You Can See Everything - Review: Can You See Everything?

 

Elizabeth Holmes is a woman most famous for founding a company with the goal of creating a household device that could run thousands of tests from one drop of blood. Nathan Fielder ("The Rehearsal," "The Curse") is a comedian and filmmaker most famous for creating elaborate schemes to help everyone from small business owners to airline pilots to himself overcome struggles in their everyday lives. Both are con artists, experts at tricking the public and others into seeing what they want them to see. But while Fielder does so for entertainment purposes on Comedy Central or HBO, Holmes defrauded investors and the public to the amount of around $700 million and was eventually sentenced to eleven years in federal prison for doing so.

Then, why in the world would she and her partner Billy Evans invite someone like Fielder into their home? Not only is he a comedian, not a documentarian, but he is well known for being abrasive and awkward in his material, purposefully putting people off to try and elicit something different out of them. Perhaps Holmes and Evans thought they could manipulate him more easily than a typical documentary filmmaker? Perhaps they gravitated towards his awkward stylings? Perhaps they just simply didn't know who they were getting involved with?

Those questions are where the film starts. And they aren't even remotely close to where the film ends. This is an enigma of a project, virtually impossible to talk about in normal terms because it regularly doesn't feel like a normal documentary or even a normal film. There's an air of awkwardness and intrigue to every moment. You're peeking around every corner, leaning forward, waiting for some new revelation or oddity to be shown. But that's the oddest thing: virtually nothing shown here is particularly revelatory when it comes to what is already known about Holmes and her company Theranos. If you're coming here to see more nitty gritty information about how she fooled everyone, then you're likely to be left disappointed. But a large part of why there aren't any further revelations to her deception is because she seems to not believe she did deceive anyone.

Unless she really did? Is her belief that she did not deceive deceit in itself as well? Most fascinatingly, Fielder and his co-director Lance Oppenheim ("Primetime," "Some Kind of Heaven") seem content to let Fielder become a part of Holmes and Evans' lives to interrogate their own natures. But that results in a documentary, the very type of film that purports itself to be about the truth, to turn into a far more manipulated piece of filmmaking than one might intend. Whether intentionally or otherwise, Fielder's growing relationship with Holmes and Evans turns this from a project into genuine emotional concern he has for these people. And as things go on and his own feelings begin to turn and become stronger, the line between objective documentary filmmaking begins to blur. If Fielder wasn't there, things surely would not have turned out like they did, would they? As Holmes tells Fielder partway through the film, "You can see everything." But the word "can" is the most interesting part of that statement.

It would be easy to think that this is nothing more than an interesting hook for the film to hang its hat on, but it quickly and clearly becomes more than that. Instead of some bombshell moment, the film ends on a recreation of an event that we are not able to see happen in real time. We are relying on a reenactment based on the recounting of someone emotionally involved in this situation. Therefore, we have to wade through multiple layers of potential bias: the bias brought by the actors doing the reenacting, the person writing the project, the memory of that person, as well as the decisions made by the filmmakers shooting the project, all of that either unconscious or not. The complicated nature of all of that, whether in reenactments or the real footage, seems to be the point of Fielder's exercise with this project.

He's picked one of the most famously manipulative people currently living to make a documentary on the nature of manipulation, making you question if you can really trust his own project as remotely objective. The crowning achievement of the film may very well be that, within all of these questions, Fielder and Oppenheim never forget that these are real people we're following. Holmes might be manipulative, but she is a real person. The team takes care to make sure that always comes across, but never letting it apologize for her past or present actions. For all the film's questions about truth, it's remarkably empathetic to everyone on screen.

In terms of the film's technical merits, the 4:3 shooting style makes for a claustrophobic image that frames each interaction and person with a voyeuristic atmosphere. Oppenheim is behind the camera almost entirely, working with cinematographer David Bolen ("Primetime," "Thelma") and composer Ari Balouzian ("Primetime," "Some Kind of Heaven") to set up the film's specific atmosphere. It isn't a sinister film in terms of material, and it's actually quite funny when it leans into Fielder's deadpan nature and the general absurdity of what's going on. But things still feel uneasy and bizarre, mostly down to the film's central idea of truth and trust and who's playing who.

So often the film throws objectivity out the window, if it existed at all, and it becomes a fever dream. Not in terms of how it's shot or any kind of psychedelic visuals, but rather in what it wants you to question. Fielder and Oppenheim have created a documentary that could only exist right now. Not because of its subject, but because of the way it presents truth, subjectivity, objectivity, and emotion in our modern day. Can we ever be truly objective? Is it possible when we're alone with someone or surrounded by multiple cameras and multi-million dollar backing? Is it a bad thing if we aren't? If you're on board with Fielder's style, this is the most serious project he's ever worked on but still packed with the deadpan weirdness that he's made a trademark. Is it good? Is it bad? It's hard to say. It is undeniably fascinating. You can see everything. But can you actually?

Other Mommy - Review: Are You My Mother?

 

What’s in a name? Well, a name as silly as “Other Mommy” can do wonders for a film’s marketing campaign. When you pair a title like that with a well edited trailer playing before one of the biggest box office hits of the year, you have a recipe for the kind of buzz any studio would kill for. So, if nothing else, director Rob Savage’s (“Dashcam,” “The Boogeyman”) latest horror film has plenty of eyes on it regardless of any level of quality. If it’s actually good, then things could be even better.

“Other Mommy” follows 7-year-old Bela Martin, played by Arabella Olivia Clark, as she attempts to adjust to her new life and school. Her father Russell, played by Jay Duplass (“Transparent,” “Dying for Sex”) is a stay-at-home dad and her mother Ursula, played by Jessica Chastain (“Interstellar,” “Zero Dark Thirty”), is consumed by her corporate job. So, Bela decides to befriend a shadowy shapeshifting creature that lives in her bathroom who she calls Other Mommy, played by Chastain, who soon turns quite sinister as she attempts to invade Bela’s family so that she can “live inside her heart.”

Adapting from the book “Incidents Around the House” by Josh Malerman, screenwriter Nathan Elston hits the ground running and throws us directly into Bela’s difficult circumstances. There’s just enough familial drama going on to keep things engaging, and the brisk pace helps keep things feeling lively. For as quick as things are, at a runtime of just barely over 90-minutes, the film never sticks to even its own sense of internal logic. The rules by which Other Mommy seems to abide by are never consistent, but things shift from set piece to set piece so quickly that you’ll hardly notice. There are some admirable attempts to mix things up, such as the genuine childlike perspective and the lack of any explanation as to what Other Mommy is, but most of the script is material made to move from one scare to the next.

Chastain is certainly having a lot of fun here, and while the material might not be solid gold, she’s committing to the madness of it all admirably. She really gets to go off the rails as Other Mommy though, and that's where she gets to shine. Duplass is fun as the overwhelmed dad caught in the middle of all of this, and the family dynamic is really one of the film’s best aspects. Clark is surprisingly effective with the material. She delivers a genuinely good performance, especially given her age, and it makes the third act work wonders.

That third act is a perfect example of what the film does well: when it leans into the imaginative and childlike nature of things. This is still a rated-r horror film, so there’s plenty of blood and language, but the best aspects are when Savage zeroes in on the fact that this story is from the perspective of a young child. It embraces the nightmare versions of these events, and even the sillier aspects as well. Things still make little to no sense half of the time, but it at least makes no sense while embracing itself and the look. Cinematographer Lowell A. Meyer (“Knock at the Cabin,” “Greener Grass”) gets a lot of mileage out of twisty upside-down angles and reverse shots, and it's effective. Really the entire film could be summarized as incredibly derivative, but effective and entertaining.

“Other Mommy” isn’t the next massive Blumhouse cult hit, nor is it unwatchable slop either. This is a very middle of the road and derivative horror flick that benefits wildly from a committed cast and concept. Anyone going in expecting anything close to coherent logic or a deeply crafted script should leave their expectations at the door. This is a silly kind of horror film, the kind that almost wants you to be a kid again. A kid that can handle dismemberment, blood, and cursing that is. 3/5

The Social Reckoning - Review: To Be Reckoned With

 

In 2011, they made a movie about Facebook. “The Social Network” became one of the most acclaimed films of the year, grossed $225 million, was nominated for eight Academy Awards including Best Picture, and won three, including Best Adapted Screenplay and giving Aaron Sorkin (“The West Wing,” “A Few Good Men”) his first and at this time only Oscar win. The film’s esteem has only grown in the years since, now becoming one of the most beloved films of the 2010s. Given everything that’s happened with the social media/tech juggernaut in the following years, it only makes sense that Sorkin, now directing as well as writing, would want to take another swing at Zuckerberg and his website. Hence “The Social Reckoning,” a semi-sequel/follow-up that seeks to reexamine Facebook’s place in our lives and judicial system since the 2011 hit.

Set in 2019, the film follows Facebook data engineer Frances Haugen, played by Mikey Madison (“Anora,” “Scream (2022)”), who approaches Wall Street Journal reporter Jeff Horwitz, played by Jeremy Allen White (“The Bear,” “The Iron Claw”), to help her break the story that Facebook was aware of harmful societal effects from its platforms, and chose to prioritize their profit over addressing them. Meanwhile in 2021, Mark Zuckerberg, played by Jeremy Strong (“Succession,” “The Trial of the Chicago 7”), butts heads with his crisis management specialist Raya, played by Wunmi Mosaku (“Sinners,” “Loki”), and a former investor and member of his legal counsel Charlie Garrigan, played by Bill Burr (“The King of Staten Island,” “F is for Family”), over how to handle testifying before the U.S. Senate on Facebook’s effects on the world.

It’s not hard to see why Sorkin would want to return to this well. Not only is the original film likely his most well-known and acclaimed work, but since its release, he’s pivoted mostly to making films about true events, instead of fabricated ones. His writing comes across as far more forced than ever before though. Sure, it still has his trademark rapid fire dialogue and pop culture jabs. But things feel more transparently performative this time. Sorkin has clearly always been a nerd at heart, but this film is truly written like he’s trying to get back at someone, rather than present a genuinely compelling scenario. While Sorkin has also had issues with writing women in the past, numerous scenes here also stand out as being bizarrely sexist. Worst of all, these lines and moments serve no purpose in the actual narrative, instead existing for... seemingly just no reason. Somehow, despite the script's weak elements, the film doesn’t drag, pacing itself well enough to get through its two hour length without much downtime. 

Madison and White are good here, doing a lot with a weak script. Madison is clearly the film’s stand out, and each moment she spends on screen is injected with little moments that build Frances out as an unlikely heroine. She’s a compelling character, and while the script may falter, Madison’s performance never does. White is less successful mostly because the character is less interesting, but he’s still good in the role. He’s the film’s moral center and spends much of his time standing around as Madison explains technical terms and algorithms to him. It’s not a bad role, but it's almost cartoonish in how cliched it feels. Strong is the most fun to watch mostly because he’s the one doing the most acting in teh whole film. His voice and mannerisms for Zuckerberg may or may not be accurate, but he’s always the most interesting person on screen when he appears. Burr is an unexpected highlight, as he drops in like an acidic guardian angel to lecture Zuckerberg in some of the film’s better dialogue, and Mosaku is good but painfully underutilized by the film’s end.

The film has a painfully flat and grey look to everything, sapping much of the events of any sense of distinction or color. Cinematographer Jeff Cronenweth (“Gone Girl,” “Fight Club”) returns from the previous film, and he does the best he can with Sorkin’s direction, but it's a very static movie. So many scenes take place inside buildings and offices where only important characters exist. A few scenes outdoors in Puerto Rico with background cast not only come alive in terms of color, but in terms of warmth and liveliness. A movie inherently being cold isn’t a bad thing; the bad thing is that this coldness feels like a byproduct rather than anything intentional. Alexandre Desplat’s (“The Grand Budapest Hotel,” “Fantastic Mr. Fox”) score can’t hold a candle to Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross’s work on the first film, but it stands on its own as a good mixture of warm human instruments and electronica beats.

It’s obvious that Sorkin wants this film to be in the vein of movies like “All the President’s Men,” but he’s failed to capture any sense of warmth or humanity that those films have. Instead, things are routinely scenes of people explaining statistics to other people, having the dramatic tension hinge on percentages and numbers. That’s not a bad way to make a film, and there are plenty of examples of excellent movies built around those ideas. The problem is Sorkin’s direction leaves everyone feeling more like standees made to recite numbers rather than people. It just feels like a film where all of its worst aspects are due to Sorkin’s control, like everyone was afraid of the prospect of telling him no. It’s a film with too much scope and yet not enough going on, and the third act climax builds to a real-life event that is quite baffling to have in a mainstream Hollywood film like this.

On paper, everything about this film makes sense. Sure, the original actor for Zuckerberg declined to return, as did the original film’s director, but those are minor bumps in the road. Well, apparently not, as the resulting film ends up being far blander than it should. Even at his worst, Sorkin manages to be somewhat inflammatory. Here, it’s as if he wants to make a film for everyone... about politics and social media and the divide they’ve created. The musical score is good, it’s paced well enough, and the actors are clearly talented and doing the best they can with what they’re given. But when all a film like this, that clearly wants to say something and be important, can muster is a blasé feeling of indifference, something has gone truly wrong. 2/5

Digger - Review: Burning Down the House

 

It’s hard to know where to even begin with a film like “Digger.” The decade long passion project of co-writer/director Alejandro G. Iñárritu (“Birdman,” “The Revenant”), the return to more “serious” dramatic acting for Tom Cruise (“Top Gun,” “Mission: Impossible (1996)”) after decades of blockbuster action work, the last film developed by executives Michael De Luca and Pamela Abdy’s auteur driven push at Warner Bros., and the last film ever release by Warner Bros. Before they got gobbled up by Paramount and Skydance. Suffice it to say, “Digger” is unlike any other big-budget blockbuster film you’ve seen in recent years, if ever. And that’s not just because of the production behind it. The real question remains: that’s a fun list of facts behind its making, but is the film any good?

The film follows Digger Rockwell, played by Cruise, an aged oil magnate whose latest drilling operation off the coast of Greenland sets off an explosion that causes an ice shelf the size of Maryland to break off and head directly for coastal Europe. The disaster means that Digger must enlist in the help of his head of environmental safety and security Dr. Nirav Ganesh, played by Riz Ahmed (“Sound of Metal,” “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story”) and the United States President Compson, played by John Goodman (“The Big Lebowski,” “Roseanne”), to tackles the fallout head on. And things only get weirder from there.

“Digger” is a film virtually impossible to discuss without spoiling major elements, something seemingly bizarre given its relatively straightforward nature. While this will be a spoiler-free review, suffice it to say that there’s a lot going on here and one development in particular that will divide audiences almost immediately. It’ll work for some people, it won’t for others. It’s a daring twist that makes the film’s satirical edge much sharper than it otherwise would be and results in a type of story that hasn’t really been attempted on this scale before.

Cruise absolutely runs away with the movie, turning in a truly fantastic and audacious kind of performance. It’s the best he’s been since at least “Collateral” if not “Magnolia.” If Cruise has been said to embrace every stunt like it's the last thing he’ll ever do, then he takes the same approach with the character of Digger. Ahmed is also excellent, embracing the larger-than-life material and turning in a performance opposite Cruise that’s unlike anything the actor has tackled before. He’s just a lot of fun to watch navigate this material, and any scene with him and Cruise is feels like a kind of maddening magic. Goodman is good, but he’s chewing so much scenery he threatens to derail the entire production. It’s an understandable interpretation given the material, but whereas Cruise and Ahmed manage to be real people despite the extravagance, Goodman is a cartoon even as much as he is entertaining.

The supporting cast all vary in different ways and for vastly different reasons too. Sandra Hüller (“Anatomy of a Fall,” “Project Hail Mary”) plays Digger’s sister Emma and while she is great when she appears, she’s also vastly underutilized. Most of the other supporting actors also fall into a trap of cartoonish bumbling, without any real substance to their performances. The exception is Jesse Plemmons (“Game Night,” “Bugonia”), who makes a brief appearance as Kenny. He injects a different kind of seriousness into the events that not only helps to set up the actual central idea of the film, but is a breath of fresh air in the surrounding madness of the rest of the film and characters.

There’s a lot to like with the film’s production as well. The sets and overall look are daunting and surreal, bending slightly to the reality of the story in interesting ways. Everything feels heightened at all times, as if the idea of even one moment being grounded would result in the cameras exploding. It's a deliberate choice that further enhances the maddening cartoonish tone the runs throughout most of the film, shot with a keen and fantastic eye by Emmanuel Lubezki (“Birdman,” “Children of Men”). Virtually every element of the physical production is astonishing and near perfect. The musical score that backs things up is certainly unique as well, with Cosmo Sheldrake composing his first film score that alternates between actual music and rhythmic background sounds, like water droplets and machinery.

Now, a film like this is clearly trying to say something. That much is obvious from the subject matter, marketing, people involved, etc. What it's trying to say seems a bit confused, both from the film itself and the results of said message. There’s a lot here about the nature of satire, of pointing and laughing at something in lieu of actually doing anything about it. There’s also a lot being said about if that is beneficial just by the collective exhale that can be had by doing such. There’s a lot said and yet Iñárritu and his co-writers Alexander Dinelaris Jr. (“Birdman,” “The Revenant”), Nicolás Giacobone (“Birdman,” “Bardo, False Chronicle of a Handful of Truths”), and Sabina Berman (“Gloria,” “Backyard”) seem to not know where they want to land. That’s not necessarily an issue, but for a film making this kind of a statement, landing in the middle can’t help but feel deflating.

The script and dialogue itself ping pongs back and forth between being cartoonishly overdone and remarkably insightful. Given that it seems to mirror the performances in that way, one might even wonder if that was intentional. Is it supposed to be both blithering overblown and introspective to the nanometer at the same time? This sense of tonal whiplash creates a work where you really don’t know what to expect from moment to moment. This, combined with Cruise’s energy and the look of the film, makes for a movie that, for all its faults, manages to be just relentlessly entertaining. Whether it’s pure bewilderment or genuine enjoyment, it’s a film that’s hard to look away from, and Cruise seems determined to make you have a good time through his sheer movie star willpower. Then the ending hits and it's as if the entire film’s undecided ice cream sundae of ideas gets a big old rotten cherry on top in the form of a, pardon my French, fucking bleak ending that leaves you sitting with a blank stare, mouth agape.

“Digger” will likely appeal to many based purely on its nature of being a completely different film that what anyone has made recently. Led by a commanding and fantastic lead performance from Cruise, a great supporting role from Ahmed, and a gorgeous physical production, this is a film that leaves you flabbergasted. It’s certainly something new, something entertaining, and something with... something to say. How well that will all go over with you is a person by person matter though. Alejandro G. Iñárritu has certainly dug himself quite the hole here. Whether or not you want to see it through and help him out of it is your decision. 3.5/5

Verity - Review: Pulp Fiction

 

Colleen Hoover might just be the best thing to happen to the entertainment world since Stephanie Meyer. Formerly self-published, her books have rocketed into the stratosphere of the literary world, and in just three years she’s received four film adaptations of her works: “It Ends with Us,” “Regretting You,” and “Reminders of Him” have already grossed over half a billion dollars against budgets that total around $75 million. This latest adaptation promises to be the darkest and most seductive yet with her take on a sexy thriller with “Verity.”

The film follows Lowen Ashleigh, played by Dakota Johnson (“Fifty Shades of Grey,” “Materialists”), a small-time fiction writer living in New York City. She’s approached by a publishing company with the offer of a lifetime: to ghostwrite the latest novel by world famous bestselling thriller author Verity Crawford, played by Anne Hathaway (“The Devil Wears Prada,” “The Princess Diaries”). Lowen is hired by Verity’s husband Jeremy, played by Josh Hartnett (“Penny Dreadful,” “Trap”), and invited to their lakeside home to stay and research Verity’s notes, which is where she learns that Verity has been paralyzed in a car accident, unable to speak or move for the foreseeable future. While staying at the house, Lowen believes something sinister might be going on, and begins to question if Verity herself is all that she appears to be.

It’s a tight concept, and one that has worked for decades in cinema. You get a cast of sexy actors together, let them brood it out and have banter, and then end things with a crescendo. However, screenwriter Nick Antosca (“Channel Zero,” “Brand New Cherry Flavor”) just doesn’t fill the movie with enough interesting goings on to keep anyone's attention for long. There are long stretches of the film where seemingly nothing significant happens and its, quite frankly, just boring. There definitely are major developments, but they all come in the last fifteen minutes, leaving no time to actually explore them. The plentiful sex scenes don’t help either as most just boil down to awkward moments of faux sexiness. Smeared cupcake on someone’s face certainly could be sexy, but not the way it’s presented here. The dialogue suffers as well, with a lot of odd bits that come across like a first draft or a teenager's idea of layered material.

The film’s director Michael Showalter (“The Big Sick,” “The Lovebirds”) isn’t helping much either. While his background in comedy is extensive, it simply doesn’t translate here. The moments that should be cheesier or campier are never leaned into in the way that they need, resulting in a film that feels flaccid for virtually anything it tries to do. And it certainly tries to do quite a bit, with twists right up until the last shot. It’s not a complete mess, as there are scenes of tension that work well, and the mystery is interesting enough to hold attention. But, like the script, large swaths of the film simply feel cold and boring.

Johnson certainly isn’t the most emotive actress in the world, but she’s turned in some fine work in other films before. However, her more prosaic personality is the exact opposite of what the film needs from its lead. She’s just cold and flat, failing to garner much attention for any length of the film. Hartnett fares much better, mostly due to him playing up his emotions in many later scenes. Hathaway steals the show, despite her considerably limited role. It speaks to her ability to captivate that she is the most interesting person on screen despite not being able to move or emote for large chunks of the film. Her flashback sequences and narration are the highlight, managing to inject enough energy and intrigue into the film to prevent the viewer from nodding off.

If a sexy thriller is what you want, then “Verity” technically delivers in that it is a film that calls itself a sexy thriller. But it also feels like every other film of that ilk, with a high dose of valium snuck in the middle. It’s competently made, and fans of this genre should have a fine enough time thanks to Hartnett and Hathaway doing their damndest to lift the project up. But there are also far too many better examples of this genre to feel satisfied with this kind of dime store pulp story. 1.5/5 

Forgotten Island - Review: Don't You Forget About Me

A movie can be inspired by anything, and a film being inspired by a friendship is one of the oldest traditions. Writer/directors Joel Crawford (“The Croods: A New Age,” “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish”) and Januel Mercado (“Puss in Boots: The Last Wish”) are best friends. They became best friends by working at DreamWorks together and eventually directed films for the studio together. So, it's only fitting then that they would get to make a film inspired by their own friendship for the studio where they met. And they’ve done just that, mixing in the Filipino mythology of Mercado’s upbringing and the stylized animation of their previous directorial effort, to craft an animated trip to a “Forgotten Island.”

Set in the 1990s, the film follows best friends Jo, voiced by H.E.R. (“The Color Purple (2023)”) and Raissa, voiced by Liza Soberano (“Alone/Together,” “Forevermore”), growing up together in the Philippines. After Raissa decides to go to college in the United States much to Jo’s disappointment, the pair find themselves transported to Nakali Island, a mythical island full of monsters and creatures from Filippino folklore. Stranded on the island, they enlist in the help of a werewolf Raww, voiced by Dave Franco (“Neighbors,” “Now You See Me”), to help them find a way home before the island causes them to forget their entire friendship.

Soberano and H.E.R. are perfect together, with plenty of love and chemistry oozing from each of their interactions. They’re not only believable as best friends, but their vocal performances nail the varied tones of the adventure. The tale runs the gamut from wild, outlandish comedy to fantastical but serious drama. They never falter, earning the emotions throughout. Franco is also great, turning in a surprisingly layered and charming performance as the rambunctious Raww. The supporting cast ranges from comedic standouts like Manny Jacinto (“The Acolyte,” “The Good Place”) as the demon baby Bungi and Kevin McCann (“Puss in Boots: The Last Wish”) as the Kataw prince Mermahn, to the more serious roles like Jenny Slate (“Zootopia,” “Marcel the Shell with Shoes On (2021)”) as Batiba the memory demon or Lea Salonga (“Yellow Rose,” “Sana Maulit Muli”) as the villainous demon Manang. All are fantastic, with Slate and Salonga standing out among a sea of excellent supporting performances.

Crawford and Mercado’s script goes for some true emotion throughout the film, and it all works wonders. Watching Jo and Raissa hang out, just existing with each other, talking out their issues and their new quest makes for a really engaging story, and their humor feels perfectly mined from a real-life friendship. Yes, it's loud, brash, and moves like a bullet through its tale. But as opposed to other animated films where the humor can feel aggressive, here it all feels like it naturally comes from the personalities of the two leads, and by extension the two writers. It won’t be for everyone, but it never feels false or inauthentic, and the tonal balances really work. For a film to go from broad silly humor to deeply serious sequences of emotional drama without breaking a sweat, it’s a true triumph.

Given how exceptionally stylish their “Puss in Boots” film was, it should come as no surprise that Crawford and Mercado have pushed those aspects even further here. Not only is the film bursting at the seams with color on every scale, but there’s hardly a moment where something stylish isn’t going on. There’s a heavy emphasis on mixing two-dimensional and three-dimensional animation, from entire sequences animated by hand to layering two-dimensional elements on top of three-dimensional characters. It’s a dizzying art style and always manages to provide something new to see in each new scene, bring the Philippines and Island to life in gorgeous ways. The musical identity of the film is also fantastically unique; Nathan Matthew David (“Chang Can Dunk,” “Deadly Class”) develops a unique sound that meshes modern Hollywood sensibilities with Filipino flare and language.

It could be easy to call “Forgotten Island” loud or brash or hyperactive or silly. But its easier to call it deeply authentic. Here is a film that feels like it was made by two friends to make each other laugh and cry, and it just so happened to reach a mainstream audience after the fact. The voice cast is fantastic, the animation is gorgeously stylish, the tonal balance is just right, and the musical identity is pitch perfect. There’s so much energy and creativity here that it feels at times like a movie Crawford and Mercado got away with making. Something for just the two of them. Something unforgettable. 5/5

Primetime - Review: You See How This Looks

 

As the television landscape changed in the 1990s, most households went from watching Rachel and Ross and Jerry and Elaine to Big Brother and Jersey Shore and anything that involved Keeping Up with those darn Kardashians. But arguably one of the most lasting figures in 2000s pop culture is Chris Hansen and “To Catch a Predator,” a program that has loomed large over the years and remained a part of American culture even to this day. Its legacy has continued in various forms to this day, from other programs hosted by Hansen to various other forms of internet vigilantism. Now, we have a biopic film seeking to chronicle the meteoric rise and fall of that original series with “Primetime.”

Based on the Esquire article by Luke Dittrich, the film follows Chris Hansen, played by Robert Pattinson (“Twilight,” “The Batman”), as he and his producer Andie Bender, played by Merritt Weaver (“Nurse Jackie,” “Unbelievable”), are invited by NBC to develop “To Catch a Predator” into a spinoff for a primetime slot. This involves hiring a new acting decoy named Dan, played by Skylar Gisondo (“Superman (2025),” “Santa Clarita Diet”), and seeking out bigger, juicier targets courtesy of their internet team Perverted Justice, led by founder Xavier, played by Matthew Maher (“Air,” “Our Flag Means Death”) and longstanding decoy Del, played by Phoebe Bridgers.

This is a thorny film full of difficult subject material, and director Lance Oppenheim’s (“Some Kind of Heaven,” “Ren Faire”) trademark flourishes are here on grand display. It’s a film full of fuzzy lighting cues and camerawork, deliberately mimicking the style of CRT televisions from the early 2000s. Each moment has some kind of deliberately faked lighting choice that rattles the sense of realism throughout. No moment feels out of place, as if each is chosen to prevent the audience from falling into a sense of complacency. But it isn’t just for show; the film is laser focused on showcasing Hansen’s descent during this pursuit of journalistic integrity, and so much of the film is dedicated to showcasing that spiral in him and the rest of his crew. Oppenheim and cinematographer David Bolen (“Gone In The Night,” “Thelma”) make this look unlike any other drama you’re likely to see this year, and it transports you into the weird, unsettling nature of a story like this.

Pattinson is perfect. Plain and simple, he launches himself into the role and never comes up for air. This isn’t a caricature, or some kind of hollow puppet act. There’s real emotional pathos going on with his version of Hansen, and Pattinson simply transforms into the role. While it is full of his typical idiosyncrasies, there’s also a deeper rumbling beneath the surface that makes each choice riveting to behold. The entire cast is truly captivating; Gisondo’s co-lead performance sets up a perfect mirror to Pattison’s Hansen, both in character and performance. The two are electric together, and Gisondo’s slowly evolving disillusion is a feast for the young actor. Maher gets a meaty role here as well, and while his is the most strictly comedic, there’s also a lot bubbling under the surface for him as well. Bridgers turns in some great work despite limited screentime, but she manages to do a lot with a little especially in her final scene. Weaver completely captivates as well, bouncing off Pattinson’s more flamboyant portrayal of Hansen with a quieter, slowly boiling performance. She is easily delivering the performance of her career, and the nuances on display as her character evolves in the third act are simply spectacular.

Ajon Singh’s script is where a few minor cracks start to show, but not nearly enough to bring the film down. While the film certainly doesn’t shy away from the lurid nature of the program and the work it does, Singh is clearly more interested in the psyche of the people who would do a program like “To Catch a Predator.” There are musings on the viewership and the surrounding world’s reaction to the program, but it's not the focus. That’s not to say the film demonizes Hansen or vilifies the men he goes after, far from it. But it isn’t a legal procedural. It’s actually more dreamlike and hazy, giving the impression of a half-hallucinatory recounting of the stranger than fiction events that led to the show’s cancellation. Editor Daniel Garber (“Some Kind of Heaven,” “How to Blow Up a Pipeline”) layers the film in on itself, looping moments in as if it’s a snake eating its own tail. There’s a very lurid sense to the events, but also a liminal psychosis as well. The dialogue pops off the page and gets brought to life by its talented cast, and Ari Balouzian’s (“Some Kind of Heaven,” “Ren Faire”) musical score heavily juxtaposes the events on screen with a light, chime and xylophone heavy bout of music.

Oppenheim wants to captivate you; that’s why the film is shot the way it is, filled with actors as good as this group, scored the way it is, and with subject material like this. There’s a good amount going on under the surface, and while it isn’t a complete recount of this subject, it seeks to poke at it. Yes, these events are fictionalized, but the strangest ones that will cause people to seek out the truth are true. Pattinson is electric, arguably the best he’s ever been, and Weaver also delivers a commanding, career best performance. It’s a lurid dream, something that feels both completely real within the façade, like reality television, built with gorgeous production design, cinematography, and music. There are other, more nuanced takes on the nature of blending news entertainment media and journalistic integrity, but even if this isn’t the de facto authority on this subject, you cannot deny the allure of what Oppenheim has crafted. You’ll want to have a seat. 5/5

Shaun the Sheep: The Beast of Mossy Bottom - Review: A Tale of Shear Terror

 

In 2015 and after almost a decade on British television, Aardman Animation brought the lovably mute sheep who made his debut in 1995's "A Close Shave" to the big screen with "Shaun the Sheep Movie." After a second feature film adventure with 2019's "Farmageddon," Shaun and his gang are back in a new adventure, this time themed around the spookiness of the fall and Halloween season. At least as spooky as a family-friendly stop motion mute sheep can be.

It's almost Halloween! Shaun, bleated to life by Justin Fletcher ("Justin's House," "Something Special"), and his friends have been trying to grow massive pumpkins to carve for the season. But after a mishap involving their Farmer causes them to all be smashed, Shaun channels his inner mad scientist to create a potion letting them grow to gigantic sizes. However, this inadvertently results in the unleashing of a massively hairy beast running rampant through the nearby town. It's up to Shaun and his friends to stop the beast and solve the mystery of its appearance.

It's difficult to find much to say about Shaun's latest adventure, and that's not a bad thing. Aardman has spent decades finely crafting their very specific style of British humor and stop-motion slapstick to a chemically perfection concoction. Every movement, bleat, grunt, or visual gag hits with maximum precision, piled high with plenty of color and whimsy. You'd be hard pressed to find a single person with a beating heart who can't find something to enjoy in Shaun and his friend's latest adventure. The fall and Halloween theming provide some light spookiness, but it's far from terrifying, coming much closer to a "Sesame Street" Halloween episode than anything legitimately scary.

What plot exists mostly seems to be an excuse to string together a light parody of various horror tales, specifically Frankenstein. It lacks the surprising emotional weight that was seen in the very first film, but it's still filled to the brim with charm. Directors Steve Cox ("Shaun the Sheep: The Flight Before Christmas") and Matthew Walker (" Lloyd of the Flies") and writers Mark Burton (" Wallace & Gromit: Vengeance Most Fowl," "Madagascar") and Giles Pilbrow (" Shaun the Sheep: The Flight Before Christmas," "Horrible Histories: The Movie - Rotten Romans") know these characters well, and the fun then comes from putting them in these circumstances outside of their farm. Shaun's turn as a pseudo mad scientist is exceptionally amusing, particularly just to allow him ample time to be the butt of many jokes. It never exceeds its own grasp but reaches as high as possible within its own constraints.

It's a quick little romp as well, clocking in at just around 75 minutes when the credits start. No moment ever overstays its welcome, moving briskly from gag to gag without feeling hyperactive. There's plenty to enjoy here for kids without feeling like they're rotting away, and plenty to amuse adults without resorting to adult jokes or pop culture references. Natalie Holt's ("Loki," "Pin Cushion") musical score pops in and gives everything as much bravado as needed; a welcome bit of theatricality added onto an otherwise charmingly low-stakes film. Really, it's just a perfectly charming little tale, and, with the spooky theming, one that could and should easily fall right into plenty of family's fall movie rotations.

If you like stop-motion, Aardman's other works, or just fun and simple filmmaking, then chances are you're already planning on seeing "The Beast of Mossy Bottom." But if it isn't on your radar, then you should take the time to see just a simply delightfully charming and extremely amusing little slice of hand-made Halloween filmmaking magic. With sci-fi and now horror under their belts, if Shaun and his friends keep invading other genres every few years until the end of time, the world would be a better place. 4.5/5 

Resident Evil (2026) - Review: Delivery Us To Evil

After decades of varying approaches, from CGI heavy action romps to animated continuations to faithful-to-a-fault adaptations, and varying degrees of commercial and critical success, the "Resident Evil" video game franchise is getting its third theatrical reboot and eighth live-action film in just under twenty-five years. The difference though is the director behind the camera; fresh off the back-to-back critical and commercial success of "Barbarian" and "Weapons," co-writer/director/self-proclaimed "RE" super fan Zach Cregger is here bring his version of the mega-successful survival horror franchise for the big screen. 

"Resident Evil" follows medical courier Bryan, played by Austin Abrams ("Weapons," "euphoria"), as he takes a last-minute job transporting an overnight package through the snow-covered Colorado mountains to Raccoon City. While on his way, he finds himself in the middle of a zombie outbreak, forcing him to fight his way through to reach Raccoon City General Hospital with his delivery intact. 

Given the franchises' prior existence as what some might charitably call "guilty pleasure films," Cregger's deft hand is immediately apparent from the start. His vision of this world isn't one of direct adaptation or winking nods to the games. Rather, his goal is clearly to impart the same atmosphere and feelings given when one cracks open an entry in Capcom's legendary series. From the moment things begin to turn sour for Bryan, there's a very specific and direct feeling of tension that echoes a loss of control. Once things make a turn for the worst, the film moves like a bullet, never letting up in its quick pace. At just under 90 minutes without credits, it's a borderline perfect mixture of tense dread and adrenaline rush. That rush can overtake the third act a bit, where things can get a bit silly. But the slow evolution of the film's tone from tense dread to more adrenaline pumping sequences means this doesn't feel out of place. 

Cregger and his co-writer Shay Hatten ("John Wick: Chapter 3 – Parabellum," "Army of the Dead") inject just enough humor throughout the film to allow the release of that tension at very specific moments. Cregger makes sure that it doesn't betray the scares though, and the peril felt for Bryan on his adventure is never sacrificed for a cheap gag or laugh. There aren't jokes so much as Hatten and Cregger mining the circumstances for fish out of water scenarios to put Bryan in, and they all work wonderfully thanks to Abrams immense charm and everyman talents. 

Abrams is a fantastic lead. He carries Bryan with a slight oafishness, but he never resorts to making him a caricature. There's never a clear moment where you think he knows exactly what he's doing, but he isn't dumb either. His lack of experience is an important aspect to this tale, and it makes him a more compelling character as a result. The supporting cast is few, but they punctuate the film well. Zach Cherry ("Severance," "Fallout") appears briefly as a scientist, and Paul Walter Hauser ("Richard Jewel," "Blackbird") pops up as an advisor to help direct Bryan further, both working for the Umbrella Corporation. Neither make grand impressions, but they're fodder for Bryan's arc and journey, and they fill those roles well. 

Overall, the film's atmosphere is its greatest asset, both in terms of being an adaptation and just a straight horror film. Cienmatographer Dariusz Wolski ("Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl," "The Martian") doesn't just keep things tight and smooth, but the film looks simply gorgeous despite being set entirely at night. Wolski and Cregger display a fantastic use of both pitch-black darkness and color. Red is utilized throughout to delightfully gruesome effects, and the lighting is a constant standout. Ryan and Hays Holladay's ("Weapons," "Roommates (2026)") score is a warping electronic undercurrent that manages to be exceptionally memorable, without overpowering each scene. As it garbles along, setting the mood for each new situation Bryan finds himself in, it helps to continuously build up the atmosphere and personality that helps make this film the best kind of adaptation. 

What kind of adaptation is the best adaptation then? Well, while that can vary based on what the material being adapted is, for something as varied as this franchise, tone is the clear goal. Zach Cregger has done just that, recreating the tone and tension that comes from the atmosphere of the series rather than directly adapting the characters or stories of each game. It results in a film that's the best of both worlds: a fresh, quick paced popcorn horror bonanza that will also create many many new fans as a result of its authentic vibes. With an excellent lead actor being thrown right into the fray, the best thing that can be said about Cregger's vision of this world is that if you adapted it into a new "Resident Evil" game, it would be right at home. 4.5/5 

Hope (2026) - Review: There Goes the Neighborhood

 

In our age of modern-day blockbusters, what does it mean to be self-aware of one's own violence? Questions like that have been posited in film for decades now, with a differing perspective on the subject coming every few years to add something new to the conversation. It's not hard to see a writer/director like Na Hong-jin ("The Wailing," "The Yellow Sea") adding something to the conversation with his big CGI monsters and fights and small-town struggles. However, whether or not he is actually interested in adding anything is an entirely different story.

Set in the small Korean town of Hope Harbor, "Hope" follows police chief Ko Bum-seok, played by Hwang Jung-min (" You Are My Sunshine," "12.12: The Day"), and rookie cop Im Sung-ae, played by Jung Ho-yeon ("Squid Game"), as they investigate the destruction of a nearby town by an unknown entity. After teaming up with a local firearms expert Ko Sung-ki, played by Zo In-sung (" Something Happened in Bali," " Escape from Mogadishu"), they discover that the creature wreaking havoc is actually an alien leader J'aur, played by Alicia Vikander ("Ex Machina," "The Green Knight") and her bodyguard Ma'veyyo, played by Michael Fassbender ("X-Men: First Class," "Steve Jobs").

Hong-jin's film is immediately engrossing. In draws you in with slow, tense moments that spend the bulk of the first hour expertly setting up the mystery surrounding the destruction. It serves as a showcase for a truly fantastic amount of practical effects and production design, tearing this small Korean town to shreds and allowing the audience and Bum-seok to wade through the aftermath. It almost feels like a detective story, as you piece together clues in the scenery to try and discern what this creature might be. Then the reveal: a hulking nine-foot tall sickly green humanoid alien creature with long slick hair, created using some of the worst CGI in modern moviemaking.

This is where the film's first big tonal shift becomes apparent. The CGI on the aliens looks so particularly bad and uncanny that it comes across as completely intentional. Surely, a director with as much acclaim and experience as Hong-jin wouldn't approve of something that looks like this, right? The fact that this is then followed by an extended period of downtime without any action, and some truly bizarre dialogue. Who doesn't want to hear about how an elderly man discovered the aliens as a result of having diarrhea? It's so odd that it still manages to be enrapturing as you wonder what direction things will go in next.

For as odd as things get, Hong-jin's cast are all completely game for the material. Jung-min is a great stoic kind of action lead that lets his fears bleed through to create a relatable and realistic kind of protagonist. Ho-yeon fluctuates between a cool badass and a bumbling goof in a myriad of endearing ways. Sung-ki is a slimy kind of oddball that feels like a teenager who never grew up, and he makes for a great foil against Hong-jin's more mature character. Vikander and Fassbender are completely bizarre in their casting, as the pair never speak any English or even any discernable language. The fact that they are here for only a handful of moments in total, speaking an entirely made-up language, makes for one of the film's biggest and oddest swings.

While much of the appeal here is how odd the project is, what is undeniably excellent is the film's action. Hong-jin and cinematographer Hong Kyung-pyo ("Parasite," "Save the Green Planet!") shoot the film with a blistering sense of action. The combination of CGI and practical effects, despite the former's shoddy look, are seamless. The first and last hour hit the gas and never let up, giving the same feeling as "Fury Road" or other breakneck action flicks. Even if you don't agree with the rest of the film's bizarre, almost satirical approach to its plot, the action sequences alone are fantastic enough to be worth the price of admission. Especially with a score from Michael Abels ("Get Out," "NOPE") backing it up; his music sounds like an odd alien western action flick mixture that becomes as fascinating as the film itself the longer things go on.

"Hope" is an oddball of a film, one far more bizarre than its marketing would have you believe. The plot is both extremely detailed and also superfluous, the performances are completely committed to the insanity, and the practical effects are excellent, juxtaposed against some truly awful (possibly purposefully so) CGI effects. Na Hong-jin's latest film is an oddity, plain and simple, almost satirical in its execution of action movie filmmaking and storytelling. But it is a wild ride of an oddity that will keep you engrossed even while baffling you. 3.5/5 

Coyote vs. Acme - Review: Comedic Justice

 

Way back in 2023, Warner Bros. announced a number of films they were set to receive tax write offs on, meaning that they would not be allowed to release the films or profit from them in any way, taking a lump sum of money instead. While two of those projects, “Batgirl” and “Scoob: Holiday Haunt” were in various stages of completion, one of them was a film that was finished and had undergone test screenings in the months prior: the animated-live action legal family comedy “Coyote vs. Acme.” After this was announced, the internet spiraled into a frenzy, resulting in Warner announcing that they would allow other studios to offer bids for the film instead of banishing it to their archives forever. Now, one year after their marginal success from the similarly almost canned Looney Tunes film “The Day the Earth Blew Up,” Ketchup Entertainment has snagged the completed film and are finally releasing it worldwide. 

This film follows Wile E. Coyote as he hires lazy cartoon injury lawyer Kevin Avery, played by Will Forte (“Clone High,” “The Last Man on Earth”), to sue Acme for the injuries he’s sustained from decades of using their faulty products in an attempt to capture and eat the Road Runner. Alongside Avery’s niece and law intern Paige, played by Lana Condor (“X-Men Apocalypse,” “To All The Boys I’ve Loved Before”), this leads to a massive legal case against Acme and its CEO Foghorn Leghorn, voiced by Eric Bauza (“Looney Tunes Cartoons,” “The Day the Earth Blew Up”), and their defense lawyer Buddy Crane, played by John Cena (“The Suicide Squad,” “Blockers”). 

While that idea might initially seem like it only has enough meat to sustain a short or two, writers Samy Burch (“May December,” “Late Fame”), James Gunn (“Guardians of the Galaxy,” “Superman (2025)”), and Jeremy Slater (“Mortal Kombat II,” “Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire”) do a lot to develop the heart and pathos behind this tale. There’s not only legitimately surprising intrigue behind the events, but there’s a lot of care put into developing Wile’s plight and case. It bobs and weaves in clever ways, and while not the most tightly knit legal drama to grace the silver screen, it's fully committed to breathing life into this world and tale. 

At the end of the day, that’s what gets this effort to the finish line with flying colors: if the heart and care are there, then the quality of the lawsuit and plot don’t even matter that much. They’re still good, but that big beating heart is the reason this project shines. It's still riotously funny as well, keeping the slapstick sharp as well as the general humor of seeing a character like Foghorn Leghorn taking the witness stand. The film also takes clear aim at corporate greed and corruption, placing big business squarely in its crosshairs. While the filmmakers never could have predicted the film being written off by a big studio in the midst of a corporate merger, it is quite telling that a film with this strong of a perspective was initially canned by its corporate overlords. 

Director Dave Green (“Earth to Echo,” “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows”) clearly cares just as much, and while the film features quite a bit of high-stakes loonacy, it also treats the legal proceedings and surrounding mystery like any other film of its ilk. The blending of live-action and animation is seamless, and while the quality of some of the 3D models pretending to be 2D is suspect, the expressive and detailed animations are always fantastic. There’s quite a bit of medium mixing as well, with cartoons interacting with real objects and vice versa in convincing and fun ways. Steven Price’s (“Suicide Squad,” “Gravity”) musical score mixes typical Tunes motifs with some lightly electronic strings and gets quite playful throughout. A dramatic moment, for example, has the 1812 Overture playing, but with Road Runner’s trademark “beep beep” replacing the cannon sounds. It’s a film that simply looks great and made by people having a ton of fun making it and with a lot of love for these characters. 

Acting against nothing for a film like this is quite the tall order, but Forte is clearly up to the challenge. He’s a comedian’s comedian, and he completely commits to the venture. There’s not a moment he doesn’t take everything as serious as a heart attack, and it lets the film flourish anytime he’s opposite Wile. It's a sort of sincerity that lets the film work as well as it does; yes, it's funny already but the cast playing it so straight is what elevates it. Cena is equally as good, playing up his evil lawyer character to levels that equal the cartoons he’s surrounded by. Condor is a bright spot of overly eager optimism, and she plays well off Forte’s lackadaisical apathy. While Wile may be silent, Bauza gets a lot of space to shine as the new defacto voice for a majority of the Looney Tunes. Rarely do these characters get these kind of intrigue laden monologues or legal proclamations, and his skill as a voice actor is on full display here as he gets to play with the silly and the dramatic. 

There’s something to be said about the underdog nature of the film itself and its long and rocky road to release. It's a victory that it even was released, but for it to be as good as it is makes for an ever better feeling. This is an extremely funny crowd pleaser with a surprising amount of heart and effort put into its plot. Forte is borderline perfect, playing everything completely straight in the midst of the film’s absurdity. It has some roughness around the edges, but nothing diminishes the care and love that clearly exists here for the whole Tune gang and their cartoons. Quite simply, it's one of Wile E. Coyote’s favorite things: dynamite! 4.5/5

Buddy (2026) - Review: Barney & Fiends

 

When flipping through Adult Swim at 1:30 in the morning, you might find yourself greeted by the works of Casper Kelly. A longtime writer for various animated shows for the channel, he eventually began working on surrealist live action horror comedic material, eventually culminating in the short works “Too Many Cooks” and the two “Adult Swim Yule Log” specials. These works are perfect, bite-sized showcases of his skill in turning the mundane into the bizarrely horrific, without losing any humor in the process. Now, after directing a segment of 2025’s “V/H/S/ Halloween” film, he has his first feature length film with the tale of an orange unicorn named “Buddy.” 

It’s Buddy! Everyone’s favorite orange unicorn here to teach you life lessons on how to share, be brave, and get along with all your friends. But something is wrong with Buddy, voiced by Keegan-Michael Key (“Key and Peele,” “Schmigadoon!”). Freddy, played by Delaney Quinn (“If I Had Legs I’d Kick You,” “The Beanie Bubble”), has noticed that some of her friends around the clubhouse have been disappearing, and that Buddy seems to be more and more frustrated. Can she and her backpack Strappy, voiced by Patton Oswalt (“Ratatouille,” “The King of Queens”), stay safe among Buddy’s increasingly concerning behavior? Meanwhile, what does suburban mom Grace, played by Cristin Milioti (“Palm Springs,” “The Penguin”), have to do with all of this? 

If you’re a seasoned horror fan, what Kelly and co-writer Jamie King (“Jessica Jones,” “World’s Best”) have written here won’t blow you away in terms of the plot’s originality. It shares a lot of DNA with other mascot-based horror projects from the past decade, as well as the likes of “The Wizard of Oz” and “IT.” That’s not a problem though, as it provides a solid foundation to build up from, and build they do. The production design is without a doubt the film’s best element. As opposed to other shows or movies that throw a VHS filter over modern footage and call it a day, the many retro sequences of “Buddy” looks like they might actually have been shot in the 1990s. The other big problem they avoid is the over-design of the characters. It’s hard to look at Freddy Fazbear and think any adult actually thought a kid would find him safe. The costumes are perfect here; if you sliced out the film’s most normal moments, you could easily convince anyone that this was a real unthreatening show from the 1990s. 

Key has perfect delivery as he, much like the costumes, avoids becoming too overtly sinister or winking to the audience with his performance. It feels like a legitimate, authentic delivery someone from this era might have given. Quinn absolutely steals the show, with one of the best child actor performances in a long time. Her fear and genuine heart power the film; she is its secret weapon. All of the child actors are fantastic, like Tristan Broders as Oliver and Madison Skyy Polan as Hannah. They go through a veritable odyssey together, and it shows by the end. Milioti, like Quinn, is one of the film’s best elements. While she gets less time to shine compared to the younger cast, she’s nevertheless deeply compelling and serves as the big beating bloody heart at the center. 

The authenticity coming from the production design and the cast end up fueling the film’s sense of unease. By withholding any sense of deliberate horror or off-kilter nature directly, it lets the uncertainty bubble to the surface. There’s no “in your face” moments of Buddy doing drugs or using guns or anything otherwise; it commits to the aesthetic entirely until things go completely wrong. This means that the themes they play with, child actors, toxic positivity, predatory children’s environments, get time to fester instead of bluntly beating the audience over the head. Yet, these elements clearly are not the point; Kelly and King want to make a dark horror comedy, and they succeed in that. The film is quite dry and uneasily funny, mining plenty of humor from the absurdity of the world and the way the scenario is presented. They also avoid giving any direct explanations to a majority of the events, instead letting the confusion and questions bubble up to further add to the film’s unease and mystique. 

If “Buddy” is playing with some plot points and children’s mascot horror tropes that are well-worn by now, Casper Kelly has certainly spruced things up to feel considerably less so. The entire film’s production design and commitment to its atmosphere lifts it above typical costumes horror fare, and the cast deliver the heart needed to make this little adventure something special. This is a tried-and-true midnight movie filled with mystery and unanswered questions and tons of black humor that will delight most and turn off the rest. It’s as much fun as one could expect to have with a guy as cuddly as Buddy! 4/5 

Teenage Sex & Death at Camp Miasma - Review: Psycho Sexual

 

Arguably more than any other genre in the history of cinema, horror has had a complicated relationship with change, both internally and externally. Whether comedic, cosmic, psychological, or fantastical, evolution is a key part of any work of horror. Over the years, there have been plenty of works that have grappled with that relationship, whether in more traditional ways like “Wes Craven’s New Nightmare” or the more abstract ways in the likes of “Beyond the Black Rainbow” or “Crimes of the Future.” Now, fresh off their 2024 A24 hit, writer/director Jane Schoenbrun (“I Saw the TV Glow,” “We’re All Going to the World’s Fair”) has returned to the world of abstract, dreamlike, nostalgic horror-tinged dread with “Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma.”

The film stars Hannah Einbinder (“Hacks,” “Seekers of Infinite Love”) as Kris Williams, an up-and-coming queer independent film director offered the chance to reboot her favorite horror slasher film franchise “Camp Miasma.” In an effort to recontextualize the original film’s story and serial killer Little Death, played by Jack Haven (“I Saw the TV Glow,” “Atypical”), Kris seeks out the film’s original final girl actress, the reclusive Billy Presley, played by Gillian Anderson (“The X-Files,” “Sex Education”). As Kris learns more about Billy, their connection begins to deepen, and the lines between reality and slasher film begin to blur.

Unexpected given the film’s title and premise, Schoenbrun goes full tilt into the realm of campy silliness alongside the bloodshed and self-reflection. Einbinder’s character adores this film series to the point of obsession, knowing filming techniques and facts about each entry, surrounding herself with a comical amount of named candy brands and popcorn. By the time things fully tilt into glorious 1970s grindhouse tributes, the film stakes an identity for itself within the glorious mountainous spurts of blood and needle drops. This isn’t a gratuitous film, rather it uses its camp humor to explore the kind of adoration people have for movies like this, horror films or otherwise.

Einbinder and Anderson turn in some really interesting work, exploring the inner emotions of this pair while also embracing the sillier elements inherent in their depictions. Einbinder avoids complete parody in her depiction of a typical modern day indie director, viewing film purely academically within the lens of what would be considered acceptable or not. It’s a slyly silly, but completely confident kind of performance that establishes the character as an almost complete joke before letting Einbinder’s talents win you over. Anderson is playing something like an askew version of the fem fatale from works like “Sunset Boulevard,” playing things up to camp levels without creating a caricature. Both work together fantastically, perfectly in sync with Schoenbrun’s vision, as if they created a hive mind during rehearsals.

Schoenbrun clearly has a lot on their mind and knows exactly what they want to deliver, and a larger budget than before means that they and cinematographer Eric Yue (“I Saw the TV Glow,” “Atropia”) get to work with a team to craft that vision in a way that resembles a half-remembered cinema-soaked dream. Matte paintings litter the backgrounds, as do actual repurposed candy litter. It’s a film obsessed with the artifice of movies, be it CGI and practical gore or clearly fake weather affects. It can be jarring at first glance, but the film itself is built to teach you how to watch it. Schoenbrun slowly introduces you to the film’s visual language and the way it elaborates on stimulus, eventually culminating in a wonderful third-act full of deliberately fake looking lighting, imagery, and colors. Even the costume donned by Little Death, a mixture between a diving suit and an air-conditioning vent, is clearly deliberately fake, but so well constructed and fascinating that it becomes instantly iconic. Alex G’s (“I Saw the TV Glow,” “We’re All Going to the World’s Fair”) score matches this deliberate visual aesthetic with a musical identity that’s equally as distinct and obvious and engrossing.

For a film as obsessed with the mechanics of horror films, film in general, and why we ourselves become obsessed with these works of art, this is a remarkably kind film. While not without its own brutality, there are moments where it allows Little Death and Kris so much vulnerability and space to explore what has happened to them and what it means to find yourself through media, transgressive or otherwise. It’s a film that adores horror but is also directly pushing against so many of the genre’s worst instincts to comment on them: a genre so steeped in fear of what’s different is embraced by a queer filmmaker and a genre where sex is a sign of death used to help a character come to terms with a comfort in sex and sexuality. Anyone aware of where the term “Little Death” comes from should be well aware of the material Schoenbrun is tackling here. It might seem too daunting of a subject to tackle in a film under two hours, but the breezy direction and camp nature of the film’s sense of self help keep things digestible and engaging. At the very least, Schoenbrun is able to boil these ideas down to a simple thought: why do we love what hurts us, and what can that danger teach us about ourselves?

It’s truly difficult to describe whether a film like “Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma” will be for you without simply knowing it. There’s a specific wavelength that Jane Schoenbrun’s latest queer, nostalgic, horror think piece is operating on. It’s easy to love from a purely visual and aesthetic point of view, but it offers so much to chew on beyond that. Its two leads are perfectly cast and in sync with the vision of this work. You’re not going to see many films like this for quite a while, if truly ever. But maybe that’s the best thing about it. Arguably more than any nostalgia-obsessed director currently working, Schoenbrun understands what the deep pit of genre love is for any cinephile: it’s a hole at the bottom of the lake where the movies come from. 5/5

The End of Oak Street - Review: Jurassic Block

Despite not ever reaching the same cultural significance seen with the release of the original "Jurassic Park" film in 1993, from the moment dinosaurs lumbered onto the silver screen, they've never left. When CGI became more prominent, they've grown to greater heights and more bountiful box office numbers, with varying critical results. Now Writer/Director David Robert Mitchell ("It Follows," "Under the Silver Lake") is making his move from low-budget indie hits to big studio blockbusters with his own take on the dinosaur film with "The End of Oak Street."

Set in 1982, the film follows a small-town family living on Oak Street consisting of mother and aspiring novelist Denise, played by Anne Hathaway ("The Devil Wears Prada," "Interstellar"), dad Greg, played by Ewan McGregor ("Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith," "Moulin Rouge!"), son Brian, played by Christian Convery ("The Monkey," "Sweet Tooth"), and daughter Audrey, played by Maisy Stella ("Nashville," "My Old Ass"). One night during a thunderstorm, the family finds their entire suburb mysteriously transported into a prehistoric jungle populated by all manner of dinosaurs and other million-year-old creatures. The family must stick together to survive their new environment and somehow find a way back to their own time.

This is a crowd-pleasing blockbuster plain and simple, but Mitchell spends ample time building tension and character stakes throughout the first act. He borders on satirizing American nuclear family culture, but never goes so far, instead settling on establishing our four family members for some easy arcs by the time things wrap up. There's definitely a lot of Spielbergian elements wrapped in here, from the nuclear family on the rocks to the dinosaurs to the kids on bikes. It uses these elements more as landmarks rather than letting the entire film be overwhelmed by their nostalgia. Suffice it to say, if you don't know the difference between a Goonie or a Gremlin, you'll still have a good time here.

McGregor is doing some fun work here essentially offering both an earnest and slightly comedic portrayal of the typical American suburban dad, but Hathaway is the one turning in some really great subtle work that branches a bit beyond the written material. It's a testament to her skills as an actress that she can do a lot with just a few looks even in more genre heavy fare like this. Convery and Stella get in a lot of good sibling material here, with Mitchell's script avoiding a lot of annoying tropes of sibling hatred. This is a close-knit family that obviously loves each other, despite their rocky nature, and it comes across fully through the lead quartet's performances. The surrounding supporting cast is full of a few character actors serving themselves up as dino fodder, and they each get their own little moment to shine.

After the town blips into the past, Mitchell's vision of this film becomes quite clear: it's tense and hugely character driven. There's a lot of comparisons one could make to the original "Jurassic Park" in that way, as he plays with chase sequences and has quite a few hide and seek moments. Mitchell is a director that understands presence and tension, and the film is a great example of that. There's no point where hordes of dinos are thrown at the screen; its methodical and disciplines in its scares and action, letting things boil over to maximize the potential fear. This is still a PG-13 four-quadrant mass appeal blockbuster, so things never reach the pure fear levels of Mitchell's breakout success "It Follows," but there is a true sense that anyone is on the chopping block at any moment.  

It's a gorgeous film as well, with Mitchell and cinematographer Michael Gioulakis ("It Follows," "Us") taking great advantage of their small-town suburban locations. There's a physicality to the adventure, utilizing plenty of average American homes and cul-de-sacs juxtaposed against the harsh prehistoric plants and animals, to create an arresting locale. While the lumbering dinos are all CGI, there's a lot of built out practical sets that provide a genuine tactile sense of place. Helping to add to the tension, the film even populates many of the locations with the remnants of unfortunate dinosaur encounters. One sequence that has a pair of characters hiding in a car features the dead body of the driver in the front seat. It isn't gratuitous or used as a jump scare. Just an example of the fantastic window dressing to make this horrifying adventure scenario pop to life. Michael Giacchino's ("Ratatouille," "The Incredibles") score also is clearly adjacent to the works of John Williams from those Spielbergian films, but injects enough of his trademark musical flourishes to set it apart.

David Robert Mitchell's latest film is clearly a tribute to family and parental leadership more than anything else, and he manages to wrap that tribute in a great sense of adventure and tension. Not too scary to not be for the whole family, but not devoid of tension either, this is a fantastic end of summer blockbuster that not only makes dinosaurs thrilling again but just provides a good old fashioned adventure flick. A great quartet of performances are set up against a gorgeous looking romp through suburban 1980s America, just with more dinosaurs than you're used to. It puts virtually every "Jurassic Park/World" film after the original to shame, but even outside of that, this is a fun and tense bit of popcorn filmmaking that'll leave you satisfied. 4/5