The Drama - Review: Here Comes the Bride

 

Why is it that a wedding is always the most stressful day of someone’s life when it’s supposedly also their best day? There are a myriad of reasons one could give, but suffice it to say that its rarely just the wedding day itself. There’s the catering, photographer, vows, venue, and numerous other things, any of which could be a source of immense stress for the bride or groom. The idea of making a dark comedy about the stress surrounding a wedding has been explored in plenty of films already, but writer/director Kristoffer Borgli (“Sick of Myself,” “Dream Scenario”) has decided to add even more layers of anxiety to the tale of these two soon-to-be newlyweds.

Emma, played by Zendaya (“Spider-Man: No Way Home,” “euphoria”), and Charlie, played by Robert Pattinson (“The Batman,” “Twilight”), are young, in love, and engaged. As their wedding quickly approaches, they find themselves going through the typical motions of pre-wedding jitters: deciding on the right kind of food to serve, picking flowers, the cake, the DJ, and many others. However, one night before the wedding, while drinking with fellow couple, and Best Man and Maid of Honor, Mike and Rachel, played by Mamoudou Athie (“Elemental,” “Jurassic World Dominion”) and Alana Haim (“Licorice Pizza,” “The Mastermind (2025)”), respectively, the four decide to play a game where they tell each other the “worst thing they’ve ever done.” All is well initially, until Emma tells her secret, which causes Mike and Rachel to reevaluate their friendship with her and Charlie to question if he truly knows his bride to be.

Much has been made over how the marketing for “The Drama” has deliberately avoided revealing Emma’s secret, while also drawing heavy attention to the fact that she has one. It’s a bold move in the current age of social media speculation and complaints of movie trailers “showing the whole film” prior to release. It’s also smart given that her secret is… quite a doozy. Like his most recent film “Dream Scenario,” Borgli is pointing a direct finger at our cultural sense of empathy using this style of deeply dark satirical humor. Almost immediately, sides are being taken and his script goes to great lengths to hear everyone out. It never feels heavy handed or one-sided because it keeps coming back to the comedy at the center, never becoming a morality play.

Zendaya’s performance rides that tightrope as well, playing up her natural charisma and comedic talents as well as utilizing both as a weaponized kind of empathy for the audience. Despite the double billing though, this is Pattinson’s film to run away with. He plays beleaguered characters in such note perfect ways, and his level of self-imposed anxiety and difficulties border on farcical in the best way. You’d almost believe his full name was Charlie Brown. Athie and Haim are good in their own supporting ways, with Athie’s calming voice and warmth juxtaposing against Haim’s truly snide and hateful behavior throughout the second half of the film. She walks away being one of the most hateable characters in recent memory. Special shoutout goes to Jordyn Curet (“Home Economics”) as a young Emma, seen in multiple flashbacks, who manages to pull the same kind of dark humor and empathy from a role seen for probably about five minutes total.

There’s a very deft hand on display with the film’s editing, especially in the first half, and Borgli and editor Joshua Raymond Lee (“Ripley (2024),” “Monsterland”) really take advantage of the nature of the craft to layer on the character’s psyche and anxiety. Flashbacks are used expertly throughout, both to zero in on Emma’s state of mind and to further draw into the dark comedy. It creates a spider web of crisscrossing emotions that further add to the film’s central ideas of challenging empathy. What decisions are excusable, which are not, and still finding ways to elicit uncomfortable laughter throughout it all. Daniel Pemberton’s (“Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse,” “The Trial of the Chicago 7”) score backs up this feel by crafting a wonderful and lightly tense musical undercurrent with little more than string instruments.

If you’re in the know and saw the name Ari Aster listed as a producer in the opening credits, that should give some clue as to what kind of film “The Drama” is. It is certainly dramatic, and its two leads manage to walk a thin line between some genuinely distressful relationship discussions and the inherent dark comedy of it all. There’s something genuinely insightful going on here about manufactured empathy and what someone’s true intentions really mean, but Borgli’s latest film manages to pull of a hat trick: it turns those themes into an engrossing a wickedly funny tale of anxiety, without sacrificing either. It’s the film equivalent of a whispered piece of gossip, told dripping with delicious drama. 4.5/5

The Super Mario Galaxy Movie - Review: Spaced Out

 

Expectations are the death of criticism. For as many genre bending, high quality works of cinema that release each year, there are arguably even more films that come out that are seemingly critic proof. You get what you pay for, as they say. 2023’s “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” was, like plenty of Illumination’s others, one such film. It was fun and breezy, brightly colored and high energy. But also riddled with its own myriad of problems that prevented the first animated film featuring Nintendo’s overall wearing Italian super star from being a slam dunk quality wise. I say quality wise because none of that prevented it from leveling up to a cool $1.3 billion at the worldwide box office. So, inevitably, here comes the sequel.

“The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” starts with a bang, as the son of Bowser, aptly named Bowser Jr. and voiced by Benny Safdie (“Are You There, God? It’s Me, Margaret,” “Oppenheimer”), kidnaps the queen of the cosmos Princess Rosalina, voiced by Brie Larson (“Captain Marvel,” “Short Term 12”). Soon Princess Peach, voiced by Anya Taylor-Joy (“Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga,” “The Menu”), hears of this and she and Toad, voiced by Keegan-Michael Key (“Key & Peele,” “Schmigadoon!”)), venture into space to find her. This leaves Mario, voiced by Chris Pratt (“Parks and Recreation,” “The LEGO Movie”), Luigi, voiced by Charlie Day (“It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia,” “The LEGO Movie”), and their new dinosaur friend Yoshi, voiced by Donald Glover (“Community,” “Atlanta”), to look after the Mushroom Kingdom and the somewhat reformed and still shrunken villainous Bowser, voiced by Jack Black (“School of Rock,” “Kung Fu Panda”). That is, until Bowser Jr. shows up to take his father back, sending that trio on their own galaxy spanning adventure as well.

For all of its criticisms, the first “Super Mario Bros.” movie produced by Illumination had a basic but still functional arc at its core. The brotherly relationship between Mario and Luigi served as a decent enough arc, providing something to get invested in for the moments between the game references. It wasn’t much, but it was enough to provide some kind of catharsis in the third act, earning a bit of pathos. The same cannot be said on this second outing. Despite retaining the first film’s directors, Aaron Horvath (“Teen Titans GO! To The Movies,” “Elf: Buddy’s Musical Christmas”) and Michael Jelenic (“Teen Titans GO! To The Movies,” “Elf: Buddy’s Musical Christmas”), and screenwriter, Matthew Fogel (“Minions: The Rise of Gru,” “The LEGO Movie 2: The Second Part”), it’s as if any desire to do anything even perfunctory with the plot had gotten lost in the cosmos.

The film doesn’t exist as a straight narrative, but rather a series of scenes strung together to form the loosest sense of plot. The Mario games aren’t known for having grand stories, but they at least have some sense of momentum. The act of watching “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” feels more like having someone show you their favorite clips of a movie on YouTube: scenes that just begin and end, sometimes feeling like they’ve cut themselves off before they’re supposed to, and giving the impression that there’s a narrative you simply aren’t being shown. Again, you might ask why one would even expect anything else from this kind of movie, but the first film at least had a basic enough plot to build things off of. This feels like characters go where they need to simply because the movie has to continue.

Thankfully, even if the narrative is almost complete mush, the film’s technical elements are truly wonderful. Just like the first film, it’s obvious that these movies are the exception to Illumination’s usual cheap budget rules. Each location is vibrant and gorgeously detailed, with color popping from every frame. It’s a beautiful movie, and Brian Tyler’s (“Now You See Me,” “Transformers One”) musical score gets to breathe new cinematic life into a wide collection of musical motifs originally crafted for the Mario Galaxy games by composers Mahito Yokota and Koji Kondo. In one of the clear lessons learned from the first film, the number of 80s needle drops have been significantly reduced (but not eliminated), allowing that classic music to exist in its own right.

The vocal cast is also resoundingly excellent. While Pratt’s Mario is still the weakest link here, it’s certainly an improvement over the first film. Day and Black are still the complete highlight of the package, and Taylor-Joy and Key keep their buddy movie banter going strong. Safdie is a wonderful new addition, playing with some excellently nasally pre-teen angsty as Bowser Jr., and Larson is perfect as Princess Rosalina, utilized far less than one would hope given her excellent performance. A smattering of other notably celebs pop up in minor roles, such as Glen Powell (“The Running Man (2025),” “Anyone But You”) in a role I won’t spoil here, and Luis Guzmán (“Narcos,” “Wednesday (2022)”) as Wart, a character that originally debuted in the much maligned U.S. release of Super Mario Bros. 2.

The fact that a character from that game is featured here is an indicator of just how weird Nintendo has allowed Illumination to get with this sequel. If the first film felt almost too safe by sticking to the most basic elements from the original “Super Mario Bros.” and “Mario Kart” games, this one goes so crazy it’ll make a non-gamer’s head spin. There are a huge number of easter eggs and plot beats pulled from almost every Mario game released over the last three decades like “Odyssey,” “Sunshine,” “Wonder,” “Yoshi’s Island,” “Galaxy,” and “World.” It’s an Amos Bouch of the weirdest and wildest bits of this franchise’s best games, all thrown together in highly detailed and gorgeous Hollywood animation.

And yet… it all feels paper thin. Even if the first film wasn’t perfect, it felt like it was trying to prove something. It had moments of calm, arcs for the titular brothers, and a genuine sense of love for the franchise. That love isn’t gone from “Galaxy” but it feels misplaced. Now that these filmmakers know just how successful this film is almost guaranteed to be, it’s as if they don’t even want to try. As a perfect example: the first film had the wonderful surprise that was Bowser’s “Peaches” song that took the internet by storm. Not only is there no such moment of oddball creativity here, it feels like the team that made “Galaxy,” despite being the same people, would never even attempt something like that. A moment that slow, that takes time away from referencing another Mario game? Why would they bother?

And why would one bother caring? This film is destined to make buckets of cash for Nintendo, Universal, and Illumination, and if the post-credits teases are any indication, they have no intention of slowing down anytime soon. And why should they? Even in its lessened state, “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” should prove easy entertainment for kids and almost anyone who’s held some form of a Nintendo controller over the last thirty years. Its plot might be paper thin and lacking in any sort of substance, but its gussied up in some truly gorgeous art, music, and vocal performances. Expectations are the death of criticism. “The Super Mario Galaxy Movie” won’t be hurt by its less than stellar quality, but these fans, young and old, deserve more than some expertly polished space junk. 2.5/5

Project Hail Mary - Review: Shoot for the Stars

 

Way back in 2011, Andy Weir self-published his first novel and quickly “The Martian” became a smash hit. After a 2015 film adaptation proved to be a critical and box-office success, Weir’s future as a successful science fiction author seemed unlimited. So much so that when his latest novel was announced in 2020, the film rights were snatched up before it was even released. Now, after years of work and development, directors Phil Lord (“The LEGO Movie,” “21 Jump Street (2012)”) and Christopher Miller (“The LEGO Movie,” “21 Jump Street (2012)”) have returned with their first directed film in over a decade, taking Weir’s specific blend of science fiction back to the big screen.

“Project Hail Mary” stars Ryan Gosling (“Barbie,” “La La Land”) as Ryland Grace, a microbiologist and middle school science teacher recruited by Eva Stratt, played by Sandra Hüller (“Anatomy of a Fall,” “The Zone of Interest”), for Project Hail Mary, a secret government project to help scientists around the world figure out why the sun has begun to dim and how to stop it. This task sends Grace into deep space to study Tau Ceti, the only sun that has not begun to dim, and leads him to meet Rocky, voiced by James Ortiz in his film debut, an alien lifeform who’s been sent to Tau Ceti for the same purpose as Grace.

With a premise steeped in hardcore science fiction tropes and techniques, you need a lead who is capable of not only diving into the density but also keeping the human element intact. Gosling is absolutely fantastic here, completely carrying the entire film with his innate charisma. However, there’s something more going on with his performance. While Lord and Miller make great use of his everyman charms, there’s an almost Chaplin-esque humility to both Grace and Gosling’s performance. Instead of simply making Grace a slowly evolving hero, there’s a depth to his misunderstandings that helps humanize him and makes his triumphs even more satisfying. It’s a pure weaponization of Gosling’s disarming emotional talents and his physical comedy skills and it makes for his most compelling lead performance since 2016’s “The Nice Guys.”

Hüller plays her role much more straight-faced than Gosling, and this disarming of his more lackadaisical nature allows the two to play off each other’s perspectives in their scenes. It builds not only their chemistry, but allows the later, more dire scenes to punch a bit harder while also working as a pseudo-metaphor for the varying different ways one could approach such harrowing circumstances. Lord and Miller meanwhile make particularly great usage of the other supporting characters, such as Lionel Boyce (“The Bear,” “Loiter Squad”) as Carl, a security guard Grace befriends while working on Project Hail Mary. Boyce instantly becomes a standout despite his brief appearance, with Carl and Grace’s friendship further establishes the deeply human core of the film’s identity.

While the supporting cast is full of standouts and scene stealers, it’s incredible to say the one who’s burgled the most moments is Ortiz as Rocky, the rocky-like alien puppet that becomes Gosling’s scene partner for a large majority of the film. This is where things become a buddy movie, and despite their stark physical differences, Gosling and Ortiz keep the banter high. The friendship they form becomes the big beating heart of the film, which further deepens the stakes beyond just the fate of their two worlds. It’s a double act that strengthens every other aspect of the film by relation. Rocky himself is an incredible design that manages to maintain his alien aspects without sacrificing an inherent adorable quality to him, working as a feat of puppetry and seamless digital effects.

Drew Goddard’s (“Cloverfield,” “The Cabin in the Woods”) script manages to blend the intense scientific aspects of Weir’s novel with its most deeply human aspects to great effect. It’s clear that his previous experience adapting Weir’s writing as screenwriter of “The Martian” has paid off here, and his work is fantastic. It works because, given the unknown nature of the scientific mystery, Grace and Rocky are learning along with the audience. Because of this, it doesn’t dumb down the discoveries, instead plainly explaining its science as the film progresses without relying on exposition or narration. But those deeply human and personal moments spread throughout the film, like Carl and Grace’s scenes and a brief moment of Eva singing karaoke days before takeoff, are what make this a truly special kind of film. It’s the kind of film where the events would still be harrowing and exciting without character work this deep, but because it excels in that aspect, you’re on the edge of your seat not because of the exciting events, but because of what they mean to those characters.

Surrounding all of the charisma and relationships and big beating heart is a production of true beauty and technical mastery. Lord and Miller have crafted this tale of deep space as a remarkably physical one, with Grace’s and Rocky’s ships each being fully built practical sets. Like Rocky himself, it allows for a tangible sense of reality and stakes for the film, as well as working as a feat of production craft. Rocky’s ship in particular is nothing short of breathtaking as it blends the digital effects with the craft of production designer Charles Wood (“Doctor Strange,” “Guardians of the Galaxy”). It’s a perfect example of big budgets being spent to make films that truly feel like grand scale production as opposed to green screen heavy digital works.

But all of that technical craft would mean nothing without a cinematographer like Greg Frasier (“The Batman,” “Dune: Part Two”) behind the camera. His skill is evident here as he shoots with a particular eye for the majesty of this kind of tale, manipulating camera placements and movements, even changing aspect ratios whether we’re deep in space on grounded on Earth. Daniel Pemberton’s (“Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse,” “The Trial of the Chicago 7”) score combines with Frasier’s images to create a beautiful sense of style and space, with numerous moments standing out for pure visual and auditory beauty. Color pops from every frame and numerous moments make for all encompassing shots, as the images and sound simply wash over you. It’s the kind of film built for the cinema experience but does so with a deft and calm hand. As opposed to more action-heavy works that justify such and experience, like “One Battle After Another” or “Dune: Part Two,” “Project Hail Mary” does so in an achingly human and almost calmingly emotional way.

Comparisons have been made to “Interstellar” leading up to the release of “Project Hail Mary,” and while they are both about space, the films couldn’t be more different. What Lord, Miller, Goddard, Gosling, and the rest of the team have accomplished here is a film that understands the science, the spectacle, and the awe of what a film like this needs and they’ve delivered every aspect of that with flying colors. But what makes this feel like a truly special work is the care in the heart of it. It’s a story about kindness and helpfulness and friendship, and how each person can excel. Calling it a human film doesn’t feel accurate. Rather, it’s a deeply felt work of cosmic hope, one of the best films in recent memory, and one that will move you to the stars. 5/5

The Bride! - Review: A Monstrous Woman

 

What does one do with identity? The very idea of identity has been the central thought for films and stories since the inception of either medium. Mary Shelley’s genre defining science fiction novel “Frankenstein” might just be the earliest example of a work taking that thought of identity and truly poking at and questioning it for a broad audience. Filmmakers and other writers have taken her tale and morphed it into their own visions for decades since, and now a new, bold, and unique take on the tale after that tale has arrived. “The Bride!” has arrived.

The film stars Jessie Buckley (“Women Talking,” “Hamnet”) in dual roles as Mary Shelley, the author of “Frankenstein,” and Penelope Rogers, the woman who would become the titular Bride. After an accident leads to Penelope’s death, she is revived by Dr. Cornelia Euphronious, played by Anette Benning (“The Kids Are All Right,” “Nyad”), and Frankenstein, played by Christian Bale (“The Dark Knight,” “America Psycho”). Frankenstein is looking for a companion, and soon takes the Bride as his own, with the pair on the run across the country from mobsters and cops. Among those chasing them are detectives Jake Wiles and Myrna Malloy, played by Peter Sarsgaard (“Shattered Glass,” “Jackie (2016)”) and Penélope Cruz (“Volver,” “Vicky Cristina Barcelona”) respectively, and Clyde, played by John Magaro (“The Big Short,” “First Cow”), a mobster associate and then man responsible for the accident that killed Penelope.

Regardless of your thoughts on the rest of the film, make no mistake: this is Buckley’s film and she absolutely steals the show. Her almost bipolar kind of performance here borders on transformative and takes what could have been a schlocky B movie into… well a shlocky B movie with a genuine fantastic lead performance. She’s electric, pun entirely intended, and her physicality is unmatched throughout. She also somehow manages to have note perfect chemistry with herself thanks to the all too brief interjections from Buckley’s portrayal of Shelley. Bale is also great, although in a far more restrained kind of way compared to Buckley’s role. They play excellently together and manage to twist this tale into a genuinely bitter love story by the end. Benning, while underutilized, is also great as a wild haired mad scientist that certainly fits into the archetypical mold, but still allows the actress to have plenty of fun with the material.

Outside of them, the rest of the cast seems far more satisfied to take the paycheck and leave. Sarsgaard and Cruz aren’t bad, but their roles feel so cookie-cutter that they almost seem like the kind of stereotypical detective roles trotted out for improv shows or Mad Magazine bits. At one point, one of them literally says “I picked a bad day to start drinking” and that’s all you need to know about their performances. Magaro meanwhile is fine enough, but the film simply forgets he exists for a large part of the plot, and the mobster element already isn’t one that’s particularly engaging.

What is engaging though is the film’s vision of this twisted early 1930s Chicago. There’s an almost steampunk aspect to the environment, and colors pop in virtually every scene. Costume Design lead by Sandy Powell (“The Favourite (2018,” “Hugo”) is thoroughly inspired and instantly iconic, particularly with Penelope’s striking orange dress and black formaldehyde stain streaking across her mouth. It’s a dizzying visual identity that is certainly writer/director Maggie Gyllenhaal’s (“The Lost Daughter,” “The Dark Knight”) clear vision. That vision will likely be the most divisive aspect of the film writ large, as it’s a clear and uncompromising tale, reinterpreting and recontextualizing the idea of the Bride with a more modern, revolutionary, feminist point of view.

The earliest aspects of the film, particularly the entire first half, are when it works best. There’s a loose and frenetic energy that makes the film work well as midnight movie fare: lots of thoughts thought very loudly, but with purposefully less internal logic. Hildur Guðnadóttir’s (“Joker,” “Chernobyl”) score backs this up, as it pulses and thumps throughout Frank and Penelope’s adventure, setting a purposefully anarchic rhythm to these events. The latter half, when things morph into more of a “Bonnie and Clyde” type story, are when things just become less interesting.

Gyllenhaal clearly has a lot of converging ideas she wants to fit into this story. The feminist revolutionary aspects, punctuated by a movement Penelope spurs on with the phrase “Brain Attack,” seems initially like the strongest throughline until it is forgotten in the second half. Frank’s love of movies, to the point where he cures a borderline panic attack by going to the theater, is actually the stronger central idea, eventually culminating in the film’s best scene involving a mind-control impromptu dance sequence at a crashed party. That is the only aspect truly kept intact once the scattershot second half begins, as almost all of the truly oddball identity, including the arresting and all too brief moments with Buckley as Shelley, stop. It’s up to Buckley and Bale to carry that latter half and luckily they do manage to prevent it from completely collapsing in on itself.

“The Bride!” is a title punctuated with an exclamation point and Gyllenhaal’s version of this story is clearly one she wants to tell loudly. If nothing else, Buckley’s exhilarating central performance makes this worth watching, and the jumbling of ideas certainly crafts its own identity. It’s a shame that identity can’t be carried for the entire runtime, but for all the peaks and valleys on display here, it’s still unlike pretty much anything else you’re going to see in a movie theater this year. It’s a bold film that absolutely buckles under the weight of its own self-referential ambitions. But like its titular undead lead, its just throws that broken arm around as it keeps on dancing. 3.5/5

The Reel Life's Year in Film: Best of 2025

Join me in celebrating this year in film as I count down my top 10 films of 2025, as well as highlighting my most surprising, best actor, and best actress, and other individual awards.

The Testament of Ann Lee - Review: Mother of God

 

The way that someone worships is such a deeply personal experience that it almost becomes impossible to explain to anyone outside of their faith. While some do so in large groups, surrounded by likeminded individuals, others do so in a far more solitary manner. Ann Lee certainly worshiped in ways that were considering outside of the ordinary to some, and Mona Fastvold’s (“The Brutalist,” “The World to Come”) new film seeks to tell her story and spread her take on worship as far as a dramatic work can.

Set in the mid-1700s, “The Testament of Ann Lee” follows the life of Ann Lee, played by Amanda Seyfried (“Mamma Mia!,” “The Dropout”), the founder of the “Shakers” religion, a division of the Quaker faith characterized by rhythmic interpretive dancing and singing. As she begins to disturb the public in England, she and her flock, including her brother William, played by Lewis Pullman (“Bad Times at the El Royale,” “Thunderbolts*”), and her friend Mary, played by Thomasin McKenzie (“Jojo Rabbit,” “Last Night in Soho”), travel to colonial America where they seek to further establish their faith and community.

The most important and distinctive thing that Fastvold and co-writer Brady Corbet (“The Brutalist,” “Vox Lux”) do to set this “Testament” apart from not only other biopics but other faith-based films is in its depiction of Ann and her faith. Films like “God’s Not Dead” and similar works seek to present faith as something under attack, whereas their simpler approach of just showcasing someone deeply entranced in their worship is a far more compelling work. This becomes easier with the Shakers given their inherently visually stimulating way of worship, but this relatively simple idea of promoting Ann Lee’s faith simply by showing how and why she believes it means this central idea is directly communicated via the characters' actions. We’re being shown, not told.

It then helps even moreso that Seyfried’s performance is, quite simply, the crowning achievement of her career. Her talent is on full display here, and the conviction required to dive directly into a role like this is nothing short of incredible. This is the prime example of an actor giving themselves over to a role that will live in them for the rest of their career. It’s simply spectacular. Pullman is able to match much of her energy, albeit in a calmer, more reserved way, and his is a performance of equal weight. McKenzie both serves as a calming presence in Lee’s life as well as the calming narrator of the film, and each moment her soft voice perks up is a great one.

“Testament” will likely also be remembered as a film making full and complete usage of its slim budget. Shot for just $10 million, it looks sumptuous. The detailed craftsmanship of the Shaker homes and materials aren’t just recreated here to fantastic results, but the land Lee and her people inhabit feels truly like its own almost otherworldly place. Cinematographer William Rexer (“The Get Down,” “Summer Days, Summer Nights”) alternates between claustrophobic close-ups and expansive wide shots, allowing the beauty of the dancer’s movements to be on full display. But it’s the way the camera floats through the longer, more extravagant sequences that puts you directly in the works of Lee and her believers.

Fastvold and her team clearly put a lot of work into giving this tale a borderline dreamlike quality, and that all comes back to the film’s defining trait: the music. Choreographed by Celia Rowlson-Hall (“After Yang,” “Smile 2”), each sequence somehow manages to feel intricately performed and choreographed while also seeming freeing and uninhibited. It helps that the musical numbers, adapted from Shaker hymns by Daniel Blumberg (“The World to Come,” “The Brutalist”), are all transfixing. It’s hard to describe without getting into pure hyperbole, but there are moments in the film when, through the combination of the choreography and music, it makes you feel as though you’ve stumbled into the woods and are watching an intimate ballet of worship that makes you question if its real or not. So much of the film is dedicated to communicating that feeling that the more typical biopic moments stand out starkly in comparison. These segments aren’t bad and they do have a place in the overall narrative of the film, but given how interesting Ann Lee’s latter life is, the way that this early chunk of the film is told is less interesting that what comes after.

“The Testament of Ann Lee” is a fantastic showcase for a career best performance for Seyfried, but even beyond that it manages to be both an engrossing depiction of faith and worship in a more unconventional manner and a detailed and gorgeous display of dance and music. All three of those aspects on their own would be reason enough, but combined together it means that Fastvold’s feature is a dizzying and beautiful portrait of belief and motherly leadership. 4.5/5 

No Other Choice - Review: A Killer Job Market

 

Making a thriller film about a prospective job hunt in this modern-day industry is slowly becoming a more understandable practice. Long gone are the days of help wanted signs on store windows and instead we have “ghost jobs,” endless interviews, and internal hiring cutting off outside opportunities. Which all seems perfect for a director like Park Chan-Wook (“Oldboy,” “The Handmaiden”) to step in and add his distinctly violent black comedy stylings to a film all about trudging through that kind of a market.

“No Other Choice” follows Yoo Man-su, played by Lee Byung-hun (“Kpop Demon Hunters,” “Squid Game”), a father and wealthy longtime employee of a bustling paper company. After the company is purchased by an American subsidiary, he and many others are laid off, forcing his wife Lee Mi-ri, played by Son Ye-jin (“The Truth Beneath,” “April Snow”), his teenaged son Si-one, and young daughter Ri-one to forgo their pricier hobbies and putting his childhood home in jeopardy. After over a year with no luck, Man-su develops a drastic plan: to kill Choi Seon-chul, played by Park Hee-soon (“Seven Days,” “My Name”), the line manager of a nearby paper company and his two most likely replacements Goo Beom-mo and Ko Si-jo, played by Lee Sung-min (“Reborn Rich,” “The Spy Gone North”) and Cha Seung-won (“Blood Rain,” “Our Son”) respectively, so that he can take the position.

Byung-hun's portrayal of Man-su is an excellent work of comedic seriousness. As this is essentially a tale to see what it takes to push a good man over the brink, he treats Man-su with a delicate nature. He’s not quick to jump to any decision, and he balances the clear intelligence and care with a bumbling sensibility reminiscent of a sitcom dad. Less expected is Ye-jin's performance as Mi-ri; what could have easily been a “doting wife” slowly evolves as the film goes on. Just as Man-su is forced to bend as the world comes at him, so does Mi-ri, and Ye-jin's portrayal of this evolution is one of the most fascinating elements of the film, almost eclipsing Byung-hun's excellent lead performance.

If the performances are fantastic, the film’s editing and visual style are borderline perfect. Chan-Wook and editors Kim Sang-bum (“The Handmaiden,” “Decision to Leave”) and Kim Ho-bin (“Lobby”) make heavy use of various half-screen fades and dissolves to douse this tale in a noir-like energy. Simply put, it's a tactile film, like you can reach out and touch it. Cinematographer Kim Woo-hyung (“The Front Line,” “The King”) plays with plenty of fun angles and tricks as well, such as the angle of a beer glass and close-ups on a cavity filled tooth. It’s a delightfully crafted film, finding a twisted sense of fun in each scene transition and presentational aspect. Unexpectedly so, the film’s sound design is its best aspect. Supervising sound editor Eunjung Kim (“The Handmaiden,” “Concrete Utopia”) and sound supervisor Kim Suk-won (“The Handmaiden,” “Peninsula”) get a lot of mileage out of simple juxtapositions, setting up seemingly quiet acts and scenes with cranked up sound effects. Whether it’s a bone crunch or simply amplifying the sound of an action as the camera sits far far away, it makes for a soundscape as impressive and commanding as any modern war or racing film.

With a filmography as long as his, there are certain expectations one might have at a Park Chan-Wook film that “No Other Choice” certainly fulfils in spades. It has his trademark satirical bit and dark comedy, as well as a penchant for creatively staged violence and melodrama. Yet, for as great as each of these individual elements are, there’s a specificity that’s missing compared to his other works. It results in the ending lacking the precise sharpness that would otherwise be expected from a work like this, instead landing as a softer hit. It’s the film equivalent of a punch in the arm versus a bullet to the chest.

This isn’t to say that the script written by Chan-Wook, Lee Kyoung-mi (“The Truth Beneath,” “The School Nurse Files”), Don McKellar (“Blindness,” “The Red Violin”), and Lee Ja-hye (“Uprising”) isn’t engaging. Rather that at this point in our age, with so many stories about modern day jobs, these statements don’t feel as impactful or radical as they seem to think they do. The dialogue is still riotously funny, the moments of pure physical comedy, such as the scene involving Man-su's first kill, are magnificent, and the central mystery surrounding his actions is legitimately tense. It’s simply an issue that doesn’t hit you until the bleak as all hell ending is realized in real time.

Park Chan-Wook's latest might have a bleaker, slightly softer touch than his previous highly precise works, but it's nevertheless equally entertaining and darkly funny. A completely committed cast comes together to deliver on his singular idea of what a good man can do when pushed to the brink. The violence never overwhelms the comedy, and neither does the comedy overwhelm the drama. Byung-hun and Ye-jin lead a terrific ensemble right down to the bank, cashing a massive check of violent satirical entertainment bliss. 4.5/5 

Marty Supreme - Review: Don't Hate the Player

 

Sports movies may be a dime a dozen; biopics arguably even more so.  But just because a film takes on the shape of either of those genres doesn’t mean it’s following their rhythm. Case in point, the latest film from co-writer/director Josh Safdie (“Uncut Gems,” “Good Time”) and his first solo-directed film since splitting with his brother Benny, “Marty Supreme” certainly wears the skin of an underdog sports film or a biopic about an athlete wunderkind. But while its main character is only loosely based on a real-life person, the stress it’ll put you, the viewer, through is all too real.

Written by Safdie and Ronald Bronstein (“Uncut Gems,” “Good Time”), the film follows the titular Marty Mauser, played by Timothée Chalamet (“Dune (2021),” “Wonka”), a young hustler and ping pong player living in New York City. After losing the International Table Tennis Championship to Japanese player Koto Endo, played by Koto Kawaguchi, Marty becomes determined to make it back to the tournament in Japan the next year. This results in him hustling with his friend Wally, played by Tyler Okonma (“Loiter Squad,” “The Jellies!”), to earn the money needed to travel and compete, as well as manipulating his married girlfriend Rachel Mizler, played by Odessa A'zion (“I Love LA,” “Hellraiser (2022)”), aging movie star Kay Stone, played by Gwyneth Paltrow (“Iron Man,” “The Royal Tenenbaums”), and her pen magnate husband Milton Rockwell, played by Kevin O'Leary, all while evading the police and his overly concerned mother Rebecca, played by Fran Drescher (“The Nanny,” “This is Spinal Tap”).

If nothing else is ever said about “Marty Supreme,” let it be known that Chalamet’s leading performance is the stuff careers are made of. What he and Safdie are able to do with a character as off putting as Marty is nothing sort of a magic trick. At no point in the film do they hide, obscure, or hoodwink you into thinking Marty is any other kind of person than he is: this is a complete bastard of a man, willing to manipulate his loved ones and virtually anyone around him in the pursuit of greatness. Not even money, just so he can make a grandstand of showcasing his own skills. At one point early on, Marty describes himself as a being such a good salesman that he “could sell shoes to an amputee.”

The fact that he describes himself like that tells you everything you need to know. And Chalamet absolutely runs away with the role. He’s effortlessly charming in the role, and he takes Marty so far that he doubles back around on himself and becomes the sort of despicable character you find yourself rooting for by the end. Even if you actually don’t though, Chalamet keeps you invested in him the entire time, whether to see his success or downfall. Even as the final act ratchets to a fever pitch of tension, you’re still not sure if you really want him to fail or really want him to succeed. But he’s so utterly compelling, you want to watch him no matter what.

The rest of the supporting cast are all fantastic in their own rights. Okonma has wonderful chemistry with Chalamet, and their all too few scenes together are excellent fun as they galivant around together. A’zion somehow matches Chalamet’s chaos in a twisty, more unique way, making each scene with the pair of them a balancing act of relationship woes. Paltrow’s role might not require a ton of interesting or complicated choices from her, but she nails it regardless. Drescher is in a far briefer role than one might expect, but she punctuates the film nicely when she does appear. What becomes much more interesting though is Safdie’s continued choice of casting real athletes and unknowns to fill out the cast.

Koto Endo, for example, is a Japanese deaf ping-pong champion who is played by Koto Kawaguchi, a Japanese deaf ping-pong champion. It’s proof of the skills of Safdie and company that these minor roles never feel out of place or mis-performed. It could be the simple fact that these are so close to their real lives, but each one of these performers, from Kawaguchi to published authors like Larry Sloman, who plays Marty’s uncle Murray, or essayist Pico Iyer, who plays ITTA head Ram Sethi, to internet personality Luke Manley as Marty’s best friend Dion Galanis, manages to excel in their roles even up against experienced actors. The only odd spot amongst them is Kevin O’Leary; while his personality on Shark Tank isn’t far off from his well-documented arrogance in real life, that real world attitude spills over into the role here in a way that is certainly appropriate but occasionally distracting.

Thanks to Safdie’s tight directorial control, cinematographer Darius Khondji’s (“Uncut Gems,” “Panic Room”) 35mm period photography explodes off the screen. The mid-1950s style of New York bleeds into each aspect of Marty’s story, and the scrappy nature of the city and its claustrophobic interiors works to further his repressed feelings. Each frame is stuffed to the brim with gorgeous set and production designs, giving the whole film the feeling of an overly decorated off-Broadway black box play. Daniel Lopatin’s (“Good Time,” “Uncut Gems”) score putters along as a deliberately anachronistic juxtaposition to the period setting, and it rattles your brain with various bits of nerve shredding electronic music to match Safdie’s nerve shredding direction and plot.

Unfortunately, that is the largest barrier to entry with this latest film from one of the brothers who brought you “Uncut Gems.” If that film’s heightened stress and anxiety inducing plot turned you off, “Marty Supreme” won’t fare much better. It’s a deeply engaging film thanks to Chalamet’s lead performance, but it's also one of the few non-action films in recent memory that’ll have you digging your nails into your armrest with each bone headed decision Marty makes. That, combined with Marty’s generally brash attitude, could lead this to be a film that most hate purely based on that lead role. But again, something magically happens by the end as Safdie almost dares you not to feel some kind of way about this hustling ping pong player.

“Marty Supreme” would be worth talking about based purely on its titular performance, a genuine career best from Chalamet, but it's surrounded by top tier elements across the board as well. Paced like a rocket ship, with cinematography and music to match, this is a supremely entertaining piece of high-wire entertainment with a central character that’ll certainly stick in your mind. For better or for worse. 5/5 

Is This Thing On? - Review: Standing Up Straight

 

There seems to be a line running directly through each of writer/director Bradley Cooper’s (“A Star is Born (2018),” “Maestro”) films ever since he’s stepped behind the camera. Each, in their own way, focuses on performing and the idea of using that performance to heal or hide from something eating away at its lead’s insides. Whether remaking one of the most quintessentially remade Hollywood tales or focusing on the life of a man arguably too vast to capture in two-hours-and-thirty-minutes, Cooper is clearly fascinated with the artistic process and its therapeutic abilities, however successful they may be. His third feature, and the first to not star himself, taps into that well once again in the least flamboyant way thus far.

“Is This Thing On?” stars Will Arnett (“Arrested Development,” “Bojack Horseman”) and Laura Dern (“Jurassic Park,” “Marriage Story”) as struggling married couple Alex and Tess Novak. After the pair decide to amicably call it quits, Alex ends up wandering into an open mic night at a comedy club. When his improvised, meandering set is somewhat of a success, Alex decides to return night after night, finding the process refreshing and therapeutic. Meanwhile Tess decides to get back into coaching volleyball, and the pair end up inadvertently rekindling their rocky relationship via their newfound hobbies.

Arnett and Dern are perfect together, and the film simply is at its best when they get to share the screen. Their relationship feels genuine and lived in, and at no point are they ever in question. Arguments can be made about the overall plot and the way it handles their characters, but they light up the screen each time they appear. Doubly so when they appear together. The film’s extensive supporting cast are more uneven. Andra Day (“The United States vs. Billie Holliday,” “Percy Jackson and the Olympians”) and Cooper play Christine and Balls, a fellow rocky married couple, and while they’re charming enough, the film doesn’t do anything with them by the end of things. They populate the tale well enough, but don’t leave any kind of impact.

The same goes for the comedians Alex runs into while doing standup. Each is played by a real-life standup comic, like the always delightful Amy Sedaris (“Bojack Horseman,” “Strangers with Candy”) or Jordan Jensen, but they don’t leave any kind of impact on the overall film. They simply show up, do their thing, and leave. Most bizarrely is a ham-ily acted borderline cameo by Peyton Manning playing Laird, a fellow coach of Tess’s. He just appears and is immediately so out of place it becomes clear the only reason he survived the edit is because the couple of scenes he’s in prove too crucial to cut.

James Newberry’s (“Barron’s Cove”) energetic score keeps things moving briskly, with a rat-a-tat feeling that sounds like a much less ambitious version of the score from “Birdman.” Matthew Libatique (“Reqiuem for a Dream,” “Black Swan”) meanwhile shoots with a very claustrophobic close-up eye, emphasizing the numerous intimacies involved with the film’s evolving emotional arcs. Cooper’s decision to zero in on Alex and Tess’s emotional journeys via their reactions to and with each other is a massive highlight, allowing the narrative to ebb and flow as they do, rather than being told to the viewer as they recount things to friends or loved ones.

For as great as his direction and eye with Libatique is, the script from Cooper, Arnett, Mark Chappell (“Flaked,” “See How They Run”), and John Bishop is far more uneven. As previously stated, many of the supporting characters feel as though they’re there simply to fill up a cast list rather than for any legitimate reason. It’s easy to see this film falling into many of the traps notorious for works like this. Your eyes will certainly roll when you see the inevitable third act emotional “take my wife please” spiral coming a mile away. The dialogue is full of sparky one liners and, again, Dern and Arnett really make some magic happen together almost in spite of the pitfalls for a tale like this. But it doesn’t change the routine twee-ness at the center of it.

“Is This Thing On?” is certainly Cooper’s most interesting directorial work yet, in that it seems like it would be the hardest to nail. Dern and Arnett’s emotional arcs are fantastic thanks to these two leads, and hopefully it’ll lead to many more semi-dramatic live-action roles for Arnett in the future. But with a meandering script and underutilized supporting cast, it's a frustratingly messy film with a big beating heart. After the semi-misfire of “Maestro,” this is a “two steps forward, one step back” project for Cooper. But it can’t be argued that he isn’t trying to stretch out and do something a little different. 3.5/5 

Avatar: Fire and Ash - Review: Rising from the Ashes

 

It’s hard to believe that just a few years ago James Cameron (“Terminator 2: Judgement Day,” “Aliens”) returned to the world of Pandora for the first time in thirteen years for the sequel to his mega-blockbuster highest grossing film of all time. Despite claims that the sequel would have “zero cultural impact” and bomb given its $450 million price tag, it once again made waves, generating over $2 billion at the global box office and awards nominations, including one for Best Picture. Now comes the ultimate test: will people show up for another adventure with the Sully family just three years later? And will it be worth the wait and price tag?

“Avatar: Fire and Ash” picks up almost immediately after the events of the previous film, with the Sully family reeling from the death of their eldest son. While traveling with a tribe of merchant Na’vi, they’re attacked by the violent Mangkwan tribe, a group of fire themed Na’vi led by the villainous Varang, played by Oona Chaplin (“The Comey Rule,” “The Hour”). Now separated, Jake Sully, played by Sam Worthington (“Hacksaw Ridge,” “Under the Banner of Heaven”), Neyteri, played by Zoe Saldaña (“Guardians of the Galaxy,” “Emilia Pérez”), their children Kiri, played by Sigourney Weaver (“Alien,” “Ghostbusters”), Lo'ak, played by Britain Dalton (“Dark Harvest,” “Goliath”), Tuk, played by Trinity Jo-Li Bliss (“The Life of Chuck,” “A Really Haunted Loud House”), and their adoptive human son Spider, played by Jack Champion (“Scream VI,” “Everything’s Going to Be Great”), must survive while being hunted by the human RDA military, the Na’vi form of Colonel Miles Quaritch, played by Stephen Lang (“Don’t Breathe,” “Public Enemies”), and Varang.

As expected, Cameron’s latest is a gigantic spectacle that’s difficult to describe in its visual majesty. Even without taking the incredibly detailed motion capture into account, “Fire and Ash” continues the series’ epic swaths of alien, naturalistic beauty and deep technicolor wonder. There are times where it almost seems as though Cameron has taken the observation that modern blockbusters have become too gray or washed out as a persona challenge. There’s a reason that even this franchise’s detractors can’t help but praise the look of these films, and this latest is a continuing example of that. Returning composer Simon Franglen (“Peppermint,” “The Magnificent Seven (2016)”) keeps James Horner’s original melodies alive just as much as he did before, but with new injections of alien, electronic motifs. Like the film itself, it's a familiar score, but an enhanced and broadened one. Cameron’s little Na’vi family continues to deliver the kinds of performances one would expect from a blockbuster of this scope. Worthington continues to deliver as an incredibly heartfelt soldier turned father, Weaver yet again surprises with how well she can play a teenager despite being in her mid 70s, and Saldaña once again turns out a heartbreakingly honest portrait of a woman dealing with an internal battle between her deep grief and her warrior spirit. Truly, her performances in this franchise are the stuff that Oscar nominations are made off, if the Academy ever decided to truly recognize motion capture performances.

What stands out the most in this particular film are Lang and Chaplin. Lang is exploring the fruits that were planted in “The Way of Water” with Quaritch, slowly helping him to evolve into possibly the franchise’s most fascinating character. He becomes a twisted version of the grizzled military man, as Cameron and screenwriters Rick Jaffa (“Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,” “Jurassic World”), Amanda Silver (“Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,” “Jurassic World”), Shane Salerno (“Armageddon (1998),” “Savages (2012)”), and Josh Friedman (“War of the Worlds (2005),” “The Fantastic Four: First Steps”) clearly see more for him than just being the main antagonist. Chaplin is also turning in a truly evil role here as Varang, the sort of villain so easy to hate it becomes fun. She has a clear swagger and energy to her that anytime she pops back up onscreen, she becomes a delight to watch.

What does become increasingly apparent as things continue is that this is a film that feels more like a direct sequel to the previous film than the third in the overall franchise. Eventually it essentially becomes “The Way of Water 2.5,” with some scenes and moments seeming as though they are repeating from the previous film. It’s the most frustrating aspect of the film, yet it somehow still doesn’t drag. There’s still plenty of new explorations made here, both emotional and in the overall narrative of the series. Despite being longer than the previous film, its pacing is somehow even better, resulting in a film that's getting more mileage out of its length. Normally when people say a film feels longer than it is, it's a bad thing. However, with “Fire and Ash” it feels longer simply because it seems impossible to cover the kind of ground Cameron does in the listed length.

Even more than with “The Way of Water,” “Fire and Ash” proves that the “Avatar” series is the largest, most expensive soap opera ever made. For some people, that will always be enough. It’s not just that the drama continues to escalate and complicate with each moment that passes on Pandora. But Cameron is a director who so clearly loves this world and cast of characters that he has created. Yes, it would be so easy for him to just cash a check as the producer of these and sit back and watch them print money. But by having his voice and hand in each of them, he injects them with something blockbuster entertainment is so often missing: sincerity. Not a moment goes by in any of these films where it isn’t apparent that he genuinely cares about what happens to Jake, Neyeteri, Kiri, Lo’ak, Spider, Tuk, Quaritch, or any other character just as much as we do. And that makes all the difference.

“Avatar: Fire and Ash” continues to deliver exactly what fans of the franchise would expect: great performances and visuals wrapped up in gorgeous science fiction locals and melodrama. At this point, it's a series that you’re either on board with or you’re not. For those who are here and committed, Cameron has laid the groundwork for even more interesting things to come in the potential (or inevitable) fourth and fifth films. 4.5/5