the film as the audience is kept on their toes, wondering what on earth is coming around the next corner. The actors do well in depicting themselves as friendly, likeable characters, with a seedy task at hand, but we’re encouraged to warm to them from the start, whatever we think about what they’re doing there! It’s all shot very nicely, creating an almost retro slasher-flick feel to it (indeed from the 70’s) and is glorious fun throughout.
Played by Goth, she is depicted throughout this film as a complete fruit-loop, presumably paving the way for the nasty old sinister woman in X later on, but also a sadly troubled soul who really doesn’t have much grasp on reality and lives in a dreamworld. The whole film is centred around her and forms something of a character study, crossing the ‘t’s and dotting the ‘i’s for what’s to come later.
In many ways, it’s a bit of a slow-burner compared to X but that doesn’t mean to say that it’s bereft of the early inklings of Pearl’s violent leanings as we are served up some nasty deeds (between her cutesy talking to farm animals behaviour), just not in quite the same slasher-flick way as X.
Back to the plot and Pearl bumps into a chap who is working as a director who sees his opportunity for a bit of a wriggle in the sack in exchange for providing her with some door-opening opportunities to mould her dream in entertainment. She gets an audition to perform on the stage which he leads her to believe she’s going to do well with, but she flunks it, is destroyed by the outcome - especially when the chappie, having had his way with her, unceremoniously dumps her. This is the point at which Pearl is pushed over the edge and starts to develop behaviours more consistent with her part in X.
The cinematography is great, again, but this is certainly of a different ilk and during the first half of the film seems more like some kind of Wizard of Oz tale, very slow, as Pearl’s character’s background is built for us. Thrills await in the second half as it shifts up a gear! It’s certainly worth watching to enjoy Mia Goth’s performance (in both films) but also for much more besides. Part of me wishes I’d watched them the other way around, but they stand alone too. Great fun and very enjoyable. Recommended.
.JPG)
Short 6-part (see update below) drama (half hour each) on Netflix about stalking, the true story of comedian Richard Gadd and what happened ...
