Alien: Romulus - Review: They Still Can't Hear You Scream

 

In space, no one can hear you scream, but they can keep cranking out movies about the inability to scream in space. 45 years after the first film’s release and seven years since the previous installment, the franchise is getting the “interquel” treatment with “Alien: Romulus,” a new film co-written and directed by Fede Álvarez (“Evil Dead (2013),” “Don’t Breathe”) and set in-between the events of the first film and “Aliens” that’s ready to take you back to space and scare the pants off you. 

The film follows Rain, played by Cailee Spaeny (“Priscilla,” “Civil War”), a young miner working for the Wayland-Yutani corporation with her synthetic adopted brother Andy, played by David Jonsson (“Rye Lane,” “Industry”). They, along with a group of Rain’s fellow miners Tyler, played by Archie Renaux (“Shadow and Bone,” “Upgraded”), Kay, played by Isabela Merced (“Instant Family,” “Dora and the Lost City of Gold”), Bjorn, played by Spike Fearn (“Tell Me Everything,” “Back to Black”), and Navarro, played by Aileen Wu, all decide to scavenge an abandoned space station for supplies to fuel their light-years travel to a better planet. However, while scavenging the station, they discover sinister and horrific experiments that unleash the horrors of the Xenomorph once again. 

If this sounds much like virtually every previous “Alien” film, that’s not an unfair assessment. There are only so many ways to make a film like this without completely reinventing the concept or entering an entirely different genre. Luckily, having an experienced horror director like Álvarez at the helm helps to create more interesting scenarios. Even despite the numerous moments clearly aping other famous situations from across the franchise, Álvarez and co-writer Rodo Sayagues (“Evil Dead (2013),” “Don’t Breathe”) manage to craft plenty of creatively terrifying moments and inject the ones that do repeat with a heavy layer of fun. 

Spaeny is fantastic, now having proved her skills in three different types of films in the last twelve months. She makes for a phenomenal lead, nailing the mixture of vulnerability and sternness that Weaver herself nailed so many years ago with Ripley. Her chemistry with Jonsson is fantastic, bolstered by a great performance of his own. The two are the heart of the movie and they nail everything about their roles. The rest of the cast, however, while being well performed, feel mostly forgettable. Merced is the only one who somewhat escapes this, thanks to one of the most beaten and battered performances in a blockbuster in recent memory. 

While the film industry has recently straddled the line between reintroducing more practical effects into modern filmmaking, Álvarez and his team dive headfirst into the craft for this film. Numerous practical facehuggers leap across the screen, and giant sets with impressive scale and lighting help to establish the setting. Even with our modern-day CGI techniques, the old-school retro-futuristic style of the technology in the “Alien” world never ceases to impress or look absolutely gorgeous. There are truly multiple moments that not only feature great works of practical effects-work, but it also meshes with the CGI in such fantastic ways that it makes the film look like it should easily cost double its budget. It's all set to a great score from Benjamin Wallfisch (“Twisters,” “Blade Runner 2049”) that also manages to fuse new, electronic beats with plenty of cues and notes clearly lifted from past “Alien” scores. 

Which is exactly where this new trek into the terrifying world of “Alien” ends up, because for as much as it takes from previous entries, Álvarez clearly wants to put his characters through the ringer and bring them to a life beyond serving as walking reference machines. Thankfully, the cast is headlined by two fantastic performers in Spaeny and Jonsson, and the almost entirely practical affair is sold by their emotional bond and the great effects on display. It’s taking a lot from what’s come before, but that doesn’t mean it's not adding its own works or pulling it off well. 4/5

Jackpot! - Review: A Middling Payout

 

Our world has gone from one wherein the satire of something like “Robocop” can start to not only seem like reality, but like the logical solution to a lot of people. But that doesn’t mean the desire to tell skewed, satirical tales of humans and their search for money has been diminished in the slightest. That’s why we keep getting films like “Jackpot!”, an action-black comedy and the latest from director Paul Feig (“Bridesmaids,” “A Simple Favor”). 

Set sometime after the year 2030, the film follows Katie, played by Awkwafina (“The Farewell,’ “Crazy Rich Asians”), a former child-star who finds herself accidentally winning the Grand Lottery, a multi-billion-dollar California state lottery wherein the winner must survive until sundown to claim their winnings. If anyone is able to kill them without using guns, then the killer may claim the winnings. Katie finds herself unwittingly under the protection of Noel, played by John Cena (“Blockers,” “The Suicide Squad”), a lottery protection agent who wants to make a name for himself amongst more successful agents, including his former colleague Louis, played by Simu Liu (“Kim Convenience,” “Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings”). 

It's certainly a heightened concept, and the level of violence and humor could easily lead to comparisons to films like “Robocop.” Feig and writer Rob Yescombe (“Outside the Wire”) certainly mine the scenario for tons of wacky, over the top violence that’s mostly staged with bloody glee. Yet the material itself lacks the sort of punch required to really make a concept like this sing. The observations made about the surrounding world are one-note and surface level, and the script is far more invested in trudging through bland emotional arcs and character revelations. It’s not that these decisions come across as lazy, just uninspired. The film as a whole could hardly be called lazy, given the extensive stunts and sets, so it at least has that working in its favor. 

Awkwafina and Liu are fine with the material they’ve been given, and the pair manage to come out fairly unscathed, even as they're turning in fairly routine performances. Cena makes an absolute meal of the material though, further cementing himself as a scene-stealing comedic master. The film seems to brighten up whenever he’s on screen, and he manages to effortlessly sell his character’s action and meekness in equal measures. 

Given how central it is to the plot, thankfully the action is fantastically choreographed. There’s a lot of it here, and it manages to feel well staged and sloppy at the same time. It makes sense given the fact that it's supposed to be perpetrated by members of the general populus, and thankfully it never comes across as too pompous or overly finessed. There’s variety and verticality in the stunts that means it all really shines. 

Despite a fantastic turn from Cena and the excellent action, “Jackpot!” is mostly saddled with the disappointing nature of being the blandest version of its premise. The emotional arcs, execution of its central idea, and general worldbuilding of this not-to-distant future setting all feel like the first draft version of what they could be; it's the most generic way you could tell this story. It’s even stranger then that, even for how simplistic it’s kept, the rules seem to keep changing at the whim of the writer and director as the story goes on. 

“Jackpot!” is a fun action comedy when it's kept to those two elements. Cena is a delight, easily leaping over Liu and Awkwafina’s performances, and when it pairs him with any of his co-stars, the comedy really excels. The action is violent, choreographed, and fun, but it's all surrounded by a story far too generic for what this concept is. It’s a high concept, low execution movie that’ll be hard to remember too many days in the future. 3/5

Cuckoo (2024) - Review: Call and Response

 

There are few horror tropes as time-honored as simply placing a troubled teen in the middle of a wooded European country and letting all hell break loose on them. It creates easy fears within the forests, unsettling atmospheres from the foreign locations, and allows for a young actor to go for broke in an unhinged lead performance. And if you want all of that and not much else, then “Cuckoo” is the movie for you. 

The film follows teenaged Gretchen, played by Hunter Schaffer (“euphoria,” “The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes”), who moves with her father Luis, played by Marton Csokas (“The Equalizer,” “Into the Badlands”), his new wife Beth, played by Jessica Henwick (“The Matrix Resurrections,” “Iron Fist”), and her stepsister Alma, played by Mila Lieu, to the German Alps to live in a resort town while they assist the manager Herr König, played by Dan Stevens (“Legion,” “Godzilla X Kong: The New Empire”), in designing a new resort. While there, Gretchen soon finds herself seemingly hunted by a mysterious woman and is enlisted by police detective Henry, played by Jan Bluthardt (“Luz”), in finding the woman. 

First things first, in a film filled with insane moments and revelations, Schaffer is the absolute queen of it all. She commands the screen and throws herself into the role, unafraid to come across as arrogant or selfish. It’s a commendable kind of performance, one where the actor is letting themselves be completely demolished during the course of the adventure. Schaffer is able to connect with the audience and ground this fantastical tale with a real sense of emotion and exasperation in a way that actively makes the movie better. 

However, the rest of the cast rides the line between under and overplayed with seemingly reckless abandon. Csokas, Henwick, and Lieu are fairly underplayed given their roles in the story. Meanwhile, Stevens and Bluthardt go above and beyond, entering the realm of camp in a way that only somewhat meshes with the rest of the film. The dissonance between their performances works as a metaphor for one of the film’s main issues as well. 

As crazed as the tale can be, there’s a lack of commitment on display that makes is a somewhat confusing affair. You’d expect a tale like this to be over the top or campy, but it all plays things rather straight. Apart from Stevens and Bluthardt’s performances, writer/director Tilman Singer (“Luz”) plays everything fairly straight, instead of divulging into the campy weirdness most would associate with a story like this. There are certainly plenty of twists and turns, and the scares are constructed in a fantastic way, but it's not the kind of over-the-top weirdo horror many might think based on the marketing. 

Thankfully, regardless of how it's constructed or performed, the film itself is a gorgeous tableau. Shot by cinematographer Paul Faltz (“Luz,” “Intermezzo”), there’s a fantastic construction of fabricated sets and gorgeous German woodlands and mountainsides. Faltz and Singer have fantastic eyes for their horrific events and the musical score from Simon Waskow (“Luz”) keeps things underscored with a delightfully playful bit of music matching the events on screen. Singer also keeps things fresh with some creative bits of editing, including a fantastic repeating element that further adds to the weirdness on display. 

“Cuckoo” is certainly that, but it’s a bit too strait laced to fully transcend into the bonkers horror-creature-feature it likely wants to be. The uneven performances are all anchored by Schaffer’s commanding lead role, and the technical aspects of the film, as well as its general weirdness will certainly be enough for genre fans seeking a scary and bizarre night at the movies. Though some will absolutely wish it got weirder. 3.5/5

Harold and the Purple Crayon (2024) - Review: Coloring Inside the Lines

In the realm of Hollywood IP consumption and beloved children’s books, it is kind of surprising that it took them this long to make a film out of Crockett Johnson’s eponymous childhood tribute to drawing and creativity. Based on the book of the same name, the film version of “Harold and the Purple Crayon” seeks to inspire creativity and hope in the real world, and doesn’t end up conjuring much feelings of anything. 

The film follows the titular Harold, now grown and played by Zachary Levi (“Tangled,” “Shazam!”), as he and his two animal friends Porcupine, played by Tanya Reynolds (“Sex Education,” “Emma (2020)”), and Moose, played by Lil Rey Howery (“Get Out,” “Free Guy”), venture to the “real world” to find their narrator/“old man”, voiced by Alfred Molina (“Spider-Man 2,” “Frida”), and end up finding themselves mixed up in the lives of newly widowed mother Terri, played by Zooey Deschanel (“New Girl,” “Elf”), her imaginative son Mel, played by Benjamin Bottani (“Leo (2023)”), and the villainous but incompetent librarian Gary, played by Jermaine Clement (“What We Do in the Shadows,” “Flight of the Conchords”). 

It's a very bog-standard family film plot, reusing many of the same “weird thing comes to the real world to the bewilderment of the real people” plot thread that’s been given to every IP adaptation from “Rocky and Bullwinkle” to the “Looney Tunes” to “The Smurfs”. It feels just as lightweight as it ever has, lacking impact and strength in its material. It’s the same kind of story output used in plenty of other films because it's easy to attach to almost any property. But “Harold” the IP lacks the complexity required to allow this kind of structure to flourish in “Harold” the movie. 

Levi is fine enough, using the same kind of manchild charms he’s made a career out of over the last decade or so. He’s certainly been better or felt more genuine, but he’s working with a shtick that’s stuck to him and he’s fine enough. Deschanel simply does not want to be here, and it shows during her every scene. Bottani is fine enough as well, in a very standard “kid actor in a family movie” kind of way. Howery and Reynolds stand out the most, thanks to their commitment to the weirdness of their animal-to-human characters and the strength of their cartoonish delivery. Clements is the oddest one of the bunch, as he does a fine job with the oddball character he plays, but the character itself feels completely out of place with the film, tone, and story that exists here. So, take that for what you will. 

It’s understandable that a director with plenty of experience in the animated realm like Carlos Saldanha (“Ice Age,” “Robots”) would want to make his first live-action film one with as much creativity and animation baked into the premise as this. His direction is fine and capable, and the movie itself never drags, moving briskly through is 90-minute runtime. The script from David Guion (“Dinner for Schmucks,” “Slumberland”) and Michael Handelman (“Dinner for Schmucks,” “Slumberland”) is also, as previously stated, fine if unadventurous. Then there are two majorly weird developments that both lift the movie up and drag it back down. 

The films central concept, of Harold looking for his “narrator” in the real world in the form of author Crockett Johnson, is an interesting metatextual idea, and the resulting inevitability given the authors passing in 1975 resembles the inklings of a film that could grow beyond its initial premise. Somewhere in there is a more mature, committed idea to the concept of imagination, of the “real world”, and of holding onto things. Levi even, for a brief moment, gives a genuinely somber performance. However, the film then spirals right back to its cheery, “what kind of weird animal can you draw” spirit and even goes into more wildly bland and tonally dissonate directions. The third act is so standard and boring that, even if it wasn’t followed by the brief glimpse into a more complex version of this tale, it would still drag the movie as a whole down. 

A handful of other weird qualities pop up as well. The musical score from Batu Sener (“The Ice Age Adventures of Buck Wild”) is a standout feature of the film, but the look of everything is overly bland, from the visual effects to the cinematography itself. There’s also an extended bit of product placement for Ollie’s, the bargain store, which makes it almost look like a rural interpretation of Sears instead of a cheap bargain store filled with wholesale toys and carpets. It’s not just a weird bit of misrepresentation, but also a bizarre choice of product placement for the “Harold and the Purple Crayon” movie. 

While there are certainly worse family movies on the market, there are also far far better ones. And more than that, there are more memorable ones, as arguably the biggest sin “Harold and the Purple Crayon” commits is mediocrity. It’s filled with performances that are just fine, a visual style that’s just fine, a plot that’s just fine (and then not), taking a book long remembered as a tale of childhood creativity into another bland IP farm film that’s frustratingly lightweight and leaves almost no impact. 2.5/5

Saving Bikini Bottom: The Sandy Cheeks Movie - Review: Turn the Other Cheek

 

Titled like a Lifetime movie biopic made a few years after she’d passed, “Saving Bikini Bottom: The Sandy Cheeks Movie” isn’t a retelling of the tragic life of a starlet. Rather, it’s yet another spinoff for the uber popular “SpongeBob SquarePants” series, this time focusing on SpongeBob’s best friend and scientifically minded squirrel from Texas, Sandy Cheeks. And it’s one tale you’ll wish was left untold. 

The film follows Sandy, voiced by longtime performer Carolyn Lawrence (“Moral Orel,” “Jimmy Neutron”), and SpongeBob, voiced by Tom Kenny (“Rocko’s Modern Life,” “Adventure Time”), as they attempt to rescue the town of Bikini Bottom from B.O.O.T.S., the science lab Sandy worked for back in Texas, and the clutches of evil scientist Sue Nahmee, played by Wanda Sykes (“The New Adventures of Old Christine,” “Over the Hedge”). To do this, they venture to the Texan plains, where they encounter Sandy’s circus performer family consisting of Pa Cheeks, voiced by Craig Robinson (“The Office,” “Pineapple Express”), Randy Cheeks, voiced by Johnny Knoxville (“Jackass,” “Action Point”), and Ma Cheeks, Granny Cheeks, Rowdy Cheeks, and Rosie Cheeks, all voiced by Grey DeLisle (“Scooby Doo: Mystery Incorporated,” “Foster’s Home for Imaginary Friends”). 

Where to begin with this tale? Well, for starters, this is the first streaming movie for the franchise, as opposed to the theatrical outputs made for the first three “SpongeBob” movies. Because of that, it's natural to expect the animation to be of a lower quality compared to those outings. But even given that disclaimer, the animation is much poorer than anyone would have expected. Sure, it all squashes and stretches like the requisite elasticity of the show, but it feels almost too stretchy, as if someone took the finished animations and cranked up their intensity by 25%. Not only that, but so many moments seem as if they’re against a flat backdrop. Yes, these are CGI characters layered overtop of a live action scene. But they somehow manage to give too many moments the feeling of being poorly green screened onto said live action footage, despite these characters already being digital to begin with. 

Director Liza Johnson (“Elvis and Nixon,” “Hateship, Loveship”) simply seems like an odd fit for the series, as her previous work has been adult aimed dramas. It comes across as a film directed by someone simply unfamiliar with the material or the medium, and it appears that might have been the case. There’s a particular moment in the third act where a live-action character’s head is super imposed on a younger body, to give them impression of them at a younger age. But the effect is so bad, it's hard to tell if this was meant to be the final effect or was simply a work-in-progress shot that snuck through the vetting process. 

Luckily, the vocal work is still incredibly solid, even as many of the actors are showing their age after voicing these characters for 25 years. Kenny and Lawrence are as delightful as ever, really nailing the back and forth between these lifelong friends. The entire pack of Bikini Bottom-ites are fun whenever they’re onscreen, and it helps to buoy the otherwise uneven film. Meanwhile, the live-action actors are just plain bad. Ilia Isorelýs Paulino (“The Sex Lives of College Girls,” “Family Switch”) and Matty Cardarople (“Stranger Things,” “A Series of Unfortunate Events (2017)”) play a pair of bumbling scientists named Pheobe and Kyle, respectively, but they come across like bad high school play acting. Sykes, meanwhile, is certainly giving her all in a performance that is just terrible. It’s as if she thought she’d be giving a campy, “so good it’s bad” performance and yet still ended up with a bad one. 

It’s hard to expect much from modern SpongeBob, especially after Stephen Hillenberg’s passing, given that Paramount greenlit two different spinoff shows (something he’d always said he’d never do) almost immediately after his death. But even for the lowest common denominator material churned out now, the script from Tom Stern (“An American Werewolf in Paris,” “Freaked”) and series veteran/cartoonist Kaz (“The Patrick Star Show,” “Phineas and Ferb”) lacks anything resembling intelligence. It's the same yelling and pop-culture references plaguing most modern kids cartoons, made even stranger by a seemingly genuine attempt to critique Nickelodeon’s oversaturation of SpongeBob merchandise slid into the second act. It disappears almost immediately, but it hints at a much better film hiding under the surface. Or a cheeky dig at Nickelodeon that nobody at corporate managed to catch and order be removed. 

It’s hard to really expect a lot from something like “Saving Bikini Bottom,” but even as the returns diminished, each of the three previous “SpongeBob” movies managed to at least be enjoyable at bare minimum. Not so here, as this is simply 80-minutes of the franchise’s worst impulses laid bare. Full of poor live-action performances, a lousy script, and animation that’s weirdly over-stylized yet still poorly made, this is a supersized adventure for Sandy and SpongeBob that would be better left under the sea. 1.5/5

Deadpool & Wolverine - Review: Knife-Hands & Butthead Do The MCU

 

Sometimes, to take on all of the crazy in a world as all-encompassing as the MCU, you need to be a little crazy yourself. Which is why someone like Deadpool might just be the perfect hero to come in and stir things up in this, the 34th film in the overall Marvel Cinematic Universe. There’s been a lot of stories before now and there’ll be a lot after this, so can the merc with the mouth make the kind of impact on the world that only he could? 

The film follows the titular, red-suited buffoon, played again by writer/producer Ryan Reynolds (“The Proposal,” “Van Wilder”), as he floats listlessly through middle-age in a state of arrested development. One day, he’s yanked from his universe by Mr. Paradox, played by Matthew Macfadyen (“Succession,” “Pride & Prejudice (2005)”), and the Time Variance Authority who inform him that his universe is dying due to the lack of a Wolverine since his death at the end of 2017’s “Logan.” So, Deadpool decides to hop from universe to universe to find a Wolverine, played again by Hugh Jackman (“The Prestige,” “The Greatest Showman”), to fix his world, all the while drawing the ire of Paradox, the TVA, and the antagonistic Cassandra Nova, played by Emma Corrin (“The Crown,” “My Policeman”). 

It’s a jam-packed film with a jam-packed script, written by Reynolds, Rhett Reese (“Zombieland,” “Deadpool”), Paul Wernick (“Zombieland,” “Deadpool”), Zeb Wells (“Robot Chicken,” “SuperMansion”), and co-written/directed by Shawn Levy (“Free Guy,” “Night at the Museum”). There’s a lot going on, but it doesn’t feel overstuffed by the end of things. It’s helped by Levy’s brisk pacing, but it’s also mostly because the film lacks a strict “plot” for most of the runtime. It keeps moving, but the events feel more loosely connected before the third act kicks things back into action. The middle section is entertaining, and things certainly are happening, but it lacks a real sense of motivation, feeling more like a series of extended gags and excuses to have Reynolds and Pool play in the MCU sandbox. 

Reynolds is certainly having a blast, and his performance as Pool is as entertaining and winning as it's ever been. Jackman also somehow manages to show us a side to Wolverine that we haven’t seen yet, and when the pair are bantering back and forth, the screen lights up with their charisma. Corrin is also excellent as the menacing antagonist, and they manage to bring a real straight-man bravado to the events. Macfadyen, while utilized less so, also delivers on the exacerbated nature of his character’s role opposite the merc with the mouth. There are also a number of winning supporting roles that won’t be spoiled here, but the entire cast is game for the wild and weird adventure Reynolds takes them on. 

Levy and crew manage to craft a fun looking and feeling adventure in this universe. While a good chunk takes place in the “Void” as seen in the “Loki” television series, there’s still enough visual variety to prevent things from getting stale. The action is fun and well-choreographed as well, playing into the strengths of the characters’ regenerative abilities. There's a general sense of poking fun at everything in sight, from product placement bits to gratuitous cameos to even the MCU’s quality itself. Clearly anything is game for Pool’s mockery and Reynolds and crew take full advantage of the MCU’s larger budget and playground. Even the musical score from Rob Simonsen (“Ghostbusters: Afterlife,” “The Whale”) has a more playful tone than before, even incorporating kitty meows into some tracks. 

While it is fun to see Reynolds and crew run around in the money vault that is the Disney-Marvel world, there is a sense of diminishing returns as the film goes on. It’s not that it’s the third Deadpool film, as the moments focusing on the merc are the best ones. Rather, the film seems to be settling for the most obvious version of this tale, meaning that while the humor can be quite surprising in the gags it goes for, the plot is not. It's the most typical way this plot could play out, leading to a feeling of an adventure that lacks the complete spark that Reynolds’s first two outings had. 

That doesn’t mean that spending the day with “Deadpool & Wolverine” isn’t a ton of fun. Because it is, and the signature brand of crass, fourth wall breaking silliness fits delightfully into this universe. It’s a fun and frenetic film that can’t quite reach the highs of its first two, settling for an adventure that has its fun and sits in the realm of a good adventure with two pals that just want to tear into each other. 3.5/5

Twisters - Review: Prepare To Get Swept Up

 

There is no better way to get butts in seats in a movie theatre than to throw a bunch of insane stuff on the big screen. If only that were true the entire time, but “Twisters” is certainly a movie that abides by that central idea. It’s full of insane weather and destruction, but it also pads it all out with the same kind of grounded characterization and Hollywood pseudo-science babble that makes its a thrilling throwback to the kind of movies that could only exist in that bygone era of the 90s. 

The film follows retired storm chaser Kate Carter, played by Daisy Edgar-Jones (“Fresh,” “Where the Crawdads Sing”), who’s recruited back into the field by her friend Javi, played by Anthony Ramos (“In the Heights,” “Dumb Money”), to help with his new storm tracking business. While assisting him, she meets famous internet storm tracker and self-proclaimed “Tornado Wrangler” Tyler Owens, played by Glenn Powell (“Anyone But You,” “Top Gun: Maverick”), who takes a more cowboy approach to the storm tracking business, leading the two of them to butt heads amid the summer Midwest Tornado season.

For director Lee Isaac Chung (“Minari,” “Munyurangabo”) to go from making small scale dramas to a special effects summer blockbuster like this might seem like a big leap, but the building blocks of “Twisters” have much more in common with his previous works than you’d think. At its heart, it's a character piece that thrives off the chemistry between Powell, Edgar-Jones, and Ramos. The trio are fantastic together, crackling with energy every moment they’re together. It’s a wonderful back and forth, and writers Mark L. Smith (“The Boys in the Boat,” “The Revenant”) and Joseph Kosinski (“Tron: Legacy,” “Top Gun: Maverick”) combine the kind of interplay and charm one might normally find in a rom-com with the disaster movie structure to great effect.

The trio really runs away with everything, funneling the science and thrills through their characters. It’s not just showcasing the fascination with storms and the destruction of them, but it's showcasing it through the experiences of Kate, Javi, and Tyler that make it. The surrounding ensemble cast is also great, rounded out with the likes of Katy O’Brian (“Love Lies Bleeding,” “The Mandalorian”), Sasha Lane (“American Honey,” “Loki”), Brandon Perea (“The OA,” “Nope”), Harry Hadden-Paton (“The Crown,” “Downton Abbey”), David Corenswet (“The Politician,” “Pearl”), and Tunde Adebimpe (“The Girlfriend Experience,” “Strange Planet”). They’re full of big smiles and personalities that fit neatly into the 90s disaster movie personas with great effect, with Lane, Perea, and O’Brian stealing each moment.

Cinematographer Dan Mindel (“Mission Impossible III,” “Star Wars: The Force Awakens”) and Chung make the film's wide vistas work as a celebration of the beauty of midwestern America, with plenty of sweeping vistas and gorgeously constructed moments throughout. It’s a truly beautiful film to watch, with large scale destruction pulled off with a mixture of fantastic digital and practical effects work. It feels real, but doesn’t sacrifice its playfulness, with plenty of bits of humor from Tyler and playfulness with the destruction, including one moment involving a movie theater, a tornado, and a screening of the 1931 “Frankenstein” film that will undoubtedly be the highlight of the adventure.

Couple the gorgeous cinematography with a startlingly beautiful score from Benjamin Wallfisch (“A Cure for Wellness,” “Blade Runner 2049”) and you have a film that fully embraces the energy provided from its intersection between midwestern culture and scientific nerdiness. It’s a lively and endearing crossroads that helps to foster an understanding between two sides of American life that are normally at odds. It also helps to smooth over some of the film’s more predictable and cliche disaster movie plot elements.

“Twisters” is a shockingly fun and just plain fantastic time at the movies. As a character yells in the third act, “We have to get everyone into the movie theater!” If that was Chung and company’s central idea behind the film, its resulted in a thoroughly entertaining disaster flick that never forgets to be exceedingly charming and packed to the gills with lovable characters and a gorgeous portrait of midwestern American culture and landscapes. It, pun entirely intended, just might blow you away. 4.5/5

Despicable Me 4 - Review: More Antics, More Minions, More Money

 

As the world turns, so do we get another chapter of Universal and Illumination’s money printing factory known as the “Despicable Me” franchise. It’s hard to even begin to critique these films as their success is virtually guaranteed every time, but there’s still enough different between each entry to warrant discussion. Hence, the review you see here for the latest film, the incredibly creatively titled “Despicable Me 4.” 

This latest entry finds Gru, voiced again by Steve Carell (“The Office,” “The 40-Year-Old Virgin”), working for the Anti Villian League and enjoying married bliss with his wife and fellow agent Lucy, voiced by Kristen Wiig (“Bridesmaids,” “The Secret Life of Walter Mitty”), and three adopted kids Margo, voiced by Miranda Cosgrove (“School of Rock,” “iCarly”), Edith, voiced by Dana Gaier, and Agnes, voiced by Madison Polan, as well as newborn son Gru Jr. However, the family are forced to assume new identities after Gru’s archrival and former classmate Maxime La Mal, voiced by Will Ferrel (“Anchorman,” “Step Brothers”), escapes from prison and decrees that he will hunt Gru down. This leads them to hide out in the suburbs of Mayflower, where Gru is blackmailed by next door neighbor and teenage wannabe villain Poppy Prescott, voiced by Joey King (“The Kissing Booth,” “The Act”), into teaching her how to be a villain. Meanwhile, the Minions, all voiced again by Pierre Coffin (“Minions,” “Despicable Me”), have taken up a new gig with the AVL as the superpowered Mega-Minions.

As is the case with virtually every other “Despicable Me” film, the plot isn’t necessarily cohesive, instead writers Mike White (“The White Lotus,” “School of Rock”) and Ken Daurio (“Horton Hears a Who,” “Schmigadoon!”) just craft something resembling a joke and/or Minion antic delivery machine. No one grows or changes or has an arc, rather just going through various set pieces and action sequences to get to the gags. Luckily, the gags and jokes have a pretty good batting average. While Lucy gets saddled with some random bits involving hair styling and a scorned customer that are quickly forgotten, Gru gets a fantastic arc not only poking fun at suburban dad antics, but also pairs him up with the best character in the series besides himself or the Minions: Poppy Prescott.

King’s vocal performance is top notch and the character herself proves to be a fantastic foil to Gru’s reformed/older and wiser villain persona. Every scene with the two of them together begs the question of why they weren’t just the entire film. Carell also nails his performance, putting years of experience with the character to good use. Ferrell is also excellent, with he and Carell volleying off each other just like their early live-action comedy days. The rest of the cast is serviceable to wasted. Wiig, Cosgrove, Gaier, and Polan are all fine, meanwhile the likes of Stephen Colbert (“Monsters vs. Aliens,” “Mr. Peabody and Sherman”) as Gru’s next door neighbor and Poppy’s father Perry, Sophia Vergara (“Machete Kills,” “Modern Family”) as Maxime’s girlfriend Valentina, and Chloe Fineman (“Babylon,” “Saturday Night Live”) as Poppy’s mother Patsy all feel wasted, failing to make an impact beyond just “another celebrity voice.”

Pharell Williams (“Hidden Figures,” “The Amazing Spider-Man 2”) turns in yet another excellent opening musical number and the score from series veteran Heitor Pereira (“Puss in Boots: The Last Wish,” “Curious George”) uses the right themes at the right moments for maximum action and comedic impact. It’s hard to call any of it unique, but it is an example of a finely tuned musical style that serves its purpose and not much more.

There is something weirdly enjoyable about the low stakes of it all. Gru and Maxime’s rivalry isn’t about taking over the world, but rather petty jealousy. There’s no massive destruction of a city or object of world ending power. It’s shockingly low stakes and it helps to serve as the antithesis of most Hollywood franchise moviemaking nowadays. It’s almost as if Gru and his Minions have become so over saturated in the market that they’ve spun back around to being ironically funny and cool, much like Shrek a decade or so ago.

“Despicable Me 4” is yet another entry in the critic proof series, but it's one of the better ones. Carell and Ferrell are excellent together, as is King, with all three maintaining a heightened level of energy that lifts the entire film up whenever they’re on screen. It’s more of the same that you’ve seen before, but with a higher joke-to-minute ratio and lacking the annoying elements from previous entries. It’s about as good as this series can get, which only somewhat sounds like damning with faint praise. 3.5/5

Thelma (2024) - Review: This Ain't Your Grandma's Grandma

 

There’s something really delightful about getting to see older, experienced performers get to “act their age” so to speak. In an industry constantly chasing after the new, hip, young thing, seeing an aged film star come back to lead a film or to a role they played when they were younger is always a good feeling. Doubly so when that actor gets to lead a film that could only exist for someone their age, as is the case here with the delightful little tale of “Thelma.” 

The film follows the titular elderly woman, played with spirit by June Squibb (“Nebraska,” “About Schmidt”), who sends her family into a tizzy after she falls for a phone scam that results in her sending ten thousand dollars to a random address, believing her grandson Danny, played by Fred Hechinger (“Eighth Grade,” “News of the World”), is in jail. After she learns how worried they are that this trick is a result of her mind deteriorating, she enlists in the help of her fellow elderly friend Ben, played by Richard Roundtree (“Shaft (1971),” “Being Mary Jane”), to track down the scammers and get her money back. 

If there’s one surefire thing from both the premise and the actress cast in its lead, “Thelma” is certainly going to let Squibb have an absolute blast. It’s a good thing that writer/director/editor Josh Margolin (“Deep Murder”) is content to let her run as wild as her orthopedic sneakers can let her in the film’s brisk 98-minute runtime. Squibb has always been a source of laughs and glee, wisely aware of her age and the expectations surrounding it. She embraces the role with vigor and delight, taking on the material with the confidence and security of an action star to make it all sing. 

Roundtree plays a perfect straight man to her shenanigans, and it ends up being a fantastically charming and subdued posthumous performance for the legendary actor to go out on. Hechinger is also great as Danny, a hodge-podge of various arrested development youth tropes, but when he and Squibb are on screen together, they shine. The rest of the cast are also great, although they’re simply damned with less screentime. Clark Gregg (“The Avengers,” “The West Wing”) and Parker Posey (“Dazed and Confused,” “Josie and the Pussycats (2001)”) are great as Thelma’s daughter and son-in-law/Danny’s parents Alan and Gail, respectively, and there’s a great little role from Malcolm McDowell (“A Clockwork Orange,” “Mozart in the Jungle”) here as well. But Gregg and Posey simply don’t get much to do apart from show up and be charming, which they succeed at, and McDowell’s role might as well be a cameo, as fantastic as he still manages to be with that limited time. 

It’s a quaint little movie in most aspects outside of the cast. While they get a lot of mileage out of Los Angeles and it is all shockingly well shot by cinematographer David Bolen (“Some Kind of Heaven”), there is a very simple sense of vision to it all. This isn’t a bad thing, as it clearly exists as a showcase for an actress like Squibb; it ends up feeling like a movie that could’ve been shot in a week around the city by a bunch of actors simply looking to have a good time. The score from Nick Chuba (“Dr. Death”) is remarkably excellent, standing out from the rest of the production's aspects thanks to a mixture of simple strings and quieter melodies and riffs on the typical “spy/espionage” movie theme sounds. 

Within those simpler elements, and bolstered by Bolen’s cinematography, is a movie that has a shocking number of layers to it. For a silly movie about an elderly woman looking to get her money back, there’s a lot to be said about how we treat the elderly and how we can over-care for those we love. It isn't getting into things with the depth that a two-hour drama might, but the handful of moments where we simply sit, wordlessly with Thelma and the rest of the characters are both gorgeous and remarkably profound. 

“Thelma” has everything you could want in a movie! Elderly hijinks, revenge on scammers who take advantage of those who don’t know better, June Squibb, electric scooter chases! It's the kind of good ol’ fashioned fun time at the movies that can often be forgotten about or taken for granted nowadays, much like it’s elderly lead, with just enough to think about under the surface. With Squibb at the helm, it’s a movie that practically dares you not to have a good time 4.5/5

The Bikeriders - Review: Just Along for the Ride

 

If there is a movement, some kind of cause that makes an impact on the world, chances are there will someday be a film made about it. Writer/director Jeff Nichols (“Midnight Special,” “Mud”) has looked to the past to create a film about such a movement, basing it around the motorcycle clubs of the 1960s and 70s, with “The Bikeriders.” 

Starting in 1965, the film follows the creation and eventual downfall of the Vandals Motorcycle club, documented by photo-journalist Danny Lyons, played by Mike Faist (“West Side Story (2021),” “Challengers”), and focusing on the creation of the club by President Johnny Davis, played by Tom Hardy (“Venom,” “Mad Max: Fury Road”), and the romance between biker Benny Cross, played by Austin Butler (“Elvis,” “Dune Part Two”), and outsider Kathy Bauer, played by Jodie Comer (“Killing Eve,” “The Last Duel”), with an ensemble cast consisting of Michael Shannon (“Midnight Special,” “Revolutionary Road”), Boyd Holbrook (“Logan,” “The Sandman”), Norman Reedus (“The Walking Dead,” “The Boondock Saints”), among others. 

There’s a casual, lowkey nature to the entire film that adds to the hangout vibes of the story being told. Much of it is recounted to Lyons by Bauer at various points of her life, and the events not only have a wistful, nostalgia twinge to them, but also stark reality to things. Comer herself lays her accent on thick and is fairly good at the role, maintaining a good line between narrator and character within the tale. Hardy and Butler really steal the show, with the former employing a fantastically implausible accent to portray his vision of subdued and suppressed masculinity and anger.  

Meanwhile, Butler plays his role with an opposite kind of perspective, whereas Hardy fills his performance with grand displays of manly protection, Butler keeps things wound tight until the most opportune moments to let them unfurl. The rest of the ensemble cast is a delight, all embodying some fun, larger than life personas that fill out the film well. Faist is the only one who feels purely underutilized, instead wasting a strong actor on a role that feels like little more than a narrator who just happens to physically be there. 

The musical score from David Wingo (“Midnight Special,” “Barry”) is absolutely beautiful and helps to build the setting alongside some shockingly gorgeous and underplayed cinematography from Adam Stone (“Loving,” “Midnight Special”) which come together to create a great and realized vision of the 60s and 70s biking movement. While there isn’t an overall story perse, the film does exist on an engaging thread of tales and misadventures of the characters themselves, telling the story through small moment-to-moment escapades. 

Nichols zeroes in on the different kinds of masculinity and expressions of it therein to tell the arc of Hardy and Butler’s characters, and it quickly becomes apparent that this is where his interests lie the most. It is a very well realized and interesting story, but there is also a blaise feeling to it all that makes it hard to love. It's the sort of movie where nothing is objectively wrong or bad, but the elements don’t really come together to create a perfect film. Rather, they’re all good, just not great. 

That might sound like damning with faint praise, but don’t mistake “The Bikeriders” for a movie not worth your time. It’s a rousing and nostalgic drama that feels like part period piece for the 60s and 70s and part hangout movie, that still finds time to deconstruct two very different types of masculinity within its club. Its two lead performances are terrific, and the ensemble cast is also great. It does meander a bit too much and might overall feel like less than the sum of its parts, but those individual parts are still wholly enjoyable. 4/5 

Inside Out 2 – Review: All I Want Is to Have My Peace of Mind

 

There’s a world of emotions inside of every person, which means there’s plenty of room for a sequel to Pixar’s 2015 modern classic “Inside Out,” a film showcasing the world inside the mind of a pre-teen girl. And appropriately, the aptly titled “Inside Out 2” showcases that same girl’s mind, now at the frightening cusp of puberty and filled with anxieties. 

Picking up a few years after the end of the first film, Riley, voiced by Kensington Tallman, has now turned 13 and her emotions Joy, voiced by Amy Poehler (“Parks and Recreation,” “Mean Girls”), Sadness, voiced by Phyllis Smith (“The Office,” “The OA”), Anger, voiced by Lewis Black (“Accepted,” “The Daily Show”), Fear, voiced by Tony Hale (“Arrested Development,” “Veep”), and Disgust, voiced by Liza Lapria (“The Equalizer,” “Don't Trust the B---- in Apartment 23”), must now confront a new group of emotions who’ve taken hold of Riley’s mind: Embarrassment, voiced by Paul Walter Hauser (“Black Bird,” “Richard Jewel”), Envy, voiced by Ayo Edeberi (“Bottoms,” “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem”), Ennui, voiced by Adèle Exarchopoulos (“Blue Is The Warmest Color,” “Passage”), and their defacto leader Anxiety, voiced by Maya Hawke (“Stranger Things,” “Do Revenge”). 

There’s clearly a lot to dig into with a concept like this. Introducing just Anxiety herself could provide for a boatload of new storytelling material, but the new emotions all balance out well without overloading each other or the story. The returning cast is all excellent, with Black in particular adding some more depth to his Anger through a softer vocal performance and Hale and Lapria doing a good job filling in for their role's original voices. Hawke meanwhile is an absolute powerhouse. Her Anxiety is a delight, running rampant with fantastic delivery and pained self-idolizations. Much like Poehler in the first film, she turns what should be a predictable one-note character into one that’s easy to feel for. 

Not much has changed in the visual style from the first film, but that’s not at all a bad thing. Instead, Pixar and its animation wizards have continued to flesh out the existing world within Riley’s mind. The textures and colors continue to pop will vibrance and glee, and there are now different styles of animation, such as hand-drawn 2D and early PlayStation-style graphics, for minor characters and elements that make for great bits of variance. 

The musical score also maintains the greatness of Giacchino’s score from the first film, even if it doesn’t retain Giacchino. Andrea Datzman fills in his shoes competently, crafting new and great musical motifs when needed and blending them with the original film’s themes when appropriate. However, in actuality, there isn’t a whole lot different between the first film’s score and this one, and that actually leads to the only real issue with the film. 

Given the nature of the film and the world that Pixar has created with these tales, there’s only so much co-writer/director Kelsey Mann and writers Meg LeFauve (“Inside Out,” “The Good Dinosaur”) and Dave Holstein (“Kidding,” “Weeds”) can do to differentiate things. It can therefore feel like the story itself is simply repeating what came before but with some variances. It’s within those variances though that Mann, LeFauve, and Holstein mine for unique scenarios and emotional humor.

That humor has a bit more of a cheeky, almost Simpsons-esque sense of silliness to it all, mining individual moments for visual and script gags. More than any Pixar film previously, there's a squash and stretch to everything, mimicking the kind of playful exaggeration in the likes of old school Looney Tunes cartoons. Anxiety chugs 5 energy drinks at once whilst Envy's eyes grow to be the size of her head, creating not only an amusing visual palette, but a stark different between the human world and the emotion world. It not only helps separate these worlds but draws a distinction between these humorous moments and the ones that are deeply serious and deliberate.

Even if it feels routine, it's still a deeply emotional journey to go on with these characters, and Pixar once again refuses to take the easy way out. The third act is remarkably complex and complicated, arguably more so than the first film’s, to a degree that feels almost unnecessarily ambitious. It refuses to take a simpler, easy way out, instead tackling the changes associated with growing up and puberty head on. So many films focus on the awkwardness of those physical, external changes, but it feels refreshing to see one directly tackling the internal. 

“Inside Out 2” has plenty of similarities to the first film, but these lay the groundwork for more expansions on its initial concept and the characters, internal and otherwise, therein. The vocal cast is still exceptional, with Hawke and Poehler turning in some truly fantastic performances, and it’s still an exceptional visual treat. There’s some déjà vu, but it doesn’t harm what’s still a fun, funny, and emotionally charged adventure that refuses to take the easy way out. It may be a sequel to a beloved original film, but make no mistake, nobody would’ve made this like Pixar has. 4.5/5

Am I OK? - Review: Sometimes, That's All You Need to Be

 

Most coming-of-age films tend to take place during their character’s teenaged years for good reason. It’s one of the more awkward times in one's life, as you’re attempting to figure yourself out and determine what kind of person you might want to be as you grow older. Which is why the act of coming out can make you feel as though you’re going through a second set of teenage years, making a film like “Am I Ok?” feel like a coming-of-age movie for the mid-30s crowd. 

The film follows Lucy, played by Dakota Johnson (“Fifty Shades of Grey,” “Madame Web”), a mid-30s woman living in Los Angeles working as a receptionist at a spa who mostly spends time drinking with her best friend Jane, played by Sonoya Mizuno (“House of the Dragon,” “Devs”), and Jane’s boyfriend Danny, played by Jermaine Fowler (“Superior Donuts,” “Coming 2 America”). After many failed attempts at dating men and spurred by the thoughts of flirtatious new masseuse Brittany, played by Kiersey Clemons (“Dope,” “Hearts Beat Loud”), Lucy realizes that she is a lesbian and begins to step into her new experiences, struggling with her late-bloomer revelation and new world. 

Especially after years of playing more unflattering roles in films like the “Fifty Shades” trilogy, Johnson has emerged in recent times much like Kristen Stewart did in her post-”Twilight” career: she’s flourished in a realm of fresher, deeper, more emotionally complicated role. “Ok” is no different, and she somehow turns a quieter role into one of real vulnerability and honest humor. Her chemistry with Mizuno is fantastic, and their friendship really feels believable and works as the anchor for the entire film. Likewise, Mizuno is also great, and the pair of them develop a friendship that feels messy and complicated and real, unlike most other fake feeling movie friends. 

The rest of the cast are all good, serving their roles well, but aren’t majorly memorable. Fowler does a great job as the doting, humorus, self-effacing boyfriend role, and Clemons plays the stereotypical “early-20s, overly flirtatious girl” role well. But neither the script from writer Lauren Pomerantz (“Strange Planet,” “Saturday Night Live”) nor their performances do much to break out of these kinds of archetypes. Likewise, even for a fairly simplistic movie, co-directors Tig Notaro (“One Mississippi,” “Star Trek: Discovery”) and Stephanie Allynne (“Dream Corp LLC,” “The L Word: Generation Q”) struggle to do more than point and shoot for much of the film’s runtime. 

It’s a well-directed film in terms of getting lots of good dialogue-based scenes and moments of honest humor, but there isn’t any real sense of dramatic flair or flashiness. Not that it needs it, but eventually it stops feeling like a movie and more just like a filmed play because of this. There’s a good but not particularly memorable score from Craig Wedren (“School of Rock,” “Velvet Goldmine”) and Annie Clark (aka St. Vincent) as well, and it ends up feeding into the film’s main issue. It’s a fine story that's well-acted and clearly has a lot of emotion put into it. But it fails to make any real impact from a craft perspective. 

Unfortunately, despite Johnson’s great performance, the queer elements of the story don’t really feel explored beyond a base level. It's fun to see her go on dates and discover herself, and plenty of great scenes come from this. A particularly excellent one sees Lucy and Jane lying in bed for a sleepover with Lucy slowly realizing her female attractions and working through it by talking to Jane. But it feels as though it stops short of really allowing Lucy to explore herself onscreen. Yes, the film is clearly moreso about their friendship, but given how much of it is central to Lucy’s coming out and self-exploration, it’s disappointing we don’t see more of it. 

“Am I Ok?” is a well-acted and sweet tale that buoys itself around excellent chemistry between Johnson and Mizuno. But it never really feels like it gets deeper into any of the subjects it brings up, resulting in an emotionally charged, important, but ultimately rather surface level exploration of the middle-age coming out experience. It’s worth watching certainly, but it fails to make a major impression like one might hope given the material and those involved. 3/5

The Garfield Movie - Review: A Big Fat Hairy Deal

 

Somehow, the rotund orange tabby cat with a love of lasagna and a hatred of Mondays by the name of Garfield has managed to keep a stranglehold on the Sunday comics market for the better part of the last 45 years. After metric tons of merchandise, television specials, and two live-action films, the character finally has his first feature-length animated film released in theatres, the creatively titled “The Garfield Movie.” 

The film stars Chris Pratt (“Guardians of the Galaxy,” “Parks and Recreation”) as Garfield, the titular lazy fat cat, who gets cat-napped alongside his dimwitted dog pal Odie, voiced by Harvey Guillén (“What We Do In The Shadows (2019),” “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish”). They’re dragged out of the house by the villainous cat Jinx, voiced by Hannah Waddingham (“Ted Lasso,” “Sex Education”), who seeks revenge against Garfield’s father Vic, voiced by Samuel L. Jackson (“Pulp Fiction,” “Django Unchained”). She forces the trio on a heist, which quickly goes awry, leading Garfield and his father to butt heads and cause chaos, all while Garfield’s owner Jon, voiced by Nicholas Hoult (“Mad Max: Fury Road,” “The Menu”), awaits their return. 

It’s quite an adventurous tale for such a lethargic cat, and the script, written by Paul A. Kaplan (“Spin City,” “Raising Hope”), Mark Torgove (“Spin City,” “Raising Hope”), and David Reynolds (“The Emperor’s New Groove,” “Finding Nemo”), goes to great lengths to get the tabby out of the house. Unfortunately, the adventure itself ends up as a mostly bland tale that recycles much of the same plotting and character beats seen in numerous other animated family films. The film’s sense of humor and the gags throughout are still amusing and maintain the wry, broad sense of silliness that the comic strip is known for, but the overall plot feels stitched together from other, better, family films. 

The vocal performances are a complete mixed bag. While none are really doing any difficult work, mostly residing in the realm of “celebrities doing their own voices”, some fit the characters far worse than others. The big stickler is Pratt, and his performance is fine enough but at no point ever gives the impression that it’s Garfield you’re listening to. Meanwhile Jackson is fine enough, with Hoult stealing the show in his minor appearances. Waddingham is also just fine, and Guillén does a lot of very amusing yipping and barking as Garfield’s technically mute canine companion. 

Visually, it's a somewhat bland film. It looks technically nice, with lots of painted looking backgrounds and warm autumnal colors to showcase a generalized picture of midwestern US landscapes. But it's a very serviceable look, with nothing standing out stylistically or visually. The film’s visual identity, or lack thereof, actually ends up speaking to the larger issues with the movie as a whole. 

Despite having an experienced director at the helm in Mark Dindal (“The Little Mermaid,” “Aladdin”), the film lacks anything memorable about it, existing more as an animated babysitter for the kids and a contractual obligation. You simply need more than a recognizable face or an experienced director to make something memorable, as those elements can get butts in seats, but do not guarantee a good or enjoyable product. Luckily, the film itself does manage to be amusing and silly enough to be a fun waste of 90 minutes, but it lacks any legitimate reason to exist. It’s made even worse given the numerous amounts of product placement in the film, which eventually borders on inane. Family films like this will always have some kind of tie-in or product placement, but there the small moments of real brands and restaurants being shown and then some that feel like short ads meant to be airing on TV that accidentally got spliced into the final film.

“The Garfield Movie” continues the orange tabby’s tradition of starring in serviceable but lackluster family films, and it's at least better than the previous live action works. It’s pretty to look at but bland overall, in both story and overall visual style. Its voice cast is mostly good, and the sense of humor is fun, but it’s hard to imagine anyone remembering anything about this film a year from now, beyond the bizarre casting of its title role. 2.5/5

Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga - Review: A Fantastic and Furious Femme Fatale Fable

 

After thirty years since the release of “Beyond Thunderdome,” George Miller (“Three Thousand Years of Longing,” “Babe”), the original creator of the “Mad Max” franchise returned with the acclaimed and lauded “Mad Max: Fury Road,” which not only introduced a new Max and new style to the series, but also a new lead in Imperator Furiosa, a badass war-rig driver with a buzz cut and a metal arm played by Charlize Theron. Miller now returns to the character to tell the story of her life up to the events of “Fury Road” with a film simply titled “Furiosa.”

Played now by Anya Taylor-Joy (“The Menu,” “The Queen’s Gambit”) in her teen years and beyond and by Alyla Browne (“Three Thousand Years of Longing”) as a young child, the film is a sprawling, borderline Shakespearean tale of Furiosa’s life after she was taken from her paradisal home known as The Green Place by Dr. Dementus, played by Chris Hemsworth (“Thor,” “The Cabin in the Woods”), and his biker gang. She seeks revenge on him for stealing her away and killing her mother, while rising through the ranks of the War Boys and warriors of Immortan Joe, played by Lachy Hulme (“The Matrix Reloaded,” “Offspring”), working alongside his own Praetorian Jack, played by Tom Burke (“Mank,” “Strike”).

More than ever before, thanks to the length of the film’s scope and its runtime, Miller dives headfirst into the wasteland with more detail and lore than ever before. With his co-writer Nico Lathouris (“Mad Max: Fury Road”), the pair further expand the wasteland to show locations only heard about before and also new aspects of their culture. The film’s unreliable narrator is someone referred to as a History Man, played by George Shevtsov (“Three Thousand Years of Longing,” “Stormworld”), a man literally tattooed with numerous words, turns of phrase, and definitions, literally called upon at some points to define complicated words or give synonyms for what Dementus is saying.

As Miller continues to mine the depths of his world, so does he connect himself with actors ready to throw themselves to the floor for these characters. Taylor-Joy is a genuine revelation, giving what is borderline the best performance of her career. So much of the film is based on her body language, movements, and intense gaze. Even when going long stretches without speaking, she commands the attention of the camera and world itself to tell this story.

Hemsworth, meanwhile, goes for broke to an almost comedic degree. His Dementus is a fascinating villain, maintaining a level of charisma and apathy that makes it a wonder to watch his downfall. As he continues to spiral downwards, it becomes a marvelous display of hubris as Dementus falls from grace despite his continued best efforts. The supporting cast is also packed full of great performances straddling the line between insanity and seriousness. Angus Sampson (“Heartbreak High (2022),” “Insidious”) as Dementus’s Organic Mechanic, John Howard (“The Girl from Tomorrow,” “All Saints”) as Joe’s advisor known as The People Eater, and Charlee Fraser (“Anyone But You”) in an impactfully small chunk of time as Furiosa’s mother, Mary.

The fact that Miller takes these smaller roles so seriously despite their insane names, physicalities, and demeanors is a testament to his approach with this film and what makes it so different from “Fury Road” before it. Whereas “Fury Road” was a shot of adrenaline that never lets up, with harsh searing colors and camerawork, “Furiosa” spends a shocking amount of time going slower, with a focus on building up the titular heroine’s characterizations. The previous Shakespearean comparison is no accident; it's an extremely apt comparison rather. As the

History Man narrates, we realize we’re being told a story, and given that no one ever really thinks they’re insane in their own story, we get a tale of a wasteland that’s still crazy, but in a more reserved way. Imagine having someone explain one of the most bizarre experiences they’ve ever had to you in the calmest manner possible, and you’ve got a good idea of the level “Furiosa” is operating on.

Even if it isn’t flying by at two-hundred-mph or shot with the bright yellow haze that sears your eyeballs, what’s here is still a massive technical and visual achievement. From numerous sequences involving complicated stunt works or massive vehicular destruction to the way various locations are dressed and designed, Miller’s wasteland continues to be a feast for the senses, shot with glee by cinematographer Simon Duggan (“Warcraft,” “The Great Gatsby (2013)”), and even if there are fewer of them, the action sequences that do exist are still thrilling to behold, thumping along to a chunky electric score from Tom Holkenborg (“Deadpool,” “Mad Max: Fury Road”).

Slightly disappointing though, for all the fantastic stunt work and practical production designs, there are a few glaring moments of visual weirdness that seem out of place given the budget and level of care given to the rest of the film. For example, while there’s some really impressive work with meshing Taylor-Joy and Browne’s faces for young Furiosa and creating the Bullet Farm leader’s face entirely out of CGI, there are also moments of glaring obviousness. Shots of the War Boys standing atop a Rig with clearly green screened backgrounds behind them, as well as various CGI vehicles and crashes that look less than convincing. It wouldn’t be such a discredit if not for the impressive practical work on every front, leading to a jarring clash when these less than stellar elements do appear.

The end result of the film’s various disparate elements is something quite bizarre and unique. It’s a serious film filled with insanity, that never fails to take everything to heart. It’s a work located mostly in deserts and dilapidated locals, but that often looks beautiful in its technical and production design aspects, and it’s lead by two career best performances from two actors who’ve already given plenty of fantastic performances in the past. It lacks that immediate, genre defining momentum that “Fury Road” delivered, not surprising given that film’s lighting in a bottle nature. It’s a fascinatingly different take on a world Miller has had the reins on for his entire career, and it’s worth a watch for that aspect alone. 4.5/5

IF (2024) - Review: A Messy, Uneven, Big Hearted Family Flick

 

It takes a lot for a studio to bankroll an original family film with zero ties to any kind of book, game, television series, or other merchandisable immediacy, especially for a budget of $110 million. But when you have the goodwill of the public and have made said studio over $600 million with two films who’s combined budget was a little under $80 million, you can snag yourself a blank check feature, much like John Krasinski (“A Quiet Place,” “The Office”) has with his latest film, “IF.”

Starting a few years after the loss of her mother, the film follows twelve-year-old Bea, played by Cailey Fleming (“The Walking Dead”), back in New York staying with her grandmother Margaret, played by Fiona Shaw (“Enola Holmes,” “Killing Eve”), whilst her father, played by Krasinski, is in the hospital. While there, she finds her upstairs neighbor Cal, played by Ryan Reynolds (“Deadpool,” “Free Guy”), with an apartment full of imaginary friends, known as IFs, such as Blossom, voiced by Phoebe Waller-Bridge (“Fleabag,” “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny”), and Blue, voiced by Steve Carell (“The Office,” “Despicable Me”). Since she can see them, they enlist in her help to pair them with new kids since their old ones have grown up and forgotten them.

There’s definitely whimsy to behold here, and a lot of that comes down to the titular IFs themselves. Packed to the gills with varying styles and aesthetics, each one makes a visual impact, brought to life with a colorful and charming voice from a celebrity cast that could alone fill an entire theatre. Krasinski does smartly play them down though, letting the voices just be voices and not winks for the parents. Louis Gossett Jr. (“An Officer and a Gentleman,” “Roots”) voices Louis, an elderly teddy bear who runs the IFs retirement home, and his voice lends a lot of warmth to the proceedings, becoming a calming bright spot for the film overall.

Waller-Bridge and Carell do a good job with their IFs, but they mostly plod along with the same kind of candor you’d expect from most celebrity voiced animated characters. The voices do fit the parts, but they never excel in a particular way. Reynolds, meanwhile, plays mostly against type for the first time in a while. Calvin is more subdued and downplayed than pretty much every other character he’s played for the last decade, and it's a welcome strength. Fleming is okay, doing the best with a script that’s mostly asking her to stand around, look wide-eyed at the IFs, and ask questions so the film can explain its premise(s).

The elephant, or IF, in the room for the film is that script and the wild tonal shifts it takes throughout. Shortly after meeting the IFs, Bea is reduced to asking a lot of questions and looking astonished. It stifles her character and gives the movie a stalling pace. It’s as if Krasinski won’t let us continue without really really making sure we understand what’s going on. The film also swings wildly between being full of whimsy and remarkably sad and melancholy. This isn’t a problem since it does commit to these differing tones, but it is an interesting choice, nonetheless.

Visually, there is a lot to like here, and cinematographer Janusz Kamiński’s (“Saving Private Ryan,” “West Side Story (2021)”) work pairs beautifully with a score from Michael Giacchino (“Up,” “Inside Out”). The visual effects and practical sets blend together seamlessly, and the IFs themselves really do look fantastic. Kamiński’s camerawork maintains a level of professionalism and playfulness, making sure we get the best possible views of this adventure without feeling stale or stiff.

“IF” is a very odd and conflicting film. It’s a family movie aimed at kids that might be too mature for them. It’s a movie that wants to make you feel the whimsy but is better at conjuring it when it's not trying to conjure it. It’s also funny and fun, but remarkably sad as well. In some ways, it's a head scratcher; will this be a movie kids pick to watch on a car ride or sleepover over other picks like “Toy Story” or “Despicable Me”? It isn’t that it's too complex for younger audiences or that it isn’t actually a movie for them. It just ends up being a lot for a young mind to handle.

Krasinski clearly has a lot of ambition here, and it works on most levels, especially visually. Yet the script kneecaps its protagonist once its most interesting element comes into play, and it struggles with wanting to spark joy and magic versus when it actually does. Reynolds is a surprisingly subdued highlight, and it’ll definitely make most smile and tear up. But those going in expecting a lighthearted family romp should be warned: this one is gonna get a bit heavy and messy. 3.5/5