Caught Stealing - Review: A Baseball Player, A Cop, Some Russians, and Two Hebrews Walk into a Bar...

Calling a director like Darren Aronofsky (“The Whale,” “The Wrestler”) a “general audience” filmmaker would be like calling extra-spicy siracha a “light condiment.” While his films are beloved and acclaimed, he is still the director behind “Requiem for a Dream,” “Pi,” “Black Swan,” and “mother!” to name just a few. So, to see him direct a crime thriller starring Austin Butler (“Elvis (2022),” “Dune Part Two”) might be a bit of a leap. But make no mistake, even if “Caught Stealing” is the most audience friendly film he’s yet made, it's still far from an easy pill to swallow.

Set in 1998 New York City, the film follows Hank, played by Butler, a high school baseball star turned bartender puttering along in life. He spends his days drinking, bartending, and hanging out with his girlfriend Yvonne, played by Zoë Kravitz (“The Batman (2022),” “Big Little Lies”). After his next-door neighbor Russ, played by Matt Smith (“Doctor Who,” “House of the Dragon”), has to rush back home to London, Hank finds himself caring for Russ’s cat in the meantime. Things quickly take a turn though after Hank finds himself hunted by police detective Roman, played by Regina King (“The Boondocks,” “If Beale Street Could Talk”), Hebrew gangsters Lipa and Shmully Drucker, played by Liev Schreiber (“Doubt,” “Ray Donovan”) and Vincent D'Onofrio (“Men in Black,” “Daredevil (2015)”) respectively, Cuban gangster Colorado, played by Benito Martínez Ocasio (“Bullet Train,” “Happy Gilmore 2”), and two Russian gangsters Aleksei and Pavel, played by Yuri Kolokolnikov (“Game of Thrones,” “The Americans”) and Nikita Kukushkin (“Captain Volkonogov Escaped,” “Attraction”) respectively, all of whom are looking for Russ.

It's a fairly simple premise for a crime caper like this, and screenwriter Charlie Huston (“Powers”) uses that simplicity to stack bodies and misunderstandings as high as possible to further complicate Hank’s adventure. It’s the sort of film that doesn’t have a mystery at its core, rather everyone withholding information from each other. It means that each moment feels exceptionally tense, as if a backstab could occur at the drop of a hat. Huston does an excellent job bringing his own novel to the big screen, and he and Aronofsky makes great use of the material together. Most notably, it feels like a true “New York” film in a way one hasn’t in quite a while. As opposed to most others that use the landmarks for set dressing, Aronofsky gets into the streets and alleyways and lets it all breathe. There’s not a single shot of the Statue of Liberty or Grand Central Station or any place like that, but it feels more “New York” than a movie that just shows you New York.

Butler makes for a great patsy here, playing Hank’s naivety for the situation to a great effect. He never feels like an idiot or clueless; he’s the kind of guy who can piece together what’s going on but genuinely is mistaken in his position in it all. It’s a great kind of role, as opposed to films that have their “good guy” actually be a not so good guy after all. It adds meat and tension to his role in the story and to Butler’s performance as things go on. King is a fantastic force of nature against him, peppering her role with classic bits of New York cop attitude and dialogue. Smith is a delightfully fun British crust punk and is so much fun to hate. Ironically, the film’s two best performances are two that deserve far more screen time: Kravitz, Schreiber, and D’Onofrio are all great but leave you wishing they had a larger role in the film as a whole given their excellence and chemistry with Butler.

As Aronofsky and cinematographer Matthew Libatique (“Black Swan,” “A Star is Born (2018)”) dip and weave through alleyways and supermarkets, the wonderful score from composer Rob Simonsen (“Ghostbusters: Afterlife,” “Deadpool & Wolverine”) and rock band Idles worms its way into your ears and sets the entire escapade alight. The film certainly looks the part, bloodied, beaten, and tattered, and yet Aronofsky’s more brutal touches are here in full force. While not as psychologically brutal or full of gore as his previous works, it's a film that’s brutal in its story. No one is safe in this tale, and it straddles the line between emotional devastation and catharsis. It makes the journey feel worth it, knowing lives are on the line as opposed to being a film wherein there’s an absence of danger. That being said, Aronosfky isn’t the sort of director to hide any of the brutality even in a lighter fare film. Just know that, if a character gets shot, you’re going to see them get shot before, during, and after.

It’s odd to call a film like this, a dark comedy crime thriller from Darren Aronofsky, a crowd pleaser, but it's as close as we’re likely to get from him. Because for all its tension and toughness, this is a film wherein he and Huston clearly just want to take you on a wild ride through New York City. It just so happens that this ride is bumpier and bloodier than you might expect. But with a cast, musical score, and generally grimy look like this, it's a ride well worth taking. If you can stomach a few dead bodies. 4.5/5

The Toxic Avenger (2025) - Review: The Goriest Do-Gooder of Them All

 

Way back in 1984, a little company burst (pun entirely intended) onto the low budget scene with “The Toxic Avenger,” a tale of a mutated and mutilated janitor that poked fun at superhero stories and monster movies in equal part. That film helped put its studio, “Troma Entertainment,” on the map, and they’d later be responsible for helping to spawn the careers of the likes of Matt Stone, Trey Parker, Oliver Stone, James Gunn, Eli Roth, and Samuel L. Jackson. They even originally released “My Neighbor Totoro” in the U.S! Now, over 40 years after the original splattered onto the silver screen, we have the long in purgatory remake from writer/director Macon Blair (“I Don’t Feel at Home in This World Anymore,” “Green Room”) of “The Toxic Avenger.”

Winston Gooze, played by Peter Dinklage (“Game of Thrones,” “The Station Agent”), is a down on his luck stepdad reeling from the death of his wife and looking after his stepson Wade, played by Jacob Tremblay (“Room,” “Good Boys”), in the aftermath. After being diagnosed with a fatal disease, Winston begs for the help of his boss Bob Garbinger, played by Kevin Bacon (“Footloose,” “Tremors”), the CEO of evil pharmaceutical company BTH, who declines to help. This results in Winston becoming mutated into a half-melted, mangled version of himself that becomes known as the Toxic Avenger, voiced by Dinklage and performed by Luisa Guerreiro.

While the plot takes a wildly different approach to the material than the 1984 original, the guts of it are still the same. There’s a surprising sweetness to the material and the way the film sets up Winston’s transformation. A lot of time is spent setting up Winston’s character and lonely feeling in the world and it makes his emotional and physical transformation far more interesting as a result. It doesn’t prevent the first act of the film from grinding to a halt at times as various characters are set up, world building is established, and things are generally fleshed out. Once Winston becomes Toxie, things ratchet up: the pacing gets better, and things get more interesting.

Dinklage does a great job completely throwing himself into as sad of a sack as Winston is, both physically early on and in his vocal performance. He has a great talent for imbuing his voice with even subtle emotions and that, coupled with an excellent physical performance from Guerreiro, makes Toxie really come to life. Tremblay does some interesting work, as he gets the most emotional material to deal with outside of Dinklage, and the pair do have a great awkward father son relationship to work through. The rest of the cast, meanwhile, completely chews through the material in the best possible way.

Bacon is a hoot, and Elijah Wood (“The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King,” “Happy Feet”), playing opposite him as his deformed mad scientist brother Fritz, keeps that energy up phenomenally. Taylour Paige (“@Zola,” “Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom”) appears as BTH whistleblower J.J. and she plays the straight man in all of this madness to excellent effect. A surprise standout is scene stealer David Yow (“Dinner in America,” “I Don’t Feel at Home in This World Anymore”) as Guthrie, a homeless confidant of Winston’s post-transformation. Not only is he hysterical, but there’s also a slight madness and sweetness to his behavior that makes him stand out in a crowd of equally insane side characters.

Despite its low budget and scrappy technical merits, this modern version of St. Roma’s Village (aka Tromaville) is effectively stylized and cartoonish in the best ways. Washed out colors paint the daytime events in a flat trashy persona, and the nighttime shadows and neon give things a liveliness that manages to still be trashy without betraying the daytime styles. Toxie’s practical effects are exceptionally impressive, especially on the low budget, and the film’s heavy usage of stylized colored lighting accentuates everything. Virtually every piece of practical makeup and prosthetics looks excellent. When it comes to the CGI blood and gore however, those effects are decidedly less good looking. While these elements are copious, they suffer the most from the lower budget, popping off the screen in the worst way with lower quality spurts and an unintentionally fake look.

Speaking of blood and gore, just as much as the original film and virtually anything baring the Troma Entertainment name, “The Toxic Avenger” is not for the faint of heart. Eyes pop, brains spurt blood like fountains, and there’s all manner of blood, viscera, and body parts strewn about the scenery. This violence is part of the appeal, certainly, but it doesn’t betray the brain working behind the scenes as well. While it certainly feels overstuffed, Blair’s interpretation of Toxie’s origins takes on organized crime, polluting pharmaceutical companies, and corrupt politicians. It absolutely doesn’t go for the cheap way of rehashing the original film, but it's hard to say it pulls these themes off gracefully or to their fullest potential.

That’s likely because, for as much as it is its own version of events, Blair’s film is a clear love letter to not only Toxie and Troma, but to the entire kind of B-movie shlock fest films that the company helped exist. Without Troma, we don’t have “Evil Dead,” “South Park,” likely the U.S. releases of Ghibli films, or even the “Guardians of the Galaxy” films. While references to those aren’t involved, Blair still treats the studio with the reverence it deserves and invites. There are references and tributes to various Troma works spread throughout, including a cameo from original “Toxic Avenger” director and studio founder Lloyd Kaufman, and it not only fleshes out the world of the film even more, but it showcases just how much heart the film has beating underneath, almost in spite of its other, more objectionable aspects.

"The Toxic Avenger” is certainly not for everyone, but a big beating heart and love of the genre and character helps catapult this film above the shlocky “direct to video” remake status it so easily could have claimed. Dinklage delivers a fantastic new version of the character, and despite a slow start and some low-quality CGI effects, the film remains a mushy, splattery good time with a surprisingly big heart beating underneath its charred, half-melted husk. 3.5/5

Honey Don't! - Review: A Lesbian Noir That Gets Lost Along the Way

 

After the writing and directing duo behind hits like “Fargo,” “The Big Lebowski,” “No Country for Old Men,” and “Inside Llewyn Davis” split in 2020, the Coen Brothers each began directing projects that fit their own specific interests. Ethan Coen and his wife Tricia Cooke (“Drive Away Dolls”) began writing and directing a trilogy of “lesbian B-movies” meant to be of a far less serious tone than his previous works. That first film, “Drive Away Dolls” had a fairly muted reception in 2024, and now the second film in that disconnected trilogy is here with “Honey Don’t.”

The film follows private investigator Honey O'Donahue, played by Margaret Qualley (“The Substance,” “Maid”), who finds herself stumbling into the mysterious death of a potential client. This death leads her to a mystery involving many faces around town, including Drew Devlin, a pastor and leader of a local religious cult played by Chris Evans (“Captain America: The First Avenger,” “Knives Out”), MG Falcone, a police officer played by Aubrey Plaza (“Parks and Recreation,” “Agatha All Along”), O’Donahue’s sister Heidi played by Kristen Connolly (“The Cabin in the Woods,” “Zoo”), her niece Corinne played by Talia Ryder (“Never Rarely Sometimes Always,” “Do Revenge”), and police detective Marty Metakawich played by Charlie Day (“It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia,” “The Super Maro Bros. Movie”).

From the start, it's clear that Coen wants to leave his more outlandish sensibilities behind and make a film that represents a more serious vision of the classic “Noir” genre films he and his brother love. There’s still plenty of off-kilter humor here, and plenty of queerness as well. However, by stripping out the almost cartoonish sense of reality that his previous works, and particularly “Drive Away Dolls” had, what remains is an amateurish imitation of these detective driven noir films from the past. There’s a handful of great camera angles from cinematographer Ari Wegner (“The Power of the Dog,” “Zola”) and Carter Burwell’s (“The Banshees of Inisherin,” “Anomalisa”) musical score captures the noir vibes well, but they both simply slot into their genre rolls without ever standing on their own. It certainly feels like a professionally made film, but like the humor, the ramshackle sense of filmmaking shown in “Drive Away Dolls” or other Coen productions gave their films a sense of personality. Here, it works but it works plainly.

Qualley’s lead performance does some heavy lifting, and she plays the stone-cold sleuth role well, constantly propping the film up but she can only do so much to save it. Evans and Plaza are fine enough, but don’t do anything remotely remarkable with their roles. Plaza in particular starts out well enough, but the plot takes a complete nosedive with her character in the last act in the worst possible way. Meanwhile everyone else simply putters along. Day manages to turn a borderline annoying character into a slightly charming one, and Connolly and Ryder are fine enough, if only because the characters are the most plain in the film.

It would be one thing if the film felt plain and yet kept the mystery engaging, but that might be the film’s worst aspect. Coen and Cooke initially set things up as a slow, meandering sort of tale with multiple different directions things could go, before essentially knocking everything down at the end in the most unsatisfying way. Nothing connects or loops back around on itself, essentially making a good eighty percent of the mystery completely pointless. It's not hard to see a vision here, as if they wanted things to be subversive in how it all culminates. The dialogue is great, keeps the rat-a-tat rapid fire nature of other Coen films and noir genre movies, so each scene does at least have a quick pace. But it feels like a massive twist just to have one, instead of something rooted in pre-existing characters or clues spread throughout the film.

“Honey Don’t” might have a compelling and charming lead performance, and it's certainly admirable that the film wants to center queer characters outside of a coming-out story. However, Coen’s seeming desire to make a more “serious” film means that all sense of personality has been stripped away, leaving a mediocre film with a lukewarm cast and a bad ending. Even without comparing it to Coen and Cooke’s previous so-so queer comedy, there’s a good deal left to be desired here. There’s certainly worse out there but given the “whodunnit” renaissance that’s occurred recently, you can also find far, far better examples of the genre. 2.5/5

Ne Zha 2 (English Dub) - Review: A Little Dubbed Demon Reborn

With a box office of over $1.8 billion in China alone, it's safe to say that “Ne Zha 2” has turned into something of a phenomenon. It’s become the highest grossing film ever in China, the highest grossing film in a single country ever, the highest grossing animated film ever, the highest grossing film of 2025 so far, and the fifth highest grossing film of all time. To say the film has become a phenomenon would be an understatement, and after a theatrical run earlier in the year, A24 has now released an English language dub with an all-star cast as an attempt to capture the small sliver of the market that has yet to see this new hit.

Picking up directly from the end of the first film, this sequel follows the mischievous demon child Ne Zha, voiced by Crystal Lee (“Barbie Dream Besties,” “Kageki Shojo!!”), and his friend, the good-hearted Ao Bing, voiced by Aleks Le (“Demon Slayer,” “Solo Leveling”). After Bing’s body is destroyed, Ne Zha agrees to complete a trial to become immortal and win a potion that can create a new body for Bing to hold off Bing’s father, Ao Guang, voiced by Christopher Swindle (“Ultraman (2022),” “Boruto: Naruto Next Generations”), and the villainous Shen Gongbao, voiced by Daniel Riordan (“Transformers: Robots in Disguise”), from attacking Ne Zha’s home as revenge. Ne Zha enlists in the help of his master, Taiyi Zhenren, voiced by Rick Zeiff (“The Tom & Jerry Show,” “Olivia”), to help him complete the trial, while sharing a body with Ao Bing to prevent his soul from being lost.

The first and most important thing to understand is that “Ne Zha 2” is a sequel in the truest sense, meaning it makes no accommodations for those who haven’t seen the first film. While a brief summary of the first film’s events appears at the beginning, it will still be quite difficult to piece together what is going on for the first fifteen-twenty minutes. Once things get going, it picks up enough for things to be relatively intelligible, although it's obvious that this is the sort of film that will play best to those readily familiar with each character, location, and previous story beats. Things are still plenty entertaining though, as the material has its roots in the basics of the “Hero’s Journey” trope, and are easily understandable by all with a little bit of paid attention. Director/writer Jiaozi (“Ne Zha”) flows smoothly, and the English translation keeps things moving just as briskly. Each scene manages to be a thrilling display of Ne Zha’s childlike sensibilities and raw strength, while also working as individual pieces of the evolving larger narrative, full of twists and unexpected turns.

The tradeoff for that brisk pace though is that, like many films dubbed like this, there are numerous moments where it feels as though the English cast is rushing to say their lines as quickly as possible. It’s a verbal whiplash at times, and it’s one of the reasons the film can be hard to parse for its initial fifteen-twenty minutes. The sense of humor is something else though; while it can be entertaining to watch Ne Zha poke fun at stuffy gods and angels, numerous moments of the film grind to a halt for fart and pee jokes that feel straight out of the kiddiest of kid’s films. They feel so out of place that you’d think they were added by an American studio if not for the fact that they were fully animated scenes.

Crystal Lee’s vocal performance is one of the highlights of the film, a wonderfully spunky bit of antihero and preteen boy mischief. She brings her vocal talents to bare and turns what could have easily been an annoying protagonist into a lovable little ball of spitfire chaos. There’s a heart of gold underneath his brutal exterior, and it makes the film’s eventual emotional arc work wonders. Aleks Le provides a great balance as Bing, and the both of them bicker and spar back and forth, providing a yin and yang of the film’s central conflict and sense of humor. Zeiff is a charming bit of comic relief as well, and he’s a delightful bit of raspy voiced respite anytime he appears.

The vocal performances across the board are all generally good, with each filling their spots well. Riordan, for example, plays a menacing reluctant villain and delivers the exact kind of vocal performance you’d expect for a role like that. Oddly enough, the weakest performance of the bunch comes from the most well-known actor: Michelle Yeoh (“Everything Everywhere All at Once,” “Crazy Rich Asians”) as Ne Zha’s mother Lady Yin. She isn’t bad but compared to a cast full of performers giving full-throated, over-the-top voices, her reserved nature seems out of place. Even in the moments where she attempts to match the nature of the others, she just falls flatter than them.

What certainly does not fall flat is the film’s action and visual style. This might not be the most detailed looking film in the world, but it makes up for it in sheer grand size. It’s an ever-expanding sense of space and world, with each action sequence taking place with seemingly hundreds of thousands of characters on screen. Battles erupt forth with mobs of people moving more like dust clouds or liquids than individuals, leading to a greater sense of scale and epic combat. Characters appear, made of jade, mist, ice, fire, and it all feels remarkable to behold. It’s a dizzying sense of scale, and each subsequent event builds on the previous ones. Quite simply, it's the kind of film made for as big a screen as possible. The musical score from Wan Pin Chu (“Ne Zha,” “Rainbow Sea Fly High”), Rui Yang, and Roc Chen (“The Wandering Earth,” “Autumn Cicada”) isn’t particularly incredible, but it underscores each moment with thrilling intensity. It’s a truly awesome kind of film, pushing the animated medium in what it can showcase on a pure scale level.

“Ne Zha 2” certainly has had an unexpected journey in the theatrical landscape. Beating “Inside Out 2” to become the biggest animated film of all time in just three weeks, it's clear there’s a fervor behind the film. And for good reason, as it takes a well-worn style of storytelling, drenched in the “Hero’s Journey” tropes, and dresses it up with some exceptional animation and thrilling battle sequences. The script and vocal performances might be slightly rushed, more a factor of the English dub than anything, and it's certainly not the kindest to blind viewings, but it’s the kind of film that justifies its existence on a visual level alone, with everything else simply being icing on the cake. 4.5/5

Freakier Friday - Review: Thank God It's Friday... Again

Despite not drawing nearly as many box office dollars as others, the “Freaky Friday” franchise has proven to be one of Disney’s safest mainstays. With three theatrical films, four made-for-TV movies, and a stage musical, it’s safe to say this version of the story lives somewhere in the head of most audience members, whether they realize it or not. Now, the first direct sequel and the third theatrically released film is here, bringing back the cast of the 2003 remake and seeking to further push Disney’s recent brand of sweet nostalgia within the theatrical market.

Set twenty-two years after the 2003 film, this film follows Anna Coleman, played by Lindsay Lohan (“The Parent Trap (1993),” “Mean Girls (2004)”), and Tess Coleman, played by Jamie Lee Curtis (“Halloween (1978),” “Everything Everywhere All At Once”), struggling on the cusp of Anna’s wedding. Her daughter Harper, played by Julia Butters (“The Fabelmans (2022),” “American Housewife”), refuses to get along with her future stepsister Lily, played by Sophia Hammons (“The Absence of Eden,” “Under Wraps”). When their feud comes to a head, the four of them find themselves swapping bodies: Anna swapping with Harper and Tess swapping with Lily. While this would already create confusion and complications leading up to the wedding, Lily and Harper have even worse plans: to call off the wedding between Anna and Lily’s father Eric, played by Manny Jacinto (“The Good Place,” “The Acolyte”).

While none of the original writers or directors return, this latest film does great work in keeping the same tone and style that the original had back in 2003. Director Nisha Ganatra (“Late Night,” “The High Note”) and co-writers Elyse Hollander and Jordan Weiss (“Dollface,” “Sweethearts”) keep the light snark and family friendly amounts of rebellious attitude in ample supply. This is still a Disney film after all, but they push right up against the boundaries and, like the first film, create what most tweens would call the edgiest film they’ve ever seen. They also load the film with far more subplots than the first, creating a longer, more bloated film as a result.

Gone is the simplicity of the first film’s premise of mother and daughter in each other’s shoes. Now, with four characters switching, more time is spent on the awkwardness, the differing bodies, and the jokes surrounding them. This material is still fun, but much of this was also done in the first film in the same way. And the fact that they’re now doing it for twice as many characters can lead to plenty of great lines lacking impact given how many times jokes like it are repeated. The multiple characters also means a longer film, and this sequel is almost a half hour longer than the first. While there’s certainly more material here, it also means that the film drags in the middle as all the pieces are starting to fall into place and definitely does so before the switch takes effect.

Luckily, this is the perfect example of a film elevated by a cast completely letting loose. Curtis and Lohan are completely fantastic, easily sliding back into these “kids in trench coats” kinds of performances that they excelled at twenty-two years ago. They not only play off each other fantastically, but they do a great job at the “playing a person playing someone else” element of the role that most others would likely stumble over. Butters and Hammons are also great together and turn what could have easily been two annoying “kids as adults” performances into something special. Like Lohan and Curtis, their turn from annoying teens to their “adults in kid bodies” performances are impressive and effective. Jacinto is a surprise as well, channeling his awkward heart of gold persona into a shredded single dad that plays his “too good to be true” aspect for comedy in the best ways. He’s completely in on the joke and is all the better for it.

The most disappointing aspect of the film, especially in comparison to the 2003 film, is simply how bland everything looks. The costumes are fun, especially when you see a teen’s version of adult clothes, but the look of the film is closer to a Capital One commercial than a theatrical film. The cinematography is flat, the lighting is flat, the colors look washed out. Yes, this is a Hollywood mid-budget comedy, but there have been and are still Hollywood mid-budget comedies that look exceptionally better than this. And one of them was the 2003 film. 

“Freakier Friday” is the sort of film that gives you exactly what you expect, no more no less. Curtis, Lohan, Butters, and Hammons are great, and the script has fun with the material and colliding conflicts as things progressively get messier. If it was cut down a bit or had a tighter pace, or even looked better, it's not hard to see this being just as beloved as the 2003 film. As it stands, it's a fun little nostalgic flick that is definitely worth your time, even if it doesn’t excel. 3.5/5 

Weapons (2025) - Review: The Kids Aren't Alright

 

In the longstanding tradition of other recent horror directors like John Krasinski, Jordan Peele, and David Gordon Green, now Zach Cregger (“Barbarian,” “Miss March”) has transitioned from the world of comedy to that of horror with thundering success. His follow-up to the 2022 hit “Barbarian” has been shrouded in secrecy from its announcement to the marketing campaign itself. This is not by accident, as even the premise of the film itself deals with a mystery shrouded in the unknown and the unknowable. Thankfully, Cregger’s has not fallen into a solo sophomore slump and his second feature is a more confident, mysterious, technically ambitious, and most of all scarier film than the last.

One night at 2:17am, every single student in the classroom of Justine Gandy, played by Julia Garner (“Ozark,” “Inventing Anna”), got out of bed, walked out the front door, and ran into the night, vanishing without a trace. Every student except for Alex Lilly, played by Cary Christopher (“An Almost Christmas Story,” “Days of Our Lives (2020)”). The film follows the town itself as it reacts to the mysterious events and the questions surrounding it, including father of one of the kids Archer Graff, played by Josh Brolin (“Dune (2021),” “Avengers: Infinity War”), local cop Paul Morgan, played by Alden Ehrenreich (“Solo: A Star Wars Story,” “Cocaine Bear”), elementary school principal Marcus Miller, played by Benedict Wong (“3 Body Problem,” “Doctor Strange”), and local burglar James, played by Austin Abrams (“euphoria,” “Do Revenge”).

Just like his previous film, Cregger’s latest works best when you know as little about it as possible. The fun of the film comes from how it's structured, slowly showcasing various scenes and elements from different perspectives and at different times, allowing the puzzle pieces to all click into place. Cregger and his editor Joe Murphy (“Barbarian,” “Zeroville”) spend plenty of time building tension by letting things simply play out. It’s a deliberately paced film, with plenty of great scares sprinkled throughout, but the tension is expressed not through massive jump scares but through expertly placed bits of humor and the pieces of the puzzle slowly found by the characters.

This is an exceptionally confident film, especially for a second feature. Cregger has an expert command of the narrative and his cast, both working in perfect harmony to dole out a specific kind of unlikable nature within each of them, without anyone becoming despicable. Garner is an exceptionally flawed portrait of a teacher, immediately likable but allowing that to slowly wear away as the film goes on and her performance is exceptionally compelling. In a similar manner, Brolin manages to be an understandably upset parent, while also tiptoeing into the realm of discomfort. Watching these two play against each other, with characters both struggling as well as being in the wrong, is a ballet of simply fantastic acting. The rest of the cast are excellent, but the standout amongst them all is Cary Christopher. At just 9 years old, he’s giving a performance that is not only heartbreaking and fantastic, but one that easily stands alongside the far more experienced actors he’s sharing the screen with. His role is the lynchpin of the entire film, and he absolutely excels.

Cregger’s script isn’t just expertly paced, but it's a prime example of a director presenting questions and answers deliberately to build suspense, but also without over explaining everything. To put it simply, “Weapons” is a film that will invite discussion by its very nature; it is a film that does not explain everything that goes on. There are certainly hints and clues that are placed throughout, allowing discussions to be had, but at no point does Cregger stand back and break down what is going on piece by piece. It’s an exceptionally risky move and given elements of the narrative, on paper, it shouldn’t work. But it does, not only because of Cregger’s directorial skill and excellent script, but because of a central performance that can’t be discussed here for fear of spoilers. Suffice it to say, that performance and the actor in that role are absolutely phenomenal.

Beyond what’s on the page or in the narrative, the technical elements of the film are excellent. This is director of photography Larkin Seiple’s (“Everything Everywhere All At Once,” “Swiss Army Man”) first film with Cregger, but there’s a trust in the work that makes it seem as though they’ve worked together for years. The camerawork not only excellently builds tension, but the parallels that it evokes with each repeating scene and different perspective allows the central mystery to be filled in and fleshed out in unique ways. It keeps with the film’s identity, both a great example of a scary movie in traditional kinds of ways but filled with mysteries and unconventional senses of dread. No where is that more apparent than in the musical score, composed by Cregger, Ryan Holladay (“Class Action Park”) and Hays Holladay (“Class Action Park”), which certainly is creepy, but keeps a dreamlike atmosphere, with melodic tones and light, almost fairy tale like strings and touches. It sets itself apart and keeps the film’s atmosphere unique and unpredictable.

There are twinges of fantasy and fairy tale in the film, both in the structure and also the central ideas. The confidence behind the camera makes these elements work exceptionally well by tying them into the suburban setting. Despite being placed in an average American cul-de-sac, so many sequences feel supremely scary and otherworldly thanks to the camerawork and heavy usage of a cool blue and grey color palette. It feels like a modern day “scary tale,” comparable to something the Brothers Grimm would have passed down alongside “Hansel and Gretel” and the like. It makes the mystery more unsettling and expected, as well as setting itself apart from a typical slasher film gore fest. But even beyond evoking that feeling, there’s a sense of dread aimed at these kinds of formerly close-knit communities and manufactured American small towns that makes things even deeper. It’s not hard to see a line drawn between the events of the film and the ideas often spouted of crumbling communities and the idea that “we don’t know our neighbors anymore.”

Cregger’s second horror feature doesn’t feel like a traditional horror film, even compared to his previous work. Rather “Weapons” is closer to something the Brothers Grimm would have crafted in the modern day. Using a backdrop of suburbia and parental hysterics to paint a portrait of mystery and dread, it’s a fantastic film that manages to be funny, scary, and circles around a central mystery that’s thoroughly satisfying in what it does and doesn’t tell. With a team of fantastic actors and technical merits, “Weapons” is an Elementary set horror that passes with flying colors. 5/5

Sketch (2025) - Review: Coloring Outside the Lines

 

There’s something about a child’s mind that can be equally one of the most wondrously creative things in existence and one of the most terrifying things in existence. Kids can seemingly stand up to almost anything, which is why there’s a legion of films made putting preteens in the center of world ending disasters and all manner of crazy adventures. “Sketch” is the latest in a long line of films like this, films that clearly owe a debt to the works of Spielberg and other imitators over the years. It just takes a, shall we say, more “artsy” approach to the subgenre.

The film follows aspiring artist Amber Wyatt, played by Bianca Belle (“Lady in the Lake”), her brother Jack Wyatt, played by Kue Lawence (“Unfrosted”), and their father Taylor, played by Tony Hale (“Arrested Development,” “Veep”), all quietly dealing with the death of their mother and Taylor’s wife Ally. Amber finds solace in filling her notebook with twisted drawings, which proves to be a healthy coping mechanism until the notebook is accidentally dropped into a nearby mysterious lake, and the monstrous sketches come to life, wreaking havoc on their small town and house.

Belle and Lawrence are the heart and soul of the film, and both carry it on their pre-teen shoulders. The wild tonal shifts that the film makes, from kid-centric horror to monster movie to emotional family heartbreak, are handled perfectly by them, and they are a truly believable sibling pair. The bickering back and forth, as well as the tiny details of close-knit sibling bonds are on full display and feel authentically messy. Hale is turning in some great work here, and while not completely out of his pre-existing skills, he still proves to be a great awkward dad without cranking up the quirk to unbearable levels. D'Arcy Carden (“The Good Place,” “A League of Their Own (2022)”) also appears as Aunt Liz, Taylor’s brother and a real estate agent trying to help sell their house, and she provides a great bit of maturity mixed with snark to offset the kid-centric adventure.

“Sketch” is the feature film debut of writer/director Seth Worley, but his years of experience working on short films is evident. Given the small-scale nature of the film, his handle over the heavy visual effects work is impressive, and the film’s editing is excellent. It pinballs back and forth between its subplots with a chaotic abandon and once things become chaotic, it never lets up. The monsters are a delightful mixture of craft store-styled visual effects, practical effects, stunt work, showcasing just how great things can be even on a (relatively) shoestring budget. Worley’s script also makes great use of its kid perspective, and at no point does it ever feel watered down or like it is talking down to the audience. There are curse words and bits of dark humor peppered throughout, but the dialogue feels particularly real, especially the moments between Amber and Jack. There are genuine sibling touches, and it might be one of the best representations of sibling bonds and bickering in a recent film.

The great musical score from Cody Fry is drenched in horror touches, becoming almost a reference in and of itself. The film as a whole has plenty of winks at previous horror flicks, and cinematographer Megan Stacey (“Balloon Animal,” “A Week in Watts”) definitely shoots a majority of the scenes like it is a horror film made for kids. However, this isn’t a film that’s thrown these references in to distract adults. There’s a genuine heart, thrill, and great pace to this adventure, separating it from films that are “for kids” and making sure it is a film “for families.”

“Sketch” is a big surprise. It wears its horror and Spielbergian influences proudly on its sleeve, but Worley also isn’t content to just stay safely in that box. His cast is great, with excellent performances from its child actors, and the script is sharp and pushes the edges of PG just enough to feel cool to kids. But the big beating heart at the center, led by Bianca Belle, is the reason to show up and "Sketch" makes its mark on a viewer's mind and heart with permanent ink. 4.5/5

The Naked Gun (2025) - Review: Son of a Gun

 

The law never takes a holiday. But comedic filmmaking seems to have done just that over the past decade or two. A genre that was once dominated by silly goofy movies like “Talladega Nights,” “There’s Something About Mary,” or “Ted” could gross over $300 million worldwide each easily. Now, most comedy films are relegated to streaming services or simply far smaller box office returns. A comedic draw like Seth Rogen, who used to attract worldwide returns of $100-200 million easily, now struggles to break $50 million total. Which is why a film like “The Naked Gun (2025)” can feel like such a gamble. Sure, on paper a legacy sequel IP film with a recognizable lead star should be a sure thing, but whether audiences will show up is an entirely different story.

This latest film stars Liam Neeson (“Taken,” “Star Wars: The Phantom Menace”) as Frank Dreben Jr., the son of Nielson’s original character from the first three films, as he attempts to solve a new crime involving various characters across Los Angeles, including Beth Davenport, played by Pamela Anderson (“Baywatch,” “The Last Showgirl”), tech mogul Richard Cane, played by Danny Huston (“Wonder Woman (2017),” “Children of Men”), police chief Davis, played by CCH Pounder (“The Shield,” “NCIS: New Orleans”), and Dreben Jr’s fellow cop Capt. Ed Hocken Jr., played by Paul Walter Hauser (“Black Bird,” “Richard Jewell”).

A film like this needs a certain kind of comedy director. Sure, Judd Apatow or even Adam McKay can make funny films, but they’re decidedly different kinds of comedies compared to “Airplane!,” “Top Secret!”, the original “Naked Gun” or the other films by Zucker, Abrahams, and Zucker. Which is why co-writer/director Akiva Schaffer (“Popstar: Never Stop Never Stopping,” “Hot Rod”) seems borderline perfect for the pick. With a background in short form comedy skits on “SNL” as well as the same combination or sight gags, stupid, silly, and somehow still smart humor that made ZAZ films excellent, he steers the ship here excellently. His co-writers, Dan Gregor (“Most Likely to Murder,” “Chip ‘n Dale: Rescue Rangers (2022)”) and Doug Mand (“Most Likely to Murder,” “Chip ‘n Dale: Rescue Rangers (2022)”), work on the exact same wavelength, and the trio stuff the film to bursting with gags.

Whether it's the trademark “Naked Gun” style of wordplay and sight gags or more modern bits of action comedy and meta-movie gags, jokes fly relentlessly fast and if one flounders for you, it's almost a guarantee that another one will. Despite its short length at just 85-minutes with credits, the gag-to-minute ratio is kept exceptionally high. The end of the film does let off the gas a bit when the plot needs to wrap itself up, but then it gets right back to it with even more visual gags going all the way until the very end of the credits. There’s no snark, no sarcasm, just pure absurdism and crude humor. In an age where it seems as though the only kind of comedy that can get greenlit is the winking, self-aware “isn’t this ridiculous” kind of humor pioneered by “Deadpool,” a film this disconnected from pop culture references and a desire to seem “cool” is nothing short of refreshing.

While it's hard to compare him directly to an icon of straight-faced comedy like Nielson, Nesson certainly does a fantastic job in this film. His gruff persona allows him to play everything straight, adding to the absurdity of each passing moment. If nothing else, this is clearly the kind of comedic performance an actor can only give when he is completely and totally having a blast. Anderson is just as amusing, though the plot doesn’t give her as much material to work with. When the pair are together, they’re a great comedic match, and a bizarre sequence in the middle of the film involving them is an absurd riot. The rest of the cast are all fine, filling their roles well, essentially just existing as people for jokes and gags to bounce off for Neeson.

A new “Naked Gun” film would be a bit of a surprise, even if the state of modern theatrical studio comedies wasn’t in such a dire state. But in this current state, it's a bit of a surprise in a completely different way. Jam packed with every kind of gag imaginable, led by a pair of actors willing to commit to every single bit thrown their way, and helmed by writers and a director who know the power of a good visual gag, you’d be hard pressed to find more laughs squeezed into 85-minutes this year. 4.5/5

The Bad Guys 2 - Review: Bigger and Badder

 

DreamWorks’ last adventure with the anthropomorphic bunch of criminals-turned-heroes known as The Bad Guys hit theatres in 2022 and proved to be a great time, adding another notch to the studio’s growing belt of franchises. Now director Pierre Perifel and co-writer Etan Cohen (“Tropic Thunder,” “Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa”) return, joined by co-writer Yoni Brenner (“Rio 2,” “Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs”), to this team of lovable furry antiheroes returns with a sequel that’s bigger, badder, and choked full of even more stylish animation, heist sequences, and celebrity voice talent.

The sequel follows the titular group reformed thieves made up of Mr. Wolf, played by Sam Rockwell (“Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri,” “Galaxy Quest”), Mr. Snake, played by Marc Maron (“Maron,” “GLOW”), Mr. Shark, played by Craig Robinson (“Hot Tub Time Machine,” “The Office”), Mr. Piranha, played by Anthony Ramos (“Twisters,” “In the Heights”), and Ms. Tarantula, played by Awkwafina (“Crazy Rich Asians,” “The Farewell”), as they struggle to prove their goodness to the distrusting population as well as the Governer Diane Foxington, played by Zazie Beetz (“Deadpool 2,” “Joker”), and police commissioner Misty Luggins, played by Alex Borstein (“The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel,” “Family Guy”). Things are further complicated when they become entangled with a trio of criminals, Kitty Kat, played by Danielle Brooks (“Orange is the New Black,” “A Minecraft Movie”), Doom, played by Natasha Lyonne (“Poker Face,” “But I’m a Cheerleader”), and Pigtail, played by Maria Bakalova (“Borat Subsequent Moviefilm,” “Bodies Bodies Bodies”), who blackmail them into performing one last heist.

Perifel, Cohen, and Brenner keep the same kind of freewheeling, charismatic comedy that helped the first film make an impact amongst DreamWorks’ other animated fare. Each moment in the film feels as though it moves with a kind of energy and attitude only comparable to the likes of the “Oceans” trilogy or other heist films of the genre. This sequel does lose some of its simplicity in the third act though, as the film feels the need to go bigger for this second adventure. It’s still a delight, and the first film also went big in its third act as well, but it robs the tale of the kind of simplicity that it had to begin with.

The vocal cast is as stellar as they were the first time around. Each performer in the titular Bad Guys are simply a ton of fun, and they have a genuine comradery and sense of banter that make their misfit family relationship immediately believable. The newcomers are also just as great: Bakalova has a big warm-hearted sense of silliness in her role, and Lyonne’s trademark raspy voice gives her character an immediate sense of coolness before she’s even done anything. Brooks, like Rockwell, has the sort of air about her that makes what could have been a paycheck role something a bit more. Like the best animated voices, even those not from career voice actors, she sinks her teeth into it and really runs away with the character.

As before, the animation is completely stellar, arguably becoming the sole reason to see the film. It feels a hair more expressive and colorful than the first film, which was already a step above in that regard. An early sequence focusing on Neon colors stands apart, and each moment is propped up by the film’s expressive use of impact bursts, speed lines, and other hand-drawn effects to accentuate the 3D animation work. It might not be as daring and experimental as the “Spider-Verse” films or even DreamWorks’ own “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish” but it's still a great bit of slick, cool, sly animation thievery. Daniel Pemberton (“Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse,” “The Trial of the Chicago 7”) returns for the musical score as well and, like the animation, it works with the same building blocks while elevating them slightly, going bigger and brasher than before.

“The Bad Guys 2” is more of what came before and, like its titular newly reformed group, that’s not at all a bad thing. It takes the same slick animation, now bolstered by some even more polished work, a great script and talented voice cast and delivers another adventure that slots right alongside the first film. It doesn’t seek to reinvent the formula or world established from the first, but it does plenty well and manages to run away with 100 minutes of your time, and you’ll be none the wiser. 4/5

The Fantastic Four: First Steps - Review: Welcome to the Family

 

Long before the Marvel Cinematic Universe was even a twinkle in executives’ eyes, there have been “Fantastic Four” adaptations. From Saturday morning cartoons to films made by B-movie kings just to keep the rights, Marvel’s first family remains one of the most long-standing and well-known creations in comic-book history. Even if you’ve never read a comic or seen one of their previous works, you know this foursome. Now, after various studio issues and rights changes, this iconic group is finally joining the MCU in their own special, cosmic, and gloriously dated way.

Set in a retro-futuristic 1960s styled alternate universe, the film follows the titular group, made up of Reed Richards (Mr. Fantastic), played by Pedro Pascal (“Narcos,” “The Last of Us (2023)”), Sue Storm (The Invisible Woman), played by Vanessa Kirby (“Pieces of a Woman,” “The Crown”), Johnny Storm (The Human Torch), played by Joseph Quinn (“Stranger Things,” “A Quiet Place: Day One”), and Ben Grimm (The Thing), played by Ebon Moss-Bachrach ( “The Bear,” “Girls”). The quartet, assisted by their robotic companion HERBIE, must contend with a new threat from space in the form of the planet eating being Galactus, played by Ralph Ineson (“The Witch,” “The Green Knight”), and his servant Shalla-Bal, the Silver Surfer, played by Julia Garner (“Ozark,” “Inventing Anna”).

From the moment this film was announced, the most eye-catching aspect has been the distinct visual stylings set up in this “Jetsons”-esque vision of the Four’s alternate universe. The adventure is full of bright colors, blues, and whites, punctuated by a warped sense of technology that feels both as futuristic as “Iron Man” with the sensibilities of “Leave It to Beaver.” This isn’t just surface level either, as the entire film never lets up from that visual touch. Even when venturing beyond Earth, things still maintain an overly designed level of hyper-detail that makes everything flow together. The costumes make fantastic use of the color-palette and reotr-styling, but Galactus is the visual standout, both in costume and overall visual design. Michael Giacchino’s (“The Incredibles,” “Up”) score is just as buoyant and airy as well, with the music and even instruments used feeling plucked directly out of the 1960s itself.

Matt Shakman (“WandaVision,” “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia”) makes his feature directorial debut here after a long career of television directing, and his experience with ensemble works is used here expertly. The scenes with the central foursome are all fantastic, and their individual moments to shine are also great. Johnny particularly gets some excellent moments that far outshine his previous film appearances, and anytime the group is simply together, no matter the context, they excel. Pascal is working his expected level of charm, with a lot clearly going on in his elastic genius’s mind. Moss-Bachrach is a fantastic Ben Grimm, channeling the charm and gruff but calm enforcer attitude required of the character. Kirby is turning in some fantastic work here, making Sue not only the center of the film but the best performed role out of the main four. Most surprisingly, the standouts come from Quinn as Johnny and Garner as the Surfer.

Quinn’s performance adds far more nuance to Johnny than we’ve ever seen before and his every scene with Garner is fantastic. They have a chemistry that lights up the film and their subplot is one of the most interesting things about the film. The film’s script, written by Eric Pearson (“Thor: Ragnarok,” “Godzilla vs. Kong”), Jeff Kaplan (“The Last of the Great Romantics,” “Bert and Annie’s Guide to Friendship”), Ian Springer (“The Last of the Great Romantics,” “Bert and Annie’s Guide to Friendship”), Kat Wood, and Josh Friedman (“War of the Worlds (2005),” “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes”), manages to keep a great balance between the typical superhero fare and the family dynamic that makes the Four stand out. The focus does lean more towards Sue, Johnny, and the Surfer, but each character gets plenty of great moments to shine on their own and as a part of the group. The film’s second and third acts are borderline perfectly paced and exceptionally fun, keeping the film’s drama and excitement in equal measure. The first act is far more jumbled and awkwardly paced, and the rest of the cast outside of the Four, Surfer, and Galactus suffers from having their scenes cut to ribbons.

Natasha Lyonne (“Poker Face,” “But I’m a Cheerleader...”) shows up as Rachel, a schoolteacher who is friends with Ben, and Paul Walter Hauser (“Black Bird,” “Richard Jewell”) plays the classic Fantastic Four villain Mole Man, but neither gets a ton of room to work. Their scenes have either been almost completely cut in the editing room or just never existed to begin with. Hauser gets far more to work with than Lyonne, who is on screen for no longer than one or two minutes at most. While their characters get almost cut out of the film, numerous other scenes have bizarre editing issues. It’s not continuity or logical errors, rather there are a handful of scenes that feel like they are either cut off or begin late. It’s an ironic issue given that most modern superhero films are criticized for being far too long, but here things are so much fun and the world is so wonderful, that those shortened scenes hurt because you just want to spend more time in this tale.

“The Fantastic Four: First Steps” is the best Fantastic Four movie by a wide margin, though that isn’t saying much. What is saying a lot is that the film itself manages to be a buoyant, lighthearted, retro tinged affair drenched in a wonderful visual design and central set of characters that makes this one of the most fun Marvel features to date. Kirby is a commanding powerhouse, and the entire cast is fantastic. It’s a shame that the film seems to be almost self-consciously cutting its supporting cast and so many scenes short just to keep the runtime under two hours. When a modern superhero film can be called a movie that you wish you had more of, you know that’s when it's truly something fantastic. 4/5

Superman (2025) - Review: A New Hope

 

In all the marketing leading up to the release of writer/director James Gunn’s (“Guardians of the Galaxy,” “The Suicide Squad”) “Superman” film, the first in a new cinematic universe for DC and Warner Bros., there has been heavy use of John Williams’s theme from the 1978 “Superman” film. While some could view this as a nostalgic ploy, in reality it seems to have been something much different. While nostalgia may be an element, it's clear that the use of that music was a sign more than anything; a signal that this new version of the Kryptonian and this latest film is far closer to Christopher Reeves’s first adventure in red and blue spandex than we could have thought.

Set three decades after the destruction of Krypton and his arrival on Earth, the film follows the titular Superman, played by David Corenswet (“Pearl,” “The Politician”), as he attempts to balance his desire to help humanity with increasing efforts from Lex Luthor, played by Nicholas Hoult (“Mad Max: Fury Road,” “Nosferatu”), to turn public opinion against him. Meanwhile, he attempts to keep his relationships with fellow Daily Planet reporter Lois Lane, played by Rachel Brosnan (“The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel,” “I’m Your Woman”), photographer Jimmy Olsen, played by Skyler Gisondo (“Licorice Pizza,” “Booksmart”), and the budding Justice Gang made up of Green Lantern corps member Guy Gardner, Hawkgirl, and Mr. Terrific, played by Nathan Fillion (“Firefly,” “The Rookie”), Isabela Merced (“Instant Family,” “Dora and the Lost City of Gold”), and Edi Gathegi (“X-Men: First Class,” “The Harder They Fall”), respectively. Oh, and also there’s Supe’s beloved mangy superpowered dog, Krypto.

Gunn’s vision of this new universe is immediately refreshing for numerous reasons, but the best of them is the immediacy. He understands that we know who Clark, Lex, Lois, and the rest of the gang are. We don’t need to see the death of Krypton all over again, and it means that the film we get has a greater sense of momentum right away. We can just jump straight into a tale virtually while its being told, and it makes for a more interesting story as a result. We’re forced to piece together the reality of these characters and their world, allowing us to engage with the material more easily. It also means that, put simply, Gunn can use some of the more fun elements of this world and these characters that require those built out relationships from the start.

Corenswet simply fades into the role, keeping the bright, cheery persona of the son of Krypton present, but allowing a more frustrated and emotional side to shine through. He’s a delight, and there’s a physicality and expressiveness in the action sequences that feel particularly bright as well. He has an almost cartoonish ability to seem like an impenetrable wall while also maintaining a lightness that makes you believe he cares enough to prevent a stray dog from being crushed by a building. His chemistry with Brosnan is excellent as well, and a scene between the pair of them involving an impromptu interview is one of the best in the entire film. Brosnan’s charm and attitude makes her Lois a fantastic one, and she slots right into a modern-day version of the character without losing any of her 60s go-getter charm.

The Justice Gang are an excellent bunch of cohorts to play off of Superman, given their markedly different position compared to him, and the trio of actors are excellent portrayals of them. Fillion and Merced are great, so much so that it’s disappointing they aren’t used more than they are. Gathegi completely steals the show as Mr. Terrific, full of quips and brutal smarts that means he continues Gunn’s streak of turning lesser known characters into fan favorites. Like Gathegi, Hoult is an absolute scene stealer and arguably the highlight of a film full of highlights. He makes Lex a refreshingly simply villain, someone you love to hate and who hates just because he can. There’s clearly a complexity under the surface, but he relishes playing him as a cut and dry villain with glee.

Despite having plenty going on and a game cast here to do it all, the biggest weakness of Gunn’s film is just having so much going on. It isn’t that it all feels overstuffed, as the runtime and pacing are remarkably smooth for a modern blockbuster. Rather Gunn has written himself a double-edged sword: his characters are written in such a charming way that the handful that don’t get as much screen time sting more. You want to spend more time with them simply because they come off so well. It’s not hard to see a version of the film with an extra half-hour added on simply to spend more time with Gisondo, Merced, Fillion, or other characters like Pruitt Taylor Vince (“Lady in the Lake,” “Gotti”) and Neva Howell (“Ghosts of the Ozark”) as Ma and Pa Kent, respectively, Wendell Pierce (“The Wire,” “Selma”) as Daily Planet editor Perry White, or Sara Sampaio as surprise comedic standout Eve Teschmacher, the on-and-off girlfriend of Lex Luthor.

Those characters don’t feel as though they’ve been given less time as an excuse for future installments however. Gunn’s script keeps making sure everyone ties back around to Superman’s own arc. It all comes back to Supes, and it's a remarkably focused film in that way. However, that doesn’t mean things don’t get to be just as rollicking and fun as an episode of the titular hero’s early-2000s animated television series. The gorgeous locals pop with candy-colored glee, and nothing feels drab. It’s colorful without being garish, and the entire film is lit with almost hyper realism. It feels like a living comic book in the best possible way, shot with varying calmness and excited glee by cinematographer Henry Braham (“The Suicide Squad,” “Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3”). Even the action sequences seem to be ripped straight from the thin pages of a monthly serial, with an elasticity and buoyancy that’s fitting of the superhuman nature of its lead. All the while, John Murphy (“28 Days Later,” “The Suicide Squad”) and David Fleming’s (“The Last of Us (2023),” “Mr. & Mrs. Smith (2024)”) score rocks along with equal parts emotional strings and shredding guitars.

What’s most interesting is that, in a Hollywood film which is meant to be the launching point of a brand-new cinematic universe, with hundreds of millions of marketing dollars pumped into it, and utilizing one of the most recognizable characters in media history, Gunn has somehow gotten away with making an exceptionally politically minded film. Plain and simple, there are pertent themes and identifiers that make this a Superman film for this exact moment, and it doesn’t appear that any of this was reined in by executives. It becomes a refreshingly honest piece of media and makes those themes stick even more than they would if Gunn had decided to dance around it all. He seems to remember that, regardless of whether the viewer is a child or an adult, the audience doesn’t like being talked down to and can recognize themes like this if they’re handled correctly. The material doesn’t dampen the morals or empathy or hope that sits at the core of the film or Superman’s character either. Rather it enhances it and makes it that much stronger, like a sweet piece of candy at the end of a long and savory meal.

Those added themes and effort to make it more than just surface level heroism speak to the extra effort Gunn puts into his projects that makes them that much better. It isn’t just that Clark and Lois’s romance is present; it's that it feels romantic and real. It isn’t just that Superman has that sense of duty and hope; it’s that it feels earnest and real. It can be easy to throw these characters on screen and call it a day, for someone to say, “I put a man in red and blue spandex and made him fly, isn’t that enough?” And for a cursory glance with half attention paid on a cable channel on a Tuesday evening, maybe that is enough. But Gunn knows that to most, these characters are real. Putting that effort in, even if the film as a result might feel like it's bursting at the seams, is the right thing to do. It feels real.

There’s a phrase that’s come about recently to describe a subgenre of media that, while it’s always existed, has become more prevalent in recent years. “Hopepunk” has been used to describe works as recent as “Free Guy,” “Wall-E,” “Mad Max: Fury Road,” and “Isle of Dogs” and as timeless as “The Lord of the Rings” and “Star Wars.” The idea that, against radical violence and hate, sometimes hope is the punk rock response. James Gunn’s “Superman is, if nothing else, the perfect embodiment of this. It doesn’t wear its heart on its sleeve so much as it has armor made of it. The film’s central message of hope and empathy beats true throughout a fun and fantastic adventure that keeps things just campy enough without sacrificing any sense of self-seriousness. Corenswet is a perfect Clark and a better Superman, and Gunn’s entire ensemble is electric. The script is packed tight with nuance and timely themes that nevertheless feel right out of the golden age of Superman’s best comic book years. There’s a lot here, maybe too much, but it's clear that every character, moment, and fight are there for one reason: to further Superman’s arc and journey. You will believe a man can fly. 5/5

Jurassic World: Rebirth - Review: New Age, Same Stuff

 

It’s hard to believe but there was a period where, like other classic blockbuster franchises, we didn’t have a “Jurassic Park” movie every few years. But ever since “Jurassic World” stomped into theaters back in 2015 with a record-breaking global opening weekend of over $500 million, Universal has been dead set on making sure this series continues on no matter what. And after 2022’s lucrative dud “Jurassic World: Dominion,” they’ve returned to the well with an all-new cast and an all-too familiar premise with “Jurassic World: Rebirth.”

Set over a decade after the events of “Jurassic World” and well into the time when dinosaurs have begun to re-roam the Earth again, the film follows covert ops expert Zora Bennett, played by Scarlett Johansson (“Marriage Story,” “Jojo Rabbit”), as she’s recruited by pharmaceutical exec Martin Krebs, played by Rupert Friend (“Pride & Prejudice (2005),” “Anatomy of a Scandal”), to lead a secret mission to Ile Saint-Hubert to extract the DNA from three living dinosaurs to synthesize into a drug to prevent heart disease. Her team consists of nerdy paleontologist Dr. Henry Loomis, played by Jonathan Bailey (“Bridgerton,” “Wicked (2024)”) and team leader Duncan Kincaid, played by Mahershala Ali (“Moonlight,” “Green Book”). While on the island, they also run into a shipwrecked family consisting of father Reuben, played by Manuel Garcia-Rulfo (“A Man Called Otto,” “The Magnificent Seven (2016)”), his daughters Teresa and Isabella, played by Luna Blaise (“Manifest,” “Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe”) and Audrina Miranda respectively, and Teresa’s boyfriend Xavier, played by David Iacono (“The Summer I Turned Pretty,” “Dead Boy Detectives”).

Given his experience playing with large scales in previous works, it's no surprise that director Gareth Edwards (“The Creator,” “Rogue One”) has an excellent handle on the chaos as it unfolds in this tale. His film has a very clear-sighted vision, ditching any semblance of shaky-cam effects or muddied action. It’s a gorgeously shot film as well, that plays with camera angles in plenty of ways that would make Spielberg proud. The musical score from Alexandre Desplat (“Little Women (2019),” “Fantastic Mr. Fox”) maintains a playful tone, mixing in well-trodden themes from previous “Park” films while still mixing in new material throughout.

Davis Koepp’s (“Spider-Man (2002),” “Jurassic Park”) script, meanwhile, is a less than excellent affair. While the moment-to-moment dialogue is fine enough, with a handful of clunkers thrown in, the overall plotting is nothing the series hasn’t seen before. It’s fine enough, but it feels as though it’s a stitched together movie made from chunks of previous films. It doesn’t mean they don’t work, but there’s a pervasive feeling of deja vu throughout the whole picture. Johansson is great, but feels like a female version of Chris Pratt’s character. Ali is great, but he feels like a slightly more sane version of Bob Peck’s character from the original film. Bailey is one of the film’s largest saving graces; his charism and genuine interest in the dinos and material shine through and deliver one of the best characters in the series. But at the same time, there are clear and obvious shades of both Dr. Grant and Dr. Sattler in his character that are hard to overlook.

Worse than that, the family sharing the film’s spotlight are unfortunately just plain boring. Anytime the film cuts away from the main team to them, the tension dissipates, and their scenes feel as though they have zero consequence on the overall plot. They’re performed fine enough, and Garcia-Rulfo is doing some great work with a fairly generic character, but so much of their screen time is spent wondering what the other, more interesting and complex characters are up to. 

But does any of this really matter? This is, at the end of the day, another “Jurassic World” movie. If it delivers the dinos, then the audience will come, and they’ll enjoy it. There is certainly fun to be had as the film does deliver the goods. A moment in the middle of the film involving Bailey’s character and a Titanosaur is moving and wonderful. The entire last thirty minutes inside of an abandoned company town are a lot of fun. But it's all grizzly, bloody, mean fun. The whimsy of the original film and even the first “World” film are completely gone. The fun of the parks and seeing humans interact with dinosaurs is completely absent, save for the one scene with Bailey. The dinosaurs are also borderline alien at this point, with most being bizarre hodgepodges waved off as “mutations” without their own names. It just feels disheartening to see a series that used to be about science gone wrong combined with the joy of the Jurassic age turned into a glorified kaiju film series.

This latest film opens with some text describing a world “disillusioned with dinosaurs” and it feels as though the filmmakers are as well. “Jurassic World: Rebirth” is a film that can’t be called bad, but nothing about it stands apart. Koepp’s script is a stitched together combination of various other elements from other films in the series with a boring familial subplot for good measure. The technical elements are great, and Edwards clearly has a directorial passion that equals that of Bailey’s excellent character. But for a series that started with one of the greatest blockbusters of all time, it's disheartening to see it come to this. It is still a massive step up from “Dominion,” but the film executives were so concerned with whether or not they could keep the series going, they never stopped to think if they should. 2.5/5

M3GAN 2.0 - Review: The Bot is Back, for Better or Worse

Blumhouse is certainly no stranger to sequels or “lightening in a bottle” concepts. If it's a hit, it's likely going to get a sequel since most of the studio’s films have micro-budgets compared to other Hollywood studio fare. So, while a paltry $181 million gross might seem like tipping money to some studios, for a Blumhouse film with only a $12 million budget like 2022’s “M3GAN,” it's a rich vein to strike again and again. And again they have struck, with a sequel aptly titled “M3GAN 2.0” that is decidedly less horror than the first film or the rest of the studio’s fare. If the first film was “Child’s Play,” this one is far more “T2: Judgement Day” or “Mission: Impossible” than it is “Child’s Play 2.”

The film follows the titular killer android M3GAN, played again physically by Amie Donald and voiced again by Jenna Davis (“Treehouse Detectives,” “Chicken Girls”), newly rebuilt by her creator Gemma, played by Allison Williams (“Girls,” “Get Out”), after being destroyed at the end of the first film. Gemma wants to use M3GAN to find and defeat a rogue military android named AMELIA, played by Ivanna Sakhno (“Ahsoka,” “The Spy Who Dumped Me”), who’s hunting down and killing each person involved with her creation, including Gemma as she was based on M3GAN’s original design. Also reprising their roles are Violet McGraw (“The Haunting of Hill House,” “Separation”) as Cady, Gemma’s niece and M3GAN’s original owner, Jen Van Epps (“Don’t Make Me Go,” “One Lane Bridge”) as Tess, one of Gemma’s co-workers, and Brian Jordan Alvarez (“English Teacher,” “80 for Brady”) as Cole, one of Gemma’s other co-workers.

Returning director Gerard Johnstone (“The Jaquie Brown Diaries,” “Housebound”), who now also is on as a co-writer, and returning writer Akela Cooper (“Malignant,” “The Nun 2”) have certainly crafted a work that makes large creative changes from the original material. The campiness, silly nature of the original film is still here, but far more intentionally than the “happy accident” nature of the first film’s viral moments. Therefore, while things are certainly campier than even before, it can feel more manufactured than the first film’s more natural silliness. It doesn’t help that the film is longer than the first and lacks the tight focus from M3GAN’s original rampage, bringing in numerous additional characters and subplots that manage to be either boring or actively unfunny. 

A borderline cameo from Jermaine Clement (“Flight of the Conchords,” “What We Do In the Shadows”) as a tech-obsessed billionaire feels completely out of step with the rest of the film’s sense of humor, and the third act of the film forgets Tess exists and has Cole take a larger spotlight that doesn’t fit the character. That’s not even mentioning the completely forgettable FBI agents that pop up before Johnstone and Cooper completely forget about them until the last ten minutes. That’s not even getting into the completely nonsensical central threat that, when revealed, feels as though it was thought up by someone who saw “Mission: Impossible: The Final Reckoning” and wanted to dumb it way way down.

Luckily, when the film does refocus on Gemma, Cady, and M3GAN on their quest, things are far more entertaining. M3GAN’s emotional journey here is surprisingly satisfying, without sacrificing any of her snark and attitude, with Davis’s vocal performance working exceptionally well. Williams and McGraw get a more standard “parent and teen child butt heads” plotline, and it works well enough, without ever working beyond basic levels. Sakhno is a fantastically fun addition to the cast, working well against Donald and Davis and injecting a fun adversarial relationship into the fare.

As a whole, the film looks like its budget, with a large assortment of average soundstage-built sets and some garish green screen for a few open landscape action sequences. Despite the shift to action from horror, Johnstone and his team have fun with the fight sequences, taking gleeful advantage of the fact that their heroine and villainess are both robotic, throwing logic out the window. By the time the third act hits, any semblance of realism has been completely ejected in favor of a freewheeling junk food type of cinematic fun. It’s certainly nothing groundbreaking, but when firing on all cylinders, it's undeniably a good time.

“M3GAN 2.0” changes a great deal from the original film, and while it's still absolutely a fun and campy time, it's certainly not without its own issues. For every action sequence and borderline spy parody featuring M3GAN, there’s another with an utterly forgettable character or plot point. This sequel simply can’t hold a candle to the simplicity, tension, or inadvertent camp of the first film. It’s cinematic junk food that invites you to turn off your brain and go along for the ride. There are certainly still other better examples of cinematic junk food out there, but you’ll still have a good time with this psychotic robot regardless. 3/5

F1 - Review: The Need for Speed

 

“Dad movies” is a turn of phrase often used to describe blockbusters simply about “guys being dudes,” often involving big cars and/or vehicles, big muscles, and big emotions. Movies like “Top Gun,” “Gladiator,” “Rocky,” “Braveheart,” “Chef,” “Indiana Jones,” etc. While it can sound like its downplaying the work done in these films, far from it as many works that could be labeled as such are also lauded, some of them even being some of the best films of their respective years. Joseph Kosinski (“Top Gun: Maverick,” “Tron: Legacy”) has made a few of these before, and he’s back working within territory he’s quite familiar with in another tale of high-octane vehicular thrills in “F1.”

Set in the world of high-octane Formula 1 competitive racing, the film follows aged former-F1 driver Sonny Hayes, played by Brad Pitt (“Fight Club,” “Ocean’s Eleven (2001)”), who finds himself invited back into the sport by his longtime friend and former-F1 driver turned team owner Ruben Cervantes, played by Javier Bardem (“Dune (2021),” “No Country for Old Men”). Ruben’s team has yet to win a race, and he invites Hayes in to race in his second car, as well as to give his rookie driver Joshua Pearce, played by Damson Idris (“Snowfall,” “Outside the Wire”), a mentor-like figure to work alongside. Hayes soon finds himself butting heads with every member of the team, including Pearce, Pearce’s mother Bernadette, played by Sara Niles (“Ted Lasso,” “Beautiful People”), the team’s technical director Kate McKenna, played by Kerry Condon (“Better Call Saul,” “The Banshees of Inisherin”), the team’s principal Kaspar Smolinski, played by Kim Bodnia (“Killing Eve,” “The Bridge”).

Kosinski’s previous experience with grand scales will obviously help with a project like this, but he showcases a true mastery of the technical arts here. The film is constantly whipping between static and moving shots, whirling around the tracks with a choreographed reckless abandoned. Despite the numerous vehicles racing and crashing around, cinematographer Claudio Miranda (“Top Gun: Maverick,” “Life of Pi”) sets it up like a ballet. The same touch extends to the moments outside of the cars, and it creates a tonal symbiosis between the different worlds of the film and sport. Hans Zimmer’s (“The Dark Knight,” “The Lion King (1994)”) thunderous and phenomenal musical score provides a backdrop to the dance of speed that zooms across the screen throughout the two-hour-and-thirty-five-minute-long runtime.

Pitt and Idris are a fantastic duo, complimenting each other's styles of acting just like their characters do on the racetracks. Pitt’s weaponize lackadaisical charm is put to great use here, as is Idris’s young hotshot attitude. Condon and Bardem are also used perfectly, with each exuding charm at every moment and bouncing fantastically off Pitt. The entire supporting cast is put to great use; none of them ever fall by the wayside, with each getting their own little moment in the spotlight. The only one who gets cut a bit short is Tobias Menzies (“Rome,” “Outlander”) as Peter, one of the board members for Ruben’s F1 team. Nothing about his portrayal or character is bad by any means, but it also doesn’t stand out in any way either.

The excellent technical elements and performances all help to glisten up what is a rather routine script. Co-written by Kosinski and Ehren Kruger (“The Ring (2002),” “Top Gun: Maverick”), while the dialogue is snappy and the pacing is borderline perfect, the individual character arcs and archetypes are lifted straight out of every other film with this similar plot. There’s certainly nothing wrong with that, and the actors do exceptional work with the material regardless. However, at no point does the film ever feel truly unexpected. It’s then a testament to Kosinski’s directorial skills, as he manages to wrap you up in the tension and thrills of it all so much, you won’t have time to pay attention to how predictable it can feel.

F1” is a super-charged surprise. From the exceptionally charming and talented cast to the gorgeous cinematography and production values, Kosinski’s latest film continues his streak of turning in some of the best blockbuster entertainment out there. Even if its plot isn’t anything particularly new, it's been supped up to a scale fitting this kind of work. Think of it like this: it's a car full of well-worn and used parts but gussied and revved up to run and sound like it never has before. 4.5/5