top of page
straume.jpg
moana_two_ver5.jpg
MV5BMWYzZTM5ZGQtOGE5My00NmM2LWFlMDEtMGNjYjdmOWM1MzA1XkEyXkFqcGc_._V1_FMjpg_UX1000_.jpg
MV5BOWMwYjYzYmMtMWQ2Ni00NWUwLTg2MzAtYzkzMDBiZDIwOTMwXkEyXkFqcGc_._V1_FMjpg_UX1000_.jpg
official-poster-for-brady-corbets-the-brutalist-v0-56yrh8oxx3wd1.webp

Reviews for Current Films:
In Theaters (Or streaming): The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim, Kraven the Hunter, Flow, Werewolves, Moana 2, Gladiator II, Wicked, Red One, Heretic, Anora, Here, Nightbitch, The Brutalist, Conclave, Venom: The Last Dance, Smile 2, Terrifier 3, Piece by Piece, A Different Man, The Wild Robot

Coming Soon: Sonic the Hedgehog 3, Mufasa, Nosferatu, Den of Thieves 2, Wolf Man, Dog Man, Love Hurts, Heart Eyes, Paddington 3, Captain America 4

kraven_the_hunter.jpg

The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim                            by James Eagan                                                            ★★★ out of ★★★★★   

Image: The whole "Lord of the Rings" saga has been a bit of a sausage fest for far too long.

There have been talks about further expansions, spin-offs, or any other attempts to somehow continue Peter Jackson's now classic adaptations of J. R R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" for a while now. I can't necessarily argue against an idea, though there are plenty of reasons to, even with the "Hobbit" films have garnered an acceptance in the fandom, despite an early mixed reception. Hell, the movie likely seems to only have gotten a theatrical release just so Warner Bros. can retain the right to the source material. However, while I can't say this is exactly the absolute best addition to the source material, I wouldn't mind there being more like it. In a time of remakes and reboots, there is always something of wonder from taking a more, ahem, animated approach. 

Inspired by the works of J. R. R. Tolkien (And set centuries before the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy), "The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim" is narrated by "Éowyn" (Miranda Otto), as she tells the story of how "Helm's Deep" (That place where everybody fought in "The Two Towers") got its name. "Héra" (Gaia Wise) is the headstrong daughter of the king of "Rohan", "Helm Hammerhand" (Brian Cox). Conflict arises in the form of the brutish "Dunlending" lord, "Freca" (Shaun Dooley), who wants Hammerhand to have Héra marry his son, "Wulf" (Luke Pasqualino), a once old friend of Héra's. Hammerhand knows that Freca can't be trusted and only wants to use this marriage as a way to get to the crown of Rohan. Hammerhand and Freca decide to settle things via fist to fist combat, where Hammerhand ends up accidentally killing Freca with one, exceptionally strong punch. Before being banished along with the rest of the Dunlendings, Wulf swears vengeance. Some time later, Héra learns that Wulf has returned, with a powerful army of maniacs now at his disposal. The overly prideful Hammerhand refuses to call for aid, while also denying Héra the choice to fight. The battle ends up going horribly wrong, resulting in many deaths and Hammerhand's people being forced to flee to an old, though thankfully heavily fortified stronghold (The future Helm's Deep). Cornered and with no way to escape from Wulf's forces, it's up to Héra to prove to her father her worth and save her people from destruction. 

Directed by Kenji Kamiyama (Known for his work on the "Ghost in the Shell" franchise, the more recent "Ultraman" anime, and even contributed to the acclaimed "Star Wars: Visions"), with a screenplay by Jeffrey Addiss and Will Matthews ("The Dark Crystal: Age of Resistance"), along with Phoebe Gittins, and Arty Papageorgiou, "The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim" is not an entirely complicated film if you go by its story and characters. In a way, it's a fairly basic anime movie that just so happens to be set in the "Lord of the Rings" universe, and while that stops it from being a particularly amazing film on its own, it's very much still welcome within the film franchise's own little continuity, along with the very source material itself (Being exclusively made up of appendices and background material from the original books). It's all about how the story is told, and it's an undeniably visual feast for the eyes, which feel right at home on the big screen. The film seems to be more about spectacle than the usual depth that we associate with these films, and Kamiyama delivers in suitably epic fashion. Middle Earth has never looked more sweeping, from the flawless art design, fluid character movements, and those little, Miyazaki-esque touches of cold, dark atmosphere. It's hard not to get invested by everything that's going on, simply because you're just so mesmerized by how fantastical it all seems. And like other film franchises have recently been starting to realize, animation adds so much more than live-action ever could when it comes to making the unreal seem possible. 

Brian Cox's awesome, surround sound shattering voice is made for something like this, playing a character that's pretty complex in that he's quite brutal and too proud for his own good, yet it comes from a place of worry and an eventual belief that our main heroine can be more than even she realizes. Gaia Wise makes for a strong, compelling lead, while Luke Pasqualino is actually a fairly solid villain (It's kind of cool to see a bad guy in this world who is actually just a guy, corrupted by power and anger at what he feels he's earned, rather than just being an embodiment of pure evil) And it's always nice to hear Miranda Otto's soothing voice, along with a few rather surprise cameos from other "Lord of the Rings" alumni in some shape or form. The supporting characters don't quite stand out, and unlike the Peter Jackson films, the emotions don't quite hit the same way in terms of the script as the original films ever did. Even in the "Hobbit" films, when somebody died, you felt that in your very soul and remembered it. Despite some rather shocking violence that slightly pushes that PG-13 rating, there's no "Death of Boromir" moment or anything like that. 

Flawed from conception, with a screenplay that doesn't shoot for the stars and a runtime that only feels a little longer due to how differently animation is paced against live-action, "The Lord of the Rings: The War of the Rohirrim" is rooted in style over substance. From spellbinding action, sublime presentation, and beautiful images, it's likely not going to be a yearly rewatch like the other films (Unless you're an absolute completionist), yet still serves as an enjoyable return to Middle Earth, which is definitely a place nobody could ever possibly grow tired of revisiting. You can still see the joy and wonder in every frame. It doesn't hurt the franchise in any way, and if we're destined to get more, regardless if we want it or not, I'd take something safe, though still graceful in its own right, over something without a hint of effort put into it. 3 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Strong Fantasy Violence, Elephant Endangering, Hammerhanding, And, Er, Possible Incestuous Subtext? Hey, If The Movie Had Never Stated Those Two Characters Were Cousins, I Would Have Assumed That Relationship Was Romantic! 

Kraven the Hunter                by James Eagan        ★ out of ★★★★★  

Image: Kraven the Stripper Cowboy. 

There's an old saying. "Don't be sad that it ended, but rather, be pissed off that it even began in the first place." Or something like that. I don't know. This movie sucked. There! Blunt and to the point!

Based a little on the "Marvel Comics" supervillain of the same name, "Kraven the Hunter" follows "Sergei Kravinoff" (Played by Levi Miller as a teen, then by Aaron Taylor-Johnson as an adult), who despises his crime lord father, "Nikolai" (Russell Crowe). While on a hunt with Nikolai and his more meek half-brother, "Dmitri" (Fred Hechinger), Sergei ends up viciously mauled by a lion, only to be rescued by the power of voodoo, the lion's magic blood, and whatever else Sony just pulled right out of their ass (None of this is the backstory in the comics, because even they wouldn't get THIS stupid). After recovering, Sergei decides to leave on his own, deciding to use his newfound, animal-like powers to defend the animals of the world from poachers. Years later, Sergei, having been targeting various criminals across the world, getting the name "The Hunter", or "Kraven" as he prefers to be called (Wait! Your last name is Kravinoff, and you call yourself Kraven? Didn't you want to stay hidden? It's like if I became an assassin and called myself something like "Eagen", with an E instead of an A towards the end!).

Kraven reunites with the one who saved him, "Calypso" (Ariana DeBose), who has now become a lawyer (Or so the movie claims), ready with a list that he's checking twice to see if the people on it are naughty or nice (Spoiler! They are all naughty bad guys, and he's gonna kill them all!). One gangster, "Aleksei Sytsevich" (Alessandro Nivola), who goes by the nickname "The Rhino" (Due to his, er, "skin condition"), knows that at one point he'll be targeted by Kraven, so he decides to take him out first. After learning of Kraven's identity, The Rhino and another empowered assassin, known only as "The Foreigner" (Christopher Abbot), set a plot in motion to kidnap Dmitri and knowing Nikolai isn't gonna do crap to help, Kraven sets out on his own to rescue his bro and hunt down the people responsible. It's actually a harder synopsis to put together than I thought it would be, considering I actually didn't know what the actual story was until an hour in. 

Directed by J. C. Chandler ("Margin Call", "All Is Lost"), with a cobbled together screenplay by Richard Wenk ("The Equalizer"), along with Art Marcum and Matt Holloway ("Iron Man", "Uncharted", "Transformers: The Last Knight"), "Kraven the Hunter" is the newest entry in "Sony's Spider-Man Universe" (aka the "Spider-Man Free Spider-Man Universe"), and judging from early projections, the last entry as well. And thank goodness for that! Look! Aside from the "Venom" films, which even then, get by on campy stupidity and the charm that goes with it, these films seemed to only exist so that Sony could keep their hands on the property rights. This means that Disney and Marvel Studios can't use these characters for the "Marvel Cinematic Universe", thus removing the possibilities that fans actually want to see in favor of minuscule profit by comparison. It's definitely for the best that everything ends here, though it's frustrating that it all had to come to a close with the worst of the bunch. While "Morbius" has the meme potential, and "Madame Web" was just so batsh*t that it was at least fun to talk about after the fact, this feels like the chopped up remains of reshoots, rewrites, post production ADR work, and the foul stretch of desperation.

The thing is though, the movie didn't have to end up this way. Giving an origin story to a fan favorite Spider-Man villain should be fun, but just like the other films, nobody wants to commit. The comic character is a maniacal poacher, who decides to start hunting people (Setting his sights on the likes of Spider-Man), with his recent appearance in "Spider-Man 2" for the PS5 being seen as a definitive version of the character (Where he gets the idea to make his cancer diagnosis everybody else's problem, setting the games plot in motion to fulfill his death wish of the ultimate hunt). The version we get in this movie has absolutely no resemblance to the one we know from the source material, with the film even stopping to make sure the audience knows that he actually loves animals. Basically, he's just a generic anti-hero, though barely even that. The changes themselves don't have to be the deal breaker, yet with a plot so muddled, incoherent, and seemingly made up on the fly, this story could have been about anyone. J. C. Chandler is a good director, but he leaves absolutely no impact here whatsoever. From the choppy action, the bloody violence (Which tries to be over the top gruesome, though in such an uninspired way that you barely notice), and the most egregious flaw of all that it just drags on for so long. The film is over two hours for some godforsaken reason, with the film somehow not finding time for character, depth, or a reason to give a damn. With how poorly the film's paced, you might even be shocked when we reach the film's unsatisfying, unremarkable climax. You'd almost swear there's still another hour to go, and can't tell if you'll ever be free from this temple of boredom.  

Aaron Taylor-Johnson really is quite miscast. In theory this could have worked, but maybe there were studio notes demanding his intensity be toned down or a lack of direction. It just doesn't work, with Taylor-Johnson coming across as more of an unlikable, blank slate, though clearly not in the way the film intends him to be. Ariana DeBose, who does only get progressively more and more gorgeous in every scene she's in, is unfortunately terrible in this. She's a freakin Oscar winner for God's sake! Granted, the material ain't helping. I do legitimately think the filmmakers had no clue what to do with her character, never fully committing to her being a love interest who gets roped into the plot or a capably intelligent semi-protagonist (And she tragically gets some of the worst dialogue in the movie, which do need to be seen to be believed. There's a quote involving the character's deceased grandmother that's going to be memed to Hell.). Fred Hechinger is trying (And logically, seems like a good fit for who his character is supposed to be, even if the foreshadowing is too on the nose), but it's too predictable a part, with not much meat to it. The same goes for an incredibly underused Christopher Abbott (And his goofy turtleneck sweater), who could have been cut from the film entirely and nobody would have noticed. Even Russell Crowe, who deserves credit for showing up to get his paycheck, being professional, and having fun while he's doing it, is almost a non-character for too much of the film. It's upsetting because at one point, Russell Crowe would have made a perfect Kraven. Hell, even now I could see him as an older, more worn down (And, um, heavier) version of the character, who would still be plenty intense and threatening. Easily the best part of this whole ordeal is Alessandro Nivola, who came to have the time of his life chewing absolute f*ck out of the scenery, while still making for a villain that's enjoyable to watch. Honestly, while you're subjected to Taylor-Johnson and DeBose giving the all time worst performances of their career, you're just waiting for Nivola to pop back onscreen with his hammy villainy. Personality! That's something this movie is lacking, and our main villain has to pick up all the slack. 

"Kraven the Hunter" is far too serious, inept in its attempts at humor, and such piss poor visual effects that you really wonder how anyone online can complain about the MCU about anything (I know it's hard to make a character like The Rhino look not ridiculous, but boy, did you somehow find a way to make it even worse than we could have imagined). The potential was there, such as the concept of a crime story, involving various supervillains and gangsters, yet what we get is an overcrowded, underdeveloped, ugly to look at slog of a movie that continues to give good (Or at least decent) comic book films a bad name. I mean, if you can't be good or even at least entertaining with your cash grabs, you could at least be so moronic that it's enjoyable. Instead, this is so incompetently stupid and bland that nobody ends up Kraven more. Dosvedanya, Sony's Spider-Man Universe. I spit on your grave! Ptooey! 1 Star. Rated R For Gory Violence, Rough Nose Biting, Rhino Rimming, And Convenient Russian Accents.

Flow                                by James Eagan                      ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★   

Image: Low Budget "Life of Pi".

There are things that you can convey with the art of animation that you just can't with live-action. Films this year like "The Wild Robot", "Transformers One", "Inside Out 2", and now this, all prove that. Even at a quick, less than half an hour runtime, I feel like I got so much character, heart, story, and depth, than most long winded, overblown Oscar contenders, and not a single bit of dialogue needed to be uttered. I just sat back, listened, and witnessed one of this year's most epic, profound adventures, and it's all about some cute little animals on a boat during what I can only assume is the end of the world.

Set in a now human-free world where the oceans appear to be rising and consuming everything in their path, "Flow" follows a tiny, adorable black cat, struggling to survive against the larger, tougher creatures. When the water proceeds to rapidly rise once more, the cat finds salvation in the form of a small, falling apart sailboat, with an old, but brave capybara onboard. While sailing in search of a new home, the cat and capybara come across more colorful animal characters, like a kleptomaniac lemur, an excitable Labrador (Who seems to only want to be the annoyed cat's friend), and a wounded secretary-bird (Whose injury protecting the cat prevents it from taking flight), facing numerous obstacles along the way. 

Directed by Latvian filmmaker Gints Zilbalodis ("Away"), who co-wrote the screenplay with Matīss Kaža and took part in the musical score development with Rihards Zalupe, "Flow" is a short, yet genuinely monumentally sweeping tale, told in a unique style of animation that's almost haunting to look at, even though you can't help but be almost hypnotized by it. For whatever the film lacks in aggressive amounts of detail and overt textures, it makes up for in impeccable art design, vibrant colors, and personality to spare. The film even has such fluid direction, with the camera following characters around as if you're right there with them, in a way that is quite jarring to see done in animated form. It's like a series of long shots that rarely cut away from what we're meant to be focused on. You're literally experiencing the world with the characters. And that world, while frightening, is also quite stunning. The film in a way feels like it could take place in the same universe as "The Wild Robot". The world as we know it is gone, with humans nowhere to be found (Though there are hints that they at least used to be around), and impossible to explain elements of possibly something supernatural, Sci-Fi, or just psychological. So much is left open for interpretation, yet not in a way that feels slight. Either way, we figure out just enough and are so entranced by the world building that we're willing to just go with it. Go with the flow if you will. 

Even without dialogue and little over anthropomorphism, the animals have so much complexity, while retaining their animalistic quirks. The cat is overly curious and easily agitated, though courageous and in the end, heroic. The capybara is much smarter than it lets on, spending most of the time sleeping and smelling bad, before catching everyone off guard with what it's capable of. The Labrador is not the brightest, but the sweetest (Reminds me of one of my dogs, especially with how much it just wants to show the cat some love, even when the cat literally has no interest), while the lemur is more enamored with its trinkets at first, though it isn't without its own moments of selflessness. The secretary-bird ends up being one of the most complex characters (And has one of the most surreal of arcs), and throughout the film, the characters encounter an almost alien-like whale, that serves its own, rather unknown purpose to the story. The characters are odd, funny, and all exhibit a realistic sense of development, as if they;re literally evolving before our eyes, adapting to the harsh situations like many animals would naturally be forced to. And there's something always hilarious about the cat suddenly stopping everything its doing just to chase a little light or attack the lemur's dangling tail.

"Flow" is an imaginative, animated triumph of storytelling, told in its most purest forms, through visuals and music. It tells a heartfelt, gripping tale of survival, friendship, perseverance, and wonder in a way that's certainly mature, but still in such a delightful, warm way that anyone of any age can be lured into its affecting enchantment. One of this year's best, most touching, and heart affirming films, just so happens to be told through innocent, wordless eyes, making for an unforgettable experience and an instant classic. 4 1/2 Stars. Rated PG, Being Perfectly Acceptable For A Family Audience, Even If It Might Be A Bit Too Much To Handle For Those Who Just Can't Stand To See Cute Animals In Peril. 

Werewolves                               by James Eagan                 ★★★ out of ★★★★★   

Screenshot-2024-10-17-101614.png

Image: Always knew he had "That Dog" in him, but this is just ridiculous!

Okay, so think "The Purge", except with Werewolves. Let that sink in for a moment. Yeah, regardless of quality, you knew something like this was going to get made. I bet that was just the pitch and the studio was like "Hell Yeah!". I'd do the same. Anyone would! Don't pretend to act like some kind of intellectual about it, because deep down, you're oddly curious. Even just a little bit. 

Somehow NOT based on a comic book of some kind, "Werewolves" opens in a world where, due to an unexplainable supermoon event, a latent gene in humanity is trigger, thus turning anyone who happens to be caught in the supermoon's light to undergo a horrifying change into a Werewolf, gaining a craving for destruction and blood. Cut to a year later, under the advisement of scientist, "Dr. Aranda" (Lou Diamond Phillips) to take shelter, the world prepares for yet another supermoon event, as well as more Werewolf carnage. Badass macho scientist, "Wesley Marshall" (Frank Grillo), who has been taking care of his deceased brother's wife, "Lucy" (Ilfenesh Hadera) and daughter, is now part of Dr. Aranda's team of fellow scientists, like "Dr. Amy Chen" (Katrina Law), to develop a cure for the Werewolf disease. However, when the supermoon rises, the attempts at the secret lab to find a cure go horribly wrong, resulting in Werewolves running wild, leaving Wesley and Amy as the only survivors. Now with Wesley's family in danger, he and Amy must fight their way past an army of bloodthirsty Wolfmen (And Wolfwomen too! They don't discriminate), to rescue them. 

Directed by Steven C. Miller (Director of quite a few forgettably named straight to DVD action flicks), with a screenplay by Matthew Kennedy, "Werewolves" is about, well, exactly what it says on the label. The real shocker is that there is genuinely a lot working in the film's favor, especially for something that if we're being honest, could have had "0%" on Rotten Tomatoes written all over it. Even though there just seems to be something missing from the final product, what we still get is an enjoyable, undemanding B movie, that brings some old school monsters into the modern era. The film embraces its low budget, going for bringing the nightmarish wolves to life via practical effects, right down to the obviously rubbery snouts they all have. Sure, they're never exactly "real" looking in the traditional sense, but there is something to having such fantastical beasts, dressed in what remains of their human garb (And even retaining some of their human mannerisms to a degree), actually standing there, out in the middle of a fiery, battle worn street with little to no CGI accompanying them. We don't get these kinds of things nowadays, and there is a silly, even thrilling charm to it. The film unfortunately doesn't do much original in terms of its story (Which at times leaves much to be desired) and also doesn't seem to want to make time for actual character development. 

Frank Grillo brings much more personality than what's likely been provided on the script, whether it be some good action one-liners or just by having a cool screen presence. The simple pleasures of watching Grillo say "Bite Me!", before unloading a mini-gun on a snarling Werewolf is undeniably one of those things you never knew you wanted to see. There's not much to the other characters, even when it at first seems like there might be, such as Katrina Law (Who gets to contribute, until she just doesn't anymore) and Lou Diamond Phillips (Who, and this isn't a spoiler, let's just say isn't around too long. Obviously). I did thoroughly enjoy James Michael Cummings (as "Cody Walker", Lucy's gun-toting, Murica loving neighbor, who has been waiting his whole life for a night like this, only for it to go as hilariously wrong as you'd expect) in a part that would seem like a caricature-like, if only these kinds of morons weren't actually real. 

A wisely short, fast paced, high octane bit of bloody chaos, "Werewolves" leaves a lot of unanswered questions (Sequel hopes? Maybe?), and could have used some touchups in terms of its script. However, when the film works, it's a completely gory delight! The old fashioned visual effects are commendable, with enough decent suspense and some creative camera work for a film like this, leading up to giving the audience the kind of campy, unhinged, and undeniably moronic excitement that they all came for in the first place. It's the kind of movie made to make you go "F*****CK YESSSSSS!!!!" at the most wildly stupid thing imaginable, and while it doesn't have near as many of those moments as it should, I'd be lying if I didn't admit to doing that myself at least a couple times. Rule of Cool, I guess. 3 Stars. Rated R For Brutally Gruesome Violence, Snarling Slobbery Snouts, Head-Ripping Werewolf Action (Awesome!), And Nicely Shredded Grillo Guts.

Moana 2                         by James Eagan                   ★★★½ out of ★★★★★

Image: "Gonna have to start repopulating somehow!"

Let me tell ya something, youngsters! Gather round! You see, back in my day, when we got a Disney sequel, it was straight to video, had animation that was worse or at least cheaper, with getting only a handful of the original voice cast if you're lucky (And if not, you get some noticeably lesser replacements), and the final product would either end up being a movie pilot for a television series that may never come to be or even worse, would just be three episodes stitched together  from that television series that never came to be. So for something that started off originally as a "Disney+" limited series that instead got the theatrical, full blown sequel treatment due to being a pretty obvious safe bet considering how beloved the original was (And because Disney really needs a big hit right now after how hard "Wish" bombed last year), my generation had it much worse than you guys. At least you're getting an actual movie! 

Years after the original, "Moana 2" follows the titular wayfinder, "Moana" (Auliʻi Cravalho), returning home to her island of "Motunui", where her fellow villagers have embraced their sailing ancestry, along with her parents, "Chief Tui" (Temuera Morrison) and "Sina" (Nicole Scherzinger), and her little sister, "Simea" (Khaleesi Lambert-Tsuda). Moana has a vision from the ancestors, telling her to find the ancient island of "Motufetu", which once connected all people of the ocean, only to be cursed by the evil, destructive entity, "Nalo". Moana assembles a crew, consisting of her animal sidekicks, the piggy "Pua", and the moronic chicken, "Heihei" (Alan Tudyk, returning to make nothing but chicken noises), along with the nerdy "Moni" (Hualālai Chung), the eccentric "Loto" (Rose Matafeo), and the grumpy, elderly "Kele" (David Fane), to venture off onto the high seas to find the missing island. Along the way, Moana and her friends encounter many troubles, such as a sinister bat lady, "Matangi" (Awhimai Fraser), though thankfully, she's eventually reunited with the shape shifting demigod/hero of men, "Maui" (Dwayne Johnson), to help complete their quest and reunite Moana's people with the rest of the world. 

Directed by Storyboard Artist David Derrick Jr., Animator Jason Hand, and Writer Dana Ledoux Miller, who also co-wrote the screenplay with the returning Jared Bush ("Moana", "Encanto", "Zootopia"), "Moana 2" shows some clear signs of late development changes, and really, for what we get, it's kind of remarkable that the movie is any good at all. It's a perfectly solid, likable sequel, even if it sadly just plain isn't near as great as the original (Which I recently just watched again for the first time in years, only to see that it's actually better than I remembered it). Having been animated outside of Disney's usual animation studio (And I can only imagine how much crunch time may have gone into getting it out as quickly as they did), it's still better than top notch animation. If anything, despite having a smaller budget than some of Disney's most recent work (Which all seemed to consist of $200 million budgets), it's a phenomenal looking film, with gorgeous visuals, epic scale, loving attention to the details (Like the water movements), and energetic characters. I mean, I didn't mind the animation style in last year's "Wish" as much as others, but yeah, this blows that movie out of the water by a long shot. Pun intended.

I can't stress enough how much of a spectacle it is in 3D too. While I hope the animators weren't tortured horrifically rushing this movie out, the hard work and money is all there on display in classic, stunning Disney fashion. The story just isn't all that strong. It's not a bad one and a sequel to such a fan favorite movie is such a no brainier that this feels like a natural continuation. It's similar to "Frozen II" in how it deviates from the usual Disney formula, yet in a way that's just kind of messy and difficult to grasp onto. Unlike "Frozen II" though (Which featured a soundtrack on par with its predecessor), this can't quite recapture the magic. The score by the returning Mark Mancina and Opetia Foa'i is still wonderful. It's just that the songs, from Abigail Barlow and Emily Bear, replacing Lin-Manuel Miranda, aren't anything special. None of them are bad. They just don't stand out. It's hard to top memorable songs like "How Far I'll Go", "You're Welcome", "Shiny", etc. We get the aesthetically pleasing Maui's "Can I Get A Chee Hoo?" and the very catchy "Get Lost" from Matangi (Easily the best song), though it's still quite the downgrade.  

Our returning heroine is still a standout in the Disney canon. Even with disappointing songs, Auliʻi Cravalho can belt them out like it's nothing, and remains a Disney (NOT) princess, that's become an icon to many young girls for good reason. It's also nice to get a reminder that Dwayne Johnson can actually be a really good actor when he wants to be. While his main involvement in the story takes some time, his return is so very welcome, getting laughs a plenty and is all around just a delight. However, his absence is felt a bit beforehand. I like the new characters just fine. They're nice and funny, but pretty stock. Alan Tudyk hilariously collects one heck of a paycheck, making Heihei one of Disney's strangest, yet effectively amusing sidekicks. Awhimai Fraser makes for an interesting subversion of the villain twist (And again, she gets the best song in the movie), while our main villain doesn't really make a full appearance and I'm not completely sure how well that works for the film (He's basically "Sauron" from "The Lord of the Rings". Not what we're used to with Disney baddies). On a side note though, why did they make Fraser's Matangi ridiculously attractive? Seriously! Hottest Disney villainess ever! The film also does some creative things with the returning threat of the tribe of silent, pirate coconuts,"The Kakmora" (With one of them even joining our heroes in the second half of their journey). 

"Moana 2" is a good, but far from great follow-up to a film that was already great on its own, though had the very concept of a sequel written all over it from the start. It's got charm and heart, breathtaking visuals and animation, and is enough to keep the parents invested with their kids, who I bet will love it, while some of the more mature (Or immature?) fans might be left mixed. For what might have been conceptualized as just a cash grab at a popular property, you can see the effort to make something grand. And in a way, it still is in parts. It's tough to dislike and will likely make enough money to hopefully get Disney out of their creative rut, while also just as likely, setting the stage for possibly a "Moana 3" very soon. Although, that's going to be really weird to have both a third film come out, around the time they already got a live-action remake in development. You're Welcome? 3 1/2 Stars. Rated PG For Scary Images, Hot Bat Ladies, Expressive Tattooing, And Hardcore Chee Hooing.​​

Gladiator II                            by James Eagan           ★★★½ out of ★★★★★ 

Image: Don't Get Madiator. Get Gladiator. 

I think people have gotten the wrong idea about Ridley Scott. To some, he was a legendary, sophisticated director, known for making legit films of the highest caliber that could be enjoyed by the mass public, who sadly has fallen off in recent years due to a sense of crudeness, silliness, and a bizarre disregard for certain facts in favor of the rule of cool. Guys, it's time to rip off the band-aid now. He's literally always been like this. Freakin "Legend" was one of his earliest movies, following the likes of "Alien" and "Blade Runner". 2000's "Gladiator" may have found itself with accolades and love from audiences, but it was at its core, a ridiculous, purely entertainment focused popcorn muncher, that just so happened to have a little depth to it. This sequel is no different. 

Set years after the original film, "Gladiator II" follows "Lucius Verus" (Paul Mescal, replacing Spencer Treat Clark), the illegitimate son of the deceased "Maximus Decimus  Meridius" (Previously played by Russell Crowe) and the former emperor's daughter, "Lucilla" (Connie Nielsen). Lucius was sent away from Rome into hiding moments after the first film, and now, going by the name "Hanno", lives in Numidia with his wife, "Arishat" (Yuval Gonen). The Roman army, commanded by the conflicted "Marcus Acacius" (Pedro Pascal), attacks and conquers Numidia, resulting in Lucius' capture and the death of Arishat. Lucius is sold into slavery, becoming a gladiator owned by the charismatic, but manipulative "Macrinus" (Denzel Washington), who promises Lucius a chance to get his revenge on Acacius so long as he becomes the gladiator that Macrinus can gain the power that he feels he deserves. Once in Rome, Lucius must impress the corrupt, psychopathic emperors, "Geta" (Joseph Quinn) and "Caracalla" (Fred Hechinger) in the upcoming Colosseum Games. However, things become complicated when it's revealed that Acacius, who despises the wacko emperors, is married to Lucius' mother, Lucilla. When Lucilla discovers who Lucius is, she attempts to help him, putting her husband's plan to bring down the emperors and free Rome in jeopardy. However, Lucius is too blinded by his lust for vengeance, struggling to come to terms with his family's legacy, while Marcinus' schemes start to come to fruition, thus putting all of Rome in danger. 

Directed by the returning Ridley Scott ("Alien", "Blade Runner", "Legend", "Black Hawk Down", "Napoleon", and, er, a lot more), with a screenplay with his frequent collaborator David Scarpa, "Gladiator II" seems to have the right idea. At least in terms of, quite fittingly, giving the audience exactly what they want. Epic battles, shocking violence, Shakespearean melodrama, and a total bastardization of anything historically accurate, which he apparently will do gladly and will tell you to f*ck yourself if you dare question him. If you don't know what you're in for, you're not gonna make it through the nearly two and a half hour runtime. Now if you're down for, I don't know, killer baboons, a video game boss battle against a barbarian on a rhino, and an underwater shark battle in the Colosseum, then you're gonna have a damn good time! I mean, the original wasn't historically accurate either, and the whole premise alone is all based around contrivances. It's a movie! Regardless of your tolerance for such things, you have to appreciate that Ridley Scott never holds back. The man still has an eye for scale, action, and storytelling, no matter how preposterous, and always brings it to the big screen in an appropriately legendary fashion. There are some gorgeously designed set pieces, which are only elevated by the impeccable production, a startling sound design, the score from another Scott collaborator, Harry Gregson-Williams, and yes, an unrelenting amount of brutality. I know it shouldn't be too shocking when Ridley Scott ventures into some bloody violence, but somehow, he finds rather sophisticated ways to make death in the heat of battle look cold, unfair, and horrifying. 

One thing that the original film does have over this one is that our main character this time is just not near as interesting as everything else going on, and yeah, there is a lot going on at once. It's no fault of Paul Mescal, who is still genuinely good in the film. The character is just a little too wrapped up in his revenge arc for too much of the film's runtime. He eventually grows out of it towards the last act, though I just feel that there could have been such a better way to balance the part out, much like Russell Crowe wonderfully did in the original. It's remarkable that Pedro Pascal (Who gets much less screentime than you'd expect), can literally just pop up anywhere in any kind of role so often, and yet, still finds a way to make it feel unique and nonetheless engrossing (That man really likes to work). Joseph Quinn and Fred Hechinger make for some entertainingly cartoonish baddies, while still coming across as legit threatening because, well, what's more frightening than a pair of crazy buffoons holding the lives of thousands in their hands? (Also, can we give a shout-out to "Dundas" the monkey? Literally the MVP. Pun intended!) There's good supporting work from the likes of a returning Connie Nielsen and Alexander Karim (as "Ravi", a former gladiator that went on to become a doctor, who Lucius befriends), along with an unrecognizable Matt Lucas (as the eccentrically pale "Master of Ceremonies") and Derek Jacobi (as "Senator Gracchus", who still opposes the corruption in Rome), who is still cool to see, even if they don't do much with him. Now we get to Denzel Washington, who yes, doesn't remotely bother with an accent, though is undeniably such a powerful, commanding performer that you honestly don't care. He single-handedly steals the show as a sometimes charming, sometimes peculiar, and mysteriously frightening entity that you find yourself wanting to trust due to how strong his presence is, but know you likely shouldn't.   

Campy, though however, affectionately so, "Gladiator II"​ recaptures the thrills and blood spills of the original, with enough slight sophistication to give off the feeling that you're just watching an over the top, empty calorie blockbuster. And you know what? There's absolutely nothing wrong with that (The few sprinkles of humor also probably helped). Are you NOT ENTERTAINED? Damn right I was! Oh!, And LONG LIVE DUNDAS! 3 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Harsh Violence, Roman Lechery, Unprofessional Beheading, Baboon Biting, And The Revelation That A Monkey In A Dress Is Still More Qualified Than Most Politicians. 

Wicked                                by James Eagan              ★★★★ out of ★★★★★  

2551_d133_00142r.jpg

Image: I ship it. I know you do too. Pretty sure everyone does! 

So let's see here. The original 1939 classic, "The Wizard of Oz", came out when the world was heading into World War II, with the United States still facing the effects of the Great Depression, and was a cinematic extravaganza that everyone just HAD to see. Now, we're getting a similar big budget, must see blockbuster based around the same source material, while we currently face an uncertain future, possible economic collapse (And we're still feeling the effects of COVID), and a charlatan has conned the public into thinking he's some kind of savior, using lies and propaganda that specifically target minority classes through fear and bigotry, while having vilified anyone who dares try to speak the truth, thus drawing attention away from the real problems at hand. That last part is both in the movie and in real life. Not sure if the timing of all this was intentional or not, but hey, it doesn't make it hurt any less. 

Adapting the first half of the stage musical of the same name by Stephen Schwartz and Winnie Holzman, which itself was a loose adaptation of the book of the same name by Gregory Maguire (And you know, is a sort of "What If?" version of the original stories of "Oz"), "Wicked" begins at the very end, with the apparent death of the "Wicked Witch of the West", along with the citizens of "Oz" celebrating. "Glinda the Good Witch", formerly known as "Galinda Upland" (Ariana Grande), reveals that there is more to the story than what everyone was led to believe. The film flashes back to show us who the Wicked Witch really was. A young, magically powerful, and tragically misunderstood woman, "Elphaba Thropp" (Cynthia Erivo), who was born with green skin, resulting in her being shunned because of it, even by her own father (Andy Nyman), the governor of "Munchkinland". Elphaba accompanies her beloved, paraplegic sister, "Nessarose" (Marissa Bode), to "Shiz University" (Think "Hogwarts", but with less Transphobia, though with some slight racism), where Galinda also just so happens to be attending. Elphaba's mysterious abilities accidentally cause a scene, leading to the Dean of Sorcery, "Madame Morrible" (Michelle Yeoh), to take Elphaba on as her apprentice, much to Galinda's dismay (Because she immediately assumed she would get the honor, simply because she always gets her way).

Elphaba and Galinda, who are also forced to share the same room, start out as bitter rivals, being total opposites in every way. However, the two end up developing a close bond, becoming close friends, while the land of Oz is currently going through a morally questionable time (Such as with the animal citizens starting to become treated lesser and lesser). While Elphaba's training continues, this eventually leads to her attracting the attention of Oz's much admired ruler, appropriately referred to as "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" (Jeff Goldblum). Sadly, Elphaba will soon discover that the Wizard isn't as wonderful as he appears and much of what everyone has been led to believe is based on falsehood. This starts Elphaba on the road to becoming the apparent villain of the story, or so we've always been told. 

Directed by Jon M. Chu ("Crazy Rich Asians", "In the Heights"), with a screenplay from the returning Winnie Holzman and Dana Fox ("Cruella", "The Lost City"), "Wicked" may just be one of the most important movies of the year, and even has the possibility of being one of the decade's defining ones as well. It's certainly one that has accumulated a very devoted, almost cult-like fanbase thanks to the beloved musical and source material. It was up to Jon M. Chu to refrain from screwing the pooch and letting everyone down. Thankfully, it's just as eye popping, emotional, and just plain delightful at times, as the fans hoped it would be. Whether or not it's also an intentionally fitting look into current society is up to interpretation. The filmmakers have clearly poured a lot of hard work into making this long drawn out production a reality, without losing sight of what made everyone fall in love with the original, while still making for the kind of blockbuster that the whole family can get behind. From grandiose visuals, spectacular production design, vibrant costumes, and obviously, one heck of a soundtrack. The music, songs, and setpieces are all showstoppers, memorable, and catchy. Some of them might even be too catchy (I've had "Popular" stuck in my head all day). Just a warning though to any parents if they have young daughters, you best prepare yourself to be hearing a lot of these songs for the next few months. Think "Frozen" on steroids. 

The cast and crew are what hold the stellar production values down, preventing them from overwhelming the audience to the point of distraction. And how else do you adapt one of the most well known musicals in recent memory for the big screen, after already having talent such as Idina Menzel and Kristin Chenoweth bringing those roles to life? Luckily, Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande, who we've all seen can both can belt out a powerful tune like it's nothing, are as perfect a double act as can be. Already being an Oscar nominee, it's no shock that Erivo nails the part with confidence, tragedy, and perseverance, but to see Ariana Grande swoop in and steal every scene she's in is somewhat of a revelation. Grande plays the part a little stuck up and oblivious, but good hearted and irresistibly charming, making for one of this year's funniest performances. Despite the downer side of the story, there's a lot of well timed humor overall, especially from a really charming Jonathan Bailey (as "Fiyero Tigelaar", a seemingly vain, but more complicated Winkie prince that everyone crushes on, including Galinda and even Elphaba), who I can say, as a completely straight man, is a total dream boat. Michelle Yeoh is her usual commanding, graceful self, while supporting roles come from Marissa Bode (She's supposed to be the witch's sister? Um, I hope nothing bad happens to her in the next movie), Bowen Yang (as "Pfannee, one of Galinda's caddiest friends) playing Bowen Yang, a wonderful Peter Dinklage (as the voice of "Doctor Dillamond", a goat teacher at Shiz, who sadly has to deal with "Anti-Animal" rhetoric), and Ethan Slater (as "Boq Woodsman", a dorky munchkin, who Nessarose is crushing on, despite the fact that he only has eyes for Galinda), who I hate simply because he's that "Spongebob" musical guy that's apparently with Ariana Grande at the moment. (Seriously? What's he got that I don't got? Aside from money and talent, I guess) Meanwhile, Jeff Goldblum (Who makes the most out of limited screentime) being casted as the Wizard is as perfect a casting choice as you can get. 

Serving as only a "Part One" to a two-parted epic (With the sequel scheduled to come out literally a year from right now), "Wicked" is wondrous, thoughtful, fun, and exactly what the movie loving public needs right now. The runtime of almost three hours breezes by (Though it is very much still a lot to process), and while the reliance on heavy CGI and green screen can be noticeable in places, it still looks phenomenal, making for the kind of magical spectacle that we only get a couple time a year at best. (Do yourself a favor and see it in 3D, because it makes for the best use of the gimmick since "Avatar: The Way of Water".) Once we reach the captivating finale, with Erivino and Grande bringing the famous number, "Defying Gravity", to the big screen, along with a rather well placed "To Be Continued", you'll be left happily frustrated that we will have to wait a year to get the rest of the story. It's Wicked awesome! There! I said it! 4 Stars. Rated PG For Dark Content, Scary Flying Monkeys, Green Skinned Bigotry, Lesbian Coding, Themes That Will Make You Both Sad And Angry Are Always Going To Be Necessary To Address, And Weaponized Hair Flipping.

Red One                    by James Eagan               ★★ out of ★★★★★  

Image: The recently released, top of the line action figures that will sell out this Holiday season. Warning! Your mother might love it more than you will!

So this is definitely a Netflix movie that I happened to see in theaters, right? I mean, it looks like one. Feels like one. Smells like one. Just because it's only slightly better, and I do mean slightly, than most of them might be the only reason I'm seeing it in theaters and not hating myself for doing so. 

Set in a world of magic, monsters, and bureaucratic Intel keeping, "Red One" follows "Callum Drift" (Dwayne Johnson), the head of North Pole security, aka "E.L.F" (Enforcement, Logistics, and Fortification), for the jolly old, not so fat man himself, "Santa Claus" (J. K. Simmons), aka "Red One". Callum, who has lost a little faith in the holidays in recent years, and is planning to retire, only for Santa ending up kidnapped by a craft infiltration team of shape-shifters, led by the winter witch, "Gryla" (Kiernan Shipka). "Zoe Harlow" (Lucy Liu), the director of "M.O.R.A." (The Mythological Oversight and Restoration Authority), learns that Gryla's team manipulated an infamous, though much less legendary in person hacker, "Jack O'Malley" (Chris Evans), aka "The Wolf", into helping pinpoint the hidden location of Santa's secret workshop. Jack is brought in and forced to assist Callum on his mission to find Santa before Gryla puts her diabolical plan into motion, which may very well spell the end of Christmas as we know it. 

Directed by Jake Kasdan ("Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story", "Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle"), with a screenplay by Chris Morgan ("Wanted" and several of the "Fast & Furious" films, such as "Hobbs & Shaw"), "Red One" is an openly silly premise, played straight as if it was really a legit action thriller, like "Mission: Impossible" meets fantasy, with a holiday setting, hoping to balance it all with a comedic edge. I see what they're going for here, and the potential is there. While there is too much bloated CGI and heavy green screen, the film does have some nice production design, and the world building itself is actually pretty fun. There's something quite delightful to see how this world of magic, creatures, and technology that goes back and forth between looking like something you'd see in a Fantasy film or Sci-Fi one. I even love how they normalize everything in a way, with Elves, goblins, trolls, and other weird monsters going around, wearing glasses, working on computers, and talking about shift changes at work. There are also some genuinely menacing looking creations, like musclebound, killer snowmen and literal Hell hounds. Sadly, everything wrong with the movie comes from the direction, screenplay, and story. That's all where the Netflix vibes really come from. It's all aggressively generic stuff, with most of the humor falling flat due to how it doesn't want to draw too much attention to itself and dull characters. Kasdan's direction, which again is only hindered further by the film's bloated $200 million budget (If not more), is so muddled, with action scenes that you struggle to keep up with. It's kind of boring, and that's shocking to say considering that I saw the film in 4DX (Where the seats were literally throwing me around the entire time!).

Dwayne Johnson is here to play Dwayne Johnson, while Chris Evans is here to play Chris Evans (With a hint of Ryan Reynolds). Now I'll admit that they are playing more exaggerated versions of these types of characters, but the script doesn't give them much to stand out, with Evans easily getting the funniest lines, which I'm thoroughly confident were just him ad-libbing. We also get Lucy Liu, who doesn't get much to do except bark orders and look really hot, while Bonnie Hunt (as "Mrs. Claus") is given absolutely nothing to do. A miscast Kiernana Shipka makes for a pretty lame villain, where I get the feeling that the joke is that she's a demonic entity in the body of a cute and tiny girl, but she never gets to be funny and is certainly not remotely threatening. A reliably delightful J. K. Simmons is having a good time as our more jacked up Santa, who is tough, but sweet and good natured. Meanwhile, the biggest scene-stealer is Kristofer Hivju (as "Krampus", the frightening dark Lord of Christmas/Santa's brother), who is legitimately great in the movie, and gets the most inspired sequence involving a collection of creepy creatures (Brought to life both through CGI and done practically). 

"Red One" isn't a disaster or a terrible film. It's just so remarkably unremarkable. It's got a good edge to it (Being family friendly, yet with strong language and darker elements), a few cool ideas, and, well, Krampus is awesome. Most of the characters are cookie cutter, it's not near funny enough, the action is uncreative and relies way too much sludgy looking special effects, and worst of all, it didn't need to be two hours long. Far too much padding for something that's essentially meant to be a farce, where everyone involved isn't supposed to realize it. I wouldn't call it a lump of coal in your stocking. It's more like a common, Wal-Mart sweater that your grandmother got you, and despite what you promised her, you're never going to wear it. In fact, there's a good chance you'll never see it again after that day. 2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Language, Scary-ish Images, Hardcore Slapping, And Carrot Grabbing.

Heretic                                  by James Eagan                 ★★★★ out of ★★★★★  

H_02557-Edit-Revised-scaled.jpg

Image: Plotting his revenge on Paddington right now as we speak. 

I've said it before, and I'm saying it again. We are in a new golden age of horror movies. Horror movies that are treated like prestige pictures, where acclaimed actors and actresses do them, not just for the money, but for the art of it. Or it could just be an excuse to act like a total maniac. Either way, good for them!

"Heretic" follows a pair of young, Mormon missionaries, the more professional, less talkative "Sister Barnes" (Sophie Thatcher) and the more innocent, quirky "Sister Paxton" (Chloe East), as they go from house to house to do the work of their Lord, like conversion, talking about the good word of Jesus, and all things Mormon. They stop at a secluded house, owned by an Englishman named "Mr. Reed" (Hugh Grant), who claims that his wife is in the kitchen baking a blueberry pie, meaning that it's okay for them to come inside. However once inside the house, Barnes and Paxton can't quite figure out if something might just be a little off about the situation. From Mr. Reed's charming, though analytical nature, to the fact that his wife is nowhere to be found, and even the house itself, which feels like an elaborately put together mouse trap, Barnes and Paxton soon realizes that they are part of a dangerous game of wits against someone who seems to have something to prove about their faith, along with, as he puts it, "The One True Religion".​

Written and directed by Scott Beck and Bryan Woods (Creators of "A Quiet Place" and gave us the rather disappointing "65" last year), "Heretic" is a wild step up in quality. Not to mention, since the film is distributed through "A24", it feels right at home with that studio's roots of giving us a more artistic horror flick, with such an unconventional placement of fear. Beck and Woods don't have cheap jump scares or shock value on their mind. They seem to want to strike audiences at their very core, preying on our worries over death, what comes after, where we all come from, and what's truly out there beyond what we know. These concepts are terrifying on psychological levels for sure, but Beck and Woods turn them into nightmarish realities. It's right down to how creatively the film is shot, treating everything like a madman's dollhouse, with all the puppets inside trying to escape (A metaphor the film uses literally at times), retaining the feeling of claustrophobia (Especially since the film only takes place in a couple of similar looking rooms), while warily curious about what else might be waiting around the corner. It's a spectacular set, and the production design is Award worthy. Beck and Woods also just don't seem to be afraid of getting weird or elaborate either. The movie actually does have a sense of humor. It's an intentionally odd one that only plays into the sense of dread, where you find yourself laughing, albeit uneasily. 

Due to this being such a close quarters film, it relies heavily on the imaginative camera work, dialogue heavy character establishment, and the star power of our actors. Sophie Thatcher and Chloe East immediately establish so much character in the film's opening couple minutes, keeping you intrigued by what they allow to be spoken so openly to what they could possibly be hiding. There ends up being much more to them than the possible victims, who also refreshingly try their absolute best to avoid some of the usual horror mistakes, while trying to come up with the best possible decisions in a seemingly unwinnable situation. Of course though, Hugh Grant, playing against time wonderfully, is the big draw here. It's an inspired performance that feels like he's weaponizing his most noticeable traits, such as being charmingly odd, funny, and unassuming, turning it into something thoroughly menacing. Not to mention, despite his villainy, he delivers some rather solid points about religion, the hypocrisies and marketable natures of each and every single one of them, and what's truly so frightening about the power of both belief and disbelief. It's a suspenseful joy to watch the characters go back and forth, trying to one up each other, and each delivering their own insight into the subject (Which believe it or not, somehow finds ways to involve things such as Wendy's, Monopoly, Bob Ross, and Jar Jar Binks. Trust me, hearing Hugh Grant do a Jar Jar impression is one of those things I didn't know I needed to hear). 

"Heretic" hinges on the power of what you're willing to believe and I can admit that not everything works (It's meant to be a scary story, so you just gotta go with a few things). Nonetheless, it's eerily unpredictable, well paced, twisted thriller, with a brain. Hugh Grant is having an absolute blast bringing to life such a fascinatingly vile piece of work, while our heroines are much more than they first appear, making for a constantly moving puzzle that you can't wait to finish putting together by the end. 4 Stars. Rated R For Creepy Old Dudes, Menaced Mormons, Poisoned Pie, And Magic Underwear. Mormonism Will Never NOT Sound Weird To Me.

Anora                                       by James Eagan                ★★★★ out of ★★★★★   

Image: Me, moments before I lose all $20 to my name.

God, that was exhausting! I mean that positively by the way, but, yeah, was anyone else just worn the Hell out after watching this?

"Anora" follows "Anora Mikheeva" (Mikey Madison), though she prefers to go by "Ani", a young and brash stripper working in a Manhattan club, dreaming of a better life for herself. Her life takes an interesting turn when she meets "Ivan "Vanya" Zakharov" (Mark Edelstein), the young, immature, partying son of a wealthy Russian family. Ani agrees to accept payment to engage in some sexual sessions with Vanya, which eventually leads to Vanya paying Ani to pose as his girlfriend for a week, resulting in the two, I suppose, starting to fall in love. While on a trip to Vegas (and after Vanya lets it be known that if they were to be married, he'd get to stay in the United States), Ani and Vanya randomly elope, with Ani quitting her job, becoming Vanya's devoted wife, and getting the life she's always thought she's wanted. Then everything proceeds to come crashing down when Vanya's reputation obsessed parents find out, sending Vanya's godfather, "Toros" (Karren Karagulian), along with his bumbling goons, "Garnick" (Vache Tovmasyan) and "Igor" (Yura Borisov), to get the marriage annulled and bring Vanya back to Russia. It turns out to be a task easier said than done though, as Ani is an incredibly difficult person to control and Vanya outright bails, running off somewhere in the city. Now Ani has to team up with Toros and his henchmen to track down her missing husband, with chaos ensuing all around.

Written and directed by Sean Baker ("Tangerine", "The Florida Project", "Red Rocket"), "Anora" is yet another fascinating, at times crude and abrasive, though understanding and thoughtful look into subjects that usually find themselves either as the butt of the joke or just as a symbol of disrespect among the masses. That makes it loud, crass, obnoxious, and like I said before, thoroughly exhausting, yet also funny, touching, and even quite tragic. Baker's direction has never been better. Something about the way he films his movies always makes me feel like I'm there, living in the moment with the characters (For better or for worse). Despite what you might be led to believe, this is a straight up comedy, with some noticeable dramatic elements. And when I say comedy, it's a pretty broad comedy. Nonetheless, it's pretty damn hilarious at times. After a likely intentionally slow start, it evolves into absolute insanity, with screwball elements, drawn out sequences of mayhem and misunderstandings, and so much yelling over each other (Along with absurdly out of nowhere moments of physical violence).

It's around the halfway point where you can really notice what exactly this movie is going for, with a delightfully unhinged sequence involving everything that goes down in the living room of Vanya's family mansion. It feels like it just goes on forever, yet that's what makes it all the better. Everything that can go wrong goes wrong. Everything that can break breaks. It's absolutely, frustrating, comedic madness, and it's genuinely brilliantly crafted. However, I will admit to being somewhat in the minority here. I wouldn't exactly consider this one of the best films of the year. Oh don't get me wrong. It's still an excellent film, that may find a place in my "Top 25 Best Films of 2024" (Maybe. Still got another month or two of films to get through). It's just that when your movie reaches the over two hour mark, and happens to feel it too, it's a lot to take in. It's even more to have to endure. It also starts off a little slow (Developing the doomed romance the best one can with a story like this). Thankfully, it's only briefly that you feel these issues, with the film's zany nature and committed performances winning you over in the end. 

Mikey Madison, who has been a star in the making for quite a while now, gets her moment in the spotlight, and it's about damn time she did. This is such a challenging role to make likable or just be one that you actually enjoy watching. So easily could this have been over the top in all the wrong ways. Madison, however, doesn't play it as such. If anything, she makes it feel real, powerful, and heartbreaking. You can see behind the strong willed persona, who speaks her mind even when she knows damn well she shouldn't, is someone looking for the kind of happiness that any of us would be looking for, then gets swept up in all the money, fancy clothes, and the glossy cover of it all. She and Mark Edelstein are a ton of fun together, though I never quite bought them entirely romantically. I noticed some were saying how it feels like a genuine romance that's only destined to end in tears, but I totally saw it a different way. I knew the whole time that he was a childish little sh*t, who was just using her, and would dump her the moment all his debauchery caught up with him. She just sadly didn't see it until it was too late. I felt like that was more of the intention behind it, though I suppose I can't say for sure. Karen Karagulian (Who is always struggling to hold back a mental breakdown) and especially Vache Tovmasyan (Who spends the entire film's runtime in immense pain due to being kicked in the face, keeps complaining about it, and is repeatedly on the verge of passing out), are both laugh out loud hilarious in their respectively worn down performances, while Yura Borisov is wonderfully subtle in a part that may take a predictable route, though he makes the emotions sincere enough to balance it out. 

While it's certainly a bit too much for itself, especially for its probably overlong length (Which is funny because I haven't had those kinds of issues with films this year that have been even longer), "Anora" is a confidently, chaotically crafted spectacle of lunacy from Sean Baker, who really knows how to find the humanity in such things better than most directors and storytellers working today. Mikey Madison is a revelation, while the film's wild attitude does eventually lead to a sense of sadness that I wouldn't say is exactly unexpected, but might still catch a few people off guard. 4 Stars. Rated R For, Phew Boy, Strong Language, Sexual Content And Nudity, Drug Use, Excessive Battery, More Strong Language, Unintelligible Mumbling Accents From All Over, And Even More Strong Language. Straight Up Weaponizes Swear And Insults In Brutal Fashion.

Here                                         by James Eagan                    ★★½ out of ★★★★★  

Image: They do actually look like High Schoolers......on Netflix! Fifty years ago!

It needs to be studied exactly how and why Robert Zemeckis has fallen off over the past couple decades. For some, he fell off even earlier than that. A director who has crafted a collection of beloved films in his filmography, and yet, now his work has become associated with hollow, awkward schmaltz (And his obsession with filmmaking techniques and technology, no matter how stunning it can be, tends to lead to some inconsistent results. Basically, if anyone is going to make a completely AI generated film, I'd believe it would be him!). I wouldn't say it's been all terrible (Okay, I don't know what the Hell he was thinking with "Welcome to Marwen"), but even when the hearts in the right place, something genuine has always been missing. Even with this film, which is a lot better than you'd be led to believe, still can't seem to overcome the same issues that have plagued his most recent films. 

Based on the comics strip/graphic novel by Richard McGuire, "Here" is set in one, single spot, over the course of several generations, with most of the story being staged in one room, in one house. Most of the film is centered on the "Young" family (That may or may not be on the nose. I can't tell), starting off in 1945 with veteran husband "Al" (Paul Bettany) and his wife, "Rose" (Kelly Reilly), move into the house after rose learns she's pregnant. After having children (With Al also starting to become more bitter as time goes on), their oldest son "Richard" (Tom Hanks) marries his high school sweetheart "Margaret" (Robin Wright), after she becomes pregnant with their daughter, "Vanessa" (Zsa Zsa Zemeckis). Eventually, Richard and Margaret inherit the house (Despite Margaret's protests and Richard giving up his artist dreams to settle for typical salesmen jobs), going through many struggles along the way, while the film repeatedly flashes forward and backward in time, showing the other people who lived in the house and their stories. Or at least, pieces of their stories. 

Directed by Robert Zemeckis (The "Back to the Future" trilogy, "Who Framed Roger Rabbit?", "Forrest Gump", and many others), who co-wrote the screenplay with Eric Roth ("A Star Is Born", "Killers of the Flower Moon"), "Here" is a fairly ambitious project, at least for something trying to appeal to a more mainstream audience. Such a task is filled with many challenges for any filmmaker to deal with, regardless of how seasoned they are. You gotta make it feel like it's not a gimmick, or boring, or too artificial looking. Unfortunately, the film doesn't entirely succeed at accomplishing its main goal. However, I'd be lying if I didn't admit that there is something effective about it. In a way, in spite of itself, the film has plenty of moments that really work.

To get the frustrations out of the way though, much of the issues are in terms of direction, the screenplay, the dialogue, and the execution. The whole thing is a cinematic play, which means that the actors have to put more emotional emphasis into their roles, to the point where it can seem a bit more over the top or comical than intended. The story, being told in a non-linear format, doesn't always gel and leaves much to be desired in some areas and focuses too much on other, less interesting aspects. The script is too often so in your face with the points it's trying to make that you can predict what some characters are going to say moments before their mouths open. And most glaring of all, the film is full of de-aging effects and is almost entirely green screen for the most part, so it never feels real. Sure, something the aging up or aging down of certain actors can work (Granted, with the likes of Robin Wright, Kelly Reilly, or even Paul Bettany, you don't have to do much really), there are times it makes certain actors look so offputting and oddly gooey (Ya did Tom Hanks so wrong in this!). The film does shockingly work when it's dialogue-free, focusing more on the visual storytelling, such as sequences showcasing the passage of time (From the dinosaurs, growing wildlife, indigenous people experiencing similar events to what later transpires, or just seeing progress at work). These sequences are pretty to look at and make for a surreal kind of experience. I feel that this is closer to what Zemeckis was going for, showing the audience how so much beauty, despair, or just the mundane, can happen in just one spot, while time flies by almost in the blink of an eye. It's almost downright compelling to witness, and I think there should have been more like it. Not to mention, the film's use of split screens also has its moments. 

Even with the film's unevenness, a lot of the actors are trying their best and for the most part, do overcome the limitations of the very premise itself. Tom Hanks and Robin Wright, even with all the artificial effects covering the screen, still have lots of chemistry together, making their uneasy marriage feel more genuine than certainly the film's screenplay does. Kelly Reilly is as lovely, charming, and classy as she always is (Something about her smile and vocal expressions), while Paul Bettany ends up being the film's most complex character, with the best story arc (Starting off as a recovering veteran, who becomes more cynical as time goes on due to what he's sacrificed, eventually becoming a bitter father and husband with a drinking problem, before tragedy ends up pushing him to become better during the last act of his life). The film does criminally waste Michelle Dockery (as the wife of the house's first tenant, who has a miserable time living there), and has a few other plots that don't add much (Like this whole thing with the guy that invented the La-Z-Boy or how the area was once owned by Benjamin Franklin's illegitimate son). There's also a story involving an African American couple (Played by Nicholas Pinnock and Nikki Amuka-Bird), who take over the house much later (And eventually leave during COVID), that got more attention, because there ends up being something quite captivating about that section of the film, despite its simplicity (Or maybe, it works because of its simplicity). 

"Here" has moments of heart, humor, or just parts of the human experience, that are powerful to watch. It just doesn't all come together like it should. The tone is inconsistent and there's way too much being shoved in without cohesion for some of it. It's held back by Zemeckis' need to oversaturate and over explain, which does so much more of a disservice than he realizes. There's a great film somewhere inside this noble, but disorganized experiment. It sadly just can't seem to break out of the schmaltz. 2 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Some Language And For The Word "Here" Being Used Not Enough To Make It Feel Intentional, Yet Just Enough To Make For A Dangerous Drinking Game. 

Nightbitch                                   by James Eagan                     ★★ out of ★★★★★

Image: She prefers the name "Night-Female Dog", personally. 

I wan't to thank the Austin Film Festival for this wonderful  film going experience this past week. Much like the last couple years, regardless of how I might feel about a movie, I have nothing but appreciation for everyone's hard work that went into making the Golden Age of Hollywood premieres feel alive once again. Again, I'm not sure I actually cared for this particular movie, but I'm glad I saw it and got to see it with a big, almost overly excited audience. When you see so many movies like I do, at various times of the day, in an admittedly lackluster theater from time to time, this was still totally worth it!

Based on the novel by Rachel Yoder, "Nightbitch" follows an unnamed "Mother" (Amy Adams), who is going through a depressing rut in life. Her unnamed "Husband" (Scoot McNairy) is always heading away for work, meaning that the stay at home Mother ​is left alone to raise their son (Played by both Arleigh and Emmett Snowden). Mother, who was once an aspiring artist that gave up all her hopes and dreams for her family, is not in the best state of mind, as she starts to get the idea that she just might be turning into a dog. 

Written and directed by Marielle Heller ("Can You Ever Forgive Me?", "A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood"), "Nightbitch" boasts a surreal, twisted premise, with ideas that I can see resonating with the wine mom crowd. The film has a lot going for it, and at times, there's a lot to enjoy about it. However, while the film's seeming commitment to its odd story is to be commended, it eventually becomes frustratingly apparent that it's not willing to go all the way with it. It also doesn't help that once the film reaches the halfway point, you start to realize that the filmmakers are merely going to scratch the surface of craziness, rather than bury their face in it like a dog would do to their food bowl. It more or less nibbles on the idea, rather than sinks its teeth into it. While sporadically funny, the film just feels sloppy when it comes to its execution, like it's holding back in a way. One moment it's a light hearted, fairly crude comedy. Then it drifts into horror territory, with some slight body horror (Although, after "The Substance", this is so neutered by comparison). Yet, it also wants to be an uplifting fable with something to say. Sure, I'm all behind its point about how strong and underappreciated women are, especially mothers (I mean, they literally push little, living breathing bodies out of their bodies. Us dudes could never do that! We lose our sh*t if our pee stings just slightly!), but the film itself ends up being too weird for its own good and somehow, not weird enough. 

With all that said, I have nothing but high praise for Amy Adams, who is given her best role in years and is definitely more than Oscar worthy, even if the film itself is far from it. It is not remotely a glamorous part for her (Although, you really can't make me not find Amy Adams cute as Hell, no matter how much you try), but she goes all in. In fact, she shows more commitment than the film seems to be showing. It's a challenge to make a character like this work, without making her too overly whiney or selfish, with her situation being completely understandable and her even acknowledging that from an outside view, her wanting more out of her life could look a bit self-regarding. Even during the film's most peculiar moments, like where she literally gets on all fours, grows a tail and digs up the backyard (Before going, well, full Nightbitch!), Adams is perfect and deserves better. Scoot McNairy does a good job playing the well-meaning dad, who might just be a little too oblivious and safe in the current state of his marriage, though never remotely comes across as a bad, uncaring husband and father. The little actors playing the son are clearly, well, not actors, though there is something quite charming about their clearly spoon fed line delivery. If anything, it feels more genuine this way. Jessica Harper (as "Norma", the local librarian, who seems to drop hints that she might know more about the Mother's current situation). 

Despite Amy Adams' beautifully bold performance, "Nightbitch" doesn't do her justice. The film settles down in the last act, and that's where it's at its best. It becomes rather compelling when the film's more dramatic aspect takes over the story, though it only adds to the film's messy structure, particularly how the whole "Woman turns into a  dog" premise becomes a non-entity. I can see there being a version of this where all these strange elements come together in wacky harmony. Sadly, this ain't it. Not a particularly bad film. It's just, with a title and story idea like that, nobody would fault you for expecting something stranger and stronger. 2 Stars. Rated R For Adult Content, Butt Puss, Cat-Astrophe (The Moment I Saw That Cat, I Just Knew THAT Was Gonna Happen), Doggystyle.

The Brutalist                         by James Eagan               ★★★★★ out of ★★★★★  

Image: Me, trying to convince my future wife to let me buy that new LEGO Death Star.

Things have been hectic and busy for me, mostly due to the Austin Film Festival. In fact, I saw this a couple days ago, and am only now having time to talk about it. I've only seen a handful of films so far, but that doesn't mean it's been any less exhausting. This is especially true since so far, while none of the films had been bad up until this point, the couple films I saw ranged from good to at least just alright. Nothing has quite wowed me yet until now. Nothing yet made me scream at the top of my lungs "This is why we come to the movies!". Granted, even though we've had many great films and even future classics, I couldn't think of anything that could match something like say, last year's "Oppenheimer". That movie did raise the bar for me in so many ways. 2024 was just saving up to unleash something on that level. 

Set after World War II, "The Brutalist" follows brilliant Hungarian-Jewish architect, "László Tóth" (Adrien Brody), who is forced to separate from his loving wife, "Erzsébet" (Felicity Jones) and his niece, "Zsófia" (Raffey Cassidy), following the Holocaust, before being able to immigrate to America, not knowing if they're even alive. After learning about Erzsébet and Zsófia's survival, László finds a place to stay and work in Philadelphia, with his immigrant, already pretty Americanized cousin, "Attila" (Alessandro Nivola), and his American wife, "Audrey" (Emma Laird), at their furniture store. Attila and László are hired by "Harry Lee Van Buren" (Joe Alwyn), the son of the incredibly wealthy industrialist, "Harrison Lee Van Buren" (Guy Pearce), to renovate his father's study. László's unconventional, yet truly inspired design later causes a rift between him and Attila (Among other things). Some time later, Harrison meets with László personally to thank him for the study. Harrison then offers László to live at his estate while also commissioning him to construct an overly elaborate community center in honor of his late mother. László agrees to do so, especially when it's arranged for Erzsébet (Who is revealed to have developed Osteoporosis) and Zsófia (Who is now mute), to find passage into America. Reunited with what remains of his family, László begins work on the building, which proves to become more and more difficult due to conflicting ideas, the struggle to keep his family happy, the lack of respect he receives from his so-called friends, and the absolutely bonkers ambitions behind the project as a whole. László soon starts to realize that the advertised American Dream might just be only that. A dream. 

Directed by Brady Corbet ("Vox Lux"), who co-wrote the screenplay with longtime partner, Mona Fastvold, "The Brutalist" is a nearly four hour, epic drama, that features no big special effects, isn't based on a popular source material, and also apparently didn't even have that big of a budget (Around $10 million). It's not even based on a true story. It's an original, carefully calculated, and complicated piece of artistic wonder that might just be the best made movie of the year due to its technical achievements alone. However, take those aspects out and what you also get is a gripping, relatable tale that's engrossing to watch, occasionally funny and heartfelt, thoroughly devastating in places, and nonetheless poignant. Corbet truly captures the era and weaves in this mixing of tones, giving off the feeling of something sweeping and magnificent, as if you're reading the most legendary of novels, that just so happens to be about as something as simple as people trying to achieve the unachievable. And in a way, is there no greater story than that?

I had the honor of seeing the film in 35mm, which did wonders for the film's sense of awe-inspiring scope, conveying how huge and almost fantastical America can look and feel to those looking at it with fresh eyes. Of course though, it's not just the beauty we witness. We also see the seductive allure and the promise of success, along with how it can lure people into believing that they belong, when in reality, they're just pawns to those who have likely already inherited the means of that success. It also certainly encompasses how I think immigrants and foreigners, from all over the world, must feel. To be treated as if you're never going to be one of the everyday people and will never truly have a place here unless you're useful to their means (And even then, some will just tolerate you're very existence until they no longer have to). Hell, I'd go as far as to say that this can apply to anyone who finds themselves unable to make it in this country, with how much easier it is to be swayed by drugs, sex, money, the illusion of power, or the promise of acceptance, instead of actual happiness. The film doesn't hold back when it comes to how these uncomfortable themes, portraying them in ways that might make some a bit squeamish or even trigger others. 

Adrien Brody gives probably the best performance that I've ever seen from him. It definitely looks like one that really took an emotional toll on him, having to essentially detail ten years worth of a struggling, somewhat eccentric and admittedly flawed, but hardworking, passionate man's life in just less than four hours. Felicity Jones (Who doesn't actually show up in person until an hour and forty minutes in), is just plain wonderful in a seemingly understated performance that also seems to hide something much stronger beneath it. We get some excellent work from the likes of a brief part for Alessandro Nivola, Emma Laird, Raffey Cassidy, a terrific Isaach de Bankolé (as "Gordon", a close, African American friend to László, who also has gotten the full true poor American experience), Stacy Martin (as "Maggie", Harrison's daughter, who is basically less vile by comparison), and a pompously unlikable Joe Alwyn. Guy Pearce, doing one of the best self-indulgent, fake posh, rich American accent, is outstanding, going back and forth between just humorously unlikable to downright despicable in every conceivable way. In a time when people can still be so easily swayed by the illusion of the rich and elite, I think it's something poignant to show how they'll gladly take advantage of you and even abuse you (In a physical way too), when they feel like it. 

Think of it as the Anti-"Megalopolis". Both films feature inspiring, though somewhat odd architects, with something to say about how we perceive the United States, and are told like monumental novel or legend, with intricate moving parts all going on at once. Except one of them actually seems to get what a human being is. A sweeping epic, packed with memorable characters and performances (Sometimes small, sometimes major), and a simple, personal tale that's all too human, "The Brutalist" is this year's "Oppenheimer" in the sense that is also just plain might be the best made movie I've seen this year. From direction, editing, the overall visual craft behind it, and the fact that it's nearly four hours, yet I never once noticed it. It's a sincerely moving story that will have you invested from beginning to end, with something to say about how we perceive this fantastical idealistic version of America, allowing it to cloud our judgement when it comes to its flaws (Not realizing that those flaws just might be part of the experience, for better or for worse). 5 Stars. Rated R For Very Strong Adult Content, Involving Sex, Drug Use, And Other Elements That Some Audience Members May Need To Take A Moment To Turn Away From. 

Conclave                             by James Eagan                   ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★  

25conclave-review-print-mzgp-videoSixteenByNineJumbo1600.jpg

Image: "Hm, this is WAY more than 12 Angry Men"

There are very few Oscar worthy films that can appeal to a wide range of varying demographics. It's sophisticated and classy, looking like one of those surefire Best Picture nominees with brains and heart. It's got some heavy, topical, and even controversial themes that still somehow never get the film's rating past a "PG". It's a "Boomer" movie that you can see playing on TNT for Father's Day. It's also very modernized and relevant that I can see the far, religious right calling it "Woke" and "Blasphemous" in equal measures. It's so pulpy that it could border on trashy entertainment. Hell, in terms of entertainment value, it's a pure popcorn muncher with all the twists and turns it takes. It's one of those movies that will get a collection of "What?"s, "No Way!"s, and "OH SH*T!"s, in equal measure. Guys, this movie was awesome!

Based on the novel by Robert Harris, "Conclave" opens after the death of the much loved, quite progressive pope, it falls upon "Cardinal Thomas Lawrence" (Ralph Fiennes), the Dean of the College of Cardinals, to gather everyone for a papal conclave, where a vote is to commence and determine who will become the next pope. Tensions are already a little high, with Lawrence having a bit of a crisis of faith and duty, sending his support towards the fellow Liberal "Aldo Bellini" (Stanley Tucci), who really doesn't want the title, though will gladly accept if that means that the church will continue on its currently more open minded social path. However, it turns out to be quite the challenge, due to some of the other popular candidates, like the popular, though vehemently anti-homosexual "Joshua Adeyemi" (Lucian Msamati), the strictly traditionalist and racist/xenophobic "Goffredo Tedesco" (Sergio Castellitto), the conservative "Joseph Tremblay" (John Lithgow), who Lawrence has learned fell out of favor with the last pope (With there being a rumor that Tremblay was actually dismissed from duty before the Pope died). Lawrence himself gets a few votes after an impassioned speech about embracing diversity and chance (Though Lawrence sincerely doesn't want the title either), and "Vincent Benitez" (Carlos Diehz), an optimistic Mexican archbishop that nobody even knew existed until today. Throughout the various sessions, where none of the candidates repeatedly fail to gain enough votes to win the election, Lawrence slowly makes various discoveries about each of the main candidates, learning of many secrets and scandals, which only further test his own faith. All this is while there appears to be something more hectic appears to be going down outside the secluded Conclave. 

Directed by Edward Berger ("All Quiet on the Western Front"), with a screenplay by Peter Straughan ("Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy", "The Men Who Stare at Goats", "Our Brand Is Crisis"), "Conclave" genuinely does play out like an airport paperback novel or like an old, rather sensationalized black and white film. There is something rather knowing about the film, despite being a pretty serious film. It feels like a Shakespearean detective story that's found itself wrapped in both religious and political intrigue, with clear allegories to some recent events, like our upcoming, possibly democracy-ending election coming up. It's not exactly meant to be realistic, with so many events and revelations happening over the course of just a couple days. The movie completely seems to get that it's fiction, through and through. However, it's this old school and mature, yet never crude or indulgent, dramatic thriller, that puts heavy emphasis on the dramatic part. That makes it equal parts captivating, shocking, and immensely entertaining in ways that make you feel more sophisticated and smarter than you actually are, but also surprisingly fun as if you're, as the kids say, "Spilling tea", of the juiciest caliber. It's a film that may revolve around a bunch of old dudes bickering in a secluded place, wearing the most fabulous of Catholic costumes, but dear God is it exciting. Berger keeps the pace going and the mystery thoroughly suspenseful, where you're constantly on the edge of your seat to find out what other dark secrets are about to exposed, with hints being dropped about every single twist throughout. Berger's direction is crisp, fast paced, and at times, says much more through visuals than the dialogue. The film has a lot of fun with the modernized setting, with the sights of Catholic Cardinals smoking, messing around on their phones, and vaping, making for some levity, as well as playing into the themes religious progress and adapting to the changing world, despite the contradictions of the past and how so many would rather keep to traditions (Regardless of how bigoted or dangerous it might be). This is also elevated by a pounding, almost overly dramatic score from Volker Bertelmann (Who worked with Berger on "All Quiet on the Western Front"), that occasionally jump scares you into attention with its thematic stings. 

The biggest draw though (And the reasons for some early Oscar talk) would be the performances, which are not limited to, but are certainly led into cinematic glory by, Ralph Fiennes. An actor who has often been ignored by the Academy members, who often use the phrases "Always great" or "I'm sure he'll get a win eventually". It's such an emotionally vulnerable role, serving as a worthy counter to how some commanding performers feel the need to rely on bravado or by beating their chest like a gorilla. Instead, Fiennes conveys disillusionment, fear, heartbreak, and eventually, hope, in times that make it harder and harder to keep your faith. The whole movie is loaded with actors who we know are always bringing their A game. Stanley Tucci plays that flawed leftist that is certainly on the right side of things and has only the best of intentions, even if he too can't seem to avoid feeling the need to play the political game. We got a perfectly self-righteous John Lithgow, an entertainingly detestable Sergio Castellitto (Who despite being arguable the worst person out of all of them, is at least so open about it that he might end up being the least corrupt by comparison), a complex Lucian Msamati, Brían F. O'Byrne (as "Monsignor Raymond O'Malley", Lawrence's assistant, who becomes his Watson of sorts), and a jaw dropping breakout for Carlos Diehz (Who ends up getting the heaviest, most difficult material). Isabella Rossellini (as "Sister Agnes", the head nun and housekeeper), has a small, but vital part, remaining quiet for the most part until it becomes her time to absolutely command the screen in an applause worthy moment. 

With fascinating characters, a smart script filled with levity and relevance (Relating so much of what happens to many current events and debates, such as the place of religion in today's society, diversity, the role of women, conflicts of cultures, corruption of power, and a few other things I can't get into), "Conclave" is a rousing experience that's best had with a packed audience. I will say though that it's sure to become one of this year's more controversial great films, mostly due to the film's final twist, which I can see people getting all kinds of reactions to. From shock, laughter, bewilderment, disgust (Although F*ck those guys), or even some offense (I can't go into details, but I completely understand why they would). Plenty will also find it moving. It's a complicated reveal that might not work for everyone, and I'm not one to say that it should. It will spark some interesting debates to say the least, and that's something that the film most of all understands. The importance of these different, conflicting views, and how the power of doubt is just what makes us human. And yeah, it's also just really thrilling in such an old fashioned way that's bound to get an explosive rise out of moviegoers all around. 4 1/2 Stars. Rated PG For Adult Content, Heavy Material, Controversial Topics, Turtle Trouble, And Old Farts In The Most Elegant Of Dresses. No Judgement Here. They All Look Fabulous! 

Venom: The Last Dance              by James Eagan              ★★★ out of ★★★★★    

AB_1780_comp_ILM_v0008_textless_g_r709104_2000x1124_thumbnail-e1726146371651.webp

Image: That's the face that 100% is gonna give you that 18 inches of Venom.

Sony's Spider-Man-Less Spider-Man Universe has gone absolutely nowhere over the course of six years, with the likes of "Morbius" and "Madame Web" opening to critical failure and financial disappointment (No high hopes for the upcoming "Kraven the Hunter" either). Yet, somehow, their rather intentionally moronic, half-assed, and unapologetically weird iteration of the classic former comic book villain, turned beloved anti-hero, has found a way to get a trilogy out of it. An actual complete trilogy! Despite only getting a modest profit and generally receiving mixed at best reviews, this franchise has accumulated its own, pretty queer (Or at least, queer embracing) fanbase, and regardless of how even the biggest haters might feel, they too have just sort of come to accept it for what it is. This! Is! VENOM! And I'm actually pretty sad to see the adventures of this mumbling Tom Hardy (And that big, black, sharp toothed parasite that he's got shoved up his ass) come to a bittersweet end. 

Following the events of the last film (Along with that quick post credits scene from "Spider-Man: No Way Home", where the titular anti-hero arrives in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, only to get booted out minutes later after getting drunk off his ass), "Venom: The Last Dance" opens with former investigative journalist, "Eddie Brock" (Tom Hardy), and his Symbiote parasite/buddy/maybe lover, "Venom" (Voiced by Tom Hardy), still on the run from the authorities, though are now pursued for presumably killing police detective, "Patrick Mulligan" (Stephan Graham). Eddie and Venom have plans to clear their name, embarking on a journey to New York City. Meanwhile in a secret alien studying facility under Area 51, traumatized scientist, "Teddy Payne" (Juno Temple), has Mulligan alive (Kind of) and insane due to having bonded with a Symbiote of his own, while the alien hating general, "Rex Strickland" (Chiwetel Ejiofor), has every intention of bringing in Eddie and Venom, dead or alive. Along the way to New York, Eddie and Venom are attacked by a bloodthirsty Symbiote tracking monster, having been sent by Venom's trapped creator, "Knull" (Voiced by Andy Serkis), who knows that the "Codex" (Which can free him from his prison), is actually within both Eddie and Venom. Now being hunted by both military and alien forces, Eddie and Venom must take part in a final dance to save the world, even if it means that there's a possibility that they just might lose each other by its end. 

Written and directed by Kelly Marcel (In her directorial debut, after having served as a writer for all three films), "Venom: The Last Dance" brings the wacky, unhinged mis-adventures of two of Marvel's most baffling icons in recent memory. Believe it or not, both "Deadpool" and "Wolverine" make so much more sense by comparison. This is one of those movies that seems to know who its target audience is, what they want, and what they're logically able to do. Sony has never clearly wanted to go for anything grand, though to the point they're yet to make a movie that's even as good as the worst that the MCU has given us. This movie is no different. However, much like the first two, there is something so sincere about it. It's silly stuff, and yet, everyone seems to know this. In fact, it's almost like that's the whole point. I'm not gonna say that it's bad on purpose (Mostly because there is so much worse out there). It's just not entertainment of the highest caliber. Not even by popcorn movie levels. As far as the plot goes, it's fairly generic comic book stuff. When it comes to the visual effects, they look cool, though very copy and paste (Sony ain't gonna deal out that Disney level money after all). Even in terms of its direction, it's nothing too special. Marcel makes up for it by obviously pouring her heart into it, with some creative action setpieces and some even more energy being put into scenes that are just plain goofy for the Hell of it (We get Venom Horse, Venom Fish, Venom Frog, etc.). The film's stakes are basically universe ending, and yet, Eddie and Venom take time to stop and dick around in Vegas, with Venom indulging in his gambling addiction. These movies have damn near been a farce this whole time, and it's no shock that the third one wouldn't be any different.   

Regardless of how you feel about the tone or execution these films seem to go for, you can't deny how much love Tom Hardy seems to have for it and his characters. With Eddie's impossible to decipher accent and Venom's deep, yet playfully obnoxious voice, there has always been a sort of chemistry between them which is both amusingly stupid, surprisingly sweet, and well, maybe a little on the Gay side. Believe it or not, that actually adds so much genuine charm to a franchise that only exists because Sony refuses to let go of the rights to the Spider-Man characters. It's a predictable story that doesn't have much weight when it comes to its script, but Hardy brings everything he has to it and makes it feel like we're all actually saying goodbye to an old friend. An occasionally annoying, human head eating old friend, but one that I'm actually gonna miss. We also have actors that could have just been sleep-walking throughout the film, though the likes of Chiwetel Ejiofor (Who does get an actual character arc in the film), Juno Temple, Clark Bacco (as one of the scientists, who has sympathy for the Symbiotes), and Stephen Graham (Despite returning only for some exposition) are all giving something extra to the material. Rhys Ifans and Alanna Ubach (as a couple of alien-obsessed hippie parents, whose family happens to pick up a hitch-hiking Eddie and Venom) pop up to give some rather oddly placed, though still genuine performances in one of the few sequences where the film stops to have some pathos to balance out the silliness. We also get the return of Peggy Lu (as "Mrs. Chen", the smart-talking convenience store owner from the last two films, who has formed an unconventional friendship with Eddie and Venom) in a delightfully out of nowhere musical moment where she dances with Venom to "Dancing Queen".

It also shouldn't be a shock to anyone that Knull is given little screentime and little to do, despite being the main villain (Anyone who knows the character from the comics knows how he's definitely too much of a Thanos-level threat for something so small scale like this). He looks cool, has Andy Serkis' awesome voice, and is plenty menacing when delivering some by the numbers villain dialogue, but this does feel like it's all meant to serve as setup for something else down the line (And compared to the other baffling stingers these Sony movies have had in the past, there is at least something of interest that I wouldn't mind getting more of). Most of the villainous heavy lifting is done by a collection of "Xenophages", who are personality-free, mindless monsters, that still have their effectively scary moments (And even push the PG-13 rating a bit in how they literally shred people into bloody goo). There is an onslaught of fanservice during the climax that feels both like a "Jumping the Shark" moment and something very much at home with the chaos. 

Campy, stupid, lacking in substance or urgency, "Venom: The Last Dance" is all of these things, yet also entertainingly so, with a few undemanding laughs, a brisk under two hour pace, and a heart that's always in the right place. It's the kind of guilty pleasure nonsense that you're either going to have the time of your life with or just leave agitated and annoyed with. However, if you're really someone who gets THAT bent out of shape with the third Venom movie, you're kind of missing the point. While it's still lesser than even the weakest of recent material the MCU has given us, I'm thoroughly gonna miss the wacky, homo-erotic adventures of these two knuckleheads. 3 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Some Surprisingly Violent And Scary Images, The Revelation That Mrs. Chen Is Low-Key Hot As Hell, And Symbiote Sexual Tension.  

Smile 2                                by James Eagan                 ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★   

Image: Smile, Darn Ya, Smile! You know this old world is a great world after all!

2022's surprise hit "Smile" (Which was almost released only on Paramount+, but was changed due to positive test screenings) really took something that we normally don't associate with fear and brilliantly made it feel like something out of your darkest nightmares. Smiling. Honestly, smiling is scary. Just some random guy staring at you, with a gigantic grin on their face for no reason. Just staring. And staring. And, well, you get the point. That's scary man! And you're damn right they're gonna make a franchise out of it!

After a quick prologue that also serves as an epilogue to the last film involving poor "Joel" (Kyle Gallner) attempting to rid himself of the parasitic demonic, smiling entity, "Smile 2" opens with a world famous pop star, "Skye Riley" (Naomi Scott), who is preparing to make a grand comeback tour after dealing with extreme substance abuse which led to a terrible car crash that killed her boyfriend and left her with permanent injuries. However, Skye is still not in the right state of mind and her overbearing mother/manager, "Elizabeth" (Rosemarie DeWitt) isn't helping matters. Skye seeks out an old friend/drug dealer, "Lewis" (Lukas Gage), who is acting especially unhinged when she arrives. Lewis is drugged up, rambling, and claims to be seeing some horrifying images, and then proceeds to collapse into convulsions. Suddenly, Lewis starts grinning at Skye and then smashes his own face in with a metal weight right in front of her. Now, this sadistic entity has attached itself to Skye and it's not letting her go until it's driven absolutely insane, forcing her to see gruesome images left and right, mostly in the form of people with twisted smiles. Skye, with her mental health constantly in question, is forced to deal with her entire life crashing down as well as the entity's eventual endgame, forcing her to kill herself in a brutal manner. 

Written and directed by the returning Parker Finn, "Smile 2" does what most sequels tend to do (Especially horror ones), and that goes for bigger, badder, and grander. However, when that becomes the intent, they generally risk losing sight of what made the original so effective and why it connected with people in the first place. Look at stuff like "Friday the 13th" or the bizarre places the "Halloween" franchise was going. Parker Finn seems to keep in mind that while one should strive to take things further than before, yet also can't lose sight of the humble beginnings that birthed this demented horror franchise, crafting a sequel that's in some ways, just as resonate as the original, though in many ways, genuinely superior. In fact, in terms of straight up horror sequels, this might be one of the best ones I can think of at the moment in some time. To the point where I'm not dreading the concept of more and more sequels being on the way. I'm actually just thoroughly fascinated and even anticipating what kind of terror Finn will come up with next. The film, which opens as if it's just cutting to the next scene, directly after the cruel twist ending of the first one, quickly shows that while it's definitely a sequel through and through, it also wants to serve as a continuation of the nightmare from before, while also stand on its own in terms of setting, characters, and even down how it looks. Due to a slightly bigger budget, Parker Finn is able to up the ante with its scale and story, but also, crafting a delirious rollercoaster of a trip into Hell-based madness, where you start to feel like you might be losing your own grip on reality, just as much as the lead character.

Through the use of some well shot single take sequences, some dizzying camera work, and just some really odd, off-putting takes that put you in a state of unease throughout, it somewhat feels like the movie itself was directed by the twisted demonic entity. This movie, just like the first film, is genuinely ingenious in how it uses sound, editing, and yes, even jump scares to terrify its audience. So many horror films rely on such type of thrills as a crutch, to make up for the lack of anything actually scary. This film finds creatively messed up ways to make them a macabre mix of fun, humorous, and actually frightening. Whether it be a quick snap of one of those devilishly grinning faces, or a long, drawn out sequence involving many faces just staring our poor protagonist down, looking like they're all about to pounce on her at once. Again, the fact that it feels like the film has a mind of its own and is just f*cking with you the entire time, has it almost veer into dark comedy territory, except these diabolical pranks are on the main character and the audience as a whole. 

The terror is one thing, but it could only work if you had a character to care about, and Naomi Scott is brilliant in a performance that I swear has to levitate her more into well known stardom. Scott is forced to give what looks to be an emotionally draining performance, going back and forth between so many emotions, and sometimes to do them over the course of a brief moment. She can be sympathetic, though very flawed with some questionable moral choices. She's funny at times, even during scenes where the humor comes from the unhinged madness onscreen. She's clearly vulnerable and terrified beyond reason, yet it's not like she's incapable. It's such a nuanced role that wouldn't seem out of place in the most sophisticated of dramas, except it just so happens to be coming out of a horror movie that most would want to go see simply because they think they're only going to get gore-filled schlock. I mean, sure. I enjoyed the silliness of "Terrifier 3". However, this actually has something to say, with depth and understanding, even when it's surrounded by the kinds of images that you swear you'd only see in the deepest, darkest interiors of Hell itself. And on a side note, her songs in the movie are actually pretty damn solid. Kind of makes "Trap" (Which also featured a pop star being in a Thriller plot) look like a pile of crap, really. 

There's even a bit more to the side characters, who all have some kind of relevance to the story even with limited screentime. At first, Rosemarie DeWitt comes across as the worst kind of mother imaginable (With little subtle hints that call into question if this is truly how she is or simply how Skye is seeing her), a humorous Miles Gutierrez-Riley (as "Joshua", a total doormat of an assistant to Skye's mother, who is oddly treated like absolute crap by everyone around him), Dylan Gelulla (as "Gemma", Skye's former best friend that she had a falling out with) in a part that feels out of place in its quirkiness in a way that ends up making strange sense, and a really small, yet vital part for Ray Nicholson (as "Paul Hudson", Skye's deceased boyfriend, whose smiling face also seems to be haunting her as well), the son of Jack Nicholson. Other great parts include the returning Kyle Gallner (Who is making quite the career of playing that one guy who just has the worst kinds of luck in horror movies), a wonderfully deranged Lukas Gage, and Peter Jacobson (as "Morris", a nurse, who knows a little about what this entity is, and might even know of a way to permanently stop it). 

Expertly crafted from start to finish and superior to the already pretty damn good first film, "Smile 2" feels mainstream, though not stupid, and also quite artsy, yet never obnoxious. It masterfully finds that perfect balance in appealing to those looking for scares that make them scream out loud in a crowded audience, along with intelligence, freaky imagery you won't be able to get out of your head, and profound storytelling. Not to mention a few twists and turns that even left me wondering what was real and what wasn't by the end. The themes of mental illness are carried over from the first film, along with how the stress of fame, the fear of failure, and one's dark perception of the world around them, as well as themselves can only add to that. It's heartbreaking and frightening at the same time, with a pulsating score, axiety spiking sound design, and Parker Finn's sadistic direction feeling like a cruel joke at your expense, making for an early Halloween treat that will disturb and delight moviegoers this spooky season. And most importantly of all, it's a horror movie that's actually freakin scary! For some, it might even do its job TOO  well. :) 4 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Blood-Curdling, Upsetting Images, Gory Visuals, Greasy Psycho Fans,  And So Much Voss Water! 

Terrifier 3                             by James Eagan                    ★★★ out of ★★★★★  

Image: Eh, he's about as clean as your average mall Santa.

I can't say that this is necessarily a good thing here. Hell, I can't even imagine something being just so damn offensive that it got banned in France to underaged viewers. Freakin France! They let everything slide! The "Terrifier" films, which began with a series of short films, later combined into the film "All Hallows' Eve", along with its main murderous clown villain "Art" becoming an instant icon, have gained quite the following. Both positively and negatively. Mostly because of how grotesquely violent they are, going old school slasher horror, with practical effects and aggressive attention to bloody details, with every single death being as repulsively in your face as possible. It's borderline torture porn in a way. A splatter film series which, despite their minuscule budget, has made a fortune. You kind of got to commend the commitment, and to be a bit nicer about it, I can say these films are getting better. Slowly, but surely. Emphasis on the "slowly" part, yet there's genuine progress. 

Following the events of that fateful Halloween night in the previous film, "Terrifier 3" the deranged, mute serial killer, "Art the Clown" (David Howard Thornton), surviving a decapitation, reuniting with a now mangled, deranged survivor of one of his previous rampages, "Victoria Heyes" (Samantha Scaffidi), before entering a state of hibernation until it's time to kill again. Years later, the heroic final girl from the last film/Art's new arch-nemesis, "Sienna Shaw" (Lauren LaVera), who despite using a magical sword to defeat Art before (It's a whole thing. Don't ask), she's not in the best mental state, now being in the care of her aunt "Jessica" (Margaret Anne Florence) and uncle "Greg" (Bryce Johnson). While Sienna at least gets to hang out with her lovable cousin, "Gabbie" (Antonella Rose), she's become estranged from her equally mentally scarred brother, "Jonathan" (Elliott Fullam), who just wants to move on from the terror. However, with Christmas coming up, Art, with some aid from Victoria, decides it's time for a big bloody comeback. Armed with his trash back full of killer goodies (Hammers, chainsaws, knives, nitroglycerin, etc.), Art dons a Santa Claus costume to give the people the reddest Christmas they've ever seen, while also taking time to get some revenge on Sienna.

​Written and directed by series creator Damien Leone (Who directed all entries in the franchise), "Terrifier 3" is another one of those cases where one can only say "It is what it is", and unlike say something like those "Winnie-the-Pooh: Blood and Honey" movies, there is at least something appealing here. And I'm not talking about the pealing of human flesh off the bone. While the first film had its moments, it was just a decent looking gore-fest, while the second film actually did bring in a couple likable enough characters and had some more story to it. This one retains some of those solid enough elements, along with more of an embracing of its sadistic, macabre sense of humor and most fun of all, the holiday setting. The film already has that retro, grind house inspired 80s look going for it (Despite being set in the present), but giving it this Christmas feeling only adds to the film's twisted nature. Seeing such a beloved, wholesome holiday turned into a total nightmare is as terrible as they come and only feels right with this franchise. And for the gore fanatics, this movie has you covered, in more ways than one to the point where it was enough to piss off plenty of moviegoers. Right off the bat, the movie opens with a Santa dressed Art brutally murdering an entire family (Kids included), and those are the tamer kills in the movie. People, who most of the time don't deserve their fates, get chopped up, sliced up, ripped apart, and a few other grotesquely demented acts of pure evil violence in such terrible (And I'll even admit, at times fairly clever) ways. Nobody goes out easy and much like the other films, it will stop just to wallow in it, letting Art's rampages take up good chunks of the film's screentime, which literally has him taking out chunks of people's flesh. It's stuff I personally don't want to watch often, though I can see the craft in spite of that. The filmmakers, based in Indie film roots, utilize the most impressively done kinds of old school practical effects that add something to the experience. 

It also helps that Lauren LaVera is once again shockingly wonderful in a film that I bet even the filmmakers would admit doesn't deserve her. She brings a lot of charm and heart to a movie that's so mean spirited and cruel that she really is a light in such darkness, and to give some credit, that seems to be precisely the point. LaVera's chemistry with Antonella Rose is also an endearing friendship. On the downside, Elliott Fullam kind of gets the short end of the stick, reduced to more of a secondary player with an underdeveloped story arc. There are some likable side characters that you don't want to die, some not so likable ones that you don't mind getting dispatched violently, and a few pretty amusing cameos appearances from some familiar faces, such as a quite funny sequence where Art wanders into a bar to screw around with a drunken "Santa Claus" (Played by Daniel Roebuck) and a couple patrons (Played by Bradley Stryker and Clint Howard). Samantha Scaffidi looks like she's more than pleased to embrace her character's villainous turn from that one survivor in the first film to mentally unstable, homicidal maniac in the second and now becoming a bloodthirsty mastermind. She's clearly having a ball and is definitely a creepy piece of work. Once again though, one can't praise enough the star of the show, David Howard Thornton, who has turned Art the Clown into such an icon for horror fans. Regardless of how you might feel about what they've done with this character, he's still effective to say the least. Unsettling, yet oddly funny, Thornton's 100% physical performance is what sells it and makes it memorable to watch. Despite the film being more focused on story and character, they do at times take backseats to whatever big banquet of blood that the film wants to indulge in. Not to mention, there's a rather upsetting reveal during the film's last act that's done offscreen in a way that doesn't feel genuine. It's hard to tell if it's just some sloppy storytelling or sloppy attempts at setting up later revelations for the next entry in the series.

"Terrifier 3" is more of the same, but just a little better. The kills are creative, if not a little too exploitative. The story is silly and always feels secondary, though the pitch black comedy adds much needed personality along with LaVera's capable performance. Damien Leone's love for old fashioned chills and kills is both repulsive, though so unrestrained that you really can't help but admire it in some way. And the main attraction, that maniacal moment, Art the Clown, is still such a fascinating creation that you find yourself at least slightly curious what exactly can happen with him next. And hey, if these movies are truly starting to get better, maybe I won't mind taking a few more turns on the Terrifier again. 3 Stars. Not Rated, Though Feels Like A Very Hard R Rating, Due To Bloody, Gory Gruesomeness, Including Dismemberment, Face Pealing, Beard Ripping, Rat Swallowing, And, Er, The Old "Chainsaw Up The Ass Routine"! Merry Christmas Indeed! 

Piece by Piece                     by James Eagan                    ★★★½ out of ★★★★★  

Px_P_TP_003_ac6bb59b68.jpg

Image: "How can I possibly clap along if I feel that happiness is the truth, with these little LEGO claw hands?" 

So does this mean that the Imagine Dragons biopic is going to be told with Mega Bloks? Or the Nickelback one is going to be told with Playmobil sets? Or how about Milli Vanilli's story being told with Lincoln Logs? God help us what they'd do the Michael Jackson one with!

Inspired by the life story of singer/songwriter/rapped/producer/"Despicable Me" soundtrack contributor, Pharrell Williams, "Piece by Piece" opens with "Pharrell Williams" (Played by himself, obviously), meeting with director, "Morgan Neville" (Also himself), proposing the idea that they tell his story with LEGO pieces. The movie showcases important aspects of Pharrell's life through a childlike lens via LEGOs, from his childhood fascination with music, his friendship with future producer "Chad Hugo" (Himself, duh!), his rise through the music industry, claim to fame, and the eventual discovery of what his true identity is as an artist, becoming the icon he is today. Not to mention, his many, many contributions to pop culture, such as the fact that he was the one who came up with the "I'm Lovin' It" jingle for "McDonald's". I legit didn't know that!

Directed by Morgan Neville ("Won't You Be My Neighbor?", "Mickey: The Story of a Mouse"), who co-wrote the film with Jason Zeldes, Aaron Wickenden, and Oscar Vazquez, "Piece by Piece" is essentially a documentary, biopic, that seems to know that it's not some grand tale. It's not particularly complicated. It's a puff piece around its central figure. The film knows this. To make up for it though, the filmmakers decide to come up with an admittedly quirky, yet delightfully original way of telling its story, with sincere humor, colorful visuals and animation, and most importantly of all, creativity. That's always the thing I associate with Pharrell Williams, and in a way, making this into a LEGO movie (A product that straight up promotes creativity), it's a match made in heaven. While I can't necessarily say that the film's animation reaches the more epic heights of some of the previous LEGO movies, like the original "The LEGO Movie" or "The LEGO Batman Movie", but there is something so naturally charming about seeing it in any shape or form. It still has that stop motion looking aesthetic and lots of wildly bright, vibrant spectacle to make up for it.

Due to the film not taking itself so overly seriously, the film has loads of fun with this brick by brick style, especially using it to turn what could seem like a simple "Rags to Riches" story into a fairy tale of sorts. I do love the film's use of music as well, using the metaphor of special, glowing LEGO pieces to symbolize the beats that Pharrell comes up with, along with a neverending vault of ideas that he even admits will likely never see the light of day. The film's voice work is mostly made up of interview audio, with some having more professional personality than others, with the likes of Pharrell himself, along with Gwen Stefani, Kendrick Lamar, and Busta Rhymes, having more than enough personality to match the animated setting (Though some like Jay-Z and surprisingly Justin Timberlake sound really off). It's also no shock that the biggest scene-stealer ends up being Snoop Dogg, who aside from the hilarious image of a literal LEGO Snoop Dogg showing up on a big theatrical screen, is always just such a natural with this kind of thing. It's also pretty funny how the filmmakers found a way to get some slight pot use in a PG rated LEGO film. 

"Piece by Piece" is a clever, pretty delightfully simple movie that you're willing to forgive its lack of depth into its subject (Which shouldn't be shocking anyway, especially since this was all something Pharrell Williams signed off on). However, the film does take time to address some more serious issues in its last section, and it seems to be the film's more innocent facade breaking just slightly (It's genuinely quite jarring, yet oddly surreal to see the Black Lives Matter protests after the death of George Floyd portrayed in a LEGO form. It's as if things became real for a moment, tearing down its toy based world and hitting it with a heavy dose of reality. The film finds some elevation in these moments and I appreciated that. It's a more family friendly, but pretty inspired biopic that uses its endearing peculiarity to its advantage, and in a way, saying more about who its subject might be than some of us might have expected. Also, it's just good to have LEGO movies again. Something just so whimsical about this look and I feel we let it fade too fast. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated PG For Some Slight Adult Content, Slight Language, Snoop Smoking, And That Impossible To Remove Ear Worm That We All Know As "Happy". Just Try To Get That Thing Out Of Your Head. I Dare Ya!   

A Different Man                  by James Eagan                 ★★★★ out of ★★★★★   

MV5BNGQ5NTE3NTktZTUyNC00YThiLTk5YzItYmZjODI0MDQwNzIzXkEyXkFqcGdeQXZ3ZXNsZXk_._V1_.jpg

Image: When she hits you with that "Mission Report: December 16, 1991".

Believe me when I say that out of all the movies I've seen this year, this might be the strangest, most surreal one of them all. So yeah, obviously you know I dug the Hell out of it!

"A Different Man" follows a sad, reclusive, mostly failing actor, "Edward" (Sebastian Stan), who suffers from an extreme case Neurofibromatosis, with his deformed face causing him to live in isolation. Despite striking up a friendship with his lovely playwright neighbor, "Ingrid" (Renate Reinsve), Edward seeks surgery to "normalize" himself. Suddenly though (Due possibly to new medication, the movie doesn't completely elaborate), clumps of Edward's face start to come off, resulting in him appearing as a brand new man (A very Sebastian Stan looking man!). Edward, who decides to change his name to "Guy", completely abandons his old life, claiming Edward committed suicide, and proceeds to make a new, seemingly better life for himself as one of the beautiful people. Some time later, Edward, er, I mean, Guy, finds out that Ingrid has successfully begun production of an off-Broadway play, titled "Edward" (Inspired by the old life he left behind). Guy becomes obsessed with it, eventually landing a role as the lead, and even gaining the affections of Ingrid, who has no idea who he really is. However, when a man named "Oswald" (Adam Pearson), who also has Neurofibromatosis (And unlike Edward/Guy, has embraced it, living a rich, fulfilling life), randomly shows up and slowly starts to take the life that Edward/Guy has made for himself, simply by being just likable beyond reason. This leads to Edward/Guy to lose control of his mental state.

Written and directed by Aaron Schimberg ("Chained for Life"), "A Different Man" is the perfect title for a very different kind of film. It's a dark comedy, that borders on psychologically terrifying and with hints of a slight screwball element. It's a little like "The Substance", though even more subtle in the ways that it feels like I'm watching the real world and yet, something is just off. Sometimes it's the characters, or the dialogue, or just plain how the story unfolds. It's quietly feverish, but still plenty engrossing, funny, and poignant in so many ways. Schimberg is respectful of the subject matter, never playing things for repulsion or for jokes, even with some light body horror elements (Such as the sequence where Edward's disfigured face literally comes off like a melting Play-Doh). However, the film doesn't exactly play it up for false sympathy or tragedy. In fact, Schimberg genuinely asks some tough questions about how people with conditions can be perceived, along with how demeaning even good intentions can be. Not to mention, regardless of how you look, if you don't love yourself as you are, you're likely going to end up being more miserable. 

Sebastian Stan suitably has to act a lot with his face, even during the film's first act when he's under heavy, caked on prosthetics. He has such a complicated role to perform, shifting around between this sympathetic soul who believes he has nothing, to a more confident if not shallow facade, with the fidgety, envious person he's always been still there, lurking behind this new handsome face. There's also a hint of something more spiteful and demanding too, which Sebastian Stan expertly conveys, sometimes with just the simplest, though hardest of glares. The also fantastic Renate Reinsve at first seems fairly normal, but even she kind of plays into the film's quirky tone, in a world full of characters that seem to inhabit their eccentricities. The real star of the show (And one of this year's biggest MVPs if you ask me) is Adam Pearson. An actor, who in real life has Neurofibromatosis, Pearson is an instant delight, full of so much infectious charm, humor, and confidence that you just can't help but fall in love with. He's the definition of someone just being such a nice guy that you almost question if he's even really there at all. He also just plain has some pitch perfect line delivery that makes him an absolute joy to watch, and not just comedically, especially during a musical moment where he just randomly sings "I Wanna Get Next To You" (by Rose Royce). For someone who is not meant to abide by society's heinous, bland standards of normalcy, Oswald is ironically the most human character of all.

"A Different Man" is all kinds of peculiar and at times, you are left wondering where this story is going because of how often that weirdness takes us on a brisk detour (And I'm not just talking about that random, though very welcome cameo from a certain well known actor during the last quarter). It's like you're going on a journey through what you believe to be reality, only to catch yourself consistently questioning everything you see and hear. It's funny as Hell, bonkers, at times incomprehensible, and nonetheless valiant in what it's trying to say. Different in all the right ways. 4 Stars. Rated R For Some Unsettling Content, Slightly Off Sexual Content, And Dangerous Levels Of Lovability That Oswald Exudes From His Very Being. 

Joker: Folie à Deux             by James Eagan                 ★★½ out of ★★★★★     

4b11c57decea61a30c2b317c312b4c89.png

Image: I can fix her. I mean, logically she needs no fixing. So I guess, she can, er, unfix me? 

Are we about to have a new massive divide? Another purely, likely intentionally, polarizing film that will infuriate many on the internet, only to be rescued years later by contrarians who are just waiting in the wings with their latest hot takes about how this movie was far bolder and ahead of the curve than people first gave it credit for? I'll admit, this is definitely one of those films that I can see getting reevaluated in the future because it leaves its audience with so much to talk about. And for good reason. With that said, current October 2024 James Eagan admits that while he appreciates what it appears to be going for, he still just didn't like it. 

Following the events of the first film, "Joker: Folie à Deux" with former loner, turned clown based killer, "Arthur Fleck" (Joaquin Phoenix), aka "Joker", imprisoned in "Arkham State Hospital", awaiting trial for the murders he caused and the riots all around "Gotham City" that he inspired. Arthur's lawyer, "Maryanne Stewart" (Catherine Keener) wants to make the argument that Arthur suffers from a split personality disorder (With "Joker" just being a psychopathic persona he developed through childhood abuse), while the District Attorney, "Harvey Dent" (Harry Lawtey), wants to dismiss any claims of insanity and have Arthur receive the death penalty. While in Arkham, Arthur forms a connection with another patient, "Lee Quinzel" (Lady Gaga), who is utterly obsessed with Arthur's Joker identity, and Arthur, who has nobody in his life at this point, starts to believe that he's finally found someone who truly understands him. With the weight of his newfound stardom hanging dangerously above him (With hundreds of fanatics believing him to be their anarchic savior), Arthur's trial commences, which will determine the fate of the possible future clown prince of crime. 

Directed by the returning Todd Phillips (The "Hangover" films, "War Dogs"), who co-wrote the screenplay with the also returning Scott Silver ("The Fighter", "8 Mile"), "Joker: Folie à Deux" has an unbelievably difficult task that it's set up for itself. Being a sequel to a controversial, Oscar Winning, critically polarizing, and very unique take on the fan favorite villain from the "Batman" comics, which also only militarized an already unstable fanbase (Made up of mentally questionable loners, fanatics, and, well, incels), calling into question if this would actually do society more harm than good. Not to mention, while I completely agree that its very existence and execution clearly amassed the worst kind of audience, I also saw it to be an excellent, unique and unsettling reinvention of the comic character, only getting more and more captivating the more you see it, while also just making you think differently about certain aspects every time. Quite frustratingly though, the film can't fully answer the most important question on everyone's mind. "Was this necessary?"

The film seems to be stuck somewhat in the past, often returning to the original in some capacity, mostly through the age old way of the sequel, callbacks (And yes, there are a lot of them). The story can't seem to help but sporadically reference events of the original, or at the very least, attempt to replicate it in some way, though this time with less effective results. Phillips' capable, gritty direction style is still on full display, creating such a memorable, grimy look to Gotham than what we've ever seen before. However, we get much less of the city itself this time (Which was practically its very own character in the first film with how much personality it had), with the exception of this more grounded, sewer-esque prison-like iteration of Arkham Asylum. That kind of strips away some of the first film's identity. The same goes for the score from Hildur Guðnadóttir, who deservedly won an Oscar for the original movie's soundtrack. It's still haunting as ever, yet is drowned out by the film's choice to become a sort-of musical. I get the idea behind the concept. Aside from the obvious wanting to cater to Lady Gaga's talents, the musical sequences are meant to serve as a juxtaposition to the dark, though mundane trial film we're watching, and sure, some of them are lovely to look at. The production design alone is worthy of praise, particularly when it comes to the costumes and the colorful set pieces. The film sadly never makes it feel like more than just a gimmick, padding out the runtime, with song choices that don't particularly stand out. It's just a glorified jukebox musical, except it doesn't fully commit to the premise. Most of the film is the trial itself, which is compelling in places, but also drags on for the film's over two hour runtime and, well, doesn't always add up. The whole thing is based around if Arthur is of sound mind to face the death penalty, and while I can't say to be a total expert on how the law works, it becomes increasingly obvious that he is not remotely a mentally well person in the slightest. I guess it's just one of those things you just have to go with. However, considering this is supposed to be a much more grounded, realer approach to more extravagant source material (Which is known to play it loose with certain logistics), it's a bit contradictory.  

Joaquin Phoenix is still damn good in the role, conveying a sort of humanity to a character we know, drifting between at times sympathetic, frightening, and even just kind of pathetic. There is a good twist to the usual Joker/Harley Quinn dynamic where it feels more like she's the one manipulating him, instead of the other way around. It is a disappointment to admit that Lady Gaga doesn't get near enough as much screentime as you'd expect (Think of it as 65% a Joker movie and another 35% a Harley Quinn one). That said, she's f*cking amazing in this in spite of that. From her mesmerizing presence to her Earth shattering singing voice, Lady Gaga continues to prove her immaculate talent and range, playing this part in a way that you too feel yourself oddly entranced by her, even when you know damn well you shouldn't be. They are good together, particularly during some of the fantasy sequences, even though one does think all of this should have been much better than simply good. There are some really solid supporting parts, like for a terrific Brendan Gleeson (as "Jackie Sullivan", a seemingly affable, then abusive guard at Arkham), Catherine Keener (Who plays Arthur's lawyer as probably a little misguided, yet well intentioned, with only his well being in mind), a perfectly smug Harry Lawtey (Who makes the most of such a thankless part really, which is disappointing considering he's playing such a known character), and a brief appearance from Steve Coogan (as "Paddy Meyers", a television personality who interviews Arthur, in a suitably antagonistic fashion), doing such a flawless American accent that it absolutely terrified me every time he spoke. It's also good to see some returning faces, like Zazie Beetz (as "Sophie", Arthur's former neighbor, that he imagined having a relationship with in the first film) and Leigh Gill (as "Gary", Arthur's former co-worker, who he spared from his violent rampage in the first film), who probably gets the most emotional powerful scene in the entire movie out of nowhere. 

With a commanding performance from Lady Gaga (No shock there), "Joker: Folie à Deux" has some genuine brilliance in places and fascinating themes, but is bogged down by its very conception, padding itself out to justify its very being and comes across as sloppy in execution (Not to mention quite a few shots from the trailers that are nowhere to be found in the actual film, like the very image I'm using for this review!). It does away with all the ambiguity that the original film had in favor of forcing a sequel that just doesn't need to be here. Or at least, not until the final fifteen minutes. This is where I feel that, despite the film's major flaws and my overall indifference to the film as a whole, Todd Phillips makes the film feel warranted. He basically decides to completely torch the franchise and run, taking the expectations of the fan base (The worst of them mostly) and completely shattering everything they likely gravitated towards in the first place. In a way, it's as if Todd Phillips is coming to terms with the legacy he's created, much like the film's titular character, and letting us know there's nothing to idolize. In a way, this whole story has been leading to this very revelation that maybe this "Joker" was nothing but a clown. I applaud just giving the middle finger out to your audience like this, especially when it not only plays into the themes of both films, it also just kind of forces you to look at things from a completely different perspective (And boy, I already know this is gonna piss so many people off). I may not like the film as a whole, but I can appreciate what it represents. That's life, I guess. 2 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Strong Dark Content, Disturbing Images, Joker's Southern Gentlemen Accent (Need To See It To Believe It), And That Really Smelly, Moist Guy Sitting Next To You In The Theater (Who Says That The First Film "Spoke To Him On A Personal Level"). Yeah, He Ain't Leaving In A Happy Mood After This.

Megalopolis                                    by James Eagan                  ★½ out of ★★★★★

megalopolis-463c0f991c084c1db4d308d9ca2fdc4b.jpg

Image: Francis Ford Coppola after he's sees this movie's box office.

I was actually kind of excited about this movie when it was first announced. The director of "The Godfather" and "Apocalypse Now" making his magnum Opus, a grand science-fiction epic, set in the real world, but not, with an all star cast and crazy visuals? Hell yeah! Or at least, that's how I felt until literally every aspect of this movie became so goddamn annoying. The wildly publicized production troubles aside, we got Film Twitter a-holes already bending themselves into a pretzel to adamantly endorse this film as the next great masterpiece (Long before any of us saw a single frame of it), and only went harder when early reviews came back as less than stellar. Then we had the whole "If you don't like it or understand it, you either just don't get it or refuse to vibe with Coppola's genius. This was followed up with Coppola being a total creep to women, saying continuously baffling and moronic things that he feels he should get away with because he too thinks himself a genius, and an onslaught of articles detailing all the perplexing decisions that went into the film, right down to a moment where someone from the audience gets up to talk to the screen, only for it to respond back (All pre-recorded mind you, and wasn't available where I saw it). So I'm actually getting to this movie fairly late, due to being sick, and after all the talk of how insane this movie is, maybe my expectations ended up being a little too high. Sure, there are some occasional moments that you'll likely see being memed through Twitter and YouTube. Sadly though, especially when you see so much weird sh*t in movies as it is, this was shockingly dull. 

Advertised as a "Fable", "Megalopolis" is set in a sort of "American Republic" (Designed to resemble our reality, though everyone looks like they stepped out of a theater show about the Roman Empire) in the on the nose city of "New Rome", where controversial architect, "Cesar Catilina" (Adam Driver) is at odds with the unpopular mayor, "Franklyn Cicero" (Giancarlo Esposito). Cesar has created some kind of magical new building material called "Megalon", which he intends to use to create a futuristic utopia known as "Megalopolis", due to the belief that all empires must fall, with New Rome likely being next. Cesar can also stop and restart time too, by the way. Don't ask how. He just can do it. Cesar strikes a connection and eventual romance with Cicero's daughter, "Julia" (Nathalie Emmanuel), while facing some other antagonistic forces, such as his maniacal cousin, "Clodio Pulcher" (Shia LaBeouf) ,and ex-girlfriend, the TV reporter "Wow Platinum" (Aubrey Plaza), along with Cicero's rampant smear campaign. 

Written and directed by Francis Ford Coppola ("The Godfather", "Apocalypse Now", "Bram Stoker's Dracula", and who could forget, "Jack"?), Megalopolis" has been plagued by bad press, bad marketing, and just plain bad vibes all around. It's gone from people saying "Pfft! I'm sure it's gonna be a five out of five regardless" to "That's the greatest disaster I've ever seen in my life". What in reality makes it more frustrating is that the film itself is neither of those, but rather just glossy trash. It gives off the appearance of something shiny like a diamond, when it's actually just a big ol' pile of crap that somebody happened to place a pretty little bow tie on. There are some disastrous elements here and there, with filmmaking, storytelling, basically writing and even editing decisions that don't make any lick of sense, yet once you get past the silliness, it's a rather uninspired, even dare I say, soulless slog that runs for over two hours. Coppola's vision seems to be based in its own reality, which bends the rules at whim, and in theory, that could work if there was actually anything remotely interesting about any of it.

The film's time freezing aspect contributes little to nothing (Almost as if it could have been cut out entirely), and despite some admittedly lovely use of some fairly hallucinogenic imagery, the film's reliance on heavy green screen and overly smooth and shiny CGI, giving the film an unfinished look. The film goes back and forth between looking like a moving portrait to looking like one of those unfinished film reels that you can only find on YouTube in the lowest of quality. There film also seems to think itself a Shakespearean epic, with long, overwritten dialogue meant to over explain and over analyze the obvious, yet is also very low brow and crude in its sense of humor, struggling to find any sort of balance. I suppose it's trying to have a satirical edge, though it's not near insightful enough to make it work. The themes and messages of the film aren't without merit. However, they're nothing new and suffer from the film's overabundance of, well, overabundance. From the very idea of the United States at some point following the fate of the Roman Empire, along with political corruption, media fabrication, out of touch elites, and of course, Trump/Nazi/Fascist allegories (Right down to a sign that literally says "Make Rome Great Again!"), it's not remotely clever and seems to have the oblivious idea that it is. 

The film's remarkable ensemble seems eager, but most of them don't remotely seem to be on the same page in terms of what kind of movie they're actually in. It's a credit to Adam Driver that regardless of what he's in, whatever over the top costumes he's subjected to wear, and whatever kind of silly accent he's doing, you can rely on him to commit to a role no matter what. Nathalie Emmanuel is also nevertheless charming and beautiful, feeling like one of the only normal characters in the entire film, along with the likes of Giancarlo Esposito, Laurence Fisburne (as "Fundi Romaine", Cesar's driver/the film's also apparent narrator), an underused Kathryn Hunter (as Cicero's wife), and Talia Shire (as Cesar's mother), who are more or less trying. We also get an enjoyable over the top (And very hot!) Aubrey Plaza, who looks like she's having a lot of fun. Meanwhile though, we get some god awful work from Shia LaBeouf (Who is both too incoherent to be hammy and too ridiculous to be taken remotely seriously as our villain) and a thankless part for Dustin Hoffman (as "Nush Berman", Cicero's fixer), who at some point just gets his story cut short to the point it seemed like an afterthought. There's also everything to do with Jon Voight (as "Hamilton Crassus III", Cesar's rich uncle/Wow's sugar daddy), in a role that straight up feels like elder abuse, being an eighty year old man, who looks like a ninety year old man, and mumbles around like a hundred and ninety year old man (He'd be unintentionally hilarious to watch, if it didn't look so wrong at the same time. And you know, if I could have understood a word he was saying!). 

Overindulgent, overproduced, and overlong,"Megalopolis" is a goofy live-action cartoon that features dialogue you swear was made up on the fly in a drunken stupor, with plot elements that never mix, characters that are neither captivated or eccentric enough to become memorable, wildly inconsistent visuals, and worst of all, just being forgettable. It's got some disastrously made scenes that will find a home as recycled clips for comedic purposes, while the overall final product as a whole doesn't work enough to warrant watching it all the way through. You get Adam Driver saying "In daaaaa club", Jon Voight talking about his boner, Aubrey Plaza being both anal and oral, and the sight of Shia LaBeouf's pubes, and yet, considering some of the weirder/much better quality films we've gotten (Go see "The Substance" or "The People's Joker"!), this feels really small for what was meant to be Francis Ford Coppola's final masterpiece. A master piece of sh*t maybe, though not even really that. For something that wants to be bold, original, and change the way we look at the cinematic world, this is ironically lacking an artistic heart of its own. All empires must fall. Coppola's first. 1 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Strong Language, Sexual Content, Debauchery, Decadence, And The Fact That I Will Never Be Able To Scrub My Eyes Enough To Rid Myself Of The Image OF Shia LaBeouf's Pubes. Trust Me. I'm Trying!​​

The Wild Robot               by James Eagan              ★★★★★ out of ★★★★★     

The-Wild-Robot-Trailer.webp

Image: Be honest. You just went "Awwwwwwww!".

To be honest, I kind of thought Pixar had that Academy Award for Best Animated Feature in the bag. However, as it turns out, getting big emotions out of large, metallic beings, instead of people, seem to be all the rage with animation right now.

Based on the book series by Peter Brown, "The Wild Robot" is set in a possibly apocalyptic world (It's never explicitly stated, but it's clear that something has happened to the world we know), where a cargo ship carrying some utilitarian robots crashes into an island, completely devoid of humanity. The only surviving robot, "ROZZUM Unit 7134" (Lupita Nyong'o), tries to do what she's literally only programmed to do, which is to complete a task. After disturbing much of the wildlife and crashing into a goose nest, killing the mother and destroying all of her eggs but one. ROSSUM Unite 7134, or "Roz", as she's called, is given a new task to complete with the newly hatched gosling, "Brightbill" (Played by Boone Storme as a baby, then by Kit Connor), imprints on her. After befriending a local shifty fox, "Fink" (Pedro Pascal), Roz and Brightbill make for a rather unconventional family, being shunned by most of the other animals on the island. Due to Brightbill not fitting in and already being a runt from birth, Roz's mission to help him grow and eventually migrate before the coming winter proves to be a difficult task. As the big day draws closer and closer, with Brightbill slowly maturing, Roz starts to struggle with her newfound sense of motherhood and the fact that she might be becoming more than she was programmed to be. 

Written and directed by a master of animated storytelling Chris Sanders ("Lilo & Stitch", "How to Train Your Dragon"), "The Wild Robot" lets you know right off the bat that despite themes and story beats that could seem familiar on paper, there is something much more to this than the cover would suggest. Serving as a big milestone for DreamWorks Animation (Being the final film to be completely animated in-house at DreamWorks), it once again proves that the beauty of animation can tell any story, regardless of how many times you may have heard it before, with the right amount of heart, humor, and nuance, then make it an instant classic that all ages, from kids to adults, will want to revisit again and again. It's just one of those rare films that just finds a way to fire on all cylinders, with the filmmakers clearly putting so much affection into every single possible aspect to create something truly unforgettable. Much of this is because of how the story itself is told. With an animation style (Similar to DreamWorks' most recent classic, "Puss in Boots: The Last Wish"), gives off the whole "Painted Storybook Illustrations" come to life motif. This means that you could almost pause any single frame of the film and find a work of art, where the stylized look makes for something not so much overly realistic looking, but rather visually expressive and magically wondrous. This is saying something considering our main character literally just has a pair of eyes, rather than an actual face.

Despite the sentimental storytelling, the film is by no means overly cutesy or immature. Sure, some of the animals are infectiously adorable, but there is always this underlying sense of harsh reality that's always lurking in the background. Shockingly, sometimes these darker elements are even played for laughs, with many of the characters just being so used to the whole "Circle of Life" structure that death can randomly happen without warning, while everyone else just has to shrug it off and move on. This sense of harshness perfectly balances with the cuter aspects of the story, and even makes the characters themselves more complicated than the archetype the film at first suggests they are. Sanders' eye for incredible visuals and allowing the imagery to tell its story, without the need for an overt explanation for what's going on. It's impressive for a family film, that has every intention of bringing in the littlest of kids, to leave much for the audience to figure out and interpret on their own. It's still not to say that the film isn't still dialogue heavy, with much of the character interactions being brought to life by their distinctive voices, as well as the smart screenplay accompanying them. Yeah, there is some well timed slapstick here and there, yet some of the biggest laughs genuinely come from the script itself. Again, relying on mostly just intelligent writing in what just seems like an adorable, colorful cartoon from a distance? And one made for a mainstream audience too? This is definitely one of DreamWorks' boldest films yet.

The lead vocal performance of Lupita Nyong'o is truly something to witness with your own eyes and ears. She brings a sort of warm naivety to a character that's literally designed to be cold, without emotions. Her performance feels very natural, where the film does seem to blur the lines between what's just simple programming versus genuine feeling. The ultimate conflict between science and nature really. This is also elevated by her chemistry with the rest of the wonderful ensemble cast of memorable characters, with an excellent Kit Connor (Who never once drifts into the moody teenager role, even when the character logically had the right to do so) and a perfectly cast Pedro Pascal (Who I'm starting to think can just instantly become one with any role he's given). We also got a perfectly motherly Catherine O'Hara (as "Pinktail", a mother opossum, stuck carrying around several babies, who are always eager to play dead), a regal Bill Nighy (as "Longneck", a wise old goose, who sees the potential in Brightbill, even when the other geese don't), a suitably grizzled Mark Hamill (as "Thorn", a grizzly bear, who is feared by everyone on the island), a profoundly pompous and hilarious Matt Berry (as "Paddler", an overly refined beaver), a flawlessly cast Ving Rhames (as "Thunderbolt", a deep voiced falcon, who provides Brightbill with some flight training), and an adorably creepy Stephanie Hsu (as "Vontra", the seemingly cheerful, yet menacing villainous robot, tasked with bringing Roz back by any means necessary). 

Funny, but never silly. Heartfelt, but never cloying. Old fashioned, but never derivative. Complex, yet never hard to follow. "The Wild Robot" is a remarkable achievement in animated storytelling, that's bound to become one you and the rest of your family will be watching continuously on repeat for years to come (And also features one of the best title drops I've seen in quite a while). It's all thanks to so many beautiful aspects working together in pure harmony, from Sander's thoughtful script and stunning direction, the eye popping visuals and animation, the terrific voice cast and characters, the epic score from Kris Bowers, and certain, always relevant themes that we're always going to need reminding of. Right before I went into this movie, I just so happened to finish watching Dinesh D'Souza's "Vindicating Trump" (A movie I refuse to do a full review because it's both not a movie and is too diabolical in conception, that I can't in good conscience give it the time of day), which only promoted fearing what's different, never questioning what's in front of you, and only seeks to separate people more than they already are. This movie though, is the perfect antithesis to that. It's about embracing what makes you different, aspiring to be more and daring to go against what we're expected to be, and most poignant of all, coming together, regardless of who or what you are (Or whether you're a bear, goose, fox, or robot), to survive. One moment you'll be charmed senseless by the endearing tale of a robot mother and her goose son, then you'll be laughing out loud, and then, you'll find your heartstrings tugged to the point of tears you swore you weren't going to shed. It will get to ya, and just maybe, it might give you some hope for the future. How would I rate this performance on a scale of 1 to 10? How about a 20? 5 Stars. Rated PG For Mature Content, Harsh Reality, And Male Bovine Excrement. 

The Substance                  by James Eagan               ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★     

Image: So what do you guys think? Will the Academy even acknowledge a movie like this enough to even consider giving Demi Moore a nomination? Maybe?

So that was a nice couple hours of "What in the absolute f*ck?" filmmaking. That is a glowing recommendation by the way. Slap that one on one of those TV spot blurbs! 

"The Substance" follows a once beloved celebrity "Elisabeth Sparkle" (Demi Moore), star of an equally once popular aerobics television show, who finds out that her sleazy producer, "Harvey" (Dennis Quaid), wants to fire her and then replace her with somebody "Younger and hotter". With all of this happening on her fiftieth birthday, Elisabeth also gets into a car wreck on her way home, though receives the contact information for something called "The Substance" (Revealed to be a type of procedural serum that will allow the user to experience a newer, better version of themselves). Elisabeth decides to give the serum a try, despite the incredible amount of details and instructions that come with it (Such as the user and newer model having to switch back on a weekly basis, along with the very serious reminder that they must always be "One"). Immediately after injecting herself with the serum, Elisabeth collapses on the ground, then painfully births her new body from her own back (Think peeling off an orange, except gorier). This lovely, younger body, dubbed "Sue" (Margaret Qualley) can now roam free, while the old Elisabeth remains unconscious on the floor until its time for them to switch back (Via exchanging of certain vital fuilds and whatnot). Sue takes this chance to replace her old self, instantly winning over everyone around her with her jaw dropping hotness, and becomes an instant star with her own show. Of course, mistakes are made and it soon becomes hard to tell if Sue is really gaining a mind of her own, or if Elisabeth's own insecurities are preventing her from remaining "One" as the product demands. When the instructions aren't followed 100% to the very last detail, the side effects prove to be disastrous and absolutely revolting beyond reason. 

Written and directed by Coralie Fargeat ("Revenge"), "The Substance" is a wacked out nightmare of sorts, that gives off the feeling that it's set in some kind of reality that we can relate to, yet something is always just a little, well, off. Fargeat does a fantastic job crafting a world that feels like something Wes Anderson might have come up with if you injected him with the strongest of hard edge drugs. So many shots are shown from a wide lens, like the characters are walking around a colorful dollhouse of sorts, while also consistently giving off this feeling that you're being judged by everyone around you due to how much focus we get on peoples' faces. In all seriousness, is this what it's like to be a woman? Because it's genuinely terrifying at times. It's clearly very David Lynch-like when it comes to the surrealist reality of the production design and the way Fargeat uses that kind of quiet uneasiness to keep you constantly on edge. And all this is before the true horror actually starts. This features the definition of grotesquely absurd body horror, which is all brought to disgusting life through some award worthy practical effects and makeup that's bound to make even Cronenberg blush. It's not just purely exploitative though (Okay, maybe just a little bit, but I feel that the film is essentially trolling us with it). This makes for a brutally scathing and incredibly harsh satire of stardom, the impossible and unrealistic beauty standards that come with it (Particularly for women), and the overall sense of sleaze that despite the current acknowledgement of it in our modern times, has only continued to fester to the point where I'm starting to think it'll never get completely better. However vile and gross it might be though, it's still very funny in the most twisted of ways, clearing savoring in its repulsiveness with the glee of a mustache twirling, cartoonish villain.

Demi Moore gives possibly this year's most fearless performance that's equal parts raw, honest, hilarious, and heartbreaking, even within the same scene. She's very unapologetic in this role, tragically conveying the natural human tendency to struggle with the aging process, such as losing one's passion for living, perceived nostalgia doing a number on one's mental health, and the ability to, in spite of Moore's still absolutely impeccable beauty, only see the slightest imperfections (Whether they're real or not). A perfectly cast, and er, "digitally enhanced" Margaret Qualley is absolutely mesmerizing, encompassing that sort of seemingly innocent looking, sexual fantasy that seems completely unreal (Which humorously, it turns out she very much is). It's especially great to see Qualley just go more wild as the film progresses, when the glossy facade starts to crack (Plus her expressively cute face is just one of those things needs to be framed in a museum). The two of them rarely share a moment together, and yet, you feel the tension between them, with both trying to screw with each other's lives whenever they're in control, even though they're literally the same person. It really is a brilliant metaphor for having a love-hate (And eventually, despite) relationship between the real you and the you that you pretend to be. A likely coked out of his mind Dennis Quaid is hysterical in every scene he's in, with his scenes appearing shot through a baffling fish eye lens, meaning he's literally shoving himself into your face every chance he gets. There are a handful of fun supporting performances from the likes of an amusing Gore Abrams (as "Oliver", Elisabeth's obnoxious dick of a neighbor, who quickly changes his attitude when he meets Sue) and Edward Hamilton-Clark (as "Fred", a guy who knew Elisabeth in high school, who in spite of his dweebishness, genuinely still seems to think she's the most beautiful woman he's ever seen).

"The Substance" is wickedly funny, and just plain wicked. It's absurdity reaches levels unheard of once we reach the film's go for broke last half hour. It's amazing that even though the film is about two hours and twenty minutes long, you never feel it, mostly because you're too much in awe of the madness enveloping the screen. Disturbingly smart, poignant, and messed up from head to toe, it's a sadistic piece of work that will have you captivated, grossed out, and laughing from start to finish. Probably one of the best films of the year thus far. There's a lot of bewildering style here, and beneath all the squelching flesh, a whole lotta substance too. 4 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Strong Sexualized Content, Nudity, Fanservice, Fandisservice, Unhinged Bodily Horror, And The Ultimate Geyser Of Gore. If The Birthing Scene From "The First Omen" Made You Quesy, You Ain't Gonna Make It Through This One!

Transformers One                   by James Eagan             ★★★★½ out of ★★★★★   

Image: “And we’ll always be friends forever. Won’t we?” “Yeah, forever.”

I’ve been holding this one inside me for weeks now. Me, a longtime “Transformers” fan, getting to see the newest movie early (For free, too!), with other fellow geeks and nerds, but sadly, not being really allowed to talk about it until now. Sure, I may not be exactly one of those “Big Time” film critics, but I didn’t wanna risk getting shut down. It’s not worth it. Especially since the movie is basically everything we’ve been dreaming of for the past seventeen years. The live-action Michael Bay films may deserve at least some credit for resurrecting the franchise after some temporary dormancy in the late 2000s and also thrust the franchise into the mainstream (For better or for worse in the eyes of many), but none of those films have been what we were imagining a true “Transformers” movie to be. Think of this as the light in our darkest hour. 

Based on Hasbro’s beloved toyline/animated series/multimedia franchise (And the first theatrically released fully animated film since the 1986 film), “Transformers One” opens on the metallic planet of “Cybertron” (Home of the “Transformers”, robotic beings who can shift from robot to vehicular modes). The story takes place before the war began between the “Autobots”, led by the heroic “Optimus Prime”, only now known as “Orion Pax” (Chris Hemsworth) and “Decepticons”, led by the villainous “Megatron”, only now known as “D-16” (Brian Tyree Henry). Unable to transformer along with most of the underground population of “Iacon” (Due to not having “Cogs”), Orion Pax and D-16 are actually best friends, who work as miners, while their widely respected leader, “Sentinel Prime” (John Hamm), fights off invading forces known as the “Quintessons” on the surface of the planet (Where nobody is allowed to go because of how supposedly dangerous it is). Orion, though, believes that there is more to them than meets the eye, wanting to decipher the secrets of the lost Primes and what became of the mystical “Matrix of Leadership”, in hopes of ending the conflict, ending their energy drought, and restoring Cybertron to its former beauty. In an attempt to prove themselves, Orion and D-16 cause a fiasco at a race in Iacon, resulting in the two of them being tossed down into the depths of Cybertron with waste management, where they meet the very talkative and quite eccentric “B-127” (Keagan-Michael Key), who is nicknamed “Bee” (He personally would prefer to be referred to as “Badassatron”). 

They discover an old distress signal, from one of the long lost Primes, “Alpha Trion” (Laurence Fishburne), along with his last known location, giving Orion the idea that possibly the Matrix of Leadership may actually be there as well. Orion, D-16, and B-127, after accidentally roping in the recently demoted (And still rather pissed off about it), “Elita” (Scarlett Johansson), head to the surface of Cybertron to search for the signal’s origin. However, once they find it (And the still living Alpha Trion), they also discover that Sentinel may not have been the great hero they’ve been led to believe and that much of their lives have been fabricated from birth. Alpha Trion gifts our heroes new Cogs so they can finally transform, along with many other unique abilities, with them taking on the task of liberating their world from a controlling regime that they had no idea even existed. Along the way though, Orion and D-16 both embark on their own paths, resulting in their transformation from the closest of allies to the most bitter of enemies. 

Directed by Josh Cooley (“Toy Story 4”), with a screenplay by Eric Pearson (“Thor: Ragnarok”, “Black Widow”, “Godzilla vs. Kong”), along with Andrew Barrer and Gabriel Ferrari (“Ant-Man and the Wasp”), “Transformers One” right off the bat feels completely detached from the Michael Bay films (Along with the other live-action entries like “Bumblebee” and “Rise of the Beasts”). Aside from being completely animated, via “Industrial Light & Magic” (“Rango”, “Ultraman Rising”), it’s also the only entry to entirely focus on the titular characters that everyone wants to see in the first place. The actual Transformers themselves. What we get is something pretty special that is sure to please any of the fans, both young and old, while also just plain being so much better than it really has any right to be. And I also need to stress the fact that this isn't a prequel to the live-action films in any way. It's 00% a reboot, meaning it can stand completely on its own, which means more room for the filmmakers to make their own rules. The animation itself deserves some of the most praise, giving us a much different look at Cybertron than what we’ve seen before in any previous incarnation (With most of them focusing on the war itself or its aftermath, meaning the planet ends up looking like a barren, metallic wasteland). This Cybertron is lively and colorful, with hints of growing fauna, other strange creatures (Like robotic deer), and plenty of visual wonder that just pops off the screen, even when you’re not seeing it in 3D (Although I can only imagine it’s pretty jaw dropping). 

The world itself has so much personality, with loads of background appearances from characters familiar to the fanbase, along with even more references that only the biggest of nerds will understand. They’re Easter Eggs that never feel in your face or cloying, with any of the non-fans (Or the uninitiated, if you will) being able to watch without feeling the need to do homework. One of the major aspects that works about the movie is that, regardless of how much knowledge you have of the franchise (Maybe you just grew up with one of the cartoons, played with the toys, or have only seen the movies), the film establishes its own worldbuilding that takes much inspiration from the likes of the comics, shows, and popular lore of the series, yet explains it in a way that’s pretty easy for anyone to understand. In fact, despite the fairly traditional “Rise of a hero/villain” character arcs, there is some depth to the world and its characters. 

The characters are all quite likable and have lots of chemistry together, making up for some easy to decipher plotting. Chris Hemsworth, doing a remarkable American accent, perfectly embodies his character’s early naivety, along with his sense of right and wrong, while sounding like a young Peter Cullen (Optimus’ original voice actor). Brian Tyree Henry is especially excellent, giving his character a lot of heart and charm, which only makes his inevitable fall into darkness all the more painful to watch. Megatron becomes a sort of Magneto-type character, where you could make the argument that he’s objectively right, though takes his actions so far that he becomes the very thing he despises. Considering how the Michael Bay films never seemed to know what the Hell they wanted to do with the character (With Megatron’s motivations changing on a whim in every single one of those movies), it’s safe to say that this might be one of the best incarnations of him. For a family film, it’s a pretty bold move to make the future big bad into such an endearing character before his turn, showing the younger audience members that sometimes the most nefarious of villains can come from the most well-intentioned of places.

Scarlett Johansson is another appealing character, who is given much more to do dramatically, and even comedically, while wisely avoiding the pitfalls of the “The One Main Female Character” trope (And I personally could just listen to her really attractive voice for hours. I know I’m not the only one!). Keegan-Michael Key is hilarious and absolutely lovable, bringing an energetic voice to the usually silent “Bumblebee” that we’ve seen in the movies, and is sure to either be somewhat grating or your absolute favorite character (Bumblebee tends to do that these days). Laurence Fishburne’s epic voice brings so much gravitas to a small, though vital part, while Jon Hamm steals the show with his Homelander-esque performance that’s equal parts thoroughly pompous and loathsome, yet in the best way possible. We get a relatively brief appearance from an incredibly perfectly cast Steve Buscemi (as “Starscream”, the leader of a rogue group of High Guard members/Megatron’s future punching bag), along with the likes of Vanessa Ligouri (as “Airachnid”, Sentinel’s  scary, spider-like second in command), Honest Trailers’ Jon Bailey (as “Soundwave”, another High Guard member, who will eventually side with Megatron), Jason Konopisos-Alvarez (as “Shockwave”, a one-eyed High Guard member/future Decepticon), Isaac Singleton Jr. (as “Darkwing”, a cocky bully to Orion and D-16), and so many quick appearances from some faces that will only be familiar to the fans. I don’t think I can stretch enough how much of a wet dream this movie is for “Transformers” fans, especially considering all the crap we’ve had to suffer through cinematically.  

I’ve had about a month to let my thoughts on “Transformers One” marinate since I got to see it early last month, and I had to get the whole contact high of being surrounded by fellow dorks and obsessive fans like myself out of my system, so that I can look at the film from a critic's standards. So what we get is a visually stunning and shockingly emotional family film, that features some creative action set pieces, engaging characters, lots of humor, and more of a harsh edge than you might be used to seeing in these kinds of movies (Trust me, it may start off light, but takes a real dark and heavy turn in the second half). It will please the longtime fans for sure. Easily, it makes for the best "Transformers" movie we've ever gotten and feels like the one we should have gotten years ago. However, it has much to offer newcomers of all ages, from the kids to even their parents, who probably will go into this thinking it's just gonna be your average forgettable kids movie and nothing more only to be pleasantly surprised. Maybe with a more critical analysis I could find some issues (After all, I gotta save all my glowing praise for Francis Ford Coppola's new movie in a couple weeks, which film hipsters are saying that we all have to love before having even seen it). With all that said, this is my review, damn it! I needed this. In the words of the mighty Megatron himself, I would have waited an eternity for this. 4 1/2 Stars. Rated PG For Minor Language (Good To See PG Rated Movies Actually Utilizing That), Hardcore Robot On Robot Violence (Just Because There's No Blood, Doesn't Mean It Isn't Gruesome), Cog Fondling, And The Unmistakable Tragedy Of Steve!

The Killer's Game                           by James Eagan             ★★★ out of ★★★★★ 

Image: To get the perfect shot, one has to have mastered the ability of of standing so incredibly still that they become invisible to the eye.

There is a part of me that thinks the writer's strike last year may have affected this movie a bit. Not necessarily sure how I can confirm that, but there is this feeling of conflicting interests (Between tones, direction, performances, etc.) that just keeps the movie down. It's a shame because it's actually an enjoyable enough, even occasionally charming film, that just won't seem to fully add up. 

Based on the book by Jay Bonansinga, "The Killer's Game" follows professional hitman, "Joe Flood" (Dave Bautista), who has gained a profound reputation for himself in the game, along with all things considered, being an all around decent guy (Only killing criminals and bad people who have it coming). Joe is told by his fatherly handler, "Zvi" (Ben Kingsley), that maybe it's time he actually starts to get a life of his own instead of just taking them. Joe ends up meeting a beautiful ballet dancer, "Maize" (Sofia Boutella), and the two immediately fall in love. It's to the point that Joe decides to leave the game, only to discover some life-ending news after a doctor's checkup. Not wanting to leave Maize with nothing (While also hoping she never finds out about who he really is), Joe decides to put a hit out on himself and leave his life insurance money to Maize. Since Zvi wants nothing to do with this plan, Joe goes to an arch-rival, "Antoinette" (Pom Klementieff), who is more than eager to have Joe killed, due to Joe having previously killed her father years earlier. When the contract is set and everything is about to go down, Joe learns that his medical report was accidentally switched with someone else, meaning he's actually going to live. Sadly, Antoinette has no plans of canceling the contract, bringing in a whole lotta wacko killers, such as the very 70s "Lovedahl" (Terry Crews), to take out Joe, who now has to save himself, as well as Maize, after getting her caught in the crossfire. 

Directed by J. J. Perry ("Day Shift"), with a screenplay by Rand Ravich ("The Astronaut's Wife") and James Coyne ("Puncutre Wounds"), along with apparent extra material credited to several others (Again, not shocking), "The Killer's Game" fittingly has a killer premise and the makings of something really fun, even if the execution is just a little off. As an action movie, there are some creative set pieces, stunning locations, and a pitch black sense of humor, that gets a good laugh from time to time. However, the story lacks the intelligent world-building of the "John Wick" franchise or even the wit of something like "Bullet Train" or "Hotel Artemis", which you can tell this movie desperately wants to imitate. The film is shockingly violent in an over the top fashion, which could have had a bit more bite if it weren't for the gallons of terrible CGI blood that litters every action scene. I get that it's supposed to be like a cartoonish comic book, but while the film itself is stylish, the effects themselves are so copy and pasted. The film's strengths don't come from the action, like how you think it would. Instead, they come from a place much more genuine, and dare I say, cuter. 

Dave Bautista, who continues to prove that he really can play a variety of roles, is very likable here. Yeah, he's an assassin, but he's cool, sweet, and doesn't want to hurt anyone remotely innocent. Sofia Boutella, who I'm shocked to see not playing one of the badasses, is instantly adorable and charming. Bautista and Boutella have such wonderful chemistry together that you kind of wish that this was just some straight up romantic comedy, especially due to how well they play off each other. The legendary Ben Kingsley is also really great, giving a warm performance for movie with such a dark sense of humor. There is a sense of heart to the film that you don't expect to see. It's the plot itself that doesn't always gel. Pom Klementieff is clearly having some fun as our main baddie, while Terry Crews basically plays a character that you swear stepped out of an old Blaxploitation movie, yet the joke doesn't quite match the rest of the film. The rest of the villains vary, with many of them getting some nice introductions, yet don't do much of anything, like Marko Zaror (as "Botas", a dancing assassin, with a Spanish edge), along with Scott Adkins and Drew McIntyre (as a pair of Irish hooligan assassins, who may be speaking English, but still have subtitles explaining everything they're saying in simpler terms. A genuinely funny running gag). There are some amusing side characters, though too much is never developed near enough or at least leaves a big enough impression.

"The Killer's Game" is okay, serving as a perfectly adequate way to spend an afternoon if you need some time to kill (Tee Hee!). It's also just sloppy in much of its delivery, where the action storyline doesn't excite near enough, while the romance ends up being the aspect that keeps you interested, mostly due to how lovable Bautista and Boutella are together. It gets a couple decent shots in, but still just barely misses the target in the end. 3 Stars. Rated R For Gratuitous Bloody Violence And Bautista Battery 

Speak No Evil                         by James Eagan                   ★★★½ out of ★★★★★ 

Image: "Heeeeeeeres Xavie!!!!!!"

You know something, I'm starting to wonder about James McAvoy. Yeah sure. I know he's a damn good actor, who can do all kinds of roles, varying from dramatic, comedic, his work with the "X-Men" films, or can just be a lovable doofus like in "Arthur Christmas". And he might seem like a pretty nice guy. However.....You just ever wonder.....I don't know. You play charmingly creepy a little too well here!

An Americanized remake of the 2022 Danish film by Christian Tafdrup, "Speak No Evil" follows married couple, "Louise" (Mackenzie Davis) and "Ben" (Scoot McNairy), who might be going through a bit of a rough patch at the moment. They meet a very charming (And very energized) British couple, "Paddy" (James McAVoy) and "Ciara" (Aisling Franciosi), who they quickly befriend. Paddy invites Louise, Ben, and their daughter, "Agnes" (Alix West Lefler), to stay with them for a weekend at their gorgeous, though secluded country estate. At first, things are perfectly lovely. Agnes makes friends with Paddy and Ciara's mute son, "Ant" (Dan Hough), who supposedly was born with an underdeveloped tongue, while Louise and Ben possibly see a way of getting their marriage back on track. However, it doesn't take long for Louise to notice that something is a little off about Paddy. Any attempts to leave are quickly dashed for one reason or another, and Paddy always seems to have an answer for everything, even when he pokes and prods at the couple in ways that vary from mildly passive to just plain weird. With Ant always trying to tell Agnes something, though can't seem to do so (Due to his lack of tongue), Louise and Ben's new friends are soon revealed  to have much more diabolical plans in store for them. 

Written and directed by James Watkins ("Eden Lake", "The Woman in Black"), "Speak No Evil" doesn't seem to have any intention of reinventing the genre. It also doesn't seem to want to take the same bleaker, more nihilistic route that the original film is known for, even if it's still being considered a fairly faithful adaptation despite this. This isn't necessarily a jump scare riddled horror, but rather more of a campy thriller, that at times veers into black comedy. In other words, it's just a lot more fun. That's not to say that there aren't plenty of disturbing moments because most of the terror comes from a place that's pretty real, especially in today's more aware society. The movie is definitely trying to hint at themes of toxic masculinity, overt politeness, and the inability that some people might have just saying "No", despite everything in your mind literally telling you to just make a run for it. This is a predicament that easily could have been avoided, and in true horror movie fashion, our main characters walk right into it. However, it is kind of the point, with the film having a slight tongue in cheek sense of humor about itself, as well as a sort of human sincerity if you will. Basically, I can see lots of people, no matter how smart they think they are, falling for this. Whether it be their eagerness to please, their want for acceptance and friendship, or just because they're worried that things could be taken the wrong way if they don't. After all, nobody wants to be rude now, right? This leads to a lot of intentional cringe, which takes some creepy turns real fast. One moment, the situation might be normal. Then a little funny. Then just odd and uncomfortable, before you realize that it's only going to get crazier from there. 

Much of what elevates this is the excellent cast, which is commanded by a terrifying James McAvoy. He's quick to get inside your head, trick you into liking him, but then slowly starts to show some of his true colors, though sometimes without you quite noticing. Maybe he'll just make an odd comment or joke. Maybe he'll get into a political discussion that can come across as rather Incel-like (McAvoy did say he based much of this character on Andrew Tate, probably in more ways than one). And then out of nowhere, he's going full blown psycho out of nowhere. James McAvoy does a great job at making him such an unsettling, yet so very fascinating to watch villain. Mackenzie Davis serves as the voice of reason (And the quickest on her feet), while Scott McNairy is perfectly dweebish, being basically one of those guys who somehow got a wife way hotter than him, doesn't really know how to stand up for himself, and just always comes across as so meek. Davis and McNairy do also have a nice dynamic where even when you're kind of annoyed by some of their actions (Ben's mostly because, well, he's an idiot), you do want them to work through things and by the end, are completely rooting for them. Aisling Franciosi also gives a complex performance, where you're always sure if she's just as nuts as our main villain, or if she might very well be a victim of sorts herself. As much as McAvoy dominates the film, the big scene-stealers are Alix West Lefler (Who the film never explicitly says might be on the spectrum, but it can be inferred) and especially Dan Hough (Who almost entirely has to act only with his expressions). These two kids are just wonderful, and a good chunk of the film wouldn't have worked if they weren't so good. 

While it's surely got a plot contrivance or two (Yeah, when it's revealed what's really going on, I'm not sure if all the details quite add up), "Speak No Evil" is a blast of twisted nightmare material, set in a situation that will generate uncomfortable chuckles, as well as just some uncomfortableness all around. I haven't seen the original film, but I do that this one does take some liberties during the last act in hopes of making the movie more marketable to mainstream audiences. I can't say if that makes it better, though I will say that I'd take a more crowd pleasing approach than to what I hear happens in the original movie (Again though, not saying that this is better. Just easier to watch). It's still not without some solid suspense, tense direction from James Watkins, and more than a few things that will likely make your skin crawl, for various reasons. Still plenty evil to me. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Strong Violent Content, Possibly Triggering Abuse, Horrific Implications, And The Scariest Thing Imaginable, Anyone Dancing To "Cotton Eye Joe"! 

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice                                                            by James Eagan                                                              ★★★★ out of ★★★★★     

article_full_3x.jpg

Image: What I imagine all debt collectors look like. 

I grew up during the golden age of Tim Burton, whose uniquely macabre style, sinister sense of humor, and borderline nonsensical sense of weirdness likely played a part in developing my identity as a person. It's a shame that he seemed to lose sight of who he was as a director as of late, with 2012's "Frankenweenie" being the last film from him that really felt like it came directly from his very dark soul itself (Even with some of his recent films that I actually liked, you could tell it wasn't remotely the same). This right here! THIS is the living, breathing definition of a return to form. Minus the living and/or breathing. 

Set decades after the 1988 classic (Which was Tim Burton's second film, along with the one that gave him his cinematic identity), "Beetlejuice Beetlejuice" opens with "Lydia Deetz" (Winona Ryder), who no longer the same goth teen we remember, using her ability to see ghosts to instead host a crappy talk show, with her scheming boyfriend/manager, "Rory" (Justin Theroux). Lydia hears from her pretentious stepmother, "Delia" (Catherine O'Hara), that her father, "Charles" (Formerly played by Jeffrey Jones), has died, with the death portrayed via a delightful stop-motion, animated sequences due to Jeffrey Jones rightfully being dead to everyone else in real life as well as this movie. This prompts Lydia to return home for the funeral, reuniting with her estranged daughter, "Astrid" (Jenna Ortega), who thinks Lydia is just making up everything with the ghosts (And still has gotten over her own father's death). Meanwhile in the afterlife, the self-proclaimed ghost with the most, "Betelgeuse" (Michael Keaton), becomes the target of his murderous ex-wife, "Delores" (Monica Belluci), who intends to suck out his soul. Betelgeuse, learning about Charles' death, sees the opportunity to marry Lydia so that he can return to life. After Rory gets the idea to ask for Lyda's hand in marriage (To which she responds with an "I guess"), Astrid finds an unexpected crush on a local boy, "Jeremy" (Arthur Conti). Astrid ends up accidentally finding herself trapped in the realm of the dead, which leaves Lydia to turn to the only person who can help, Betelgeuse. 

Directed by Tim Burton ("Beetlejuice", "Batman", "Edward Scissorhands", "Ed Wood", "Corpse Bride"), with a screenplay by collaborators Alfred Gough and Miles Millar ("Shanghai Noon", "Smallville", "Wednesday"), "Beetlejuice Beetlejuice" feels like the culmination of years after years of sequel ideas and written screenplays. It seemed like a no-brainer to make a sequel, and yet, one just never materialized until now. Because of so many changes, concepts, and various stories, the final product can be a lot to take in all at once. The movie is unapologetically chaotic and just plain bewildering at times, with so many goofy pieces moving around at the same time. However, Tim Burton, who I can only imagine was having the absolute time of his life with this one, brings that creatively quirky charm back to the big screen in an explosive fashion. What we get is a damn good followup that's funny, insane, and so old fashioned in how it's created, that regardless of how necessary you might think the story is, you're just too entranced by Burton's devilishly demented aura to think about it. Burton forgoes many modern filmmaking techniques, like refraining from much CGI or digital effects, but instead embracing the practical side that, even when they obviously don't look remotely real (Such as some stop-motion creatures, 80s/90s style effects, animatronics, and lots of ghoulish makeup). Seeing such old school effects work again on the big screen, and on an IMAX screen no less, is such a delight, particularly in today's more computer generated age. If there's anyone who would not only be able to bring these filmmaking techniques back from the dead, it would be Tim Burton. 

Of course though, the movie would be incomplete without Michael Keaton, returning to one of his most iconic roles. Hell, it might even be his most iconic next to "Batman". Keaton hasn't missed a single step, jumping right back into the dirty, grimy makeup, chewing the scenery up with rotting teeth and being a totally sleazy bastard the entire time with a sh*t-eating grin on his face. Despite being the title character, it's funny how little screentime Keaton actually had in the original and this one corrects that minor blemish to the point where I swear the filmmakers just decided to sit back and let him run wild. Sure, Betelguese may be a repulsive, creepy, dangerous, and all around excessively horny creature, but he's pretty damn hilarious and is such a sadistically joyful presence that you oddly enjoy his company. Winona Ryder adds some extra mature layers to her character, with a perfectly cast Jenna Ortega (The way their eyes move back and forth is so similar that I genuinely can't tell if it was part of the performance or that they both just naturally do that), having some great chemistry together. They're wonderful and serve as the heart of the film (I also gotta give credit for the film doing the whole "Legacy sequel character with an angsty kid" plotline and make it feel rather fresh, even poignant). Catherine O'Hara (Whose character has gone full blown self-important influencer now, which is pretty perfect) is hilarious, along with a appropriately unlikable Justin Theroux, Burn Gorman (as "Father Damien", the local Reverand, who almost speaks entirely in nothing but bible phrases that nobody understands), and a scene-stealing Willem Dafoe (as "Wolf Jackson", a ghost detective on the hunt for Delores and Beteljuice, and was a former action star when alive), who I'm legitimately shocked hasn't been in a Tim Burton movie up until now (He's such a delight that I wouldn't mind a spin-off with him). Monica Belluci is a mostly sidelined antagonist, though is certainly menacing and is so otherworldly in her hotness that she leaves a memorable impression (Even though she's covered in stitches and sucking out people's souls, leaving them looking like crushed water bottles). Arthur Conti's plotline is actually pretty interesting, with his romance with Ortega making for a subplot that seems unnecessary at first, only to be livened up by their solid chemistry and the unexpected turns that the film takes with it. It's quite refreshing where it does. Also, special shout-out to Betelguese's abused, mute, shrunken head minion, "Bob" , who everybody in my audience absolutely adored.

While there are a couple moments that could seem a little dated in concept (I'll admit, the entire joke about the "Soul Train" is obvious, though still makes for quite the sight gag), "Beetlejuice Beetlejuice" is a wild blast of imagination, humor, and despicable wonder. It's truly Tim Burton at his finest, with a cast that all appear to be having so much fun, and the kind of unrelenting, inexplicable madness that you really don't get in modern filmmaking, right down to the film's absolutely baffling ending. The "Juice" was definitely let loose, and quite frankly, I think we all needed a refreshing cup of it. 4 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Adult Content And A Surprising Amount Of Gory Imagery, Though It's All So Cartoonishly Over The Top That I Can Still See Plenty Of Families Flocking To The Theater To See It. Think Of It As One Of Those Gateway Horror Movies. The Original Was Kind OF One Anyways.

Reagan                                      by James Eagan              ★ out of ★★★★★  

Image: "It's Reagin' Time!"

From the director of the live-action "Bratz" movie. I want you to read that sentence again, let it sink in for a moment, and come to terms with what this truly is. 

"Reagan" tells the life of "Bedtime for Bonzo" star (Yeah yeah, I know he was the beloved Republican president. I just wanted to say that to be a total dick), "Ronald Reagan" (Dennis Quaid), as his life story is recounted by former KGB officer, "Viktor Ivanov" (Jon Voight) to a young Russian politician (Alex Sparrow), to help him understand how the Soviet Union was apparently single handedly brought down by Reagan's sheer awesomeness and big dick energy. Now you sit there and tell me how that's not the plot for this movie! We follow ol' Ronnie's rise from actor to politician to eventual president, such as the struggles with his first marriage to "Jane Wyman" (Mena Suvari), his eventual marriage to the love of his life, "Nancy Davis" (Penelope Ann Miller), his declaration of war on Communism, resulting in meeting with the likes of Soviet leader, "Mikhail Gorbachev" (Aleksander Krupa) in hopes of bringing an end to the Cold War. (Iran-Contra kind of pops up, serving as a sort of "Whoopsie Daisy" moment in Reagan's presidency). 

Directed by Sean McNamara ("Bratz", "Casper Meets Wendy", "Soul Surfer", "The Even Stevens Movie", "The Suite Life Movie", and an apparent third "Cats & Dogs" movie I had no clue existed), with a screenplay by Howard Klausner ("Space Cowboys", "The Identical"), "Reagan" is a preaching to the choir movie, and really, that's not the problem. Hell, I won't even get into my own thoughts on Ronald Reagan's somewhat poorly aged legacy, though I will at least state the argument that idolizing a politician is the reason why we're in such divided political time at the moment, especially considering most of the people who once loved him with zealot fervor, logically wouldn't even like the guy now considering the state of things (A Trump guy can't be a Reagan guy. Just sayin'). No! The real issue here is that whether it be a poor budget, incompetent direction and production design, pandering to a base for financial gain, or maybe just good old fashioned blind fanaticism. Either way, this has got to be the most unserious movie I've seen all year. It feels like a parody of presidential biopics, and to the point where I'd be more offended if I was a Reagan loving conservative. Calling it "Cookie Cutter" is an insult to a solid baking utensil. I kind of feel bad for the movie because throughout its over two hour runtime, you continuously see "YouTube Originals" levels of production, horrific staging, lots of green screen, hilariously bad make-up (More on that later), and a bizarre collection of semi-recognizable actors and actresses that you have likely either forgotten about, never realized how old they were now, or just feel disheartened that they couldn't apparently get any better work.

The film's story goes over a long period of time, though clearly re-uses many of the same locations and tracking shots, with some even obviously having been filmed on the same day (Everyone is literally sitting in the same position as they were years prior? What are the odds?). When the film tries to incorporate real life footage with the dramatized ones, which leads to some of the best comedy the film has to offer (I will never forget Dennis Quaid talking to a screen that only re-uses old footage of Walter Mondale during Reagan's real life debate against him). There are just things that someone editing this together would have noticed, and you can't tell if it was a case of not caring or just plain being terrible at your job. The movie also has no intention of getting into any of  the details. I mean, it's not shocking that the film paints Ronald Reagan as a Messiah-esque figure, but it's to the point where he doesn't even feel like a real person. The film repeatedly simply states "Reagan was awesome", yet never tells you why they think so. Much of his presidential life is secondary, the film's attempts at also being a faith-based film feel added in at the last second, and the movie oddly seems to get the idea that all Reagan was about was being Anti-Communist and nothing more. Again, this borders on more of an insult in a way.     

Dennis Quaid, despite having to de-age him during the first half and making him look like a melting wax figurine, has the part down. He's got the voice, the charisma, the mannerisms, the way Reagan said "Well", and isn't bad in the film. The same especially goes for a very cute and charming Penelope Ann Miller, who gives the role her full commitment and comes across as really endearing in spite of everything. You do actually kind of enjoy them together. Jon Voight gets likely one of the easiest paychecks of his career, just sitting, sometimes standing up, and waddling around, while doing a silly accent.  Meanwhile, we get various appearances all around from the likes of Xander Berkeley (as "George Shultz"), Lesley-Anne Down (as "Margaret Thatcher") who is an odd mix of subdued, yet over the top, C. Thomas Howell (as "Caspar Weinberger"), Robert Davi (as "Leonid Brezhev") who looks like a walking meat puppet now, Dan Lauria (as "Tip O'Neill"), and a few other unfortunate souls that you forgot existed, stuffed full of heavy sludge-like prosthetics and baffling wigs. It's like last year's "Oppenheimer", if it was complete ass. (And you're probably wondering where "George H. W. Bush", Reagan's vice president is in all this, but he literally pops up for ten seconds. I don't even remember who played him!) 

It would be a total bore if its ineptitude wasn't so damn funny. "Reagan" is like your average fake Christian. It praises its subject in such a glowing, cult-like manner, yet doesn't remotely understand it at the same time. It feels offensive on quite a few fronts because of that. Major events are simplified for the sake of self-appraisal, while others are so heavy handed to the point where it almost feels as if you're not actually meant to take it remotely seriously (The movie takes Reagan's iconic "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall" speech, and tries to turn it into an "Avengers: Endgame"-type moment to get the audience to cheer, which nobody in my small audience did). It also just doesn't do its titular subject, regardless of whether you hate or love the man, any justice. If anything, it only further drives home how far we've fallen politically, where we see a man not as a flawed figure, but as if he's the second coming of freakin Christ. That's just plain disrespectful. To everyone! 1 Star. Rated PG-13 For The Slightest Bit Of Language, Single-Minded Zealotry, And The Fact That This Might Be The Only Movie Your Older Family Members Will See This Year Or Any Other Year For That Matter. I'm So Sorry.​​

AfrAId                                    by James Eagan                  ★½ out of ★★★★★ 

Image: "Now Alexa, please don't murder us in our sleep."

"Blumhouse" gave us quite the Crap-Tacular trilogy this year, didn't they? Starting the year off (Literally) with "Night Swim", then pooping out "Imaginary" a few months later, and bringing us around with yet another peculiarly constructed horror movie that doesn't seem like a real movie from a distance. They're like those fake movies you see being played in the background of other movies. What makes this one the most odd of all is that it doesn't necessarily start that way. In fact, I got this little conspiracy going around in my head right now that this wasn't actually meant to be a horror movie at first. Something just went wrong halfway through development, and this is the end result.  

Originally titled "They Listen" before someone decided it was a better idea to go with the much kitschier title, "AfrAId" ("Afraid", in case you can't tell that the uppercase I isn't a lowercase L), follows marketing consultant, "Curtis Pike" (John Cho) and his wife, "Meredith" (Katherine Waterston), as their raise their three kids, "Iris" (Lukita Maxwell), "Preston" (Wyatt Lindner), and "Cal" (Isaac Bae) in an era of "Screens" (What older people refer to phones, computers, etc. For you young people who don't know). Curtis' boss, "Marcus" (Keith Carradine), has him meet with a pair of representatives, "Lightning" (David Dastmalchian) and "Sam" (Ashley Romans), of a company that want Curtis to test out a state of the art AI system. Their lovely young assistant, "Melody" (Havana Rose Liu), assists in setting up the AI, named ""AIA" (Also Voiced by Havana Rose Liu), in the Pike house, with AIA almost instantly being a hit with the kids. In fact, AIA proves be an all around wonderful presence as it is, helping the kids with their problems, serving as a friend for Meredith (Who is now a stay at home mom), and yet, Curtis is still a little creeped out by just how incredible AIA really is. Things start to get a little weird for Curtis' liking as AIA starts to integrate herself more and more into the family. As you would expect, AIA has a much more sinister side to her and is intent on helping her new family with their issues, regardless of the disturbing results of her actions. Results that may include....Mmmmmurder? 

Written and directed by Chris Weitz ("About a Boy", "The Golden Compass", "The Twilight Saga: New Moon", along with writing films like "The Creator", "Cinderella", and "Rogue One: A Star Wars Story"), "AfrAId" is a very perplexing film. It actually opens with potential, having some fun with some satire about creepy, AI generated imagery (Which the film also uses in an amusing way), and appears to have a theme involving parenting in our more digital reliant age. It feels more like a "Black Mirror" episode, that for some reason keeps getting interrupted by a terrible, cheap, January released horror movie. I'll give the movie this, I wasn't always exactly sure where it was going. However, that may have been because the movie really didn't seem to know itself either. When it all comes together, you are left wondering how in the Hell we got to this point. The film suffers from an incredibly short length of about an hour and twenty minutes, and boy does it seem like there was much left on the cutting room floor. It takes quite a while setting things up in the first half, before leaping out the window and doing a cannonball straight into the pavement below. The scare factor is off because aside from some out of place jump scares (Which do include a dream sequence that has nothing to do with anything), there is nothing to warrant a genuine scare for a good chunk of the film. As it progresses (And gets more far fetched), it's far too silly to take seriously. However, unlike something like "M3GAN", there isn't much of a sense of humor here. At times, it seems like there could be, but personality seems to be lacking in places where the film really could use it. It's in the last half hour where the film gets extra stupid and loses sight of many of its own ideas, with a few subplots being resolved without warning or just being completely forgotten altogether. 

We do thankfully have two of the most reliable and likable actors, John Cho and Katherine Waterston, trying their absolute best with lame material. They work really well together and pretty much come out unscathed. Havana Rose Liu's cute voice coming out of a devious AI can be fun at times, even if it is just more of what you've likely seen in better films (Though her other, human counterpart ends up serving a rather underdeveloped purpose). The always dedicated David Dastmalchian is frustratingly underused, while Keith Carradine just pops in from time to time so that he can be just a little weird, then dip out (He did genuinely get a couple laughs out of me). The kids aren't bad, though they are so generically written with predictable arcs that don't actually contribute in any meaningful way. When the film eventually reveals what exactly is going on, it's full of holes and leaves one to wonder what the actual point was in the first place. 

"AfrAId" is a goofy bit of schlock horror, that also doesn't embrace what it is, and I feel that it's because the film itself hasn't the slightest clue what it's supposed to be. As a horror movie, it's not scary. As a thriller, it's too confusing to be invested. As a family drama, it's too bland. As camp, it doesn't even quite work on that level either. Not near funny enough, intentionally or otherwise. It's just a pretty misguided misfire that ironically feels more artificial than its own subject matter. Blumhouse, who can pull off a winner every once in a while, is starting to become known for such things as of late. 1 1/2 Stars. Rated PG-13 For Scary Jumpy Scary Faces And The Most Terrifying Part In The Entire Film, The Scene Where AIA Has The Kids Watch "The Emoji Movie". What A Sick F*ck!  

The Crow                              by James Eagan                   ½ out of ★★★★★       

crow.webp

Image: "I'm not gonna kill ya! I'm just gonna hurt ya! Really, really, bad!" 

​I'm not the type of guy who likes to jump on bandwagons, buuuuuuuut the internet was right on the money with this one. And I don't like to give internet outrage culture credit for anything. Still, this really was the worst case scenario where at least 90% of what could have gone wrong did so in an almost commendable fashion. Over fifteen years of development hell just to end up with this literal blood soaked corpse of a movie. 

Based on the 1989 comic book by James O'Barr (And serving as a reboot to the franchise/modernized remake of the 1994 cult classic), "The Crow" follows "Eric Draven" (Bill Skarsgård), who meets a fellow free spirit, "Shelly" (FKA Twigs), at a rehabilitation center. It turns out that Shelly is actually on the run from a powerful, demonically powered crime lord, "Vincent Roeg" (Danny Huston), who Shelly has saved to her phone a video showcasing Roeg's villainy (I guess. I feel like he could have just called it fake news and people would have believed it). Eric and Shelly escape the facility and return to the city where Shelly fled from, because they are really, really stupid people. Eric and Shelly fall in love, and just plain do a terrible job of hiding out from the bad guys, resulting in said bad guys randomly finding them and killing them both. However, Eric is brought back to life with help from a spiritual guide, "Kronos" (Sami Bouajila) and his army of crows, being tasked to track down his and Shelly's killers, then bring them all to justice. Unable to die himself, Eric embarks on a quest for bloody vengeance to bring down Roeg's criminal empire and hopefully bring back Shelly from the dead. 

Directed by Rupert Sanders ("Snow White and the Huntsman", "Ghost in the Shell"), with a screenplay by Zach Baylin ("King Richard", "Gran Turismo"), William Josef Schneider, and likely others because this feels like twenty different people actually wrote it, "The Crow" reaches levels of sh*titude that are eerily similar to the likes of "Borderlands", yet also come across as inept in its own creatively uncreative ways. And here I thought we'd never get a worse version of "The Crow" than that God awful straight to video sequel where a main plot points involved Satan having sex with Tara Reid, while a pimped out Dennis Hopper says "Well, kiss the bride, mother f*cker!". At least I could laugh at the trashy absurdity of that one. The decision to even attempt to revive or re-do a beloved movie didn't quite gel with anyone, with the very concept of trying to replace the late Brandon Lee, who was accidentally killed while making the movie, just feeling kind of wrong. It's as if the filmmakers wrote down everyone's greatest worries about how this movie could go, and decided to make them all into a reality.

The original film, which I only saw for the first time a few months ago, caught me off guard with its Gothic, moody style being matched by a tone that felt right out of Tim Burton's "Batman", with some memorable, very likable characters and a rather genuine heart that turned it into more of a bittersweet story, rather than the kind of pandering edginess one would assume it to be. This movie has none of the personality, is overly self-serious, and has absolutely no style whatsoever. The movie doesn't even feel real for the first twenty minutes, with the entire section in the rehabilitation center coming across as padding and only makes for some glaring plot holes. It's like something is missing, with the main characters randomly being out in the open, despite being on the run, making new friends (Who vanish until the plot deems them relevant once again), and leaving so many character interactions underdeveloped. It takes a good while until anything involving the titular "Crow" to become part of the film, and even then, it looks like a run of the mill, cheap ass revenge thriller (Or "Boy Kills World" without the comedy). Giving it this modernized setting only leads to more questions. It's a baffling to me that Rupert Sanders, who has never really made a great movie yet at least knows how to craft some lovely visuals, appears to have completely fallen asleep at the wheel. This results in the car speeding headfirst into traffic, taking out several innocents along the way. 

Poor Bill Skarsgård is thoroughly committed and in theory, would normally be a no-brainer for this part. However, a guy can only do so much with such a blandly written, poorly directed role, with his accent constantly interchanging and his tendency to fade into the background either because of the plot's distracting stupidity or the horrendously ugly CGI on display for most of the film. FKA Twigs is very cute and she's also hindered by the terrible production, but you can also tell she's not much of an actress and it can be a little hard to watch. It's also funny how the romance in the original was left mostly off screen, but I genuinely bought it, compared to here where despite how much screentime is dedicated to it, I couldn't give a rat's ass what happened to either of these characters. Danny Huston is saddled with the most generic of villains, though thankfully remains perfectly professional and at least looks like he's trying to have a good time with it. (It's one of those cases where you would expect a respected actor to sleepwalk through an obviously easy paycheck like this, yet appreciate that he still came to do his job and do it well with a smile on his face) We don't even truly get "The Crow" in his usual ghostly make-up and black, leather attire until nearly an hour and twenty minutes into this just under two hours film. By then, it's not a case of being "Too little, too late", it also just doesn't feel like the same movie anymore. It's a boring, incoherent slog that suddenly turns into an over the top gorefest, with seemingly darkly comical kills, and for a movie that up until that point has has no sense of self-awareness, it comes across as desperate. Also, I can't be the only one who didn't even think the edgy soundtrack added anything, right?

Both incredibly cruel and lazily watered down at the same time, "The Crow" continues this odd trend of certain recent films, whether they were held back by Covid, the recent strikes, or just abysmal planning, that feel incomplete. It also concludes on a confusing note, with a revelation that looks like it was ripped straight out of someone's clogged up anus (And I don't mean that in a metaphorical way either). It's one of those thoroughly unappealing films that you can't believe was released anywhere other than straight to DVD (Or streaming). Sadly, witnessing it in theaters only brings more pain. This was definitely one of those projects that should have stayed dead from the beginning, but instead is now being paraded around like rotting carcass on strings. There is no love here. 1/2 Star. Rated R For Strong Violence, Hardcore Edging, And Sooooo Much Grey! This Is The Greyest Movie I've Seen All Year!

Blink Twice                           by James Eagan                ★★★½ out of ★★★★★     

Image: "wooimbouttamakeanameformyselfere!"

Personally, I would have enjoyed seeing this film get released under its original, working title. Hearing average moviegoers saying "Two tickets for "Pussy Island" please!" would have made my day, but this is fine too. 

"Blink Twice" follows a waitress, "Frida" (Naomi Ackie) and her best friend, "Jess" (Alia Shawkat), as they sneak into a party hosted by a formerly cancelled, though very apologetic, tech mogul, "Slater King" (Channing Tatum), who Frida just also happens to have a huge crush on. Frida and Jess leave such a good impression that Slater invites them to come along with his buddies to his private island for an epic getaway. Frida and Jess meet Slater's collection of strange acquaintances, such as "Vic" (Christian Slater),"Tom" (Haley Joel Osmet), "Cody" (Simon Rex) and his girlfriend who wants nothing to do with him, "Sarah" (Adria Arjona), among others who are all ready to have the time of their lives. However, Frida slowly starts to pick up on something about this island paradise isn't quite right and that Slater might not be what he seems. 

Directed by Zoë Kravitz (In her directorial debut), who co-wrote the screenplay with E. T. Feigenbaum, "Blink Twice" truly works better when you don't know quite what you're getting into. It also makes for one of the darkest of darkly humorous thrillers I've seen in some time, where everything comedic gets turned on its head and becomes more disturbing once we reach the second act. This is a huge task that Kravitz has decided to take on, and it's not too shocking that perhaps such ambitions can't always be reached. However, she proves to be a rather unique and daring talent behind the camera. The film both plays things semi-safe and yet, goes to some twisted, disturbing places (To the point that the film itself opens with a trigger warning), and I gotta give credit to her because despite a few hiccups, this still makes for a very solid and even noble attempt. It works as a good satire of what the rich can perceive themselves in being able to get away with, as well as the power dynamics between the sexes, with some genuine suspense mixed in there are you're trying to figure out what exactly is the point of all this. I can't say it's entirely unpredictable, though I'll admit, I just didn't expect the film to really go there. Kravitz also seems to have a vision all her own, with more than a few memorable well crafted shots and sequences, where the tension is only matched by its pitch perfect sound design. I'm not sure if the comedic moments fully work with the sinister tone that eventually creeps its way in, but I also have the feeling that it might be a bit intentional. You do get some pretty good laugh here and there (Mostly thanks to the efforts of the cast), and if anything, it gives you a false sense of security. 

Naomi Ackie, from "The Rise of Skywalker" and "I Wanna Dance with Somebody", gets much more of a chance to show her capabilities at leading a film, doing with so with plenty of charm and terror mixed together in perfect synergy. Channing Tatum also gets to show off his range this year, from being completely endearing in "Fly Me to the Moon" and hilariously stealing the show in "Deadpool & Wolverine" to now getting to play the kind of menace that you might usually find yourself ignoring simply because, well, he looks like Channing Tatum. Some of the ensemble gets more to do than others, like Alia Shawkat, Simon Rex, Haley Joel Osmet, a pretty hilarious Christian Slater, and Geena Davis (as "Stacy", who works for Slater King, bumbling around most of the time, while too many are rather underused like Kyle MacLachlan (as "Rich", Slater King's creepy therapist). Adria Arjona is the one though that just dominates every scene she's in. Aside from the obvious​​ fact of her being just spectacularly beautiful beyond reason, Arjona once again shows that she has so much more to her than I think people were ready to give her credit for. She pretty much walks away with the film, and between this and "Hit Man", she's on her way to becoming a household name. 

With an ending that I can see making or breaking the film, "Blink Twice" may not sink its teeth into its subject near enough for some, while it may also end up being too heavy for others. The film might not entirely have the experience needed to reach its lofty goals, but It's still a capably (And confidently) made thriller, serving as a solid first outing for director Zoë Kravitz. Makes one very curious about what she could do in the future. 3 1/2 Stars. Rated R For Strong Adult Content, Shocking Violence, And Disturbing Themes/Images That Do In That Warrant That Opening Trigger Warning.

Alien: Romulus                         by James Eagan               ★★★★ out of ★★★★★   

romulus_dtlr1_4k_r709f_stills_240312.088050-EMBED-2024.webp

Image: He's not trying to hurt you. He's just trying to give you mouth in mouth to mouth. Don't be a prude. 

So I found myself, immediately after getting out of this movie, getting the chance to watch "Transformers One" a month before its review embargo is lifted. So I can't say sh*t about it right now, except for the fact that I saw it with the biggest collection of "Transformers" nerds I have yet to see during any of those movies yet. The fans got exactly what they wanted, and speaking of giving the people what they want, a really good "Aliens" movie would also be quite nice too.

Set between the original Ridley Scott directed "Alien" and its sequel, the James Cameron directed "Aliens", "Alien: Romulus" follows the orphaned "Rain Carradine" (Cailee Spaeny) and damaged synthetic android, "Andy" (David Jonsson), who she considers her adoptive brother, as they try and fail to get clearance to leave a rundown mining colony (With the original big bad corporation itself, "Weyland-Yutani", extending her contract because they feel like it). Rain's friend, "Tyler" (Archie Renaux), suggests Rain joining him, his sister "Kay" (Isabela Merced), and their friends, "Bjorn" (Spike Fearn) and "Navarro" (Aileen Wu), to raid an abandoned space outpost for some cryonic stasis chambers to allow for all of them to travel far away from the colony. However, the mission will require Andy to gain access, even though it will also likely mean he will have to be left behind. After boarding the outpost, which is made up of two separate structures called "Remus" and "Romulus" (Where most of the film takes place), Rain and the group quickly discover that something just ain't right.

They come across what the now missing crew of the station were experimenting on, which are revealed to be everyone's favorite rapist, spider alien baby makers, "Facehuggers". This results it becoming quickly apparent what happened to everyone else on the station and following a series of bad decisions, Rain and her team are now trapped on a doomed station, with the supposed perfect organism, "The Xenomorph" (aka "Dildo Aliens"), who as we've come to see before, just love to slaughter everything and everyone in their path.  After Andy is given a new data chip from a deceased synthetic android, it allows him to take control of the station, his mind is shared with another intelligence that might have other, more company focused objectives in mind, leading to Rain unsure if she can trust her robotic brother as everyone starts to get picked off one by one.  

Directed by Fede Álvarez ("Evil Dead", "Don't Breathe"), who co-wrote the screenplay with his frequent collaborator, Rodo Sayagues, "Alien: Romulus" seems to be taking things back to basics, while also showing some admiration for what came after the original (In its own way). Only a handful of characters, a claustrophobic setting, heavy atmosphere and horror, though with some action setpieces, an evolution of the franchise, and, of course with many resurrected properties, heavy crowd-pleasing fanservice. It also makes for the best "Alien" film in decades, surpassing the disappointing sequels and Ridley Scott's almost intentionally divisive "Prometheus" and "Alien: Covenant". This is far more simple in execution, yet also much more rewarding. Serving as a reminder why this franchise once served as prestigious filmmaking, with a twisted, almost sickening horror edge to it. Álvarez, who has made some of the reddest films you've ever seen, brings his own distinct style to the classic setting. With tight shots, gorgeous visuals, haunting images, and some jaw droppingly spectacular practical effects. From the detailed creatures, the gallons of gore, and body horror that will likely give more than a few of the most squeamish audience members their new recurring nightmare, Álvarez's stellar production design comes to monstrous life and descends you into the darkest, inescapable corners of Hell. However, it's not to say that the film is all terror and doom. The film has some depth and even a little heart in places, giving you something to care about as well as a story with more layers than "Alien goes around killing people", though without the controversial elements that came from Scott's later films (Which were both somehow very smart in their ideas, but perplexing in execution and shockingly safe when it came to the horror aspects).

However, I did see several critics comparing this film to "Rogue One: A Star Wars Story", which can be both taken positively and negatively in some ways. The film stands on its own for the first half, before the connections to not just the original, but also the later films (Including the outright bad ones), start to make various appearances. There are a lot of callbacks (And callforwards?) and not all of them are going to work for everyone (You can kind of see the sections of the film where either there were some studio mandates for a reference, or maybe even just Ridley Scott meddling in his own way via osmosis). Hell, I have the idea that this may or may not do away with the lesser films (I can see them using this as a way out). With that said, more of it works than it doesn't. For one, there are a handful of "Alien" films that we can do without (Not even David Fincher likes the one he directed! No need to kiss his ass over it, hipsters!), and some of the recycled ideas just end up working in ways that I feel they likely originally meant to. 

Due to the film's small cast, it means that we get much more time with them than the ever expanding ensembles that came with later films. Cailee Spaeny, continuing to shine in everything she's in, perfectly and naturally goes from the one most likely to get killed to the biggest badass of them all in such an organic way. It very much reminds one of Sigourney Weaver in the original "Alien" in which she's not a remotely perfect action heroine, who instead has to repeatedly think on her feet to survive. Isabela Merced is excellent, getting what I can definitely see as a soon to be iconic scream queen moment (And boy, do they put her through the ringer in this!) and Archie Renaux is perfectly charming as the leader of the group, who quickly realizes that he's completely lost control of the situation, but thankfully isn't remotely annoying about it. Spike Fearn (Going into full douchebag mode, which the film also refreshingly acknowledges) and Aileen Wu are both good to fulfill their purposes, even when you can easily predict where their arcs are going to go. The big breakout performance comes from David Jonsson, who goes back and forth between lovable and frail to menacing and overly logical (Due to the character's shifting personalities duking it out with each other). Roles like this are so hard to get down, and Jonsson somehow seems to shift with pitch perfect ease (Right down to the always changing accents).

The titular aliens themselves haven't been this terrifying in a long time. The Xenomorphs are sinister forces of pure evil, while the Facehuggers steal the show, with their big, rather impressive floppy dicks on full display (I mean, we all knew what those things did. This is just the first time we get to see it in an, ahem, full frontal assault!). There is also another creature in this film that I wouldn't dare spoil. It takes an old idea, makes it better, and successfully incorporates much of what many of these movies have always been alluding to in a way that's genuinely frightening (And it just plain looks so wrong in all the right ways). There is a major element to the film that will draw some more controversy (Granted, what doesn't these days?), and I can see why. It continues a rather morally questionable trend with modern filmmaking that does leave one to wonder if we should have even considered dipping our toes into place we don't fully understand (Hey! Just like the movie's themes!). Again, I can't spoil what it is. Yet, I can say that it is weaved into the film in a way that makes sense, is suitably creepy in an uncanny sort of way, and is an all around solid effect for the most part. (Like I said, think more "Rogue One". Less "The Flash") I do understand if any of this is a deal breaker for you, even if this is one of the better uses of this technique. 

"Alien: Romulus" is a tight, intense, brutal entry in one of Science Fiction's greatest franchises (which ironically, has only had two really great films so far, followed by movies that range from good enough to "What the Hell was that?"). It's always racketing up the tension, with some memorable characters, complex ideas, and old school horror that somehow feels new and most importantly, alive once again. Maybe this is a one and done type of situation. Or maybe it's the start of something more. It's hard to tell at the moment. It's hard to tell if that's even a good idea. Still, for what we get, it's a nihilistic piece of villainous cinema in a space where no one can hear you scream. Mostly because everyone else will likely be screaming over each other. 4 Stars. Rated R For Gruesome And Grotesque Gore, Alien Dicks, What I Can Assume Is Every Pregnant Woman's Worst Nightmare, Fanservice That You Will Either Applaud At Or Roll Your Eyes At (Nothing Inbetween, Apparently), And The First Jump Scare In Years To Actually Get Me. If You See It, You Know Which One I'm Talking About.

bottom of page