Babylon - Review

 

In this age of sequels, reboots, remakes, adaptations, and franchises, the phrase “go big or go home” becomes more and more understandable with each wunderkind director getting to make their big-budget original film. Damien Chazelle (“Whiplash,” “La La Land”) isn’t exactly a subtle filmmaker, but even by his standards, “Babylon” certainly is the biggest (and the most) movie he’s made yet.

Set in the late 1920s, specifically during the transition from silent films to talkies, the film follows an ensemble cast of Margot Robbie (“I, Tonya,” “Birds of Prey”) as Nellie LaRoy, an aspiring film actress, Diego Calva (“Narcos: Mexico,” “I Promise You Anarchy”), as Manny Torres, an assistant who dreams of a larger role in the film industry, Brad Pitt (“Bullet Train,” “Ocean’s Eleven (2001)”) as Jack Conrad, an aging silent film star, Li Jun Li (“Quantico,” “Wu Assassins”) as Lady Fay Zhu, a burlesque singer and title card artist, Jovan Adepo (“Overlord,” “When They See Us”) as Sidney Palmer, a trumpet player for various Hollywood parties, and Jean Smart (“Hacks,” “Designing Women”) as Elinor St. John, a sensationalist journalist for various Hollywood magazines.

At three hours long and featuring a moment involving an elephant and some feces that would make the Jackass guys blush in the first ten minutes, “Babylon” makes a very specific statement right at the start: this ain’t gonna be a movie for everyone. It’s extravagant nature and large-scale story might seem like the kind of tale that could be enjoyed by all, but as Damien himself put it “this is a love letter to cinema and a hate letter to Hollywood.” It sticks to its guns the entire way though, never faltering from this very specific viewpoint and tone. If nothing else, it’s consistent and committed to its vision.

Robbie is absolutely incredible. This is easily the performance of her career, a character of impeccable excess and emotional distress, constantly battling with herself and her dream job, with her dreams and the studio forcing her into a box to attempt to achieve those dreams. She’s powerful in virtually every scene, consistently hilarious, and an enigmatic beauty that seems destined to live in the minds of her film’s audiences forever. Diego is also excellent, and while more nuanced of a performance than Robbie’s, he nevertheless proves to be an equally compelling character as he delves through various moral dilemmas in his quest for recognition in the industry he loves.

Pitt is also great, although his character has various shades of other films in his storyline making him just a bit less compelling compared to the others. Adepo is an absolute heartbreaking delight, as he’s clearly one of the smartest people in the room most of the time with no one to actually take him seriously. As Sidney’s takes off, the tale turns sour in ways unexpected but always grounded thanks to Adepo’s performance. The same goes for the absolute scene-stealer that is Jun Li, completely running away with the film despite being in a fraction of it. She, like Robbie, perfectly balances the emotional core of her arc with the film’s extravagant excess to fantastic results.

“Babylon” is also the kind of movie wherein every performance shines through. It’s a true ensemble piece in that way. Olivia Hamilton (“First Man,” “Don’t Worry, He Won’t Get Far on Foot”) might only be onscreen for fifteen minutes as LaRoy’s longtime director Ruth Adler, but she nevertheless feels like a featured player thanks to the fantastic script from Chazelle and the blood, sweat, and tears each actor pours into their performances.

Chazelle’s script, like the film’s graphic content, definitely isn’t for everyone. It’s proudly unsubtle, but not in a dumb way. Alternatively, it feels like he felt as though, given the excess of Hollywood, subtly has no place in a story like this. Therefore, plenty of moments, including the heartbreaking climax of Sidney Palmer’s arc, are presented with hardly any subtlety or pomp and circumstance. It’s in those very specific moments where Chazelle allows the music, the glitz and glamour to fade away and leave just his actors and their material to make a statement. Even in the end, after the much-discussed final montage, the last thing you see isn’t the montage, it’s Manny’s face staring off into the distance, telling us everything we need to know.

Regardless of your thoughts on the film’s content, the technical aspects are ridiculously excellent. This is yet another movie from Chazelle score by Justin Hurwitz (“La La Land,” “Whiplash”) and his thumping music not only serves to frame the film’s flamboyant moments well, but also provide a great score for the softer moments. With a slow organ grinder sound, it feels like a cool glass of water in the midst of the hot sweaty events of the rest of the film.

Shot by Linus Sandgren (“No Time to Die,” “La La Land”), the film’s cinematography has a similar effect, going for plenty of quick and crazy movements where appropriate, and dialing into a more intimate, claustrophobic style when needed. It frames the film’s incredible sets and costumes with a gold-colored glasses and feels like a window into a bygone era in the best way.

That window gets progressively more cracked as things go on, and it becomes very clear what kind of movie Chazelle is making here. A tale about love, so often it puts its characters on display dealing with rejection and their intense love of their art in various ways. Some will stumble and fall and succeed, but it never doesn’t feel genuine.

There’s just something intoxicating about a film like this, and if you’re in its target demographic, it can feel like a borderline hypnotic experience. To editorialize for a moment, at one point about two-thirds in, a character walks into a tunnel and my screening glitched for a moment. However, I don’t actually know if that was a glitch or if that was an intentional moment from Chazelle to punctuate the transition into the world within this tunnel. But the fact that I even for a moment thought that was a possibility speaks to the kind of film he’s crafted.

“Babylon” is a divisive film with an incredibly specific vision and an impossibly intoxicating vibe. It’s hard to say if Chazelle’s entire career has been building to this moment, but this feels like a response to someone watching “La La Land” and saying to him “Now tell me how you really feel.” Robbie is giving the best performance of her career, and the entire rest of the cast headlines a movie with incredible technical merits and storytelling flare. If nothing else, this is an uncompromised film from a director who’s earned it in such a short time. Whether or not it’s for you, only you can say. But there isn’t a film like it this year and hasn’t been in quite some time. 5/5

Women Talking - Review: A Movie Everyone Should Be Talking About

 

Despite the seeming lack of visual flair, with a good script, even a film consisting entirely of people talking can be some of the most engrossing and thrilling cinema out there. It’s been shown time and again and now writer/director Sarah Polley (“Take This Waltz,” “Alias Grace”) has adapted Miriam Toews’s novel “Women Talking” into a thrilling and powerfully acted work of dialogue, sisterhood, and solidarity.

Set in 2010, the film follows a group of Mennonite women who discover that the men of their community have been using animal tranquilizers to drug and rape them in their sleep. After some of the men leave to bail out those arrested, the women decide to convene and discuss what to do: to stay and do nothing, to stay and fight back, or to leave.

Featuring a stacked ensemble cast with the likes of Jessie Buckley (“Chernobyl,” “i’m thinking of ending things”), Rooney Mara (“The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo,” “Carol”), Claire Foy (“First Man,” “Unsane”), Ben Wishaw (“Paddington,” “Skyfall”), Frances McDormand (“Fargo,” “Nomadland”), and Sheila McCarthy (“The Umbrella Academy,” “Die Hard 2”) to just name a few, the film is at its most powerful and fascinating when it simply focuses on the internal strifes and differing values of these women. Yes, the title is literal, there is a lot of women talking. But it gives way to some truly powerhouse performances from virtually everyone involved. Buckley and Foy particularly absolutely steal the entire film, but don’t mistake singling them out for damning anyone else with faint praise.

Given the simplistic nature, the film’s usage of color and even its aspect ratio feel taught and purposeful. It’s washed out, but there’s still moments of stark beauty and color which, coupled with the claustrophobic framing, lends a kind of hidden beauty to the film. It shines through despite the circumstances around it, sometimes in spite of. It’s all set to a gorgeous score from composer Hildur Guðnadóttir (“Joker,” “Tár”) that, plain and simple, elevates material that was already fantastic to begin with.

It’s in the discussions where the most interesting aspects of the film lie. Bringing up the conflicting ideas of fighting and violence, the condemning of the men, and singling out certain others. The presence of Wishaw’s character, for example, has a lingering ode over the entire discussion. They need him to dictate as none of the women can write, but few of them actually want him there. These themes of masculinity and, to simplify it greatly, who “the good men are” are further explored with the character of Melvin, played by August Winter (“Mary Kills People,” “Between”), a member of the community who was raped and afterwards began to identify as a young male within the community.

There’s almost a privilege to the film that Polley expertly displays thanks to the intimacy of it all. Yes, this is a public forum for these women, but the shooting style and ferocity makes it feel as though we’re watching something secretive, that we possibly shouldn’t be seeing so openly. It lays the emotions bare. So often we see “talking” films made and criticized for being somewhat boring due to their dialogue heavy nature. But Polley expertly lets the acting take the center stage, letting the performances strengthen the already fantastic script to bolster the rest of the film.

Maybe it’s weird to say given that it is just a movie about women talking, but there is a kind of magic to watching it. Getting to peek behind such a monumental moment in these women’s lives, and it feels special. It feels mountainous by the end of things, accomplishing a lot but also giving the sense like you’re looking into almost a dream like state of happening.

“Women Talking” feels like a trick, a spell of a film. Yes, it consists entirely of standing around and talking, and yet it is somehow one of the most gorgeous looking and beautifully constructed films of the year, packed with stellar performances and a musical score that will transport you. There’s an ethereal nature to it all that makes it feel truly unlike any other film of its ilk and of this year. 5/5

Puss in Boots: The Last Wish - Review

 

After years trapped in development hell, multiple scrapped story ideas, and two studio buyouts of its animation studio later, the sequel to the 2011 “Shrek” spin-off film is here. From its first trailer, “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” dazzled with a new watercolor painting inspired visual style. But is this sequel more than a decade later more than just a pretty kitty face?

Directed by Joel Crawford (“The Croods: A New Age”) and written by Paul Fisher (“The Croods: A New Age,” “The LEGO Ninjago Movie”), Tom Wheeler (“Puss in Boots (2011),” “The LEGO Ninjago Movie”), and Tommy Swerdlow (“Cool Runnings,” “The Grinch (2018)”), the film follows the titular hero Puss in Boots, voiced by Antonio Banderas (“Pain & Glory,” “The Mask of Zorro”), who, after losing eight of his nine lives, decides to seek out the fabled wishing star in the hopes of using the wish to regain his nine lives. Accompanied by Perrito, voiced by Harvey Guillén (“Werewolves Within,” “What We Do in the Shadows (2019)”), he must also outrun the criminal gang of Goldilocks, voiced by Florence Pugh (“Don’t Worry Darling,” “Midsommar”), and the three bears; Mama, Papa, and Baby, voiced by Olivia Colman (“The Favourite,” “Heartstopper”), Ray Winstone (“Beowulf,” “Black Widow”), and Samson Kayo (“Famalam,” “Our Flag Means Death”) respectively, as well as his old flame Kitty Softpaws, voiced by Salma Hayek (“Once Upon a Time in Mexico,” “The Hitman’s Bodyguard”), Big Jack Horner, voiced by John Mulaney (“Documentary Now!,” “Big Mouth”), all while being hunted by a mysterious deadly wolf, voiced by Wagner Moura (“Narcos,” “Elysium”).

While the visual style is the most distinctly noticeable thing at first glance, arguably the film’s most impressive accomplishment is its emotional maturity. The tale is all about Puss on the run from death, attempting to regain his past glories, and there are multiple moments where the emotional toll on him is shown. None of these moments ever feel dumbed down or childish either, such as a sequence in a haunted forest with Perrito wherein Puss has a panic attack. It’s clear that the emotional core of the film and each character was taken very seriously, and it makes for a more engaging film as a result.

Helping that emotional core are the stellar vocal performances. Hayek and Guillén are great and play really well off of Banderas, but he truly steals the show. Given how many films he’s done as Puss, it makes sense that his mannerisms would be second nature to Banderas, but the actor really gives it his all, delivering a wonderful and emotive performance that is full of energy and enrapturing life. Pugh and her three bears are also great, delivering some fantastic work in their subplot, even as the bears get more of the childish humor from the script. Moura is also an incredibly menacing villain, not just because he truly feels dangerous in the context of the adventure, but because he’s voiced excellently, avoiding simple gruff vocal fry and going for a full-bodied, energetic portrayal of menace.

Mulaney, however, sticks out like a sore thumb, pun entirely intended. The way he voices Jack Horner seems like it would be the right approach initially, and the character certainly gets his fair share of great gags and moments. But the longer the film goes on, the more apparent it becomes that he’s simply too big for the material. Yes, this is a movie set in a world that takes fairy tales seriously and also not seriously, but he just feels disconnected from the tightrope walked by the rest of the cast. It's not enough to ruin the film, as he is a secondary villain who’s only in it for maybe ten minutes at most, but he’s certainly the worst aspect.

Speaking of fairy tales though, from the opening moments which proudly proclaim that “this is a fairy tale”, to the very end, there’s a wonderful energy to the entire film that makes it come alive. It feels like you’re watching a window into another world, going on an adventure with these characters, thanks to a combination of the terrific vocal performances and the visual style. But it’s the energy and heart at the center of it all that makes things truly take off. It’s not charm, although the film does have buckets of that, but an energy that comes from how seriously it takes its central character and its world. Quite simply, it's hard not to smile and be swept off your feet the whole way through.

Now about that visual style. Simply put, this might just be Dreamworks’ most gorgeous film yet. While previous movies have experimented with differing art-styles, like the earlier 2022 film “The Bad Guys” or the Dreamworks produced and Mikros Image animated “Captain Underpants”, but this is an entirely different ballpark. Not only does it embrace the alternating frame rates seen in films like “Into the Spider-Verse" but the entire look of the film feels like a gorgeous watercolor painting, like the kind of illustrations you might see in an old book of fairy tales. It brings the entire world to life in a way it never did before, and it actually ends up making the 2011 film look far worse by comparison. Characters fur is made of splotches and smudges, the lighting and colors feel distinct, motion lines appear to accentuate movement, and numerous moments of standout single color backgrounds pinpoint specific moments wonderfully. If nothing else, it’s a beauty of a film to behold.

“Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” might just be the surprise of the year. A sequel to an oft forgotten 2011 film and the first entry in the “Shrek” franchise in nearly a decade, it bursting with visual wonder and a lively energy the studio hasn’t seen in a very long time. Bolstered by an incredible cast and a touching emotional core, it’s the kind of movie that is clearly a cult favorite in the making. And a gorgeous one at that. 4.5/5

Avatar: The Way of Water - Review

Is it even possible to critique a movie like this? Love it or hate it, the original “Avatar” has had a bizarrely massive impact on the landscape of cinema, ushering in the era of mainstream 3D, the visual effects heavy blockbuster, and somehow becoming the highest grossing film of all time. Yet, it feels like every day there are new articles, tweets, and think pieces put out about how little overall impact it’s had since. “How could a movie with so much money be remembered by so few people?” the internet asks itself virtually every week, not recognizing the irony its these statements repetition. Despite James Cameron (“Terminator 2: Judgment Day,” “Titanic”) announcing a litany of sequels way back in 2009, its only now in 2022 that we’re seeing the first of those released: “Avatar: The Way of Water.” And once again the film proves the age-old adage; “Never bet against James Cameron.”

Set fourteen years after the events of the first film, “The Way of Water”, the film follows Jake Sully, played by Sam Worthington (“Hacksaw Ridge,” “Under the Banner of Heaven”), and Neytiri, played by Zoë Saldaña (“Crossroads,” “Guardians of the Galaxy”), attempting to raise a family while also fighting back the Humans who continue to try and colonize Pandora. After an attack and attempted kidnapping of their children; Lo'ak, played by Britain Dalton (“Goliath”), Tuk, played by Trinity Jo-Li Bliss (“The Garcias”), Neteyam, played by Jamie Flatters (“The School for Good and Evil,” “The Forgotten Battle”), and Kiri, played by Sigourney Weaver (“Working Girl,” “Alien”), as well as human child Spider, played by Jack Champion, by an Avatar clone of Colonel Miles Quaritch, played by Stephen Lang (“Don’t Breathe,” “Public Enemies”), the family decides to leave their forest home for the Metkayina ocean clan lead by Tonowari, played by Cliff Curtis (“Fear the Walking Dead,” “Training Day”) and Ronal, played by Kate Winslet (“Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind,” “Mare of Easttown”).

At three hours and twelve minutes, this is no small trek back to the world of Pandora. On paper, it can easily seem like a smaller scale adventure compared to the first film’s. But in practice, Cameron and his co-writers Rick Jaffa (“Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,” “Jurassic World”), Amanda Silver (“Dawn of the Planet of the Apes,” “Jurassic World”), Josh Friedman (“War of the Worlds (2005),” “Terminator: Dark Fate”), and Shane Salerno (“Savages,” “Salinger”) have crafted a film that is the textbook example of something that works far better in motion than on paper. While the story may be fairly routine, it’s a tale of a family going on the run and hiding out to protect themselves from a dangerous threat, it's in the characters that everything truly shines. It at times could even draw comparisons to films like “Running on Empty” in how it portrays its family on the run dynamic.

That doesn’t mean its flawless by any means, and the biggest negative against the writing is the fact that it feels as though elements are simply introduced just to be brought up again in future sequels. It’s understandable enough given that this is one of four sequels to come out, but it could still have been established more gracefully than it is here. That being said, the film’s atmosphere is the clear reason to see something like this. Vistas are breathtaking, and the film feels all-encompassing, like its reaching out and wrapping the viewer in a blanket made of celluloid to transport you to the world of Pandora. An IMAX screen and a pair of 3D glasses are a must for at least one viewing.

While the characterizations have improved from a writing perspective, a lot of credit also has to go to the actors. Worthington is excellent as Sully, now having slotted himself into a fatherly role. He’s clearly juggling a lot and he comes off as earnest and protective in a great way. Saldaña plays off him well, and the pair have great chemistry, while she balances Neytiri’s threatening protective nature and her calmer motherly instincts well. The familial chemistry is just great, with Dalton, Bliss, Flatters and Weaver seeming all too realistic in their sibling dynamic. Lang is appropriately threatening, but also allows for a large amount of conflict and confusion in his role. He isn’t simply a carbon copy of Quaritch, and the difference between his Avatar clone and his human personality clash in really interesting ways.

Lang’s interplay with Champion represents the film’s most complicated relationship and Champion might be one of the film’s most vita assets, even if he doesn’t immediately seem so. Curtis and Winslet are also charming in their back and forth, representing a differing parenting and leadership style for Sully and Neytiri, with Curtis in particular being him usually endlessly charming self. However, the film’s standout is Weaver, without a doubt. Somehow the 73-year-old actress has turned in her best performance in years as an achingly sincere portrait of a teenage girl searching for her place in the world. She’s both extremely easy to empathize with and also fiercely independent, delivering the film’s best performance and most lovable character.

It should be no surprise given the long development of the film and who Cameron is, but the film’s visual effects are breathtaking. Separate from the atmosphere of the world, there are entire sequences that feel like nothing else you’ve seen before, regardless of if you actually have or not. It simply takes you away into this other world. While it is gorgeous on a technical level, enough can’t be said about the film’s production design and art direction; the visuals might be detailed, but if those aren’t also good, then none of that matters. The gorgeous oceans and forests spring to life, from the largest tree to the tiniest sea creature. It feels truly like a masterclass in worldbuilding, as if you’re watching a documentary set on another planet.

The cinematography, shot by Russell Carpenter (“True Lies,” “Titanic”), in particular feels excellent given the effects heavy production of the film. That it somehow turned out a film this cohesive and gorgeously shot, given the myriad of underwater and technical elements on display, is an achievement. And it bears repeating, when you see a fully live action human character like Spider interacting with the all-digital world and characters flawlessly, with nary a seam or green screen flicker to be seen, that’s when it truly blows you away. Not in the wide vistas and gorgeous landscapes, but in the effort to make sure even this one character still feels like he really belongs there.

A lot has been made of the success of “The Way of Water,” from the box office to the polarizing audience reception. Most on “film twitter” seem baffled by the film’s success and at the time of writing it has just barely crossed 500K logs on Letterbox’d, a number nearly doubled by “Glass Onion.” So how is it making so much money when so few “film” people are seeing it? Quite simply, Cameron knows how to make a four-quadrant crowd pleaser, and “The Way of Water” is an easy example of how to make that film and still make it excellent. With characters that are easy to get invested in, a gorgeous visual style, and an all-encompassing world to get lost in, “The Way of Water” is the kind of film that simply washes over you. 4.5/5

The Whale - Review

From the start, there’s something off about “The Whale.” Maybe it’s the claustrophobic set, the dimly lit atmosphere, or the musical score. Or maybe it’s the fact that the film represents likely the most “normal” film that director Darren Aronofsky (“Requiem for a Dream,” “Black Swan”) has ever made. As a director whose previous works have heavily trafficked in the absurd, fantastical, and horrific, seeing a work as intimate as this is, for better or worse, a huge departure.

Adapted by Samuel D. Hunter (“Baskets”) from his own stage play, the film follows Charlie, played by Brendan Fraser (“The Mummy,” “Doom Patrol”), a gay reclusive college professor struggling with morbid obesity and congestive heart failure. We see him try to reconnect with his daughter Ellie, played by Sadie Sink (“Fear Street Part Two: 1978,” “Stranger Things”), conversing with door-to-door monastery Thomas, played by Ty Simpkins (“Insidious,” “Iron Man 3”), and trying to keep his spirits up with his personal nurse and best friend Liz, played by Hong Chau (“Downsizing,” “The Menu”).

There’s been plenty said about the film’s portrayal of obesity and while it's easy to point fingers at the source material, it has to be said that Aronofsky's very particular style and viewpoint definitely add something to the film adaptation. What he adds ends up being a kind of zookeeper like visual aesthetic that often times invites audiences to point and stare and gawk at Charlie’s size. It feels incredibly awkward and uncomfortable, and maybe that’s the point, but it certainly doesn’t feel respectful of the character or the person.

Which is odd since the film seems to require it. This tale requires that the viewer empathize with Charlie and moments like him opening a drawer full of health snacks and frowning, before opening a drawer with candy bars and smiling feel almost cartoonish. However, those moments, and the film itself, do have a secret weapon: Fraser. His performance is towering and incredible, and there are so many moments that start out cartoonish that feel retroactively corrected by the emotion and skill of his talent. He’s the heart of the movie by virtue, but he never rests on that idea, working to earn Charlie’s spot in our hearts at every turn.

It’s a role so excellent that it fundamentally saves that film. Whatever weird look at obesity that Aronofsky could have turned this into with another actor is twisted into a heartbreaking drama because of Fraser. Without him, the film would simply be worse. Yes, it’s a big dramatic role for an actor we haven’t seen in quite a while, but Fraser never rests on expectations. He's working at every moment to earn the empathy for Charlie and the love for his performance.

As for the rest of the cast? Well, even in comparison to Fraser’s role, they’re hit or miss. Simpkins may have some boyish awkwardness but he’s overall fine in his role, nothing worth writing home about. Chau is fantastic meanwhile, playing wonderfully off of Fraser to the point where it’s easy to wish the film was just the two of them. Sink meanwhile is playing things up to an almost disastrous degree; yes, the point of her character is that she’s mean, but the acting calls to mind a sitcom on the Disney Channel, disconnected from the reality of the film. The same goes for Samantha Morton’s (“Synecdoche, New York,” “The Walking Dead”) brief appearance as Charlie’s ex-wife and Ellie’s mother Mary, overplaying things for the entirety of her very brief appearance.

For a movie that is essentially a filmed version of a static stage play, it is shot remarkably well. Cinematographer Matthew Libatique (“Requiem for a Dream,” “A Star is Born (2018)”) takes full advantage of the enclosed set, lighting things with dreary colors and creating an oppressive atmosphere that practically locks out all colors brighter than beige. It’s a specific look that works for the mood of the film and the rare stage-to-film adaptation that seems to make full use of its static nature.

“The Whale” is a complicated film that’s biggest issue seems to be the one sitting directly behind the camera. With a play, the entire point is that it's simply a showcase for the actors. There is no camera zooming in on specific moments to put them on display, nor is there a person telling the camera what moments to zero in on. It’s why so many works on the stage are effective at removing their visual point of view, because the nature of the medium means that there isn’t one.

In the hands of a more subtle or empathetic director, this could be a true masterpiece. However, as it stands, this is a flawed film that exists best as a showcase of the difference between an actor and a director who clearly are approaching a character from two different viewpoints. None of that can ruin Fraser’s towering performance though, which, set against Chau’s great supporting performance and the film’s cinematograph, still provide a story worth watching. 3.5/5

Roald Dahl's Matilda: The Musical - Review

 

In the realm of stories, there is no writer comparable to Roald Dahl. His stories have such a bizarre and eccentric twinge to them, it takes even the more mundane tales and explodes them into tales of fantasy and imagination and twisted humor. While the most obvious and famous of his stories is “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory,” a very close second is “Matilda”, which already saw a film adaptation in the 90s directed by Danny DeVito. Now, here comes an adaptation of an adaptation, a filmed version of the Broadway musical version of “Matilda” simply titled “Roald Dahl’s Matilda the Musical.”

Directed by Matthew Warchus (“Simpatico,” “Pride (2014)”), who directed the stage show, and written by Dennis Kelly (“Black Sea,” “Together”), who wrote the stage show, the film follows young Matilda Wormwood, played by Alisha Weir (“Don't Leave Home”), as she deals with mean and idiotic parents, played by Stephen Graham (“Boardwalk Empire,” “Public Enemies”) and Andrea Riseborough (“The Devil’s Whore,” “Oblivion”), and the tyrannical principal Miss Trunchbull, played by Emma Thompson (“Love Actually,” “Angels in America”), with the help of her kind teacher Miss Honey, played by Lashana Lynch (“No Time to Die,” “The Woman King”), and librarian Mrs. Phelps, played by Sindhu Vee (“Starstruck (2021)”).

The plot will immediately be familiar to anyone who’s seen the 90s film or read the original book, as not much has changed in adaptation here. Some elements have been cut and streamlined, more on those later, but this isn’t a radical reinvention of the material by any means. Weir is adorable and fierce as Matilda, grounding her in a mature view of the cruelty of the world without losing her childhood spirit. Lynch is the film’s heart, and arguably the best Miss Honey of any adaptation thus far. She’s incredibly kind and just melts your heart nearly the moment you meet her. The same goes for Vee, who’s passionate love of Matilda’s stories is always a delight.

Graham and Riseborough are both fine, tracking in the same kind of big character choices and extravagant overplaying that every actor to fill the Wormwood’s shoes has since the beginning. Thompson, meanwhile, defies the potential stunt casting of her role and simply fades into the nastiness of Trunchbull with utter glee. Not since her turn in the “Nanny McPhee” films has she so fully lost herself in a role, and it becomes a delight to see her throughout the picture.

Anyone who’s listened to the soundtrack or seen the stage musical will be familiar with the infectious tunes here and not much has changed regarding the songs. “Quiet” is still a heartbreaking ballad that many a young adult will likely relate too, “When I Grow Up” will bring smiles and tears to parents of all kinds, and “Revolting Children” is a perfect display of Dahl’s classic wordplay mixed with a high energy victorious number. However, all of that only applies to the songs included, as there have been quite a few cut. “Loud,” “Pathetic,” “Telly” and the entire character of Matilda’s brother have all been cut from the film, and the story of the Trapeze artist and the escapologist have been turned from songs into spoken story segments.

It’s natural to have numbers cut when adapting a musical to film, but it feels like large swaths of the musical are missing, and these cuts don’t help what feels like a two and a half hour long musical squeeze itself into a 117-minute runtime. It also doesn’t help that a major climactic moment feels extremely out of place, resembling something closer to the finale of a superhero television series rather than a moment in a musical adaptation of “Matilda.”

What songs do remain though are fully of incredible choreography and imagination across the board. “Revolting Children” is a massive highlight as various kids hop around the screen in near flawless synchronized dance. It’s a film that, at the very least, isn’t afraid to be a musical, and the production design is a masterful display of color and choreography. Even if a few weak digital effects show the film’s budget, the high quality of the practical sets and design of everything is nothing short of impressive.

It’s likely that the biggest fans of this filmed version of the Broadway hit will be the people who haven’t seen or listened to the stage version, as they won’t be familiar with the cuts made to fit the filmed format. Even if you are aware though, those excised moments can’t damper a high energy, gorgeously designed and choreographed musical adventure with some great performances and sense of childlike wonder. 3.5/5

Violent Night - Review

 

There’s no better tradition at this time of year than getting the whole family together, cozying up under a nice warm blanket, and enjoying a family flick together. And for those with more grown families, there’s no better time to indulge in something a bit more violent. So, from producer David Leitch’s (“John Wick,” “Bullet Train”) seemingly unending barrage of highly choreographed action films comes something for the holidays in the form of “Violent Night.”

The film, written by Patrick Casey (“Golan the Insatiable,” “Sonic the Hedgehog (2020)”) and Josh Miller (“Golan the Insatiable,” “Sonic the Hedgehog (2020)”) and directed by Tommy Wirkola (“Dead Snow,” “Hansel and Gretel: Witch Hunters”) (who’s no stranger to violent holiday fare), follows Santa Claus, played by David Harbour (“Stranger Things,” “Black Widow”), who decides to help fight off a group of mercenaries lead by “Mr. Scrooge”, played by John Leguizamo (“Romeo + Juliet,” “Ice Age”), who’ve decided to invade the home of a rich family on Christmas Eve.

Admittedly, there isn’t much to the plot of the film itself. It’s a lot of excuses to stage violent action sequences involving Santa letting his rage loose to kill a lot of faceless mercenary bad guys. There are plenty of seasonal and themed kills, including a few gnarly ones involving a snowblower and a candy cane, and it all maintains the same lighthearted semi-silly style of heavily staged violence that helped make “John Wick” a modern action staple.

Harbour is wonderfully fun as an older, jaded St. Nick and his banter with the young Trudy Lightstone, played by Leah Brady in her film debut, is extremely charming and gives the entire movie a big gooey heart at its center. Leah steals virtually every scene she’s in and imbues the film with its biggest secret weapon, more on that in a bit. The rest of the cast, which includes Alex Hassell (“Cowboy Bebop (2021),” “The Red Sea Diving Resort”) as Jason Lightstone, Trudy’s father, Alexis Louder (“Copshop,” “Watchmen (2019)”) as Linda Matthews, Trudy’s mother, Edi Patterson (“The Righteous Gemstones,” “Knives Out”) as Alva Steele-Lightstone, Jason’s perpetually drunk sister, Alexander Elliot (“The Hardy Boys (2020),” “Odd Squad”) as Bertrude, Alva’s idiot influencer son, and Beverly D’Angelo (“Coal Miner’s Daughter,” “American History X”) as Gertrude Lightstone, the matriarch of the family, are all fine, doing exactly what’s needed of them without ever really standing out. Leguizamo is chewing a lot of scenery quite angrily, and the romantic reconciling of Hassell and Louder’s characters is admittedly sweet, but none of it can really be called particularly memorable.

Rather, where things really shine is in the movie’s honest sense of Christmas spirit. It seems silly to point out given the incredibly blood-soaked violence on display, but the movie plays into the tropes about warm heartedness, being kind, and the magic of the holidays in a way that really works. Part of it is the chemistry between Harbour and Brady, but its also the genuine sincerity beneath the surface. It’s a movie that clearly does want to believe in the season, despite all the jabs at entitled kids and skim milk.

Despite this, there is a general feeling that the film is missing something to truly take it above and beyond. Comparing it to other films of this ilk and they all have something that sets them apart: “Atomic Blonde” has the neon-soaked production design, “John Wick” has the obsessive rules and lore, “Nobody” has its insane lead performance. “Violent Night” is a lot of fun and certainly justifies its own existence, but it lacks that central spark to make it something truly memorable.

That being said, it’s still an absolute blast to run through this adventure with a Santa whose suit is so red you can’t see the stab wounds. Harbour is a hoot, Brady is adorable, the action is crunchy and with a seasonal cheer, and it’s a quick adventure all done in one night. Given that, early on, Santa states that one of the presents he has in his sack is “a blu-ray of Die Hard”, it’s a movie clearly aware of what it is and what it wants to do. It’s not a shiny new toy, but a well-worn one that easily gets the job done. 3.5/5

Spirited (2022) - Review

In the grand tradition of classic song and dance musicals and the endless machine of holiday themed films, Apple TV+ and co-writer/director Sean Anders (“Instant Family,” “Daddy’s Home”) have brought us “Spirited”, a new musical adaptation of “A Christmas Carol” with more than a few twists on the classic tale.

The film mainly follows The Ghost of Christmas Present, played by Will Ferrell (“Anchorman,” “Step Brothers”), as he works with the Ghost of Christmas Past, played by Sunita Mani (“GLOW,” “Save Yourself!”) and the Ghost of Christmas Yet-To-Come, voiced by Tracy Morgan (“30 Rock,” “The Last O.G.”), in changing a despicable person into a good one every Christmas eve, lead by Jacob Marley, played by Patrick Page (“In The Heights (2021),” “The Gilded Age”). One year though, Present sets his sights on changing Clint Briggs, played by Ryan Reynolds (“Deadpool,” “Free Guy”), a sleazy PR consultant who’s considered by Marley to be unredeemable. Octavia Spencer (“Fruitvale Station,” “Hidden Figures”) also stars as Briggs’s longtime assistant and reluctant friend Kimberly.

It's an interesting twist to be certain and showcasing the work that goes into each yearly haunt is fun idea. It doesn’t get nearly as much screentime as it initially seems, and the film itself actually sticks fairly close to the plot of a typical “Christmas Carol”-type of tale. Some of the best things that Anders and co-writer John Morris (“Hot Tub Time Machine,” “Instant Family”) end up adding are actually the discussions of right and wrong. At multiple moments the futility of focusing on just one person one night a year is brought up, as well as who that person should be. It’s an interesting wrinkle to discuss, at it at the very least shows that Anders and Morris are thinking about the modern-day implications of these tales.

Ferrell does a great job as Present, bringing a surprising amount of drama to the comedy. His role isn’t nearly as annoying or high energy as one might initially expect from him, and it’s better for it. Reynolds likewise also tones down his typically smary persona, turning in a role that’s exactly as sleazy and aware as it needs to be without overplaying things too much. Morgan is silly exactly when needed, and Mani steals every scene she’s in. Page is perfectly fine as the grumbly kind of role required for Marley, and Spencer is great, although not doing anything particularly new. No one is bad, and Ferrell and Reynolds in particular have an old school showman styling to their roles, but no roles really jump out as anything particularly exceptional.

The musical aspect though does. It feels like any live-action musical released nowadays is either ashamed it’s a musical, has little-to-no choreography, or only has three songs. “Spirited” spits in the face of those lesser musicals and pulls out all the stops. From large scales sets with fantastical lighting and camerawork to choreography that feels lively, it’s a big budget Hollywood musical that they just don’t make anymore. It even manages to balance the high energy, highly decorated numbers with a few simpler ones, including one lit entirely with on set flashlights. There are even moments where a song isn’t happening, but dancing is. A handful of montages have people tap dancing feverishly sprinkled throughout, simply because it looks cool, and it adds to the idea that this is a movie refreshingly proud to be a musical.

It's a fantastically stylistic musical, if nothing else, and the songs are fairly great as well. While the slowest and most reprised one for Spencer is a bit forgettable, the new numbers from songwriting duo Benj Pasek and Justin Paul (“La La Land,” “Dear Evan Hansen”) are just a toe-tapping good time. From Reynolds’s tongue-in-cheek “evil” song “Bringin’ Back Christmas” to Ferrell’s emotional ballad “Unredeemable,” each song legitimately earns its place within the film.

It's easy to see a movie like this, a new twist on a classic Christmas story and be worried that it will simply come across as too sleazy or cynical. But that’s the other amazing thing, Anders injects the film with a surprising amount of sincerity. The emotional arcs not only work, they feel legitimately earned, and the movie overall has a great since of holiday wonder to it all. In an age where it feels like any genuine sincerity is shot down before it gets to earnest, “Spirited” is a movie that embraces it.

While the performances might not be groundbreaking and it might not take full advantage of it’s “new” premise, “Spirited” is a wholly enjoyable big song and dance number of a movie. Christmas musicals aren’t anything new, but the clear enthusiasm for the genre and the energy of it all go a long way towards reinvigorating the idea of the showmanship needed for this kind of big budget Hollywood musical. It’s a toe-tapping good time that’ll put a smile on your face if nothing else. 4/5

Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery - Review

 

When “Knives Out” burst onto the scene in 2019, it had received critical praise, but audience reception was still up in the air. Then it virtually doubled its projected five-day weekend gross over Thanksgiving and went on to have some of the best box office legs of the year. For an original film to gross over $300 million worldwide and receive acclaim and best of the year awards in this cinematic climate was an achievement. This success led Netflix to bid an outrageous $460 million for just two sequels from writer/director Rian Johnson (“Looper,” “Star Wars: The Last Jedi”), the first of which has finally graced us in the form of “Glass Onion.”

Once again starring Daniel Craig (“No Time to Die,” “Logan Lucky”) as the eponymous detective Benoit Blanc, the film follows a weekend getaway hosted by tech genius billionaire Miles Bron, played by Edward Norton (“Birdman,” “Primal Fear”). He’s invited some of his closest friends for the weekend: Andi Brand, Miles’s ex-business partner, played by Janelle Monáe (“Moonlight,” “Hidden Figures”), Connecticut governor Claire Debella, played by Kathryn Hahn (“WandaVision,” “Mrs. Fletcher”), head scientist of Miles’s own company Lionel Toussaint, played by Leslie Odom Jr. (“Hamilton,” “One Night in Miami…”), former supermodel and fashion designer Birdie Jay, played by Kate Hudson (“Almost Famous,” “You, Me and Dupree”), and her assistant Peg, played by Jessica Henwick (“The Matrix Resurrections,” “Iron Fist”), and streamer and men’s rights activist Duke Cody, played by Dave Bautista (“Guardians of the Galaxy,” “Blade Runner 2049”), and his girlfriend Whiskey, played by Madelyn Cline (“Boy Erased,” “Outer Banks”). However, a mystery crops up and its of course up to Benoit Blanc to solve the case.

This review will be as spoiler free as possible because, for anyone who’s seen “Knives Out”, twists and turns are clearly Johnson’s favorite part of the genre. However, the two major distinctions about “Glass Onion” are the fact that you don’t have to have seen “Knives Out” to enjoy this new mystery and that the twists feel legitimately earned and well plotted. It’s the kind of movie that has just enough surprises to keep you guessing, while sprinkling enough clues throughout to make you think you’re piecing it all together. It also works in the sense that a second viewing will show you just where everything actually really did fit into place. Johnson’s script and plotting is so remarkably done that yes, they really did do everything they say they did, not just gaslighting you into thinking they did.

Although, as good as the mystery is, a film like this is an ensemble piece through and through, and Johnson has once again assembled a team of actors who are all having the time of their lives. It’s such a blast to see people like this play off each other, both for the film’s many hysterically funny moments and also for the drama. Because when it comes time for it, Johnson expertly balances the hysterical satirical comedy and the legitimate drama and stakes. There’s a point to be made, absolutely, but he never lets that point overpower the film’s legitimately enjoyable atmosphere and likewise never lets the idea of making an end-all-be-all fun movie temper those themes.

Craig is just as excellent as he was in the first film and manages to flesh Blanc out more this time around. He feels like a legitimate character, not just a justice system stand-in for each new adventure. Likewise, Monáe is doing some equally fantastic work. She’s been excellent before, but there’s an angle, a spark to her work here that sets it apart from everything else she’s ever done. The rest of the cast all manage to carve out their own memorable spots in the film without ever overshadowing each other. Hahn is a hysterical scene-stealer as much as she’s always been. Bautista is doing a great job skewering the kind of alpha male dudes he resembles in physique only. Hudson is just immaculately funny, and Henwick gets plenty of her own time to shine playing opposite her. Cline is great, balancing her previously established scene stealing delivery with the drama required for a tale like this. Odom Jr. is a great straight man to the unending chaos and ridiculousness of the weekend without being a spoil sport.

To watch Norton play a role that is clearly skewering a vast number of rich people that he’s likely encountered in his life is nothing short of incredible, and he delivers what is absolutely his best performance in years. His role is a perfect example of something Johnson does so incredibly well. It’s been evident in his previous films and especially is here: he is an actor’s director and is able to work so well with his cast to coax truly great performances out of them, regardless of the material. His touch is what sets a film like this apart; it makes it something where clear acting effort has happened as opposed to being a film that simple coasts along on the strength of its names alone.

What sets this film apart, and what makes it clear that if we are to get more annualized sequels that they’ll be great, is that despite the larger scaled sets, the lush locals, and the higher profile of the release, Johnson doesn’t let that distract from the craft. Its bigger, bolder, and funnier, but it still feels like the kind of movie he could have made before the previous one. Not just in terms of its easy ability to jump in without having seen the first, but in terms of its tight focus. It’s not the kind of movie that’s gotten away from its director because of money, but one that’s made better because of it. It lets him take bigger swings, play with bigger themes, and gives his creative team, like composer Nathan Johnson (“Knives Out,” “Looper”), more freedom with their craft as well. Speaking of, the new score here is an absolute delight, playing like some kind of twisted operatic orchestra that goes big with its strings when the moments need them the most.

It's hard to guess just how much money Netflix could have made if it had let “Glass Onion” play in more theatres for longer than just one week, but if the rabid audience attendance is anything to go by, they have another bona fide modern classic on their hands. And they’re right; “Glass Onion” is just as entertaining as the first, sprinkling in even lusher locations and bigger swings with the rest of Johnson’s now trademark twists and turns. If this begins a trend of one new “Knives Out” mystery during the holidays every two years, it’ll be a tradition well worth the wait. 5/5

Strange World - Review

 

With the release of any new Disney animated movie there comes plenty of expectations and “Strange World” is no different. Inspired by pulp novels from the early 20^th century and films like “Journey to the Center of the Earth” and the original “King Kong,” director Don Hall (“Big Hero 6,” “Moana”) and writer Qui Nguyen (“Raya and the Last Dragon,” “She Kills Monsters”) deliver a fun and gorgeous adventure flick that’s held back by its routine messaging.

The film follows Searcher Clade, voiced by Jake Gyllenhaal (“Donnie Darko,” “Nightcrawler”), son of legendary adventurer Jaeger Clade, voiced by Dennis Quaid (“The Right Stuff,” “Far From Heaven”), who’s recruited by Jaeger’s former team member and president of Avalonia Callisto Mal, voiced by Lucy Liu (“Charlie’s Angels (2000),” “Set It Up”) to venture underground to find the source of the problem with Avalonia’s energy source, accompanied by Searcher’s wife, crack pilot Meridian, voiced by Gabrielle Union (“Bring It On,” “Love & Basketball”), and their son Ethan, voiced by Jaboukie Young-White (“Someone Great,” “C’mon C’mon”).

Disney films of this caliber tend to have exceptional voice casts, but “Strange World” has a particularly strong one. Each actor brings their characters to life flawlessly, and it’s a truly lively film because of it. There’s some real energy behind each performance, successfully overcoming the “lazy celebrity voices” cliché that plagues most Hollywood animated films. It might just be the strongest voice cast of a Disney film in quite some time.

The art style is also particularly noteworthy. While it’s highly detailed and gorgeous because of the sheer amount of money thrown in, it’s also shines in the ways it deviates slightly from Disney’s previously established style. The characters are more cartoonish and exaggerated in their facial expressions and actions, giving everything a kind of squishiness that helps bring the adventure to life. Likewise, the heavy use of color schemes in the strange world and the city of Avalonia also helps to craft two distinct locations.

There are plenty of additional adventure movie trappings, from the general structure of the plot to the musical score, composed by Henry Jackman (“Kingsman: The Secret Service,” “Pokémon Detective Pikachu”). Neither of these are a detriment to the film at all: it’s been so long since we’ve gotten this kind of an adventure movie that it’s a welcome move even with some of the repetitive structure, and the musical score as well is lively and boisterous.

Rather, the largest detriment to the film’s quality is a different kind of repeated element. There’s so much creativity on display in the design of this new world, above and below ground. So much so that it feels particularly disappointing that the film’s emotional arcs and central conflict feel so routine.

It’s the kind of tale that Disney has done many times before, and in an age where it seemed like their animated films were getting more emotionally intelligent, it’s a shame that this one is fairly basic by comparison. It’s still a well made and well told story to be clear, but it lacks the same energy and creativity put into almost every other aspect of the film. It leaves you with more of a satisfying but not exciting film when things end, since you’ve spent almost two hours on a creative looking adventure that’s telling its story in a fairly generic way.

That being said, “Strange World” is still an overall well crafted and fun adventure, with a completely excellent voice cast and a gorgeous looking world to explore. Sure, it might not be the most creatively told story Disney has ever made, but it’s the kind of adventure that does a really good job of distracting you while you’re actively watching it. It’s an easy one to recommend, even if it doesn’t blow you away. 4/5

She Said - Review

 

In the long history of movie making, there’s been plenty of journalism movies. There have been fictional tales certainly, but the ones that remembered the fondest are the true stories. “Spotlight,” “All the President’s Men,” and now “She Said” is here to tell another true story, one very close to the home of the Hollywood people behind the production.

Starring Carey Mulligan (“Promising Young Woman,” “An Education”) and Zoe Kazan (“Ruby Sparks,” “The Plot Against America”) as New York Times reporters Megan Twohey and Jodi Kantor, respectively, the film follows their investigations into the sexual assault perpetrated by Harvey Weinstein and the cover up attempts from himself, his lawyers, and the board of Miramax. It also stars Patricia Clarkson (“Sharp Objects,” “The Station Agent”) as New York Times editor Rebecca Corbett, Andre Braugher (“Brooklyn Nine-Nine,” “Homicide: Life on the Street”) as New York Times editor Dean Baquet, and Ashley Judd (“Dolphin Tale,” “Missing (2012)”) playing herself in a cathartic minor role.

Nowadays, you’d be hard pressed to find anyone who doesn’t know who Weinstein is or what he did given the past few years of media fervor and court cases. Smartly, director Maria Schrader (“Unorthodox,” “I’m Your Man”) and writer Rebecca Lenkiewicz (“Small Axe,” “Disobedience”) don’t try to recount who he is or what his accomplishments are. In a rather brilliant move, the film virtually ignores who he is for most of the film. It’s not important, and not nearly as much as the women whose lives he’s impacted, and so that’s where the focus lies.

Kazan is wonderful, a delightful firecracker of a reporter who manages to effectively showcase the skill and intelligence on display while also balancing the deep emotion at the center of this issue. However, Gyllenhaal absolutely delivers a towering performance. She’s just excellent, delivering a performance that’s easily one of the finest, if not the best, of her career. Clarkson and Braugher are also excellent, providing a kind of elder wisdom to Twohey and Kantor as they run up against roadblocks and frustrations with the case. It’s so cathartic to see Braugher’s Baquet so unimpressed with Weinstein’s tactics and to so quickly shut him down on every phone call.

But arguably the film’s most cathartic element, and one that speaks to the true genius at the core of it, is Ashely Judd’s role. Yes, Judd’s role in the real-life investigation was necessary for the film to be made but having her play herself was not. This results in a role for an actress whose career had been essentially blocked after speaking out against Weinstein, and to have it be in a film directly about his horrible acts is, to reiterate, cathartic.

There’s an overall plainness to the film’s visuals and musical score, although this shouldn’t be taken as a negative by any means. The editing and overall pacing keeps everything tight and tense despite the flat look to it all. It might seem cheesy to say, but given how much of the film is just about typing stories and reporting, it might contain some of the tensest moments of the year, and is without a doubt the tensest clicking of a button on a webpage of this year.

Rather, the plainer visual style is a choice that clearly sets the focus of the film on the women who’ve suffered because of Weinstein’s actions. At multiple times throughout the film, Schrader and Lenkiewicz make you subtly think “If he hadn’t done this, what could these women be doing?” Seeing how their lives have continued since and how some have stalled is an emotional tour de force. When one simply responds to the knock at her front door from the Times by saying “I’ve been waiting for this for twenty-five years”, it sets everything into perspective.

It might not have the visual flair of works like “Spotlight” or “All the President’s Men” but “She Said” still has a fantastic script and phenomenal actors leading a story that feels cathartic to say the least. It might not be so good as to overcome the tropes of the genre, but this is a film that deserves to be remembered alongside the great journalism tales, and if nothing else is an excellent telling of an important story. 4.5/5

The Fabelmans - Review

 

You might wonder to yourself why someone like Steven Spielberg (“Jaws,” “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial”), a director who’s virtually entire career has consisted of telling stories about families and familial bonds, would bother making a movie about his own life. It could easily seem like overkill, as you can glean as much about his upbringing from his entire filmography as you could one autobiography.

That really is the biggest hurdle against the film: on paper, there are plenty of similarities to not only Spielberg’s past films, but also other autobiographical films from other directors. But what the film has in practice is far more than just melodrama, because it still has Spielberg’s direction, a script by Tony Kushner (“Angels in America,” “West Side Story (2021)”), cinematography by Janusz Kamiński (“Saving Private Ryan,” “Amistad”), music by John Williams (“Raiders of the Lost Ark,” “Star Wars”), and an entire cast of excellent actors bringing the drama to life.

The film follows the life of Sammy Fabelman, played as a young kid by Mateo Zoryon and a teenager by Gabriel LaBelle (“American Gigolo (2022),” “Brand New Cherry Flavor”), as he begins to develop his love of movies and filmmaking while growing up amidst his parent’s crumbling marriage and multiple moves across the country. Michelle Williams (“Brokeback Mountain,” “Blue Valentine”) plays his mother Mitzi Schildkraut-Fabelman, Paul Dano (“Little Miss Sunshine,” “Prisoners”) plays his father Burt Fabelman, and Seth Rogen (“Pineapple Express,” “Steve Jobs”) played family friend Bennie Loewy, with borderline cameo performances from Judd Hirsch (“Ordinary People,” “Independence Day”) and David Lynch (“Twin Peaks,” “Eraserhead”).

When you have a screenwriter with a pedigree like Kushner, there’s a certain level of quality to expect, and the script co-written with Spielberg is some really great melodrama. The dialogue has a naturalistic touch without feeling plain or boring. The film is also perfectly paced, never feeling rushed or slowing to a crawl. There are plenty of little touches that border on easter eggs for Spielberg’s later work as well, but more than anything, the spirit of the love of the movies is intact from the very first moments to the (literal) very end.

With material as rich as this, the cast has plenty of excellent material to work with and they’re all exceptional. Dano does a great job towing the line between stern cold leadership and also the warmth a father can have. Rogen is great as the family’s surrogate-uncle, easily channeling his comedic sensibilities into the role. However, Williams is absolutely stellar, delivering a terrific and complicated performance as the matriarch of the Fabelman household. She’s heartbreaking and exceptionally good. Zoryon is also great, but LaBelle completely steals the film from him as the older Sammy. There’s a wide-eyed earnestness to LaBelle’s performance that, set against the heartbreaking nature of some of the film’s events, delivers a remarkably sincere and emotional role.

The film’s warm color palette is easily comparable to the kind of summertime glow that often populates houseware catalogs and much of Spielberg’s 80s-era output. Kamiński’s cinematography isn’t particularly flashy, but it does a great deal to help bolster the film’s events. Instead of simple shot-reverse shot sequences, he does a lot simply by tilting and moving the camera to follow movements and gazes, which, coupled with Williams’s score, allows the film to blossom into a rose-colored glasses viewpoint of a child realizing his parents are people and the growing up that it requires him to do.

Only time will tell how “The Fabelmans” stacks up to the rest of Spielberg’s illustrious catalog. Given the wide gamut of films he’s made, it could easily land anywhere for any person. If nothing else, it manages to be an exceptionally well-executed display of family melodrama that, at its best, is a perfect showcase of how a love for the movie can infect someone at a young age and truly shape how they view the world growing up. Bolstered by some fantastic performances and generally wonderful filmmaking craft on all fronts, it’s a movie anyone’s mother would be proud of 4.5/5

Black Panther: Wakanda Forever - Review

It’s impossible to talk about this film without bringing up Chadwick Boseman. One could argue that no film in recent memory has had extenuating circumstance surrounding it quite like this one, at least emotionally. After Chadwick’s shocking passing in 2020, all eyes were on this film and how writer/director Ryan Coogler (“Creed,” “Fruitvale Station”) would be able to craft something without his friend and collaborator.

So, there’s a lot of pressure on this film; not only does it need to fill the check marks typically expected by both audiences and executives of a Marvel film, but it also needs to serve as a sendoff for an actor who poured so much of himself into these projects. Yes, there are others who are just as closely associated with their characters as Chadwick was. But with him, it felt different.

The film opens with the death of T’Challa. Racked with grief, the country of Wakanda, led by Queen Ramonda, played by Angela Bassett (“9-1-1,” “Mission Impossible: Fallout”), must deal with Namor, played by Tenoch Huerta (“Blue Demon,” “The Forever Purge”) after he seeks their help in dealing with a Vibranium detecting machine built by young MIT student Riri Williams, played by Dominique Thorne (“If Beale Street Could Talk,” “Judas and the Black Messiah”), being using by the United States to find Vibranium underwater, threatening his underwater nation of Talokan.

Whereas the first film was centered around T’Challa, Coogler and co-writer Joe Robert Cole (“The People v. O. J. Simpson: American Crime Story,” “Black Panther”) have made the smart decision here to build the film as more of an ensemble piece. Bassett is frankly just incredible, as is Huerta as a leader who’s just as easy to empathize with as Ramonda. Letita Wright (“Small Axe,” “The Silent Twins”), Winston Duke (“Us,” “Nine Days”), Lupita Nyong'o (“Us,” “”Star Wars: The Force Awakens”), and Danai Gurira (“The Walking Dead,” “All Eyez on Me”) all return from the first film, and all take advantage of the heavier emotional weight at play with their performances. Wright is positively incredible, displaying a downward spiral for Shuri’s character in an engrossing, dramatic way. Nyong’o is just as good as before, delivering plenty of great character work opposite the rest of her cast.

But it’s Duke and Gurira who arguably are the biggest standouts compared to their roles in the first film. Duke is fantastic, effortlessly charismatic and powerful, forming M’baku into a big gruff teddy bear type character who becomes an instant standout here. Gurira meanwhile gets far more emotional material to play with and becomes an absolute scene stealer, with one moment in particular opposite Bassett arguably being the best in the entire film. Newcomer to the series Thorne holds her own well against the cast, although Riri does feel more like a background character than the others, introduced here to have her own arc later. She’s still a great addition though, playing extremely well with Wright in particular.

The same goes for Martin Freeman’s (“Sherlock,” “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey”) Everett K. Ross; while he reprises his role from the first film, he’s less of a central role here. He pops up until the film forgets about him, seeming more like future set up than an integral part of the movie. As fun and great as it is to see the Dora Milaje expanded as well with the addition of Michaela Coel (“Chewing Gum,” “I May Destroy You”) as Aneka, the character feels more like an additional background character rather than an integral part of the main cast.

It feels almost unfair to talk about the production design, costuming, and music here. They’re all fantastic here, just as good as the first film’s and it stands out in particular against other recent Marvel films due to the high level of physical sets. The CGI backdrops of films like “Multiverse of Madness” and “Love & Thunder” simply don’t hold a candle to the tangible world built here. It was an absolute marvel to see in 2018 and it still holds true now, standing alongside the first film as one of the best-looking films in its genre. The visual effects are also improved, and while they still aren’t the most incredible in the industry, they’re definitely an upgrade from the “PS2 cutscene” level effects on display at the end of the first film.

The writing here feels like a particular standout for numerous reasons, even against the first film. It’s clear that Coogler and Cole wanted to craft a story that was emotionally sound and deliver something both fun and also cathartic on a dramatic level. They’ve resoundingly succeeded in that goal and crafted what might be the single most emotional and engaging standalone film in the MCU. The emotional arcs of each character feel connected in smart ways, and it all overlaps to create a tale where the dramatic elements are far more engaging than the superhero elements.

That being said, the ensemble nature of it all leads things to feel less focused than the first film’s. It doesn’t weaken the emotional impact or arcs by any means, but by the very nature of a film with a larger main cast, its going to feel like a less tightly knit narrative. Likewise, given the heavy emphasis on the dialogue scenes and the film’s overall emotional weight, it leads the typical third-act superhero fight to feel like its there more out of obligation than anything else.

“Wakanda Forever” does overall have that kind of messy emotionality to it that comes from when a director or a cast are so closely tied to the core of the film they’re making. It’s impossible to separate in this case, and while it makes for a slightly messier movie when compared to the first, it also makes for an extremely engaging adventure, one where you’re legitimately attached to the characters involved.

In some ways, reviewing this film is unfair. “Black Panther: Wakanda Forever” is on a completely different level compared to other recent Marvel projects in terms of excitement and also somberness. This is a movie that’s not afraid to engage with its emotional side and is arguably at its best when it focuses on those elements. It’s a messier experience because of its larger main cast and that emotional focus, but it’s a richer and more captivating film that it overwise could have been if it hadn’t. Lead by a commanding cast and a deep sense of dramatic weight, its easily the best Marvel has been in a long time. 4/5